On 09-14-09, EARL CROASMUN said to ALL:


~> ~>>  According to his lawyer's statements, at least in some articles,
~> ~>>  it was days later. Gee... where does Earl get his facts.


~>  EC> He sometimes intentionally misuses pronouns to create false
~>  EC> impressions, and he does that here with "it."


~>  Uh... Earl seems to have a reading problem. The "IT" was
~>  referring to his paragraph immediately above. A garage was not
~>  mentioned there.


EC>Another good example of his weaseling of words!  Here, he wants people to
EC>believe that "it" (singular) referred to "death
threats" (plural).
EC>Shearer's lawyer says Shearer got death threats, but he does not say that
EC>they didn't start for six days.  They started almost immediately after the
EC>Hardball broadcast.


~>  EC> show had been over FOR ONLY A FEW MINUTES when the first
~>  EC> call came in.  It was an anonymous deep voice threatening
~>  EC> Shearer's life."


~>  You said Shearer said that.


EC>Yes, in an interview with Dante Chinni, right down to recounting the sound
EC>of the voice ("deep") and reporting his reaction
("unnerved").


~>  And notice how you are dodging the real issue with trivialities.


EC>The "real issue' was that Klahn concocted bogus issues based on errors and
EC>made-up "facts," and he is still unable to defend them or
correct them.


~>  EC> The whole story about Buchanan "going after"
~>  EC> Shearer with a knife and the police catching him and
~>  EC> narrowly saving Shearer's life is all just a pile of klahn.


~>  At that time I did not know Buchanan also had a gun.


EC>And THAT is his only excuse for making up a series of facts!!!  This is
EC>classic!


This is the guy who claims (falsely) that nobody has ever proven he has told
one lie in Fido!


One of the *many* reasons I rarely if ever pay any attention to Klahn is I
just don't have the time nor the inclination to refute him.


I've watched people refute him over the years, and its a circular argument:


Klahn lies......someone immediately disputes his lie.


Klahn `qualifies' his lie....someone immediately shows him it cannot possibly
be true!


Klahn re-states his lie in different words, adding the claim that what he
originally said was altered/misconstrued/misquoted/mistaken/(pick one, any
one).


Klahn is again corrected.


Klahn then comes up with a two or three-screen posting of lots of
words...proving (according to him) that he's right.


Someone easily corrects him, pointing out where in those screens full off
words he has changed his position from what it was at first, to something else
entirely, which Klahn now claims was what he said all along!


The thread finally fades into the background, or gets pushed aside by some new
controversy of Klahn's.


Six months down the road, in the course of another thread altogether, Klahn
claims to always be right, citing the first lie from six months back as
`proof' that he's right!


And someone has to start all over again showing Klahn's first lie, etc etc
etc! And on and on it goes.


There are people who take the time and effort to deal with people like Klahn.
I don't. It isn't worth my time. Its much easier to ignore someone like Klahn
and let him have his little illusions, in his little world.





---
*Durango b301 #PE*