- This topic has 134 replies, 10 voices, and was last updated 6 years, 7 months ago by
CA renter.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 26, 2016 at 10:18 AM #804627December 26, 2016 at 10:31 AM #804629
zk
Participant[quote=CA renter]
It is a dead horse. Re-read the thread. I stand by what I’ve written there. What I posted is factual.Gender stereotyping — a cultural and environmental input — affects how children are segregated, whether they self-segregate, or if their parents separate them into segregated groups. This is a fact.
Many parents segregate their childrens’ playgroups by gender. They often (usually) do this from a very early age. It is also much more common among parents with sons.[/quote]
That does provide some insight into how your brain works, which is what I was looking for.
When proven wrong, you just can’t see it. Interesting. Like I said, you’re like a Westworld automaton. You should watch that show for two reasons: 1). It’s great television. The first 2 episodes or so were ok, but it gets great after that. 2). So you can see how “That doesn’t look like anything to me” fits your style of thinking.
December 26, 2016 at 10:37 AM #804630Anonymous
Guest[quote=CA renter]Um…look at the site, then look at the name of the legislation, genius.[/quote]
The law that passed is called the 2017 National Defense Authorization Act.
What insights have you gleaned from that name?
What’s really scary is that they’ve been passing the same law every year for decades. They just change the name of the year! OMG IT’S BEEN GOING ON FOREVER!!!
[quote]And what “lack of evidence” are you referring to? [/quote]
Your own words:
[quote] I searched google (using the search terms “obama signs countering disinformation and propaganda act” and “countering disinformation and propaganda act”) for any news about it among the MSM sources that you seem to indicate are truthful and unbiased, but found no MSM coverage on the first few pages of results.[/quote]
OMG the lack of evidence IS THE EVIDENCE! IT’S THAT SINISTER!
[quote]But, lo and behold, Zero Hedge is reporting on it. Other alternative news sites are also reporting about it.[/quote]
AND NOW MY SEARCH REVEALS A SITE CALLED PIGGINGTON.COM THAT IS REPORTING IT!
THE EVIDENCE IS ACCUMULATING!!
Yes, the person who cuts/pastes on the internet for hours on end doesn’t understand that the internet is mostly cut/paste material.
[quote]Why no MSM coverage?[/quote]
Clearly because they are in kahoots with the PTB!
Summary:
– The government is spending a relatively tiny part of the defense budget on a program to understand the efforts and impact of foreign propaganda.
– The usual conspiracy theory flaming websites are twisting this minor piece of legislation into a sinister plot to control the population.
– You fell for it, and tried to raise the alarm by creating this thread.
– You haven’t even attempted to explain how any of this is a threat to any American other than the “facts” that you think the name is spooky, google is not producing results to your satisfaction, and the president approved our defense budget during an oridinary federal workday.
– You’ve gone down your usual path insulting other Piggs because we are not applauding your intellect.
December 26, 2016 at 11:19 AM #804631CA renter
ParticipantYes, your reading comprehension problems are in full bloom here.
Read the name of the legislation and look at the sponsors of the bill. Now, look at the name of the senator whose link I posted, above. This bill was included in the NDAA, and the legislation is new.
You denied that it was signed by Obama, and when I proved that you didn’t know what you were talking about, you tried to change the subject again, as you so often do.
I’m raising the alarm because the people who decide what constitutes propaganda are the very people who will be supporting those who churn out establishment-based propaganda. Sites like Piggington can be classified as “propaganda” by this new bureaucracy. Anything that goes against the establishment will likely be labeled “propaganda” if it gets any traction.
If you don’t see the dangers in this, you’re not thinking clearly.
—————————-
What do these following stories have in common?
1.) There is an internet/stock market bubble and the Fed is unwilling to do anything about it. We’re going to experience a dramatic crash that will wipe out trillions of dollars in unrealized wealth.
2.) Iraq was not involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, and there is no justification for going to war with them. If we go to war, it will leave a power vacuum that has the potential to create an even more dangerous and less stable environment.
3.) Globalism and the “free trade” orthodoxy will harm, not help, the American middle class. It will create a bifurcated social and economic environment where the rich will gain more economic and political power, and the poor will lose power.
4.) There is a credit/housing bubble, and when it bursts, it will cause massive dislocations and result in a deflationary depression/recession that it will be difficult to recover from. As the Fed attempts to stimulate the economy, it will require more and more stimulus to get incrementally weaker and weaker responses.
5.) The DNC is conspiring with the Clinton campaign and major financial and political backers to win the Democratic nomination. If she wins, she will lose to Trump.
6.) Trump will win the Republican primary, and if he runs against Clinton, he will win the general election, too.
7.) California’s Secretary of State (in charge of our elections) has been campaigning for one of the candidates, including speaking at her campaign stops and headlining fundraisers for her. Not coincidentally, poll workers across the state were incorrectly trained on how to handle NPP voters’ ballots, which (along with an unusually high number of VBM ballots that were never received by voters) resulted in an unprecedented number of provisional ballots being used — ballots that have a high exclusion rate. Also, not coincidentally, the Democratic Primary Election was called the day before the most populous state in the nation ever had a chance to vote.
8.) The Trans-Pacific Partnership is being drafted behind closed doors. Even our congressional members are not able to review it while it’s been negotiated. It will create a separate, international, corporate-controlled tribunal that will allow corporations to sue countries if they interfere with the company’s *potential* profit, which can include labor or environmental regulations, etc.
All of these were stories (and there are many more where those come from, as well) that the establishment media either got completely wrong, or they were ignored (even denied) by the MSM. And they all had potentially tremendous consequences. In some cases, these stories were suppressed for years before activists got enough traction to bring them to the attention of the masses so the media could no longer ignore them.
During this time, the activists were told they were “conspiracy theorists” or “bitter jealous renters” or “deluded” or that they “didn’t understand how things work,” etc. Accurate information on many of these topics was available only via alternative news sources, like blogs (Piggington on the housing issue, for example). At every step of the way, those who are in power (yes, the PTB) suppressed the stories and tried to discredit anyone who attempted to bring them to the public’s attention. Any one of these alternative news sources could have been labeled as promoting “propaganda” and “disinformation.”
Some people have an almost perfect record of calling these things correctly. The mainstream media, including all of the “experts” they parade across their stages, have consistently gotten things wrong.
You can believe those establishment “experts” who have, more often than not, gotten things wrong or who’ve suppressed important information if you’d like, but I will stick with those who’ve been proven to be insightful and right, instead.
December 26, 2016 at 12:05 PM #804632Guest[quote=CA renter]Sites like Piggington can be classified as “propaganda” by this new bureaucracy. Anything that goes against the establishment will likely be labeled “propaganda” if it gets any traction.[/quote]
The jack-booted thugs that will kick in Rich’s door and seize his computers are entitled to a full government pension.
Because they’ve earned it!
December 26, 2016 at 11:13 PM #804638Participant[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]Sites like Piggington can be classified as “propaganda” by this new bureaucracy. Anything that goes against the establishment will likely be labeled “propaganda” if it gets any traction.[/quote]
The jack-booted thugs that will kick in Rich’s door and seize his computers are entitled to a full government pension.
Because they’ve earned it![/quote]
More of your exceptional debate skills are on full display here, yet again, Pri.
You’re right, Pri. Censorship isn’t a threat. As long as we refrain from challenging the PTB, we’ll all be fine. Nothing to see here…just move along.
[/sarcasm]
In countries that impose strict media censorship, how do you think they justify that to their citizens? Hint: It’s not by saying that these news/information sources are valid.
December 27, 2016 at 6:57 AM #804641Guest[quote=CA renter]More of your exceptional debate skills are on full display here, yet again,[/quote]
I’m not debating you. I’m mocking you.
In this thread you’ve actually gone from something you read on a fake news site, attributed to Tyler Durden – a fictional character who represents yet another fictional character – to the conclusion that “the PTB are going to shut down piggington.com.”
And you claim this logic is evidence of your superior intellect.
And who’s going to execute on this plan to shut down websites? Government employees of course, whom you’ve argued for years are the in that special class of people who actually “earn” their wealth.
It’s hard to keep track of the good guys and bad guys in your imaginary world. Myself and others have asked you to reconcile the inconsistencies in your histrionics. You’ve tried, and it’s been mildly entertaining to watch.
So tell us, since you put such an emphasis on “reading comprehension” : what specific text in this law (the one that actually passed) gives anyone authority to shut down a website like piggington?
December 27, 2016 at 9:09 AM #804642gogogosandiego
ParticipantYou’ve gotten so much wrong in this thread I’m not even sure where to start….
The Tea Party publically “started” over a rant on TV against people potentially getting mortgage modifications in 2009. It had nothing to do with bailouts or “socializing losses”. In reality the groundwork for the Tea Party had been laid for years prior with the main goal being smaller government and less regulation. It was not even remotely a grass roots movement. If you were involved you were duped.
You presented several “stories” (I’ll select a few) that you feel the MSM got ”wrong”. This is the crux of your problem, real news doesn’t tell stories. It’s doesn’t try to predict the future.
“the Fed is unwilling to do anything about it” (how would anyone know if they are unwilling? What exactly should the Fed do? Who says they should do anything? You? How is this news? it’s pure uninformed speculation)
“As the Fed attempts to stimulate the economy, it will require more and more stimulus to get incrementally weaker and weaker responses.” (the Fed again! Methinks you don’t really understand what the Fed does, but certainly a vast prediction like this is newsworthy! There have literally been 1000’s of articles about the Fed, its powers, its limitations, its role, etc. written in the past 8 years – news, opinion and otherwise)
The DNC is conspiring with the Clinton campaign and major financial and political backers to win the Democratic nomination. If she wins, she will lose to Trump. (duh, Bernie wasn’t a Democrat and had some pretty wacky ideas, of course they were, only rabid Bernie supporters feel it’s some grand conspiracy)
Trump will win the Republican primary, and if he runs against Clinton, he will win the general election, too. (reporters are supposed to be clairvoyant?)
The Trans-Pacific Partnership is being drafted behind closed doors.. (zzzzzzzzzzzz…all trade deals are negotiated confidentially. The same things in the TPP are already present in other trade deals, this has been widely reported)
You then go on to say “accurate information on many of these topics was available only via alternative news sources”. You’re not looking for accurate information; you are looking for information that supports your biases.
The irony of you trying to tell others what is news is truly amazing.
If you want to read some real news and be informed pick up the NYT or the WSJ, two of the best in the world.
December 27, 2016 at 11:10 AM #804643Participant[quote=gogogosandiego]You’ve gotten so much wrong in this thread I’m not even sure where to start….
[/quote]
You followed this with a concise, rational, informed explanation of the things that she got wrong (some of the main ones, anyway).
I assure you you’re wasting your time and effort.
It doesn’t take Nostradamus to predict she will respond with more nonsense and a complete inability to see anything she’s wrong about (just like the Westworld automatons can’t see anything unusual when shown a picture of the outside world. “That doesn’t look like anything to me”).
The country (alas, the whole world) is full of people who believe what they want to believe, and no amount of rational argument will ever change that.
December 28, 2016 at 3:34 PM #804656Participant[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]More of your exceptional debate skills are on full display here, yet again,[/quote]
I’m not debating you. I’m mocking you.
In this thread you’ve actually gone from something you read on a fake news site, attributed to Tyler Durden – a fictional character who represents yet another fictional character – to the conclusion that “the PTB are going to shut down piggington.com.”
And you claim this logic is evidence of your superior intellect.
And who’s going to execute on this plan to shut down websites? Government employees of course, whom you’ve argued for years are the in that special class of people who actually “earn” their wealth.
It’s hard to keep track of the good guys and bad guys in your imaginary world. Myself and others have asked you to reconcile the inconsistencies in your histrionics. You’ve tried, and it’s been mildly entertaining to watch.
So tell us, since you put such an emphasis on “reading comprehension” : what specific text in this law (the one that actually passed) gives anyone authority to shut down a website like piggington?[/quote]
You, the one who’s consistently shown an inability to read (and you’ve done it again right here in this post), are mocking someone else who’s consistently proven you to be wrong about so many issues? You’re delusional, Pri.
For one thing, I didn’t get the information from Zero Hedge. I got it from other activists who also do research on important news. I linked to the ZH site’s story about it, where they presented a summary of the legislation, because there was no MSM coverage to link to.
And I never concluded that they were going to shut down Piggington. This assertion of yours is yet more evidence of your inability to read and your consistent tendency to twist other people’s words into something they never said. I said that they could shut down sites like Piggington (as an example, because it’s not part of the MSM, and has presented opposing viewpoints in the past) because any news/information source that goes against the establishment’s narrative are likely to be targeted as “propaganda” and “disinformation” sources.
What could give them the authority to shut down “propaganda and disinformation” sites?
——————
“(2) Analyzing relevant information from United States Government agencies, allied nations, think-tanks, academic institutions, civil society groups, and other nongovernmental organizations.(3) Developing and disseminating thematic narratives and analysis to counter propaganda and disinformation directed at United States allies and partners in order to safeguard United States allies and interests.
(4) Identifying current and emerging trends in foreign propaganda and disinformation, including the use of print, broadcast, online and social media, support for third-party outlets such as think tanks, political parties, and nongovernmental organizations, in order to coordinate and shape the development of tactics, techniques, and procedures to expose and refute foreign misinformation and disinformation and proactively promote fact-based narratives and policies to audiences outside the United States.”
———————————-
The language is kept overly broad and allows the government to target just about any source that presents an “anti-U.S.” position. And while its stated mission is to counter “propaganda” outside the U.S., they’ve included this in the bill:
“(B) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Nothing in this subsection may be construed to prohibit the team described in paragraph (1) from engaging in any form of communication or medium, either directly or indirectly, or coordinating with any other department or agency of the United States Government, a State government, or any other public or private organization or institution because a United States domestic audience is or may be thereby exposed to activities or communications of the team under this subsection, or based on a presumption of such exposure.”
[same link as above]
Note that the public momentum for this comes from the Wikileaks exposure of the DNC and Clinton operatives’ emails. The Russians, if they are responsible for the hacked emails, didn’t engage in any electoral fraud of any sort. To the contrary, they exposed the fraud and collusion. As a result, our political thought leaders are ready to start a new war with Russia. This is beyond insane.
As for your nonsensical rants about government employees, I’ve explained to you before the difference between policy makers, government officials, and government employees. There are no inconsistencies in what I’ve written. You need to work on your information retention in addition to your reading comprehension skills.
BTW, the only person living in an imaginary world around here is the one you live in, Pri, with your imaginary friends on whose behalf you continually insist on speaking. You are only one person, and you are only speaking for yourself.
December 28, 2016 at 3:45 PM #804657Guest[quote=CA renter]And I never concluded that they were going to shut down Piggington.[/quote]
Whew…then everything’s going to be just fine.
Then why are you so hysterical?
OMG!! they’ve included A RULE OF CONSTRUCTION!!!
December 28, 2016 at 5:47 PM #804659Participant[quote=harvey][quote=CA renter]And I never concluded that they were going to shut down Piggington.[/quote]
Whew…then everything’s going to be just fine.
Then why are you so hysterical?
OMG!! they’ve included A RULE OF CONSTRUCTION!!![/quote]
Pri, you are the only one being “hysterical” with your “histrionics.”
[edited to delete unkind comments that don’t add to the discussion]
As I’ve said above, perhaps you think that this isn’t a threat to free speech. But to those of us who pay attention to these things, this legislation is chilling.
December 28, 2016 at 5:49 PM #804658Participant[quote=gogogosandiego]You’ve gotten so much wrong in this thread I’m not even sure where to start….
The Tea Party publically “started” over a rant on TV against people potentially getting mortgage modifications in 2009. It had nothing to do with bailouts or “socializing losses”. In reality the groundwork for the Tea Party had been laid for years prior with the main goal being smaller government and less regulation. It was not even remotely a grass roots movement. If you were involved you were duped.
You presented several “stories” (I’ll select a few) that you feel the MSM got ”wrong”. This is the crux of your problem, real news doesn’t tell stories. It’s doesn’t try to predict the future.
“the Fed is unwilling to do anything about it” (how would anyone know if they are unwilling? What exactly should the Fed do? Who says they should do anything? You? How is this news? it’s pure uninformed speculation)
“As the Fed attempts to stimulate the economy, it will require more and more stimulus to get incrementally weaker and weaker responses.” (the Fed again! Methinks you don’t really understand what the Fed does, but certainly a vast prediction like this is newsworthy! There have literally been 1000’s of articles about the Fed, its powers, its limitations, its role, etc. written in the past 8 years – news, opinion and otherwise)
The DNC is conspiring with the Clinton campaign and major financial and political backers to win the Democratic nomination. If she wins, she will lose to Trump. (duh, Bernie wasn’t a Democrat and had some pretty wacky ideas, of course they were, only rabid Bernie supporters feel it’s some grand conspiracy)
Trump will win the Republican primary, and if he runs against Clinton, he will win the general election, too. (reporters are supposed to be clairvoyant?)
The Trans-Pacific Partnership is being drafted behind closed doors.. (zzzzzzzzzzzz…all trade deals are negotiated confidentially. The same things in the TPP are already present in other trade deals, this has been widely reported)
You then go on to say “accurate information on many of these topics was available only via alternative news sources”. You’re not looking for accurate information; you are looking for information that supports your biases.
The irony of you trying to tell others what is news is truly amazing.
If you want to read some real news and be informed pick up the NYT or the WSJ, two of the best in the world.[/quote]
Thank you for your input, gogogosandiego, Pigg member of 5 days.
Let me educate you a bit about your assertions.
1.) The Tea Party:
The Tea Party started with Rick Santelli’s rant; that much is correct. I was watching it live when it happened. He was ranting about using taxpayers’ money to bail out borrowers who made irresponsible decisions. Rick Santelli had been very vocally opposed to the bank bailouts before this rant, and it was seen as a continuation of the anti-bailout message. Here is a clip of him months before the “Tea Party” rant:
I was one of thousands who spent 2-3 weeks writing, faxing, emailing, and calling legislators and regulatory agencies in opposition to the bailouts. As noted in the video I linked above, which was from a Wall Street protest in 2008, well before Santelli’s rant, the energy and momentum were there before February 2009.
From September 2008, before Santelli’s rant (many of these people were involved with the original Tea Party movement):
It was indeed about socializing losses, as taxpayers were being asked to bailout both banks and borrowers who had caused the credit/housing bubble by engaging in reckless financial behavior.
When I speak about the original Tea Party protesters, I’m referring to the original grassroots protesters, not Dick Armey and his FreedomWorks organization.
……………
2.) Regarding the news stories:
Yes, the news tells stories. They often present facts (or fiction) with a certain bias by highlighting certain facts, and suppressing other facts or perspectives, in the process. They help control the public discourse by reinforcing which perspectives are acceptable or unacceptable. In a media world that is controlled by the government or other agencies, the narrative is designed to promote, oppose, or discredit certain views. The NYT and the WSJ are perfect examples of biased MSM sources (I would argue that most sources are biased, which is why people need to pay attention to a variety of sources that promote different viewpoints).
FYI, “news story” is an actual term: http://www.dictionary.com/browse/news-story
3.) The Federal Reserve:
I’m well aware of what the Fed does. Many people were trying to warn about the internet/stock market bubble in the late 90s, and Greenspan even acknowledged the “irrational exuberance” in 1996, but there was no recommendation to clamp down on speculation, and rates remained in that same general range until the bubble burst…when they were subsequently lowered, which helped set of the credit/housing bubble.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS
Perhaps, if the PTB had listened more to alt-news sources who get their information from the real world instead of the usual think-tank/establishment “experts” who consistently get things wrong, we could have avoided many of the dislocations and much of the damage created over the past ~20 years.
4.) The DNC and the primary election:
You indicate that, “duh,” the DNC is obviously going to collude with one of the candidates. And while Bernie wasn’t officially a Democrat prior to his decision to run for POTUS, he had caucused with the Democrats for many years, and the Democratic Party allowed him to run in the Democratic primary election. The DNC violated their own rules:
“Section 4. The National Chairperson shall serve full time and shall receive such compensation as
may be determined by agreement between the Chairperson and the Democratic National Committee. In the conduct and management of the affairs and procedures of the Democratic National Committee,
particularly as they apply to the preparation and conduct of the Presidential nomination process, the
Chairperson shall exercise impartiality and evenhandedness as between the Presidential candidates and campaigns. The Chairperson shall be responsible for ensuring that the national officers and staff of the Democratic National Committee maintain impartiality and evenhandedness during the Democratic Party Presidential nominating process.”[Charter, Article 5, Section 4]
http://www.demrulz.org/wp-content/files/DNC_Charter__Bylaws_9.11.2009.pdf
And if you think it’s acceptable for a political party to essentially appoint a candidate prior to any elections, do you also think that we should just forego elections altogether, and simply let the PTB appoint our “elected” officials, instead?
5.) As for needing to be clairvoyant to see that HRC would lose to Trump… No, one didn’t need to be clairvoyant, just informed. This outcome was obvious to anyone who was working on the ground during the campaign. Even the polls (nearly every single poll) showed that Sanders consistently outperformed Clinton against the Republican candidates, including Trump. The DNC shot themselves in the foot by forcing Clinton down our throats. They were warned about this throughout the election season, but chose not to listen to those who knew better.
6.) The secrecy surrounding the TPP was unprecedented, and the media remained silent about the deal for years. Congressional representatives were not able to read or hear about what was being negotiated for years while it was being drafted, but corporate interests were given full access throughout the entire process. The fact that you can justify this in your mind shows a complete lack of understanding about how a representative democracy is supposed to work.
Not only did the TPP include many new items, it was also unprecedented in its scope and reach.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2014/07/tpp-negotiations-unprecedented-secrecy-around-ottawa-meetings
Your insistence on the MSM being the sole source of unbiased information shows a lack of insight and intelligence, or (as your new user ID could indicate) you’re one of the trolls unleashed on the internet to counter factual stories coming out of alternative news and information sources. Either that, or you’re just a new ID created by an existing poster in order to make it look like you have more support for your ideas than you really have.
December 28, 2016 at 6:33 PM #804660Participant[quote=CA renter]
Thank you for your input, gogogosandiego, Pigg member of 5 days.[/quote]
You’ve only been on piggington a week, gogogo. You can’t possibly know anything.
[quote=CA renter]
Let me educate you a bit about your assertions.
[/quote]
You obviously don’t know enough to educate CA Renter, you may only be educated by her.[quote=CA renter]
Your insistence on the MSM being the sole source of unbiased information shows a lack of insight and intelligence
[/quote]
No one is as intelligent and insightful as the mighty CA Renter!! She is never wrong, even when everyone else thinks she is. Only others can be wrong!!
[quote=CA renter]or (as your new user ID could indicate) you’re one of the trolls unleashed on the internet to counter factual stories coming out of alternative news and information sources.
[/quote]
Yes! That’s what trolls are all about. Why didn’t I see that before?! Unleashed by the establishment! They wear suits and ties and report directly to Mitch McConnell.[quote=CA renter]
Either that, or you’re just a new ID created by an existing poster in order to make it look like you have more support for your ideas than you really have. [/quote]
That’s less wacky than your troll theory. But still wacky. You should put them in crescendoing order of wackiness. You know, for effect. Gogogo is an uninsightful idiot. Plainly obvious that that’s not true, but only a little wacky. Fake ID. Wackier. Building up to the big one…..He’s a troll against alternative news!!! That’s really a humdinger. Gotta save that for last.[quote=CA renter]
[edited to delete unkind comments that don’t add to the discussion][/quote]
You edited out something about me being irrationally obsessed with the other thread. Which is typical of you. I brought up the other thread to illustrate your complete inability to see when you’re wrong, even when it’s proven to you. You, amazingly enough, continued to assert that you were right. At that point, I was really curious how your mind works. I think I’m figuring it out (see next paragraph):Then you went on to say that you hadn’t seen Westworld, and maybe I should spend less time watching tv and more time researching things. Again, typical of you. Hysterically lashing out at anybody who says you’re wrong. Because you can’t be wrong. It’s impossible. Your world would implode, so you can’t be wrong! I think that’s how your mind works.
[quote=CA renter]
[edited to delete unkind comments that don’t add to the discussion][/quote]
Not sure how any of the other things that I quoted above add to the discussion, either, and you left those on there.
Yes, I know I’m not contributing to the discussion. That’s impossible in a “discussion” with you. Nobody can educate you, you can only educate them. That’s not a discussion. That’s a lecture. And the professor is out to lunch. Figuratively. If she were literally out to lunch, the class would be better educated.
December 28, 2016 at 7:19 PM #804661ParticipantOkay, zk, I was trying to be nice, but you’re asking for it. You mentioned that you had issues with your mother that came to light while reading that other thread. That seems to be the source of your angst.
No, you never proved me wrong on that thread, and all of your ranting, raving, name-calling, and jumping up and down will never change that. What you did prove is is that you have a rather unhealthy obsession with the topic that doesn’t really affect you (unless it’s more the issues with your mother that are causing you such personal distress). Most of my posts had nothing at all to do with you; you were the one who kept trying to turn the discussion around to yourself. You come across as irrational and hysterical.
I had repeatedly said that we could agree to disagree, and attempted to leave it on a friendly note, but you were the one who refused to do so and kept pushing it. You can keep it up if you’d like, but if you want to continue that discussion, you need to revive that thread.
BTW, it would help both you and Pri if you would actually stick to the issues and stop flinging horse manure at the internet in the hopes that some of it will stick. Your ad hominem attacks do nothing to further your positions.
I had mentioned in the other thread, and I’ll mention it here, again: It would serve you well to look in the mirror to see if you’re projecting some of your own issues onto others. You don’t seem capable of discerning when you are right or wrong.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.