>Now you know why people ignore your ignorant speculations.
>You can't even get basic facts straight, while contriving your asinine
>I called you on an error in fact, and you aren't big enough to admit a
>mistake without launching a counterattack.
>How about providing =one= shred of proof that Universal recalled DUEL
>out of respect to Dennis Weaver?
In defense of Brockhurst, I must say that all the chat forums of
DVDfile, Digitalbits etc. all put forth the Weaver's Daughter-in-law
theory ahead of anythng else. Behind that is technical issues, with no
consensus of their actually being any such problems. My personal
belief, a legal issue with the extras, seems to be the least
But we don't KNOW! We will soon enough however find out what this
mess was about, for sure..
. STeve ..
What did you "correct" me on, Mr. Holder? The fact that I said it was
Mr. Weaver's daughter rather than daughter-in-law? So what.
Furthermore, I don't have to offer "one shred" of proof because I stated
nothing as fact - just the speculation of my friend and I. Do you
understand the word "speculation"? Probably not. Furthermore, I
launched a counterattack? You use the word "bloviate" in reference to
me, and I use it back in reference to you. Apparently you own the word
"bloviate" and you are allowed to use it in reference to others while
others are not allowed to use it in reference to you.
I think the apology is in YOUR court, Mr. Holder, but this being Usenet
and all I won't be holding my breath. You see, when I was corrected on
the daughter/daughter-in-law business I came in and posted an "oops".
As Steve jazz hunter has already mentioned, I am not the only one
speculating about Mr. Weaver's tragedy. Now, you apologize for your bad
behavior, you hear? You hear?
And really, I don't need you to e-mail me your response - I see you in
all your obnoxious splendor right here on this ng and it's enough.