---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> wrote :
On 08/26/2016 02:55 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... [FairfieldLife] wrote: ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com mailto:FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <noozguru@...> mailto:noozguru@... wrote : (snip) And neither does HuffPro because Clinton didn't mention White Supremacist sites. You mean "HuffPo." Yup. Just a typo. Of course they know what it is. What a silly thing to say! Not according to that article. Ooops, you're babbling again. What's "not according to that article"? I spelled it out but your reading comprehension seems to be failing. No, actually, what you wrote made no sense. Happens a lot with you. I said that the article is about white supremacist web sites but Hillary did not refer to those but to Infowars.com which is not a white supremacist site. Well, that isn't what you said, but sadly it doesn't make any more sense than what you did say. The HuffPo article isn't just about white supremacist Web sites. It's about the alt-right movement in general and its ties to Trump and his campaign, as was her speech. The movement is centered around white supremacy, but it's broader than that; Infowars.com pretty much covers the spectrum. The HuffPo article explained all that. You should really read it. The HuffPo article doesn't mention Infowars at all (probably didn't want to contribute to a rise in traffic there). You would know the difference if you bothered to see what was actually on these sites but apparently you fear they will influence your thinking. I've read extensive quotes from and analysis of white supremacist sites; I know what's actually on them. For me, it's just line on water and review at arm's length. Plus the show is very entertaining (even Jimmy Kimmel admitted that). There are probably a few opinions that you share with Infowars. Care for a pickle? (Bhairitu won't respond to this.)
