PDA

View Full Version : ...


01-26-2007, 02:55 PM
Am I being accused of something here? I tend to use "..." purely to leave comments open-ended. It is in no way anything to be read into.

01-26-2007, 04:01 PM
I GueSSed DaT.

01-26-2007, 05:26 PM
Are you guilty of using DOTS in an inappropriate manner, Mr. Spectre?

Please address the court and remember, you are under oath.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

01-26-2007, 06:04 PM
BlueAngel wrote:
Are you guilty of using DOTS in an inappropriate manner, Mr. Spectre?

Please address the court and remember, you are under oath.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

You'd know better than I. I did NOT intend to create a new thread on the matter but was only trying to respond in another. I merely changed the topic and here it is...

01-26-2007, 06:16 PM
spectre wrote:

BlueAngel wrote:
Are you guilty of using DOTS in an inappropriate manner, Mr. Spectre?

Please address the court and remember, you are under oath.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

You'd know better than I. I did NOT intend to create a new thread on the matter but was only trying to respond in another. I merely changed the topic and here it is...

You did not intend to create another topic, but you DID.

Are you not in control of your own actions?

I see you have place three more dots at the end of your last sentence.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

01-26-2007, 06:53 PM
BlueAngel wrote:

I see you have place three more dots at the end of your last sentence.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

I see that you see that I have placed three more dots at the end of my sentence.

We're still getting nowhere.

You were correct when you said that reverse psychology requires at least two people. What you didn't say is that reverse psychology equally requires one manipulator and one unwitting victim.

You convey yourself as the victim but I'm not so sure. Please don't take that to mean I seek any further explanation on your part. I do not. I'm not interested in playing your personal game. The topic itself is what has my interest.

01-26-2007, 06:54 PM
Are accidents occurances of those who lack control or are they evidence that the concept of control is just that... a concept?

01-26-2007, 07:08 PM
spectre wrote:

BlueAngel wrote:

I see you have place three more dots at the end of your last sentence.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

I see that you see that I have placed three more dots at the end of my sentence.

We're still getting nowhere.

Nowhere is exactly where you will get with me.

You were correct when you said that reverse psychology requires at least two people. What you didn't say is that reverse psychology equally requires one manipulator and one unwitting victim.

Since I'm not the manipulator or the unwitting victim, I have no idea what you're trying to GET AT? And, beleive me, I'm not interested in the least.

You convey yourself as the victim but I'm not so sure. Please don't take that to mean I seek any further explanation on your part. I do not. I'm not interested in playing your personal game. The topic itself is what has my interest.

Perhaps, you haven't read all of my thread. If you had, you would be aware that I am not the VICTIM. I was a victim. I am a survivor. And, why would I care what your opinion of me is? Me, playing games? Now, that's equally as funny as saying I lack response.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

01-26-2007, 07:09 PM
spectre wrote:
Are accidents occurances of those who lack control or are they evidence that the concept of control is just that... a concept?

Oh, right. Of course. Why didn't I think of that. Accidents are EVIDENCE that CONTROl is just a concept.

Let's try that one in court.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

01-26-2007, 07:16 PM
I read the entire thread.

Yes, "you" playing games.

I won't be dwelling in this lower consciousness much longer. There are far more important things to discuss than you or I. In case you receive no further response from me in this thread or any other, that is why.

I'm bored.

01-26-2007, 07:24 PM
BlueAngel wrote:

Oh, right. Of course. Why didn't I think of that. Accidents are EVIDENCE that CONTROl is just a concept.

Let's try that one in court.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

You seemed to believe that because I made a mistake in accidentally creating a new thread when only trying to respond to an existing one, that I must not be in control of my actions.

Many truths go over the head of the courts every single day. Not following your defensive and sarcastic logic.

In the very least, I've temporarily distracted you from yourself which you seem to be in desperate need of.

I'm afraid our time is up now. There isn't enough of it to lend to all that has been my attempt at communicating with you.

I concede to those walls you have built up.

01-26-2007, 07:29 PM
spectre wrote:
I read the entire thread.

Yes, "you" playing games.

I won't be dwelling in this lower consciousness much longer. There are far more important things to discuss than you or I. In case you receive no further response from me in this thread or any other, that is why.

I'm bored.

ME, playing games. That's about as funny as accusinig me of lack of response.

Dwell where ever you like.

Thanks for that heads up about no further response from you. I'm sure the next time I logged on and didn't see a response from you, well, I just wouldn't know what to do.

There is much more for me to discuss.

I'm never bored.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

01-26-2007, 07:54 PM
BlueAngel wrote:

Thanks for that heads up about no further response from you. I'm sure the next time I logged on and didn't see a response from you, well, I just wouldn't know what to do.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

This would imply that you ever log off. At any rate, it was the furthest from my intentions to stir all of THIS.

As you were.

01-26-2007, 08:00 PM
spectre wrote:

BlueAngel wrote:

Oh, right. Of course. Why didn't I think of that. Accidents are EVIDENCE that CONTROl is just a concept.

Let's try that one in court.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

You seemed to believe that because I made a mistake in accidentally creating a new thread when only trying to respond to an existing one, that I must not be in control of my actions.

Many truths go over the head of the courts every single day. Not following your defensive and sarcastic logic.

In the very least, I've temporarily distracted you from yourself which you seem to be in desperate need of.

I'm afraid our time is up now. There isn't enough of it to lend to all that has been my attempt at communicating with you.

I concede to those walls you have built up.

Spectre said:

"Temporarily distracted myself from you."

Try making it permanent for whatever end result you seek will not be realized.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

01-26-2007, 08:04 PM
spectre wrote:

BlueAngel wrote:

Thanks for that heads up about no further response from you. I'm sure the next time I logged on and didn't see a response from you, well, I just wouldn't know what to do.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

This would imply that you ever log off. At any rate, it was the furthest from my intentions to stir all of THIS.

As you were.

It doesn't imply that I never log off. And, if I never logged of, so what?

As I said, "next time I log on." That would imply that I do log off.

Why would you say "as you were" to me? This isn't a military site.

I am as I desire and not as I was.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

01-26-2007, 08:06 PM
BlueAngel wrote:

Why would you say "as you were" to me? This isn't a military site.

I am as I desire and not as I was.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

"As you were" before all of THIS started.

01-26-2007, 08:10 PM
spectre wrote:

BlueAngel wrote:

Why would you say "as you were" to me? This isn't a military site.

I am as I desire and not as I was.

In Peace,
BlueAngel


"As you were" before all of THIS started.

Before all of what started?

What is the THIS that you refer to?

In Peace,
BlueAngel

01-27-2007, 08:30 AM
spectre wrote:
Am I being accused of something here? I tend to use "..." purely to leave comments open-ended. It is in no way anything to be read into.

So, when I asked Shadow the name of the musician of whom I speak on the Freemasonry thread and the next comment was from you and it included three dots, that's because you left your comment open-ended?

There was no comment made except for three dots. That is REALLY open-ended alright.

Maybe you ought to put some language in and then use the dots as they are intended and not for the OTHER purpose as I have already described.

I know what the dots mean when used in "mind control."

Do you?

In Peace,
BlueAngel

cold
01-27-2007, 10:07 AM
...... ...... ......

01-27-2007, 10:18 AM
Why the dots?

In Peace,
BlueAngel

Shadow
02-01-2007, 06:43 AM
BlueAngel wrote:
Why the dots?

In Peace,
BlueAngel


Having the last word again are you?

02-01-2007, 07:05 AM
Yes.

In Peace,
BlueAngel

Shadow
02-23-2007, 06:24 AM
BlueAngel wrote:
Yes.

In Peace,
BlueAngel