JET, you disgusting nonhuman offal.

In this thread,, you polluted dthe ether with this inane comment:

to which JonScribe replied:

Scribe: Thank you.

JET: I think it’s high time you hit the road, you piece of shit. Your appearaed on this board and started talking about how those who kill schoolchildren are your heros. And you got a lot of well-deserved flack over that.

You have no morals.

You have no ethics.

You have no humanity.

You are offal.

Actually, shit’s better than you.

Good heavens! Those children were in 1st and 2nd grade and were thus 6, 7, or 8 years old.

If the site administrators haven’t already done so, I certainly hope they immediately contact your ISP and urge them to divulge your contact information to the local authorities. You need some serious help.

After reading JET’s posts, I must concur.

Hell yea.

That is so damned disgusting. JET, you are no gentleman. You have wore out your welcoming. I, too, am a “tortured soul”, but you don’t see me dancing giddily when people die. You are so damned creepy, and that’s the image you are going for. Please stop being a moron.

actually, I think that Monty said it best!

:mad: Yeah, definitely…thinking of people who kill as heroes is never a healthy or good thing on the boards, or in general. Fucking digusting, even…if I were jarbaby I’d probably be able to say this better, but I echo Monty, Bally, and Adam.

In JET’s defense, I would like to point out that he did take a break from mocking the deaths of children to call us all “cock-smoking Windows-master faggots” in this thread. Sure, it’s not much, but it’s sort of an improvement.

I mean, he’s still a creepy freak, don’t get me wrong. But maybe, just maybe, in a thousand years, he’ll be a little less creepy. [sub]But probably not.[/sub]

You know, Giraffe, I don’t give a flying fuck if he writes the sequel to War and Peace this weekend, he needs to just go. There is no excuse for delighting in the death of children.

Japan’s Prime Minister said it best:

from The Monterey County Herald, Satuday, June 9, 2001; p. A13, column 4, para. 1.

Now, JET may think he’s big and brave saying the shit he says here, but it’s obvious that he’s a punk, a wussy, a worthless cretin who can only hurt the weak, small, and innocent. No doubt JET enjoys the deaths of infants even more.

Good people, such as Junichiro Koizumi, try to prevent problems or find solutions to them.

JET’s a problem on this board and I think the solution’s patently obvious.

I disagree.

You can’t simply say someone has no ethics because he has different ethics than everyone else. To do so makes your own ethics simply a reflection of the majority opinion. I consider people who claim that “some humans are not human” and advocate the death penalty “for the ethicless sub-humans” more offensive myself.

I suppose you calling him names makes you a better person than him.

He is a troll, one of the few successful ones on the SDMB.

Has anyone stopped to consider that JET is simply out to get an many people’s goats as possible? He may not actually be dancing over their deaths, but he may be saying that to provoke reactions. And look at the reactions. He delights in negative comments. I’ll give him a cyberhug instead


Because he’ll truly dislike that

Has anyone stopped to consider that JET is simply out to get an many people’s goats as possible? He may not actually be dancing over their deaths, but he may be saying that to provoke reactions. And look at the reactions. He delights in negative comments.


Uhmmmmmmm…is it just me, or is that not the EXACT definition of a troll? And hopefully by now we’ve all learned what happens to trolls…

JET, if you are just looking for some negative responses to jack off too, find someplace else. I don’t want to start a troll hunt or anything, but considering that the alternative is that you actually DO delight in the deaths of others, then I’d rather you just be a troll, who can be easily gotten rid of.

Monty took JET to task for saying this:

So did JonScribe.

I’m more impressed with Monty and JohnScribe than with JET. I’d rather have JET stick around, though. He needs us.

So if he’s a troll, he gets booted. The schtick gets old, after a while. It’s not longer shocking, just annoying and disgusting.

At the risk of sounding ignorant, what exactly is a successful troll? A troll with a laptop under his bridge?

I haven’t liked JET since he first started posting here, and my distaste for him cannot get lower. Sick, stupid fucks like him are not humorous. They are not intelligent. They are not worth our time seriously conversing with them. They are only worth discarding. This is my humble opinion, shared by many others here.

I had never heard of him before.

I will certainly never hear him in the future.

Shorthand for Jeremy’s Evil Twin. As a Jeremy, I’m rather annoyed at the association.

You know, when I saw JET’s first thread my initial thoughts were the same knee-jerk reaction that I see here.

Speak to him thoughtfully and civilly and you will receive a thoughtful and civil reply.

The thing that I like best about satire is that one has to actually think, or work to uncover what is really being said.

And since this is JET’s second trotting of this particular race, this isn’t a knee-jerk reaction.

Apparently didn’t work as this is JET’s second trotting of this particular race.

Doesn’t seem to be satire, but just one very sick individual.

Oh, but it is satire.

JET sees hypocrisy in the canned sentiment attached to these atrocities.

He rejects the sentiment, and argues its opposite to make his point.

He is satiring the people who nod their heads in serious agreement at atrocities that occur to people they know nothing about, thousands of miles away. How can you have sentiment for the abstract?

He sees hypocrisy, because he feels that people who console themselves that they are good people because they feel bad about these things (or at least make the apporopriate noises,) are actually responsible to a degree.

He feels that many of these people who do this, are putting the pressures in place themselves that create the incident.

I don’t agree with his thesis, though from a media standpoint he may have a point. That’s not what he’s referring to.

He’s referring to the roles society makes you play. You play the role of the outraged person who is appalled at JETs comments. Similarly you play the role of concerned citizen of the world, outraged at this incident.

The fact is you do not know the people involved. They have no contact or meaning to you, and your sentiment serves no purpose other than to make you feel good. And, your conscience is thereby cleared of any guilt you might feel for the tittilation the media has provided you.

Odd though that your sentiments provide sympathy and empathy where it worthless, but in dealing with JET where your views and thoughts may have an impact, you instead choose to insult and wound him.

In JET’s mind this confirms his theory as JET feels that these incidents are instigated by people who are alienated by those they come in contact with because they are different, or express different views.

People you have no contact with cannot benefit from things you think, or sentiments you feel. People you have contact with can.

JET feels (and I agree with him,) that the latter is what’s important. The former is just posing.

I went through quite a long discussion with JET to understand his points. I think he enjoys fucking with people cleverly in making his points, and I wish he would find another way of doing it, but I also enjoy the satirical way in which he does so.

Scylla, I think you are giving JET way more credit than he deserves.

I concur, Scylla; you have an over-generous nature.