On 4 Nov, 08:07, "William A. T. Clark" <clarknos...@masceng.ohio-
state.edu> wrote:
> In article ,
>
>  freeireland  wrote:
> > > > > By the way, you are as ignorant about college tuition in Ohio and the
> > > > > US
> > > > > as you are about everything else, and as is this genius you quote. I
> > > > > suggest you go look up the actual figures before spouting off - it just
> > > > > makes you look dumb.
>
> > > > figures can be manipulated to say whatever you want. You had a prime
> > > > chance to put a case forward to show how good Ohio State University is
> > > > though instead revert to childish name calling about some person you
> > > > clearly know nothing about. Clearly a associate Dean would have more
> > > > intelligence and not be so obtuse. If by some chance you where I think
> > > > that would be clearly put some weight behind the student I quoted.
>
> > > I don't need a case, since you have provided absolutely nothing to
> > > answer! Again, give me the citation, and I will then give you the
> > > correct data in return. And whatever I "where", I notice that you made
> > > sure to snip your original absurd claim, just in case anyone had so much
> > > time on their hands that they might think it worth trying to verify.
>
> > What drugs are you on, you have been trying to make a case in several
> > regards. First you attempt to dismiss the student as "some eighteen
> > year old idiot" then you try do discredit the post by  discrediting
> > the web site. The next position you take is to claim the post is about
> > another university which clearly is preposterous since it refers to
> > the lift incident and OSU directly.
>
> OK, then just provide the citation so we can all share it. Otherwise it
> is seen for what it is, something you simply made up and passed off as
> real. Wow, strange world you live in. If you can;t put your source up
> for examination and discussion, then it is clearly phony.
>
> But I don't believe it exists.
>

You also believed it was about another university. I have already
posted the web site I quoted from and the quote is in its full
context.


>
>
> > > > > I don't think so - no one could even make this stuff up. I think you
> > > > > "where" wrong, "your" prone to such idiocy.
>
> > > > Incase you hadn't notice I have been putting it every post I have
> > > > made. Maybe its just your just so gullable.
>
> > > Really. Yup, we ALL believe this.
>
> > So just who is this ALL you are refering too and what gives you the
> > right to speak on their behalf?
>
> I am "refering" to anyone with two neurones firing who has been
> following this nonsense.
>

Pathetic and lame attempt to avoid being corrected on yet another wild
accusation.

What gives you the right to speak on everyones behalf?

>
>
> > > > > > > What "they" are? Or what "it" is? You just don't have a clue.
>
> > > > > > Maybe I will join TMS then. They are an illiterate lot after all.
>
> > > > > Why don't you give it a shot? Somehow, I doubt that you are good for
> > > > > the
> > > > > annual dues.
>
> > > > Yeah thats right they are so exclusive. lol
>
> > > They would certainly exclude you. To me, that is about all that matters.
>
> > lol, In the first year after graduation a graduate can join for free,
> > that is exclusive! For a few dollars any clown can join. A company can
> > even buy memberships on bulk.
>
> Gosh, I  must really be getting to you if you have gone to all these
> lengths to find (half baked) information on the web. Of course, you
> forgot that the "graduate" has to be in the particular field, and
> company "membership" is corporate sponsorship. Clearly you don't you
> belong to any professional societies or you would have known about all
> this.
>

The half baked information is from the TMS web site.  Graduates for
free. lol

>
>
> > > > > > > > > > Though using your own powers of deduction this must mean you
> > > > > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > same level of education as me and are illiterate does it not?
>
> > > > > > > > > > Its fair to assume you are illiterate and uneducated. Though
> > > > > > > > > > again
> > > > > > > > > > clearly its not a mistake though I have without doubt proved
> > > > > > > > > > my
> > > > > > > > > > point.
>
> > > > > > > > > In your dreams. You know, just standing on a street corner
> > > > > > > > > shouting
> > > > > > > > > something does not eventually make it true. Lesson one.
>
> > > > > > > > Just like somebody has been saying "Due to" is a preposition.
>
> > > > > > > > All was using your use of grammar to determine that. After all,
> > > > > > > > isn't
> > > > > > > > that what you have have been doing not just on this threa but
> > > > > > > > others..
> > > > > > > > I thought I warned you of the dangerous of spelling or grammar
> > > > > > > > flaming.
>
> > > > > > > Could you repeat this paragraph in actual English, please? As it is
> > > > > > > now,
> > > > > > > it is incomprehensible.
>
> > > > > > Not too bright are you. Do you think I am doing this dilberetly! So I
> > > > > > can once again resurrect some of your speeling or grammatical errors.
> > > > > > Do you think there are any plants in this post. lol
>
> > > > > Oh, now we are trying to lay a smokescreen. Come on, no one is dumb
> > > > > enough to fall for that, just as no one is fool enough to believe your
> > > > > earlier denials.
>
> > > > lol, you have been falling for it on quite a few occasions yourself.
>
> > > Sure, sure.
>
> > yews it is sure.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Number one, please remember that is it "The" Ohio State
> > > > > > > > > > > > > University.
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Number two, I give you an address to send the $100
> > > > > > > > > > > > > check
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to. I
> > > > > > > > > > > > > don't
> > > > > > > > > > > > > need your money, so I would like you to send it in my
> > > > > > > > > > > > > name
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to:
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > The Muscular Dystrophy Association
> > > > > > > > > > > > > 960 Kingsmill Parkway
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Columbus, OH 43229
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > (614) 436-7744
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > Let me know when you have sent it, and I will put them
> > > > > > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > > > > > alert
> > > > > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > > > expect it. At least this way some good will come out of
> > > > > > > > > > > > > this
> > > > > > > > > > > > > nonsense.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > > End of story.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > > lol, what a knob and just how have you proved your
> > > > > > > > > > > > identity?
> > > > > > > > > > > > What
> > > > > > > > > > > > after several request you have actually not even made an
> > > > > > > > > > > > attempt.
> > > > > > > > > > > > How
> > > > > > > > > > > > could you expect me to believe an associate Dean could be
> > > > > > > > > > > > illiterate.
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Oh, tiresome little man, go find Seimi and chat with him.
> > > > > > > > > > > He'll
> > > > > > > > > > > do
> > > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > an independent third party, and I'll provide him with
> > > > > > > > > > > evidence.
> > > > > > > > > > > However,
> > > > > > > > > > > I suspect you'll find more lies to wriggle your way out
> > > > > > > > > > > with.
> > > > > > > > > > > Of
> > > > > > > > > > > course, you could simply apologize.
>
> > > > > > > > > > So you think a post from an anonymous person is proof of your
> > > > > > > > > > identity. Clearly you have noway of proving you identidy to
> > > > > > > > > > me or
> > > > > > > > > > anyone else unless you physically meet them. As for taking
> > > > > > > > > > you at
> > > > > > > > > > your
> > > > > > > > > > word well its clear you full of shit and lack the literacy
> > > > > > > > > > skills
> > > > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > expect everyone else to display on an informal forum.
>
> > > > > > > > > > You have had ample time to prove your identidy and you have
> > > > > > > > > > not.
>
> > > > > > > > > Well, unlike you, I don't really feel the need to hide like a
> > > > > > > > > schoolboy
> > > > > > > > > behind some phony moniker. It's there for all to see. You are
> > > > > > > > > simply
> > > > > > > > > wiggling again. But I can see why you would want to.
>
> > > > > > > > lol, no instead you hide behind a another persons id!.
>
> > > > > > > Really. Is that the best you can do to weasel out of this?
> > > > > > > Pathetic.
>
> > > > > > Well you claim you could prove it. So where is your drivers license
> > > > > > or
> > > > > > passport with a utility bill.  I think we should call you illiterate
> > > > > > boy from now on.  The grammar flamer who clearly does not even know
> > > > > > that "Due to" can be used as a preposition. The claims and spelling
> > > > > > mistakes you have made still crack me up. I really shouldn't keep
> > > > > > bringing this up though your reaction is just so funny.
>
> > > > > Where would you like them to be sent to? Easily done. By the way, lots
> > > > > of people use "due to" as a preposition - I don't deny it. While it
> > > > > might be acceptable to the less than fully literate, as Gowers would
> > > > > say, it just doesn't happen to be grammatically correct, that's all.
>
> > > > Again nothing more than nonsense, Gower, Fowler etc are out of date.
> > > > Even Gower however recognised that change was in the air.
>
> > > > "Fowler, remarking that the prepositional use of due to was "now as
> > > > common as can be" said "perhaps idiom will beat the illiterates;
> > > > perhaps the illiterates will beat idiom; our grandsons will know". Now
> > > > that this construction may be found in The Times and is freely used by
> > > > BBC announcers, it seems clear that idiom is fighting a losing
> > > > battle."
>
> > > Perhaps, but he still maintains that such degraded usage would be a
> > > triumph for the illiterates. Judging by your string of posts, he was
> > > clearly correct.
>
> > None of these authors have the authority to define English as a
> > language. Since there is no authority on the English language literacy
> > can only be defined by common usage. This is clearly shown in all
> > major dictionaries and even updated versions of Fowler.  Your in no
> > position to tell a person that they are illiterate based on an out of
> > date, inappropriate dogma.
>
> I'm not - Fowler is. Go whine at him.
>

Sorry who made Fowler an authority on the English language?

He died in 1933, what next maybe you will be calling people illiterate
because they do not use old english and quoting Shakespeare.  You
clearly quoted Fowler to claim I was illiterate in regards to my use
of "Due to" making wild accusation after another. How foolish do you
look when I have shown you using "Due to" in the same manner. Only
idiots use grammar as a method of flamming as I have clearly shown.


>
>
> > > > - The Complete Plain Words by Sir Ernest Gowers-IX. The Handling Of
> > > > Words
>
> > > > "There are several other contrasts kept artificially alive by grammar
> > > > books and stylistic manuals - such as the difference between due to
> > > > and owing to, like and as (like/as I was saying ... ), or will and
> > > > shall. But at least in these cases, the language has been changing in
> > > > recent decades - and is still changing."
>
> > > > The reality is its not your position to determine what is or what is
> > > > not good grammar. There is no governing body of the English language
> > > > and clearly it gas evolved beyond you.
>
> > > "Its" anyone's right to draw attention to incorrect, sloppy usage of the
> > > language. And no, English "gas" not evolved beyond me, nor beyond
> > > Gowers. He draws a clear distinction between what is correct, and what
> > > is commonplace, but incorrect, usage. That's where the "illiterates"
> > > come in again.
>
> > Again I put it to you that you used "Due to" as a preposition and
> > therefore must be illiterate. Also can you tell me who and when Fowler
> > was given the job of the authority on the english language.
>
> Aaah, now we try to question the source. One, he has been an accepted
> authority for decades, and two, he clearly knows a damn sight more about
> the language than you do. End of story.
>

Who made him the authority on the English language? Was it the King or
Queen, was it the government or an offical body? Clearly he knew about
the language in 1926 and since he has been dead for decades he knows
very little  about modern english today. Clearly Burchill has
butchered his book in a very agressive update showing Fowler was well
past its sell by date.

>
>
> > > > > > > > > > > Well, at least we have established that you are a welsher,
> > > > > > > > > > > pure
> > > > > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > > > simple.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > > > > > > The term welsher I think is pretty derogatory and many welsh
> > > > > > > > > > people
> > > > > > > > > > would be severally insulted by it. Maybe you should appolgise
> > > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > the Welsh people though I doubt to have any moral courage for
> > > > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > > either.
>
> > > > > > > > > Oh, dear, you seem to have run into an etymological problem
> > > > > > > > > again.
> > > > > > > > > Let
> > > > > > > > > me help you with the OED:
>
> > > > > > > > > "welsh, welch, v.i. & t. (Of loser of bet, esp. bookmaker)
> > > > > > > > > decamp
> > > > > > > > > without paying; hence ~ER n. [19th. c.; orig. unkn]
>
> > > > > > > > > Nothing to do with Wales or the Welsh. Sorry.
>
> > > > > > > > tut tut I would have expected you to have at least sought the
> > > > > > > > origins
> > > > > > > > of the word. Do you think you where baited again.
>
> > > > > > > > The term comes from a group of English bookmakers who absconded
> > > > > > > > over
> > > > > > > > to Wales to avoid having to pay out on a lot of long shots who
> > > > > > > > came
> > > > > > > > in. This term became popular later when Edward Prince of Wales
> > > > > > > > refused
> > > > > > > > to pay a few outstanding gambling debts.  The english used many
> > > > > > > > terms
> > > > > > > > that the Welsh find offensive such as "Welsh Rabbit" etc. Welsh
> > > > > > > > language magazine in the early 90s started a campaign in the US
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > get
> > > > > > > > the term "Welsher" banned as racist.
>
> > > > > > > Sorry, but no. Sometimes relying on over hasty Googling can get you
> > > > > > > in
> > > > > > > trouble. And it is "Welsh Rarebit", not Welsh Rabbit", FYI.
> > > > > > > Finally, no
> > > > > > > one ever said the Welsh language brigade were particularly smart,
> > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > had
> > > > > > > a sense of humour.
>
> > > > > > tut tut tut, another howler, do you not have any common sense at all.
> > > > > > Its so easy to bait you its not even a challenge anymore.  Clearly
> > > > > > you
> > > > > > have no idea of the origins of "Welsh rabbit" and just as with
> > > > > > grammar
> > > > > > are in no position to comment. So I would kindly ask you to keep your
> > > > > > racist slurs to yourself please.
>
> > > > > There - my turn to catch you! Done - see "Fowler's Modern English
> > > > > Usage"
> > > > > for the correct explanation, under "True and False Etymology". Wasn't
> > > > > hard, was it?
>
> > > > maybe you should provide a full quote then.
>
> > > I believe it is page 112 or 114 - I don't have mine with me here. Go
> > > take a look for yourself.
>
> > sorry you need to quote as my Welsh language magazine claims Fowler
> > said "Welsh Rabbit is amusing and right," and "and Welsh Rarebit is
> > stupid and wrong".
>
> Yes, that's on page 114 - check it for yourself. Your Welsh language
> magazine is clearly ripping off Fowler if they did not cite their source
> precisely. It's called plagiarism.
>

hmmmm,  I and the magazine clearly cites Fowler as saying "Welsh
Rabbit is amusing and right," and "and Welsh Rarebit is stupid and
wrong". How is that plagiarism? Thanks for verifying that point
though.So now will you retract your yet another wild accusation and I
quote you "And it is 'Welsh Rarebit', not 'Welsh Rabbit', FYI".

Its then quite ironic that you go further to make racist comments such
as "Finally, no  one ever said the Welsh language brigade were
particularly smart, or  had  a sense of humour", when infact your wild
accusation was wrong.




>
>
> > > > > > > > > Bluster, bluster, bluster. Like I say, set up any independent
> > > > > > > > > third
> > > > > > > > > party to verify identity (seeing as you are so determined to
> > > > > > > > > welsh
> > > > > > > > > on
> > > > > > > > > the bet). Loser to pay his/her costs.
>
> > > > > > > > > The MDA is really looking forward to your donation.
>
> > > > > > > > > William Clark
>
> > > > > > > > So can you quote me where I agreed to those terms!
>
> > > > > > > > You know its only $100 how can you refuse to pay upto the Foyle
> > > > > > > > Hospice. tut tut tut.
>
> > > > > > > Aah, so now you are trying to deny the challenge in the first
> > > > > > > place.
> > > > > > > Very innovative, but entirely predictable. Oh, and how come you
> > > > > > > excised
> > > > > > > the bit about the third party arbitrator? Getting a little too warm
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > you, is it? Let's do that - loser pays the abitrator's costs.
>
> > > > > > lol,  well terms have to be agreed before they can be excised and
> > > > > > clearly I will accept a third party arbitrator when he/she gives me
> > > > > > his drivers license/passport along with a utility bill and of course
> > > > > > with your  drivers license/passport and a utility bill. This is
> > > > > > standard proof of identity and proof of address. These are clearly
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > terms I put before you before so why have you as of yet failed to
> > > > > > prove your identity?
>
> > > > > > Are you really so niave to think an anonymous poster here proves
> > > > > > anything. How can you prove you attented Oxford if you cannot even
> > > > > > prove your identity.
>
> I didn't "attent" it, I attended it.
>
>
>
> > > > > Again, just tell me the name of the third party arbitrator who will
> > > > > examine the proof, and we'll go from there. You pick them - that way
> > > > > you
> > > > > can confirm their ID yourself. How many times do I have to say it?
>
> > > > > William Clark
>
> > > > My mate Marty, he says he will meet you at any airport in Derry though
> > > > don't forget your utility bill for display along side your passport.
>
> > > Sorry, not verifiable as a sufficiently independent arbitrator. Tell you
> > > what, you meet me at the airport in Columbus, and my buddy who plays
> > > lineman for the Cleveland Browns will be happy to exchange and verify
> > > the information. I don't think even you will be foolish enough to try to
> > > welch/welsh on him.
>
> > "Like I say, set up any independent third party to verify identity"
> > thats what you said and I have set up my independent  third party
> > arbitrator as you stated. Still using the racist remarks I see, now
> > you can't play the ignorance card as I have already pointed out how
> > many welsh people find it offensive. What have you got against the
> > Welsh. I am from Northern Ireland, raised in the bogside in Derry so
> > sorry if I laugh at your pathetic Cleveland Browns lineman man thinly
> > veiled threat.
>
> Like I said, your buddy does not qualify as "independent". Nothing to do
> with racism (oh, what a martyr you are), just a suspicion that he is
> biased. Pick a lawyer or notary - someone whose neutrality can be relied
> upon - loser to pay. And don't think you can make me nervous with all
> this blather about the Bogside. I know what it is, I've been there more
> times than you care to think. Whoopee.
>

Marty is a solictor and highly respected at that. Its time you had a
reality check, you cannot prove your identity never mind anything
else. Can you imagine sending somebody else down to the bank as  third
party proof of idenity. Catch yourself on.

You have had weeks to prove your identity and still you cannot even
resulted to thinly veiled threats.


>
>
> > > Otherwise just withdraw the claim and apologize. It's that easy.
>
> > Again you have had weeks to prove your identity and you cannot. You
> > know the address of the "Foyle Hospice"
>
> Sad, sad, sad.

Fact fact fact.

>
> > > William Clark

In article ,
 freeireland  wrote:

> > > > Indeed, it took all that effort to force you to post the URL, when most
> > > > people include it immediately. As it happens, there was clearly a 
> > > > reason
> > > > you were reluctant to do so - your miserable "quote" was overwhelmed by
> > > > the positive ones on that forum, and so showing the URL totally 
> > > > deflates
> > > > your petty insults on the university. Too bad for you, but at least you
> > > > might have learned the difference between Ohio University and The Ohio
> > > > State University, si it was not a total loss for you.
> >
> > > > By the way, what do you think of the other student's view that I 
> > > > posted?
> > > > Sounds like OSU didn't lose anything when your lone, and ill informed,
> > > > malcontent transferred.
> >
> > > Again I ask you to retract your wild and clearly incorrect accusation
> > > "There is no URL in existence, and you made the post up just to
> > > denigrate an institution you know absolutely nothing about (and cannot
> > > even distinguish from Ohio  University). You are, pure and simple, a
> > > bare faced liar. Case proven and closed".
> >
> > Oh, we are playing the "hurt and insulted" card now, are we? Look, you
> > refused to provide this URL until you were backed into this corner, and
> > now you want an "apology"? In your dreams. Now, instead of blathering on
> > about how offended you are, how about YOU retracting your insults heaped
> > on an institution you know nothing about, beyond what you dredged up on
> > Google? How about responding to this comment, which you have taken great
> > pains to ignore, form a student clearly far ore academically able (by
> > their own description) than the inaccurate absurdity you hung your hat
> > on?
> 
> 
> Again I ask you to retract your wild and clearly incorrect accusation
> "There is no URL in existence, and you made the post up just to
> denigrate an institution you know absolutely nothing about (and
> cannot
> even distinguish from Ohio  University). You are, pure and simple, a
> bare faced liar. Case proven and closed".
> 
> There is a URL in existence, I did not make the post up and clearly
> you do not have the integrity to correct yet another wild accusation.
> If you where the associate dean in any university this would be more
> of a slur on that institution than I ever could even if I wanted to.

Fine, so if that's what it took to make you adhere to the standard 
usenet etiquette for citing, then so be it. Too bad it was necessary to 
go to such lengths, but when I look at the site, I can see why you 
wanted to keep it quiet.
> 
> 
> 
> >
> > Here it is:
> >
> > "I can not think of any other place that is more ideal for a college
> > education. Ohio State has offered me unboundless opportunities on a
> > beautiful campus, in a great city. I have not met (nor heard of) one
> > student that dislikes going here. Each and every one of the students
> > here is incredibly friendly and approachable. Even though the students
> > are aplenty, the class sizes remain small (only one or two major lecture
> > classes in first year). The academics are stimulating and interesting,
> > something I did not especially expect coming into a university of this
> > size. Ohio State offers incredible academic support...I have never gone
> > into a class not understanding any of the material. The professors here
> > are top-notch and truly care about their students.
> >
> > The school spirit here and the tradition are contagious, as people are
> > overflowing with spirit for the Buckeyes. The athletic programs are
> > great, with a beautiful RPAC (recreation center) and a newly built
> > McCorkle Aquatic Center. The Horseshoe is one of the most exciting
> > venues in all of college football. With everything that this school has
> > to offer both inside and outside the classroom, I cannot fathom any
> > parent who would be ashamed if their child chose to attend The Ohio
> > State University, one of the fastest rising and finest universities
> > this country has to offer. This truly is a special place."
> >
> > I await your comments on this statement with interest.
> >
> >
> 
> I find it really amusing that your quoting from a website that you
> yourself claimed was a "totally worthless chat forum".  So tell me
> what is it a totally worthless chat forum or not?
> 
> Though this is just another example of trying to avoid correcting yet
> another wild incorrect accusation based on nohing but assumption.

Indeed, so against your worthless post I set many more contrary posts. 
Either the site is valid (you seem to think so), in which case your 
attempt to put a university down blows up in your face, or else we can 
agree that such sites are worthless, and you therefore acknowledge your 
post as a meaningless attempt to denigrate the university. Either way 
your original pose comes up way short, and looks petty and dumb.
> 
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > > > > > Then why did you make a foolish wager you cannot win?
> >
> > > > > > The wager is already won - it's getting you to pay up that is the
> > > > > > problem.
> >
> > > > > Remind me have you proven your identidy never mind that you went to
> > > > > Oxford?
> >
> > > > I prove it to myself every day. I prove it to every financial and
> > > > governmental institution you can name, to their satisfaction, every 
> > > > day.
> > > > You, on the other hand, seem to want to hold to a higher, nay absurd,
> > > > standard. I assume this is like not wanting to publish that URL - once
> > > > you accept any reasonable proof of identity, the MDA will be $100
> > > > richer. Too bad for you.
> >
> > > Maybe then you should try and make a wager with every financial and
> > > governmental institution I can name or with yourself. You have have
> > > not provided any proof of identity which cannot be faked especially on
> > > a forum like this. You have had ample time to do so and have failed.
> > > Now back up your foolish wager and donate $100 to the Foyle Hospice as
> > > your squirming is now becoming dull.
> >
> > More weaseling and welshing. Still wriggling as hard as you can go.
> > Pretty funny from here, I must say.
> >
> > Once again, give me a URL for "Marty's" web site, and we will start the
> > "identity" process. The MDA needs the money for sick children. Otherwise
> > just admit you were wrong, apologize, and get on with your life.
> >
> 
> Who said Marty has a web site. What makes you think I would give you
> his contact details when I will not give you my own!

Oh, Marty doesn't have a web site? Hmmm, why am I not surprised. If he 
had one, then it is out there for the entire world to access, so it 
would be really foolish to suppose that he would somehow come to harm if 
I saw it, now wouldn't it? Does he do business out of the back of a 
truck, or does he even exist (as a solicitor) at all? My guess is that 
he does not.

> 
> Who makes a wager without defining any winning conditions, something
> pointed out by me a while ago. Its clear you cannot even prove your
> identity never mind anything else so to make a wager that depends on
> it was foolish.
> 
> I have now shown you making spelling errors and making wild
> accusations about grammar that are simply incorrect. Clearly you are
> no expert on grammar. I have also shown the length you are willing to
> go to save what little credibility you have left, from childish name
> calling, racial insults to thinly veiled threats.  You do not even
> have the integrity to retract wild accusations that you made which
> have now been proven wrong.


Bluster, bluster, bluster all you will, the simple fact remains that you 
stuck your neck out, rose to a challenge, got royally caught, and ever 
since have been tying yourself in knots trying to find ways to weasel 
out of something you should never have said in the first place. All this 
other twaddle is just your feeble attempt at a smokescreen. 

The MDA is waiting.

William Clark