> From: Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 06:32:53PM -0500, The Fool wrote: > > > > From: Erik Reuter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > On Sun, Jun 09, 2002 at 06:23:00PM -0500, The Fool wrote: > > > > > > > You are implying that I was advocating something that I may or may > > > > not be > > > > > > advocating. > > > > > > You wrote: > > > > > > Disturbing questions #23-25, The very fact that fox would suggest > > > these things, and that they got such high yes percentages. > > > > Because they are a news organization advocating here, the removal of > > amendments, 1, 2, 4, 5 (at least tangentally), and probably others I > > am less familiar with. In no way did I suggest they they had no right > > to say it, which is what you are implying. You were also imlying > > things about that wilber07. > > The implications are getting thick here. I wasn't aware I implied most > of those things. > > I was responding to you saying that it was disturbing that FOX news > would have a survey about requiring a test to buy a firearm, and also > you saying it was disturbing that many people responded that it was a > good idea. > > The only thing I meant to convey was that it is inconsistent to act that > way about guns, but act in a different way about Wilbur being allowed to > post what he wishes in a way that he wishes.
I'll say it again, for mayhaps it will enter your thick skull this time. I said nothing about the wilber07 thing, other than that he should get psychiatric help. DON'T ACCUSE ME OF THINGS I DID NOT DO.
