Friday, November 30, 2007

A lot of people??

One comment in the barrage of desperate (but amusingly prolific) comments to this blog yesterday said a lot of people are wondering about me.

It is, of course, a lie.

In the website Outfoxed, the argument from authority frequently used by Fox News journalists is exposed for its dishonesty. Some people say - is a fallacious argument.

Being from Liars Team HQ though, this sort of dishonesty is only to be expected. It's what they do, after all...

So, if a lot of people are wondering about me, the anonymous commenter must therefore be able to name at least a few of them...

They won't - that would lead to all sorts of discomfort for them. But it'll be interesting to see what lie they use to escape the burden of proof.

Go for it, liars.... who are these "lot of people"?


Anonymous said...

You are correct. No one is thinking about you or your dead brother.

ChatRat said...

See, I told you there wouldn't be one single person you could name who is "wondering", liar.

Btw, nobody's thinking about the spastic dragon lover either. ;)

ChatRat said...

Except perhaps for that other massive creep, Labyrinth who can't think of anything BUT having sex with children...

Anonymous said...

You've acquired quite the reputation in the P&A/Philochat communities. Until now, we've preferred not to get involved in the fundamental derailment of such a rancorous and callow individual. However in recent light of all these increasingly disturbing posts of yours, a few of us have turned our attention towards this matter.

We shall not reveal ourselves in order to appease your juvenile demand for justification. And we shall not oblige you in your wanton denial of any wrongdoing on your part.

The necessity for clarity and additional information remains ever paramount, to the parents and these children.

You adamantly refuse to shed light on your dubious affairs, which raises the question as to what the purpose of this blog is, exactly. Isn't it implicitly designed to rationalize and justify your conduct? Even here you betray your ideals.

ChatRat said...

Again you say "a few of us" yet can't name any.

Now you've brought unnamed parents and children in as well...

Your dishonesty shines. And for your information, most of the kids and their parents ARE watching this exchange and your attempts to damage my reputation with them are failing massively.

Anonymous said...

The legitimacy of such claims is as suspect as your dubious reputation. Are we to honestly believe that the parents of these children are actively engaged in the supervision of this blog?

Your activities have been solemnly mired in disrepute. You've sickeningly disparaged Down children. You've suborned several children into committing felonies on your behalf, thereby imperilling their futures and putting them in considerable personal danger. You've enlisted their assistance in various petty online feuds. You've divulged that they've aided you in your crusade against so-described online sexual predators. Take into mind, these are children. They should be focusing on their futures, not jeopardize their physical and psychological wellbeing per your request.

And you would have us believe that these parents would sit idly by in full-knowledge and in passive assent as you manipulate, groom and indoctrinate these children to commit a slough of questionable activities?

Honestly, you must be joking. Utterly preposterous.

ChatRat said...

You are so full of shit I can practically smell it.

As I've said before, if you have issues with anything I might have said or done, you go tell the authorities.

Don't sit their trying to claim some sort of moral highground when you can't even get your facts straight or your lies organised - and then not even have the moral turpitude to do something about what you're pretending you find so egregious.

Do it or fuck off, liar.

Anonymous said...

What a vapid and uninspired remonstrance, and that would be 'moral rectitude' (redundant of course.)

You've questioned the validity of my allegations-- in errant folly, to be precise, given the fact that the incriminating statements can be found on this very blog.

The original request for transparency was made in order to give you the opportunity to clarify your own incriminating testimony. It stands in resounding resolve against your petty and recriminatory denial. (Unless of course you've begun to redact the material in question, which I fear would be prudent and unavoidable for you at this stage.)

With regards to your tiresome and wholly inappropriate bluster, I would ask you to reflect upon your dubious circumstances. Any such complaints would be channelled through an overburdened internet bureau. The 'evidence' that you've yourself provided is circumstantial at best. (After all, such a petty man might have fabricated the 'accounts' to begin with in order to garner the initial support of these children.)

No, if such a complaint is to be made, it shall require the first-hand testimony of one of these children that you might have victimized. The parents themselves could also alert the appropriate authorities when finally informed of your questionable acquaintanceship with these children.

Our hope rests in the resilience of these children to reflect upon their own circumstances with sound judgment and common sense. Inducing them to act and do what is right on their own accord.

This exchange was primarily designed to place a number of crucial question marks behind the various aspects of your character, with the intent of raising awareness about the unhealthy relationships that you've fostered with these children.

Let's hope this mirror will be enough to galvanize their deep-seated feelings of unease concerning your involvement in their lives.

One thing is certain however, your spiteful rancour and petty character makes you expressly unsuitable to serve as a role model.

ChatRat said...

too long; didn't read.