When you gotta go..

quote:

Originally posted by bigmick:
Back to the earlier point; Reuters broke the story and Murdoch's press and others reported it so why would you think that it be some elaborate hoax simply on the BBC?

I didn't think that - and I didn't say that.

I struggle to see how your words can mean anything other than what I said, but if I have wholly misrepresented the sentiments of your post and the blog, I apologize. For the benefit of me and other contributors, can you please explain your words and tell us what you and the linked blog were actually saying or inferring?

quote:

Originally posted by 7V:
Of course, it's not possible that the BBC was taken in by a hoax is it?

This was my precise comment, made in the context of a link to a BBC story at the start of this thread.

quote:

Originally posted by bigmick:
Reuters broke the story and Murdoch's press and others reported it so why would you think that it be some elaborate hoax simply on the BBC?

That was your comment. Note my words 'a hoax' not 'some elaborate hoax simply on the BBC'.

Clear?

I don't feel like giving lessons in logic, semantics or the toilet habits of George W Bush so let's not waste any more time on this absurd trivia. FFS.

Sure Steve, and obviously there’s no need to explain the point of the blog link. Clear? Well your unconvincing reply clarifies absolutely nothing save that my apology for misrepresentation won’t be necessary and that you’re clearly not remotely qualified to teach logic or semantics.

As you know full well, but would prefer not to acknowledge, this exchange has nothing whatsoever to do with trivia and everything to do with the poverty of making accusations or inferences which are substantiated by nothing tangible, or worse still, nothing but the fanatical ravings of some blindly partisan blog.

Long story short, most blogs aren’t fact and rarely even informed, so you rely on them for information and you’ll be scraping egg off your face.