Replies

rebooted to HuntsvilleTxVeteran:

You sir, have no credibility.

Sorry, robooted. The lack of credibility is all yours.

Here was the statement that you said was wrong:

"“The first Secretary General was the AMERICAN Alger Hiss. Alger Hiss served time in prison pursuant to his involvement in a Communist spy ring”

Here is your reply:

Wrong. And wrong. No American has every been secretary General of the UN. Hiss was jailed for purgery, not for being a communist. You sir, have no credibility.

Now as I have found in research, Hiss was a Secretary-General (of the UN committee) before there was a Secretary-Genral of the UN. I note that Huntsville said that he was "The first Secretary General", but did not distinguish between the Committee and the UN itself. So within the context of the UN his statement is both technically truer then yours, and is certainly less misleading then your reply which would have the reader believing Hiss had no such association at all.

Secondly, Huntsville did not state that Hiss was convicted of being a Communist, he said "Hiss served time in prison pursuant to his involvement in a Communist spy ring". Noting that indeed the perjury he was convicted for was indeed pursuant to his involvement, Huntsville is again both more technically correct then you, and is certainly less misleading then your reply which would have the reader believing his being in jail was unrelated to communism.

You sir, have destroyed your credibility here on three counts:

1) You falsely accused someone else of being wrong.

2) You were being overtly technical in order to pull it off.

3) Even when being hyper technical, you were wrong both times you said Huntsville was wrong. Although your other two statements were technically true, Huntsville's entire post was technically true.