Munching on some popcorn and watching the latest train wreck. carry on.

reposted the hacked article in case anyone came lookin and found it had been deleted

what was the name of the article? something to do with analogies? It is still on the system.

here's another gem from mm's liefest...

If Sean chooses to have his beliefs as you and Baker say half in Dem and half in Lib (they mean nothing to me as I know zip about politics) - surely he is free to do so? Surely he is free to do that? Hell I thought he was free to start his own political party if he wanted to? Where is the Political tolerance if he cannot express his thoughts, ideas and feelings freely without castigation?
Why do you seem to think that being challenged on an opinion is the same as being denied the right to express that opinion? It's a weird mindset, one I can't get my head around no matter which way I turn it.You took the same stance when challenged on your opinion of FS. The moment you were disagreed with, you started screeching about not being allowed to speak your mind in regards to the girl. It seems to me you DID speak it, you spoke it loudly, rudely, aggressively. You spoke it all over JU, and you did so without a break for almost two weeks straight before you managed to calm yourself.No one has infringed on Sean's "freedom" jennifer. He's still typing away on his own blogs and many others....

acually whip, i am not contending that anyone has "infringed my freedom." anyone can blacklist me from their blog, that's their perrogative.

i am contending that MM is delusional or a liar. only he can take a complient as an insult, even tho it has been well established that he was wrong. i will not stand for lies told about me without answering.

i will not permit people who like to dish it out, not take it as well. i can go easy, or i can go hard. if someone wants to mix it up, let's go. but be honest and don't lie about me, especially after things have been well established and can even be checked on. .. after you do, all bets are off.

i sincerely gave a ton of thought to blacklisting the 2 stooges. it is against my free speech principles. but like the old saying goes....your right to swing your fists ends at my nose.

lying about me, deleting my posts to try to manipulate a debate and then strong evidence of hacking are all things that attempted to hit my nose. 3 strikes, you're out!

what was the name of the article? something to do with analogies? It is still on the system.

no jennifer, it was this article above. when i signed on after a meeting, i found all but 1 line had been eliminated.

no jennifer, it was this article above. when i signed on after a meeting, i found all but 1 line had been eliminated.

If that is the case then you should report it to admin, I am sure they would be interested to hear about it. Report it.

Were you really unaware of the fact that linking an article about how a lot of people lie about their service in 'Nam in the same post that you 'complimented' MM on the same would be offensive?

what it linked to , at least i thought, was an article by dr guy about exposing vietnam myths. in the responses for that article, mm mentioned his service. i saluted him for his service, as did others in the post. in fact, by my count, i was the 3rd to give him some kudos for his service. and none of the other responders, including guy, who was one of the other complimenters, was attacked.



just to make sure,,,here's the link again of the article and all the responses. my response is #35. https://forums.joeuser.com/?forumid=85&aid=57684

Since you had already openly suggested that he was lying about his active duty before,(

where the hell did i ever doubt his service????

that is totally untrue

A phone conversation with Elie proves otherwise, though, because he DID verify that it was the link he found so upsetting. Perhaps you meant it a different way, but it really doesn't matter anymore, offense was taken whether it was intended or not.

yeah it does matter. and your phone call proved nothing. the article was dr guy's. mm actively particpated in that thread, not once pointing out ANY insults guy allegedly wrote. he melted down because he was hell bent in seeing the worst of anything i do. and it's not intention on my side, it's the facts and the truth.

and you know what they say about truth...(setting one free and all)

I enjoy a good flamefest myself now and then, but I'm not going to participate in this one.

it seems you only wanted to participate when you thought he was right and i was wrong. and you have participated plenty. it's a little late to claim that mantle...i think now that maybe you are seeing the facts, you back away, per usual. and this isn't really a flamefest. 1 side is fact based, the other is hate based.

Since you had already openly suggested that he was lying about his active duty before,

you really owe me an explanation on this one...you made a serious charge towards me that was a total lie. where did you get this? did you get it from your "chum"? it's a lie and at the very least, you should acknowledge that.

he has questioned my age, my education, my marital status, my sexual orientation, my children's existence, he's claimed having sex with my mother and a whole host of more insults. all of which are lies. but you remain silent on that.

i have questioned nothing about his service, ever. and claiming dr guy's article "set him off" is b.s. he actively participated in that thread and never , ever brought up any discontentment with the article or it's contents. the reason he never did when he was participating was because he AGREED with the article as it vindicated vietnam vets, it didn't put them down in the least.