In article , 
amacmil304@aol.com writes
>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:31:52 +0000, Malcolm
> wrote:
>
>>
>>In article ,
>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 12:46:21 +0000, Malcolm
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>In article ,
>>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>>On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 11:01:34 +0000, Malcolm
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In article ,
>>>>>>amacmil304@aol.com writes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So why say so?
>>>>>
>>>>>Where have I said it?
>>>>>
>>>>You're being obtuse, Angus.
>>>
>>>No I'm not.
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Out of the blue, you wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"I have never used the term "Fake RSPB".
>>>>
>>>>If you've never used the term, why did you think you had to deny using
>>>>it?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Because the  RSPB is a reality.  They're conservation is fake.
>>>
>>"They're" ????
>>
>>Have you been on the bottle, Angus?
>
>I meant "their" conservation is fake.
>
Ah, you "meant" something different from what you wrote.

How interesting.

>You might have worked that out.
>
I did. You didn't.

-- 
Malcolm