Re: fibrocystic beast
- From: bae@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 16 Dec 2005 22:32:10 GMT
In article <1134764309.298270.35850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
fresh~horses <fresh~horses@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
><< It's okay to have an agenda, but to push it by misleading language
>is dishonest.
>
>Since that's just what you have done here in a spectacular
>demonstration of hypocrisy and distortion, I won't bother with further
>comment to you.
Gosh, I'm so hurt.
Note that I pointed out the distortions in the material you posted,
while you just assert that I've done the same. Sorry, but your bare
word isn't worth much, especially in this forum where you've had plenty
of opportunity to demonstrate its value.
Perhaps you can tell me what my agenda is, since I don't believe I have
one, other than pointing out propaganda and lies. Also, you might
explain in what way I'm hypocritical. But you can't be bothered. Gee.
.
- References:
- fibrocystic beast
- From: amanda
- Re: fibrocystic beast
- From: fresh~horses
- Re: fibrocystic beast
- From: bae
- Re: fibrocystic beast
- From: fresh~horses
- fibrocystic beast
- Prev by Date: Re: fibrocystic beast
- Next by Date: A Human Cytome Project - an idea - Update 17 Dec. 2005
- Previous by thread: Re: fibrocystic beast
- Next by thread: Re: fibrocystic beast
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading