--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_re...@...> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote:
> > >
> > > How 'bout it. It's a VERY simple question. Are
> > > you willing to agree with Geezerfreak's state-
> > > ment above, in the converse? Are you willing to 
> > > state categorically in public, "There is a 
> > > possibility that the TM critics here are right 
> > > and I am wrong?"
> > > 
> > > Any of the above-listed posters who fail to 
> > > answer are IMO pussies.
> > > 
> > > They can answer "Yes" or they can answer "No, 
> > > but failure to answer in this case can and IMO
> > > should be interpreted as a big, fat "No." And 
> > > IMO *that* should be interpreted as fundament-
> > > alism and the non-response of the "cultwhipped."
> > 
> > What's the criticism?
> > 
> > Judy and most other "TBers" on this forum agree with the
> > TM critics on certain points already. On others, they disagree
> > vehemently. SO, here's the converse question:
> > 
> > could it be that the TBers are right afterall?
> 
> You didn't answer, pussy.
> 
> When you answer my question with a "Yes"
> or "No" answer, then you have the right
> to pose a diversionary question of your
> own. Not until.
>
Gettin' mighty quiet in this here town Jeb.....

Reply via email to