Here's a little post which I have cut and pasted (and it's the first time I've cut and pasted here) in it's entirety without any editing of any kind to demonstrate that Warrior, whose posts come supposedly from Washington either the State or the District of Columbia, and I are not the same person. In fact, I find Warrior's posts after reading a few of them to be rather absurd. Two or three posts like this are enough to make one commit Sepukku.

Here's Warrior's verbatim post.

Yes my other two children that I have are so completely miserable I mean you can it in the smiles in their faces and when they say " I love you mommy" and all the hugs and kisses I get when I put them to sleep at night before reading them a childrens book. I mean I tell you it must be terrible to have a mom tell them she loves them everyday and caresses them when they fall down or kiss thier boo boos. Making them feel safe when it is dark by giving them a night light and going into thier room at night when they get scared and cuddling them to sleep.
Man I tell you these kids just have it terrible. I mean honestly call CPS right now the amount they suffer from the overwelming love from me is just dispicable.
Alex's is fine with is father too. It is about time men do the work woman have been doing for centuries. Personally I think more men should raise children instead of it always being the mother. Build character.


end quote:

Now let's proofread it and examine it for grammatical usage and spelling.

The first sentence is two run on and garbled sentences and refers to her two children. At any rate, I have no stinking children giving me hugs and kisses at night saying "Mommie, I love you." I don't get "Daddie, I love you" either as my two boys are grown and live their own lives now, one is a computer programmer for a medical firm and working on his first novel.

Warrior's reference to "childrens book" (note lack of apostrophe) indicates that her children are likely preschool or gradeschool age.

Note the phrase "kiss thier booboos" with "thier" for "their", but then this may be a mere typo. As for myself, I've never kissed "booboos", but I have an idea of the similarity between the efficacy of kissing booboos and faith healing in some cases. It's psychosomatic and nothing but-- no miracle either way.

Toward the end Warrior mispells despicable as "dispicable" which was not likely a typo and frankly I'm not sure what she means by "CPS". I've dealt with CPAs before but no CPSs as far as I know. Is it possibly a Children's Psychological Specialist? If not, I don't know. Looks like Warrior's children are as screwed up emotionally as she is!

I love the line "Alex's is fine with is father too" which does not exactly constitute a great writing style.

Warrior's final insipid observation about the "unfairness" of Nature making the female the bearer of children and not the male and how it "build character" (another little grammatical snafu) is too lame and bourgeois to even rebut.

So let a philosopher make a little remark about what MIGHT be if men carried the children and not the women.

Well, an argument from a hypothetical is a non-argument indeed, but I'll abandon logic for the moment and see if I can envision this sordid scenario.
Well, one thing I suspect would happen and it'd be MUCH FOR THE BETTER for the World and Humanity: The World's population would probably not be 1/100th of what it is now, resulting in no Global Warming, no environmental degradation, less destruction of wildlife habitats, fewer species going extinct, no housing shortages, no unemployment, no sending children into battle in hopes of martyrdom to some retarded God, less crime, less poverty, less despair.

In fact, the stupid race Homo sapiens might have joined Stegosaurus and T. Rex in extinction! Now imagine that! And once more the World becomes an Edenic Paradise!


Yes, it's a pity that Divine Providence gave the job of child rearing to the sex that neither knows when to shut their mouths or their legs!

(You guessed right, I'm a misogynist of the highest degree and you don't want to get me started on that topic, so this'll be the first and last of that!)

Now after all this, you still think I'm that retard known as "Warrior" who pops pills, slashes her wrists or overdoses on prescription medication, and spends the night reading bedtime stories to her emotionally challenged children and cuddling with them a la Michael Jackson, and giving them "yum yums" and kissing their "booboos" and making them go away........

....then YOU ALL can plant your bouche right on my derriere!

Nighthawk,

I don't know WHO you are and frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.
Myself, I try to welcome every new poster in a polite, or at least, not hostile, manner.

However, I have to wonder why it is you feel the need to

A give out so much personal info to total strangers

B. Refer to kids as "stinking children."

I'm glad to know that you, like Red Butler in Gone With the Wind "don't give a damn" about me and neither do I about you. From the moment I joined this little forum or shortly after I was immediately attacked by a group of regular "grand dames" here who take offense at the rank atheistic posts from yours truly. I follow the law of Lex Talionis, which I can guarantee Warrior knows nothing about, which is retaliation in kind. I've no sympathy or compassion for fools, capisce? Am I hostile? Only to those who attack.
And once a few rumors get spread like "This Nighthawk guy is just Warrior under another name" nothing written here will ever get taken seriously again. I know because I've scanned a few of her pathetic little posts. About the only common ground between us is she is also an infidel--bless her panties---and may she get the reward of being an infidel which is absolutely NOTHING!

As far as personal information goes, there's nothing here that anybody could do with what little information I provide, and that usually contains a la Lenin some misinformation as well. Good luck with revealing my true identity, if anybody cared to! And even better luck with doing anything about it if you succeeded! I fear nothing at all from any online hucksters, con-men, hackers, or predators. And that's because unlike you bored housewives out there, I AM a man.

What about forum etiquette? I'm polite to all who are polite to me.
I care nothing for conventions. Give me just and fair consideration and I'll reciprocate and not until then, capisce?

A bon chat, bon rat!

It's Rhett Butler, Nighthawk. I'm shocked that someone as intelligent as you claim you are doesn't know that.

What we seem to have is a disconnect between the reality of Nighthawk and Nighthawk's perception of himself.

And that's because unlike you bored housewives out there, I AM a man.
So, are you Richard Meadows???

You not only don't know the characters in GWTW, you seem to not know what Lex Talionis means. Bye the way, foreign terms are italicized, my pedantic friend.

Lex Talionis or as it is more commonly known is The Law of Retribution. Being retributive in nature it demands an initial attack first. There was no initial attack against you so you were not acting in retribution. You were simply attacking.

It would be as if the Code of Hammurabi, one of the first of the known Lex Talionis codes said you could pre-emptively kill a builder of a house that fell down even before the house fell down and killed the owner. Or if the Hebraic injunction of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth was interpreted to mean you can take the eye of someone who did you no initial harm.

If you are going to use big words try to learn what they mean first.

You not only don't know the characters in GWTW, you seem to not know what Lex Talionis means. Bye the way, foreign terms are italicized, my pedantic friend.

Lex Talionis or as it is more commonly known is The Law of Retribution. Being retributive in nature it demands an initial attack first. There was no initial attack against you so you were not acting in retribution. You were simply attacking.

It would be as if the Code of Hammurabi, one of the first of the known Lex Talionis codes said you could pre-emptively kill a builder of a house that fell down even before the house fell down and killed the owner. Or if the Hebraic injunction of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth was interpreted to mean you can take the eye of someone who did you no initial harm.

If you are going to use big words try to learn what they mean first.


:corn:

Rhett Butler it is. I stand corrected, which is something we'll never hear from you, who take such glee in pointing out an error in movie trivia. As far as italicizing foreign expressions, I've tried to but it hasn't worked so don't bother. You are correct that foreign words or expressions should be italicized unless they are so common as to be a permanent part of the English Language like Shmuck or Schmuck which needs no such treatment.

Your comments on my ignorance of Lex Talionis are totally false. I know exactly what it is. Yes, the "eye for an eye" of Moses is an example of it.

It means simply "The Law of Retaliation (in kind), Retribution, and is commonly called the Brazen Rule. You've probably seen these online.
When it comes to knowlege of foreign expressions I'd mop the floor with you and you know it, scatophage!

Golden Rule: Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Brazen Rule: Do unto others AS they do unto you.
Iron Rule: Do unto others BEFORE they do unto you.

Note: several variants exist and none of this crap is "official".

Here's some Latin for Frogger who claims expertise

Quos deus vult perdere prius dementat.

It's a pity what God has done to you, Froggy!

Are you a Friend of the Friends, nighthawk?

Reason I ask, your use of "capische" and talk of retribution.
I know this is none of my business.

BTW, welcome, fellow criminal.:D

I've never claimed expertise in Latin, Nighthawk.

Very good, Nighthawk. You can quote Euripides.

Antiquis temporibus, nati tibi similes in rupibus ventosissimis exponebantur ad necem.

It's official: Nighthawk scares me.

Are you a Friend of the Friends, nighthawk?

Reason I ask, your use of "capische" and talk of retribution.
I know this is none of my business.

BTW, welcome, fellow criminal.:D

You just think he might be Italian because he is acting like a Testa di minchia.

Batman was cooler. Nighthawk was just Robin's way of saying, "Look! I'm not gay. Really! Bruce Wayne never touched me there!"

Warrior's reference to "childrens book" (note lack of apostrophe) indicates that her children are likely preschool or gradeschool age.

And then observe the beginning of your post... (I've made the error bold in case it doesn't jump out at everyone.)

Here's a little post which I have cut and pasted (and it's the first time I've cut and pasted here) in it's entirety...

Now don't get me wrong, I wouldn't have gotten all pedantic on you if you hadn't done it first. :)

'Nighthawk', me thinks thou doest protest too much.

In other words, you ARE Warrior1972.
And the manner in which you've tried to both deny your identity and also re-insert youself into this web-forum is shallow, superficial, shabby, and predictably, half-assed.

Please just go back to the History Channel boards, will you?

(Say, the website for your community church announced that you got married back in May. What does your husband think of all this time you spend on the computer?)

You are a sad person, lady.
Please stop this.
You're embarassing your family.