Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elmer who wrote (117837)	6/27/2000 1:34:00 AM
From: kapkan4u	Respond to of 1577063

<Elmer: As I said, other than the above post I have never lied here> How about this: Message 13902682 Elmer, look in the mirror. Your "pants on fire" reputation is well deserved. Kap

To: Elmer who wrote (117837)	6/27/2000 4:42:00 AM
From: hmaly	Respond to of 1577063

Elmer ...Re<<<<<<No need to admit to anything. Here's the proof you are a liar.<<<<<<< Elmer, I have copied a paragraph from your link. Simply stated, the link you provide proves you are a liar, not Albert. The link shows you accusing Albert of lying but no proof. The link also shows you freely admitting to lying. <<<<<Anyway thanks for your response. I was hoping you would respond that way. When you lied about another, that person responded with demands for proof, which you have always ignored. When someone lied about you, and I freely admit what I said was untrue, you responded with a bigger lie. This speaks volumes about both you and Paul. Thanks for clearing up any remaining doubts anyone may have had about your character. As if there really was any question. <<<<< Elmer when you said <<<. When someone lied about you, and I freely admit what I said was untrue, you responded with a bigger lie. This speaks volumes about both you and Paul. Thanks for clearing up any remaining doubts anyone may have had about your character. As if there really was any question. <<<<<<; how could we infer Albert was lying. However this statement, <<<>>I freely admit what I said was untrue<<<< does indeed speak volumes about your character. You are a self admitted liar, and you have used your lying ways to get Albert thrown off the thread. I am not sure who your lawyer is, but you had better fire him. The way you are going, you are looking more despicable every link you provide. I would also like to note Elmers apparently routine habit of responding to an alleged lie with a lie when Elmer feels someone else is lying. Normally when I feel someone is lying (like now) I provide links or other proof. Elmer; as he has done in Alberts case; and in Niceguys case responded ; as Elmer himself has admitted; with a bigger lie. Does this make sense to anyone here? Elmer is trying to disprove a lie by lying. And now he is wondering why everybody is calling him a liar? Go figure. Elmer when you say <<As I said, other than the above post I have never lied here. <<<<<< you are again lying because just a week ago, you admitted you were also lying in Niceguys case. Get a grip Elmer.

To: Elmer who wrote (117837)	6/27/2000 4:52:00 AM
From: hmaly	Respond to of 1577063

Elmer ...Re<<<<<<No need to admit to anything. Here's the proof you are a liar.<<<<<<< Elmer, I have copied a paragraph from your link. Simply stated, the link you provide proves you are a liar, not Albert. The link shows you accusing Albert of lying but no proof. The link also shows you freely admitting to lying. <<<<<Anyway thanks for your response. I was hoping you would respond that way. When you lied about another, that person responded with demands for proof, which you have always ignored. When someone lied about you, and I freely admit what I said was untrue, you responded with a bigger lie. This speaks volumes about both you and Paul. Thanks for clearing up any remaining doubts anyone may have had about your character. As if there really was any question. <<<<< Elmer when you said <<<. When someone lied about you, and I freely admit what I said was untrue, you responded with a bigger lie. This speaks volumes about both you and Paul. Thanks for clearing up any remaining doubts anyone may have had about your character. As if there really was any question. <<<<<<; how could we infer Albert was lying. However this statement, <<<>>I freely admit what I said was untrue<<<< does indeed speak volumes about your character. You are a self admitted liar, and you have used your lying ways to get Albert thrown off the thread. I am not sure who your lawyer is, but you had better fire him. The way you are going, you are looking more despicable every link you provide. I would also like to note Elmers apparently routine habit of responding to an alledged lie with a lie when Elmer feels someone else is lying. Normally when I feel someone is lying (like now) I provide links or other proof. Elmer; as he has done in Alberts case; and in Niceguys case responded ; as Elmer himself has admitted; with a bigger lie. Does this make sense to anyone here? Elmer is trying to disprove a lie by lying. And now he is wondering why everybody is calling him a liar? Harry