In a message dated 8/21/06 7:56:25 A.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Otherwise, why not say "Almost Nobody"?

I could have said that, and I believe I have in
other posts. But I started the sentence with
"Nobody," and then I thought, Well, I don't know
about Bhairitu; I don't want to attribute views
to him that he does not hold. So I stuck in
"maybe Bhairitu" as a qualifier, figuring he'd
speak up either way. And he did.
Exactly. You bated Bhairitu. He had to come to his own defense and deny your implication. And if you didn't want to attribute views to him that he doesn't hold, you wouldn't have mentioned him by name in the first place. Also if your intention was never to imply Bhairitu held a certain view, I think I would feel somewhat "used" if I were Bhairitu for being nudged to have to clarify my own views or have others possibly think otherwise because of what somebody else said. That, is baring false witness, a lie.< But Judy don't get me wrong, I thought what you said was in jest and never took it seriously. Only your adamant denial caused me to dwell on it and look at your comment a little more critically.  
__._,_.___

To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'





YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




__,_._,___

Reply via email to