12-07-2015, 08:49 PM
You're obviously not answering what I'm writing Scully.
You fluster and link an index that has nothing to do with anything and then accompany it with a bizarre barrage of sophist filibuster, but after you are done you have said nothing and made no attempt to answer the very precise arguments I made in my previous post. I personally think you are a document magician who doesn't do very well in open debates of the evidence. Your last response appears to be very indignant about something but after I read it I can't figure out what it is or how it has anything to do with the necessary responses my last post requires.
You are trying to claim total victory over whether Barry Gray actually met and interviewed Rizzuto. I have already explained that is a minor irrelevant point compared to the overall evidence we are talking about. You ignore that and return again with the claim that this somehow refutes us. It doesn't, and the fact you try claim victory with it while ignoring my explanation of why you can't, displays a rather outstanding condition of desperation or bombast on your behalf. You're obviously trying to do too much with too little and trying to shut something down without ever having acknowledged the reasoning of why you can't. The precise circumstances of Rizzuto's interactions with WMCA does not preclude or vacate the full case of evidence I have been discussing and you have been avoiding. And it cannot be used to avoid recognizing or discussing it like you are attempting to do (FBI and Parnell do that too).
Please explain to me how your unstable, easily disturbed schizophrenic with a chronic stuttering problem could pull off numerous interviews and infiltration operations with a passable, lengthily-sustained, and undetected faked southern accent?
Shoot, why don't you just come right out and defend the FBI documents in the Kennedy assassination while you're at it?
Scully,
Could you please explain to me how the above answers my point that you are the worst violator of that standard you keep pontificating by referring to an FBI photo that you have no evidence of? Your offerings are mostly a bombastic lecture on quality of evidence that never answers the direct points and then proceeds to shoot itself in the foot by proceeding to enter evidence that violates every single thing you've said about the rules of evidence.
You fluster and link an index that has nothing to do with anything and then accompany it with a bizarre barrage of sophist filibuster, but after you are done you have said nothing and made no attempt to answer the very precise arguments I made in my previous post. I personally think you are a document magician who doesn't do very well in open debates of the evidence. Your last response appears to be very indignant about something but after I read it I can't figure out what it is or how it has anything to do with the necessary responses my last post requires.
You are trying to claim total victory over whether Barry Gray actually met and interviewed Rizzuto. I have already explained that is a minor irrelevant point compared to the overall evidence we are talking about. You ignore that and return again with the claim that this somehow refutes us. It doesn't, and the fact you try claim victory with it while ignoring my explanation of why you can't, displays a rather outstanding condition of desperation or bombast on your behalf. You're obviously trying to do too much with too little and trying to shut something down without ever having acknowledged the reasoning of why you can't. The precise circumstances of Rizzuto's interactions with WMCA does not preclude or vacate the full case of evidence I have been discussing and you have been avoiding. And it cannot be used to avoid recognizing or discussing it like you are attempting to do (FBI and Parnell do that too).
Please explain to me how your unstable, easily disturbed schizophrenic with a chronic stuttering problem could pull off numerous interviews and infiltration operations with a passable, lengthily-sustained, and undetected faked southern accent?
Shoot, why don't you just come right out and defend the FBI documents in the Kennedy assassination while you're at it?
Quote:Okay then..... henceforth, depart from all sources, resort only to unsupported speculation, and make everything up or pull it out of wherever you house your speculation apparatus. It must be located in a Walmart
distribution hub sized space. How many loading docks does it take to load up and truck as much BS as you can be seen delivering here and on the other sites you post your speculation on. I get it, load and clear. You do
not like your sources and opinions to be impeached. As David Joseph posted, nobody does like that. But either come better prepared, or do not lecture me with erroneous assumptions I can take apart in short order....
Scully,
Could you please explain to me how the above answers my point that you are the worst violator of that standard you keep pontificating by referring to an FBI photo that you have no evidence of? Your offerings are mostly a bombastic lecture on quality of evidence that never answers the direct points and then proceeds to shoot itself in the foot by proceeding to enter evidence that violates every single thing you've said about the rules of evidence.