The Fiasco of Spartacus

[Vanessa Loney]

Thanks moderator. Although I can't help feeling the warning about attacks on individuals could have come quite a few posts earlier.

All I'm proposing is a fair debate on neutral ground.

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...post100336

Let's take this off this EF thread and see what you got to offer Ms. Loney...

DJ

Hello David

Now you know very well I was proposing a debate between Armstrong and Parker on the neutral ground of Black Op Radio, not between myself and you.

Just quietly David I don't think it really matters much what you and I debate. After all, as Mr Di E. has so kindly pointed out I'm a neophyte and my views are neither here nor there in this overall issue.

But I think it's important that the two researchers who are leading this discussion get to debate it. That way we all get to learn something.

I offered to debate you on Prayer Man any time. That offer is still open. As long as you promise to play nice of course. Just a hint, it's not really PC to refer to people as loonies' any more. It really is time to update your insults.

Hello Vanessa,

While I can appreciate your thinking that a debate may accomplish something, Greg has yet to address the simpliest of conflicts in the evidence, let alone illustrate his knowledge of the nuances of the material enough to have a meaningful discussion with John. All he would be doing is arguing with him over insignificant issues to avoid his inability to discuss the topic with any authority.

Why would John even bother? Taking the time to explain each and every item that Greg repeatedly gets wrong is tiresome.. besides, this is and will always be about the evidence... He doesn;t need John to use the evidence to prove the critical aspects of H&L wrong... he needs to use the ACTUAL evidence. Yet this is the same evidence Greg steers clear of when he presents his arguments... the same evidence which he consistently mistrepresents as saying and meaning one thing when the evidence is there for all to see.

You directly challenged me to discussion/debate on the topic - remember? So please don't pawn off the opportunity to show your understanding of the subject HERE and your take on why it's wrong by claiming this is about Greg and John...
You are on your own here Vanessa... no Greg et al to come derail the discussion... but let's keep it where it belongs https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...post100336

When you go to this link there is a simple question about the counting of days... no H&L detailed knowledge necessary... just a calendar and some common sense...

I look forward to how you present yourself over this very simple question... will you be avoiding the issues or can you look at the evidence and come to your own conclusions?

===================

Hello David

You know very well I didn't challenge you to discuss H&L. I've never discussed it on EF and have never been on the H&L thread here. The H&L theory with two Oswald's and 2 Marguerites is simply not credible and that is about as polite as I can be about it. I have already told you that on EF. I came on here to address the criticisms of EF, ROKC and myself and to suggest a debate between the two key players.

The one time I did venture on the H&L thread on the EF was to take you to task for saying that Australians couldn't do maths or understand English and because you referred to me as a looney. Remember that? For which you were told off by the mods at EF. I suspect that is why you have brought your bat and ball over here, because you don't think you'll get into trouble for the personal attacks and because you didn't think many of us ROKCers were on here to rebut you.

But I have offered to debate you on Prayer Man and will do that anywhere. That is pretty much the only aspect of the assassination that I comment on in detail on EF because it is a game changer and also has solid research behind it.