> They use ad hominems and other psuedoreason, so it's "poor critical
> thinking."

> "Vincent Henry Bartning" <Bartn...@comcast.net> wrote in message <news:lYOdnU7UleFAwoHdRVn-jQ@comcast.com>...

> > There's something wrong with missives from the 404th Group Mission Trolls
> > and Posters gang.  It's probably also a violation of the RICO act.

> > They use ad hominems and other psuedoreason, so it's "poor critical
> > thinking."

> How does poor critical thinking constitute a RICO violation?

> Do you know what RICO is?

> <snip>

>> Why? It's a waste of time. The subject is covered in the discussion
>> groups for the various wars, and properly so.
>> And why are you dragging soc.religion into this?

> Somehow your group reminds me of a cross between "pirates of the
> Caribbean" and the unfriendly ghosts Casper knows.  However, I
> don't know if you're part of the 404th Group Mission and Troll
> Posters, aka Benedict Arnold's Really Bad Boys.  LOL!

> > <snip>

> >> Why? It's a waste of time. The subject is covered in the discussion
> >> groups for the various wars, and properly so.
> >> And why are you dragging soc.religion into this?

> > Somehow your group reminds me of a cross between "pirates of the
> > Caribbean" and the unfriendly ghosts Casper knows.  However, I
> > don't know if you're part of the 404th Group Mission and Troll
> > Posters, aka Benedict Arnold's Really Bad Boys.  LOL!

> ??? I'm a group? I asked a perfectly reasonable IMHO question. Well,
> actually two. Why am I being insulted? That is, I think I am - it's
> not all that clear, what with an lol ending.

>>> <snip>

>>>> Why? It's a waste of time. The subject is covered in the
>>>> discussion groups for the various wars, and properly so.
>>>> And why are you dragging soc.religion into this?

>>> Somehow your group reminds me of a cross between "pirates of the
>>> Caribbean" and the unfriendly ghosts Casper knows.  However, I
>>> don't know if you're part of the 404th Group Mission and Troll
>>> Posters, aka Benedict Arnold's Really Bad Boys.  LOL!

>> ??? I'm a group? I asked a perfectly reasonable IMHO question.
>> Well, actually two. Why am I being insulted? That is, I think I am
>> - it's not all that clear, what with an lol ending.

> You dared to challange his "wants".
> In his would this is not allowed. IMHO he thinks by adding in
> soc.religion he will gain support to keep the words "for god and
> country" in the RFD for the proposed group.
> He has not apparently heard of the Quakers, Amish or Seventh Day
> Adventist's, none of whom are too keen on fighting "for god and
> country" but may still be found in the armed forces. Though SDA
> representation is most likely not too high.
> I am suprised he did not call you treasonious. Wait, he did.

>    Thus Spake God's Creator;