OT: Al Franken

[Seth Koster]

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil, cut off all trade with
Islamic nations, and blockaded them with booomers, and set about the
systematic destruction of all Mosques on earth by laser-guided bombs
in our own good time, and burying every media outlet in the middle
east with jamming and alternate broadcasts.

Then we'd target ANY and ALL demonstrations in the streets with
fuel-air bombs and fragmentation clusters, and encourage everyone
of the Islamic bent on earth to kill themselves or be converted
to secularism because we are going to gas them to death if they
don't.

Then over the next 50 years we would pacify each small area one
at a time by cordoning it off and killing anyone resisting or who
has a weapon and taking the weapon. Then we would issue IDs and
require every single person to be where we say they should be or
simply execute them if they don't. They will work for themselves
to better their lives and support themselves under OUR direction.
They will not be allowed to go anywhere that hasn't been swept
clean for our safety. We will prefer killing thousands of them
to losing even one of our own.

Their kids will be schooled by us and the homes will be bugged
and monitored randomly for parental brainwashing efforts, which
will be rewarded with immediate execution. In 50 years Islam
would be a filthy word, nothing more. That's what any religion
should get when it can't control its idiots. Any religion that
spreads nonsense and death DESERVES to be OBLITERATED!

-Steve

You do realize you are insane, right? This is a serious question.
I mean you sound a bit like Hitler with all this talk of immediate
executions, obliteration, bugging, gassing, targetting demonstrations
with bombs, etc... I recommend that you look into treatment options.
None of this is an attack or meant in jest, I really think you might
find some use from either an intensive psycho-therapy regimen or a
voluntary commitment. Advocating genocide on the basis of someones
religion is not a sane position.

 

[Tim Auton]

qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.


Tim
--
Love is a travelator.

 

[KR Williams]

In article <abqo801u7592ounv8fokcgkfj567kk1mnf@4ax.com>,
tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY] says...

qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

You obviously don't know RSW very well! He does belive this and
yes, *is* insane.


--
Keith

 

[Chuck Harris]

Maxfoo wrote:

And your note, pointing this out, was on-topic in what way?

Seriously, regardless of the group's "charter", the only
controlling authority on unmoderated newsgroups is between
your ears. It is up to you, and you alone, to decide whether
you are going to read, or post a particular message.

-Chuck Harris


One can complain to the offenders ISP.
In your case it's abuse@rcn.com
I suppose as long as no one bitches its permitted.

Yes you can, but if I am not violating my ISP's
rules, what will it get you? My ISP is interested in
my not breaking civil, or criminal law, spamming, and
a few other things, but violating a newsgroup charter
is very far off of their radar. (not that I ever would ;-)

-Chuck

 

[Chuck Harris]

Tim Auton wrote:

qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:


I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]


You do realize you are insane, right?


Seth, meet sarcasm.


Tim

Nothing I have ever read from Walz would lead me to believe that he is
being sarcastic. Advocating the killing those that disagree with his
"utopic" visions of how life should be is very much within his doctrine.

-Chuck

 

[Tim Auton]

KR Williams <krw@att.biz> wrote:

In article <abqo801u7592ounv8fokcgkfj567kk1mnf@4ax.com>,
tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY] says...
qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

You obviously don't know RSW very well! He does belive this and
yes, *is* insane.

I went to look for some evidence of RSW's opinions in his posting
history. It's fascinating. Sufficiently fascinating that I withdraw my
judgement and will reserve it till can be bothered to gather enough
evidence. The first post I came across contained this:

"Myself, I greatly enjoyed my wife enjoying her birthday gangbang
from a number of our male friends, I was kissing her while they
pleasured her every other part, her mouth virtually turned to
butter, and feeling her response in her breath was miraculous."

I should add that I in no way disapprove of the above (in fact, it
sounds like jolly good fun if that's your thing), nor do I think it
adds to the argument that RSW is insane. It is the unexpected volume,
variety and nature of RSW's posts that is making me pause.


Tim
--
Love is a travelator.

 

[Tim Auton]

Chuck Harris <cfharris@erols.com> wrote:

Tim Auton wrote:
qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

Nothing I have ever read from Walz would lead me to believe that he is
being sarcastic. Advocating the killing those that disagree with his
"utopic" visions of how life should be is very much within his doctrine.

I've looked about a bit and I suspect you may be right. From what he
wrote I assumed he must have been taking the piss.


Tim
--
Love is a travelator.

 

[KR Williams]

In article <s2so80l2hpb2l9db8et32ra899u2hscouj@4ax.com>,
tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY] says...

KR Williams <krw@att.biz> wrote:
In article <abqo801u7592ounv8fokcgkfj567kk1mnf@4ax.com>,
tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY] says...
qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

You obviously don't know RSW very well! He does belive this and
yes, *is* insane.

I went to look for some evidence of RSW's opinions in his posting
history. It's fascinating. Sufficiently fascinating that I withdraw my
judgement and will reserve it till can be bothered to gather enough
evidence. The first post I came across contained this:

"Myself, I greatly enjoyed my wife enjoying her birthday gangbang
from a number of our male friends, I was kissing her while they
pleasured her every other part, her mouth virtually turned to
butter, and feeling her response in her breath was miraculous."

I should add that I in no way disapprove of the above (in fact, it
sounds like jolly good fun if that's your thing), nor do I think it
adds to the argument that RSW is insane. It is the unexpected volume,
variety and nature of RSW's posts that is making me pause.

If you think simply he's happy with having others "bonk" his wife
while he watched and let the rest of the world live, you haven't
read enough RSW. Do continue reading. He *is* looney. ...and
*does* believe that those who don't agree with him should be
killed.

--
Keith

 

[R. Steve Walz]

John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 18:02:36 GMT, "Tom Del Rosso"
tdnews01@att.net.invalid> wrote:

I think the anarchists expect people to be civilized,

And use bombs to prove it.

Communism is infinitely optimistic, and engages in best-case
design. I
wouldn't want to drive over a bridge designed on best-case
assumptions.

John
-----------------

Nonsense, I believe in the entirely sufficient near-perfection of
humankind by the proper laws and their enforcement with the most
frightening and immediate penalties.

If you believe you're right, then enforce it brutally, and if you
don't, then nobody should bother to care what you think.

All I want is better laws (Communist Laws), and their very
frightening, immediate, and most intense enforcement.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

KR Williams wrote:

In article <cg1o80tntkea2hovojk1rku6pduvfgdfa4@4ax.com>,
jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com says...
On Sun, 25 Apr 2004 18:02:36 GMT, "Tom Del Rosso"
tdnews01@att.net.invalid> wrote:


I think the anarchists expect people to be civilized,

And use bombs to prove it.

Communism is infinitely optimistic, and engages in best-case design. I
wouldn't want to drive over a bridge designed on best-case
assumptions.

...or designed by someone who thought that someone else should be
responsible for his work.

--
Keith
-----------------

Nonsense, calling Communists "optimistic" is like calling Nazis
"laid-back".

We Communists believe that the only individual perfection possible
is best accomplished from without, by brutal enforcement of the
right laws.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Seth Koster wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil, cut off all trade with
Islamic nations, and blockaded them with booomers, and set about the
systematic destruction of all Mosques on earth by laser-guided bombs
in our own good time, and burying every media outlet in the middle
east with jamming and alternate broadcasts.

Then we'd target ANY and ALL demonstrations in the streets with
fuel-air bombs and fragmentation clusters, and encourage everyone
of the Islamic bent on earth to kill themselves or be converted
to secularism because we are going to gas them to death if they
don't.

Then over the next 50 years we would pacify each small area one
at a time by cordoning it off and killing anyone resisting or who
has a weapon and taking the weapon. Then we would issue IDs and
require every single person to be where we say they should be or
simply execute them if they don't. They will work for themselves
to better their lives and support themselves under OUR direction.
They will not be allowed to go anywhere that hasn't been swept
clean for our safety. We will prefer killing thousands of them
to losing even one of our own.

Their kids will be schooled by us and the homes will be bugged
and monitored randomly for parental brainwashing efforts, which
will be rewarded with immediate execution. In 50 years Islam
would be a filthy word, nothing more. That's what any religion
should get when it can't control its idiots. Any religion that
spreads nonsense and death DESERVES to be OBLITERATED!

-Steve

You do realize you are insane, right? This is a serious question.
---------------

I'm not insane, I simply don't believe in defeat of the Goodness,
and I would go to any lengths to defeat Evil. If you want Evil
insanity look at Islam and the Taliban. ANYONE supporting that
oppression and enslavement of humans in word or deed should be
shot down in the street like a dog.

I mean you sound a bit like Hitler with all this talk of immediate
executions, obliteration, bugging, gassing, targetting demonstrations
with bombs, etc... I recommend that you look into treatment options.
----------------

Every Allied general has discussed those same things. Vengeance is
an entirely normal reaction of self-defense. You were simply raised
to be a pansy-assed wussy.

None of this is an attack or meant in jest, I really think you might
find some use from either an intensive psycho-therapy regimen or a
voluntary commitment.
-----------------

You're a idiot and a moron. Do you expect to defeat ALL your political
opponents by convincing them they're insane? If so you should just
give up now, as you're not very good at it.

Advocating genocide on the basis of someones
religion is not a sane position.
---------------------

Sure it is, if the religion is insane and evil. And without
targetting people by race it isn't "genocide", the killing
of a whole kind, because religion is NOT a "kind", it's a
belief system, like Fascism.

You have simply absorbed too much "tolerance of all religions"
nonsense. If religionists could fucking keep it to themselves
and not inflict it politically on others, and on their own
children, abusing them and destroying their lives, then maybe
they'd have a genuine cause for tolerance, but if they are
militating to remove anyone's rights, then they are an eligible
political and military target.

Nazi-ism was/is a religion, so's the Ku Klux Klan, it says
so in their charter. When we get done killing the Fundies on
that side of the world, it will be closer to the time when
we can start killing all the abusive Fundies over here!!

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Tim Auton wrote:

qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

Tim
---------------------

You're wrong, Tim. More wrong than you can even believe, obviously.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

KR Williams wrote:

In article <abqo801u7592ounv8fokcgkfj567kk1mnf@4ax.com>,
tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY] says...
qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

You obviously don't know RSW very well! He does belive this and
yes, *is* insane.

--
Keith
-------------

No, even worse: I believe that, and I'm NOT insane.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

KR Williams wrote:

In article <s2so80l2hpb2l9db8et32ra899u2hscouj@4ax.com>,
tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY] says...
KR Williams <krw@att.biz> wrote:
In article <abqo801u7592ounv8fokcgkfj567kk1mnf@4ax.com>,
tim.auton@uton.[groupSexWithoutTheY] says...
qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

You obviously don't know RSW very well! He does belive this and
yes, *is* insane.

I went to look for some evidence of RSW's opinions in his posting
history. It's fascinating. Sufficiently fascinating that I withdraw my
judgement and will reserve it till can be bothered to gather enough
evidence. The first post I came across contained this:

"Myself, I greatly enjoyed my wife enjoying her birthday gangbang
from a number of our male friends, I was kissing her while they
pleasured her every other part, her mouth virtually turned to
butter, and feeling her response in her breath was miraculous."

I should add that I in no way disapprove of the above (in fact, it
sounds like jolly good fun if that's your thing), nor do I think it
adds to the argument that RSW is insane. It is the unexpected volume,
variety and nature of RSW's posts that is making me pause.

If you think simply he's happy with having others "bonk" his wife
while he watched and let the rest of the world live, you haven't
read enough RSW. Do continue reading. He *is* looney. ...and
*does* believe that those who don't agree with him should be
killed.
Keith
--------------

I KNEW that you would positively cringe at him being interested. ;->

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Tim Auton wrote:

Chuck Harris <cfharris@erols.com> wrote:
Tim Auton wrote:
qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote:

I agree absolutely, we'd have nuked Mecca, Medina, Riyadh, Teheran,
Bagdadh, Kabul, Islamabad, Damascus, Amman, Cairo, and a few others
with 10 kTonners, and then taken over the oil[...]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

Nothing I have ever read from Walz would lead me to believe that he is
being sarcastic. Advocating the killing those that disagree with his
"utopic" visions of how life should be is very much within his doctrine.

I've looked about a bit and I suspect you may be right. From what he
wrote I assumed he must have been taking the piss.

Tim
--------------------

"taking the piss", hmmm, never have been sure what that phrase means.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[Ratch]

Advocating genocide on the basis of someones
religion is not a sane position.
---------------------
Sure it is, if the religion is insane and evil. And without
targetting people by race it isn't "genocide", the killing
of a whole kind, because religion is NOT a "kind", it's a
belief system, like Fascism.

From the American Heritage Dictionary:
genˇoˇcide n. The systematic and planned extermination of an entire
national, racial, political, or ethnic group. [Greek genos, race; see gen.-
below + -cide.] --gen"oˇcid"al adj. --gen"oˇcid"alˇly adv.

Don't politics largely involve beliefs, and if so, isn't it genocide if you
exterminate people based on their political beliefs?

Do you still believe that folks who deliberately run stop signs should be
executed? Isn't that digital thinking, i.e., life/death, bad/good, on/off,
high,low, etc. Isn't there some middle gray ground or gray area. Don't you
think that you need some analog perspective in your life. Ratch

 

[Seth Koster]

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

Nothing I have ever read from Walz would lead me to believe that he is
being sarcastic. Advocating the killing those that disagree with his
"utopic" visions of how life should be is very much within his doctrine.

I've looked about a bit and I suspect you may be right. From what he
wrote I assumed he must have been taking the piss.


Tim

Tim, I certainly understand how you might have thought he was being
sarcastic, and I take no offense at your assumption that my abilities
to detect sarcasm were suspect at best. I do assure you, however,
that I have waded through enough of Steve's posts to be pretty sure
that he is, to put it quite bluntly, a raving lunatic. I honestly
think some psychological help might be in order. I don't joke around
about these things, as when I was young a close friend took his own
life in a situation where I believe counseling might have helped. In
Steve's case I fear that the life or lives taken may not be his.
I am curious as to what 'taking the piss' means and refers to. I
assume it has to do with being sarcastic, considering the context, but
I have absolutely no idea how or why.

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Ratch wrote:

Advocating genocide on the basis of someones
religion is not a sane position.
---------------------
Sure it is, if the religion is insane and evil. And without
targetting people by race it isn't "genocide", the killing
of a whole kind, because religion is NOT a "kind", it's a
belief system, like Fascism.

From the American Heritage Dictionary:
genˇoˇcide n. The systematic and planned extermination of an entire
national, racial, political, or ethnic group. [Greek genos, race; see gen.-
below + -cide.] --gen"oˇcid"al adj. --gen"oˇcid"alˇly adv.
-------------------

Give us a break, that's just shoddy dictionary confabulating. Killing
every combative Nazi on earth is a patently Good Thing(tm). While it
seems a fair thing to not hold people culpable for their beliefs,
if their belief is that they must harm you for yours, then their
belief has become a malignant influence, and one you must destroy.

Don't politics largely involve beliefs, and if so, isn't it genocide if you
exterminate people based on their political beliefs?
--------------------

The dictionary is wrong, that's NOT what anybody means when they
allude to the Latin word "genus".

Do you still believe that folks who deliberately run stop signs should be
executed?
------------------

Sure, if they won't stop from the threat, it means they are going to
kill one of us at some point, let's make sure it's THEM!

Isn't that digital thinking, i.e., life/death, bad/good, on/off,
high,low, etc.
-------------------

That's irrelevant, ridiculous, even puerile.

Do you want Good or Evil? Decide!

Isn't there some middle gray ground or gray area.
------------------

What would be the mixture of Good and Evil, would they only beat you
for masturbating some of the time, and suck your dick the other times?
Wouldn't that give you a nervous twitch?

ANY Evil is Evil!! Period.

Don't you
think that you need some analog perspective in your life. Ratch
-------------------

No, that notion is merely a fraudulent and absurdist usage and
facetious and not well thought-out juxatposition of those words.

Not every possible collection of words yields something useful
when they are conjoined. The belief that they somehow must is
merely fuzzy thinking bordering on the notion that fine art can
be made by a random number generator.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[R. Steve Walz]

Seth Koster wrote:

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

Nothing I have ever read from Walz would lead me to believe that he is
being sarcastic. Advocating the killing those that disagree with his
"utopic" visions of how life should be is very much within his doctrine.

I've looked about a bit and I suspect you may be right. From what he
wrote I assumed he must have been taking the piss.


Tim

Tim, I certainly understand how you might have thought he was being
sarcastic, and I take no offense at your assumption that my abilities
to detect sarcasm were suspect at best. I do assure you, however,
that I have waded through enough of Steve's posts to be pretty sure
that he is, to put it quite bluntly, a raving lunatic. I honestly
think some psychological help might be in order. I don't joke around
about these things, as when I was young a close friend took his own
life in a situation where I believe counseling might have helped.
-------------

And it has given you the life-long delusion that you can detect why
in people and prevent it. Go back to school, boy.

In
Steve's case I fear that the life or lives taken may not be his.
----------------

Given the political chance, sure. But don't worry, it would have
good result.

I am curious as to what 'taking the piss' means and refers to.
I assume it has to do with being sarcastic, considering the
context, but I have absolutely no idea how or why.
-----------------

As I understand it from a short Google, it seems to be not taking
someone seriously.

-Steve
--
-Steve Walz rstevew@armory.com ftp://ftp.armory.com/pub/user/rstevew
Electronics Site!! 1000's of Files and Dirs!! With Schematics Galore!!
http://www.armory.com/~rstevew or http://www.armory.com/~rstevew/Public

 

[Bill Sloman]

qtc333@hotmail.com (Seth Koster) wrote in message news:<7a43e28a.0404252237.64bef675@posting.google.com>...

You do realize you are insane, right?

Seth, meet sarcasm.

Nothing I have ever read from Walz would lead me to believe that he is
being sarcastic. Advocating the killing those that disagree with his
"utopic" visions of how life should be is very much within his doctrine.

I've looked about a bit and I suspect you may be right. From what he
wrote I assumed he must have been taking the piss.


Tim

Tim, I certainly understand how you might have thought he was being
sarcastic, and I take no offense at your assumption that my abilities
to detect sarcasm were suspect at best. I do assure you, however,
that I have waded through enough of Steve's posts to be pretty sure
that he is, to put it quite bluntly, a raving lunatic. I honestly
think some psychological help might be in order. I don't joke around
about these things, as when I was young a close friend took his own
life in a situation where I believe counseling might have helped. In
Steve's case I fear that the life or lives taken may not be his.
I am curious as to what 'taking the piss' means and refers to. I
assume it has to do with being sarcastic, considering the context, but
I have absolutely no idea how or why.

"Taking the piss" is an English locution. John Woodgate would probably
be a more reliable source than I am, but IIRR it means feeding someone
an implausible story which the victim will find believable because it
is a story that they want to believe, or because their critical
faculties aren't up to much.

------
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen