XPost: alt.politics.british, alt.politics.bush, alt.politics.democrats
XPost: alt.politics.republicans, can.legal, misc.legal
From: forget@it.com
Gerard Greeley wrote:
> Ken Smith wrote in message news:<40A626E3.10106@it.com>...
>>Gerard Greeley wrote:
>>>Ken Smith wrote in message news:<40A1CA77.2040104@it.com>...
>>>>Jon C wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I don't blame Disney at all. Michael Moore is such a propoganda artist
it's
>>>>>obscene. He's clearly demonstrated he won't hesitate to greatly skew the
>>>>>truth and even lie to make a point.
>>>>
>>>> And Drugs Limburger isn't? Sean "Dough-Boy" Hannity?
>>>>
>>>>>There are so many great arguments against Bush and company, it amazes me
>>>>>that this guy needs to make shit up and mislead people over and over to
get
>>>>>his point across.
>>>>
>>>> Moore sees the world through his lens, but that is no different than
>>>>the drivel troweled out by Roger Ailes and FAUX News. If anything, MM
>>>>is far more "fair and balanced."
>>>>
>>>>>I don't blame Disney at all. I think this has less to do with upsetting
>>>>>Bush than it does not wanting to produce and distribute a film that is
>>>>>slanderous and grossly misleading. That's smart business, IMO.
>>>>
>>>> When they fire Hannity at WABC, they can talk that talk.
>>>
>>>I am no fan of Sean Hannity or Michael Moore. Although you spent a
>>>lot of time on attacking Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, Fox News, President
>>>Bush, etc. in your posts, I don't think there is much content in your
>>>words.
>>
>> I find it quite revealing that, when I do a Google search for "Gerard
>>Greeley," I could find one and only one USENET post. A designer troll,
>>firing off an unfair attack -- WHAT A SURPRISE!!!
>>
>> [Ken rolls eyes]
>>
>> Let us just say that a lie is a terrible way to introduce yourself.
>
> You are quite internet the detective.
A-HA! Yoda your former handle was! :)
> If it's any of your business
> Sherlock, I got tired of spam clogging my mailbox from these
> discussion forums, and I'm hoping this filter won't fail me.
Likely story! You JUST HAPPENED to come to that conclusion, and you
JUST HAPPENED to take corrective action and then, JUST HAPPENED to fire
an arrow at me, straight out of the blue, right? Now, why *shouldn't*
that sound like COMPLETE bullshit?
That you chose me is a bit of a stretch, considering that Uncle
Samuel and Vox Populi are flooding this NG with "eat shit and die"
exchanges. That you would go after me, but not Ted Kaldis, is
presumptive evidence that you have an agenda, which you are not candid
enough to reveal here. And that you should fire at me at this time,
when the bulk of my posts involve advanced discussion of our structure
of government....
Let us just say on its face, that your story is less than compelling.
But be that as it may; you can start by revealing your former handle,
so we can all get a fair notion of what your political position *really*
is.
> I tried to email you but it seems to keep bouncing back to me as
> undeliverable.
Absolutely. I got tired of people telling me all the amazing things
little Patty can do with farm animals.
> What's that about a "designer troll"?
That you would take your first shot out of the box at me suggests
that you have a beef with me -- that *is* the modus operandi of the
"designer troll."
> How about addressing my post per relevance? If you can.
Sure. Let's start with you expressing your opinion about Ted Kaldis'
constant references to my bar admission dispute. Do you or do you not
agree that *they* are ad hominem attacks? If not, why not? And if so,
why did you attack me and not him?
I'll be happy to talk substance about any issue you want to bring up,
but until you can prove to me that you are on the level, I am entitled
to presume that you are not. Just the way USENET is.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
