Rich's Website

[_rich kelsey]

With Rich's long excerpts, I would expect a follow-up post would quote the precise, offending passage that is an "attack" or that is inaccurate. That none does follow, convinces me that Rich's excerpts have no actual attacks of any religions, have no note-worthy attacks even of individuals who behave less than virtuously, and have no significant inaccuracies. Simon Belmont's explicit silence in this regard is, in a sense, equivalent to implicit approval. :)

Valorius,

I am convinced the person’s goal was/is to malign my name and my work to see if he could get a response from me.

I am convinced that he was trying to stir up trouble to see what kind of response he could get, regardless of how bad it made him look. My response was to stop this insanity by refusing to take part in any more dialog with him.

His posts remind me of a person who takes a 32 ounce Big Gulp drink to a party and without ever drinking from it, knocks it over just to see the crowd’s reaction. I know a man who did this on several occasions.

I was perplexed by this activity; and, it cost me plenty. The guy tried to ruin the carpet in a new car I just got. It looked like a lake in the car. I paid a carpet cleaner to come to my house and clean the carpet.

Then, one day, he was over at a house I just moved into and I saw him look around and when he thought no one was looking I saw him purposely knock over the Coke drink and stand up and giggle while other people in the room tried to clean it up.

My solution was to never allow him in the house again.

[_Simon Belmont]

Valorius,

I am convinced the person’s goal was/is to malign my name and my work to see if he could get a response from me.

Wrong, Rich. It is your goal to malign my faith, my God, my revered leaders, and my community. It is my goal to hold you accountable for that. If you aren't accountable for your words, then who is? You won't address the hard questions, and you aren't interested in dialogue. It is as if you believe that you are free to criticize, but no one can criticize you.

[_Themis]

Wrong, Rich. It is your goal to malign my faith, my God, my revered leaders, and my community. It is my goal to hold you accountable for that. If you aren't accountable for your words, then who is? You won't address the hard questions, and you aren't interested in dialogue. It is as if you believe that you are free to criticize, but no one can criticize you.

Yet you are theopne who won't address what is inaccurate on his site. I mean he has quoted huge sections in this thread. Why don't you back up what you say about him. How can one think he should be accountable if you can't even show where he is wrong. I think he is right about you. Many of the threads you participate in do seem to support that. All you seem to do most of the time is call anti-mormon and think you have achomplished something other then attack someone.

[_Simon Belmont]

Yet you are theopne who won't address what is inaccurate on his site. I mean he has quoted huge sections in this thread. Why don't you back up what you say about him. How can one think he should be accountable if you can't even show where he is wrong. I think he is right about you. Many of the threads you participate in do seem to support that. All you seem to do most of the time is call anti-mormon and think you have achomplished something other then attack someone.

I did.

He didn't read it.

Because Rich is always right when it comes to bigotry.

[_schreech]

I did.

He didn't read it.

Because Rich is always right when it comes to bigotry.

bump...gotta keep this thread at the top as a testament to yet another full-blow SB failure...woot!

by the way...at least he is not a hypocritical-ass-hat, like yourself....

[_Themis]

I did.

No you did not. Show us where you show inacurate information on his site. Again his links to other sites, which you also have not establishes as having inaccurate information on, do not count. Man up SB.

[_Simon Belmont]

bump...gotta keep this thread at the top as a testament to yet another full-blow SB failure...woot!

by the way...at least he is not a hypocritical-ass-hat, like yourself....

Go away schreech, or I'll mop the floor with you again as I did earlier in the thread.

[_Simon Belmont]

No you did not. Show us where you show inacurate information on his site. Again his links to other sites, which you also have not establishes as having inaccurate information on, do not count. Man up SB.

His links a all anti-Mormon. To be balanced, one should include at least some sites which aren't hostile toward the church.

[_Themis]

No you did not. Show us where you show inacurate information on his site. Again his links to other sites, which you also have not establishes as having inaccurate information on, do not count. Man up SB.

His links a all anti-Mormon. To be balanced, one should include at least some sites which aren't hostile toward the church.

You are still avioding what we are asking of you, and you haven't even established that they all anti-mormon, and didn't you say he did have a link to at least one LDS friendly site. Again you know we atre not talking about links to other sites. man up and show what we asked which was for inaccurate information on HIS SITE.

[_Simon Belmont]

You are still avioding what we are asking of you, and you haven't even established that they all anti-mormon, and didn't you say he did have a link to at least one LDS friendly site. Again you know we atre not talking about links to other sites. man up and show what we asked which was for inaccurate information on HIS SITE.

His links section resides on HIS SITE.

He claims to be fair, but how can he be when he directs people to only anti-Mormon sites (except the Joseph Smith Papers). I don't need to go through his poorly written articles -- I know anti-Mormon filth when I see it.

Do you believe he can criticize my faith and not be victim to criticism himself?