Dr. Thompson I presume

On Nov 19, 9:06*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:
"William R. Mattil" wrote:

Monkeys aren't capable of rational thought. As you have proven so many
times.

Why not just deny that you donated to his fund? *All you have to say is, "I
did not donate to Floyd's fund and I think the guy is guilty as ****."

Say that and I will believe you. *But you won't because you know you did
donate to his fund and you don't want to say he is guilty because you don't
believe he is.

Your recent tripe is **** poor, Nim. It's like someone watching an
old episode of Rowan and Martin's Laugh In. They sit there saying,
"Was this stuff ever funny? It sure isn't as funny as I remembered
it."

Get some new material, Nim. This crap is played. Step up or step
off.

R

MagillaGorilla wrote:
"William R. Mattil" wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:

You were one of the people who thought he was innocent throughout his
trial...that the lab techs framed him because of a French conspiracy.
You have no proof of this. Like most of the drivel you post, you make it
up as you go along.

You have never denied it. Why not go on record and say that you think
Floyd is guilty?

What a ****ing nitwit. My supposed "failure" to deny something is not
proof of the "something" at all. Besides you are the one throwing around
feces and accusations. So little monkey - you provide the proof.


I'
ll tell you why you don't...because you're one of these 9-11 conspiracy
freaks who thinks the guvmint imploded the buildings.

You know nothing about my politics or my beliefs. You keep throwing ****
around to deflect what is really happening here. And that is that you
have finally proven yourself to be completely wrong on many subjects.



You think the female
lab techs conspired to frame Floyd because a Frenchman didn't win.


Nope. I don't think that at all. Stupid Simian.



Why not just deny that you donated to his fund? All you have to say is, "I
did not donate to Floyd's fund and I think the guy is guilty as ****."

Say that and I will believe you. But you won't because you know you did
donate to his fund and you don't want to say he is guilty because you don't
believe he is.

I did not donate to his fund ..... and my thoughts regarding his guilt
or innocence is of no consequence. But I don't like Lite Beer. That is
more pertinent I think.


Bill


--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

"William R. Mattil" wrote:

"William R. Mattil" wrote:


I did not donate to his fund ..... and my thoughts regarding his guilt
or innocence is of no consequence. But I don't like Lite Beer. That is
more pertinent I think.

Bill

--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

It is of consequence. If you believe Fraud is innocent, it means you're s
stupid **** and a Pro Tour semem drinker And it also means you are so ****ed up
in your thinking, and so prejudiced against anybody who "harms" a cyclist, that
the facts do not matter.

But you don't want to admit you think Fraud is innocent because you can see
where I'm going with this....that it means you are not credible to adjudicate
whether Dr. T was guilty based ON THE FACTS...just like you cannot adjudicate
Fraud's situation based on the FACTS.


Magilla

RicodJour wrote:

On Nov 19, 9:06*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:
"William R. Mattil" wrote:

Monkeys aren't capable of rational thought. As you have proven so many
times.

Why not just deny that you donated to his fund? *All you have to say is, "I
did not donate to Floyd's fund and I think the guy is guilty as ****."

Say that and I will believe you. *But you won't because you know you did
donate to his fund and you don't want to say he is guilty because you don't
believe he is.

Your recent tripe is **** poor, Nim. It's like someone watching an
old episode of Rowan and Martin's Laugh In. They sit there saying,
"Was this stuff ever funny? It sure isn't as funny as I remembered
it."

Get some new material, Nim. This crap is played. Step up or step
off.

R

R=retard


Magilla

MagillaGorilla wrote:


that it means you are not credible to adjudicate
whether Dr. T was guilty based ON THE FACTS...just like you cannot adjudicate
Fraud's situation based on the FACTS.


Retard,

I wasn't on the jury. So my thoughts are not relevant. Just as yours
aren't either you ignorant ass.


Thanks


Bill


--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

"William R. Mattil" wrote:

MagillaGorilla wrote:


that it means you are not credible to adjudicate
whether Dr. T was guilty based ON THE FACTS...just like you cannot adjudicate
Fraud's situation based on the FACTS.

Retard,

I wasn't on the jury. So my thoughts are not relevant. Just as yours
aren't either you ignorant ass.

Thanks

Bill

--

William R. Mattil

http://www.celestial-images.com

I'm allowed to have an opinion of something even if not on the jury. To say it's
not relevant is stupid, since it's obvious neither of us were on the jury. Why
state the obvious?

Magilla

On Nov 20, 2:35*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:

But you don't want to admit you think Fraud is innocent because you can see
where I'm going with this....

Yeah, around in circles on your little clown bike.

Please, I don't do this often, but I'm begging you - get some new
material. Even the top guys pay people to ghost write for them. Have
some pride in your work and stop churning out the same old ****.
Thanks.

R

RicodJour wrote:

On Nov 20, 2:35*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:

But you don't want to admit you think Fraud is innocent because you can see
where I'm going with this....

Yeah, around in circles on your little clown bike.

Please, I don't do this often, but I'm begging you - get some new
material. Even the top guys pay people to ghost write for them. Have
some pride in your work and stop churning out the same old ****.
Thanks.

R

R=retard

In article
,
RicodJour wrote:

On Nov 19, 9:06Â*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:
"William R. Mattil" wrote:

Monkeys aren't capable of rational thought. As you have proven so many
times.

Why not just deny that you donated to his fund? Â*All you have to say is, "I
did not donate to Floyd's fund and I think the guy is guilty as ****."

Say that and I will believe you. Â*But you won't because you know you did
donate to his fund and you don't want to say he is guilty because you don't
believe he is.

Your recent tripe is **** poor, Nim. It's like someone watching an
old episode of Rowan and Martin's Laugh In. They sit there saying,
"Was this stuff ever funny? It sure isn't as funny as I remembered
it."

It is still funny. We have moved on; but it is funny now too.
Sammy Davis Jr. on the bench.
Ruth Buzzi and Artie Johnson on the bench.
Rowan and Martin did a perfect straight man and wise-ass.
Great editing to make perfectly timed cuts.

Get some new material, Nim. This crap is played. Step up or step
off.

--
Michael Press

On Nov 2, 3:45*pm, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Oct 30, 5:28*pm, Anton Berlin wrote:

In the better med schools they teach this method of creating patients.

http://velonews.com/article/99513

Velonews Tweets:
Verdict expected within the hour in LA Road Rage case. Stay tuned.

Followed by sentencing tomorrow, 12/3.