Do you really admit you wrote all that crazy stuff?
I didn’t realize you had been here 17 years, Wow, that makes you.... here 17 years.
Seriously, when your fixation is on anyone who simply points out that Texas law makes it criminal offenses to deal drugs, to murder someone or to belong to a criminal street (motorcycle) gang that does these things, then, quite frankly, it’s not a credit that you have been here 17 years, It’s a discredit to FR that you have been allowed here for 17 years.
We are all known by the company we keep, and as a lover of drug dealing, murdering motorcycle thugs, you drag everyone on FR down by your presence... and your mental instability is no excuse for it.
By the way, Dr. Carson was with us on the photo safari. We were all addressed by the game guides as “Bwana.” It is a Swahili word. It means “Boss,” or “Employer,” of “Master” which comes from their use of the term for owners of large farms, large ranches or large tract of lands, as in “Master of all he sees” i.e to the horizon.
In closing, due to your repeated racism, stupidity, mental, (I’ll be kind and say “instability) and support for drug dealing motorcycle thug murderers, I simply will do as I would advise others to do. That is to have nothing to do with you or people like you.
That said, as a charitable Christian man, I do advise you to get some serious professional help. You are much more of a danger to yourself and others than you realize. The severity of your illness is demonstrated by the fact that you refuse to recognize it.
I will pray for you and your family. Bahati njema
Fixation? On this thread, initially I pointed out a few things you got wrong. For that you called me a "druggie" and worse. It's been back-and-forth ever since. You seem to think you should be afforded the last word.
Since that time I first pointed out to you error regarding assertions you had made, I've been responding to the garbage you keep spewing at me, pointing out to you that you're also wrong about things between me, and you -- all wrong, supplying the whys and wherefores of that.
You keep squirming around.
First, you serve up false accusation about freepers here (beyond merely only myself) in reply to things I've been pointing out to about yourself, that are in evidence within the your own words.
Then, you say that "you'll pray" for me.
After that, it's back to calling me a drunk, and a drug user, and crazy, and whatever you can dream up that may discredit the observations I've been making. Hardly ever do you deal directly with those observations. When you do, it's often with non- sequitur, and extraneous info that's neither here, nor there.
At this point the charges presented against me in the above italicized is sort-of like "fruit of a poisoned tree" kind of thing. You begin in error, then keep on going. The above italicized is also well beyond category of having merely entered "asked and answered". How many times must I deal with that sort of SHIT out of you?
If we had been talking face-to-face, that kind of talk would have come to an abrupt end long ago. But no, you're a chickenshit keyboard commando that's all wee-wee'd up because every thing you throw at me keeps getting smashed right back in your face. When are you going to learn? You'll never defeat me. You're simply not righteous.
The habit you have of using "by the way" and "btw" is annoying. A "photo safari". Wow. So impressive. And it was at this "photo Safari" that you were referred to as "Bwana"?
Do you recall the context where you first bragged that term was one of your titles, one of the names that you went by? You posted that sort of thing in response to myself demanding that you tell the forum here what your previous freep-name was. You supplied a braggadocio list of other "names" you've been known by.
A Big Trip to Africa. And Mr. Carson was there? So? Does that make him some sort of "friend" of yours? Really?
You failed to explain why I would need apologize to that man. I said nothing against him. I seriously doubt he'd be upset with anything I'd posted, either.
Did you go to the link I pointed you back towards, and see how that related to your use of the term "the "magic" word?
The word dawg sure was a magic word for one black man. It was turned into magic spell against himself that was intoned back "at" himself by the priesthood to empower minions of the cult while stripping that black man of his Constitutionally protected civil rights.
I have men call me "Boss" that I'm not in position of authority over. Although it's a manner of speech in some present-day American subcultures -- I usually thank them, while reminding them too -- "I'm not your boss" and working into the situation "I am but a man, such as yourself".
Young men from somewhere in the nearby neighborhood environs (but whom I do not know, at all) strolling by when I'm sitting on my front porch have more than once sang out greeting to me, "O-G!" . Yet I'm no gangster. Still, I'll wave back, and give them a "hey!".
Now you just stop right there, you son-of-a-bitch. WHAT racism? Hmmm? Show me. Or STFU. Racism... and "repeated" the man says! phfft. More lies out of your mouth. You sound JUST LIKE the people who, not being able to oppose what Trump, and Trumps' supporters have to say about things gin-up charge of "racism".
Huh? Here it's been myself that has had to break things down for you into small bite-sized pieces (since you never seem to catch on to my meanings the first time) -- and you STILL don't get it! You're almost as much of an idiot as Princess Puddles. Just ~wow~.
Skipped right past the part, did you(?) about yourself having allegedly dragged a psychiatrist into supporting that accusation would have been an ethics violation, if it wasn't an imaginary tale that you had pulled out of your ass.
If you were not making things up --have her contact me here, and provide a phone number I could reach her at. That would settle that issue.
No matter what, I see you won't let go of that particular highly "loaded" false accusation.
Ha. You've got nothing. Nothing but lies and your butthurt over myself having repeatedly whipped your lying ass in epic forum conversation take-down dismantlement. Bring it, dawg. woof
Well don't that just beat all? You've not been "charitable" with myself, not one farthing's worth. And no --- "charitable" does not necessarily mean $$$.
For what? For having points of view differing from your own shallow, highly egotistical viewpoints wherein (going by how you speak of your "self") you're always the starring hero of your own movie?. Get bent, fool.
Ha. lol. But as I pointed out to you -- if that was indeed true -- no scratch that -- it need not need be true "indeed", it could be limited to needing be true only in your own opinion, and the opinion of your imaginary friend (the alleged psychiatrist) for the both of you to be guilty of ethics violations -- your friend the more-so, of course.
But I have a solution for it. Fall on your sword -- admit you were just making things up (about the supposed friend you had over just last night for a barbecue -- for whom you had printed off a comment I'd posted to you for her to read, etc.) to protect you so-called friend from potential legal harm due to her's (and your?) ethics violation. It would not be possible to plead that I was in realm of the "hypothetical non-patient", not in context of what you said and how you said it.
But no real worries -- I'm not planning on filing formal complaint, nor would consider doing so. Yet if that person were real, then they should be told to not do what you said she just did. If everything else you've been saying about me were to be true -- then the two of you would have been making things worse.
Oh, brother. There's one of those "can't prove a negative" problemo's AGAIN. Don't you remember? You were agin' it, before as you are here (again) for it.
Send all your friends to this thread, and others, like I'd asked. Have them send me some freepmail. We could talk about you behind your back, then I could talk about that talking about you openly, on this forum. Sound fair? It should. That's about what you say you did to me. What's the diff? Two sets of rules, eh? One set everyone else has to live up to, and then another more conveniently fluid set for the hero of your own movie.
Can't you see that in this, if there actually was serious issue beyond the two of us despising one another --you'd need recuse yourself due to conflict of interest? You're in no place to be providing clinical diagnosis --for a critic of what you have been saying, and how you've been going about saying it. Nor can you invoke some mythical "friend" who could properly diagnose an anonymous stranger over the internet, to use that as some form of interpersonal weapon in public forum. I provided extract from AMA guidelines in the last comment that I'd addressed to you that explains that would be ethics violation. What do you suppose "being bound by" means in regards to AMA ethics guidelines? The "being bound by" does include penalty for going outside of those boundaries. Just food for thought for you (imaginary?) friend.
If you're going to pray, it would be best to not do so so loudly, and while standing on a street-corner making sure people saw what a pray-er you are.
You have a way of making mockery of everything even remotely 'holy' that you touch. You know that? I'm trying to tell you -- man -- you gotta' repent. You're walking in darkness but mistake what you *think* you know for The Light.
And "luck"? What's luck got to do with it? Good grief, what a poseur you are. You make me sick, you hypocrite!
Do you see how it's the "doing" crime while member of what could be identified as a "gang" rather than the "belong to a ..gang" that is against the law?
Do you even understand the question(s)?
I will lay it out this way ---
It is not against the law to be a member of a "gang".FULL STOP Questions? Do you dispute the statement? If not, then we can proceed.
To reassert, to make sure we're clear on this point --that much, that part of overall consideration (simple identifiable membership, alone) is not against laws of the State of Texas, nor laws of the State of California, nor laws of any State (within the United States of America) that I know of.
I think this point, and potential divergence of understanding is where our main disagreements chiefly stem.
If you dispute this -- then tell me now, and make whatever difference of opinion you may have plain.
Yet if you do --please spare us repetition of the viewpoint you hold that MC members are -- drug dealing murderous scum -- etc., etc. -- we've all heard that before a thousand times over by now.
Answer the questions, and answer those narrowly considered before going afield from those into other blah-blah-blah., dawg.
I used a "magic" word. Perhaps even two of those. What will be your excuse for not addressing the subject matter, this time?
Moving on from there, from that pile of muck I sense will soon be impending --then (when you respond) @splat@ delivered like a turd an the pages of a perfectly innocent 'book':
IF it were against the law to merely be "member" of what LE could possibly identify as being a "gang" then rounding people up once they were identified (either rightly, or else wrongly too) of being in a gang would be a simple matter. It would be so simple that it undoubtedly would rapidly begin to present an entire other 'set' (no pun intended) of problems.
What to do with the gangs? Send them away, make them disappear --- would be one of the solutions presented as cure for "the problem". It has happened before. Lets's not be too eager to pave the way for it to happen all over again, Mmm'kay?
Do you understand what I am saying here? If not, then feel free to consult with Dr. Ben Carson. Though one not be required to be an actual brain surgeon to understand the things I'm talking about here, I'm persuaded the good Mr. Carson would see at once what I'm driving at.