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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (150735)	6/4/2001 6:43:43 PM
From: E	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

To know whether the word 'admit' connotes that there has been a prior reluctance to state something (or prior position indicating that a reluctance might be expected) requires context? Or does rationalizing the distortion require context? Here is the context: You made one threat toward me (granted you later admitted it was a joke). Message 15887537 Re context, I assume you know that I have proclaimed rather than denied from the beginning that it was a joke, yet Mike's inserting the little verb "admitted" implies that it was I who was disreputably trying to wiggle out of or evade something, and that he wrested the truth out of me. I like this little item just because it is so gratuitous a deceit. Deceit for merely the sake of making me look like I try not to admit true things and of making himself look as though he can get reluctant discussants to "admit" things. There is, of course, the additional false implication that i had tried, earlier, to make him think he was being seriously threatened by me. You have to have a special talent to come up with such devious devices. If something other than what I have stated is the case regarding whether I ever implied or said it wasn't a joke, Mike will post it, surely. I will pay him Johannes' ten thou for it, so if my denial that it was a jokey post isn't posted, you can be sure it was never made! We've pretty much settled the matter of twt's 'intimate relations' remark already, i believe.