As was pointed out earlier, we pretty much agree on this, except for the culpability of Palin.
You think she bears some of the blame for what happened. I disagree with that. In my opinion, when you start placing blame on the victim you are almost validating the crime and/or saying that they deserved it. On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 1:48 PM, Eric Roberts <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: > > That is because when you make shit up, it is lying and dishonest. You are > attributing to us things that we never stated, much like you did with me in > our discussion about homeschooling. > > Eric > > -----Original Message----- > From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] > Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 11:14 AM > To: cf-community > Subject: Re: Palin email hacking case - guilty! > > > I have not made up anything. I have expressed my opinion and > interpretations of what you and Dana have said - most of the time > trying to find some clarity. > > Its kind of funny how anyone who disagrees with you eventually gets > called a liar and dishonest. > > On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:50 AM, Eric Roberts > <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >> >> And that has what to do with what was stated? I am beginning to think you >> need some glasses there Scott as you seem to not be able top read very > well. >> "She bears some blame for not properly securing her account" does not > equal >> "It's ok if they don't have a warrant if they fiond something illegal". >> That's pretty asinine Scott and not based on any form of reality. So >> instead of talking about my (and Dana's) opinion, you and Sam feel it >> necessary to dishonestly make shit up and claim that Dana and I stated > that. >> That is called lying and is very dishonorable. Try honesty for a >> change...you will feel a lot better about yourselves. >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Scott Stroz [mailto:boyz...@gmail.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 10:39 AM >> To: cf-community >> Subject: Re: Palin email hacking case - guilty! >> >> >> You have said that you feel she bears some blame for what happened. >> That is an opinion, not fact. (and pretty much the only thing I think >> we disagree on - at least on this issue) >> >> On Tue, May 4, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Eric Roberts >> <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >>> >>> Please show where either of us have stated that Sam. I know it's hard to >>> argue when the facts are against you, but please stop making shit >> up....that >>> is very dishonorable and dishonest...granted that is something that is >>> expected from teabaggers... >>> >>> Eric >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Sam [mailto:sammyc...@gmail.com] >>> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 7:22 AM >>> To: cf-community >>> Subject: Re: Palin email hacking case - guilty! >>> >>> >>> The kid didn't have a warrant and you've been bitching for years about >>> wireless wiretapping. Based on what both of you have said a warrant >>> isn't needed if they find something illegal. >>> >>> On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 11:43 PM, Dana <dana.tier...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I think it's called a warrant, lol...that thing you are againt >>>> requiring for wiretaps. >>>> >>>>> So, you are saying the government or anyone else can invade your >>>>> privacy as long as they end up finding illegal activity? >>>>> How's that saying go? You have nothing to worry about as long as you >>>>> don't do anything wrong >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> >> > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:317365 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
