"Angof"
yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1eKdnadxOZHZzjXVnZ2dnUVZ8h-dnZ2d@posted.plusnet...>> "Angof"
yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:dOqdne_7_vpgEzvVnZ2dnUVZ8sLinZ2d@posted.plusnet...>>>> "Angof"
yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>> news:maydnd1aNaFJNjjVRVnyvgA@posted.plusnet...>>>>>> "Angof"
yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:moSdnZD4h5eBDzjVRVnyjgA@posted.plusnet...>>>>>>> "liam*"
googlemail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:d08618e7-dd6e-42ff-808c-de311ecd463d@l64g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
>>>>>>> "Angof" yahoo.co.uk> wrote:>>>>>>>> "ZB"
hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dry my eyes? Get over what? As usual, you made a cunt of
>>>>>>>>>> yourself in the
>>>>>>>>>> thread.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So why not join in and and show me where I've made a cunt of it
>>>>>>>>> instead of
>>>>>>>>> making silly little chidish remarks to a third party? Fucking hell
>>>>>>>>> if i
>>>>>>>>> kept doing that you'd be running around with wet knickers
>>>>>>>>> screaming,
>>>>>>>>> 'stalker! stalker!" Hehe...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Don't you think you are being your usual self though?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is being totally gob smacked at some of the daft questions people
>>>>>>> ask being my usual self? If so, yes I am.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Gob smacked" is not a term I associate with many of your posts. "Dry
>>>>>> your eyes" on the other hand...
>>>>>
>>>>> That's nice for you. Indecipherable nonsense is something I associate
>>>>> with the majority of your posts but there we are. Instead of coming
>>>>> out with this inane crap, why didn't you and your wee pal Dorothy
>>>>> Lamour comment on what is actually said in the thread?
>>>>
>>>> Well, that's certainly much more like the old Angof we all know...But
>>>> whilst you may have been charged a jam jar to see here on the silver
>>>> screen....Dorothy Lamour was abit before my time auld yin.
>>>
>>> ...and that is not the new or the old Liam, just the norm. Avoiding the
>>> question but continuing with the nonsense.
>>
>> Hold on a minute, you failed to answer my first question to you in this
>> thread
>
> I did answer actually, not that it was a serious question...surely to
> fuck?
No you didn't. You accuse me of avoiding the question but you failed to
answer my first question in this thread. Indeed you didn't even reply to my
post. That's a bit rich.
>>and attempt to turn this into another long thread with nonsense.
>
> You and your wee pal seem to have a problem with how this works. For
> example...he comes into a thread and makes a comment about something I've
> said, fair enough, I reply. He does likewise and so on. After a while
> he accuses me of stalking him, LMAO. On this occasion he's accusing me of
> drawing out threads, after he resurrects this dead one, and answers every
> post...WTF?
>
> Now you make a comment in this thread and I reply. Now it appears if I
> reply I'm trying to turn the thread into a 'long thread'...you are as nuts
> as he is. You do realise that you don't have to reply, right? And you do
> realise that you and your pal are also contributing to this thread, right?
No need for a freak-out Angof...
I'm just pointing out it's rich of you to suggest I'm not answering the
question.
