Re: No admission -- RSQUBF discussion forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 18:12:35 10/22/04 Fri
Author: Shane
Subject: Re: No admission
In reply to: Mike K. 's message, "No admission" on 07:20:48 10/22/04 Fri

Mike,

I thought the same thing when I read Baghdad Brian's comment of "little evidence". This shows that he is very proud and stiff-necked. Personal testimony is the most power evidence against UBF. I have found in reading Baghdad Brian's posts that he has little to say when confronted with personal testimony. If he is the best UBF can offer in the way of an apologist, then UBF is really, really in trouble.

>I will not say such words based on such little
>evidence. Based on the words alone, I've already
>answered, multiple times.
>
>UBF leaders and their henchmen are very quick to spout
>for assumptions on other people allegedly doing
>something wrong
>(see rel=nofollow target=_blank >href="http://www.ubf-info.de/int/bonn/stephanusp200106.
>en.htm"> here for instance)
>but when any UBF person is asked to admit that a UBF
>leader has done anthing wrong, they'll weasle around
>with every possible excuse and even try to claim that
>"there's not enough evidence" when the testimony of 2
>or 3 people (reference Matthew 18) are available.
>
>Call it a double standard.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]