Talk:Sherman Skolnick/Archive 1

Untitled

I have added a reference to this article. Capitalistroadster 02:56, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

While im not a member, someone had some vandalism in here and i editted it out

POV much?

This is a piss-poor example of a 'biography'. It reeks of brown-nosing and completely lacks objectivity. Reads like something a Catholic would write about the Pope. --Baltech22 22:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree. The man was a conspiracy nut of the first order. Jhobson1 15:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

With a procrustean, philistine attitude like that, there are no conspiracies, then. Which is another form of nuttery, really. Fact of the matter is, of course the ruling-class conspires against the people of the World. It's all they ever really do. So the real issue here is -- Skolnick's certain percentage of exaggerations aside -- what is or is not true..?

Pazouzou (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:48, 8 April 2010 (UTC).

Well, it's so bad that it's self-defeating. I doubt it would mislead anyone. His parents lost their meager life savings due to the corruption of crooked politicians and judges LOL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.162.26.4 (talk) 15:35, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

What a revolting comment. What happened to his parents is what put him on his life-time crusade. You -- you're just a garden-variety cynic. Who will have been of greater worth to Humanity in the end? Two guesses. First doesn't count.

Pazouzou (talk) 06:53, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Skolnick

Many of his conspiracy claims were unfounded in fact and outright ludicrous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.234.175.93 (talk) 21:46, 21 April 2008 (UTC)