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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (219346)	2/18/2007 9:25:02 PM
From: jttmab	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I said "like holocaust deniers". I consider 911 conspiracy theorists to be like holocaust deniers. I directed you to a recent post where someone posted a belief the CIA did 911. You said let me at them but are still posting to me i/o replying to #219204. I get it. When you said "like holocaust deniers" you didn't actually mean "holocaust deniers". Makes sense to me. [Not really, but I'll pretend to be someone as dumb as mjfdl.] However, what you really said was: "We've had 911 conspiracists and holocaust deniers on this thread - where are you taking them on?" Message 23292502 Do I take it to mean that "We've had 911 conspiracists and holocaust deniers on this thread", doesn't really mean: "We've had 911 conspiracists and holocaust deniers on this thread"? [This is typically where you respond by not quoting any text and pretend it's semantics. I'm not quite sure whether you think I don't notice or you're just trying to slip one past your conservative buddies. The later not being hard to do.] Why would you possibly claim to have said something different when it's so easy to click back to your original quote? That doesn't seem to be very bright. jttmab