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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (23372)	8/20/2001 2:53:01 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

That is the X I know. What about the links I posted to you. Are those the X you know, too?

To: E who wrote (23372)	8/20/2001 2:58:43 PM
From: one_less	Respond to of 82486

"Brees just says anything that suits his purposes, I note. There you go again, lying. When did I say any of this suits my purposes. Many people who know me on this thread and others have indicated that you are wrong on this. Yet, you claim I think, indicted, stated, or what ever that it suits my purposes. As you claim to know X and base your position in all this on that familiarity that makes you a ....hypocrite.

To: E who wrote (23372)	8/20/2001 3:36:55 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

No one cares enough about her to hate her. I wouldn't have bothered today if I were not defending brees. I think you are being disingenuous. At least it used to be the case that people would defend X by referring to her "persona", while admitting that it was pretty brutal and disdainful towards those who disagreed much with her. Now, you won't even do that. The search engine isn't good enough, and to get the tone of many exchanges would require a boatload of posts, so I find it too tiresome to try to prove anything. No one is ashamed, because there is nothing amiss. It is your fault the matter was belabored......