What are you trying to find? Bitching and moaning from the OP? Hint: it's on every page of this thread, and most pages of most other threads involving BFL.
Hardly surprising. People tend to complain when they're constantly lied to.
Seems to be a small handful of people making all the noise?
That is part of the problem. There is so much evidence about the history of BFL that people just see a wall of text and refuse to read it. Thus it just comes across as "noise".
Since we cannot rely on people to read, we have to continuously dispel nonsense brought up by the Wrenchmonkeys of the world.
There's also a difference between what I said, and what you actually accuse me of saying. I didn't say I was an "expert" on anything. I said I've read plenty of legal documents.
The questions was asked why anybody would place an order with a company who X,Y,Z. I responded as to why I (being one of those people) placed an order with said company, in spite of X,Y,Z. And was attacked for it. Don't ask the fucking question if you don't want the answer.
@wrenchmonkey
Perhaps if your posts were not laden with false statements, the community might be less hostile towards you. Also, you could lessen your use of the terms "troll", "douche", and such. Continuous name calling is one of the tactics BFL PR uses on these forums and it does not engender feelings of respect.
Finally, you might spend a little time reading before you make ridiculous assertions. Weirdly, you are not the first account on bitcointalk to suggest that Mr. Vleisides was the victim of evil government or media machinations. I expect you will not be the last. From our point of view, it is you and those like you that sounds like the broken record. Just another low post account who either hasn't read any history behind the issues, or is deliberately clouding the air for reasons unknown.
@ bitcoiner49er
Love your analogy extension. No cats, but still excellent internets.
You keep accusing me of false statements, but you're unable to produce any. Who is the broken record?
You said the IRS indicted Sonny. I corrected you.
You said it was an IRS witch hunt. I corrected you.
You just said you made no false statements. I have now corrected you.
You will continue to make false statements in support of BFL for reasons that are not clear.
No, you're playing the semantics game. The US DOJ files indictments for the entity that requests it. In this case, the IRS.
I said that it appears to me to be little more than an IRS witch hunt (statement of opinion, not of fact, and not up for debate in terms of "false statements"),
The US DOJ would have been merely accessory to (since they're the ones who actually do the prosecution, once a case/witch hunt gets turned over to them).
They apparently weren't given a particularly strong case, however, throwing out most of the charges in exchange for avoiding a trial (for which they have unlimited funding). Federal prosecutors only care about a conviction rate. If they think they don't have a particularly strong case, they'll throw out most of it in exchange for a mere conviction. If they actually thought he was a bad guy, they would've thrown the book at him, knowing that they with a strong case, and unlimited funds, they would eventually bury him.
Come on, you can do better than that. You've been accusing me of making false statements since well before this even came up. Getting desperate?
