Have it your way

[Guest Melanie]

So you are saying that Matthew had the consent of the teacher to tape this?  You can say anything you wish here but the truth still remains. There was no censent and the teacher knew nothing of it.  That is the undeniable truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Apparently you can't read, "Guest." Strife wrote that Matthew did confront Paszkiewicz with the recordings before he went public with them. It has nothing to do with whether Paszkiewicz consented to being recorded, which of course he would not have done, or if he did he would have cleaned up his act.

You fundies will go to any lengths to change the facts. First you change what happened, and now you're changing what Strife wrote about it. You're pathetic.

[Strife767]

So you are saying that Matthew had the consent of the teacher to tape this?

Noooooo, the second part is the lie, doofus. And had you read my whole post, you'd know that. You said he went public with the recordings before they were brought to Paszkiewicz's attention. This is a lie that you (probably; you're taking credit for it, at least) told. Therefore, you are a liar.

You can say anything you wish here but the truth still remains. There was no censent and the teacher knew nothing of it.  That is the undeniable truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which is 100% irrelevant to what I was actually saying. Do you have the guts to address my actual statements, or are you going to keep attacking your straw men instead?

[Guest Guest]

So you are saying that Matthew had the consent of the teacher to tape this?  You can say anything you wish here but the truth still remains. There was no censent and the teacher knew nothing of it.  That is the undeniable truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, if it's good enough for the federal govt. then....................

[Guest Guest]

Uh-huh, a non-issue covered nationally and internationally. It doesn't work that way.

As for Paszkiewicz, that depends on how lucky he feels. He got the message.

Thanks for the heads-up, though on the teachers' seminar. I'll make sure attendance is mandatory. I believe it is already, but I'll make sure now. Anything else you'd like to offer?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Attendance mandatory? You've got alot to learn.

Then again you call the BOE's statement about Matthew's courage glowing. And you believe it. What a joker.

[Matthew LaClair]

So you are saying that Matthew had the consent of the teacher to tape this?  You can say anything you wish here but the truth still remains. There was no censent and the teacher knew nothing of it.  That is the undeniable truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think that there maybe some mis-communication. I believe that you think Strife is saying that I went to Mr. Paszkiewicz before taping the classes, but he is actually saying that I went to Mr. Paskiewicz and Mr. Somma after taping the classes, but way before the tapes and story became public knowledge. I hope that this clears it up.

[Matthew LaClair]

So you are saying that Matthew had the consent of the teacher to tape this?  You can say anything you wish here but the truth still remains. There was no censent and the teacher knew nothing of it.  That is the undeniable truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think that there maybe some mis-communication. I believe that you think Strife is saying that I went to Mr. Paszkiewicz before taping the classes, but he is actually saying that I went to Mr. Paskiewicz and Mr. Somma after taping the classes, but way before the tapes and story became public knowledge. I hope that this clears it up.

[Guest Guest]

Noooooo, the second part is the lie, doofus. And had you read my whole post, you'd know that. You said he went public with the recordings before they were brought to Paszkiewicz's attention. This is a lie that you (probably; you're taking credit for it, at least) told. Therefore, you are a liar.

Which is 100% irrelevant to what I was actually saying. Do you have the guts to address my actual statements, or are you going to keep attacking your straw men instead?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Nice name calling. Now you are showing your true colors calling people "doofus". It just backs up my argument. You just do not have a case.

[Guest Guest]

You're missing the point. If Matthew had premeditated an attack on Paszkiewicz he would have begun recording him on the first day of class. Instead, he went to class and after two days of the man's ramblings on politics if not religion (I don't recall, but I don't trust any of the other students in that class to state the matter accurately either, given their abysmal track record of inaccuracy about what happened), Matthew determined that Paszkiewicz was out of control and decided to record him. The recordings proved that Matthew was right.

Strife is not our mouthpiece. Strife has his/her own views and opinions, and expresses them as he/she sees fit. There is no discussion back and forth between us about it, although I have met Strife since this started and do know who the person is.

Strife's point was that Matthew did not take the matter public until after he met with Paszkiewicz. That is true. You attacked Strife for something he/she did not write.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Again that is just your word since we do not know who this Stife is? And we all know you choose to perceive things your way and not necessarily the way things happen in this forum but yet you claim to have an open mind.

[Strife767]

Nice name calling. Now you are showing your true colors calling people "doofus".

Actually, I'm describing your subpar reading comprehension.

It just backs up my argument.

Uh, no. If I said "Squares have four sides, retard," it wouldn't make "squares have four sides" any less correct. Your above statement is absurd.

You just do not have a case.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You wish.

[Strife767]

Again that is just your word since we do not know who this Stife is?

But Paul does. We've met in person. It's his word, from first-hand experience. Got anything better?

[Guest Paul]

So you are saying that Matthew had the consent of the teacher to tape this?  You can say anything you wish here but the truth still remains. There was no censent and the teacher knew nothing of it.  That is the undeniable truth.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So you're saying that we have to get a lawbreaker's consent to bust him? You are saying exactly that, and probably don't realize it.

[Guest Paul]

Again that is just your word since we do not know who this Stife is?  And we all know you choose to perceive things your way and not necessarily the way things happen in this forum but yet you claim to have an open mind.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm wasting my time. You don't even understand what a discussion is. Strife's identity is irrelevant. You got caught making false statements and now you're changing the subject. Those are the facts.

[WilliamK]

Nice name calling. Now you are showing your true colors calling people "doofus". It just backs up my argument.    You just do not have a case.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That would back up your argument if you had been arguing that Strife sometimes resorts to name calling. But that, of course, was not what you were on about. You were trying to defend and distract attention away from your lie.

Are these not your words?

I would like to know what truth you are talking about. How can you say that this was not premeditated when he secretly taped class conversations without prior consent and did not approach the students or the teacher he taped on it instead of going public with it first?

Where's the retraction? Where's the apology for the false accusation? Where is any hint of integrity or honesty from you?

No amount of Strife or anyone else calling you names will turn your lie into truth. Talk about "true colors" and not having a case.

[Guest Paul]

That would back up your argument if you had been arguing that Strife sometimes resorts to name calling. But that, of course, was not what you were on about. You were trying to defend and distract attention away from your lie.

Are these not your words?

Where's the retraction? Where's the apology for the false accusation? Where is any hint of integrity or honesty from you?

No amount of Strife or anyone else calling you names will turn your lie into truth. Talk about "true colors" and not having a case.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I've noticed that these radical right-wing extremist nut jobs, who presume to think that they are religious, never once admit a single one of the literally hundreds of errors they've made, or outright lies they've told. Says a lot about what they call their "religion," and I'm not referring to Christianity. I'm referring to their distortion of religion and Christianity. These people are no more religious than I am Chinese.

[Guest Bing]

I think that there maybe some mis-communication. I believe that you think Strife is saying that I went to Mr. Paszkiewicz before taping the classes, but he is actually saying that I went to Mr. Paskiewicz and Mr. Somma after taping the classes, but way before the tapes and story became public knowledge. I hope that this clears it up.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So Matt - what's the cause du jour this year (dress code? religion? underfunding of women's athletics?) Please don't let us all down and go through a year quietly - there are far too many inequities that need redressing.

[Matthew LaClair]

So Matt - what's the cause du jour this year (dress code? religion? underfunding of women's athletics?)  Please don't let us all down and go through a year quietly - there are far too many inequities that need redressing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I won't do a thing, unless somebody does something that should be challenged.

[Guest Guest]

So Matt - what's the cause du jour this year (dress code? religion? underfunding of women's athletics?)  Please don't let us all down and go through a year quietly - there are far too many inequities that need redressing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bing,

When is the last time you got up off your ass to stand for something?

[Guest 2smart4u]

I won't do a thing, unless somebody does something that should be challenged.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thank you , Paul.

[Bryan]

You're missing the point. If Matthew had premeditated an attack on Paszkiewicz he would have begun recording him on the first day of class.

That doesn't follow.

Matthew could have decided only after starting the class exactly what attack to launch against Paszkiewicz, and (obviously) it's possible in principle to plan a premeditated attack without premeditating it prior to signing up for the class.

Instead, he went to class and after two days of the man's ramblings on politics if not religion (I don't recall, but I don't trust any of the other students in that class to state the matter accurately either, given their abysmal track record of inaccuracy about what happened), Matthew determined that Paszkiewicz was out of control and decided to record him. The recordings proved that Matthew was right.

The recordings proved that Matthew took things out of context.

Strife's point was that Matthew did not take the matter public until after he met with Paszkiewicz. That is true.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Regardless, it does not appear that Matthew bothered to meet with Paszkiewicz to resolve the issue before doing the recordings and sending a letter to the school administration.

[Bryan]

I've noticed that these radical right-wing extremist nut jobs, who presume to think that they are religious, never once admit a single one of the literally hundreds of errors they've made, or outright lies they've told.

Sounds like you've got something in common with them. Remember back when you suggested a targeted boycott to bring down the price of gas? Remember way back when you were going around saying that the Big Bang theory begins with "very dense matter" (Matthew's words)?

Yet no acknowledgment of your error.

Wei shen?

Says a lot about what they call their "religion," and I'm not referring to Christianity. I'm referring to their distortion of religion and Christianity. These people are no more religious than I am Chinese.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wei shan zhe.

[Guest Paul]

Thank you , Paul.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I know how people like you think. You think that if you say it often enough it becomes true. For you, reality is about what you want it to be and can convince yourself that it is. That's not how things really work, but you think it is, which is why you keep writing things that aren't true just because you want them to be true. Your theology teaches you to do it this way, which is one of the gravest problems with your theology.

So it becomes like potty training with boneheads like you. What you just wrote is not true. That was Matthew's post. He wrote it, I didn't even see it before he posted it up.

I know. You don't.

Those are the facts. Your wishes are not the facts. Maybe if I put you on the potty often enough you'll start to get it.

[Guest Guest]

That doesn't follow.

Matthew could have decided only after starting the class exactly what attack to launch against Paszkiewicz, and (obviously) it's possible in principle to plan a premeditated attack without premeditating it prior to signing up for the class.

The recordings proved that Matthew took things out of context.

Regardless, it does not appear that Matthew bothered to meet with Paszkiewicz to resolve the issue before doing the recordings and sending a letter to the school administration.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The "teacher" got schooled. Get over it!