Memo

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Justification for your sadistic bullying and stalking people, I don't think so..

You asked me about my attitude to you and what I see as the disgraceful ideas you often promote, so I told you. You are not being "bullied" or "stalked". If you propagate obnoxious ideas in a public arena, some people are going to stand up to you. It's the very nature of debate and discussion message boards.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Infact Startreader has you down to a T. You will attempt to corner and bully and humiliate anyone on any issue almost. If you cannot find anything you will fabricate it. This has nothing to do with serious issues as you have claimed and which is demonstrably false but it has everything however to do with a sinister and creepy personality. If you ar ...[text shortened]... values about other people in order to simply attack them you have a problem, a serious problem.

Using the words "sinister" and "creepy" ~ and other abusive buzz words and word-string-ad-hominems ~ over and over and over again - indeed, with a decidedly odd rate of frequency and exact repetition, doesn't have any effect on me.

Originally posted by FMF
Using the words "sinister" and "creepy" ~ and other abusive buzz words and word-string-ad-hominems ~ over and over and over again - indeed, with a decidedly odd rate of frequency and exact repetition, doesn't have any effect on me.

Anyone who continually stalks, harasses and attempts to justify humiliating other people on the basis of fabricated values is sinister and creepy.

Originally posted by FMF
You asked me about my attitude to you and what I see as the disgraceful ideas you often promote, so I told you. You are not being "bullied" or "stalked". If you propagate obnoxious ideas in a public arena, some people are going to stand up to you. It's the very nature of debate and discussion message boards.

I do not hold any disgraceful ideas and no amount of stalking, bullying, fabricating values or sinister creepiness or anything else can change the fact. Anyone is free to examine any of my content and i can assure them they will find no stalking, bullying or fabricating of values with the sole purpose to attack and humiliate other people. As has been noted, the same cannot be said of you. Your attempts to justify your sadistic bullying are just about the most unsavory thing I have come across of late, really I find you repulsive.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Anyone who continually stalks, harasses and attempts to justify humiliating other people on the basis of fabricated values is sinister and creepy.

I am simply confronting you over what I see as the disgraceful things you promote and argue, and the topics - and my stances on them - are completely specific and you have no success deflecting me from them. You've aired these ideas of yours in a public space. People are going to tackle you about them. I have tackled you about them. Trying to smear my robust and always properly argued rejection of your opinions and assertions as "stalking" and "humiliation" is only going impress the most shallow and partisan of onlookers, and does not add to the credibility of your advocacy of what you believe one little bit.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I do not hold any disgraceful ideas and no amount of stalking, bullying, fabricating values or sinister creepiness or anything else can change the fact. Anyone is free to examine any of my content and i can assure them they will find no stalking, bullying or fabricating of values with the sole purpose to attack and humiliate other people. As has bee ...[text shortened]... are just about the most unsavory thing I have come across of late, really I find you repulsive.

You are using exactly the same abuse words, catchphrases and ad hominems over and over again, sometimes in several posts all in a row. I'm not sure what effect you think such peculiar repetition has.

Originally posted by FMF
I am simply confronting you over what I see as the disgraceful things you promote and argue, and the topics - and my stances on them - are completely specific and you have no success deflecting me from them. You've aired these ideas of yours in a public space. People are going to tackle you about them. I have tackled you about them. Trying to smear my robust and ...[text shortened]... ookers, and does not add to the credibility of your advocacy of what you believe one little bit.

You were confronted with your own words and empirical evidence which refuted those words, the disgrace being that you simply could not bring yourself to comment upon it despite being asked numerous times and your behavior was such that all you could do was reiterate the same fabricated drivel over and over again even as you are doing so now.

Here you are talking of holding people to account for their words, shall we add hypocrisy to your ever growing list of repulsive behavioral traits, along with stalking, sadistic bullying , fabricating values and continually attempting to demean and humiliate other people with no justification other than falsehoods fabricated by you?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
You were confronted with your own words and empirical evidence which refuted those words, the disgrace being that you simply could not bring yourself to comment upon it despite being asked numerous times and your behavior was such that all you could do was reiterate the same fabricated drivel over and over again even as you are doing so now.

Here ...[text shortened]... demean and humiliate other people with no justification other than falsehoods fabricated by you?

Oh dear, the same abuse words and word strings yet again. The sheer flow of freestanding, repeated insults has increased quite noticeably since I asked you this (a an entirely on topic question that you have made absolutely no attempt to answer):

Why have you not quoted any of the arguments defending the cover up of child sex abuse that you made in exchanges with posters such as twhitehead, divegeester, googlefudge, stellspalfie, Proper Knob and myself on the first nine pages of Thread 162947?

Originally posted by FMF
Oh dear, the same abuse words and word strings yet again. The sheer flow of freestanding, repeated insults has increased quite noticeably since I asked you this (a an entirely on topic question that you have made absolutely no attempt to answer):

Why have you not quoted any of the arguments defending the cover up of child sex abuse that you made in exchanges ...[text shortened]... ge, stellspalfie, Proper Knob and myself on the first nine pages of Thread 162947?

Yes the same thread which refutes your assertions and which you could not bring yourself to comment upon when confronted with the reality, how repulsive. The thread which produced this,

The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as they come to light. Penitent privilege does not prevent this nor can it be used to prevent access to information or hinder in any way investigations by civil authorities.

So if a kid came to me and said that they were being abused, I would drive them to the nearest police station, which is not far from me and give the matter into the hands of the police. I am a minster of God, I have been trained to deal with sin, I have not been trained to deal with criminality. It is a matter for the police. - Robbie Carrobie

and from which you somehow manage to extricate this,

'you have defended the covering up of child abuse' - FMF

Oh dear.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Yes the same thread which refutes your assertions and which you could not bring yourself to comment upon when confronted with the reality...

I could not bring myself to comment? I have commented on the two sentences you tacked onto the end of your nine pages of argument over and over again. You have simply ignored these comments of mine.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
...and from which you somehow manage to extricate this,

'you have defended the covering up of child abuse' - FMF

Read the whole thread, robbie. You spent nine pages of the thread defending the cover up of child abuse. And a page or two ago on this thread you insisted that you have not retracted any of it.

Originally posted by FMF
I could not bring myself to comment? I have commented on the two sentences you tacked onto the end of your nine pages of argument over and over again. You have simply ignored these comments of mine.

Tell us how you get from,

The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as they come to light. Penitent privilege does not prevent this nor can it be used to prevent access to information or hinder in any way investigations by civil authorities.

So if a kid came to me and said that they were being abused, I would drive them to the nearest police station, which is not far from me and give the matter into the hands of the police. I am a minster of God, I have been trained to deal with sin, I have not been trained to deal with criminality. It is a matter for the police. - Robbie Carrobie

to

'You have defended the covering up of child abuse' - FMF

Originally posted by FMF
Read the whole thread, robbie. You spent nine pages of the thread defending the cover up of child abuse. And a page or two ago on this thread you insisted that you have not retracted any of it.

simply repeating the same drivel is not working for you FMF, you are being asked to comment specifically on the threads contents. Lets see how you fare, shall we? How do you get from,

The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as they come to light. Penitent privilege does not prevent this nor can it be used to prevent access to information or hinder in any way investigations by civil authorities.

So if a kid came to me and said that they were being abused, I would drive them to the nearest police station, which is not far from me and give the matter into the hands of the police. I am a minster of God, I have been trained to deal with sin, I have not been trained to deal with criminality. It is a matter for the police -robbie caroobie

to

you have defended the covering up of child abuse - FMF

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Tell us how you get from...

[...a couple of sentences tacked onto the end of a thread when you were probably trying to distance yourself from the odious argument you'd laid out in detail in the first nine pages of the thread - my paraphrasing]

to

'You have defended the covering up of child abuse' - FMF

I simply read the whole thread, robbie. All of it. Including the the argument you laid out in detail in its first nine pages, which you have now stated categorically that you do not retract.

Originally posted by FMF
I simply read the whole thread, robbie. All of it. Including the the argument you laid out in detail in its first nine pages, which you have now stated categorically that you do not retract.

yes indeed so you will now tell us after reading the whole thread how you get from, this

The matter is quite clear, in the UK there is mandatory reporting which supersedes that of penitent privilege, meaning of course that a minster of God is under duress to report any instances of child abuse to the relevant authorities as soon as they come to light. Penitent privilege does not prevent this nor can it be used to prevent access to information or hinder in any way investigations by civil authorities.

So if a kid came to me and said that they were being abused, I would drive them to the nearest police station, which is not far from me and give the matter into the hands of the police. I am a minster of God, I have been trained to deal with sin, I have not been trained to deal with criminality. It is a matter for the police.

to

'you have defended covering up child abuse' - FMF

tell us how you did it FMF, your reasoning, go on.