rat289 1 | 142 ☆
Apr 15, 2007 | #1
As some of you know I was locked in a heated debate with a member of this group who was calling a company criminals without any evidence at all. My posts contained truth and proof which exonerated the company in question. Whereas her arguments contained no proof and were often the same four pieces of her "evidence" twisted and displayed in differing context.
This member's MO is to turn to name calling whenever she'd lose ground with her unfounded claims. I have been silenced and the thread in question has been closed. Granted I was for the most part done with the discussion she still continued to attempt to blast my intentions and character with the same lies and twisted half-truths she used to condemn the company in question.
When you quiet the free flow of ideas and speech you are in effect exercising censorship. There's only one reason I could think of to employ censorship under these conditions. I have spoken nothing but the truth but she lied on more than one occassion.
Now it could be a "glitch" in the system, and I would assume so were it not for the fact that one of my supporters couldn't post either. I've asserted that Amy's desperate fight to defend her lies seemed a bit suspect. I wonder where her money comes from. The competition? This site? Other sources with vested interests in the colapse of overseas companies of this nature? Sources I've yet considered? I'm not saying essayscams is up to no good all I am saying is something is fishy here. Doesn't it seem odd to you that a defender of what they stand against was silenced? Doesn't it seem odd that the defender of what they stand for is allowed to continue to run wild to spread more lies and distorted facts?
This member's MO is to turn to name calling whenever she'd lose ground with her unfounded claims. I have been silenced and the thread in question has been closed. Granted I was for the most part done with the discussion she still continued to attempt to blast my intentions and character with the same lies and twisted half-truths she used to condemn the company in question.
When you quiet the free flow of ideas and speech you are in effect exercising censorship. There's only one reason I could think of to employ censorship under these conditions. I have spoken nothing but the truth but she lied on more than one occassion.
Now it could be a "glitch" in the system, and I would assume so were it not for the fact that one of my supporters couldn't post either. I've asserted that Amy's desperate fight to defend her lies seemed a bit suspect. I wonder where her money comes from. The competition? This site? Other sources with vested interests in the colapse of overseas companies of this nature? Sources I've yet considered? I'm not saying essayscams is up to no good all I am saying is something is fishy here. Doesn't it seem odd to you that a defender of what they stand against was silenced? Doesn't it seem odd that the defender of what they stand for is allowed to continue to run wild to spread more lies and distorted facts?

Scam 7,225