Its been my experience that people in general don't want to hear the truth. They say they want friends who are genuine and honest, but as soon as one such friend opens up and starts talking about things that are actually important that affect their lives other people just shut down and don't want to listen, writing off their "friends" problems as unimportant, justifying their discomfort by saying "your problems are nothing compared to mine".
Its a bit ironic that as a liar one can get everything they want, if they are clever enough, but as an honest person they may loose people who are important to them in their lives.
So I want you to think honestly for a moment. Think about things that are deep, or taboo, or beyond the limits of normal thinking. Imagine if your closest friend started talking about those things in a serious way. Say they were talking about them in relation to themselves. And be honest. Would you prefer to hear the truth, or to have friends who were very good at making you believe what you wanted to believe.
Full Version: Truth or Clever liars
I'm well known for my honesty, and bluntness; those friends in my inner circle are well aware of it and have come to expect it. But you're right, I have noticed that so many people ask you for the truth and then when you give it to them undiluted they throw a drama fit. My motto is, I don't sugar coat anything; I'll give it to you straight up. It may hurt, but at least I'm not lying to you.
Sometimes I think people are just fishing for compliments when they ask your honest opinion of something - depending on the subject.
Personally, I much prefer the truth even if it hurts.
Sometimes I think people are just fishing for compliments when they ask your honest opinion of something - depending on the subject.
Personally, I much prefer the truth even if it hurts.
The truth is not always easy, but I think, and agree with you both, that it is the better option.
I have friends that are definitely not honest, but I tolerate them because I want them to feel more comfortable around me so that eventually they will begin telling me the truth and I'll get to know them as they are versus the façade they portray.
I am personally honest, though not blunt. I don't specifically "sugar-coat" things, but I'm very tactful; I prefer someone to learn than to get upset and not learn anything. Though sometimes, I have noted, it is better to be blunt and push someone to see a problem so that they will correct it. However, I am generally tactful and able to present an issue in such a way that I don't come off as being a jerk, and am still able to get a problematic situation resolved. (Problematic situations that involve helping others with their personal relationships, etc.)
So yes, honesty is great; and going about it tactfully is a bonus.
I have friends that are definitely not honest, but I tolerate them because I want them to feel more comfortable around me so that eventually they will begin telling me the truth and I'll get to know them as they are versus the façade they portray.
I am personally honest, though not blunt. I don't specifically "sugar-coat" things, but I'm very tactful; I prefer someone to learn than to get upset and not learn anything. Though sometimes, I have noted, it is better to be blunt and push someone to see a problem so that they will correct it. However, I am generally tactful and able to present an issue in such a way that I don't come off as being a jerk, and am still able to get a problematic situation resolved. (Problematic situations that involve helping others with their personal relationships, etc.)
So yes, honesty is great; and going about it tactfully is a bonus.
QUOTE (Arbor @ Aug 13 2011, 06:24 PM) 
Its been my experience that people in general don't want to hear the truth. They say they want friends who are genuine and honest, but as soon as one such friend opens up and starts talking about things that are actually important that affect their lives other people just shut down and don't want to listen, writing off their "friends" problems as unimportant, justifying their discomfort by saying "your problems are nothing compared to mine".
Its a bit ironic that as a liar one can get everything they want, if they are clever enough, but as an honest person they may loose people who are important to them in their lives.
So I want you to think honestly for a moment. Think about things that are deep, or taboo, or beyond the limits of normal thinking. Imagine if your closest friend started talking about those things in a serious way. Say they were talking about them in relation to themselves. And be honest. Would you prefer to hear the truth, or to have friends who were very good at making you believe what you wanted to believe.
Its a bit ironic that as a liar one can get everything they want, if they are clever enough, but as an honest person they may loose people who are important to them in their lives.
So I want you to think honestly for a moment. Think about things that are deep, or taboo, or beyond the limits of normal thinking. Imagine if your closest friend started talking about those things in a serious way. Say they were talking about them in relation to themselves. And be honest. Would you prefer to hear the truth, or to have friends who were very good at making you believe what you wanted to believe.
I'm inclined to disagree. I've talked to a close friend about suicide, and a parent, in depth. Recently a friend of mine was diagnosed with with a kind of tumor, which thankfully turned out to be safe, and tried to be as comforting as I could. Frequently I am a shoulder to cry on for my friends, and I really don't like opening up about my own problems. I don't consider my problems anything of significance.
I agree that manipulative people, not liars, often gain more than an 'honest' person. But that's not a realistic comparison of good vs evil. It's too disney. In life, people who have the ability to benefit themselves, will benefit themselves. People who cannot benefit themselves, will complain about it. This is natural.
It's entirely possible to act in your own interests, and be manipulative, but still have well meaning intentions. Likewise, it's possible to be 'honest' purely out of fear and self preservation.
Society is full of people who complain that there lives are SO DAMN BAD and that:
a - this means they are awesome people for surviving it.
b - this is why they are not famous or rich, because they're being held back.
To answer your question though, I would prefer to hear whatever it is best for me to hear. Truth is not objectively good, nothing is. There are dozens of examples where telling the truth is wrong.
QUOTE (Sparrowsmith @ Aug 13 2011, 06:01 PM)
To answer your question though, I would prefer to hear whatever it is best for me to hear. Truth is not objectively good, nothing is. There are dozens of examples where telling the truth is wrong.
I think that is a solid opinion to have (the emboldened section of the above quote), though I would disagree about truth being "not objectively good".
In my opinion, there are no issues with telling the truth. People will react to hearing the truth as they will, you cannot control that, and if you choose to tell the truth in a situation where it may not be considered "proper" then that is your choice and the reaction is someone else's choice.
I consider truth, in and of itself, to be "objectively good", however I consider the decision to tell it to someone in an improper situation/manner to be completely subjective (as you cannot determine the outcome/result of telling the truth in every case).
Both the result, of telling the truth, and the reactions, made based on someone's knowledge of the truth, do not make the truth (of itself) bad. =\
(Truth is good, knowledge is good, power is good; the human element is what convinces people that they are bad.)
There are situations though, where lying must be done. Truth is purely dependent of context. However, it really depends on your definition of truth.
If you dial the emergency services, give them your address, followed by the service you need, then proceed to describe the scenario. Pausing to tell that "As I was sitting down to a warm glass of milk, I was perturbed by a noise coming from outside, as I went to investigate I saw some hoodlums quickly approaching my home, having already made it past the fence, and attempting to cut the phone line... Hello? Well shit"
So there's an example where less is more
And of course, the old catch 22 of deontological reasoning.
"You're hiding jews in WWII Germany, some Nazis knock on your door asking if you are hiding jews, do you tell them the truth, or do you lie?"
Now of course, it's easy to say the truth is objectively right, even if in this example you would have to lie.
Truth is truth, it is neither right nor wrong. As much good can come from truth as from lies. Knowledge is simply power, or rather, the discrepancy of knowledge between opposing parties is power. An honest man either has no desire to be more powerful than you, is already more powerful, or is so much less powerful that they know it is not worth the risk.
If one applies this view to things, then friends will often lie to each other, because they're on equal footing.
Imagine, if you will, the classic clash where to close friends are fighting over a romantic interest, or a job, or pretty much anything substantial. They are going to compete, they are going to hide advantages from each other. It's only natural. However, if one side was entirely honest, well then you could only conclude that they'd either: Already won, already lost, or didn't care.
Well, I'm just spurting some vague philosophical stuff now.
I just accept that, in life, I don't always know best. I do know what's natural though, and competition is natural. That might not make it right, in fact it's probably not, but I can never regret acting naturally - and I cannot blame others for acting naturally either.
If you dial the emergency services, give them your address, followed by the service you need, then proceed to describe the scenario. Pausing to tell that "As I was sitting down to a warm glass of milk, I was perturbed by a noise coming from outside, as I went to investigate I saw some hoodlums quickly approaching my home, having already made it past the fence, and attempting to cut the phone line... Hello? Well shit"
So there's an example where less is more
And of course, the old catch 22 of deontological reasoning.
"You're hiding jews in WWII Germany, some Nazis knock on your door asking if you are hiding jews, do you tell them the truth, or do you lie?"
Now of course, it's easy to say the truth is objectively right, even if in this example you would have to lie.
Truth is truth, it is neither right nor wrong. As much good can come from truth as from lies. Knowledge is simply power, or rather, the discrepancy of knowledge between opposing parties is power. An honest man either has no desire to be more powerful than you, is already more powerful, or is so much less powerful that they know it is not worth the risk.
If one applies this view to things, then friends will often lie to each other, because they're on equal footing.
Imagine, if you will, the classic clash where to close friends are fighting over a romantic interest, or a job, or pretty much anything substantial. They are going to compete, they are going to hide advantages from each other. It's only natural. However, if one side was entirely honest, well then you could only conclude that they'd either: Already won, already lost, or didn't care.
Well, I'm just spurting some vague philosophical stuff now.
I just accept that, in life, I don't always know best. I do know what's natural though, and competition is natural. That might not make it right, in fact it's probably not, but I can never regret acting naturally - and I cannot blame others for acting naturally either.
QUOTE (Sparrowsmith @ Aug 13 2011, 06:31 PM)
There are situations though, where lying must be done. Truth is purely dependent of context. However, it really depends on your definition of truth.
If you dial the emergency services, give them your address, followed by the service you need, then proceed to describe the scenario. Pausing to tell that "As I was sitting down to a warm glass of milk, I was perturbed by a noise coming from outside, as I went to investigate I saw some hoodlums quickly approaching my home, having already made it past the fence, and attempting to cut the phone line... Hello? Well shit"
So there's an example where less is more
And of course, the old catch 22 of deontological reasoning.
"You're hiding jews in WWII Germany, some Nazis knock on your door asking if you are hiding jews, do you tell them the truth, or do you lie?"
Now of course, it's easy to say the truth is objectively right, even if in this example you would have to lie.
Truth is truth, it is neither right nor wrong. As much good can come from truth as from lies. Knowledge is simply power, or rather, the discrepancy of knowledge between opposing parties is power. An honest man either has no desire to be more powerful than you, is already more powerful, or is so much less powerful that they know it is not worth the risk.
If one applies this view to things, then friends will often lie to each other, because they're on equal footing.
Imagine, if you will, the classic clash where to close friends are fighting over a romantic interest, or a job, or pretty much anything substantial. They are going to compete, they are going to hide advantages from each other. It's only natural. However, if one side was entirely honest, well then you could only conclude that they'd either: Already won, already lost, or didn't care.
Well, I'm just spurting some vague philosophical stuff now.
I just accept that, in life, I don't always know best. I do know what's natural though, and competition is natural. That might not make it right, in fact it's probably not, but I can never regret acting naturally - and I cannot blame others for acting naturally either.
If you dial the emergency services, give them your address, followed by the service you need, then proceed to describe the scenario. Pausing to tell that "As I was sitting down to a warm glass of milk, I was perturbed by a noise coming from outside, as I went to investigate I saw some hoodlums quickly approaching my home, having already made it past the fence, and attempting to cut the phone line... Hello? Well shit"
So there's an example where less is more
And of course, the old catch 22 of deontological reasoning.
"You're hiding jews in WWII Germany, some Nazis knock on your door asking if you are hiding jews, do you tell them the truth, or do you lie?"
Now of course, it's easy to say the truth is objectively right, even if in this example you would have to lie.
Truth is truth, it is neither right nor wrong. As much good can come from truth as from lies. Knowledge is simply power, or rather, the discrepancy of knowledge between opposing parties is power. An honest man either has no desire to be more powerful than you, is already more powerful, or is so much less powerful that they know it is not worth the risk.
If one applies this view to things, then friends will often lie to each other, because they're on equal footing.
Imagine, if you will, the classic clash where to close friends are fighting over a romantic interest, or a job, or pretty much anything substantial. They are going to compete, they are going to hide advantages from each other. It's only natural. However, if one side was entirely honest, well then you could only conclude that they'd either: Already won, already lost, or didn't care.
Well, I'm just spurting some vague philosophical stuff now.
I just accept that, in life, I don't always know best. I do know what's natural though, and competition is natural. That might not make it right, in fact it's probably not, but I can never regret acting naturally - and I cannot blame others for acting naturally either.
My argument would not be "truth is right/wrong". I make no reference to morals in my post. =]
I say "truth/knowledge/power is good" in the same way that I say "life/death/time/nature is good"; speaking of inherent "goodness".
I'm of the opinion that, in and of itself, almost any noun is objectively good. I do not find these things to be evil, though I do find humans to be both good and evil.
Because humans are able to be evil, they are able to use good things (almost any noun) to do things (actions) which c/sh/would be considered evil.
What is right, and what is wrong, would be a moral argument (which I won't get involved in, though I mostly agree with what you've mentioned in relation to right/wrong). =]
In relation to the first portion of the above quote, I would agree that there are certain situations where telling the truth wouldn't be the best option, though that is a matter of deciding whether or not it is proper to do so (at the time one is either asked, or decides to talk, about it).
If I were in the first situation, involving the police call, I would be telling the truth regardless of how many words I would say - thus it wouldn't relate to telling the truth, rather it would relate to how much truth is supplied.
If I were in the second situation, involving the Nazi soldier's question, I would be in a situation where I have chosen (based on whatever morals I would have had at the time that would have put me in that situation, hypothetically speaking) to lie about hiding the Jews.
But again, that is a moral argument (and both examples are emergency situations).
Thus, I could say that in emergency situations (where a life may be at stake) I would lie to ensure the safety of others.
Although Sparrow, I agree with many of the points you brought up - you wandered in a much broader direction than I believe the op intended with their initial question. My response was answering the direct post. Assuming a scenario where a friend/family member etc knew something about say my boyfriend that I didn't, and knew that it's pertinent information, but could possibly lead to hurt feelings - in that sort of scenario, or a "do these jeans make me look fat" kind of scenario, then yes I much prefer the truth.
What you've brought up is a much broader aspect, and furthermore goes beyond black and white truth and into the realm of morality behind the truth or lie itself.Given a scenario where I was hiding x persons from y persecution that is unjust/unfounded, then absolutely I'd lie if it meant sparing their lives.
Yes, context plays a very large role - it does everywhere else and every other situation as well - hence why it's very easy to be offended by text online because you don't entirely understand the speakers' intended context entirely. Different topic however.
Personally, I always tell the truth if I feel it's going to be in some way beneficial for the person, despite hurt feelings. I'll 'soften the blow' so that it doesn't come across as entirely harsh, but it'll be the truth regardless. Now if it's something that isn't beneficial to the person, or couldn't conceivably help them in some way, then I don't regard it as a lie as I've not said anything, simply withheld information.
What you've brought up is a much broader aspect, and furthermore goes beyond black and white truth and into the realm of morality behind the truth or lie itself.Given a scenario where I was hiding x persons from y persecution that is unjust/unfounded, then absolutely I'd lie if it meant sparing their lives.
Yes, context plays a very large role - it does everywhere else and every other situation as well - hence why it's very easy to be offended by text online because you don't entirely understand the speakers' intended context entirely. Different topic however.
Personally, I always tell the truth if I feel it's going to be in some way beneficial for the person, despite hurt feelings. I'll 'soften the blow' so that it doesn't come across as entirely harsh, but it'll be the truth regardless. Now if it's something that isn't beneficial to the person, or couldn't conceivably help them in some way, then I don't regard it as a lie as I've not said anything, simply withheld information.
Ahh, I admit I did go off on a tangent. I've been without college (or high school, I forget how years translate over to America) for months now, no philosophical musings 
Then again, the classic 'does my butt look big in this' is quite the dilemma. Answering yes can seem malicious, or honest, depending on the approach. I've been asked the question before where the answer was yes, but the outfit itself was astounding (must have been the first time I gave a damn about fashion
) and I knew the question wasn't "Does my butt look big in this" but more like "Does it look good?".
So I dodged the question by saying she looked great (Which is honest) and that she has a terrific arse and shouldn't worry about it.
Completely honest, but I avoided making her feel self-conscious (Which I know is a problem for her, and 99% of people on earth).
I'd define this as a clever lie. I never answered her question, but she'll assume the response, even if that's not the truth. However, I still said the truth, and paid a compliment in doing so. I've noticed when people have done this same tactic on me before, and I take their word for it - I stop worrying. A lot of the time people are looking out for you.
http://www.cracked.com/funny-2796-the-girlfriend-paradox/
As the above link shows in the first diagram, there is a reason guys have to dodge this question in 99% of cases.
It's fairly safe for work, but you shouldn't read cracked articles at work because you'll laugh yourself to death
Here's another little dilemma. I know for a fact that a friend of mine confessed his love for someone while going out with someone else. They were pretty serious, three months I believe, and he's trying to cheat on her.
I disapproved, and told him this, but I wasn't going to rat him out, because the girl he was chasing would never say yes (she's friends with his girlfriend) and it wouldn't do any good anyway. He stopped trying after a while and now they're a perfectly happy couple.
But if I'd been asked whether he was cheating on her, I would have said no. If I'd been asked whether he was faithful, or liked someone else, I'd have to tell the truth.
So I guess telling the truth is a pretty complex situation sometimes. I'd like to know exactly what the OP was referring to when he started the thread.
Then again, the classic 'does my butt look big in this' is quite the dilemma. Answering yes can seem malicious, or honest, depending on the approach. I've been asked the question before where the answer was yes, but the outfit itself was astounding (must have been the first time I gave a damn about fashion
) and I knew the question wasn't "Does my butt look big in this" but more like "Does it look good?".So I dodged the question by saying she looked great (Which is honest) and that she has a terrific arse and shouldn't worry about it.
Completely honest, but I avoided making her feel self-conscious (Which I know is a problem for her, and 99% of people on earth).
I'd define this as a clever lie. I never answered her question, but she'll assume the response, even if that's not the truth. However, I still said the truth, and paid a compliment in doing so. I've noticed when people have done this same tactic on me before, and I take their word for it - I stop worrying. A lot of the time people are looking out for you.
http://www.cracked.com/funny-2796-the-girlfriend-paradox/
As the above link shows in the first diagram, there is a reason guys have to dodge this question in 99% of cases.
It's fairly safe for work, but you shouldn't read cracked articles at work because you'll laugh yourself to death Here's another little dilemma. I know for a fact that a friend of mine confessed his love for someone while going out with someone else. They were pretty serious, three months I believe, and he's trying to cheat on her.
I disapproved, and told him this, but I wasn't going to rat him out, because the girl he was chasing would never say yes (she's friends with his girlfriend) and it wouldn't do any good anyway. He stopped trying after a while and now they're a perfectly happy couple.
But if I'd been asked whether he was cheating on her, I would have said no. If I'd been asked whether he was faithful, or liked someone else, I'd have to tell the truth.
So I guess telling the truth is a pretty complex situation sometimes. I'd like to know exactly what the OP was referring to when he started the thread.
The real nature of this question I suppose should be clarified. When it comes to other people its rather easy to make a decision, but what about when it comes to yourself.
Let us suppose that there are many dark things you keep hidden about yourself/your past. If you speak you may lose everything. Friends, family, employment, and possibly more. However if you don't speak you must suffer in silence for eternity. Either way you pretty much lose.
That is the real nature of the honest person. The honest one loses, while the one who lies well, while they still suffer within, they keep the things they care about and can gain more.
When your talking to someone about someone, same person or different, the situation can change. Sometimes the truth is best, sometimes a lie, but when you are talking about yourself, it changes. So which is best? To lie or to be honest? In that respect I have yet to meet a person who want to hear the truth about the person their talking to. The truth about themselves, maybe. The truth about others, sure. But when confronted with the truth of a person right in front of you, it changes.
Let us suppose that there are many dark things you keep hidden about yourself/your past. If you speak you may lose everything. Friends, family, employment, and possibly more. However if you don't speak you must suffer in silence for eternity. Either way you pretty much lose.
That is the real nature of the honest person. The honest one loses, while the one who lies well, while they still suffer within, they keep the things they care about and can gain more.
When your talking to someone about someone, same person or different, the situation can change. Sometimes the truth is best, sometimes a lie, but when you are talking about yourself, it changes. So which is best? To lie or to be honest? In that respect I have yet to meet a person who want to hear the truth about the person their talking to. The truth about themselves, maybe. The truth about others, sure. But when confronted with the truth of a person right in front of you, it changes.
hmmm, if there's something dark in your past that you are ashamed of, then it is no longer something you agree with. And if you don't agree with it, then it's not you. If it's not you then you're hardly lying to avoid talking about it. If someone asks you about it, it is your call to tell them, but you're under no obligation to tell them outright.
Now if someone is still doing dark deeds, whatever they may be, and hiding them, then they are being quite despicable.
Now if someone is still doing dark deeds, whatever they may be, and hiding them, then they are being quite despicable.
QUOTE (Sparrowsmith @ Aug 20 2011, 12:26 PM)
hmmm, if there's something dark in your past that you are ashamed of, then it is no longer something you agree with. And if you don't agree with it, then it's not you. If it's not you then you're hardly lying to avoid talking about it. If someone asks you about it, it is your call to tell them, but you're under no obligation to tell them outright.
Now if someone is still doing dark deeds, whatever they may be, and hiding them, then they are being quite despicable.
Now if someone is still doing dark deeds, whatever they may be, and hiding them, then they are being quite despicable.
This is a very good argument, considering the fact that there are many debates on whether a person is the same person as they were in the past, or if they are a different person based on their experiences, knowledge, etc.. If they are, does this change the way people view them?
Are people able to forgive everything they know about a person, even if they feel the person has changed? (Consider people in prison, who may have done something horrid in the past, but have had a change of heart. Note that I'm not suggesting their sentence be changed, I'm specifically referring to the way people would think about that person if they knew both their past person and their new person.)
I agree that it is not lying if you withhold truth, but that is why you can tell the truth by saying, "I'm not comfortable with discussing that". It is true that you are not comfortable with discussing it, and thus you are not lying but also do not have to divulge information that you do not wish to. =]
QUOTE (X-M-O @ Aug 20 2011, 11:59 PM)
QUOTE (Sparrowsmith @ Aug 20 2011, 12:26 PM)
hmmm, if there's something dark in your past that you are ashamed of, then it is no longer something you agree with. And if you don't agree with it, then it's not you. If it's not you then you're hardly lying to avoid talking about it. If someone asks you about it, it is your call to tell them, but you're under no obligation to tell them outright.
Now if someone is still doing dark deeds, whatever they may be, and hiding them, then they are being quite despicable.
Now if someone is still doing dark deeds, whatever they may be, and hiding them, then they are being quite despicable.
This is a very good argument, considering the fact that there are many debates on whether a person is the same person as they were in the past, or if they are a different person based on their experiences, knowledge, etc.. If they are, does this change the way people view them?
Are people able to forgive everything they know about a person, even if they feel the person has changed? (Consider people in prison, who may have done something horrid in the past, but have had a change of heart. Note that I'm not suggesting their sentence be changed, I'm specifically referring to the way people would think about that person if they knew both their past person and their new person.)
I agree that it is not lying if you withhold truth, but that is why you can tell the truth by saying, "I'm not comfortable with discussing that". It is true that you are not comfortable with discussing it, and thus you are not lying but also do not have to divulge information that you do not wish to. =]
These issues are made quite concisely in "A clockwork Orange" where a rapist/murderer is released after being made physically allergic to violence, however, everyone he ever did wrong to wants to enact their own horrific retribution until he tries to kill himself. One of the many morals to the story is that once they've paid their dues, you shouldn't pain people any more.
The same applies to past transgressions. If you disown what you have done as wrong, then it is hardly pure to allow others to punish you for it. Thus is life.
QUOTE (Arbor @ Aug 13 2011, 10:24 AM)
Its been my experience that people in general don't want to hear the truth. They say they want friends who are genuine and honest, but as soon as one such friend opens up and starts talking about things that are actually important that affect their lives other people just shut down and don't want to listen, writing off their "friends" problems as unimportant, justifying their discomfort by saying "your problems are nothing compared to mine".
Its a bit ironic that as a liar one can get everything they want, if they are clever enough, but as an honest person they may loose people who are important to them in their lives.
So I want you to think honestly for a moment. Think about things that are deep, or taboo, or beyond the limits of normal thinking. Imagine if your closest friend started talking about those things in a serious way. Say they were talking about them in relation to themselves. And be honest. Would you prefer to hear the truth, or to have friends who were very good at making you believe what you wanted to believe.
Its a bit ironic that as a liar one can get everything they want, if they are clever enough, but as an honest person they may loose people who are important to them in their lives.
So I want you to think honestly for a moment. Think about things that are deep, or taboo, or beyond the limits of normal thinking. Imagine if your closest friend started talking about those things in a serious way. Say they were talking about them in relation to themselves. And be honest. Would you prefer to hear the truth, or to have friends who were very good at making you believe what you wanted to believe.
I am a down right truthful bluntly honest person. if you have to make up stories or tell me things I know for a fact is not true about you, your life, your life style I want nothing to do with you and your identity or who you presume to be. Why? Because your wasting my time, my effort and my energy when your some one, talking about, being, describing things that are not true in any way shape or form.
You cannot pull the wole over the wolfs eye, but you can over the sheeps. and I am no sheep.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.