Hammond drops annual dinner cruise

Posts: 3424

happy jack wrote:

I’m not mad that the thread was deleted; it should never have been allowed to exist in the first place, and a non-psychotic administrator would have realized that early on and put a stop to it. Unfortunately, the administrator at that time did not fit that description.

Artie60438 wrote:

Wow! Pretty tough talk now that the previous admin is gone,Coward. It's also pretty stupid for someone who thinks the administrator of a board is psychotic to join there,but then again logic and reasoning aren't exactly your strong points.

It’s kind of odd to be called a coward by someone who joined a cyber wolfpack and spent two years picking on a lonely woman from behind his keyboard, using an alias. But that’s a different issue.
Incidentally, I used that same "tough talk" in real time with the previous administrator; why do you think I had so many 'vacations'?
(I had no way of knowing he was nuts until after I had joined.)

happy jack wrote:

That thread was never designed to allow people to “argue’”with Freetime. It was designed and and maintained for the express purpose of ridiculing and vilifying a lonely woman and private citizen.

Artie60438 wrote:

Bullsh*t. This was someone who was carrying on a very public vendetta against the city and employees of Hammond even going so far as to filing a frivolous and malicious lawsuit against the City and a few employees that caused them financial harm. Non-stop posting of lies on the BLT board and constant calling in to WJOB....hardly a "private citizen".

I see.
Freetime made you create that thread – you just couldn’t help yourself, could you?
Nothing like beating up on a woman for a few minutes every day to make yourself believe (for at least those few minutes) that you are not completely impotent.

Posts: 7254

happy jack wrote:

[b]It’s kind of odd to be called a coward by someone who joined a cyber wolfpack and spent two years picking on a lonely woman from behind his keyboard, using an alias. But that’s a different issue.

I simply criticized and made fun of someone that thought that anyone who challenged her lunatic allegations should be silenced. Oh,and for the about the 20th time,my criticism didn't start until after she lied for months about this site harboring viruses. Please make a note of that so you don't embarrass yourself further.

Quote:

Incidentally, I used that same "tough talk" in real time with the previous administrator; why do you think I had so many 'vacations'?

Your vacations were a result of your failure to leave baggage from the other board behind and attacking other members.

Quote:

(I had no way of knowing he was nuts until after I had joined.)

Yet you still stayed,didn't you?? Sure doesn't paint a very flattering picture of your common sense.

happy jack wrote:

That thread was never designed to allow people to “argue’”with Freetime. It was designed and and maintained for the express purpose of ridiculing and vilifying a lonely woman and private citizen.

She could have joined here anytime she wamted to. She chose not to.

Artie60438 wrote:

Bullsh*t. This was someone who was carrying on a very public vendetta against the city and employees of Hammond even going so far as to filing a frivolous and malicious lawsuit against the City and a few employees that caused them financial harm. Non-stop posting of lies on the BLT board and constant calling in to WJOB....hardly a "private citizen".

happy jack wrote:

[b]I see.
Freetime made you create that thread – you just couldn’t help yourself, could you?
Nothing like beating up on a woman for a few minutes every day to make yourself believe (for at least those few minutes) that you are not completely impotent.

I simply pointed out her lies and false allegations. It's interesting how you always point out that she was a woman,as if they're the weaker sex and can't defend themselves intellectually. You do realize that we're living in the 21st century and women are equals to men,don't you? Do I detect a bit of Misogyny here? After all,you've made it very clear in the past that you believe a woman shouldn't have the right to decide for herself on certain health issues.

Oh,and I asked you before but you ignored the question.....What is your purpose for continuing to dredge this up. What on earth do you think you're going to accomplish?

Posts: 3424

Artie60438 wrote:

Your vacations were a result of your failure to leave baggage from the other board behind and attacking other members.

My vacations were for objecting to the insane censorship of the previous administrator.

Artie60438 wrote:

It's interesting how you always point out that she was a woman,as if they're the weaker sex and can't defend themselves intellectually. You do realize that we're living in the 21st century and women are equals to men,don't you? Do I detect a bit of Misogyny here?

Misogyny?
No, what you are detecting is a suggestion that you act like a gentleman. But I realize that I’m spinning my wheels by suggesting that because, in order for someone to be a gentleman, that person must first and foremost be a man.
And with you, that definitely ain’t happenin’.

Artie60438 wrote:

After all,you've made it very clear in the past that you believe a woman shouldn't have the right to decide for herself on certain health issues.

I believe a woman has the right to choose to do with her own body whatever she wishes. It is only when she opts to dismember other bodies by sucking them through vacuum systems, or to scald to death other bodies using various chemical solutions, that I have an objection.

Artie60438 wrote:

Oh,and I asked you before but you ignored the question.....What is your purpose for continuing to dredge this up. What on earth do you think you're going to accomplish?

I didn’t “dredge this up”.
Look at the second and third posts on this thread …. genius.

Posts: 7254

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

Your vacations were a result of your failure to leave baggage from the other board behind and attacking other members.

[b]My vacations were for objecting to the insane censorship of the previous administrator.

Yet you continued to press for membership even though you thought the admin was "psychotic". Priceless!

Artie60438 wrote:

It's interesting how you always point out that she was a woman,as if they're the weaker sex and can't defend themselves intellectually. You do realize that we're living in the 21st century and women are equals to men,don't you? Do I detect a bit of Misogyny here?

[b]Misogyny?

Quote:

No, what you are detecting is a suggestion that you act like a gentleman. But I realize that I’m spinning my wheels by suggesting that because, in order for someone to be a gentleman, that person must first and foremost be a man.
And with you, that definitely ain’t happenin’.

Ha! Now comes the usual attack on my manhood. Getting desperate again? Very Happy

Artie60438 wrote:

After all,you've made it very clear in the past that you believe a woman shouldn't have the right to decide for herself on certain health issues.

Quote:

[b]I believe a woman has the right to choose to do with her own body whatever she wishes. It is only when she opts to dismember other bodies by sucking them through vacuum systems, or to scald to death other bodies using various chemical solutions, that I have an objection.

Yet if a woman becomes pregnant through no fault of her own you would deny her the right to choose to have a medical procedure that is in her own best interest.

Artie60438 wrote:

Oh,and I asked you before but you ignored the question.....What is your purpose for continuing to dredge this up. What on earth do you think you're going to accomplish?

Quote:

[b]I didn’t “dredge this up”.
Look at the second and third posts on this thread …. genius.

I did,but apparently you didn't. Rolling Eyes

Karen asked me when she died. I responded "Valentine's day". Immediately you fired off "Have you stopped dancing yet?" Clearly you're the one who provoked the argument.

I'm still waiting for an answer as to what on earth you think you're going to accomplish,other than making a fool of yourself and amusing me,by bringing ancient history up? Basketball

Posts: 1306

I'm sorry I took the thread off track. I figured Freetime was dancing in heaven about the cruise's cancellation.

Posts: 7254

KarenT wrote:

I'm sorry I took the thread off track. I figured Freetime was dancing in heaven about the cruise's cancellation.

You had absolutely nothing to do with this thread turning out the way it has,Karen. All you did was ask a simple question that I answered plainly and with no sarcasm whatsoever that would have instigated a fight. Unfortunately,the board troll decided to to stir things up again.

Posts: 3424

Artie60438 wrote:

Ha! Now comes the usual attack on my manhood.

You have no manhood to attack.

Artie60438 wrote:

Yet if a woman becomes pregnant through no fault of her own you would deny her the right to choose to have a medical procedure that is in her own best interest.

Yet if a baby is conceived through no fault of his own, you would deny that baby the right to choose whether or not he wishes to undergo any of these ‘medical procedures’(or, as you like to call them, ‘choices’).

Suction Abortion: Used during the first three months of pregnancy - A suction tube (27 times stronger than a home vacuum cleaner) is inserted into the womb. The powerful suction tears the baby apart limb from limb and sucks it from the womb along with the placenta. The baby's remains are deposited into an attached waste bottle.
Dilation and Curettage (D&C): Used at the end of the third month of pregnancy (approximately 12 weeks) - The cervix is dialated, ring forceps are inserted into the womb and the baby is extracted piece by piece. Then a curette (a sharp knife in a loop shape) is inserted and used to scrape away any of the baby or the placenta that remains. Profuse bleeding follows.
Dilation and Extraction (D&E): Used after 13 weeks - The cervix is dialated and the unborn child is dismembered with plier-like forceps. Force is needed to pull the baby apart. The instrument is used to seize a leg or other part of the body and then, with a twisting motion, tear it from the baby's body. The baby's spine is snapped and the skull crushed. After the baby parts are removed, they are reassembled outside the womb to be sure all are removed. Frequently baby parts are left inside the mother's womb. This can cause serious complications and sometimes death.

KarenT wrote:

I'm sorry I took the thread off track

You didn’t, KarenT. Artie did that when he dredged up his version of events of the night of Freetime's death, an event that finally put an actual, non-inflatable woman in his life on Valentine's Day.

Posts: 7254

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

Yet if a woman becomes pregnant through no fault of her own you would deny her the right to choose to have a medical procedure that is in her own best interest.

[b]Yet if a baby is conceived through no fault of his own, you would deny that baby the right to choose whether or not he wishes to undergo any of these ‘medical procedures’(or, as you like to call them, ‘choices’).

A simple yes or no will due,coward.

KarenT wrote:

I'm sorry I took the thread off track

Quote:

[b]You didn’t, KarenT. Artie did that when he dredged up his version of events of the night of Freetime's death, an event that finally put an actual, non-inflatable woman in his life on Valentine's Day.

[/quote]
My "version" is exactly what was documented by the NWI Times newspaper yet you continue to lie about it and showcase your idiocy. Once again genius....

Quote:

I'm still waiting for an answer as to what on earth you think you're going to accomplish,other than making a fool of yourself and amusing me,by bringing ancient history up?

Going to answer or run away like you always do?

Posts: 3424

Artie60438 wrote:

A simple yes or no will due,coward.

OK.
Yes or no.
Will that “due”?
Incidentally, what was the question?

Artie60438 wrote:

I'm still waiting for an answer as to what on earth you think you're going to accomplish,other than making a fool of yourself and amusing me,by bringing ancient history up? Going to answer or run away like you always do?

I didn’t bring up ancient history – I responded to the ancient history that was brought up on the first page of this thread, first by KarenT, then by you.
You might try reading it.
Or, you might want to query KarenT as to why she brought up ancient history.
Either way, don't make me no never mind.

Posts: 7254

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

A simple yes or no will due,coward.

[b]OK.
Yes or no.
Will that “due”?
Incidentally, what was the question?

Look everyone!!! The trolling coward has now morphed into the typo/spelling police affraid

Quote:

Artie60438 wrote:

I'm still waiting for an answer as to what on earth you think you're going to accomplish,other than making a fool of yourself and amusing me,by bringing ancient history up? Going to answer or run away like you always do?

[b]I didn’t bring up ancient history – I responded to the ancient history that was brought up on the first page of this thread, first by KarenT, then by you.
You might try reading it.
Or, you might want to query KarenT as to why she brought up ancient history.
Either way, don't make me no never mind.

And once again the board troll runs from the question Very Happy

Posts: 1306

The two are linked in my mind - free and the Hammond cruise.

Posts: 3424

Artie60438 wrote:

And once again the board troll runs from the question Very Happy

Once again, please read the first page of the thread.

Posts: 7254

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

And once again the board troll runs from the question Very Happy

[b]Once again, please read the first page of the thread.[

Run coward run! Your title as board Pinata is safe Laughing

Posts: 3424

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

And once again the board troll runs from the question Very Happy

[b]Once again, please read the first page of the thread.[

Run coward run! Your title as board Pinata is safe Laughing

Artie60438 wrote:

While perishing in a fire is indeed a horrible way to go,the truth is that I don't give a rats ass that she's dead.

Posts: 7254

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

And once again the board troll runs from the question Very Happy

[b]Once again, please read the first page of the thread.[

Run coward run! Your title as board Pinata is safe Laughing

Artie60438 wrote:

While perishing in a fire is indeed a horrible way to go,the truth is that I don't give a rats ass that she's dead.

I made that comment a long time ago and it's just as true today as it was then.

The cartoon was a response to your unnecessary comment that started you down the road to another embarrassing defeat.

Posts: 3424

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

And once again the board troll runs from the question Very Happy

[b]Once again, please read the first page of the thread.[

Run coward run! Your title as board Pinata is safe Laughing

Artie60438 wrote:

While perishing in a fire is indeed a horrible way to go,the truth is that I don't give a rats ass that she's dead.

I made that comment a long time ago and it's just as true today as it was then.

The cartoon was a response to your unnecessary comment that started you down the road to another embarrassing defeat.

Defeat?
Please explain.

Posts: 7254

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

happy jack wrote:

Artie60438 wrote:

And once again the board troll runs from the question Very Happy

[b]Once again, please read the first page of the thread.[

Run coward run! Your title as board Pinata is safe Laughing

Artie60438 wrote:

While perishing in a fire is indeed a horrible way to go,the truth is that I don't give a rats ass that she's dead.

I made that comment a long time ago and it's just as true today as it was then.

The cartoon was a response to your unnecessary comment that started you down the road to another embarrassing defeat.

Defeat?
Please explain.

As soon as you answer this:I'm still waiting for an answer as to what on earth you think you're going to accomplish,other than making a fool of yourself and amusing me,by bringing ancient history up?

Posts: 3424

Artie60438 wrote:

As soon as you answer this:I'm still waiting for an answer as to what on earth you think you're going to accomplish,other than making a fool of yourself and amusing me,by bringing ancient history up?

Why do I need a reason?

Posts: 3987

Posts: 1306