|
Home > Archive > Lyme Disease > October 2004 > Frank is the Good Guy and........
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Frank is the Good Guy and........
|
|
| Greatcod 2004-10-12, 7:09 pm |
| these other two are trollholes. Some people seem to have a problem
with
anyone who realizes that the Lyme Disease "Controversy" is much more
widespread and serious than "contoversy" suggests. The trollholes
never offer any serious advice or direction, but only try to disrupt
and discredit those who make honest attempts to find ways to better
understand or treat the problems that medical failure has created for
us. Fortunately, the trollholes
aren't intelligent or informed enough to shut us down.....and they are
humorless, which is conclusive proof of their lack of character.
| |
| JWismille 2004-10-12, 7:09 pm |
| Does anyone read this assholes posts anymore?
He must be mad that the queers went back to the village and left the cape.
| |
| RMAgricola 2004-10-12, 7:09 pm |
| Well, well look who is homophobic ?
Martha A.
| |
| derdrittemann 2004-10-13, 11:08 am |
| Greatcod@Yahoo.com (Greatcod) wrote in message news:<caef409e.0410121019.5b80953e@posting.google.com>...
> "The trollholes
> never offer any serious advice or direction, but only try to disrupt
> and discredit those who make honest attempts to find ways to better
> understand or treat the problems that medical failure has created for
> us".
And you seem, like many others here, to repeatedly resort to the ad
hominem attack...
....apparently because you lack the intellectual ability or willingness
to address substance.
You continually denigrate and degenerate with nonsensical personality
issues...a mindless continual gradeschool playground of endless
name-calling and abuse. (i.e., "trollholes"...ooooh, clever).
Pathetically childish.
"Good" guys and "bad" guys? Are you serious? You the "Lyme Avenger" or
something like that? You think this is a Saturday morning cartoon show
or something?
Is this the comicbook world you and your cohorts live in?
Why don't you try focusing on WHAT people are saying...
....and not WHO is saying it?
| |
| Frank de Groot 2004-10-13, 11:08 am |
| "derdrittemann" <derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> And you seem, like many others here, to repeatedly resort to the ad
> hominem attack...
You don't, XXXXX?
| |
| Greatcod 2004-10-13, 11:08 am |
| You say nothing, you offer nothing. And you probably don't know
anything.
You use words to slash what others offer. Meanness is your calling
card, the kind of meanness that characterizes bad lawyering
everywhere.
| |
| derdrittemann 2004-10-13, 7:09 pm |
| "Frank de Groot" <franciad@online.no> wrote in message news:<0a9bd.1783$Km6.43835@news4.e.nsc.no>...
> "derdrittemann" <derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
>
> "You don't, XXXXX"?
I am perfectly willing to have calm, reasonable dialogue with anyone
who wants to try to behave civilly.
I will, however, as I have said repeatedly in the past, respond "in
kind"...and even "up the ante" to those who prefer name-calling to
reasoned argument and discussion.
I came in here to point out what should now be obvious to
everyone...that the RICO "case" was a fantasy with no basis in legal
reality.
Pointing that out...was not "negative". It needed to be done.
I was attacked by the author of this "idea" and her little yapping
attack Chihuahua...whose main function seems to be to dysfunctionally
nip at other people's ankles...and wet herself with her own rhetoric.
I was labelled "McSweegan's lawyer"...with absolutely no basis,
whatever. Accused of all kinds of misconduct with absolutely nothing
except difference of opinion to account for any of that nonsense.
There is a "rule" in American sports that the retaliator is the one
who always gets caught and penalized.
I take no satisfaction that one of those responsible for the mess here
is hopefully, now where she needs to be...and let's hope she gets the
help and attention she needs and deserves.
The other one...should think about getting some help as well.
| |
| derdrittemann 2004-10-13, 7:09 pm |
| Greatcod@Yahoo.com (Greatcod) wrote in message news:<caef409e.0410130800.688fb884@posting.google.com>...
> "You say nothing, you offer nothing. And you probably don't know
> anything.
> You use words to slash what others offer. Meanness is your calling
> card, the kind of meanness that characterizes bad lawyering
> everywhere".
I wonder if you realize that you just responded to criticism that you
repeatedly utilize "ad hominem" arguments and attacks...
....with another "ad hominem" attack.
I really don't feel as if I need you assisstance to help me prove my
case...
....but your help is nonetheless, appreciated.
| |
| zipzip 2004-10-14, 2:07 am |
| like lionel hutz...
Lionel Hutz: Well, he's kind of had it in for me ever since I
accidentally ran over his dog. Actually, replace "accidentally" with
"repeatedly," and replace "dog" with "son."
Lionel Hutz: This is the greatest case of false advertising I've seen
since I sued the movie The Never Ending Story.
Lionel Hutz: Well, I didn't win. Here's your pizza.
Marge: But we did win.
Lionel Hutz: That's okay. The box is empty
Judge: Mr. Hutz, are you aware you're not wearing any pants?
Lionel Hutz: Uh, your Honor, can I call for one of those bad trial
thingys?
Judge: You mean a mistrial?
Lionel Hutz: Yeah ... that's why you're the judge, and I am the law
.... talkin' ... guy.
| |
| Greatcod 2004-10-14, 11:07 am |
| derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com (derdrittemann) wrote in message
>
> I wonder if you realize that you just responded to criticism that you
> repeatedly utilize "ad hominem" arguments and attacks...
>
> ...with another "ad hominem" attack.
When the problem is a hominem, you attack the hominem
| |
| derdrittemann 2004-10-14, 7:10 pm |
| Greatcod@Yahoo.com (Greatcod) wrote in message news:<caef409e.0410121019.5b80953e@posting.google.com>...
> "The trollholes
> never offer any serious advice or direction, but only try to disrupt
> and discredit those who make honest attempts to find ways to better
> understand or treat the problems that medical failure has created for
> us".
And you seem, like many others here, to repeatedly resort to the ad
hominem attack...
....apparently because you lack the intellectual ability or willingness
to address substance.
You continually denigrate and degenerate with nonsensical personality
issues...a mindless continual gradeschool playground of endless
name-calling and abuse. (i.e., "trollholes"...ooooh, clever).
Pathetically childish.
"Good" guys and "bad" guys? Are you serious? You the "Lyme Avenger" or
something like that? You think this is a Saturday morning cartoon show
or something?
Is this the comicbook world you and your cohorts live in?
Why don't you try focusing on WHAT people are saying...
....and not WHO is saying it?
| |
| derdrittemann 2004-10-14, 10:08 pm |
| Greatcod@Yahoo.com (Greatcod) wrote in message news:<caef409e.0410140756.10e2f602@posting.google.com>...
> derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com (derdrittemann) wrote in message
>
>
> When the problem is a hominem, you attack the hominem
That's brilliant. Just brilliant.
"Hominem", however, is the indirect object. "ad"=towards,
"hominem"=the person.
The "em" ending simply is put there to show that it is the
object...not the subject.
Like I said, if you lack the intellectual capability to argure and
reason civilly...
....which it seems you do...then...well...ad hominem is about all
you've got isn't it?
| |
| Greatcod 2004-10-15, 10:07 pm |
| You say nothing, you offer nothing. And you probably don't know
anything.
You use words to slash what others offer. Meanness is your calling
card, the kind of meanness that characterizes bad lawyering
everywhere.
| |
| RMAgricola 2004-10-19, 7:07 am |
| Well, well look who is homophobic ?
Martha A.
| |
| Frank de Groot 2004-10-19, 7:14 pm |
| "derdrittemann" <derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> And you seem, like many others here, to repeatedly resort to the ad
> hominem attack...
You don't, XXXXX?
| |
| derdrittemann 2004-10-20, 2:07 am |
| Greatcod@Yahoo.com (Greatcod) wrote in message news:<caef409e.0410130800.688fb884@posting.google.com>...
> "You say nothing, you offer nothing. And you probably don't know
> anything.
> You use words to slash what others offer. Meanness is your calling
> card, the kind of meanness that characterizes bad lawyering
> everywhere".
I wonder if you realize that you just responded to criticism that you
repeatedly utilize "ad hominem" arguments and attacks...
....with another "ad hominem" attack.
I really don't feel as if I need you assisstance to help me prove my
case...
....but your help is nonetheless, appreciated.
| |
| Greatcod 2004-10-21, 11:07 am |
| derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com (derdrittemann) wrote in message
>
> I wonder if you realize that you just responded to criticism that you
> repeatedly utilize "ad hominem" arguments and attacks...
>
> ...with another "ad hominem" attack.
When the problem is a hominem, you attack the hominem
| |
| derdrittemann 2004-10-21, 7:09 pm |
| Greatcod@Yahoo.com (Greatcod) wrote in message news:<caef409e.0410140756.10e2f602@posting.google.com>...
> derdrittemann2003@yahoo.com (derdrittemann) wrote in message
>
>
> When the problem is a hominem, you attack the hominem
That's brilliant. Just brilliant.
"Hominem", however, is the indirect object. "ad"=towards,
"hominem"=the person.
The "em" ending simply is put there to show that it is the
object...not the subject.
Like I said, if you lack the intellectual capability to argure and
reason civilly...
....which it seems you do...then...well...ad hominem is about all
you've got isn't it?
|
| |
|
|