Revelations

[Albert Doyle]

Brian, if you think that for five seconds I was only referring to Ford and David, you are dead wrong.

It was you who dragged that whole "PM is a woman" over here and took Duncan's bait: hook, line and sinker.

When you got everyone pissed off at you to the point you became so obnoxious it was intolerable, you then went over into the Belly of the Beast, Duncan's forum, and started trashing me.

Then you come over here, and start doing the same thing over again--and you call Alan a troll? In all this time, you have gotten one person to even half buy into your self-proclaimed Newtonian science proclamations, which according to you, should be inscribed with the sacredness of E=mc 2. Maybe they buy that at Duncan's nest, but not here.

And BTW, the other stuff of metaphysical certitude, like Fratini, or whatever his name is, has been attacked vociferously at ROKC. But see that is not serious for you, right? Everyone at ROKC is sub human. But not Fratini or Duncan right?

So stop calling people trolls--and ignoring the fact that this debate has been politicized, and you were a big part of it.

LET US DROP IT RIGHT NOW BRIAN. Now please go over to Duncan's and tell them how I stopped you from proving with utter mathematical certainty your latest ideas about the pixel picture.

Which I am convinced now we will never know the truth about until we get the original. Which they are trying to do at ROKC.

Can we now get back to Wesley Frazier? Who I think is a very complex and compromised witness.

Jim,


I can't answer this because it is unfair to allow one side to have a bold print say and the other to be pre-emptively silenced at your word. Plus there is a totally arbitrary warning that has been issued that "causing trouble" can be used as justification for site action.


Drew presented some very reasonable and simple math that backs what I wrote that has merit outside all of the negative associations you are using to ignore it. I would be glad to debate this with you on a fair playing field where you were not allowed to simply come in and back one side and shut the discussion down as you have done. Drew called for an answer for it and was ignored. If you are pretending that didn't happen you are denying reality. Honestly Jim, your mocking of that math is something I would expect from ROKC and not one of the assassination world's best minds.


Jim, honestly. Have you looked at the content on ROKC? You're not seriously backing that in public against my seriously argued, intelligent posts? The content is idiotic trolling and talking about penis sizes etc. Go read it yourself. This is the group you endorse??? Have you lost your mind?


I suspect that you are motivated by the fact you spoke at ROKC and don't want to admit you may have put CTKA's weight behind a group whose main claim to fame can be disproved by one simple analysis. No man is above good argument and no man is above good evidence Jim. I'm sorry. Last time I mentioned that I had a little vacation from the site. But if you look at the site's definition that is what is supposed to rule here.


Sure, let's drop this. And let's see what's behind your words in a fair debate on a fair playing field where you can't skip answering good evidence like you've done here.