Product pushing in blog comments

I notice that one of the fun things about this blog is that anyone passing by can post random comments to any of these blog articles. The article that has produced the most comments is one discussing whether the US is at war or not.

I decided it would be easier to just move the comments here and address them more openly. I edited them to remove identity information since I just feel that is prudent and fair, and also I do not want to help these unscrupulous individuals continue to promote their anti-American agendas and products, including conspiracy theory videos and other nonsense.

7 comments:

E said...You have totally misrepresented the facts and even went so far as to manufacture positions and conclusions that were NEVER presented in that cast. You sir, are a liar. I listened to all of the conversations and no one in your select group of friends would even allow S to finish a statement. Everything he said is fact and I know this because I researched everything that was said by anyone making a claim. The other rude man that was always interrupting and calling S names was the worse for providing correct information. Most of what he said is just not correct or only half-truths. You should not blog fiction unless you claim it to be fiction and not real stories/conversations from Skypeland. E
September 9, 2007 11:11 PM

Bob in MD said...I will invite others to listen to the opinions expressed for themselves in Skypeland and draw their own conclusions. I am absolutely SURE that almost everyone who believes they or their friends are not represented in the best possible light will make the same claim. As I said, one can split hairs and make the sort of statements I describe with some tenuous justification. For example, one can describe the activity in Iraq as a police action rather than a war. So what? Vietnam involvement was supposed to be a police action as well and not a war. So what? Most military involvements of the US since its founding in 1776 were not associated with a formal declaration of war. So what? I even tried to mention this but I was shouted down and interrupted enough times that I gave up. I have seen examples of this gentleman's "facts", and they are pretty silly, to be honest, and ignore other viewpoints and information. That is why he has minimal credibility, as far as I am concerned. You are free to accept whatever he says without question, however. He can believe whatever he likes and promote whatever ideas he wants. However, others might dispute these ideas. So what? You have a problem with that? Promoting conspiracy theories and alien abduction stories and a raft of similar fantasies is fine, but he should not expect everyone to swallow all that stuff without question. Since you think others should just accept all these ideas, I guess this says quite a bit about you, doesn't it?
September 10, 2007 7:12 AM

E said...Bob in MD,Yeah, but you're a liar and you haven't excused yourself from the liars table. You manufactured and misrepresented any and all "truth" in your blog post regarding your conversation with S. I listened to the entire thing. You have no remorse for doing so and will continue to spread this kind of slander until you are stopped or have a change of moral direction. S gave you and your cohorts ample room and plenty of uninterrupted talk time to present facts or at the very least to request some from him. None of you complied, opting to hurl insults and close your ears and chant like a loud child, over and over again. Not S, he waited and then tried to answer your objections even under your yells and vocal graffiti, S could be heard answering in factual detail. Too bad you're not a respectfully honest man. Too bad you won't represent the Skypecasts correctly.Too bad for those people you choose to befriend because you're soured and have shown here in your blog that you'll defame another just to gain wordspace on a screen. E
September 10, 2007 11:09 AM

Bob in MD said...Ok then, give me one example of a fact I misrepresented or did not understand? Otherwise, what you are doing is just mindlessly spewing more vague nonsense. So how about the claim that the US is not in a war and that this means something? How about the claim that the US is being manipulated by various unnamed secret societies and induced to engage in wars unwittingly? How about the claim that someone in the US military who was put in prison for child abuse 6 years after the Battle for Mogadishu discredited the motives and efforts of the US forces in that battle? Those are all things I have heard from those quarters, and I have to admit, I am not particularly convinced or impressed. Maybe you are. Maybe others are. I am not. Sorry.
September 10, 2007 11:34 AM

Bob in MD said...By the way, Genius, "slander" applies to spoken statements. Libel applies to written statements. You have only made more clear than ever why you and your vague gratuitous claims should be summarily dismissed. Have a nice day.
September 10, 2007 11:37 AM

E said...Bob in MD,More falsehoods. S never said any of what you attribute to him in your latest answer here on your blog. None of it! Here are the facts as you requested. If you would like to hear audio examples from that Skypecast, those can be made available.ANTI-AMERICAN:You called him anti-American here on your blog and said he tried in vane to prove that the US is not in a "War" in Iraq. Again, not true and totally fabricated. S talked about his sister returning to active duty with the U.S. Air Force and that he loves the troops. He explained the three best ways to support our country during these times of conflict. And offered no objection to this country or anyone that is uniform serving this country. WAR:The fact that this "War on Terror" (whatever that is) has spread into Iraq (and anywhere the US president feels it should spread to stop terror)it is still an illegal war; an undeclared war. No matter what you say, the truth is that this "War on Terror" is not a declared war. No more so that the war on drugs, poverty, immigration, flying spaghetti monsters. JFK:S urged the listeners and those participating in the cast to venture to the homepage and view the JFK video that is a mash-up of the enitre JFK's speech on secrete societies and their influence on the mass-media and stills representing many of the symbols used to control throughout modern history up to and including more recent orders of secrets. S never said that secret societies are behinds the scenes and taking the US to war. You made that up. That is a lie. Used only to better your own position, whatever it is beyond being a liar, slanderer, defamer. AND THEN THERE IS THIS:You said, "How about the claim that someone in the US military who was put in prison for child abuse 6 years after the Battle for Mogadishu discredited the motives and efforts of the US forces in that battle?" where does what you said there appear anywhere in the cast you wrote about? I'll keep you from guessing... It doesn't. Nowhere in the cast did S even remotely tak about this wacko statement. In fact, no one spoke of the matter. This is what you call factual representation of the casts as they occur? Shameful.You should recognize and revise your blog entry to better reflect the truth of the matter and refrain from future embellishments when serving the minutes of a meeting such as a Skypecast you choose to audit. Honor should be more important to you along with integrity and remaining teachable. Otherwise you'll remain a despicable, dishonest sell-out unable to recognize respect nor deserve an iota of it.E
September 10, 2007 12:19 PM

As was previously explained in detail several times, promoting conspiracy theory videos and war deserters is definitely anti-American and inviting more attacks on the US by foreign elements. If you doubt this, just read what I hear from foreigners in this blog, or watch Al Jazeera and other major news media.

And I guess we disagree about what was said in this cast and previous casts, such as the one described in my blog article on "Radio Shows". Others heard the cast and have read my blog notes and confirmed that I had represented the conversation reasonably accurately. Your indignation and efforts to continue to promote this commercial enterprise here are ludicrous.

E said...Bob in MD,You slandered him in the cast. You borderline libeled him with your blog. You defamed him directly with your blog. What did S do to you again? E
September 10, 2007 12:24 PM


S did not do anything more than invite foreigners to come here and kill me, and to kill our troops and to kill his sister he supposedly supports. He is free to do so, but I think it is pretty low; trying to make a buck from promoting nonsense and hate. And I am free to offer my opinion; this is irresponsible and misguided, and evidence of his substantial ignorance, and now E's as well. However, you are free to continue to embarass yourself. I am glad to let your words speak for themselves.