Dear Vice-Chair of The Party of Two (Alan Avans),
Well, well, well!
I expose Ryan as deleting hundreds of emails (and thus
being a compete hypocrite in demanding that his emails to Ownership be not
deleted) and you object. Ha, Ha, ha.
I think I am right in saying only one -- just
one -- of known Social Credit supporters on this elist has so
far had the guts to face the fact that Ryan deletes hundreds of messages on
the social credit list. You are certainly not that
one because you are miserably gutless --- and the attitude of the
other known Social Credit people is also in question because they have not
yet had the courage to say anything. Come on, boys, do tell us
-- did you know that hundreds of emails (say, two hundred) to the social credit
elist have been deleted? All you need say is yes, or no.
Oh -- one of the three, simple, conditions I made before
I would agree to be moderator was that messages should be confined to the
subject of capital ownership. Do tell me, Vice-Chair (and
you're such a dear, I can't wait to receive the answer) -- but does not that
exclude most emails from you and virtually all from Ryan who
endlessly rambles on about A + B which has nothing to do with
widespread capital ownership? So a basic rule of all moderators (I
did not invent it) wipes out most of your and Ryan's emails!! Well I
never!! Will Ryan claim First Amendment rights for total
irrelevance? Ha, ha ha!!
Moreover, many moons ago, I pointed out on
this forum that Social Credit has no proposals for capital ownership (and that
is also specifically said in Binary Economics by Ashford &
Shakespeare) Yet, at the same time, I am also co-author of a book (Seven
Steps to Justice ) which explains the circumstances in which debt-free issuance
is acceptable. I have done my bit to get co-operation from good
faith Social Credit supporters -- you didn't know that, did you? And
you and Ryan have done nothing to get co-operation with ANYONE, have you?
Moreover, Ryan rants on about his First
Amendment Right to say what he likes on Ownership but it never seems to occur to
his obsessive, stalking mind that the Ownership subject is wide capital
ownership and so most of his stuff is irrelevant. Ha, ha ha!!
So, like Ryan, you are a hypocrite, and a
muddle-head -- and, of course, in your case, completely gutless in not
insisting that Ryan should refrain from extreme hypocrisy. Ho, ho,
ho!
Oh, one other thing -- Ryan (and no doubt, you as
well) talks about how difficult it is to understand Social Credit so that
must be the reason why his version of social credit only has you and Ryan
as supporters! TWO supporters! Big, BIG, DEAL!!! You are a
Party of Two -- Ryan is Chair, and you are Vice-Chair.
CON......GRAT TEW......LAY.....SHUNS!!
There are NO other Social Credit people out there
known to support you and Ryan. Two, it is, and two it will remain --
FOREVER!!
On the other hand -- and I really, really
don't want to be a colossal bore -- Norm Kurland's cesj alone has thousands
supporters throughout the world and maybe six or seven thousand have
signed up to the Kurland/Turnbull Statement of Vision. You didn't know
that, you ignorant twerp, did you?
Furthermore -- and I hope this won't
depress you and Ryan too much, in fact, I don't want to depress you at all,
because I suspect you both have fragile personalities -- binary economics is a
key part of the movement for endogenous loans (all of which must be directed at
forms of productive capacity) now developing very nicely in various parts of the
world. You did not take up my offer to learn more of the subject, of
course, which is highly understandable in your case since you, like Ryan,
have no interest in capital ownership and will be excluded by any
future moderator on the grounds of irrelevance to the list subject.
You and Ryan really ripe ones, aren't
you? "Righteous anger" you wrote, you little prig. Ha,
Ha, ha.
Rodney Shakespeare
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:09
PM
Subject: Re: OWNERSHIP: Ownership
Moderator
Warning: This is a very angry post. For those of you to whom my
righteous anger is aimed let me recommend that as you read, please imagine the
voice of God being directed toward you. Then imagine that you are sinners in
the hands of an angry God. I've frikkin' had it with a couple of jerks around
here.
Ed Dodson and John Medaille and Shann Turnbull....thanks for
always taking the high road. Well
done!
Rodney Shakespeare....scram. I'm sick of you. Why
should this forum be a place for you to air grievances about Ryan's
Elistas site? Just get out of here and don't come back
again. I mean it. Hey, if Norm Kurland, bless his always "principled"
heart doesn't like it, he can leave the board with you. I'm just
absodamnlutely tired of ya! Yup, I really really am.
Dropping the angry voice of the Lord now....
Bill Ryan....please just refuse to ever deal with the BE jerks on this
board again. My guess is that if they'll just leave you'll be able to show
your more civil side again...the side of you that is actually useful, thank
you very very much. We all know that Kelso owes his best insights to
Douglas, thanks of course to you. And again, that BE scholars ought to
be a little more forthcoming about this. That's all mighty
fine.
Raising my Sword O'theLord to the square once again....
By and large BE advocates on this board have treated everyone like
dirt at the worst and at best like children. BE advocates have..yep, I'm
gonna say it...and you can kiss my ruby red *ss if you don't like
it...talked sh*t about their betters (David Ellerman for example, Shann
Turbull for example) and run all over the Georgists and Distributists with
slight praise and faint damns. Go jump in the blazin' lake
o'fire.
Regards to those whom regards are due
The rest of you to whom any regard is not due (Rodney Shakespeare
for example), don't let the door hit your fanny on the way out.
Alan Avans
Prairie Village KS