13-07-2015, 04:22 PM
(This post was last modified: 13-07-2015, 04:44 PM by Albert Doyle.)
I think Scully is done. When I accused him of stirring up a fluster instead of directly answering points he returned with a bizarre collection of text quotes that never really say anything and never really answer anything. Apparently his argument method is a sort of soap box speech making that only returns to his regressive orations and never answers your specific arguments.
Scully never answered the fact that the personality profiles of both men, combined with SR Landesberg's undeniable use of a southern accent, confirms that the provocateur and Rizzuto were definitely two different men. Scully avoids answering this because he knows it works against his semantic quote-based argument method.
Scully never bothered to address the fact that Barry Gray spoke to both men and said they were different people. Turner only met with Rizzuto. His witnessing is worthless in this context.
There's simply no way that the awkward, unconfident and yielding SH Landesberg, with his tendency to break in to stressful stuttering when pressured, was the same man who passably pulled off character impersonation in a lengthily-sustained southern accent during interviews, and, more importantly, during rough provocateur work where he was under pressure.
Apparently Scully thinks nitpicking the details of FBI reports translates into holy infallibility in FBI reports where the FBI self-description of obvious frame jobs becomes sacrosanct and unquestionable. Scully noticeably never answers where he draws the line on truthfulness in FBI reporting? Apparently he thinks once you prove someone got a minor detail on an FBI report wrong that translates to unlimited license for claiming everything in FBI reports is true. And he doesn't have to answer to any other evidence.
Anyone who tries to ignore the fact SR Landesberg was strongly associated with southern accents and fit the personality description of L'eandes perfectly is just flat-out dishonest and not credible. They're in denial of the evidence. FBI was clearly avoiding investigation of this individual and trying to pin blame on SH Landesberg. They would use the same telemetric for Ralph Yates shortly after.
While Golz was a good investigator he really dropped the ball badly by not realizing the importance of what he witnessed on TV and making all efforts to identify the specific program. He really screwed up there because he had a huge opportunity. Like weasels seeking the easiest opportunity deniers take full advantage of this video not being found.
Parnell is what you call a "Denial Troll". It's part of the COINTELPRO psy-ops strategy to flagrantly deny some very obvious evidence in your face. The greater the outrageousness of the denial the more effective the result. I'm not not sure how that translates into the recent poll taken on H&L. I don't know what percentage of those negative voters are agents or what percentage are recent neo-con contrarians who have transformed their frustration with the evidence into anal attacking of fringe witnesses. Sort of like caged animals turning on each other in cannibalism. It's obviously time to ignore Parnell since his gig is mostly based on ignoring evidence and trolling denial. That's more a game for children than any serious researchers.
.
Scully never answered the fact that the personality profiles of both men, combined with SR Landesberg's undeniable use of a southern accent, confirms that the provocateur and Rizzuto were definitely two different men. Scully avoids answering this because he knows it works against his semantic quote-based argument method.
Scully never bothered to address the fact that Barry Gray spoke to both men and said they were different people. Turner only met with Rizzuto. His witnessing is worthless in this context.
There's simply no way that the awkward, unconfident and yielding SH Landesberg, with his tendency to break in to stressful stuttering when pressured, was the same man who passably pulled off character impersonation in a lengthily-sustained southern accent during interviews, and, more importantly, during rough provocateur work where he was under pressure.
Apparently Scully thinks nitpicking the details of FBI reports translates into holy infallibility in FBI reports where the FBI self-description of obvious frame jobs becomes sacrosanct and unquestionable. Scully noticeably never answers where he draws the line on truthfulness in FBI reporting? Apparently he thinks once you prove someone got a minor detail on an FBI report wrong that translates to unlimited license for claiming everything in FBI reports is true. And he doesn't have to answer to any other evidence.
Anyone who tries to ignore the fact SR Landesberg was strongly associated with southern accents and fit the personality description of L'eandes perfectly is just flat-out dishonest and not credible. They're in denial of the evidence. FBI was clearly avoiding investigation of this individual and trying to pin blame on SH Landesberg. They would use the same telemetric for Ralph Yates shortly after.
While Golz was a good investigator he really dropped the ball badly by not realizing the importance of what he witnessed on TV and making all efforts to identify the specific program. He really screwed up there because he had a huge opportunity. Like weasels seeking the easiest opportunity deniers take full advantage of this video not being found.
Parnell is what you call a "Denial Troll". It's part of the COINTELPRO psy-ops strategy to flagrantly deny some very obvious evidence in your face. The greater the outrageousness of the denial the more effective the result. I'm not not sure how that translates into the recent poll taken on H&L. I don't know what percentage of those negative voters are agents or what percentage are recent neo-con contrarians who have transformed their frustration with the evidence into anal attacking of fringe witnesses. Sort of like caged animals turning on each other in cannibalism. It's obviously time to ignore Parnell since his gig is mostly based on ignoring evidence and trolling denial. That's more a game for children than any serious researchers.
.