The Westminster Tennis Club

The Westminster Tennis Club
720 Sixth St Unit 160
New Westminster, BC V3L 3C5
Org Phone: (604) 951-9546
Director Phone: 604-522-6022
Toilet paper will be no longer be supplied by the club
in the rest rooms!
Men’s and Women’s room will have a phone installed to
Broughton’s office. At the completion of you duty, just call him
for some asswipe. He will supply it all, as he has been to the usenet
groups
for quite a few years now.
Contact information
Phone is 604-951-9546 or the club 604-522-6022. Email djcamp@shaw.ca
www.nwtennis.com
see him here
This site is still in the development stage: http://www.corruptgacourts.com


POSTED TRUTH

On Jun 12, 5:57 pm, Robert wrote:
>
> Now smoking bans are a "right."

Breathing is a right, asswipe. We’ll keep on passing smoking bans, and
we will not be asking for your approval when we do so, asswipe.

On Jun 16, 10:14 pm, Robert wrote:

> The problem is, there’s no one to organize smokers.

The tobacco industry has made many well-financed attempts to organize
smokers. Every one of them failed.

Club Presidents Trolling Internet to harass smokers groups
are the way forward for the future.
The Westminster Tennis Club Internet Troll phone 604 522-6022
Irratating smokers groups for years now.
Do you trust a man that abuses people in groups
that has complete disrespect for their forum.?
Robert Broughton # 2 Third Street & Royal Avenue Phone 604 522-6022
New Westminster Tennis Club, Tipperary Park, Third Street and Royal
Avenue,
New Westminster, British Columbia. Phone: (604) 522-6022
Usenet Troll Make’s a Good President, Eh?
Can’t this club find a better man for their representative.
A club president and internet troll Robert Broughton will make
quite a clown image for the management there.
Maybe they’ll enjoy the Shiner then.
Be careful If you are a member! This guy finds a cigarette
in your possession, he’ ll probably write about you and use
you name as his assault on your persona. The Voguls
must be unaware their name is being used in his vendetta
against smokers.
It isn’t a far leap for a troll to go into a netstalker
and ********** mode. If your a member and have
kids watch out!
For you non believer’s Use the google Search
Engine
Alt.Smokers is not your playtoy group.
10 plus years of insults and swearing at smokers
will result in this hitting and sitting right in your adverts.
Alt.Smokers will not tolerate your antics any longer
as you keep the sway of public opinion to the right.
Or what ever your motive’s truely are.
You want open and candid...Here it is.
If you don’t stay out of there...Plenty more coming!
Open your mouth sucker
Pahauuktouuiiii let’s feed those tonsils.
Just the google search results show quite a legacy.
Proud president here’s your troll record.
search google groups
Query
idiot: Robert Broughton 29 pages of results
http://tinyurl.com/2hzsbg
you are an idiot: Robert Broughton 24 pages
http://tinyurl.com/ys83kw
bull#@($ Robert Broughton 11 pages
http://tinyurl.com/2e8ez4
you are a total moron: Robert Broughton 15 pages
http://tinyurl.com/2f4ke5
Liar: Robert Broughton 10 pages
http://tinyurl.com/ysjynk
mentally ill: Robert: Broughton 9 pages
http://tinyurl.com/26dfwo
truthful (always in jest): Robert Broughton 8 pages
http://tinyurl.com/yugtxg
your an a$$hole: Robert Broughton 7 pages
http://tinyurl.com/2xr9qs
Asswipe: Robert Broughton 20 pages
http://tinyurl.com/yvdyth
So to all those that are members and investors,
owners of this tennis club, let’s have some
exposure of the TRUTH
Why on earth the tennis club wants this??who Knows?
Several alias names are also used by this Guy in
his lifelong mission of making a fool of himself.

How come you haven’t tried to organize smokers, asswipe?

PROOF Read it Here!

On Jun 17, 10:34 am, Robert wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jun 2008 06:49:10 -0700 (PDT), Malcolm wrote:
> >On Jun 16, 10:14 pm, Robert wrote:
>
> >> The problem is, there’s no one to organize smokers.
>
> >The tobacco industry has made many well-financed attempts to organize
> >smokers. Every one of them failed.
>
> >How come you haven’t tried to organize smokers, asswipe?
>
> It’s more difficult than organizing antismokers, because smokers are not followers like
> antis.
>

1. So, you’re not interested in taking on anything that is difficult.

2. As I’ve pointed out previously, you don’t know **** about "antis",
asswipe.

On Jun 18, 6:04 am, Robert wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008 06:29:05 GMT, "Norm" wrote:
>
> >"Robert" wrote in message
>
> >>>>>The tobacco industry has made many well-financed attempts to organize
> >>>>>smokers. Every one of them failed.
>
> >>>>>How come you haven’t tried to organize smokers, asswipe?
>
> >>>> It’s more difficult than organizing antismokers, because smokers arenot
> >>>> followers like
> >>>> antis.
>
> >>>Or maybe they just don’t get along well with others.
>
> >>>> It’s not a one man job.
>
> >>>Surely you’re not the only one left interested in changing the course?
>
> >>>> We need an organization, other than Big Tobacco,
>
> >>>Why?
>
> >> Antis took away their freedom of speech in the Master Settlement
> >> Agreement, which
> >> prohibits " limiting or suppressing research into smoking and health".
> >> They’re not
> >> allowed to call junk science what it is.
>
> >You’ll need to give that a little more context before I believe thats what
> >it means. As written it says you can’t stand in the way of research, ie
> >buying off scientists or the like. Nothing about commenting on existing
> >research.
>
> The MSA is deliberately vague on this.

That’s not what you wrote seven hours earlier, asswipe.

As I pointed out, you don’t know **** about the Master Settlement
Agreement.

On Jun 17, 10:58 pm, Robert wrote:
>
> >> We need an organization, other than Big Tobacco,
>
> >Why?
>
> Antis took away their freedom of speech in the Master Settlement Agreement, which
> prohibits " limiting or suppressing research into smoking and health". They’re not
> allowed to call junk science what it is.

So, you’re not talking about an organization to stick up for smokers.
You want an organization to stick up for the tobacco industry. That’s
why you’ve been outed as a tobacco industry asswipe.

And once again, asswipe, you’ve demonstrated that you don’t know ****
about "antis". You don’t know **** about the Master Settlement
Agreement, either.

On Jun 16, 4:45 pm, Robert wrote:
> On 16 Jun 2008 15:55:19 GMT, anon3...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
>
>
> >In article <9vnc54l47klaee748u0i30vldu1226u...@4ax.com>,
> >Robert wrote:
> >>On 14 Jun 2008 01:54:34 GMT, anon3...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
> >>>In article <1l6654hbj3sa5jm55poseugnpisi395...@4ax.com>,
> >>>Robert wrote:
> >>>>On 13 Jun 2008 15:30:44 GMT, anon3...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
> >>>>>In article
> >>,
> >>>>>Malcolm wrote:
> >>>>>>On Jun 12, 6:34 pm, anon3...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
> >>>>>>> >Referenda ended in 2006.
> >>>>>>> >State are almost at an end in 2008. Three passed and five failed..
>
> >>>>>>> Noted and saved for future review.
>
> >>>>>>Bruce, I’ve got $20 that says that the next time that a state passes a
> >>>>>>smoking ban referendum, Robert will claim, "I mean ’smoking bans
> >>>>>>enacted by legislatures’, not ’referenda’".
>
> >>>>>Or he will say he meant a total ban. He’ll point out the next
> >>>>>one has exemptions for hospices, psychiatric hospitals, prisons,
> >>>>>and dumpster dining.
>
> >>>>What will you say when repeals kick in and the number of new bans goes
> >>>>negative? Will
> >>>>repeals be on your lists?
>
> >>>I’ll say, "Gosh, Robert, you were right. It was all Big Pharma.
> >>>The average nonsmoker doesn’t care. Obviously most people
> >>>like tobacco smoke and are indifferent to those who don’t and think
> >>>smokers have the right to inflict others with toxins and
> >>>carcinogens."
>
> >>>Is it nicotine that makes you think nonsmokers will give
> >>>up the gains they’ve made? Or have you always been a raving lunatic?
>
> >>A professional team from New Jersey made the gains. Nonsmokers cheered
> >>from the sidelines
> >>and carried water.
>
> >>The biggest gains came from outright lies about the dangers of second
> >>hand smoke.
> >>Nonsmokers weren’t bold enough to lie like that.
>
> >So you have always been a raving lunatic.
>
> You don’t see many lunatic smokers.

No, and Bruce implied no such thing. He wrote that YOU have always
been a raving lunatic. And you just reconfirmed it, asswipe.

On Jun 12, 5:57 pm, Robert wrote:
>
> Antis

It’s become well established here that you don’t know **** about
"antis", asswipe.

On Jul 1, 7:25 pm, Robert wrote:

> Arson is a felony. So is the battery you’ll recieve.

Is that a threat, asswipe?

You seem to have forgotten your obligation to address and refer to us
as the Anti Smoker Illuminati (ASI). Learn some respect, asswipe.

On Jun 27, 7:50 pm, Robert wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:35:40 -0700 (PDT), Malcolm wrote:
> >On Jun 27, 6:11 am, Robert wrote:
> >> On Thu, 26 Jun 2008 19:53:42 -0700 (PDT), Malcolm wrote:
> >> >On Jun 26, 10:04 am, Robert wrote:
>
> >> >> >Robert lied to the readers of alt.smokers when he wrote the following:
>
> >> >> >"I served in Laos and Cambodia." - Robert, May 28, 2008
>
> >> >> >"I went to law school on the GI Bill." - Robert, May 31, 2008
>
> >> >> >"Smokers are not addicted to nicotine any more than alcoholics are
> >> >> >addicted to alcohol, gamblers are addicted to gambling, sex addicts
> >> >> >are addicted to sex, food addicts are addicted to food or religion
> >> >> >addicts are addicted to religion." - Robert, April 15, 2008
>
> >> >> When you fail to attack the message, attack the messenger.
>
> >> >When the messenger is a serial liar who keeps making the mistake of
> >> >calling people who he knows nothing about "liars", why not?
>
> >> >(Note that Robert didn’t even bother to try to contradict my
> >> >identification of these quotes from him as lies.)
>
> >> Do you have any evidence the quotes are lies?
>
> >1. Which branch of the service were you in when you were in Laos and
> >Cambodia? And which unit?
>
> USMC, Third Recon Batallion based at Camp Schwab,Okinawa. Earlier, I was in Second Recon
> at Camp Lejeune NC under W.C. Floyd. I got out in 1963.

In other words, you’re weren’t in Laos or Cambodia.

>
> >2. Which law school did you go to?
>
> Lasalle Extension University, a correspondence school now out of business..

A correspondence school. On the GI bill. yeah, right.

>
> USMC and Calif Bar Assoc might have records going back that far, but my name then wasn’t
> the same as the name I use now.
>

Yes, it certainly wouldn’t do for a liar like you to use your real
name.


> >3. The tobacco industry’s own scientists told their CEO’s that tobacco
> >is addictive. Your claim that "smokers are not addicted..." is a
> >whopper.
>
> They were using a colloquial definition of addiction, not a clinical one.

They were SCIENTISTS, asswipe. If you believe that tobacco industry
scientists were guilty of "junk science", they why don’t you stop
being a tobacco industry asswipe and say so?

> Antismokers should be ashamed of themselves, if they had any
> consciences.

1. Tobacco industry asswipes don’t tell human beings which emotions
they should experience or not experience.

2. Since you’re an asswipe, you have no comprehension of the meaning
of the word "shame". Shame is a human emotion.

On Jun 25, 4:36 pm, "Mike" wrote:
> Here’s a picture of a healthy smoke nazi.

When you fail to attack the message, attack the messenger. Thanks for
the admission of failure, asswipe.

On May 21, 9:45 pm, Robert wrote:
> When you buy a company’s stock, you’re not giving money to the company (unless it’s an
> IPO). On the contrary, the company is giving YOU money, called dividends.
>

That’s right, asswipe, extracting money from your pockets into mine.

As usual, you’re reading from the tobacco industry’s talking points
for this week. The fact is, if the managers at BCIMC had invested in
Bre-X or Enron, they would be good candidates for getting fired. This
should also be the case for the ones responsible for the tobacco
industry investments.

1) As you know, asswipe, two of the companies BCIMC invested in were
found guilty of civil RICO in 2006. Reynolds American and BAT have
direct corporate involvement in cigarette smuggling.

2) Next year, the US government will have to start paying back the $3
trillion that the Bush Administration has added to the national debt.
A stiff increase in federal taxes on cigarettes will certainly be part
of the plan. And if all goes well, we might see a tearing up of the
Master Settlement Agreement, on the grounds that neither the tobacco
companies nor the state governments have abided by the terms.

Right now would be an excellent time for BCIMC to dump those tobacco
stocks.

On May 18, 12:23 am, Robert wrote:
>
> At risk of being Godwined,

You don’t have anything to lose. You’ve already outed yourself as a
serial liar and a tobacco industry asswipe

On May 16, 6:45 pm, Robert wrote:
> On 16 May 2008 23:24:58 GMT, anon3...@nyx.nyx.net (Bruce Watson) wrote:
>
>
>
> >In article ,
> >NobodyImportant wrote:
>
> >>>Ask the smokers here what it is about smoking they enjoy.
> >>>You’ll get extremely vague, irrelevant and confused responses.
>
> >>That first smoke of the day, or that first smoke after a long break
> >>(can’t smoke at work, can’t smoke on an airplane, etc.) or that first
> >>smoke after a delightful meal provide a slight mental/emotional kick
> >>that is part of the addiction. It’s sort of like the "aahhhh....."
> >>after very satisfying sex.
>
> >And all that is simply the relief of craving after abstinence.
> >What does nicotine do? Create euphoria? Hardly. Get you high
> >or drunk? Of course not. If it did, you couldn’t smoke
> >and go back to work or drive. Yet smokers do it throughout the day.
> >Nicotine does nothing except make the smoker take more of it.
>
> >>Other than those occasions (and a few others I’m forgetting) there is
> >>nothing enjoyable about smoking. It’s way too expensive, it stinks,
> >>it makes the smoker a social pariah, and nicotine has the ability to
> >>make the addict adjust their life around its use.
>
> >Nicotine creates the craving that can only be satisfied only
> >with more nicotine.
>
> >>There were way too many times at the end of a long day that my chest
> >>would feel on fire. It hurt almost to breathe, but that never stopped
> >>me from lighting a smoke. Sometimes I’d put my head in the freezer
> >>for a few moments to make my chest hurt less, usually with a smoke in
> >>one hand.
>
> >Because the craving needed to be satisfied at any cost.
>
> >>I still miss those "aahhh...." smokes, but not near enough to ever
> >>light another one - ever. I will never again stink like the bottom of
> >>a dirty ashtray.
>
> >You will not miss them when you realize the cigarette did nothing
> >but satisfy the craving the cigarette caused in the first place.
>
> >Smoking is a fraud. It accomplishes nothing except make the
> >people involved in its manufacture, distribution and sales rich.
>
> Fraud means deception, in other words lying. Antismokers are notorious liars, as has been
> shown here many times.

HAHAHOHOHEHEHAHAHOHOHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHAHAHO HOHOHEHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHO
HEHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHAHAHOHO HOHEHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHOHE
HEHEHAHAHOHOHEHEHAHAHOHOHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHA HAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHAHAHO

First, Robert is a notorious liar, as has been shown here many times.

And, just off the top of my head, some of the notorious liars who have
posted to this newsgroup:

David "Asswipe" MacLean
Anna Buxton
Rumi Khambata
Crapwoman (aka "Catwoman")
Fumin bin Lyin (aka "Fuming Mad")
Mary Herrin (aka "spinner8")

Ray wrote:

>>
>>No, I didn’t ignore it at all.
>
>
> You may not have ignored it,

That’s correct, asswipe.

>>
>>> Nice try deflecting the argument, but
>>> I won’t play that game.
>>
>>Oh, yes, you will.
>>
>>> Oh, and by the way....you might not have heard about it, but the
>>Allies defeated the Nazis.
>>
>>And, by the way, the Allies weren’t cowards like you.
>
>
> Your argument was that smokers are cowards.


You have told a lie, asswipe. I wrote "cowards like you" and
"creatures like
yourself", not "smokers".

>
> I have shown that you think Adolf Hitler should be considered a good
> person because of his anti-tobacco stance

No, you have shown that you are a coward by introducing Hitler to this
discussion.

And "CigarMike" showed that he was a coward by referring to someone as
a
criminal, then presenting no evidence whatsoever of criminal activity.

>
> If you won’t discuss the subject like an adult, I’m done with you.

And another example of cowardice.

--
Bob Broughton (asswipe)
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada

On Apr 18, 6:15 am, Robert wrote:
>
> >She told me that its common knowledge that casino workers have a high
> >rate of lung cancer and other ailments that have been attributed to
> >second hand smoke.
>
> She’s a lawyer, right? Did she also talk about chasing ambulances?
>

What part of "its common knowledge that casino workers have a high
rate of lung cancer and other ailments that have been attributed to
second hand smoke" did you fail to understand, asswipe?

On Apr 17, 5:54 am, Robert wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 21:39:07 -0700 (PDT), Malcolm wrote:
> >On Apr 16, 7:14 pm, Robert wrote:
> >> On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 18:00:48 -0700 (PDT), a.en...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >On Apr 15, 4:17?pm, The BIG N wrote:
> >> >> NITS Watson wrote:
>
> >> >>
>
> >> >> Thank you cut n’ paste looney. LOL!
>
> >> >We all have our reasons why we hate tobacco. Go Wack you doodle.
>
> >> No, you antismokers all have the same reason.
>
> >Robert denies that tobacco is addictive, and has thus proven himself
> >to be a liar. There is no reason to believe any of his silly claims
> >about "antismokers".
>
> Is Eric Hoffer a liar too?

Did Eric Hoffer lie about the addictiveness of tobacco? No, he didn’t.
You did, liar, and if you were a human being instead of a tobacco
industry asswipe, you would be ashamed of yourself.



> "Marc Schneiderman" wrote in message
>> On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:25:46 -0500, Shawn Hirn
>> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <3v44o31qjundr1nhsascaq8kv9cfl25pa0@4ax.com>,
>>> Marc Schneiderman wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 06:14:04 -0500, Shawn Hirn
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >
>>>> >So, then when do you anticipate those smoking bans being reversed?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> They already were in Allegheny County.
>>>
>>>The public smoking ban in Allegheny County will probably be replaced by
>>>a state-wide ban within the next year.
>>
>>
>> Probably true, albeit, so ridiculous. We’ll see if everyone lives
>> longer. hehehehehe
>
> No one cares if you live longer, asswipe.
>
Bart Goddard wrote:

> Robert Broughton wrote in news:fiuslc$gp1$1
> @venn.venn.bc.ca:
>
>
>> We don’t tell any lies at all, asswipe.
>
> That’s exactly what a liar would say, asswipe.
>
>> Do you believe that cigarettes are addictive?
>
> Wouldn’t know;

There seems to be a lot that you don’t know, asswipe.

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada

Marc Schneiderman wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 01:15:47 -0800 (PST), pipe_smoker
> wrote:
>
>>
>>> The researchers used global helium-3 diffusion MRI to study the lungs of
>>> 13 current or former smokers and 45 people who had never smoked. Of the
>>> nonsmokers, 22 had heavy exposure to secondhand smoke,
>
> Some big cohort.

For this type of study, a cohort of "one" would be sufficient,
asswipe.

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/

Chuck Wright wrote:

> Robert Broughton wrote:
>
>> Chuck Wright wrote:
>>
>>
>>>_ Prof. Jonez _ wrote:
>>>
>>>>"These are bars and restaurants where people ? including workers ? who
>>>>don’t want to breathe second-hand smoke shouldn’t have to."
>>>
>>>
>>>That’s a lie. If these people don’t want to breath second-hand smoke,
>>>they don’t have to. Nobody is forcing them to breath secondhand smoke.
>>>They can go somewhere else (including the workers).
>>
>> Tobacco industry asswipes such as yourself
>
> Civility and truthfulness aren’t your trademarks.

Actually, truthfullness IS one of my trademarks. And Losertarian
tobacco
industry asswipes are not entitled to civility from anyone, asswipe.

Chuck Wright wrote:

> _ Prof. Jonez _ wrote:
>>
>> "These are bars and restaurants where people ? including workers ? who
>> don’t want to breathe second-hand smoke shouldn’t have to."
>
>
> That’s a lie. If these people don’t want to breath second-hand smoke,
> they don’t have to. Nobody is forcing them to breath secondhand smoke.
> They can go somewhere else (including the workers).

Tobacco industry asswipes such as yourself don’t tell non-smokers
where they
can and cannot go.

> http://www.RonPaul2008.com/

No, I don’t vote for any candidate who opposes public education. I
wouldn’t
support this guy for dogcatcher.

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada

On Apr 8, 1:01 pm, "Malcolm" wrote:


> On Apr 8, 2:15 am, "GREEN HORNET" wrote:

> > Errr........If you’re a non-smoker sorry you’re hard outta luck!


> > Consensus on the streets shows most people don’t give a --RATS ***-- about
> > the smokers ban.


> Bans on smokers? On which streets? In which town?


> If there are indeed places that have bans on smokers, and it’s true
> that most people don’t give a rat’s *** about it, you should be
> extremely worried, asswipe.



Well your back again...
Just bringing another pound of horse**** and asswipe eh?

They can’t even do a damn thing about real drug problems
and supply getting into the country. Tobacco is not illegal drugs.


I’ ll bet you can’t make 10 posts without bringing your asswipe
along.
You up to the challange malcom broughton..


$10 against every pound of your horse****...
and you can hold the stakes in your mouth.


It’s so easy... See if you can troll with out asswipe...
You may **** your pants...but no asswipe.


Couldn’t find a post declaring you had a brain...
bring the link... Man up.


Post up...


Lets show your buddies what ya got.

Robert Broughton wrote:

> CamachoMan wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey Biggot!
>
> What is a "biggot"?
>
>> "Watch your mouth, if you ever want to cross the border. Bad things
>> can happen to Canadians who use foul language in the US."
>> stanlee98@yahoo.com , Nov. 30, 2003
>
>
>> So Bobby Boy! Should we start complaining to your ISP as suggested you
>> stupid Twit!?
>
> And what might be basis of such a complaint be, CamaroBoy?
>

You could try complaining that reading my postings turns you into a
stammering simpleton. The difficult part is, you’ll have to convince
them
that you’re not a stammering simpleton the rest of the time.

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada

On Oct 10, 7:20 pm, Robert wrote:
> Surgeon General’s Warning:
> Impinging on my rights as a smoker may be hazardous to your health.

Talk is cheap, asswipe.

On Sep 9, 1:29 pm, Your Name Here wrote:
> http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_r.../08/2007-09-08
> _fred_thompson_al_qaeda_smoking_ban_pushe.html?pri nt=1
>
> Fred Thompson: Al Qaeda smoking ban pushed Iraqis to U.S.
>

HAHAHOHOHEHEHAHAHOHOHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHAHAHO HOHOHEHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHO
HEHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHAHAHOHO HOHEHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHOHE
HEHEHAHAHOHOHEHEHAHAHOHOHEHEHAHAHAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHA HAHOHOHOHEHEHEHAHAHAHO

More on this tobacco industry asswipe:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2007/0...p_n_53736.html

On Aug 9, 8:48 pm, "Fred G. Mackey" wrote:
> Malcolm wrote:
>
> > I learned in school that "of course" and "probably" have different
> > (and, in this case, contradictory) meanings, asswipe.
>
>
> I just find it a little unimaginative that people of your ilk seem to
> have a vocabulary limited to "asswipe".

And what you think matters because...?

Actually, there’s a long list of synonyms for asswipe. "Lickspittle"
is a good one. There’s also "lackey" and "sycophant". However,
"asswipe" is the word that most effectively describes what you and
your fellow asswipes are.

>
>
> >>>Got any evidence to back this claim?
>
> >>Yes.
>
> > Then let’s see it, asswipe.
>
> Offered by me and ignored by you.

You offered nothing whatsoever that could possibly be classified as
"evidence", asswipe.


On Aug 8, 9:24 pm, "Fred G. Mackey" wrote:
>
> > (How can something be
> > both "of course" and "probably"?)
>
> If you can’t figure out how to parse simple English sentences, then go
> back to school.
>

I learned in school that "of course" and "probably" have different
(and, in this case, contradictory) meanings, asswipe.


> > Got any evidence to back this claim?
>
> Yes.

Then let’s see it, asswipe.

¥ UltraMan ¥ wrote:

>
> I enjoy watching your pathetic tobacco-sucking addicts suffer
> ever increasing taxes, restrictions and humiliations.
>
> Tax that, junkie!

How about this? Add a line to form 1040 for "Enjoyment of humiliation
of
tobacco industry asswipes tax". We could keeps track of the number of
times
we’ve experienced this, multiply that number by $0.25, and fill in the
amount.

However, if the TIA’s don’t trust us to keep careful track of the
number of
occurences during the tax year and report them accurately, here’s an
alternative; count the number of times that Audrey Silk is quoted in
the
media as a spokeswoman for the TIA’s, and the tax would be $1 for each
occurence.

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada

Marc Schneiderman wrote:

> On Fri, 01 Jun 2007 18:49:33 GMT, Robert Broughton
> wrote:
>
>>
>>> If you presented evidence.
>>>
>>
>>Then why not apply the same principle to the WHO, BAT, and Chris Proctor?
>
> We have

No, you haven’t, asswipe.

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada

Fred G. Mackey wrote:

> ¥ UltraMan ¥ wrote:
>> Venezuela minister says limited smoking ban to be imposed, not a halt on
>> tobacco production
>>
>> The Associated Press
>> Tuesday, May 15, 2007
>>
>> CARACAS, Venezuela: Venezuela will impose a limited smoking ban in bars
>> and restaurants but has no plans to ban the production of cigarettes and
>> tobacco, the health minister said Tuesday.
>> Starting May 31, lighting up in bars and restaurants throughout the heavy
>> smoking country will be permitted only in limited spaces equipped with
>> ventilators, Health Minister Erick Rodriguez told the government’s news
>> agency.
>
> Notice it took them less time to shut down a TV network and radio
> station that didn’t happen to agree with everything Chavez says.
>
> Is this a country to emulate?

Well, I give Chavez full marks for taking advantage of the Bush
Administration having all of their resources tied down in Iraq, but to
answer your question, full (not limited) smoking bans in bars and
restaurants os a policy that ALL countries should emulate. The
continuation
of cigarette production is a policy that all countries should NOT
emulate.

Hope this clears things up, asswipe.

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada


Marc Schneiderman wrote:

> On Sun, 27 May 2007 07:20:41 GMT, Robert Broughton
> wrote:
>
>> Is there any more reason why there should be more people that don’t
>>> smoke start to wake up to the fact that this isn’t about smoking
>>> anymore?
>>
>>Again, don’t be silly. It’s about smoking, and it’s about a criminal
>>industry that kills off their loyal customers.
>
>
> Don’t be stupid.

Don’t be an *******.

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada

On May 24, 9:12 pm, "Fred G. Mackey" wrote:
> ¥ UltraMan ¥ wrote:
> > Fred G. Mackey wrote:
>
> >>¥ UltraMan ¥ wrote:
>
> >>>__ Proof: Smokers are Inconsiderate Pigs __
>
> >>>£75 cigarette butt fine defended
>
> >>The only proof offered here is that anti-smokers are bigoted *******s.
>
> >>Most of us do not litter. Many of us are vehemently against
> >>littering.
>
> > LOL! Yeah, must be the anti-smokers who litter MILLIONS of skanky cig butts
> > everwhere just to frame losers like you ... LOL!
>
> I’m sure there are quite a few anti-smokers who litter.

And I’m sure there are a lot more that don’t, asswipe.

On May 24, 9:12 pm, "Fred G. Mackey" wrote:
> ¥ UltraMan ¥ wrote:
> > Fred G. Mackey wrote:
>
> >>¥ UltraMan ¥ wrote:
>
> >>>__ Proof: Smokers are Inconsiderate Pigs __
>
> >>>£75 cigarette butt fine defended
>
> >>The only proof offered here is that anti-smokers are bigoted *******s.
>
> >>Most of us do not litter. Many of us are vehemently against
> >>littering.
>
> > LOL! Yeah, must be the anti-smokers who litter MILLIONS of skanky cig butts
> > everwhere just to frame losers like you ... LOL!
>
> I’m sure there are quite a few anti-smokers who litter.

And I’m sure there are a lot more that don’t, asswipe.

Fred G. Mackey wrote:

> Robert Broughton wrote:
>> Fred G. Mackey wrote:
>>
>>
>>>_ Prof. Jonez _ wrote:
>>>
>>>>Fred G. Mackey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>¥ UltraMan ¥ wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Man arrested for tossing lit cigarette
>>>>>>
>>>>>>LEE COUNTY: NBC2 investigators went undercover with the Lee County
>>>>>>Sheriff’s Office to watch them catch drivers tossing cigarette butts
>>>>>
>>>>>>from car windows. We even saw one man put into handcuffs after
>>>>>
>>>>>>throwing his butt out the window.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>NBC2 went along with Lee County Corporal Steve Cart to Lehigh Acres
>>>>>>on Wednesday. He was looking for smokers breaking the law by flipping
>>>>>>cigarettes out the window.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I have no problem with that AS LONG AS they enforce laws against
>>>>>people who litter things besides cigarettes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>See many people besides asswipe tobacco-addicts tossing BURNING OBJECTS
>>>>out the window,
>>>
>>>Yes, I do. In fact, I see a lot more litter from non-smokers than I do
>>>from smokers.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Your perception is distorted by your addiction, then, unless you live in
>> Bhutan.
>>
>
> Or perhaps your hatred of smokers has distorted your perception.

This "hatred of smokers" you refer to is further proof that your
perception
is distorted by your addiction.

I don’t hate smokers at all. I dislike litterbugs. I hate tobacco
industry
executives and tobacco industry asswipes.

Litterbugs and tobacco industry executives have very few friends.
(Except,
in the case of tobacco industry executives, friends that they have
bought.)
Tobacco industry asswipes don’t have any friends at all.

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada

Alex wrote:

>
> Robert Broughton wrote:
>> nightlight wrote:
>>
>> > Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection
>> > Act, S. 3546 passes US Senate:
>> >
>>
>> Earth to asswipe: tobacco is not an "herbal remedy".
>>
>
> Earth to Robert Broughton: paleolib NDP pedophiles like yourself are

*replonk*

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada

nightlight wrote:

> Dietary Supplement and Nonprescription Drug Consumer Protection
> Act, S. 3546 passes US Senate:
>

Earth to asswipe: tobacco is not an "herbal remedy".

--
Bob Broughton
http://broughton.ca/
Vancouver, BC, Canada
Report this post for offensive content



site map | disclaimer | privacy
All Rights Reserved, Legal Spring, Inc. 2004



Report this post for offensive content



site map | disclaimer | privacy
All Rights Reserved, Legal Spring, Inc. 2004