What is with this guy? How does one write a long insulting rant that accuses someone of long insulting rants without recognizing himself in his words? Thomas’ article about me was so absurd in its distortion and biased presentation of reality, that I really believe that we’ve seen the last of the wonderful man who used to post on our site. The intellect and knowledge he used to share on this site are gone. In its place is a surly, vulgar liar, who is so self-absorbed and frantic about his own image that he doesn’t see that his image isn’t worth fretting over.

Which of the lies from his article should I expose first? How about this one:

"<Tom Pain> is the person who was twice voted off the site, was unanimously selected as worst writer on this web site…"

Utter lies. I’m not saying that because technically Tom Pain has never been voted off the site; I know Thomas refers to an alias, Ron Lewis, that I used years ago. Still, Ron Lewis was not voted off U-K TWICE. As Ron, I was voted Worst Writer once, in November ’05. However, that election was horrendously fraudulent – there was no way to tell who voted or how many times they voted. Essentially, one or two voters, who I had undoubtedly exposed as liars, voted many times to effect my "victory." Our Editor acknowledged as much when he approved my return to the site and changed the format of future elections.

Furthermore, that vote was not unanimous and for Thomas to concoct that blatant lie reveals his true nature. To my knowledge, the actual results of the vote were never posted. A clue that it was not unanimous can be seen in the number of articles posted by different contributors protesting my dismissal (go back in the archives to 11/05). Does Thomas expect us to believe that those people wrote staunch defenses of me, yet voted me off the site as well?? The truth is that Thomas is just lying.

I hate liars. It is the subject of most of my posts. For Thomas to claim that it is "preposterous" of me to say that is crazy. Just because HE thinks I lie as well is irrelevant to whether I hate liars or not.

When he recently accused me of lying as well, I asked him to document an example, but suggested that referring to my comments in retaliation of his would be a pathetic excuse. So what does he do – refer only to those comments. Am I technically a liar when I call him a pedophile? Thomas says I am. I say, "Who knows?" He might be, but I admit having no proof, only the circumstantial evidence I’ve documented.

More importantly, is that an example most people would consider accurately justifies calling me a liar? If someone calls you stupid, and you reply that he/she is a horse’s ass, are you a liar? No one I know who claim so. Everyone I know would just call that "trading insults."

Another lie from Thomas in that article:

"Pain has also posted rebuttals accusing me of pedophilia because I gave gifts of money and clothes to needy children in Paraguay."

I can’t even imagine where he came up with this statement. I’ve never referred to him giving anything to Paraguayan children. I did not even know that he did so. I very clearly explained my reasons for suspecting Thomas was a pedophile. For him to ignore those and make up lies about my rationale makes no sense – UNLESS, my true reasons were accurate and he doesn’t want them repeated.

Thomas does cite one example of a supposed lie by me that did not result from an attack against me:

"Thomas Keyes hates Jews; it’s just that simple."

What he ignores is that I wrote that after he attacked Jews. He makes it sound like I just blurted that out for no reason. Look in his archive to see dozens of articles he’s written criticizing Jews and alleging massive Jewish conspiracies to rule the world. I cannot remember any of those articles that did not rely on unsubstantiated innuendo to make its points.

So how do you describe someone who posts article after article criticizing Jews with unsubstantiated innuendo? Am I a "liar" because I chose to describe his motivations as "hatred"? There is one piece of evidence that, if submitted by Thomas, would prove that I described him wrongly. If he had ever written just one article that criticized Israel’s enemies or those who spew hatred towards Jews, such as the mad Iranian President, then I might believe that he was not biased. It’s never happened. According to Thomas, Jews and Israel are evil and their plans to rule the world must be stopped at all costs. Tell the truth, doesn’t he just sound crazy, like he hates Jews?

This statement from Thomas’ article is just ludicrous:

"From this, I gather that Pain neglects to count his own lies as lies, if he thinks I have told lies, or if his lies are reprisals for attacks I have made on him."

No one I know calls "trading insults" lies. Yes, Thomas, if you insult me with an ugly lie, I am going to say something ugly back to you – and I won’t consider it "lying." But, what makes this statement ludicrous is that he proceeds to do exactly this in the very next paragraph. He describes his ugly insulting article about me being a Brooklyn housewife as merely "humorous," yet when I respond with an article that is more "humorous" than his, I’m guilty of lying. Apparently, he thinks his lies aren’t lies, they’re humor, but my humor is lying. Go figure. Is Thomas just very confused, or does he know exactly what he’s saying? I think he’s just a liar; it’s that simple.

It’s funny that he’s surprised that "another contributor had to explain to a third contributor that Pain was lying." How can I make Thomas understand that the contributor was not confused because of my tremendous talent to deceive, he was confused because everything I said is very plausible and is supported by the circumstantial evidence. If it looks like a pig, smells like a pig, and sounds like a pig, why would he be surprised that people thought it was a pig?

Then, Thomas has the nerve to make this statement:

"The fact of the matter is that Pain hates Muslims."

Whoa! How can he complain about me, then make that statement? This man has no integrity. Unlike Thomas, who lies about his hatred of every Jew on Earth, I will admit to extreme dislike of many Muslims – the ones who want to kill non-Muslims. For the rest of the world’s Muslims, I have little regard one way or another. I would compare my feelings for those Muslims to my feelings for the homeless, crack-addicted bum living under the freeway. They are nothing to me. The truth is that they are essentially nothing to the entire world.

The world’s Muslim population, many billions of people spread around the world, has done virtually nothing to advance civilization in the last few hundred years. If they had all caught some AIDS-like virus from their camels and died 300 years ago, nothing would have changed in the world – we’d still have computers, cellphones, space shuttles, heart transplants, and every other modern convenience and life enhancement. No, I don’t hate Muslims, but if I were marooned on a desert island, I’d choose a roll of toilet paper over a Muslim for usefulness.

How about a little distortion from Thomas:

"Actually, at one time, Pain and I had good relations. He is the person who started the personal abuse, which was relatively mild at that time."

What do events a year or two ago have to do with today? For the last several months, Thomas has instigated every insulting exchange between us. Just as he’s done with the article to which this post responds. What did I do that necessitated he post that article? Do you see any article from me in the last several weeks insulting Thomas that could have motivated this attack from him?

Look in the Archive of my articles. Since March 1^st, I have posted one article that could be called insulting to Thomas – the one he cites in this latest article and acknowledges was in response to his "humorous" article about me. Now, look in his Archive. Since March 1^st, he has posted eight articles that insult me. All were just like this latest – completely uncalled for and not instigated by any article from me. Yet, he claims I "started" it all because years ago I accurately described his article in unflattering terms.

Such is the wrath of egotistical Thomas. We did actually have good relations at one time. It consisted of me telling him how wonderful he was over and over, and him saying, essentially, "Yes, you are so right." Then he started posting those bigoted screeds against Jews and I disagreed. His ego could not take it. You can’t be a person with your own opinion around Thomas – either you agree with his opinion (despite all the vague innuendo) or you are scum in his eyes and he starts insulting you.

Because I won’t stop pointing out his bigotry, he keeps posting these insulting articles about me that lie and distort. How can I convince him that he’s wasting his time? The fact that I have no ego, and therefore can care less that someone insults me, is simply unfathomable to someone with an ego the size of Thomas’. The fact that he has a huge ego is why he gets so upset and then resorts to posting these ugly articles about me.

Go ahead, Thomas; keep posting all these articles while claiming that I’m "starting" fights. Maybe for my next response, I’ll point everyone to the Rebuttal section where they can see all of those threads you’ve started that insult me (Misc Section, at least 5 recently).

	Web useless-knowledge.com