On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Wally Keeler wrote:

> Never said that you were. There's nothing personal.

Two meaningless statements. I didn't say it was 'personal'.
I wrote that there is no intent of being 'convincing'
behind the statement; it was a statement of fact.
My correcting your imbecility does not imply things being
interpreted in a 'personal' manner.

Nor does stating 'nothing personal' excuse you from
idiotic, murderous ape behavior.

> However, your statement remains unconvincing.

It doesn't. You simply wish to project 'unconvincigness'
when 'convincing' or 'non-convincing' is not even engaged
in the situation. Try to get this into your idiotic skull:
my statements were nto to you, nor were they meant to
'convince' anyone. Convincing is for idiots who feel insecure
enough that they feel the need to 'prove' their dicks over,
and over, and over again.

Ie, self-pity flipped out to self-importance.

Things of actual truth, value, and beauty are not 'convincing'.
Peddlers are. VERY convincing. Just ask Max G2K.

> However, your statement remains unconvincing

As above: none of the statements are 'convincing' or 'unconvincing'.
Ie, you're attempting falsification of my statement.

> > Delusional wishful thinking.
>
> Nothing delusional about it,

Absolutuely delusional, love. But you enjoy denial.

> just unconvinced

Nobody is trying to convince you, you idiotic ape.

> by your moronic blather. Yes,
> yes I know, the only moronic blather is mine –

True. Keep going in circles.

> nevertheless you are
> unconvincing.

Tsk. The illiteracy is appalling.
But being stuck in your ego, you'd not know any better.
You poor thing.

> You made a declaration about yourself.

No, I didn't. That you choose to mis-reprsent what I wrote as a
'declaration' is your own, very personal & myopic problem.
You can go stand in the corner and scream until you're blue
in the face that I have made declaration, or that my
statement of fact are 'unconvincing'–but that will alter little besides
your energetic status (quickly diminishing) and fuck up your ability
to discern reality furthermore.

> I prefer convincing truth

Truth is not convincing, baby. Truth is self-evident and cares not to
convince. Those who see, see; those ho don't do not. Hence truth cannot
be 'discussed, doalogued. taught, or preached'.

And you my dearest, couldn't discern the smallest possible grain of
truth. So quit yapping about it as if you do.

> = something you are remiss in making convincing.

No, baby. You want PROOFS. Bravado. Posing. Egotism.
You'll not get any of that, and you can froth at the mouth, stomp your
foot, pose all you wish–the loss will remain yours.

> Chow baby


Like talking to yourself, don't you? Such a lovable barking dog.

A buddhist monk walking down the path with a friend buddhist monk:
'Does the dog have Buddha nature'?
'Not before it's convinced, and the Buddha nature is 'proved' to him'.

Or otherwisely phrased: dogs cannot discern Truth before they get over
their self-important penises.

Ciao cuckoo,

`, . ` `k a r e i' ? ' D42