Ray Springfield Guilty of MALICIOUS LIBEL

In a post below, titled: "more childish backtracking from M" Ray Springfield wrote:


"M, Learn to read what others say, besides learning to mean what you write. You stated that dictatorshop in AMerica was ok. You stated that it was more important to conquer the Taliban to maintain a free country here. That is what you said M. Grow up."


Here is my rebuttal and challenge to Ray:


I most emphatically DID NOT state that dictatorship in America was OK, or that it was more important to conquer the Taliban than to maintain a free country here. What's more, at this point Ray knows it, as the entire issue has been thoroughly clarified. He is now DELIBERATELY spreading FALSE information about me which is LIBEL.


Ray, if you can show ONE INSTANCE where I stated that dictatorship in America was OK, I will send you $1,000.00. If you cannot do so, you really need to print a retraction.


I am all for exchange of ideas and debate of issues on this forum, but I don't think deliberately libelous erroneous statements should be allowed.


It is not a matter of opinion here as to whether Ray is correct or I am correct; he is deliberately ascribing to me a statement which I never made, period, and which does not come close to reflecting my views. Nor does it even come close to anything I wrote. I simply never wrote anything resembling the statement that dictatorship in America was OK.


This is a deliberate malicious and libelous statement on the part of Ray Springfield, since all potential misunderstandings regarding the issue have already been clarified. He knows I did not state that dictatorship in America was OK.


When Ray misconstrued Dan Hanson's past remarks, it was apparent that Ray probably believed what he was saying, as poor an interpretation as it may have been. Here it is IMPOSSIBLE that Ray believes what he is saying, because I simply never stated that dictatorship in America was OK, and that is what he claims I stated. It is quite simply and entirely a malicious attempt on Ray's part.

when I said:"When the bombing first happened, I wasn't sure that the Bush administration was staging a true military coup d'etat. The evidence suggests otherwise, but I wouldn't put it past Cheney and Rumsfeld. Without some critical thinking over the next few months or years, a military


dictatorship in the name of God and country could easily transpire."


You replied:


"First of all I seriously doubt that, but even if so, would it really be worse than the Taliban's military dictatorship?"


The answer is yes it is worse. Your answer implies approval.

Secondly, considering that the Bush campaign used black operation tactics to rig the election in Florida, it is not an unlikely event.


First,you are a cry baby.Secondly, you are an anonymous(what kind of idiot calls himself M) poster that posts ridiculous crap all of the time. If you think you can win a libel suit over this, then sue me. Of course you will be subject to a counter claim. I'm ready and willing. Let us know what your real name is and where you live.


In the mean time, go suck on a pacifier you little wimp.

Well, well... just look at the view counts in this thread. Wonder if it tells us a little something about Ray?

... before I posted the above, it was 14 views for M's post, the first of two in the thread at that time, 26 for Ray's, the second. Funny in a pathetic sort of way...

That is clear.

M,


You're a bright guy. From many of your posts and comments I get the sense you're a very decent guy as well. Unfortunately you think you can win a debate with an idiot. Ray's a troll, simple as that. Stop feeding him him and he'll go away.

First, questioning whether one thing would actually be worse than another in no way implies approval. Given that the comparison uses the word "worse", it doesn't sound like I think very highly of either, now does it?


Secondly, even if you think (wrongly) that I approve something by implication does not give you the right to make up false quotes and false statements and ascribe them to me. You should be ashamed.


Third, you may not be sued for libel but your actions are indeed malicious and libelous. I debate issues. You not only twist words, you deliberately misrepresent what others have said, even to the extent of fabricating false statements and putting these words in their mouths.


Fourth, please come to Foxwoods and ask Greg or John or Vince or Mary to introduce us. I can't think of a better finish to a good poker session than finally getting to meet the moron of 2+2.

Lets go with litigation, cry baby.You won't because you'll lose.

He still hides behind a false e-mail address, and a fake name. What a honorable idiot.

Seriously, I'll be pleased as punch when the racketeers involved in internet gambling are brought to justice. They will be. That is also something I stated would most likely happen. The government will shut down the industry. If Bush is serious about eradicating terrorism, and its money supply, then internet poker doesn't have long to live.


I would bet indictments of Americans in this industry will be fothcoming in 2002.

Ray,

He may not expose who he is on this forum because he may have outstanding warrants. I don't think that he'll ever identify himself. You should just let his further posts pass without arguing with him. He obviously is obsessed with having the last word. I agree with your interpretation of his posted statements.

He's clearly more concerned with toppling the Taliban than he is with defending liberty.

Amazing how brand-new posters seem to show up to support you so frequently when the going gets rough.

My email address is real, as quite a few 2+2'ers know.

Ii is doubtful I would waste my time with litigation over this, and I have managed to solved all but one private difference in the past in a much more personal manner. The one instance where I did sue someone: a crackpot tried to cheat me in a used-car sale, so I represented myself in court and won the case and judgment. It is rather tempting to consider the spectre of you trying to represent yourself in court, however;-)


All of this, however, doesn't change the fact that your statements are malicious and libelous. Stating on several occasions that I said a dictatorship in the US was OK, when I most certainly did not say that or anything even close to that, is just plain low-down and stupid.


Let's go instead with the visit to Foxwoods...I think you and I have quite a few things that should really be discussed in person. There are other reasons you might want to visit Foxwoods too: lovely countryside, large game selection, easy money, and a few "regulars" who also happen to be nitwits at the poker table. You'd probably make a bundle and have a grand old time. I could give you the scenic tour of the premises and surrounding area and we could "iron out" our differences;-)

...for the kind words.


I really don't much care if Ray or other trolls call me a jerk, an idiot, a kook or whatever. But it is a bit much when they falsely put words in your mouth and say you said something you never said. Even idiots and trolls should have more smarts and decency than that.

I will asking Chuck Weinstock to identify you. It is my intention to commence civil litigation against you. You are a coward, or you would have posted your name. I'll use Westlaw, and Nexus-Lexus. Your little game is up.

Ray,


I'm just wondering; What rock did you grow up under?


M's e-mail address is at the top of all of his posts. Come to

Foxwoods sometime. I'd be more than happy to introduce you to each other. You'll usually find me playing 5-10 Hold'em on saturday. Look for me in the one or the ten seat or just ask one of the flor people who I am and they will point you in the right direction.


Looking forward to seeing you soon,


Very sincerely


Mary

Sammy,


Your take on M is right on the money. I've had the pleasure of knowin g M for a while now and as far as decent guys go the only ones who give him any competition are John and Vince.


Mary

You are the malicious practitioner of slander. I would not be surprised to discover that you have no assets to lose. Nevertheless, your anonymity speaks for itself. You are a coward.

...as the resident (fill in the blank and win a prize) of this 2+2 forum.


I see you haven't taken me up on my offer to send you $1,000.00 if you could provide even ONE INSTANCE of where I stated that a dictatorship in the USA was OK, as you falsely claimed.


Take a chill pill and call your lawyer in the morning if you care to--although the best help for you, in my personal opinion, might be some psychological counseling and a year-long course in improving your reading comprehension and writing skills.


A prize quote from a Prize (Fill in the blank):


Ray Springfield:"M, Learn to read what others say, besides learning to mean what you write. You stated that dictatorshop in AMerica was ok."


As I've pointed out, I never stated this and I don't believe it. What's more, YOU KNOW I NEVER STATED THIS.


Time for an apology and retraction, Ray. I believe owe me and the readers of this forum that much.

...send 'em all to Foxwoods.

...send the Owl and the Pussycat too.

Ray,


Much of this disagreement appears to stem from your comments about the possibility of a military dictatorship, and M's response. I now realize you were talking about that possibility in the U.S. But when I read your original comment about it I assumed you were referring to the possibility it could occur in Afghanistan. It seemed clear to me M saw it that way too, and was asking whether such a dictatorship would necessarily be any worse than current Taliban rule. M clarified this in subsequent posts. But sometimes in the heat of debate, there can be a tendency to skim and reply quickly. So I'm wondering if you read those subsequent posts of his carefully, since it really appears to me that the problem was triggered by a simple miscommunication. Why not go back and read through that original thread and see if you don't agree?


I think you're wasting your talents, Ray, with all the talk of litigation and such. You guys don't actually disagree on the point in question. /images/smile.gif Believe me; I speak from experience. I've seen and been involved in such written miscommunications on the Net more times that I care to remember. But it's always nice to realize that's all it was. Why not take another look and see if that's what happened this time? I know you have the ability to reassess. Then the two of you can verbally shake hands and look back on the angry words subsequent to the seeds of the disagreement as understandable detritus to be cast off with a chuckle. What do you say?


John F.

Sheesh. Here we have a great feud brewing, something that this forum needs to elevate (?) it to the ranks of rgp, and you have to stick your nose in. (:^(?).


I say they should sue each other in a mock trial on rgp and let badger be the judge.

Since this thread is getting like RGP, I will use some RGP logic. Ray, since you can't even spell the names of online legal research sources, I don't like your chances in court.

Thanks John, for your level-headedness. That was indeed the source of the misunderstanding at the outset. Interestingly enough, however, even IF I had been referring to right here in the USA (which I wasn't), my comments STILL cannot be construed as SUPPORT of a dictatorship here...something I think Ray knows quite well at this point.


I appreciate you attempts to be a peace-maker and bring us together over what was initially a misunderstanding. However I DON'T forgive Ray for deliberately misquoting me after he knew better, and except in the highly unlikely scenario that he offers an apology or retraction, I won't forget and forgive because I have seen this sort of behavior from him before, although not to this extent. I used to believe in peace at more or less any cost; now I won't back down to those who attack me wrongly.


Out of respect for the time and space of others on this forum, however, I am about ready to let the matter drop, barring any further wrongful attacks by Ray. I apologize to the forum for taking up so much space over a personal disagreement. The main reason I did so was because I felt that I could not let false quotes ascribed to me go unchallenged. However I probably went overboard in the number of my responses and the amount of space I tokk up over this issue and for this I apologize to all. It may be that it provided a bit of amusement to some; if so, then perhaps it was not entirely a waste;-)

If they did we wouldn't refer to them as idiots and trolls, now, would we?

"Seriously, I'll be pleased as punch when the racketeers involved in internet gambling are brought to justice. They will be. That is also something I stated would most likely happen. The government will shut down the industry. If Bush is serious about eradicating terrorism, and its money supply, then internet poker doesn't have long to live.


I would bet indictments of Americans in this industry will be fothcoming in 2002"


Where did this come from? Seems to be off topic. So internet poker is a major factor in financing international terrorism? Eliminating internet poker will have no impact on international terrorism or the finances of international terrorists. I also don't see the US govt. shutting down sites or having jurisdiction in countries like Costa Rica. The alternative for stopping this activity is some very intrusive US govt. censorship and talk about losing and abusing civil liberties this would take the cake. The cure is worse than the disease. That's what kills me about you ultra liberals, you scream about the loss of civil liberties when the govt. is taking action that you are opposed to but think nothing of it and indeed are will to give them away for nothing when they are taking action you support.

the developing profile: M, A degenerate practitioner of misdemeanors, who has no assets to speak of, and publishes ignorant political analysis, then backtracks to cover the fact that he is anti-American.


From a review of the archives, he is also a contributor to the support of international crime, and "terrorism" by participating in online gambling.That comes from the FBI. Why don't you losers start telling us how not to trust the FBI, wail against them like Sammy B has....give us the Tim McVeigh propaganda... have TwoplusTwo defend their financial conflicts of interests....you guys are sick....

Have any nose left, John? Just kidding, I can't halp but be amused how the archives show your friends discussing your love of skiing and "powder",,lol....you are so credible.

Most people who have read your posts refer to you as a racist, supporter of international terrorism (by your dogged online support), and all around Tim McVeigh supporter.


Are you a conspiracist? Are you just a criminal? Perhaps you are a terrorist?


Keep supporting your favorite topics, and keep supporting M. You make wonderful bedfellows.

Ray -- One of the young guys who used to post here from the group sometimes affectionately known as the "Young Turks" made a couple of jokes in silly satirical comedy posts he wrote. They happened to be jokes about cocaine or other drug use. In context they were funny in a goofy, freewheeling way. I noticed you took them seriously at the time. As I recall he clarified that they were jokes after you made some sort of serious comments about them. Maybe you didn't see his post to that effect. I may be able to find it in the archives if they're intact for this forum, or perhaps you can find it.


Anyway, why the hostility? Did it somehow not appear that I was trying to be helpful in my post above? At some point did I criticize something you wrote under another name? I don't recall ever replying negatively to anything you wrote under "Ray Springfield." What gives? I was trying to help out.


JF

Well, "John Wren":


Since your friend Ray Springfield has participated in online gaming also, does that make him a supporter of international crime too, or is that a distinction reserved solely for M?


Dude...I'm through arguing with you unless you continue to make unfounded attacks on me...and I'm going to say one more thing and I'm really trying to help you now so please listen: please consider seeing a psychiatrist or try some counseling service...just for a chat. Bounce some of these ideas around with them...it won't hurt anyway...and it just might have some good effect in some way or other...at the very least it will be interesting talking over some of these ideas with someone who won't argue with you over everything like I do...just an idea but who knows, maybe it would be worth an hour of your time.

M,


Methinks these guys might actually be serious. Imagine, I now know a regular arch-villian. Who woulda thunk it? What's next? Vince the polo player?


John

I apologize to you, John. I'm not going to post here for a long time. I quit for many months, (over 6 months), returned and tried to have some reasonable political discussions, and find radicals like M and SammyB slander me when I point out their anti-liberty contradictions.


M obviously has either no money to be won in litigation, or legal problems which prevent him from revealing himself.


I get caustic at times. These same individuals (or similar fools such as Andrew Prock)leveled nothing but lies and paranoia crap towards me prior to the Planet Poker scandal when I suggested that the cards could be read. They certainly never apologized when I was proven correct.


I then requested that Paradise poker reveal their ownership. They refused. Many more hateful, slanderous attacks came my way again. I took serious offense and, being a former Democratic Party activist, started suggesting that the FBI considers internet gambling to be controlled by international organized crime, and prone to money laundering. The FBI does believe this to be true. I believe a straight up organization would want to disprove that assessment of their organization. Of course, many more ridiculous tirades towards me followed.


Then Hanson published his anti-Semitic crap about how he wished the Nazi's had defeated the Soviet Union in WWII. Sklansky found the material anti-Semitic when he thought that I was the source, and then backpedaled when he realized it was Hanson. I showed the material to a close friend of mine, Gary Teitelman (he had his family exterminated in WWII), and he found it disgusting. Hanson then said that I slandered him for suggesting that his remarks were anti-Semitic, even though he referred to Albert Einstein as a Jew Scientist,and put forth that the world would have been a better place if the Nazi's had won in Europe. Further, he stated that he didn't know what anti-Semitism was besides some Jewish international banking conspiracy.


I didn't slander him, or M for that matter. They slandered themselves. The evidence was posted on the forum itself in their own words.


I've become overly sensitive to criticism. This forum, and poker in general(as a lifestyle) have not been good for me. I've been a modest winner the last 10 years;nevertheless, I just find the general attitude of poker players to be hateful.


I bought your book. Its good in many ways.


I do apologize if I offended you.


Good Luck and best wishes.

Ray Springfield

In a peculiar way, John Wren is actually partially correct: I am a degenerate, at least according to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary and my own view of my former state(s).


Main Entry: 1de·gen·er·ate

Pronunciation: di-'jen-r&t, -'je-n&-, dE-

Function: adjective

Etymology: Middle English degenerat, from Latin degeneratus, past participle of degenerare to degenerate, from de- + gener-, genus race, kind -- more at KIN

Date: 15th century

1 a : having declined (as in nature, character, structure, or function) from an ancestral or former state b : having sunk to a condition below that which is normal to a type; especially : having sunk to a lower and usually corrupt and vicious state c : DEGRADED 2


Indeed I have declined in quite a number of ways over the years--and have been attempting to remedy this earlier this year at first on a most basic level regarding personal character, and now more recently commencing work upon other more "outward" or "worldly" aspects as well. The fallen shall indeed rise over the next 5 years (with a little bit of luck and a lot of hard work), and the past glorious state shall be regained, with a more seasoned perspective this time around. I am entirely serious. Degeneracy is easy to fall into in varying aspects and degrees, and I certainly have fallen into it.


Whether Vince's natural state involves playing polo, I don't know, but I'll bet he would be willing to give it a crack. Perhaps a new hat with a large feather or plume would be in order for Vince's first foray.

Actually every single aspect of the Merriam-Webster definitions apply to my current degenerate state, in varying degrees.


Awareness comes before remedy.

M,


I'll give you degenerate, if you want, but you've been painted with much broader strokes that certainly don't apply.


Now, about that prediliction for responding to your own posts....


Best,


John

Well I certainly am not anti-American, and I DO NOT support international crime, terrorism, or dictatorship in the USA, as Ray Springfield has falsely claimed.


Yet since I am indeed degenerate, it is one point of agreement I have with Ray Springfield/John Wren...perhaps our only point of agreement: at the moment, I can't recall any others.

You support internet poker. That makes you a financial contributor to terrorism. Of course you can deny this and harp on your anti-FBI right wing militia garbage, but that's the bottom line. If a person uses illegal drugs, then they also support organized crime, laundering of money, gun running and terrorism by economic participation.


Your statement about the Taliban dictatorship in comparison to a US dictatorship indicated a consciousness which rejects the constitution. Your whining over and over indicates an adolescent need to always have the last word, and to perceive yourself as infallible. If you don't like the way your posts are interpretated then you should be more clear in your idea expression. You have admitted to being a degenerate. Maybe you should go to Gambler's Anonymous.


I sure hope that you aren't a commie bastard.

How many names do you go by?

Two, John Barnhouse.

How many aliases do you have? Internet poker supporter? Drug user? Terrorist sympathizer? Commie Bastard? Laugh out loud.

"Of course you can deny this and harp on your anti-FBI right wing militia garbage, but that's the bottom line."


I never posted any anti-FBI right wing militia material. You are either trolling or you have me confused with someone else.


"Your statement about the Taliban dictatorship in comparison to a US dictatorship indicated a consciousness which rejects the constitution."


A temporary U.S. military rule IN AFGHANISTAN, once the Taliban is removed from power, would probably not be worse than the current rule of the Taliban there. That's all I was wondering about. It might even be necessary until a coalition government of some kind can be assembled in Afghanistan once the Taliban are removed from power.


For the last time, I am comparing a hypothetical temporary U.S. military rule IN AFGHANISTAN, NOT IN THE U.S., with the current military rule of the Taliban in Afghanistan. This has nothing to do with the U.S. Constitution, as far as I know, because we are talking about a foreign country, not the U.S. I am NOT talking about a U.S. military rule in the U.S., and I was NEVER talking about it...the erroneous notion that I was posting about that is a testament to Ray Springfield's poor writing and reading skills.


If you continue in this vein, you will amply demonstrate to me that you are as stupid as Ray Springfield, or that he is as stupid as you...take your pick.

Mr. Barnhouse,


No need to lock the door; I think all the animals have already fled.

No more being nice. You are a commie, sick degenerate supporter of internet poker. I hope you get jailed. Bubba will show you what poker is all about. LOL!!!

I guess you ought to give those well-wishes to all the players on the Internet Forum, too. Why leave anyone out?

Many of them will.Since yu are the only idiot that checks this thread anymore, I have the delight of pointing out that you are a traitor to America in your internet poker support. You should be ashamed. Many of the employees of the internet card rooms that post, and live in the US(perhaps you) will be jailed. Count on it.

Then Ray Springfield is a traitor to America for his Internet Poker play, too. From what I understand, he still plays poker on Paradise, whereas I haven't played Internet Poker for many months now. Perhaps you should offer him some friendly advice.

No need to lie. You've been dumping.Maybe you are starting to get the point, though. Your support of internet poker in the past (like the last 30 days back for about 2 years) was belligerent.

How about changing your name to Q?

Come on. coward, reveal your name and address.


I'll have a process server there overnight.

Man, I pop in here for the first time in months, and I've got to look at THIS?


Mr. Springfield, you keep this up and you will have a gigantic libel suit dropped on your head. I mean it. You have distorted and twisted what I said too many times, and now I find that you're doing it when I'm no longer around to defend myself.


For the record, for those that weren't around when this happened, the original question was, "What could have happened if WWII had ended differently?" The original poster's claim was that the world dodged an immense bullet, because ANY other outcome to the war other than the specific one we had would have been devastating. I believe the relationship to poker was that he thought that the Earth won a bet with extremely long odds.


My response to that was that there were other outcomes that could have been just as good or better, including Germany being destroyed sooner, or later. An example I gave was this: Stalinist Russia wasn't much better than Nazi Germany, and it might even have been possible that the world would have been a better place if the Germans had lasted longer, for one reason only: They might have damaged the Soviet Union more, and prevented them from capturing as much ground as they did. This might have avoided the Berlin Wall, the Berlin airlift, the crackdowns in Czechoslovakia, etc. Perhaps even the entire Cold War, Vietnam included. In EITHER scenario, Germany would have been destroyed. It was an evil, horrible, despotic regime. But it never stood a chance. The U.S. was so much stronger than Germany that once it entered the war Germany was finished. It was just a matter of when. My whole point was that there were conceivable scenarios that could have had Germany bring down the Stalinist government along with its own, and the world would have been rid of TWO evils instead of one. If you can find anti-semitism in that, let me know. Especially since Stalin oppressed the Jews severely as well.


In other words, it was a mere hypothetical scenario about what forms the world would have taken if the outcome of the war had been slightly different, to refute the claim of the OP that there was only one possible outcome to WWII that would have led to a world as 'good' as we have now. At NO TIME did I ever suggest that Germany was anything other than evil. The comment about Einstein being a 'Jew scientist' came up in another question when someone asked what would have happened had Einstein remained in Germany. Would Germany have had the bomb before us? My response was, "Einstein was Jewish, and was hardly going to cooperate with a Nazi government in the first place. In any event, Hitler was not about to listen to the advice of a Jew Scientist". I should have put quotes around the word "Jew" to make it clearer that I meant that that would be HITLER'S perspective. Everyone else seemed to understand what I was saying except for one hotheaded moron named Ray Springfield.


At NO POINT did I ever suggest that I thought Nazis were anything other than monsters, and I must have repeated that a dozen times when this original slanderous attack reared its ugly head. But Mr Springfield and his single firing neuron decided that his radical interpretation of a word taken out of context was more reasonable than my repeated, explicit description of what I was trying to say. And even after everyone tried to drop the subject he kept in on it until I had no choice but to leave this forum to prevent the continuous disruption he was causing both to the poker threads and my mental well-being.


So now I come back, and he's still at it. I guess I came back too soon.


There's not much else I can say without violating forum rules regarding obscenity. Mr. Springfield, if you would like to contact me privately I would love to continue this in a more 'animated' fashion. Or better yet, in person. I've got a year's worth of frustration to work off.

As you can see from these threads, Ray has been twisting and outright lying about what I said as well. Some of the relevant threads are recently archived.


I respect the reasons you left this forum for a while, and am glad to see you back. Here's hoping you stay, in part for your excellent contibutions, past and hopefully future, and in part because I think liars such as Ray Springfield who misquote and misrepresent the words of others need to be corrected loudly and publicly, and their errors and tactics made clear to all.


Apologies for not correcting Ray regarding what he said about you in the post which you just responded to above. I felt the long threads and arguments I had just had with Ray (some recently archived) were winding down and I was more than ready to let things drop at this point. I did, however, state in at least one recent post that he had seriously misrepresented your past statements.


Hope you can stay around for a while;-)

It seems many of the discussions I had with Ray are on this forum and not yet archived. I didn't see them earlier, so I assumed they were archived.


Anyway hope you can stick around for a while.

It's all in print. You seem to think that the truth is not a defense against libel.


In my opinion, and most of the free world agrees (including the current German government) that the Nazi's were, and hopefully will forever be, the worst form of government EVER to inhabit the Earth.


Re-read all of your posts. If you'll notice I started out just warning you about how controversial your posts were. I even accepted your initial backtracking. You apparently took heart that many others online (for instance SammyB)would forgive your strange view of history. You then proceeded to crow again how if the USSR had lost then the USA would have defeated Germany. Most historians would disagree.


Of course I flat took offense when you suggested that any reasonable, educated adult would not know that referring to Albert Einstein as a Jew Scientist was racist. Then you attempted to claim that you didn't realize that it was racist. You then stated that Canada doesn't have many Jews, and therefore that you had never been exposed to anti-Semitism. In the same post, you did admit to being exposed to international banking conspiracy garbage in your hometown. The Zionist banking conspiracy crap comes straight out of Mein Kampf. Obviously, anti-Semitism does exist in your community or you wouldn't have been exposed to it.


Sklansky himself posted that if the Soviets had lost to Germany then he wouldn't be alive. He also posted, after reflecting I'm sure, that the Jews would have continued to be murdered if your view of history played out.


Its all in print. You might not , in fact, be anti-Semitic. The exchange that took place would indicate that you were then very foolish.


Historians the world over credit the USSR with being primarily responsible for defeating the Nazi's. Make no mistake, I stated that the Soviet government killed. I also stated that the Soviet government changed internally. I don't believe the Nazi's would have ever changed. Franklin Roosevelt and Winston Churchill certainly agreed with the analysis that Nazi Germany was worse than the USSR. Churchill particularly hated the Russians, but stated many times that he'd ally with any enemy of the fascists.


I trust those great men's views, and the reaction my friend Gary Teitelman had to reading the whole exchange. As I mentioned, most of his family was exterminated by the Germans. If you insist on litigation, all I can say is that counter suits are filed just as easily. I have faith that I would win this in any US court, and the courts of Germany.


I have printed transcripts. Of course you can claim that you didn't type them at all, I suppose.

You can bet your ugly butt on that.


---Cyrus


aka Degenerate Pinko Commie Wefare Afghani Bastard (Has also shagged yo mama..)

Mason sure deletes fairly. Jay Cohen is the first going to Federal Prison. More will follow. Of course he could skip the country and go hang out with AL-Queda operatives like you.

RCH,


I didn't understand why my two lawyers started salivating in sync until I read your post one more time.


Did you just call me a "dangerous terrorist" or was it just my imagination?


Your reply would be much appreciated, if not appropriate.


Respectfully,


--Cyrus

Cyrus,


I have come to realize by now that we can expect this sort of thing from RCH. It is my impression that he is Ray Springfield in drag...or that Ray Springfield was RCH in drag.


A rather interesting image for a troll.

What's our last name, Cyrus? I'd bet that it is M!

Yes, it is. Why don't you demand a login system?

You owe me one unit...


--Cyrus X


[ X = a permutation of English letters

denoting my surname, the 1st of which is (by coincidence) not M ]

Oh, people really can tell who you are. Of course you don't want people to know who you are because you are wanted. I understand.

I'm not wanted, I'm not Cyrus, and you don't understand.

I yam what I yam.


Not so hard, is it?

. . . my baby.