Date: 11 Jan 93 17:50:44 GMT
Newsgroups: talk.abortion
Subject: Re: Apology for insults
Distribution: na
Status: RO
X-Status: 

In <PATRICK.93Jan9021741@rio-grande.is.rice.edu> patrick@rio-grande.is.rice.edu (Patrick L Humphrey) writes:

>On Sat, 9 Jan 1993 03:20:32 GMT, chaneysa@nextnet.csus.edu (Stephen A Chaney) said:


>Then don't -- if you want your apology (if it can be called that) to be
>regarded as not worth the electrons wasted to display it, that's your
>choice.

regarded...that reminds me.  Are you saying Chaney's apology has the
same status in your mind as my alleged accusation of forgery, as in:

"your forgery, if it could be called that..."

>>#1 - Chris Lyman has threatened to remove my access by sending my
>>sysadmin a copy of my .sig of Patrick Humphrey. 

>Uh, Steve -- last time I looked, Chris was in Minnesota, not Sacramento.  He
>can't remove your access. 

Stop playing dumb, Patrick.  It's the same kind of talk your kind uses 
daily when saying pro-lifers want to force women to give birth.

BTW I'm sending you a copy of this because it's looking more and more
like nothing I posted last week made it to anybody's boards except
mine, and I saw nothing to indicate that this status may have changed.

As I said to Galen about Steve's apology a few minutes ago:

____________________________excerpt from earlier post_____________________

I had plenty to do with it.  Did my posts never make it to your boards
where I told Chaney his kind of revolting talk about Dale Ann is 
NEVER justified, where I told him that UNTIL he apologized I would
severely curtail my criticism of Humphrey, and the third post "Unfinished
business with rocker, Humphrey and Chaney" [could be I got the order
wrong, I am typing from memory] where I said I wanted this apology
UNCONDITIONALLY, without waiting for Humphrey to apologize to him?

Geez, looks like my netserver is lying even more to me than usual...:-)

>Mr. Humphrey, as far as I am concerned, you don't owe anyone anything.

Sheesh.  Not even for posting private e-mail?

>so much for the t.a love fest.  I think you are all scum, but hardly
>as low as Kevin Darcy.			^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

*Smile* when you say that, podner.  

________________________________end of excerpt______________________

 The sponsor of your accounts can, of course --
>did you ever stop and think that maybe she's slightly offended by your
>actions in incessantly displaying your .sig?  (She's already seen it, of
>course -- after all, she got one copy of it from me, but you already are
>well aware of that.)

Hmm... I wonder which of the two of you offended her more.
[some stuff deleted where Patrick is more right than Chaney, just to
save electrons]

>>#3 - Patrick has also openly claimed he will never apologize for
>>making racist comments at me. He has also claimed that now, referring
>>to me in the words "your fat black ass" is not racist. 

>This is hilarious -- as I predicted, you forged a quote from me, and now
>you're lying about me, based on your forgery.  As I said a couple of months
>ago, you're proceeding precisely on schedule.

What on earth are you talking about here, Patrick?  I have seen no forged
quotes from you.

>have no way of telling which side a stranger is on just by looking.  Just to
>paraphrase a proverb out of your favorite book of myths -- you reap what you
>sow. 

A pity you don't believe in the proverb, Patrick.

>>I apologize for making fun of Dale Ann, but this only shows how unjust
>>and uneven the standards are, on talk.abortion. Patrick refers to me
>>as "your fat black ass" and refuses to apologize to me about it, and
>>when I decide to respond, that is the only time that trouble erupts.

>There's no point in boring everyone else to death with yet another re-hash,
>but to put it succinctly -- you could have had your apology, had you acted
>with any shred of decency.  Instead, you decided to prove to the world that
>two wrongs indeed *do* make a right -- and like I said above, you reaped
>what you sowed.  You had your chance handed to you on a silver platter --
>and you threw it away.

His chance to do what?  Spend big bucks for airfare to collect his 
apology in person, only to be handed over to the RUPD, or some other
law enforcement agency on trumped-up charges?

>Now, as to this matter of making an apology to my wife -- even though it's
>pretty obviously anything *but* sincere, it's accepted.  No one ever said it
>would be easy.  

>>Peter Nyikos should consider how much of a laugh the pro-choice camp
>>got out of Patrick's refusal to apologize, and how Mr. Nyikos is
>>helping their travesties run rampant. 

>Well, not to disillusion you or anything, but if anyone was laughing, it was
>at your antics in trying to justify your actions.  I was the first one to
>admit what I said was wrong -- but I owned up to it and made my amends to
>everyone else that was rightfully offended by it.  You got no such amends,
>because you didn't even think about anyone else's feelings -- no, you just
>went and re-posted my statement, with your stupid ASCII barphic, ad nauseam.

Right, because you refused publicly to apologize unless your silly 
conditions were met, and called me a "brainwipe," "human refuse,"
and a "sanctimonious little git" for saying you AT LEAST NEEDED TO REASSURE
CHANEY ABOUT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO HIM IF HE DID SHOW UP AT YOUR OFFICE--I
did NOT demand an apology, you insufferable jerk.

All this BEFORE Chaney first posted his "Boyz n the KKK Hood" .sig.
I'd say you fully earned it, and my postings too, PatricKK.

>If it was so offensive to all those people when *I* said it, what made it
>any less so when you incessantly re-posted it with your own bigotry thrown
>in for good measure?

Are you totally clueless, or just playing dumb, PatricKK?  If you see
no difference between the two kinds of postings, you *are* 
what Hispanics call a *sinverguenza*.  BTW did the post where I used
this make it to your boards?  It was the "unfinished business" post
I refer to above.

>>Now, Mr. Nyikos, you can say good-bye forever, to any hopes of seeing
>>an apology from Patrick, to me, about his comment. He knows now that
>>he can do or say whatever he pleases, with impunity, and any response
>>back at him, will only result in the responder being the one getting
>>the admonishment.

>In other words -- you've had your head rapped rather soundly by your
>caretakers at Sacto State, and this is why you're making this "confession".
>It saddens me that it ever had to reach that point -- but you were well
>aware of the consequences of your own actions, yet you did them anyway...so
>once again, you reap what you sow.  You're obviously bitter enough over your
>chastisement to try reading my mind, too, and as usual, you fail miserably
>-- if I can say anything I want to in this forum with impunity, why did I
>apologize to all those people I offended by my intemperate remark?
>I want to hear your answer to *that*.

Because some of them were pro-choicers, and you were afraid of offending
them?

I don't recall you ever saying what you posted was WRONG, only that 
it was a MISTAKE to have made it.  Correct me if I am forgetful here,
please.

If I'm not wrong, then everything I have seen you post in connection
with Steve is consistent with a might-makes-right philosophy, and 
your comments about Joseph Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili, aka Stalin,
apply more to you than to any one of us.

PJN
--------------------end included mail------------------


It is to laugh (and retch) -- Petey Honey has climbed into bed with Chaney.
Why am I not surprised?

Anyway, have fun burning Dr. Giggles to toast...

--PLH, think I'll sell tickets to this one

--

Newsgroups: talk.abortion