. . . in a certain
CONTEXT . . .
the unavoidable implication of the
CONTEXT . . . is that your belief would necessarily arise out of . . .
drum roll . . . .
some level of presumed
imputing your constructions on reality into my motivations, choices, actions etc.
Amazingly, when I said you were wrong,
you still insisted that YOU KNEW MORE ABOUT WHAT I DID than I did.
YOU INSISTED that my dot indicates
I’M CONCEDING A POINT.
WHEN ACTUALLY, IT HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with anything close to that.
YOU ARE
WONDERFULLY
WRONG AGAIN.
THEN YOU HAD THE . . . INCREDIBLE SOMETHING to further insist
that you were right and I was wrong about what I’d done and why I’d done it . . . and that ASSUMING ALL THAT
WAS
NOT
MIND READING.
AMAZING.
I’m beginning to think that the Vatican related rabid cliques may be initiating a round of free MIND NUMBING for members. It’s hard to explain such irrationality any other way.
Yes, that's still my belief. You haven't proven otherwise.
ASSUMING ALL THAT WAS NOT MIND READING.
I made a statement about my belief. That's not mind reading.