John Swartz wrote:

Rolf Tueschen wrote:


With my freedom of speech I included that all the critics had the right to
create their opinions. But if I read them right they accuse Sloan of being
a
criminal which is character assassination.

But when I read Matt Nemmers, such an uneducated ignorant, I remember the
tradition of lynching.


Gee, no character assassination on YOUR part...


100% not. Before you step in you should read the messages of your loudmouth
number two or three. Here goes:

Uneducated = not even having heard of Henry Miller

Ignorant = accusing Sloan of being obsessed by sex with... and at the same time
using a vocabulary of inhibited (homosexual?) sissies in combination with
unawareness why people could conclude such things out of the language


In short you must only read Nemmers to get the clues. His dominating defense
that he's married doesn't change one single thing. As a professional
psychologist I know enough about such character deformations of emotionally
dead men who never really left puberty; no wonder that he is obsessed of donkey
tails and assholes; I am also an expert of criminal cases where suddenly such
married men, also being fathers BTW, begin to make excursions in the wood but
disguised in female stockings and all kind of sweet things.

But since I don't know Nemmers personally I would never make any kind of
diagnoses about him - what he does to the contrary about Sloan. But again -
this is a consequence of his lack of education.

Just to support Phil Innes - the authentic male doesn't need to demonstrate his
superiority or length of his cock. He simply rests in himself. No need to
demonstrate anything at all. The weaker your self, the more you must do in
monkey business and scratching your genital region, say, like sissy Michael
Jackson. I seriously doubt that Matt can dance and sing like the artist. Above
all I'm asking myself what Nemmers can do at _all_ other than unsuccessfully
lynching Sam Sloan.

excuse me if I gave you too much data to digest for the coming weekend. If you
have questions, feel free to ask them.

Rolf

"Rolf Tueschen" wrote in message
...

Uneducated = not even having heard of Henry Miller

Premise: Not having heard of Henry Miller equates to being uneducated.

Premise: I have not heard of Henry Miller.

Conclusion: I am uneducated.

Sounds like I need a refund for all those years of schooling. Let's see: 13
years public, 4 years undergrad, 3 years grad, and still I am uneducated.

Of course, another posibility is that one of the premises is false.

David the Uneducated
--
without the block

On 04 Dec 2003 19:25:38 GMT, (Rolf Tueschen)
wrote:

Uneducated = not even having heard of Henry Miller

Didn't he write some medical texts on the topic of cancer? Or was he
a Nin-ny from the 1930s?

"Mike Murray" wrote in message
...
On 04 Dec 2003 19:25:38 GMT, (Rolf Tueschen)
wrote:

Uneducated = not even having heard of Henry Miller

Didn't he write some medical texts on the topic of cancer? Or was he
a Nin-ny from the 1930s?

Good God!

He is perhaps the only American writer of note after Clemens. Particularly
he wrote of what keeps us apart from each other, and of our spiritual
possibilities, individual and collective. He talked much about sex, and its
complexes within Western culture, and within our lives. He did for writing
on these subjects what Dostoyevski did for his own country - that is, deal
with the actuality of it, and as Dostoyevski anticipated Freud, and this
vast topic of the unconscious, Miller employed the American genius, and took
it head-on beyond compulsive rationalisations.

He is a world author.

An anecdote: When Orwell went to Paris in 1944/45 as correspondent, he
believed [rightly] that the communists were out to kill him. He asked Miller
for protection, and Miller gave him a pistol and a couple of guys to watch
his back. (Orwell only accepted the pistol.)

Miller is perhaps the first native World Writer from the American continent
[excepting Clemens]. What can you guys have studied in the humanities
instead?!

Phil

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 21:32:55 GMT, "Phil Innes"
wrote:

Uneducated = not even having heard of Henry Miller

Didn't he write some medical texts on the topic of cancer? Or was he
a Nin-ny from the 1930s?

Good God!

He is perhaps the only American writer of note after Clemens. Particularly
he wrote of what keeps us apart from each other, and of our spiritual
possibilities, individual and collective. He talked much about sex, and its
complexes within Western culture, and within our lives. He did for writing
on these subjects what Dostoyevski did for his own country - that is, deal
with the actuality of it, and as Dostoyevski anticipated Freud, and this
vast topic of the unconscious, Miller employed the American genius, and took
it head-on beyond compulsive rationalisations.

He is a world author.

An anecdote: When Orwell went to Paris in 1944/45 as correspondent, he
believed [rightly] that the communists were out to kill him. He asked Miller
for protection, and Miller gave him a pistol and a couple of guys to watch
his back. (Orwell only accepted the pistol.)

Miller is perhaps the first native World Writer from the American continent
[excepting Clemens]. What can you guys have studied in the humanities
instead?!

Humor, puns, word play, for example. How about you?

Miller is perhaps the first native World Writer from the American
continent
[excepting Clemens]. What can you guys have studied in the humanities
instead?!

Humor, puns, word play, for example. How about you?

Such a response Mike! Can you not express yourself more? What can this
response mean to the entirety of what I wrote???

Phil

On Thu, 04 Dec 2003 23:15:43 GMT, "Phil Innes"
wrote:

Miller is perhaps the first native World Writer from the American
continent
[excepting Clemens]. What can you guys have studied in the humanities
instead?!

Humor, puns, word play, for example. How about you?

Such a response Mike! Can you not express yourself more? What can this
response mean to the entirety of what I wrote???

This hits right in the plexus, Phil. Seemed like you missed the nexus
of what I originally said. Maybe. Or well, maybe it just wasn't
funny. But *I* thought it was a nais try.

"Matt Nemmers" wrote in message news:eD8zb.400915$Tr4.1153379@attbi_s03...
"Phil Innes" wrote in message
...
By the
way, last I heard you were still ducking Neil Brennen because he scared you
into hiding.

I think the complaints Phil's ISP received had more to do with it.
They were impressed by his threat of violence against Mike Nolan.

"StanB" wrote in message ...
"Phil Innes" wrote in message
...

"Matt Nemmers" wrote in message
news:eD8zb.400915$Tr4.1153379@attbi_s03...

Of course, I wouldn't blame you for sticking it out though. After all,
you
can't be a coward ALL your life.....

You are just a baby Matt, and know not what you say. If we ever meet, it
will be interesting to see how brave you are, in person

Phil's back and making new friends. Ahshel.

Both here and on the Shakespeare newsgroup.

..
Uneducated = not even having heard of Henry Miller

Premise: Not having heard of Henry Miller equates to being uneducated.

Premise: I have not heard of Henry Miller.
Conclusion: I am uneducated.

Sounds like I need a refund for all those years of schooling. Let's see: 13
years public, 4 years undergrad, 3 years grad, and still I am uneducated.

Of course, another posibility is that one of the premises is false.

David the Uneducated


"David the Uneducated," are you not aware that Mr. Tueschen has called,
perhaps *ten thousand* different posters "uneducated" or lacking in education,
yet over the course of many years has himself demonstrated an amazing ignorance
of many subjects? His latest gaffe was his gross misinterpretation of Michael
Jackson's "moves" during performances, which Her Tueschen called "scratching."
It is nigh well impossible to scratch oneself through leather pants, however
tight they may be.... :-)

A phrase leaps to mind, a phrase from Mr. Tueschen's own vocabulary:
"culture shock." Much is lost in translation from true Americana, to German
"academic," or vice versa. And when you see yourself as an "academic," as well
as much smarter than everyone else (including other "academics"), well, a
hammer tends to see everything as a nail.






Of course, another posibility is that one of the premises is false.


Possibility (two s's). :-)