21-03-2010, 11:38 PM
Quote:Yes, the phrase is "contentious".If it has nothing to do with this case, why is Fetzer's expert using this contentious and inaccurate term to describe Baker?
So what? It has nothing particular to do with this case, and is a clear attempt at distracting this thread away from its core issues.
Does she need that?
Does Fetzer's expert hope that 'Judyth as TI' will gain traction with readers here?
Do you see that it is potentially as discrediting as 'I represent Judyth Vary Baker and she is being harassed by intel on behalf of big pharma, big medicine and the cancer society because she has the cure for cancer and if you don't believe it just ask Eustace bloody Mullens'...?
Do I really have to spell this out?