Some of my best friends are Deer!

[CrushingBore]

To do otherwise is to be guilty of the self-centred bigotry and us v them mentality Americans are so often accused of adopting.

But please get your moron President out of my country as soon as feasible. Some poeple here are actually starting to believe him....

[Katy]

> Katy, I am sorry for being so hard on you, when you have been, always
> civil, businesslike, and professional towards me, even if I do think that
> the CEO of Sanctuary, Merck Mercuriadis, is a bit more accesible. But then
> he can be, he runs the company!

I‘m a little confused. I don’t think I’ve had professional, or other, dealings with someone known as “The World Won’t Listen” but thanks for the compliment anyway, the attributes you describe are amongst those I aim for in doing my job.

> How you could have misread my post, in the manner in which you did, is
> unfamthomable to me. It was clearly a post against the war in Iraq,
> against the American & British lead campaign, and for the Iraqi
> people. But no matter, to err is human. I do it all the time!

Again, I don’t think I’ve read any of your posts, so I’m not sure how you know what I think of them.

> I am quite certain that you are basically told to not pay too much
> attention to fans of any artist on your label. The only difference between
> these fans & I, is that....either I'm a marketing genius when it comes
> to Moz, or more likely, I am willing to find out who the various people in
> power are, suggest ideas to them directly, and put things in play.
> Morrissey signings, VH-1, Rolling Stone, and more, they were all MY IDEAS,
> Katy. I must not be a complete nincompoop if the CEO of Sanctuary Records
> takes my phone calls, responds to my email, etc, though of course nobody
> knows my real name name, address, telephone number, occupation, etc.

It is not correct to talk about a record label as if it belongs to me. I am glad that you are coming up with good ideas relating to marketing of Morrissey; In terms of the UK, have you thought of contacting the makers of “The South Bank Show” to see whether they would consider doing a show on Morrissey as a belated follow up to the 1987 programme? Many Artists have appeared twice. I would certainly not describe you as a complete nincompoop.

> The bottom line is that my ideas are good. And whenever I come up with
> another one to help secure that Moz's next album is a great success, I
> will post it here and email Merck directly. He told me it was ok to do so.
> You used to be the person I went to. You started it all, for you were my
> first Sanctuary contact, an email address I simply got from the internet.
> And look how far I've come in just a matter of weeks. Talking to producers
> at VH1, the Managing Editor at Rolling Stone takes my calls, etc., and I
> am ONLY a MERE fan.

If people have told you that they are happy to be e-mailed directly then presumably they are happy to be directly e-mailed – I would never describe anyone as ONLY a MERE fan (strangely enough I have responded to a post from “your worst nightmare” above regarding these two words).

> You should come here, read this MESSAGE BOARD, read the HOMEPAGE of the
> site, take a look at the POLLS and the STORIES there, go to the CHAT, go
> to the ARCHIVES, and learn about us. Go anywhere but the GUESTBOOK, for
> that is a cesspool dominated by lunatics.

I am familiar with all the parts of the site besides CHAT, which I’m not interested in. The guestbook doesn’t really seem to do what the name suggests, but I like this board and the main pages.

> We are a cult Katy, we are a religion, we are a way of life. Welcome, to
> The Church of Moz. We are believers, we are devotees, we are obsessed, and
> we have found our SANCTUARY here. When your record label signed Steven
> Patrick Morrissey, you did not sign just any pop artist. You signed much
> more, more than I could begin to tell you, without writing a treatise.

I consider myself a big fan of Morrissey, though obviously not as devoted as some; again I would stress that it is incorrect to describe a record label as “mine”.

> So, I am glad to see you here finally. Remember, I offered to give you a
> weekly, monthly, short bullet point report on Moz, using this site as
> first port of call, but you didn't take me up on it. I offered that
> service to make your job and life easier, because I know as much about Moz
> as you do about Duran Duran. Oh yes, I've done my homework, your words to
> me. Remember you said, "you've done your homework to know about me
> and Duran Duran."

Sorry I cannot recall any such offer, but see my comments above regarding identity confusion. I see Duran Duran have reformed and I wish them well, though I am much more interested in the new Morrissey record.

> So, since you did not want my input, you can sort though all the rubbish,
> and pick the nuggets of gold out for yourself.

> Welcome to SMITHDOM, long may it reign!!!

Thank you, I have no doubt that Morrissey is one of the most important pop singers ever.

[Katy]

> Katy, while I will stop short of calling you an idiot, I think your anger
> is severely misplaced. "Mere," when used in this context was
> used to reinforce the idea that the Iraqis who were killed were not all
> soldiers. That is, it was used as a sort of condemnation of both
> governments for having engaged in a war that led to the slaughter of
> innocent civilians. The word was not used in a denigrating fashion at all.

> -An English Major (not a major in the military -- the mere civilian kind)

Thank you for not calling me an idiot and for your alternative suggestion as to the meaning of the wording of "Who else but me"s original post.

I'm glad you are studying the English language. I've completed my studies in this area and am not convinced as to your interpretation.

I like to think that my formal education has helped me to appreciate the intrinsic worth of all human beings - which is not dependent upon their economic or military value.

[Katy]

> I encourage you to post, but not under your real name!!

> SUGGESTIONS:

> Choose your own or select from the following:

> Desert Shore
> Great Horse
> Woodpecker Rock
> Latin Quarter
> Strange Pills
> Bogey-Man
> Lion in Love
> Herman Hermit
> Disco Dancer
> Meths on Breaths
> Louder than Bombs
> Strangeways
> Karma Chameleon
> Whirling Waltzer
> Sycophantic Slag
> Count Chocula
> Tyrannosaurus Rex
> The Great Pumpkin
> The Stockholm Monsters

Thank you for the suggestion. Posting under different names can lead to confusion, so I'll probably just stick to the one.

[Chill]

Okay, now I may have to reconsider my former decision not to call you an idiot. I mean, I'm really sorry, but you are missing the point completely and you need to be knocked off your ridiculously high horse. He was not denigrating them for being civilians. He was saying that they were not the typical and expected casualties of war. That is, they were not soldiers. They were not people who were members of a military force whose job it is to fight (and possibly die) for their country. Think about it. What the hell is your point exactly? He condemned the killing of innocent civilians? It's a soldier's job to fight and die. Yeah, their lives aren't worth any less, but it's THEIR JOB. For the most part, in both the Baathist party and in our own military, these are people who signed up voluntarily for the job. It doesn't mean they deserve to die and it doesn't discount the fact that they may have felt compelled to join the army for various reasons (monetary, for example), but like I said, it's their job. If you're a soldier, you go into it knowing you may die. Civilians, on the other hand, have no military affiliation. They are not supposed to be killed in war, although sometimes they are. Nevertheless, most RATIONAL people agree that the killing of a civilian in war is more heinous than the killing of a solider, if only because a soldier goes into war with the reasonable expectation that he (or she) could die.

In short, I think you are making much too big a deal over the use of one small word. You're completely missing the point. What's more, you think you're somehow more enlightened than the rest of us, when, for all intents and purposes, we're saying the exact same thing you are. It's a damn shame and a travesty that so many civilian lives were lost in fighting this illegal war. To assume that we do not value human life because we express more concern over the loss of innocent lives is a bit foolish of you. I'm sure I speak for virtually everyone when I express regret over the loss of the lives of our servicemen as well as Iraqi soldiers, but, I must reiterate, when you sign up to be in the military, you know you could get killed. It doesn't make it right, but that's what soldiers do!

[Chill]

> To do otherwise is to be guilty of the self-centred bigotry and us v them
> mentality Americans are so often accused of adopting.

> But please get your moron President out of my country as soon as feasible.
> Some poeple here are actually starting to believe him....

If only assassination wasn't so illegal...

[CrushingBore]

> If only assassination wasn't so illegal...

Or impractical given that no sentient civilian other than a couple of Greens party senators were able to come within exocet missile range of ol' Dubya the entire time he was here. I mean he comes all this way, and we spend millions on security for him to deliver one little speech, attend a cocktail party and fuck off again. It's pathetic.

[Little Miss Curious]

> I like to think that my formal education has helped me to appreciate the
> intrinsic worth of all human beings - which is not dependent upon their
> economic or military value.

Shame your formal education also makes you sound like you have a ten foot pole rammed up your arse. This is a messageboard, girl - put away your thesaurus!

LMC x

[Chill]

> Or impractical given that no sentient civilian other than a couple of
> Greens party senators were able to come within exocet missile range of ol'
> Dubya the entire time he was here. I mean he comes all this way, and we
> spend millions on security for him to deliver one little speech, attend a
> cocktail party and fuck off again. It's pathetic.

This is precisely why I need to make like Brando and get my own goddamned little island and take myself away from all this insanity and glory in my own.

[D Attenborough]

[Katy]

Chill,

Seeing that I thanked you for not agreeing with “your worst nightmare’s” initial description of me as “an idiot”, I’m a little disappointed that you’ve abandoned civility for this second post and write that you are "reconsidering your former decision”. I have to say that, whilst not exactly calling me an idiot, this phrase does suggest that you are prepared to abandon reasoned argument for childish abuse, which I find a little disappointing.

Your interpretation of “who else but me’s” original post is different from mine. Neither of us is in a position to say for sure exactly what he or she had in his/her heart when that post was written, but I have seen language like that used by evil people to justify terrible crimes. Human beings are described as “only” this or “merely” that, living breathing people are called cowlike morons.

You say that “for all intents and purposes we’re saying the exact same thing that we are” . I’m not sure who you mean by “we”? Are you aligning yourself with “who else but me” – if so I urge you to reconsider. Words may not appear to be that important to you at this stage of your emotional development, but how ideas are presented in written form is crucial to how society develops – all societies not just the comfortable western one we live in. As Morrissey sang (on “You Handsome Devil” from “Hatful of Hollow”)

“There’s more to life than books you know, but not much more”

Some of us are prepared to challenge this filth when it appears in a public forum and I will continue to do so. All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men/women to do nothing.

I certainly do not consider myself more “enlightened than the rest of us” – I consider my self more enlightened than “who else but me” and I would guess I have seen more of the world than you and appreciate the importance of not only showing respect to others of all backgrounds but also of clearly showing others of all backgrounds that you are prepared to show them respect. This inevitably involves careful use of language – there is nothing “politically correct” in that, in fact it’s simply about old fashioned respect for your fellow human beings.

I was initially confused about your claim that I was “making much too big a deal over the use of one small word”. You are clearly not an unintelligent person, and it’s difficult to believe that you really think that my argument can be reduced down to such a statement.

At first I presumed that you had possibly misread my posts but, upon consideration, I’ve thought of a more likely explanation. I know for a fact that there is at least one contributor to this board that likes to intentionally “misunderstand” the serious points made by other posters in order to see if they can provoke an outraged reaction, which presumably causes amusement in the “misunderstanding” poster. A childish and rather pitiable recreation I’d have thought, but relatively harmless.

I’m sure you don’t do this regularly but I don’t think I’d be far wrong if I thought that you had decided to play this little game with me on this occasion?

Don’t worry, I consider that there is no place for pomposity on a message board. I’m more than capable of laughing at myself , and don’t bear grudges. I have to say though, that I am a rather busy, in demand person, both socially and workwise, and won’t be able to find the time to join in the fun. For this reason, I think, having had my say, I’ll make this my last post in this sequence.

One last, I think decisive, thought; If “who else but me” had really had the innocuous intentions that you claim, does it not strike you as a little strange that he/she has not returned to the fray to argue the case, rather than let you and “your worst nightmare” do so on his/her behalf? I realise that not everyone accesses the board that frequently, but I hardly think that someone propounding such quasi-fascistic, military–worshipping views, would not visit again to see whether it had just been ignored or whether decent people had reacted like decent people should.

I for one am proud to make such a stand, and of the apparent result my comment has had – the apparent (voluntary) banishment from the board of an amoral contributor. The next time such a person decides to soil this board with such views, I’d like to think you’d be standing with me rather than excusing such behaviour.

[Chill]

I am not even going to read your little term paper. All I have to say is that if you still believe the person was using the word "mere" to justify the murdering of civilians (or the killing of military personnel in a war which he even called ILLEGAL, which kind of suggests he doesn't agree with it), you have got a screw loose. I don't think it takes some great leap of logic to figure out from the original post that he was CONDEMNING the war on EVERY level. The person even came back on another ID and clarified his position for the benefit of the mentally challenged among us. For you to focus on one little word to the point of writing a goddamned essay about it is to show that you -- and not I -- are the unreasonable one here.

Again, stop with the self-righteous bullshit. You're posting on a fucking message board for god's sake. You aren't changing the world by focusing on that guy's diction. In fact, I think you're perhaps distracting yourself from real issues. Why don't you go put your philanthropic thrust to good use and work at a soup kitchen? At least then you won't be annoying me with your pitiful lack of critical reading skills.

[Worm]

"Mr. Blair & Mr. Bush, should both be tried for war crimes, and publicly hung for the mass murder of thousands of Iraqis, many of whom were mere civilians."

This sentence is an unequivocal expression of moral disgust over the invasion and occupation of Iraq by the United States and the United Kingdom. The final clause, which for some reason has confused you, Katy, is an amplification of the writer's point, not a deflationary qualification. To justify your outrage it would have to read something like "(even though many of them were merely civilians)".

Furthermore, in advocating a war crimes trial, and by distinguishing soldiers from "mere" civilians, the writer also implies a knowledge of and respect for international law, namely the Geneva Convention, which does stipulate a hierarchy of acceptable human losses in war time. This hierarchy therefore allows for the use of "mere" as a modifier indicating degree of validity as a military target (in this case, "little" or "no" validity). Naturally we all quail at the thought of assigning value to human beings as if they were chess pieces, Katy, but, on the other hand, these laws are intended to carry the standard of compassion which you have so enthusiastically taken up on your own.

In short, as Chill rightly said, you're all saying the same thing.

Surely there are few in the world who would deny the justness of your defense of morality, although if they are out there they're probably frequent contributors to this message board.

(Oh, extra credit for the almost verbatim parroting of Edmund Burke.)

Sorry to have to pile on, but your antagonists are correct. I'm an ex-English major too, and you know we're sticklers. Pests, actually, but as you know language is so important.

[KATY IS A CUNT, KATY IS A CUNT, KATY IS A CUNT, KATY IS A CUNT, KATY IS A CUNT, KATY IS A CUNT]

MY ORIGINAL POST:

Your nation invaded Iraq too you daft wanker. Your notions regarding the war are incomplete. You are wrong about your nation's role in this conflict. Mr. Blair is a warmonger. He came to the United States repeatedly, met with President Bush repeatedly, and spoke before the U.S. Congress repeatedly, urging us to invade Iraq. Tony Blair, along with lies from British intelligence (an oxymoron) stated that Iraq was attempting to obtain, or rather had obtained, nuclear materials, in preparation to make a nuclear bomb. This was one of the main reasons the U.S. decided (along with Britain) to invade Iraq. Tony Blair is the biggest sellout of all time. To stand with President Clinton and champion the causes of the disenfranchised on one hand, and then to stand beside that Texan fool on the other, and send those same poor off to war, is the very epitome of hypocrisy. Mr. Blair & Mr. Bush, should both be tried for war crimes, and publicly hung for the mass murder of thousands of Iraqis, many of whom were mere civilians. The U.N. weapons inspectors recently reentered Iraq and found no weapons of mass destruction. Accordingly, both the British public and the American people were lied to, and the reasons given for attacking Iraq were fabricated. As a consequence, Mr. Blair & Mr. Bush should now be held accountable for their crimes.

__________________________________________________ _________________

Look you fucking bitch, I'm going to sit here and write a long arsed treatise on my statement, which I full stand by. I don't appreciate you calling me a slew of words, based on a mere misinterpretation of one of my posts. From that misinterpretation, you think that you can judge me, know my person, and draw conclusions about my beliefs. Look you fucking twat, I explained to you over and over and over again what I meant. I posted as "who else but me" & "your worst nightmare" & "the world won't listen," and "whoever I feel like being at this point in time" because I fucking felt like it.

Dissecting you shitty, long-winded, self-righteous, overly moral, argument piece by God damn fucking piece let me say this.

__________________________________________________ ____________________

"Chill,

Seeing that I thanked you for not agreeing with “your worst nightmare’s” initial description of me as “an idiot”, I’m a little disappointed that you’ve abandoned civility for this second post and write that you are "reconsidering your former decision."

I'M FAIRLY SURE THAT CHILL DID THIS BECAUSE YOU WERE BEING OBTUSE IN REFUSING TO SEE THAT SEVERAL PERSONS, INCLUDING MYSELF ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS, CHILL IN MULTIPLE EFFORTS, AND ONE OTHER PERSON WHO SAID WORDS TO THE AFFECT OF YOU ACTING LIKE YOU HAVE A "10 FOOT POLL STUCK UP YOUR ARSE," TRIED TO REASON WITH YOU AND SHOW YOU WHAT THE INTENTIONS BEHIND THAT POST WERE, BUT YOU REFUSED TO SEE THEM. THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOU KATY, MYSELF, CHILL, AND THAT OTHER USER, IS THAT WE ARE REASONABLE IN OUR INTERPRETATION OF THE MEANING OF WORDS, MEANING WHICH IS DERIVED FROM CONTEXT. BY CONTRAST, YOU HAVE TAKEN A WORD, "MERE," AND DRIVEN OVER A CLIFF, FAR OUT OF ITS CONTEXT AND TWISTED THE ENTIRE MEANING OF MY POST. ALL REASONABLE PEOPLE AGREE THAT IT WAS A POST AGAINST WAR IN IRAQ, AGAINST THE U.S. & U.K. LED CAMPAIGN, AND FOR THE IRAQI PEOPLE.

"I have to say that, whilst not exactly calling me an idiot, this phrase does suggest that you are prepared to abandon reasoned argument for childish abuse, which I find a little disappointing."

CHILL DID NOT ABUSE YOU IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM. I DID YOU FUCKING CUNT, AND I WILL CONTINUE TO ABUSE YOU, IF YOU CONTINUE TO JUDGE ME. GET OFF MY BACK.

"Your interpretation of “who else but me’s” original post is different from mine. Neither of us is in a position to say for sure exactly what he or she had in his/her heart when that post was written, but I have seen language like that used by evil people to justify terrible crimes. Human beings are described as “only” this or “merely” that, living breathing people are called cowlike morons."

YOU ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO SAY FOR SURE WHAT I MEANT, KATY, BUT I AM. I AM. I AM. I AM. I AM. I AM. I AM. HAVE I MADE MYSELF CLEAR? I AM. I MEANT THAT MANY OF THE PEOPLE KILLED IN IRAQ WERE CIVILIANS, INNOCENT CIVILIANS, THAT WERE NOT ENGAGING IN ANY KIND OF COMBAT OR TERRORISM. WHILE YOU SAY ON ONE HAND YOU ARE IN NO POSITION TO JUDGE ME, YOU TURN AROUND AND CALL ME A "COWLIKE MORON." I TAKE UMBRAGE AT THESE COMMENTS AND FIND YOUR ENTIRE STATEMENT CONTRADICTORY, AND THEREFORE LACKING IN MERIT, AS IT IS INCONSISTENT, HYPOCRITICAL, AND WAS EITHER WRITTEN IN BAD FAITH, OR BY AN IDIOT WHICH YOU HAVE PROVED TO BE TIME AND TIME AGAIN.

"You say that “for all intents and purposes we’re saying the exact same thing that we are” . I’m not sure who you mean by “we”? Are you aligning yourself with “who else but me” – if so I urge you to reconsider. Words may not appear to be that important to you at this stage of your emotional development, but how ideas are presented in written form is crucial to how society develops – all societies not just the comfortable western one we live in. As Morrissey sang (on “You Handsome Devil” from “Hatful of Hollow”) There’s more to life than books you know, but not much more."

PLEASE DON'T QUESTION ANYONE'S EMOTIONAL DEVELOPMENT IF YOU ARE NOT VERY ACQUAINTED WITH THEM. YOU DON'T KNOW CHILL AND YOU DO NOT KNOW ME. WE BOTH MAJORED IN ENGLISH. CHILL HAS SOME STUDYING COUREWORK LEFT, BUT NOT MUCH. WE BOTH, CHILL AND I, UNDERSTAND THAT LANGUAGE IS A DYNAMIC THING, ALWAYS CHANGING, AND IN A STATE OF FLUX. I HAVE STUDIED CRITICAL THEORY FROM PLATO THROUGH TO DERRIDA. I WAS TAUGHT BY THE MOST IMPORTANT LINGUIST LIVING, AS PROFESSOR DERRIDA IS A TENURED FACULTY MEMBER AT MY ALMA MATTER, ONE OF THE UNIVERSITIES IN THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SYSTEM. I'M SURE CHILL HAS STUDIED THEM, OR IS FAMILAR WITH THEM. WORDS ARE VERY IMPORTANT TO ME. MY LIFE REVOLVES AROUND THE STUDY OF WORDS, SPECIFCALLY LEXICOGRAPHY & ETYMOLOGY. IF YOU COULD BE ARSED INTO READING "CAUGHT IN THE WEB OF WORDS, JAMES MURRAY AND THE CREATION OF THE OXFORD ENGLISH DICTIONARY" BY K.M ELISABETH MURRAY, I THINK IT WOULD BE WORTH YOUR TIME, WITH THE CAVEAT BEING THAT IF YOU ARE TOO STUPID TO UNDERSTAND THE TEXT, WHICH YOU HAVE DEMONSTRATED THAT YOU ARE, THAN DON'T BOTHER TRYING. THE REST OF YOUR WORDS IN QUOTES OTHER CULTURES BEING DIFFERENT FROM OURS, WOULD BE KNOWN TO ALL PERSONS WHO POSSESS SOME COMMON SENSE, READ, HAVE BEEN EDUCATED, AND/OR HAVE TRAVELED. YOU ARE NOT TELLING US ANYTHING WE DO NOT KNOW.

"Some of us are prepared to challenge this filth when it appears in a public forum and I will continue to do so. All that is needed for evil to triumph is for good men/women to do nothing."

AGAIN YOU HAVE SAID THAT YOU ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO SAY WHAT I HAD IN MY MIND OR HEART, AND YET YOU CALL MY WORDS "FILTH." I FIND THIS TO OFFENSIVE. MY WORDS WERE NOT FILTH, FOR THE REASONS I HAVE STATED.

"I certainly do not consider myself more “enlightened than the rest of us” – I consider my self more enlightened than “who else but me” and I would guess I have seen more of the world than you and appreciate the importance of not only showing respect to others of all backgrounds but also of clearly showing others of all backgrounds that you are prepared to show them respect. This inevitably involves careful use of language – there is nothing “politically correct” in that, in fact it’s simply about old fashioned respect for your fellow human beings."

I HAVE BEEN TO EVERY COUNTRY IN EUROPE, ALL OVER ASIA, THE MIDDLE EAST, THE INDIAN SUB-CONTINTENT, AFRICA, MEXICO. I HAVE SEEN MUCH OF THIS WORLD KATY. UNLIKE YOU, I WAS BORN IN A NATION FAR FAR AWAY FROM THE UNITED STATES. I HAVE MY ROOTS IN AT LEAST 5 DIFFERENT CULTURES. I SPEAK 5 DISTINCT LANGUAGES. I DON'T CONSIDER YOU MORE ENLIGHTENED THAT ME, AND I SERIOUS DOUBT THAT YOU POSSESS A DOCTORATE. I DO. YOU SAY THAT YOU DON'T CONSIDER YOURSELF MORE ENLIGHTENED THAN THE REST OF US, YET AGAIN YOU ARE JUDGING ME. I AM OFFENDED BY THESE REMARKS.

"I was initially confused about your claim that I was “making much too big a deal over the use of one small word”. You are clearly not an unintelligent person, and it’s difficult to believe that you really think that my argument can be reduced down to such a statement."

I THINK CHILL'S INTERPRETATION WAS ON POINT, AND CORRECT, AS YOU MADE SOMETHING OUT OF NOTHING, BY CHAMPIONING YOUR MEANING, AND NOT THE DICTIONARY'S DEFINITION. YOU DISMISSED THE WELL SETTLED CONNOTATION AND UNDERSTANDING OF REASONABLE PEOPLE. YOUR ARGUMENT CAN BE REDUCED TO THE FOLLOWING: YOU ARE AN IDIOT, AND I REMAIN DEFIANT. FUCK YOU.

"At first I presumed that you had possibly misread my posts but, upon consideration, I’ve thought of a more likely explanation. I know for a fact that there is at least one contributor to this board that likes to intentionally “misunderstand” the serious points made by other posters in order to see if they can provoke an outraged reaction, which presumably causes amusement in the “misunderstanding” poster. A childish and rather pitiable recreation I’d have thought, but relatively harmless."

THERE ARE MANY THAT DO THIS KATY, MANY. MR. IMPROPER AND LIL ROB, COME TO MIND, THOUGH SOME PEOPLE LIKE THEM VERY MUCH AND FIND THEM FUNNY. EACH PERSON RESERVES THE RIGHT TO JUDGE FOR HIMSELF OR HERSELF, WHAT THEY FIND ENTERTAINING AND WORTHY AND WHAT THEY DO NOT.

WHAT THEY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO, IS TO TAKE SOMEONE'S WORDS, AND MANGLE THEM AS YOU HAVE, REVERSING THE GOOD INTENTIONS BEHIND THOSE WORDS, AND USING THEM IN AN OFFENSIVE WAY AGAINST MY PERSON. I DO AS I PLEASE, KATY. IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, DON'T COME HERE.

"I’m sure you don’t do this regularly but I don’t think I’d be far wrong if I thought that you had decided to play this little game with me on this occasion?"

I CAN TELL YOU THAT CHILL IS NOT PLAYING ANY GAMES. UNDER MY REGULAR NAME KATY, WHICH YOU WILL NEVER BE PRIVY TO, I KNOW CHILL QUITE WELL AS I HAVE BEEN COMING HERE FOR A VERY LONG TIME. CHILL DOES NOT PLAY THESE KINDS OF GAMES. CHILL IS SMART, AND WISE BEYOND HER YEARS. I CARE FOR CHILL VERY MUCH AS FRIEND ON THIS MESSAGE BOARD. AND, I HOPE ONE DAY CHILL AND I COULD SIT DOWN FOR A COFFEE AS WE GET ALONG WELL IN THIS FORUM, AND HAVE MUCH IN COMMON.

"Don’t worry, I consider that there is no place for pomposity on a message board. I’m more than capable of laughing at myself , and don’t bear grudges. I have to say though, that I am a rather busy, in demand person, both socially and workwise, and won’t be able to find the time to join in the fun. For this reason, I think, having had my say, I’ll make this my last post in this sequence."

I AM HAPPY THAT YOU ARE AN IN DEMAND PERSON. I'M GLAD TO SEE THAT THE OLDEST TRADE IN THE BOOK, PROSTITUION IS ALIVE AND WELL. I THINK YOU SHOULD MAKE THIS YOUR LAST POST PERIOD, KATY. YOU ARE NOT WELCOME HERE.

"One last, I think decisive, thought; If “who else but me” had really had the innocuous intentions that you claim, does it not strike you as a little strange that he/she has not returned to the fray to argue the case, rather than let you and “your worst nightmare” do so on his/her behalf? I realise that not everyone accesses the board that frequently, but I hardly think that someone propounding such quasi-fascistic, military–worshipping views, would not visit again to see whether it had just been ignored or whether decent people had reacted like decent people should."

I DID RETURN TO THE FRAY AS "YOUR WORST NIGHTMARE," "THE WORLD WON'T LISTEN" & "WHOEVER I FEEL LIKE BEING AT THIS POINT IN TIME." IN ADDITION, I AM NOT A "QUASI-FASCISTIC, MILITARY WORSHIPPER." I AM AGAINST THIS WAR ON IRAQ AND I MADE THAT CLEAR. I AM OFFENDED AT YOUR COMMENTS.

"I for one am proud to make such a stand, and of the apparent result my comment has had – the apparent (voluntary) banishment from the board of an amoral contributor. The next time such a person decides to soil this board with such views, I’d like to think you’d be standing with me rather than excusing such behaviour."

I AM NOT AN AMORAL CONTRIBUTOR, YOU JUDGEMENTAL FUCKKING PIG. YOU BANISED NOBODY. I HAVE MANY FRIENDS HERE KATY, SOME EVEN CALL ME A "LEGEND." YOU WILL NEVER GET RID OF ME KATY. I'VE BEEN HERE FOR YEARS, CUNT. BY CONTRAST, I WILL NEVER ALLOW YOU TO POST AGAIN IN PEACE UNTIL YOU APOLOGIZE. YOU CAN BE EXPECTED TO BE CALLED EVERY NAME UNDER THE SUN FROM THIS DAY FORWARD, IN YOUR EVERY POST. I SUGGEST YOU TONE DOWN YOUR RHETORIC, AND GET A NICKNAME. YOU MIGHT SLEEP, BUT YOU WILL NEVER DREAM. AGAIN, FUCK YOU, YOU FUCKING SELF-RIGHTEOUS, OVERLY MORAL, HOLIER THAN THOUGH, STUPID, PREACHING, IDIOT, MISINTERPRETER OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE, CUNT.

YOU OWE ME AN APOLOGY, BIG TIME, FOR JUDGING ME TO BE SOMEONE THAT IS ENTIRELY UNLIKE THE PERSON THAT I AM. YOU ATTACKED ME. WHEN WE TRIED TO ENLIGHTEN YOU, YOU ATTACKED ME AGAIN.

YOU CAN EITHER APOLOGIZE OR FACE MY WRATH. YOU HAVE NO IDEA WHAT I AM CAPABLE OF DOING. TAKE YOUR PICK. I SUGGEST YOU APOLOGIZE.

[Sebastian]

I'd love to kill you myself, but it is illegal.

[Katy]

I'm sorry. You're obviously quite upset, something I certainly didn't intend, and my post was clearly misjudged.

I don't for a second think that you hold quasi-fascistic, military–worshipping views nor do I consider you a "cowlike moron" (not that I called you this in my post)

If you really think I might be Katy Krassner, please be assured I am not.

[Belligerent Ghoul]

I have just finished a 10 minute AOL Instant Messaging session with Mr. Merck Mercuriadis, the CEO of Sanctuary Records. He was aware of this situation, regarding someone who was posting as "Katy" as Katy Krassner was made aware of these posts by someone here. Merck asked me to tell the entire community that Katy Krassner, of Sanctuary Records, would never send anything to Morrissey-Solo that was not an official communique from Sanctuary authorized by him. I am writing this at Merck's request, as he and I are in email, and instant message contact, from time to time. He is a good, kind, open, and accessible, man. I respect him immensely.

[Chill]

[Papa Jack]

don't underestimate us....

[Belligerent Ghoul]

I never claimed anything other than an acquaintance with Mr. Merck Mercuriadis the CEO of Sanctuary Records. This extends to the occasional email and brief Instant Message sessions.

I also know someone who worked with The Smiths & Morrissey through to Southpaw Grammar. This person has asked me not to divulge his/her name. This person no longer has any contact with Moz. The last contact this person had with Morrissey was that he/she got a paycheck, and a huge box full of 12 inch Vinyl Promotional Southpaw Grammar in the mail which is gathering dust in his/her garage.

That's all.