SCUBA-SE Archives

July 2000

SCUBA-SE@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reef Fish <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
SouthEast US Scuba Diving Travel list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 31 Jul 2000 20:57:16 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (69 lines)
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000 18:41:41 -0400, Lee Bell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>You attributed comment after comment to me, after I repeatedly
>informed you that I had not once posted what you indicated.

Cite it!  Which comment I attributed to you was not said by you?
You have descended from being a WEASEL to a LIAR.


>You claimed my statement that "I had read" that Molassas was the most
>visited,

Now I see your trick of appealing to the "technicality" that "seeing"
is NOT "reading" ... let's see how far you get:

 Fri, 28 Jul 2000 08:58:32 -0400
 From:         Lee Bell <[log in to unmask]>

 Fortunately for our economy, lots of people don't know the diving's the
 best.  Last time I saw data, Molassas Reef was still the number one most
       ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 visited dive site in the world.  While S. Florida does not
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

So you SAW data, and that was not "READ".  How clever.  But when I
asked you to CITE the source of your data, this was your reply:

 Date:         Sat, 29 Jul 2000 01:35:58 -0400
 From:         Lee Bell <[log in to unmask]>

 I haven't the slightest idea where I saw it, but I've seen it more than
 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 once.  It might have been Rondale
        ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>then repeatedly used Rondales to support your own ideas while claiming
>what I had said, which I didn't say in the first place,


Keep WEASELING, Lee.  You SAW but you didn't READ.  You couldn't
remember ANY source except "might have been Rondale".   THAT's where
Rodale's came from.  Now you WHINE.


Now for the FOURTH time, you have attempted to EVADE my call for you
to EXPLAIN or RETRACT your false accusation about my reply to Viv:

 > Lee  >Nice job, Bob.  You attributed this to me without including a
 > Lee  >single word posted by me.  Ind of takes personal attacks to a
 > Lee  >new level.  It does not surprise me that you're the one do so.
 >
 > Where is your RETRACTION?>
 >
 >
 > >Put up or shut up . . . if you can.
 > >
 > >Lee

 >Where is your EXPLANATION or RETRACTION?  Never mind the apology.

Not until you either DENY that you have made the false accusation(s),
or RETRACT it, you can mouth-dance all you want, you have only proven
that you're a cowardly LIAR and a WEASEL.

Read my last post.  If you don't retract your false and unsubstantiated
accusations, then just SHUT UP!

-- Bob.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2