Re: Way to go, Dutch - you just made Fuckwit's argument for him.

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 09:19:27 GMT, "Rubystars" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> > "Jonathan Ball" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > On Sat, 29 Nov 2003 17:44:28 GMT, "Rubystars" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > <snip>
> > > > >
> > > > > >   See if you can get anything out of this. If so, maybe we can go on
> > > > > > about it a little farther:
> > > > >
> > > > > Nope, seemed like a bunch of gibberish. :(
> > > > >
> > > > > -Rubystars
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >    Please share any superior beliefs that you have about the issue.
> > >
> > > Please share a well-founded, thought out belief in the
> > > first place, Fuckwit.
> >
> > I think it's less a belief and more of a fact that something that doesn't
> > exist yet can't make any claims on a right to exist.
>
>
>     Agreed. That was nothing.  Please share any superior

Fuck you and "superior", Fuckwit.  You are demonstrably 
inferior, in every way.

> beliefs that 
> you have about the issue...but by now it's already apparent that you 
> have none.