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 (181969)	9/15/2001 1:38:39 PM
From: E	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 769670

<<<I would not accuse you of deliberately misrepresenting him, and I doubt he deliberately misrepresented you...... >>> If you would not accuse him of misrepresenting me, it is because you have not read his posts. What do you think now? -- He implied I had threatened his family. (refused to substantiate) He called me a terrorist.(refused to substantiate) He said i was engaging in terrorism. (refused to substantiate) He called me a murderer. (refused to retract or substantiate). He wrote "No matter how many lives you and your ilk take..." He said "You have urged people to hate Christians." (refused to substantiate) Message 16354954 He said I seemed to be "telling America to rethink their ideas on humanity." (refused to explain or substantiate.) He said I had said that it was "fair," and "fair play" to threaten other posters (posted a link to a post of mine that proved I had not done that, refused to retract) shortly before writing "You win. Please leave my family alone." This is a post in which i made the distinction between religion and zealotry, fyi: Message 16354900 His posts about his Arab drinking buddies was made at 2:12 am, long after his ordering me off the thread for terrorism with no explanation. Unless you believe I am, among many other untrue things, a murderer and terrorist who threatened his family, you must grant that he attempted not only deliberately but viciously to "misrepresent me." Do you believe I am those things? Or do you believe he said those things non-deliberately, and should not be held ethically responsible for the misrepresentation?