14-03-2010, 08:16 PM
I find it interesting that Len is calling to have Peter's posts reinstated.
IS this all just an effort to: 1.Get rid of Peter's VIEWS and 2. Have the entity known as Len Colby now come across as "reasonalble"? Even sympathetic.
Subtle.
I have many good friends in the assassination reasearch world who NEVER post on moderated forums. Many having been burned in the past.
In fact one of my favorite of these people is a person who once had a few "posts" at that forum, under her name and photo and said she never joined. That they were responses to emails then "posted" by someone in control there to make it APPEAR that she was a member. This sort of "honesty" also occurred with two other individuals that I have personal knowledge of: ie emails from both persons saying their "posts" there were NOT posts, they they were responses to email questions and that neither person had ever joined that forum.
The internet can be one very strange place. Deception is so easily accomplished.
Caveat emptor,
Dawn
IS this all just an effort to: 1.Get rid of Peter's VIEWS and 2. Have the entity known as Len Colby now come across as "reasonalble"? Even sympathetic.
Subtle.
I have many good friends in the assassination reasearch world who NEVER post on moderated forums. Many having been burned in the past.
In fact one of my favorite of these people is a person who once had a few "posts" at that forum, under her name and photo and said she never joined. That they were responses to emails then "posted" by someone in control there to make it APPEAR that she was a member. This sort of "honesty" also occurred with two other individuals that I have personal knowledge of: ie emails from both persons saying their "posts" there were NOT posts, they they were responses to email questions and that neither person had ever joined that forum.
The internet can be one very strange place. Deception is so easily accomplished.
Caveat emptor,
Dawn