Eldon Warman's Dishonest Quoting of Newsgroup Messages Unmasked

In an effort to sustain his detax program in the face of challenges to his ad hoc definitions of "person", "reside", "resident", and a number of other words that form the basis of said program, Warman has taken to dishonestly quoting messages posted to the can.taxes newsgroup by others, claiming that they said things that they did not say.

Here are some examples of Warman's dishonest behavior:

• Messages exchanged between Warman and myself regarding Warman's alleged use of "legal definitions obrtained [sic] from judicially accepted law dictionaries"
• A message posted by "DT" and Warman's response, using a different subject line in an attempt to hide the message thread from the reader

cbbrowne@hex.net, in Message-ID:
<bJUL6.9055$iC1.302291@news6.giganews.com>, in a message directed at Warman quoted in part below, analyzes Warman's dishonest behavior in what I find to be a definitive way:

[...]

>> And when what we see is blatant dishonesty, where you rewrite other
>> peoples' writings to say things that they did not see, that isn't
>> terribly supportive of the veracity of _anything_ that you write.

> That would be a dis-information statement by a "damage control
> goon", I presume?

It matters not in the slightest.

If you are dishonest in quoting other people, claiming that they said things that they did not say, that makes you dishonest. It doesn't matter in the _slightest_ who the other person is, or what they said, if you're lying about what they said.

That is indeed the case, as anyone who cares can verify by comparing article <3aff3663.40058362@news.telus.net> to
<NBIL6.45$6j3.2593@www.newsranger.com>.

You're a liar, plain and simple, as anyone can easily verify by looking at those articles to compare what you _claim_ was written to the original. [As original as Usenet gets, anyways...]

"Common sense" usually suggests that the claims of people known to tell lies should be discounted.