IwasJustThinking wrote:

---

Mr Pilchesky I was merely clarifying the position of the web site, and you as it administrator, as it relates to certain issues.I am somewhat surprised that you have a hard time answering a question with a simple yes or no.

I couldn't have answered your question more clearly, a question, by the way, that you processed as plural in nature for your own political benefit. Your question was asked and answered, clearly. It's no one's fault but your own that you weren't smart enough to get what you wanted with more cleverly worded questions.

The simple fact is you are ok with racist comments being made on your web site and with minors/children being dragged through the mud as if they are adults. Why can't you just say "Yes I am ok with that" it is reallyclear that you are, by your own words and lack of action against the questionable posts. In fact it is quite obvioussince those posts remain and you added to the racist tone by the use of the "n-word" again.

Why do I get the feeling there's a 10 year-old on the other end of these communications? If not 10, then you're intentionally trying to generate provocation through your misplaced feeling of helplessness.

I am exercising my free speech when I say that is disgusting and unacceptable. It isa cleardemonstration of your lack of communications skills that you and other must resort to such language.

I don't mind being jerked off, I really don't, but here's how I like it done: Intellectually, cleverly, rather sneaky and in particular, with some degree of respect for my intelligence as the sneaky, white bastard that I am (one with numerous Supreme Court victories under my non-lawyer belt). You've done none of the above. You must have driven your mother crazy.

As to this thread being about ECTV and keeping my comments on that issue, YouSir, moved my comments here from another thread. I purposely put them there so as not to high-jack this thread. Please don't blame me for this.. as you did it...not I.

But, you were determined to hijack one thread or another, yet another act of disrespect - or selfishness.

I am shocked that I would be threatened with being banned for simply asking a question.

You'll be banned for your adamant refusal to understand what you read when it's stated clearly and concisely. What part of you, or anyone else, can compare whomever you want to a chimp or any other animal?

I guess my free speech doesn't have much sway here.

I doubt your free speech has any sway anywhere until you get your mother's tit out of your mouth. Grow the fu*k up.

Yet you state above that You are "OK" with free Speech. Is it free speech you are ok with, or only the exercising of it by certain people? I ask becauseI have seen many posts by a handful of posters who are clearly just trolling for trouble. (Stormin Carmen is fine example) yet they are not threatened and/or banned. Why?

Because they comprehend the English language and don't harass me with responsive posts crying for a more elaborate conclusion to black and white issues, no racism intended, when the conclusion is, on it's face, speaking for itself as stated.

I have also seen a great deal of posters banned who are simply expressing their opinion ( a dissenting opinion to be sure) but exercising their free speech non-the-less.

The site is called Dohertydeceit.com, not voteforGatelli.com, or DivideandConquer.com. Doherty has sent his soldiers here, and he still does. People like you, for that matter. Translated, it's about exposing corruption, and those who come here with other agendas depart when I recognize the agenda as anti-anti-corruption/Doherty. We're millions upon millions of views into this forum. The rules are simple. If you don't play by them, then you don't play at all.

I find that curious. It is almost seems like certain posters are around (or exist) to keep the debate going, or to create a controversy to drive posters to the thread to comment.. I sure hope I am wrong in my suspicion, but it sure seems that way.

Is that a prejudicial remark against all the other posters?

However a true dissenting poster is more than the site can handle and they are gone? Odd.

Nearly all of the posters here are dissenters, or haven't you noticed? They don't agree with how the cityhas beenrun, so they all agree to disagree. They have a voice here, one that is heard by many. The ultimate goal of the site has always been to expose as much corruption as possible, and in the process, to rid us of Doherty and company. If you contribute to the goal, you stay, if you contribute to your own agenda or try to discolor the truth, you go.

Hardcore wrote:

---

Despite mydislike ofBrown's writings, despite the fact I think Sam Patilla needs medication, and despite the fact that Ithink Al Sharpton is a a scum sucking leech, I would never call any of them the "N" word, or chimp, or any other of the thousands of racially derogatory adjectives.

Leeches happen to be black.Gotcha, but I'm not going to go off into a rant here. You said it, and I don't think you meant to go hard on Sharpton or the leech. I'll let it go at that, because I'm not so sensitive to "looking" for the chance to call someone a racist. I can't speak for Sharpton, and you can't speak for Brown. It's that simple, but it's good that you stood up and let your opinion be heard. Tis' America.

Defend the idea all you want, you're the one who has to look in the mirror.

And, when I look in it, I don't see thin skin. I don't think Brown does either.I respect that he has a job to do, but I don't have to like him, or how he does his job. If not him, it would be someone else. Outside the political ring, I'll take him and his family to the best restaurant in town any time. Inside the political ring, he's a black bastard with the ethical and moralintegrity of the chimp at the zoo. You really don't think he's having a beer somewhere right now calling me an advocate for free speech or the people's crusader, do you?You don't even want to know what he calls me.