HOME | MAIN BOARD | TWITTER | LOGIN | REGISTER | SEARCH | FLAT MODE

not logged in

then correction:

Posted by:
pidunk 11:39 pm UTC 08/24/07
In reply to: In Addition: - pidunk 11:33 pm UTC 08/24/07



>
>
> > They're not very good are they?
>
> Well, that depends on what "lies" you are referring to. I
> just want to say, that despite what I wrote in the other
> post just a bit earlier, that your post was on the whole a
> rather kindly written post, and to acknowlege that is the
> only sensible thing to do. But, other than that, there are
> levels of seriousness, and levels of lies, and levels of
> people lying. Today's headline and the first few
> paragraphs:
>
>

> " MOSCOW - Prosecutors announced Friday that they have
> reopened an investigation into the deaths of the last
> Russian czar and his family nearly 90 years ago after an
> archaeologist reported that he may have found the missing
> remains of Nicholas II's son and heir to the throne.
>
> The announcement of the reopened investigation signaled
> the government might be taking seriously the claims made
> Thursday by Yekaterinburg researcher Sergei Pogorelov.
>
> In comments broadcast on NTV, Pogorelov said bones found
> in a burned area of ground near Yekaterinburg belong to a
> boy and a young woman roughly the ages of Nicholas'
> 13-year-old hemophiliac son, Alexei, and a daughter whose
> remains also never have been found."
>

>
> On the one hand, reopening the investigation is a good
> thing. There is also a lawsuit in the courts concerning
> the political motivations of the assassinations. If they
> reopen the investigation I hope that it will be under the
> light of accuracy, because in that light they will find
> that those bones do not belong to Alexei. My grandfather
> is Alexei. And I also know that the girl's remains will
> not be any of his sisters that I have ever known, of which
> there were two. The count of the bodies found in the
> grave, particularlythe identifications of the remains, all needs to be
> redone. Furthermore, the logo of the company Faberge needs
> to be changed to one of their own, and not take the family
> crest as their corporate seal, stop using images of members of my family on their wares, and it is the family crest
> which has served and continues to serve as the symbol of
> Russia, although now the Russian Federation. In addition,
> there needs to be an establishment that properties siezed
> from the Romanovs were privately owned, and that they come
> to.................not anyone in Europe..........but to
> the United States, to my family, including ME.
>
> So, if you want some "build-up", there is this, you know.
> Get the lithium, boys!!!!


There's nothing like having a crazy princess running around loose, is there.

Looks like I'll have to put Progaganews on ice for awhile too, while they sort a few things out. Dosv'donya.


>
>
>
>
> >
> > I mean come on... do you think if she was actually trying
> > to 'lie' to us, to 'bullshit' as many of you like to term
> > it - she wouldn't come up with something better?
> >
> > To me, they're doesn't seem to be any malevolance or
> > genuine deception here - what purpose would it serve to
> > trick us into thinking that Jim is a different person for
> > example.
> >
> > Loads of people like to tell little lies to make
> > themselves feel better, to try and gain the resepect of
> > other peers, perhaps because they're a bit insecure or
> > sometimes just to be vindictive. I've never seen any (or
> > v.little) evidence of that from Susan - certainly no worse
> > than some of the other members on here who have talked
> > about fictitious shows they're about to produce etc
> > etc!!!
> >
> > To cut a long story short I don't think Susan is 'lying' -
> > I think she genuinely believes (a lot) of what she says
> > and for that I for one, feel sorry for her. I think she
> > should be pitied, not bullied - as should all people with
> > psychological issues, for want of a better phrase.
> >
> > So what if she is delusional, how do you know it's her
> > fault - you don't know anything about her - give her a
> > break. Do you feel like this about all people in society
> > who have problems - if you do then you're very small
> > people who don't deserve to be here.
> >
> > Recently I've been more offended/fucked off with posts
> > from Smehead, Pudding et al than I have been from Susan's
> > and that's a fact. Maybe it's you who should be banned?
> >
> > And before you start it has nothing to do with a
> > lying/pointing out lying hypocrisy - there's far more
> > mature ways to address it if you really wanted to be
> > sensible and come up with a rational debate. They way
> > people have been going on here is so pathetic it's funny.
> >
> > Flash


reply |

Previous: In Addition: - pidunk 11:33 pm UTC 08/24/07
Next: re: Susan's ''lies'' - pidunk 10:57 pm UTC 08/24/07

Thread:



    HOME | MAIN BOARD | LOG OFF | START A NEW THREAD | EDIT PROFILE | SEARCH | FLAT MODE