Comments on: Fugitive Marine's Truck Found In N.C.
Search Tightens For Marine Sought In Death Of Pregnant Marine
Add a Comment See all 113 Comments
- Also, "in conclusion" means I am through with my end of the debate, unless I needed to state that as well.
- Reply to this comment
- meinnv at 12:15 AM : Jan 16, 2008
If you knew how I''''net message boards operate you wouldn''''t have asked the question.
Either you knew and are being obnozious; or, you did not know and are an imposter.
Posted by tuckerndfw at 12:34 AM : Jan 16, 2008
Do you mean obnoxious?
(obnoxious
Main Entry: ob7nox7ious
Pronunciation: db-%u02C8ndk-sh%u0259s, %u0259b-
Function: adjective
Etymology: Latin obnoxius, from ob in the way of, exposed to + noxa harm %u2014 more at noxious
Date: 1597
1archaic : exposed to something unpleasant or harmful %u2014used with to
2archaic : deserving of censure
3: odiously or disgustingly objectionable : highly offensive
%u2014 ob7nox7ious7ly adverb
%u2014 ob7nox7ious7ness noun )
(http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/obnoxious)
(According to my posts nothing in what I said pertains to this word)
You were the one who initially engaged me in a debate by personally addressing me. No one else addressed me. Nor am I anyone you reguarly debate with. I asked a question.
Question asked, answered, commented on.
On to the next subject...
And for me, that means just that. - Reply to this comment
- This particular comment is just to give everyone the website where they can view Cpl. Laurean''s wanted poster...
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/alert/laurean_ca.htm - Reply to this comment
- In conclusion, I am sure the answers to the questions we are seeking reside with Cpl. Laurean.
Until he is found we will not know the exact details of the crime; if he even wants them to be known.
"There has been a crime committed, we just don''t know what the crime is" sums it up.
[FYI: I do have other hobbies, at last count 5 of them, which I have been engaging in since this "debate"] - Reply to this comment
- meinnv at 11:31 PM : Jan 15, 2008
Since you seem (to be pretending) to be totally clueless as to how I''''net message boards operate, when you post a comment, you are engaging in a debate or discussion.
If that is not your intent, perhaps you should find a different hobby.
Posted by tuckerndfw at 11:38 PM : Jan 15, 2008
I don''t believe that message was called for.
I have been on numerous internet message boards and know quite well how they operate.
I stated my opinion/comment. You were the one who initially engaged me in a debate by personally addressing me. No one else.
I simply asked why, which I felt I had the right to ask. Question asked, answered, commented on.
On to the next subject..... - Reply to this comment
- "Iceman_1960 at 11:42 PM : Jan 15, 2008
Okay, I accepted it without question.
What"s your point?"
- Posted by tuckerndfw at 11:47 PM : Jan 15, 2008
My point is, you smug sense of moral superiority is completely unjustified, as mine would be if I affected one, as you do.
You accept the "good rumors" (the ones that support this guy"s innocence) and reject the others.
You"re no better than me, the one who says "he"s guilty as hell."
That"s why you and I belong here on this forum, but not on that jury.
We"re equally flawed. At least I"m man enough to admit it.
That is my point. - Reply to this comment
- "But, then again, she is reported to have been "bipolar" (schizo, nutsy)."
- Posted by tuckerndfw at 07:00 PM : Jan 15, 2008
Who reported it ? What qualified psychologist ? When ? Where ?
Mild bipolar disorder ? Moderate ? Severe ?
Give us the details, of **** about it. - Reply to this comment
- Cite the expert medical testimony on the basis of which you declared Lauterbach "insane" (bipolar).
Name the doctor, his credentials, when and where he diagnosed her, and the degree of severity (mild to severe) he declared her condition to be.
Give me all that ---- or else get off your high horse and quit claiming some exalted moral superiority.
"She"s bipolar" -- that"s one of the rumors you never questioned. You accepted it sight unseen. - Reply to this comment
- "Iceman_1960 at 09:30 PM : Jan 15, 2008
You claim the accused is guilty of murder. There is no factual basis for that claim. It is the product of your own imagination."
- Posted by tuckerndfw at 09:37 PM : Jan 15, 2008
You on the other hand claim that all your conclusions are based on fact, not on rumor and speculation.
Cite the expert medical testimony on the basis of which you declared Lauterbach "insane" (bipolar).
Name the doctor, his credentials, when and where he diagnosed her, and the degree of severity (mild to severe) he declared her condition to be.
Give me all that ---- or else get of your high horse and quit claiming some exalted moral superiority.
"She"s bipolar" -- that"s one of the rumors you never questioned. You accepted it sight unseen. - Reply to this comment
- Perhaps if you do not like my opinion or comment, you do not have to read or reply to it. That is your choice to do so, and to repeatedly do so.
Posted by meinnv at 11:18 PM : Jan 15, 2008
That was the same comment I was going to make to you since you are the one complaining about my comments.
Your comments don''''t bother me at all.
Posted by tuckerndfw at 11:27 PM : Jan 15, 2008
I don''t believe I was complaining. I simply asked a question which I felt I was entitled to do so.
Question asked, answered and commented on.
On to the next subject.... - Reply to this comment
Author Thomas Friedman on Obama's Afghanistan plan and the war on terror.
