Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: CharlesWayneCT
I asked jla to send me the information Mia was circulating about why she was banned, but he didn't, so I don't know her side through no fault of my own.

So if you don't know then why air an erroneous conjecture?

The implication is that Mia had been fomenting insurrection here by 'circulating information' and badmouthing. This is not the case.
When people messaged her to ask why she was banned, her reply was that precipitating event appears to have been the last thread. There were no pleadings, no 'circulating info,' no badmouthing the opposition, no talks of 'unfairness,' etc.

In my opinion, if anyone wishes to know exactly why she was banned they should ask the one who did the deed.

331 posted on 04/21/2007 5:42:04 PM PDT by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies ]


To: jla

First, I apologize for not pinging you to that post. I knew there was a comment I had which needed a second entry, but I was doing three comments at the time and screwed up. I think one should always be pinged to a comment where they are mentioned, and my ommission was an error on my part.

Second, I aired the ‘erroneous conjecture’ because first, I don’t know it to be erroneous, as it comes from someone else who may be a person with knowledge, but moreso because I disagreed with that conjecture and wanted to say so publicly because I presumed others might have the same conjecture.

The fact that Mia was banned right after posting a comment that included an irrational claim about Thompson being a “washington politician (an opinion, but one devoid of sense), along with two links to previously posted threads by Mia in the past week attacking Fred first for having “no experience” (ignoring his 8 years in the senate), and then falsely (or at least with wanton disregard for any facts) claiming that he was running just to help his good buddy McCain — and this in a vanity post asking “what does pro-life mean” in which she had just posted another comment having NOTHING to do with her own topic quoting left-wing additions to Fred Thompson’s Wiki entry to make him look bad.

Well, that was a run-on and I don’t think it’s a sentence. My point is that since April 1, Mia posted at least 2 direct attacks on Fred that had either no support or deliberately ignored facts not to her liking; she posted a vanity questioning pro-lifers commitment and saying that if they didn’t vote for a pro-abortion candidate the blood of innocents would be on their hands, and then IN that thread re-launched attacks on Fred Thompson that had NOTHING to do with the thread topic of abortion.

I am convinced that THIS is why she was booted. Well, that was the “reason” anyway, I think her deleted comments which she admitted were wrong were the excuse. If you are going to attack conservatives with little or no facts, you better make sure not to post any other lies or make false claims.


333 posted on 04/21/2007 6:30:07 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson