Guest Tom Posted January 25, 2007 Report Share Posted January 25, 2007 unfortunately I have and what I saw was a 16 year old who was trained by his attorney father to speak during the interview. Nothing amazing about that. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> This kid must really be getting under your skin. You wish you had his talent, but you don't, so you imagine him to be some kind of wind-up doll. People who aren't desperate to put him down at any and all costs see the truth: the talent and the poise he exhibited on Anderson Cooper's show and the several radio programs where he has been interviewed cannot be trained. You guys could take lessons for ten years, and you still couldn't do what he does with even a tenth of his skill. The kid is talented, and although I have no doubt that his father and mother both guided him to express his inborn talents, that's all their training amounts to. The talents are his own. You just don't like it. So keep dissing him. I'm sure he appreciates the unknowing compliments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 26, 2007 Report Share Posted January 26, 2007 Yeah, sure. And he must have won the state oratorical championship in eighth grade because his father was feeding him words through a hidden pair of headphones, right? :lol:Please--it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> He has become your hero, huh? Well, how about going there and kiss his butt now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 26, 2007 Report Share Posted January 26, 2007 Yeah, sure. And he must have won the state oratorical championship in eighth grade because his father was feeding him words through a hidden pair of headphones, right? :lol:Please--it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> you know what? maybe Mr. Laclair did.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted January 26, 2007 Report Share Posted January 26, 2007 you know what? maybe Mr. Laclair did.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> :lol: Can't say this post surprises me. It'd be depressing if it wasn't so hilarious. Even a baseless hypothetical situation I suggest tongue-in-cheek which is practically impossible is seriously considered by you morons. I can't imagine how life must be to one so gullible. Probably quite scary. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 26, 2007 Report Share Posted January 26, 2007 Yeah, sure. And he must have won the state oratorical championship in eighth grade because his father was feeding him words through a hidden pair of headphones, right? :lol:Please--it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, He won the Kearny Optimist Club oratorical contest because his father wrote the speech and he memorized it and acted it out (don't forget he is a trained actor). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted January 26, 2007 Report Share Posted January 26, 2007 No, He won the Kearny Optimist Club oratorical contest because his father wrote the speech and he memorized it and acted it out (don't forget he is a trained actor). <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Unless you can prove this, I'm going to have to conclude it's as much a blatant lie as all of the other ones made up about Matthew and Paul on this forum. Not that that would surprise me--you jerks will apparently do or say anything to try and make Matthew and Paul look bad, even if it means making things up in the absence of any 'dirt' to discover. Pathetic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted January 27, 2007 Report Share Posted January 27, 2007 --you jerks will apparently do or say anything to try and make Matthew and Paul look bad, even if it means making things up in the absence of any 'dirt' to discover. Pathetic. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Just like you jerks did and said about Mr. P. That's why he has many sympathizers,( and no, he was wrong and should not preach in class.so let's not start that crap all over again.) Now it's becoming tit- for- tat , so when is all this nonsense going to end? That is up to you. Apparently, Paul saw that the nonsence was getting out of hand, and I believe that is why you don't see him here anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Posted January 30, 2007 Report Share Posted January 30, 2007 Just like you jerks did and said about Mr. P. That's why he has many sympathizers,( and no, he was wrong and should not preach in class.so let's not start that crap all over again.) Now it's becoming tit- for- tat , so when is all this nonsense going to end? That is up to you. Apparently, Paul saw that the nonsence was getting out of hand, and I believe that is why you don't see him here anymore. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Excuse me, Mr. P was hoist on his own words, which are recorded for the world to hear. That is very different from the unfounded accusations that have been made against the LaClairs. Why Paul is not participating here is known only to him. A wise person wouldn't assume the answer. Don't forget, he stopped participating at about the same time the school district issued its statement agreeing to re-educate the teachers at in-service seminars. If he stopped posting just because the nonsense was getting out of hand --- which it is --- it's more likely he would have told you that. On the other hand, if there was some legal reason, he might not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted February 2, 2007 Report Share Posted February 2, 2007 Just like you jerks did and said about Mr. P. Uh, no, we have very clear evidence of Mr. P.'s preaching. There is also evidence on this very forum of Mr. P. apologists inventing several lies about Matthew, Paul, and even Matthew's sister in an attempt to incriminate them and/or hurt their credibility/integrity. Don't even attempt to compare the two. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DingoDave Posted February 4, 2007 Report Share Posted February 4, 2007 Guest wrote: " he is not the "so-called history teacher", you idiot! He is the best history teacher at KHS. The only person who doesn't like him is baby laClair...but we can understand that, little Matt has serious problems!" One of the most important attributes of any competent historian is the ability to differentiate between fact and fiction. Mr. P. is obviously unable or unwilling to do so. He believes that the Bible accurately portrays historical events? Dinosaurs on Noah's ark? People magically rising from the dead, then flying away into the sky? You've got to be kidding me! What competent historian believes and teaches such things? Mr. P. therefore immediatly disqualifies himself from being considered as a competent history teacher. Yet there are people on these forums who claim he is the best history teacher in the school? What woefully low standards you people must set for your teachers. It's no wonder that other nations are poised to usurp America's pre-eminance in so many fields of modern discovery. You ignorant buffoons who are defending the actions of teachers such as Mr. P. will reap what you sow. Unfortunately, there are many thoughtful and rational Americans living among you who do not deserve to have that happen to your country. Future historians will look back at controversies such as this, and marvel that they could have ever taken place in one of the leading industrialised nations on Earth. One interesting lesson that has come out of all of this, is that it has demonstrated the power of primitive superstitions to cloud the judgement of otherwise rational individuals. Mattew LaClair and people like him are the true patriots and defenders of your way of life. Mr. P. and people like him are actually the termites which are undermining the very foundations of what made your country great in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 Uh, no, we have very clear evidence of Mr. P.'s preaching. There is also evidence on this very forum of Mr. P. apologists inventing several lies about Matthew, Paul, and even Matthew's sister in an attempt to incriminate them and/or hurt their credibility/integrity. Don't even attempt to compare the two. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> CAN"T WE ALL JUST TRY TO GET ALONG!!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 5, 2007 Report Share Posted February 5, 2007 Unless you can prove this, I'm going to have to conclude it's as much a blatant lie as all of the other ones made up about Matthew and Paul on this forum. Not that that would surprise me--you jerks will apparently do or say anything to try and make Matthew and Paul look bad, even if it means making things up in the absence of any 'dirt' to discover. Pathetic. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> So......Matthew is not a trained actor? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 6, 2007 Report Share Posted February 6, 2007 Yeah, sure. And he must have won the state oratorical championship in eighth grade because his father was feeding him words through a hidden pair of headphones, right? Please--it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and confirm it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Strife, how about you prove something for once. Prove to us that Matt won the state oratorical contest. Unless you can prove it, it must be a lie, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted February 6, 2007 Report Share Posted February 6, 2007 Strife, how about you prove something for once. Prove to us that Matt won the state oratorical contest. Unless you can prove it, it must be a lie, right? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, I'm willing to take something someone credible says at face value, especially when it's about something that would be ridiculously easy to disprove (you know, like winning a state oratorical championship). What I demand evidence for are random accusations of cheating by anonymous forum posters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted February 6, 2007 Report Share Posted February 6, 2007 So......Matthew is not a trained actor? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You know that's not what I was referring to. Try again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted February 6, 2007 Report Share Posted February 6, 2007 CAN"T WE ALL JUST TRY TO GET ALONG!!!!!! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> It would be easier if Mr. P.'s apologists wouldn't keep leveling false allegations in a desperate attempt to make Matthew and/or his father look bad or like they're acting under ulterior motives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 6, 2007 Report Share Posted February 6, 2007 Unless you can prove this, I'm going to have to conclude it's as much a blatant lie as all of the other ones made up about Matthew and Paul on this forum. Not that that would surprise me--you jerks will apparently do or say anything to try and make Matthew and Paul look bad, even if it means making things up in the absence of any 'dirt' to discover. Pathetic. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> GREAT! You are getting to the point! Unless mr. LaClair can prove that Mr. P lied during that meeting, we'll have to conclude that he is a liar! Good job, we don't even have to go too far to make you speak, Strife! You got right to the point. Tell Mr. LaClair to show the cd that proves that Mr. P lied and we will believe him. Don't forget to ask him for the cd about Hitler as well. Proud of you, strife! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 6, 2007 Report Share Posted February 6, 2007 Just like you jerks did and said about Mr. P. That's why he has many sympathizers,( and no, he was wrong and should not preach in class.so let's not start that crap all over again.) Now it's becoming tit- for- tat , so when is all this nonsense going to end? That is up to you. Apparently, Paul saw that the nonsence was getting out of hand, and I believe that is why you don't see him here anymore. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Wrong, according to him he was negotiating with the BOE and stayed away from KOTW for a few days. Unfortunately he doesn't know how KOTW works and he probably doesn't know that we could see him everytime he was on a forum. See, how we catch a liar! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 6, 2007 Report Share Posted February 6, 2007 Uh, no, we have very clear evidence of Mr. P.'s preaching. There is also evidence on this very forum of Mr. P. apologists inventing several lies about Matthew, Paul, and even Matthew's sister in an attempt to incriminate them and/or hurt their credibility/integrity. Don't even attempt to compare the two. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Show us the cds that Mr. P lied! We are waiting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Wrong, according to him he was negotiating with the BOE and stayed away from KOTW for a few days. Unfortunately he doesn't know how KOTW works and he probably doesn't know that we could see him everytime he was on a forum. See, how we catch a liar! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Uh, he was well aware that he was visible in reading posts. He meant absence of contribution (read: posting/replying) himself, duh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 GREAT! You are getting to the point! Unless mr. LaClair can prove that Mr. P lied during that meeting, we'll have to conclude that he is a liar! No we don't, because both Matthew and his father are credible and have proven themselves credible by virtue of the fact that most every claim of theirs that can be verified has been verified, and they've been shown to be telling the truth all along. On the other hand, "Guests" on this forum have been caught lying about Matthew and his family on several occasions. Therefore, you have a reputation for dishonesty, and it makes perfect sense for no one to take any of _those_ allegations at face value. Why is that so shocking to you? You made your bed, now sleep in it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted February 7, 2007 Report Share Posted February 7, 2007 Show us the cds that Mr. P lied! Show us the CDs that Mr. P. told the truth! Should be easy--a positive is much easier to prove than a negative. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 9, 2007 Report Share Posted February 9, 2007 Uh, he was well aware that he was visible in reading posts. He meant absence of contribution (read: posting/replying) himself, duh. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh that's what he meant! I see.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 9, 2007 Report Share Posted February 9, 2007 Show us the CDs that Mr. P. told the truth! Should be easy--a positive is much easier to prove than a negative. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No, we don't need cds we have witnesses! Two, if that makes you happy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KHS student Posted February 9, 2007 Report Share Posted February 9, 2007 No we don't, because both Matthew and his father are credible and have proven themselves credible by virtue of the fact that most every claim of theirs that can be verified has been verified, and they've been shown to be telling the truth all along. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Most every claim? I love the "most every," that means not all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.