Strife767 Posted February 24, 2007 Report Share Posted February 24, 2007 I'm only 15 minutes into the new recording and already I have heard Paszkiewicz denying several times things that are clear on the previous recordings. If he has any brains, he will do a 180 as soon as possible before he completely sabotages his career. Seems like the poor fool really has no idea what a dire situation his statements compounded with his later dishonesty about them have put him in. EDIT: Wow...I wish I could have seen the look on Paszkiewicz's face when Matthew pulled out the CDs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted February 24, 2007 Report Share Posted February 24, 2007 I'm only 15 minutes into the new recording and already I have heard Paszkiewicz denying several times things that are clear on the previous recordings. The LaClairs have laid the groundwork for your interpretation of the recording, leading you from very early on in how you should interpret what you hear. You've gone along in very docile fashion, Strife. Matthew LaClair committed the same errors that Paul LaClair reproduced at KOTW. If he has any brains, he will do a 180 as soon as possible before he completely sabotages his career. Seems like the poor fool really has no idea what a dire situation his statements compounded with his later dishonesty about them have put him in. Paszkiewicz has reason to be pleased about the release of the recordings. A thinking person will pay attention to the context rather than simply focusing on the precise quotations. The transcript of the meeting will end up supporting Paszkiewicz. EDIT: Wow...I wish I could have seen the look on Paszkiewicz's face when Matthew pulled out the CDs. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I think it's more relevant to consider how this rather poorly executed "Gotcha" moment will reflect on Matthew's future. Paszkiewicz remained even in tone and in full control of himself throughout, I would judge. That tone didn't change at all once young LaClair's drama reached its climax. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted February 25, 2007 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2007 The LaClairs have laid the groundwork for your interpretation of the recording, leading you from very early on in how you should interpret what you hear.You've gone along in very docile fashion, Strife. Yeah, whatever you say. Paszkiewicz has reason to be pleased about the release of the recordings. He sure didn't sound pleased when the first recordings were revealed to him. I wonder why? A thinking person will pay attention to the context rather than simply focusing on the precise quotations. I direct you to my signature. In context, that quote is him speaking directly about what he believes, not in answering any question about "what the Bible says," as he kept claiming in the meeting, and speaking in no uncertain terms. Go ahead, look at the question(s) that precede what I quoted in my signature, and prove me wrong, if you can. The transcript of the meeting will end up supporting Paszkiewicz. You are out of your mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul Posted February 25, 2007 Report Share Posted February 25, 2007 The LaClairs have laid the groundwork for your interpretation of the recording, leading you from very early on in how you should interpret what you hear.You've gone along in very docile fashion, Strife. Matthew LaClair committed the same errors that Paul LaClair reproduced at KOTW. Paszkiewicz has reason to be pleased about the release of the recordings. A thinking person will pay attention to the context rather than simply focusing on the precise quotations. The transcript of the meeting will end up supporting Paszkiewicz. I think it's more relevant to consider how this rather poorly executed "Gotcha" moment will reflect on Matthew's future. Paszkiewicz remained even in tone and in full control of himself throughout, I would judge. That tone didn't change at all once young LaClair's drama reached its climax. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> And of course Paszkiewicz's repeated bullying and whining, his multiple contradictions of established facts, and his final coup-de-grace admission don't matter. Why did I bother responding to this person? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted February 25, 2007 Report Share Posted February 25, 2007 And of course Paszkiewicz's repeated bullying and whining, his multiple contradictions of established facts, and his final coup-de-grace admission don't matter. Given that there was no bullying or whining and no contradiction of "established facts", nor even even admission ... no, they don't matter. Trust Paul LaClair to beg the question in his response, though. Why did I bother responding to this person? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Probably because you wanted to belittle me while avoiding discussion of the issues. You probably would not have bothered to respond without your last line. And you know I'm right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted February 26, 2007 Report Share Posted February 26, 2007 EDIT: Wow...I wish I could have seen the look on Paszkiewicz's face when Matthew pulled out the CDs. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> You know Strife, unfortunately I wasn't able to see the look on Paszkiewicz's face, but you had to see Mr. LaClair shaking while he was speaking. Boy, I wonder....A lawyer with such an experience cannot even speak in public without shaking? Even Matthew and Mr.Pinho (hahaha) did a better job. If we have more of these meetings, Mr. LaClair will end up on the floor because he could barely control his legs! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dingo Dave Posted February 28, 2007 Report Share Posted February 28, 2007 Bryan wrote: Paszkiewicz has reason to be pleased about the release of the recordings. A thinking person will pay attention to the context rather than simply focusing on the precise quotations. The transcript of the meeting will end up supporting Paszkiewicz. My irony meter just blew a gasket Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Paul Posted March 4, 2007 Report Share Posted March 4, 2007 Bryan wrote:My irony meter just blew a gasket <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "It's only a flesh wound!" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 12, 2007 Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 And of course Paszkiewicz's repeated bullying and whining, his multiple contradictions of established facts, and his final coup-de-grace admission don't matter. Why did I bother responding to this person? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Just like the bullying and whining you performed at the town meeting. And you do know about the coup de grace, otherwise known as the death blow. Ever since you have had Strife767 "coup de grace"ing you. You should be ashamed of yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 12, 2007 Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 "It's only a flesh wound!" <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Didn’t know anything could hurt you to get through those layers or roundness and those stylish suspenders. Welcome to the new millennium. Times are changing in more ways than one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strife767 Posted March 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2007 Just like the bullying and whining you performed at the town meeting. Bullying? Exactly what did Paul do or say at the meeting (or anywhere, for that matter) that you define as "bullying?" Also, he had every right to be annoyed that the press release was full of inaccurate information. And you do know about the coup de grace, otherwise known as the death blow. Ever since you have had Strife767 "coup de grace"ing you. Now what are you blabbering about? You should be ashamed of yourself.<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted March 13, 2007 Report Share Posted March 13, 2007 Bryan wrote:My irony meter just blew a gasket <{POST_SNAPBACK}> (said the guy who posted several lengthy and failed attempts to point out a special pleading fallacy) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Guest Posted March 13, 2007 Report Share Posted March 13, 2007 "It's only a flesh wound!" <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Ah! The black knight! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Mangin Posted March 13, 2007 Report Share Posted March 13, 2007 Ah! The black knight! <{POST_SNAPBACK}> "T'is but a scratch! OK, we'll call it a draw!" 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.