[JTN]

Must be you, you replied; but, couldn't answer it. Thus, you confirmed it. Enough said. Goodnight!

That's an interesting debating tactic you have. You post gibberish, then while your opponent is still baffled by your nonsense, you declare victory and go away.

[Steve Van Doorn]

"Obviously he has accepted the evidence that she is a spy"

He did NOT. He said, 'she is a spy' in his article which is true... but he wrote his article BOTH ways. He stated she was innocent and guilty in the same dam article. It is nothing but double talk.

Try and explain to me how this artical wasn't just double speek.

[presently no screen name]

You post gibberish, while your opponent is still baffled by your nonsense

You were SO 'baffled', even though my comment was sent to you and you replied - you state you didn't know WHO it was for. Where is the honest in that? And YOU are here calling Ann a liar?? One reply from you and it showed who the liar is.


You were 'baffled' only on HOW to reply. My post was a question to you on your need to control based on your post... She should tell the truth and make her case patiently, rationally and without invective.

Look at your own post. It is void of what YOU WANT from Ann. Try WANTING it in your own life first.