13-12-2012, 01:12 AM
(This post was last modified: 13-12-2012, 03:06 PM by Charles Drago.)
It was on January 3 of this year that "Dr. Ralph Cinque" created his original thread, "TSBD Doorway man - Oswald or Lovelady?"
On that same day, only 13 posts into the snake oil tout, I referenced the technique of naming an agent provocateur after a well-known character from the deep politics milieu:
"Looks we got another one, friends. General Field Marshal Cinque Mtume lives!"
https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...r-Lovelady
Two posts later, "Cinque" was making use of the "you haven't responded to my points" lie/diversion that the likes of Jim Fetzer and "Albert Doyle" tell in order to wriggle off hooks and prolong their provocations. I called him on it thusly:
ORIGINALLY POSTED BY "DR. RALPH CINQUE":
You haven't responded to the likenesses that I pointed to- and whether those likenesses occurred by chance or otherwise. And if you are going to cling to the Lovelady hypothesis, then you have to wrestle with the odds that Oswald and Lovelady both dressed so similarly that day.
RESPONSE BY CHARLES DRAGO
I have responded DIRECTLY and REPEATEDLY to your "argument." As for my position on the Lovelady/Oswald/Altgens 6 issue -- you haven't the foggiest idea, have you? And yet the vast majority of the readers of this exchange have a very clear idea of where I stand.
Best to the girl in the closet.
Twenty-two days later, Fetzer showed up on that thread to support "Cinque."
Now examine the following two posts. They were made 16 minutes apart. One was allegedly authored by "Cinque" and the other by Fetzer. I dare you to attribute authorship:
EXHIBIT A (edited for length only)
That is preposterous. Do I have to spell it out for you?
This may be the most preposterous thing you have said yet...
I have to wonder if you even looked at the collage I posted.
EXHIBIT B
Snide remarks are not arguments. When are you going to appeal to logic and
evidence? Charles lost it long ago. Why are so many of you abandoning the
quest for the truth about JFK in foolhardy, shallow, and phony ad hominems?
Take special note of the EXHIBIT A comment, "I have to wonder if you even looked at the collage I posted." It has been used, repeatedly and with mild variations, on numerous threads by "Cinque," Fetzer, and "Albert Doyle."
Four minutes later, Fetzer (author of EXHIBIT B -- at least) goes down the all-too-familiar route "Drago is an evil guru" route:
RESPONSE BY JIM FETZER
What anyone can "see with their bare eye" from reading your posts is that you haven't a clue and that, like many others here, you are no capable of evaluating evidence. "Deep Politics" is a gross misnomer. Call it The Cult of Charles Drago, who long since abandoned reason and rationality.
In short, "Cinque's" original thread (link above) stands as an invaluable inventory of the rhetorical tricks and ad hominem attacks favored by "Cinque" and Fetzer and mimicked of late by "Albert Doyle" -- who, truth be told, appeared in "his" original (to DPF) incarnation ostensibly to challenge the so-called authors of the Doorway Man snake oil being peddled here but in reality to establish deep politics bona fides in advance of future perfidy..
Almost a year has passed since "Cinque" and Fetzer materialized on DPF like brown streaks on clean sheets to launch the Doorway Man provocation. They were exposed as agents provocateur IMMEDIATELY. Their "work" was demolished IMMEDIATELY.
And yet they and it continue to find safe haven in the extended JFK assassination research community.
On that same day, only 13 posts into the snake oil tout, I referenced the technique of naming an agent provocateur after a well-known character from the deep politics milieu:
"Looks we got another one, friends. General Field Marshal Cinque Mtume lives!"
https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...r-Lovelady
Two posts later, "Cinque" was making use of the "you haven't responded to my points" lie/diversion that the likes of Jim Fetzer and "Albert Doyle" tell in order to wriggle off hooks and prolong their provocations. I called him on it thusly:
ORIGINALLY POSTED BY "DR. RALPH CINQUE":
You haven't responded to the likenesses that I pointed to- and whether those likenesses occurred by chance or otherwise. And if you are going to cling to the Lovelady hypothesis, then you have to wrestle with the odds that Oswald and Lovelady both dressed so similarly that day.
RESPONSE BY CHARLES DRAGO
I have responded DIRECTLY and REPEATEDLY to your "argument." As for my position on the Lovelady/Oswald/Altgens 6 issue -- you haven't the foggiest idea, have you? And yet the vast majority of the readers of this exchange have a very clear idea of where I stand.
Best to the girl in the closet.
Twenty-two days later, Fetzer showed up on that thread to support "Cinque."
Now examine the following two posts. They were made 16 minutes apart. One was allegedly authored by "Cinque" and the other by Fetzer. I dare you to attribute authorship:
EXHIBIT A (edited for length only)
That is preposterous. Do I have to spell it out for you?
This may be the most preposterous thing you have said yet...
I have to wonder if you even looked at the collage I posted.
EXHIBIT B
Snide remarks are not arguments. When are you going to appeal to logic and
evidence? Charles lost it long ago. Why are so many of you abandoning the
quest for the truth about JFK in foolhardy, shallow, and phony ad hominems?
Take special note of the EXHIBIT A comment, "I have to wonder if you even looked at the collage I posted." It has been used, repeatedly and with mild variations, on numerous threads by "Cinque," Fetzer, and "Albert Doyle."
Four minutes later, Fetzer (author of EXHIBIT B -- at least) goes down the all-too-familiar route "Drago is an evil guru" route:
RESPONSE BY JIM FETZER
What anyone can "see with their bare eye" from reading your posts is that you haven't a clue and that, like many others here, you are no capable of evaluating evidence. "Deep Politics" is a gross misnomer. Call it The Cult of Charles Drago, who long since abandoned reason and rationality.
In short, "Cinque's" original thread (link above) stands as an invaluable inventory of the rhetorical tricks and ad hominem attacks favored by "Cinque" and Fetzer and mimicked of late by "Albert Doyle" -- who, truth be told, appeared in "his" original (to DPF) incarnation ostensibly to challenge the so-called authors of the Doorway Man snake oil being peddled here but in reality to establish deep politics bona fides in advance of future perfidy..
Almost a year has passed since "Cinque" and Fetzer materialized on DPF like brown streaks on clean sheets to launch the Doorway Man provocation. They were exposed as agents provocateur IMMEDIATELY. Their "work" was demolished IMMEDIATELY.
And yet they and it continue to find safe haven in the extended JFK assassination research community.
