B
Bill Sornson
Guest
Bill Sornson wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>> Bill Sornson writes:
> {WHY DO YOU ALWAYS DELETE PREVIOUS ATTRIBUTIONS?!?}
>
> snipz
>
>>>>>>>> Not to worry, Iraqis get all the news that's fit to print in
>>>>>>>> their own press... directly from the CIA and truthfully
>>>>>>>> recounted with no spin. {JB}
>
>>>>>>> Jobst, you type that like you know it for a fact. I'd like to
>>>>>>> see any evidence at all that the Iraqis can't get news from
>>>>>>> sources not "controlled" by the CIA. {MH}
>
>>>> I just hear an interview with an administration spokesman who
>>>> admitted that this was the case. I guess you don't hear what you
>>>> don't want to believe. {JB}
>
>>> Name and citation please? (An "administration spokesman" admitted
>>> that "Iraqis can't get news from sources not 'controlled' by the
>>> CIA"?!? Come on, JB! That's rich, even for you!!!) {BS}
>
>> He stop lying! Your quote marks claim that those are my words. I
>> never said that. That is a classic ploy for someone who cannot
>> defend a position. Attribute something you can attack to the person
>> with whom you disagree and shoot at him for it. It seems you and
>> Mark went to the same indoctrination camp by the rude style and
>> devious argumentation used to defend a lost cause.
>
> Um, WOW. Let's look again, shall we? (It's still right up there but
> I'll go to the trouble of cutting and pasting.)
>
> You wrote, "Iraqis get all the news that's fit to print in their own
> press... directly from the CIA and truthfully recounted with no spin."
>
> Mark replied, "Jobst, you type that like you know it for a fact. I'd
> like to see any evidence at all that the Iraqis can't get news from
> sources not "controlled" by the CIA."
>
> TO WHICH YOU REPLIED: "I just hear{d} an interview with an
> administration spokesman who admitted that this was the case. I
> guess you don't hear what you don't want to believe."
>
> So tell me again how I "lied" and misrepresented what you said. (The
> quote marks were NOT misleading, as the original posts to which they
> referred were left intact right above. It was obvious they weren't
> YOUR words but rather quoting that about which you were making
> claims.)
> Talk about dishonesty! (I KNOW you're not that stupid to not
> understand what was being said/meant.)
>
> {rest snipped cuz you just evaded and added nuthin'}
PS, JOBST: YOU STILL HAVEN'T SAID WHO THIS "ADMINISTRATION SPOKESMAN" IS
AND EXACTLY WHAT HE OR SHE SAID THAT AFFIRMS THAT IRAQIS GET NO NEWS THAT'S
NOT CONTROLLED BY THE CIA (paraphrasing so you don't use "misquoting" as an
evasive excuse not to answer...AGAIN).
Put up or retract!
> [email protected] wrote:
>> Bill Sornson writes:
> {WHY DO YOU ALWAYS DELETE PREVIOUS ATTRIBUTIONS?!?}
>
> snipz
>
>>>>>>>> Not to worry, Iraqis get all the news that's fit to print in
>>>>>>>> their own press... directly from the CIA and truthfully
>>>>>>>> recounted with no spin. {JB}
>
>>>>>>> Jobst, you type that like you know it for a fact. I'd like to
>>>>>>> see any evidence at all that the Iraqis can't get news from
>>>>>>> sources not "controlled" by the CIA. {MH}
>
>>>> I just hear an interview with an administration spokesman who
>>>> admitted that this was the case. I guess you don't hear what you
>>>> don't want to believe. {JB}
>
>>> Name and citation please? (An "administration spokesman" admitted
>>> that "Iraqis can't get news from sources not 'controlled' by the
>>> CIA"?!? Come on, JB! That's rich, even for you!!!) {BS}
>
>> He stop lying! Your quote marks claim that those are my words. I
>> never said that. That is a classic ploy for someone who cannot
>> defend a position. Attribute something you can attack to the person
>> with whom you disagree and shoot at him for it. It seems you and
>> Mark went to the same indoctrination camp by the rude style and
>> devious argumentation used to defend a lost cause.
>
> Um, WOW. Let's look again, shall we? (It's still right up there but
> I'll go to the trouble of cutting and pasting.)
>
> You wrote, "Iraqis get all the news that's fit to print in their own
> press... directly from the CIA and truthfully recounted with no spin."
>
> Mark replied, "Jobst, you type that like you know it for a fact. I'd
> like to see any evidence at all that the Iraqis can't get news from
> sources not "controlled" by the CIA."
>
> TO WHICH YOU REPLIED: "I just hear{d} an interview with an
> administration spokesman who admitted that this was the case. I
> guess you don't hear what you don't want to believe."
>
> So tell me again how I "lied" and misrepresented what you said. (The
> quote marks were NOT misleading, as the original posts to which they
> referred were left intact right above. It was obvious they weren't
> YOUR words but rather quoting that about which you were making
> claims.)
> Talk about dishonesty! (I KNOW you're not that stupid to not
> understand what was being said/meant.)
>
> {rest snipped cuz you just evaded and added nuthin'}
PS, JOBST: YOU STILL HAVEN'T SAID WHO THIS "ADMINISTRATION SPOKESMAN" IS
AND EXACTLY WHAT HE OR SHE SAID THAT AFFIRMS THAT IRAQIS GET NO NEWS THAT'S
NOT CONTROLLED BY THE CIA (paraphrasing so you don't use "misquoting" as an
evasive excuse not to answer...AGAIN).
Put up or retract!