[mseebach]

> How ridiculous, one states something, and here comes someone with deficient reading skills and whips up a slew of crap that has no bearing on what I stated.

So, I'm not going to waste any time getting into an argument with someone with deficient argumentation skills, except to clarify one bit:

> Framing the brinks guy? Was the man charged or convicted? No. Therefore, no frame.

So the police bust into his home, hauled him into custody, scaring the crap out of his wife and children, and searched everything. He was likely suspended from work, pending his clearing. And even after being cleared, there's no guarantee that the suspicion disappeared before the Dan guy was convicted. Not a frame? BS, it's the definition of a frame.

[mroman]

> So, I'm not going to waste any time getting into an argument with someone with deficient argumentation skills

Right, coming from someone whose debating skills amount to putting words into another person's mouth (or writing)

Now, just where did you read about "the police bust into his home, hauled him into custody, scaring the crap out of his wife and children, and searched everything. He was likely suspended from work, pending his clearing. And even after being cleared, there's no guarantee that the suspicion disappeared before the Dan guy was convicted."?

Seriously, where did you get that?

You seem to fabricate more and more fantasy as you go along . . .

[mseebach]

> Right, coming from someone whose debating skills amount to putting words into another person's mouth (or writing)

I called it as I read it. You pointed it out as something commendable that he preyed on the strong rather than the weak. I responded that preying is never commendable, and that he prayed on plenty of weak people. So far you've done nothing to explain your position to me, except to throw profanities.

> Now, just where did you read about "the police bust into his home .." Seriously, where did you get that?

I didn't, but extrapolated it from the the way Dan was apprehended (by a SWAT team one time, though at no point is it mentioned that anyone considered him even remotely dangerous). I should have added "it's likely that ..". Fantasy? Perhaps - but what do you think happens to a security-systems-installer who's named as the perpetrator behind a multi-$100.000 hoist?

[mroman]

I used profanity?

What?

Serious question: are you drinking right now?

[mseebach]

> I used profanity? What?

You called my post "a slew of crap". If that doesn't qualify as profanity, you still did nothing to rectify my apparent misrepresentation of your original post.

> Serious question: are you drinking right now?

No.

[mroman]

crap is a slang word, not profanity. There is a difference.

My initial post is clear, and I elaborated upon it once already. If you can't understand it, that is your problem.