More From Nutty Hugo

[Larkinn]

My observations of Larkinn's behavior are accurate, as anyone who has read his posts will know. His most recent post above provides ample evidence. It contains his typical battery of insults; almost as intense as those he sent to me via private message. Net cowards often hurl insults as they cower behind the anonymity of a keyboard. Larkinn cannot dodge the fact that he defended the murderous Hezbollah and he cannot retract his insults of board members. His insecurity is obvious. He is so unconvinced of his own intelligence, he attacks others in a feeble attempt to validate himself.

Well I would ask you to prove your asinine claims (by the way...you are asinine as well, but I think we've all realized that by now), but its become clear that you are trying to prove your unsubstantiated claims by repeating them ad nauseum.

You are as tiring as rsr, child.

Either anwser my questions and respond to me, as opposed to trying to diagnose me psychologically (by the way...you know nothing about me except your extremely biased diagnosis of a very slim part of my personality. And somehow I doubt you have a psychological background, I would be surprised if you made it through college).

Actually...you really should stop this. I don't need to validate myself, or my intelligence...my ego in both is a bit too high at the moment because of recent accomplishments which you will never, in your lifetime, reach. But someone who is obviously mentally deficient like yourself insulting me...well that is validating me even more.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

I see alot of insults and ego, from alot of people on this board. But I want to know, larkinn, do you support hezbollah or make excuses for them?

Well I would ask you to prove your asinine claims (by the way...you are asinine as well, but I think we've all realized that by now), but its become clear that you are trying to prove your unsubstantiated claims by repeating them ad nauseum.

You are as tiring as rsr, child.

Either anwser my questions and respond to me, as opposed to trying to diagnose me psychologically (by the way...you know nothing about me except your extremely biased diagnosis of a very slim part of my personality. And somehow I doubt you have a psychological background, I would be surprised if you made it through college).

Actually...you really should stop this. I don't need to validate myself, or my intelligence...my ego in both is a bit too high at the moment because of recent accomplishments which you will never, in your lifetime, reach. But someone who is obviously mentally deficient like yourself insulting me...well that is validating me even more.

 

[Larkinn]

I see alot of insults and ego, from alot of people on this board. But I want to know, larkinn, do you support hezbollah or make excuses for them?

I do not support Hezbollah. I will, however, defend them if they are accused of something they either have not done, or it is uncertain they have done. Not because of any love for them, there is none, but because I believe in the truth. Domino apparently does not.

Hence my asking him the question of whether Nazi's nuked washington DC. And why he won't anwser it. Because it is directly comparable to the asinine claims against me. If he says no, well then according to his own logic he is defending nazi's. If he says yes, well it becomes obvious he has no idea what he is talking about. His positions have put him in a bit of a bind, then which is perhaps why he refuses to address that question.

 

[actsnoblemartin]

I hope you understand why you ask you directly. I think its important to ask information from the horses mouth.

Secondly, truth is important. I dont think its supporting hezbollah, if you say, hey they did not do x, if infact, they did not do x, and if you are not sure, and if proven wrong you say, oops sorry.

my definition of hezbollah supporter: hezbollah has right to kill civilians, their own and israelies.

So, i have no problem with you, your entitled to your opinion either way, but i thought it would be more fair to ask you directly, then too just assume.

This in no way attacks domino, because this has nothing to do with domino, and he can respond with his side of the story any time. I am not attacking him in any way

I do not support Hezbollah. I will, however, defend them if they are accused of something they either have not done, or it is uncertain they have done. Not because of any love for them, there is none, but because I believe in the truth. Domino apparently does not.

Hence my asking him the question of whether Nazi's nuked washington DC. And why he won't anwser it. Because it is directly comparable to the asinine claims against me. If he says no, well then according to his own logic he is defending nazi's. If he says yes, well it becomes obvious he has no idea what he is talking about. His positions have put him in a bit of a bind, then which is perhaps why he refuses to address that question.

 

[red states rule]

Well I would ask you to prove your asinine claims (by the way...you are asinine as well, but I think we've all realized that by now), but its become clear that you are trying to prove your unsubstantiated claims by repeating them ad nauseum.

You are as tiring as rsr, child.

Either anwser my questions and respond to me, as opposed to trying to diagnose me psychologically (by the way...you know nothing about me except your extremely biased diagnosis of a very slim part of my personality. And somehow I doubt you have a psychological background, I would be surprised if you made it through college).

Actually...you really should stop this. I don't need to validate myself, or my intelligence...my ego in both is a bit too high at the moment because of recent accomplishments which you will never, in your lifetime, reach. But someone who is obviously mentally deficient like yourself insulting me...well that is validating me even more.

Hey, if you want to start showing off your intelligence - please start sometime soon

 

[onedomino]

Well I would ask you to prove your asinine claims (by the way...you are asinine as well, but I think we've all realized that by now), but its become clear that you are trying to prove your unsubstantiated claims by repeating them ad nauseum.

You are as tiring as rsr, child.

Either anwser my questions and respond to me, as opposed to trying to diagnose me psychologically (by the way...you know nothing about me except your extremely biased diagnosis of a very slim part of my personality. And somehow I doubt you have a psychological background, I would be surprised if you made it through college).

Actually...you really should stop this. I don't need to validate myself, or my intelligence...my ego in both is a bit too high at the moment because of recent accomplishments which you will never, in your lifetime, reach. But someone who is obviously mentally deficient like yourself insulting me...well that is validating me even more.

Yet another insult from the defender of Hezbollah. The person who claimed that Hezbollah did not murder the Marines in Beirut. Hezbollah has been found guilty in Federal District court of the Marine murders. Yet Larkinn claims they are innocent. In fact, he claims that Hezbollah did not even exist when the bombing occurred. He was shown links that rebutted his unsubstantiated lie, but that made no difference to him. In the 4 or 5 days he has been on this board, we have been carpet bombed with more than 150 posts, which include insults of long-time board members and the defense of a terror organization. The degree of pathetic desperation in the post above underlines Larkinn's insecurity. He insipidly drones on and on about intelligence, yet displays none. Why would someone feel the need to come to a message board and repeatedly spew about his intelligence? Only the pathologically insecure need to constantly assure others of their capability; only those who fail to demonstrate it.

 

[red states rule]

I do not support Hezbollah. I will, however, defend them if they are accused of something they either have not done, or it is uncertain they have done. Not because of any love for them, there is none, but because I believe in the truth. Domino apparently does not.

Hence my asking him the question of whether Nazi's nuked washington DC. And why he won't anwser it. Because it is directly comparable to the asinine claims against me. If he says no, well then according to his own logic he is defending nazi's. If he says yes, well it becomes obvious he has no idea what he is talking about. His positions have put him in a bit of a bind, then which is perhaps why he refuses to address that question.

Are you a member of the liberal media?

Andrea Mitchell On PBS 'Washington Week': American Media Not Pro-Hezbollah Enough?
Posted by Michael Rule on August 21, 2006 - 11:20.
This past Friday, on PBS’s "Washington Week," NBC’s Andrea Mitchell noted that Hezbollah is winning the PR war around the world:

"And, I have to say, if you look at the mainstream media around the world everywhere other than in the United States, it is remarkably pro-Hezbollah. Hezbollah at this point is being described in most places now as a social service organization and a legitimate part of the Lebanese government, not as a terror group.

Was she critical of the world press for covering Hezbollah in this light, or critical of the American press for not being Hezbollah boosters? Her own comments about Hezbollah may provide some insight. As mentioned in Brent Baker’s July 18 CyberAlert, Mitchell praised Hezbollah as a group that provides social services and it’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, as a populist:

"...Hezbollah's charismatic leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah has become Lebanon's best known and most controversial politician. A Shiite populist, Nasrallah provides social services where Lebanon's weak new government cannot, has ministers in the cabinet and operates militias."

http://newsbusters.org/node/7091

 

[Toro]

Guys, can we get back to slagging Nutty Hugh?

 

[onedomino]

Guys, can we get back to slagging Nutty Hugh?

From today's news, a story about Chevez snuggling up to the worst totalitarian state in Europe, and also one of my favorite Chavez photos:

Belarus: Chavez Visits Seeking to Build Partnership
June 30 2007

complete article: http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/lo...00nbjun30,0,5965235.story?coll=sfla-news-sfla

Minsk Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez called for a strategic partnership with Belarus on Friday, calling his Belarusian counterpart a "brother-in-arms" and lamenting the pressure he said the United States was putting on Minsk and Caracas.

Chavez met with President Alexander Lukashenko after two days in Moscow, where Russian media speculated that Chavez was trying to arrange a major new purchase of Russian weaponry.

Chavez' mentor blowing in his ear:

 

[Larkinn]

Hey, if you want to start showing off your intelligence - please start sometime soon

What makes you think you have the cognitive capacity to recognize it? You've never experienced intelligence, I doubt you will know it when you see it. Its sort of like those movies where someone from the 18th or 19th century comes to the 21st century and is blown away by all this crazy shit...telephones and cars and televisions...that is your reaction to intelligence. Utter and completel bewilderment.

Yet another insult from the defender of Hezbollah. The person who claimed that Hezbollah did not murder the Marines in Beirut. Hezbollah has been found guilty in Federal District court of the Marine murders. Yet Larkinn claims they are innocent. In fact, he claims that Hezbollah did not even exist when the bombing occurred. He was shown links that rebutted his unsubstantiated lie, but that made no difference to him. In the 4 or 5 days he has been on this board, we have been carpet bombed with more than 150 posts, which include insults of long-time board members and the defense of a terror organization. The degree of pathetic desperation in the post above underlines Larkinn's insecurity. He insipidly drones on and on about intelligence, yet displays none. Why would someone feel the need to come to a message board and repeatedly spew about his intelligence? Only the pathologically insecure need to constantly assure others of their capability; only those who fail to demonstrate it.

You've said all of this before, and I've responded, and you conveniently ignored my responses.

What a surprise. And I have no great desire to talk about my intelligence, but if you keep bringing it up, well yes I will use it as a bludgen to beat you over the head with.

Yet Larkinn claims they are innocent.

Oh, but this is a gem. This is a complete and utter lie...hey what a surprise, I'd ask for a link but you already showed you aren't interested in backing up your lies.

Don't you have anything better to do that stalk me and post lies about me domino? Oh, that and neg rep me every day. You and rsr both...its almost comforting to know that whenever I wake up in the morning I will have at least one negative rep from each of you. I've come to look forward to it in the same way that I see the same bum near the subway whenever I go by. Its nice to know that even though those things are pathetic and depressing...well they are reliable. Its sort of become a game...to see if I can get enough positive rep from the sane members of the board to keep me above, even though I have two asshats neg repping me at least once a day.

 

[red states rule]

Not to many people see you a candidate for MENSA

 

[Larkinn]

Not to many people see you a candidate for MENSA

Why don't you write them a letter and tell them that. I highly doubt they give a shit about your opinion of my candidacy.

 

[red states rule]

Why don't you write them a letter and tell them that. I highly doubt they give a shit about your opinion of my candidacy.

I rest my case

 

[onedomino]

Larkinn wants the links to where he defended Hezbollah. Why he would want to display that again is anyone guess. But since he insists, below are the links where Larkinn defended the murder organization. During the exchange, he was clearly refuted, but continued to insist that Hezbollah did not murder the Marines in Beirut in 1983. Further he maintained that even the US Government did not know who killed the Marines. When shown a Federal District court case where Hezbollah was found guilty, he said that was not good enough, i.e., it was only a civil case! Could he show less respect for the memory of the murdered Marines? We are disgusted by anyone who would defend a murder organization. For those who are interested and did not read the thread where Larkinn defended Hezbollah here it is:

The thread: http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?t=49194

My response to DeadCanDance’s post that Hezbollah had not killed Americans in more than 20 years:

I did not realize there was a statute of limitations on atrocity and mass murder. I am sure the familes of the murdered Marines would have no problem with DeadCanDance's explanation that Hezbollah was "pissed" when it blew up the Marines in their sleep.

Larkin:

Interesting that Hezbollah managed to kill US soldiers before the group was even organized. http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?p=580014#post580014

onedomino:

Ah, an Hezbollah apologist. Hezbollah was formed in 1982. It murdered the Marines in 1983: http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_co...x_article=1148. Hezbollah published its manifesto (A Primer on Mass Murder, Indiscriminate Atrocities, and the Destruction of Israel 101) in 1985.

Larkinn:

Ah, an idiotic overgeneralizer. Hezbollah was loosely formed in 1982 and was a shadowy organization then. Even US government officials don't know whether Hezbollah did the '83 attacks. http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?p=580120#post580120

onedomino:

That's a flat out lie. Hezbollah and Iran have even been found guilty in a court of law for being responsible for the murder of the Marines: http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/ir...racks.bombing/. But I suppose that a legal finding would have no meaning to someone who excuses Hezbollah.

Larkinn:

No, actually they weren't found guilty. They were found to have responsibility for the attacks. It was not a criminal suit that was filed against them, but a civil suit, in which plaintiffs have a lower burden of proof required.

By the way, the legal finding was default, since Iran never responded to the claims. http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?p=580130#post580130

Now if that is not a Hezbollah apologist, what is?

onedomino:

Can you read? “U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth said the suicide truck bombing was carried out by the group Hezbollah with the approval and funding of Iran's senior government officials.” http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/ir...racks.bombing/

Larkin:

Can you ?

“Noting that Iran was served with the lawsuits in 2002 but failed to file any responses, Lamberth wrote that the court entered default judgments against the defendants in last December but was required to study the matter further under federal law regarding lawsuits against other countries. “http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?p=580137#post580137

onedomino:

What part of "U.S. District Judge Royce C. Lamberth said the suicide truck bombing was carried out by the group Hezbollah with the approval and funding of Iran's senior government officials." do you not understand? It is amazing the degree that you will go to deny Hezbollah's guilt for the murder of the Marines in Beruit. What can be your motivation for attempting to excuse mass murderers? Read carefully the words, "suicide truck bombing was carried out by the group Hezbollah" and try to grasp their meaning.

Larkinn:

It was a civil case, with only one side presented. It is quite easy to tar Hezbollah with a negative brush, this just is a foolish way to attempt to do it.http://usmessageboard.com/showthread.php?p=580315#post580315

Larkinn: Hezbollah defender and apologist.

 

[DeadCanDance]

calm down y'all.

Stop looking for monsters under the bed.

Israel is going to deal with hezbollah. There isn't a shred of evidence hezbollah has ever intended to attack american cities. In fact, all the evidence says they won't. They have regional goals that involve lebanon, israel and palestine. Kansas City and Memphis are not on their target lists.


It's a problem israel will handle. They are fully capable of defending themselves. We certainly didn't get militarily involved with the IRA terrorism against Britain, or the ELF terrorists in Spain. Those were regional conflicts, that we left to Spain and Britain to deal directly with.

 

[DeadCanDance]

calm down y'all.

Stop looking for monsters under the bed.

Israel is going to deal with hezbollah. There isn't a shred of evidence hezbollah has ever intended to attack american cities. In fact, all the evidence says they won't. They have regional goals that involve lebanon, israel and palestine. Kansas City and Memphis are not on their target lists.


It's a problem israel will handle. They are fully capable of defending themselves. We certainly didn't get militarily involved with the IRA terrorism against Britain, or the ELF terrorists in Spain. Those were regional conflicts, that we left to Spain and Britain to deal directly with.

Oh, I forgot - I always need to add a caveat before some Bush-fan accuses me of being "weak" on terror.

I want to be smart about fighting terror. That means focusing resources on international jihaddists who really do intend to attack the United States homeland, and american civilians.

Hezbollah is not in that category.

 

[Larkinn]

originally posted by Larkin

It was a civil case, with only one side presented. It is quite easy to tar Hezbollah with a negative brush, this just is a foolish way to attempt to do

So, please...what part of saying that its easy to make hezbollah seem negative (which it is) is being an apologist for them?

Again....I point out you never anwsered my nazi question. You confuse me defending the truth with me defending Hezbollah.

 

[Annie]

So, please...what part of saying that its easy to make hezbollah seem negative (which it is) is being an apologist for them?

Again....I point out you never anwsered my nazi question. You confuse me defending the truth with me defending Hezbollah.

The reason for quoting correctly, so the rest of us can follow along. Here you are quoting yourself, though by different names or spelling of which.

 

[Larkinn]

The reason for quoting correctly, so the rest of us can follow along. Here you are quoting yourself, though by different names or spelling of which.

It was on a different thread...that would have made it fairly difficult to do especially with the connection I am on right now.

 

[Annie]

It was on a different thread...that would have made it fairly difficult to do especially with the connection I am on right now.

Not if you use quoting correctly.