In article .com,
"Andre Jute" wrote:

Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason! wrote:
From: Andre Jute
Date: Tues, Mar 14 2006 11:52 am
Email: "Andre Jute"

Let's see who apologizes and who adds abuse to the nauseating
insensitivity and appallingly poor manners they have already displayed
for 10 days and 128 messages

Well, I also posted to the thread when it said that Pinkerton was
unreliable (started by you, it appears).

Absolutely. But that was a reasoned, documented case.

So if I apologize to you, I must then also apologize to Stewart. Since
he likes and eats haggis, I'm afraid that isn't possible. I've had
haggis and it's disgusting.

I would also point out that you, to be fair, should probably apologize
to Stewart for negatively dragging his name into a thread title, which
could also be called 'insensitive.' Goose, gander, and all.

A reasoned, documented, proven case, made by me; I didn't just call
Pinkerton malicious, I *proved* that he is malicious.

The case with you is different. You carelessly contributed to a thread
in which I was accused of being a liar. snip

You are not thinking logically. You excuse YOUR action where you
ACTUALLY accuse a poster of bad behavior in the title of a post, but
accuse Shhhhh and me of being "insensitive" because we replied to posts
that had NOTHING to do with you at all. Think it though, my friend, and
stop looking foolish.