[LtdGovt]

You've called the material I posted propaganda (post 42). You told dcnd9 you were not reading propaganda pieces (post 88) and now you're saying you've pointed out flaws in propaganda you haven't read.

Wrong again. I've pointed out the flaws in your assertions, so much so that you didn't bother to defend them.

Perhaps he read over the thread again and realized he wasn't fooling anybody but himself.

A rather fanciful claim, but amusing nonetheless.

He demonstrated no credibility while he was and here and has now moved on to other threads.

Facts are stubborn things, my friend. You need to keep that in mind.

As you said, he's most likely a re-tread.

You're supposed to ping someone when you're talking about him, instead of talking behind his back in this immoral fashion.

[Judith Anne]

You're supposed to ping someone when you're talking about him, instead of talking behind his back in this immoral fashion

You! Talking about immorality!

I'm happy to respond and bump this thread. Let everyone read it, and decide for themselves.

[scripter]

That's just more obfuscation. When caught pushing obfuscation you attempt to use more obfuscation and misdirection.

I'm more than happy to let everyone make up their own minds as to who as the credibility here.

[scripter]

You're supposed to ping someone when you're talking about him, instead of talking behind his back in this immoral fashion.

You shown your morals through-out this thread. You're credibility here is non-existent.

[scripter]

I've pointed out the flaws in your assertions, so much so that you didn't bother to defend them.

Your crediblity here is non-existent.