[FascistSlayer]

Okay, to be as fair as possible here, what sources do you accept, and what are your evidentiary standards? I will restrain myself to those sources in answering your question, so there can be no claim of "liberal bias".

[Prodigal Son]

Dude, you better spit it out whatever it is you have. Don't f--= around with word games.

[cwb]

You made the claim. Just put fourth your "source" and we'll bat it around. You may by surprised by what you can learn here. But stop playing games.

[section9]

Okay, to be as fair as possible here, what sources do you accept, and what are your evidentiary standards? I will restrain myself to those sources in answering your question, so there can be no claim of "liberal bias".

Okay, that's it. That's all I'm tolerating from this intellectual prat.

I was prepared to give you a chance until you tried the Cute Debater's Trick of debating source validity instead of offering argument backed up by proofs. I know exactly where you are going, and don't intend to let you get away with it.

You have only assertion, and no argument. That is plain for all to see. You don't want to present and argue facts. You just want to drop a steaming turd in the middle of the road, claim you've been lied to, and run away.

This is the mark of the cheap poltroon, the intellectual House of Cards, the Hanging Ronald....

Put up or shut the hell up! Who lied to you? When were you lied to? How were you lied to? Give specific examples.

Saying so does not make it so.

Be Seeing You,

Chris