|
On Edwin Kaiser and Related Topics
|
10-12-2016, 09:49 AM
Trine Day = Fake News.
Right, Judyth? Isn't there a law against this? Should there be? That boiler room should be shut down, or at least explode. How many other publishing houses are there like that? Even the ones that don't use paper. 
10-12-2016, 11:20 AM
Actually Trine Day have published some very good books. Books that never got a look in elsewhere. However, some of the very good authors are unhappy that Judith has lowered the tone and also been published there. They feel that this will reflect poorly on their work and they have not chosen to publish with Trine for their recent books.
"The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways. The point, however, is to change it." Karl Marx
"He would, wouldn't he?" Mandy Rice-Davies. When asked in court whether she knew that Lord Astor had denied having sex with her. “I think it would be a good idea” Ghandi, when asked about Western Civilisation.
10-12-2016, 03:58 PM
(This post was last modified: 11-12-2016, 04:35 PM by Scott Kaiser.)
Still… All talk by Mr. Best, and I use that word, [best] lightly, and no proof. So what if I copied a few words and cited the source? Big deal! Best has tried his best at lying, manipulating, even said he was familiar with a plot he never heard of then to cover his tracks he goes to the MMF foundation and types in how the FBI misspelled my father's name to look up the documents. He's a shyster, huckster, a liar, manipulator and a hustler.
Rather than "admitting" he was never familiar with the plot, he looks for evidence which he doesn't have and every excuse to cover up his bullshit. (Yeah,) he's mad because I caught him red handed stealing the Liebengood documents [I produced], then he gets upset trying to burn me, I really enjoyed his little game, but, in the end, I did give him an opportunity to back out which he elected not to. I admitted to his little game of plagiarizing and he ran with it, does he think he's the only one who looked at the manuscript before it was ever released? If he would have remembered, the information was cited. What I used out of Wikipedia I also cited the source, but, Mr. Best won't tell you that if he won't admit to covering up his own lies about a plot he never heard of. So, he goes on, and on, and on about nothing that never existed, he uses words like plagiarize and plagiarize because that's all he's got, he can't even offer up any proof for Christ sake and yet, he's still able to have a few band of followers join in on his crusade. I know, sad, but true. I only know them by haters, after all, these are the folks who wished they lived a life I did, right Best? For some reason he can't prove I [FONT=&]plagiarized without also adding that I mentioned the source, and anyone who knows me knows I would. But! I can prove he steals others work, documents he'll call public and call me out publicly for your amusement, AND he doesn't acknowledge where or who discovered the information, he would rather steal it! He tries to pass it off as his own work, and yet he's able to convince a few folks he's right? Boy, my father always told me to watch out for fast talkers like that, and he really was able to sucker in a few.[/FONT]
10-12-2016, 04:35 PM
Now I remember why I never liked the guy, I suppose it's because I can be gullible, but he, like others I mentioned before offered up his services, (this IS the very reason I left information out). My mother would always say trust no one, now I remember why I don't like him, he's two faced, he'll tell you things you want to hear and tries his BEST to discredit you, well, if that's all he's got, I feel for those who follow him.
He's got NOTHING!
10-12-2016, 04:50 PM
Now, can anyone take the moment and reflect on what both parties have said? Sit back, and (YOU) determine who's really telling the truth? You see, the reason I will always say I don't lose, is because truth will prevail, may be not then or now, but, it will come out. Go ahead, read what he says, then, read the truth.
10-12-2016, 05:05 PM
What's been said, that right there alone should tell you something, I don't hide out, I don't ignore people good or bad. I don't have any excuses like Best, I will always answer anyone, and it's because of that, that some folks feel the need to judge me and call me out. All I care about is the end result, <period>.
10-12-2016, 05:09 PM
Seems like Scott does have some credible insider information, background, and experiences that deserve better than what MB has reduced them to.
To me Scott needs some serious help in determining his evidence and how to best present it. I think part of the problem is the good evidence he does have hasn't been coherently presented. Mr MB may be putting personal grudge before objective consideration.
10-12-2016, 06:35 PM
Albert Doyle Wrote:Seems like Scott does have some credible insider information, background, and experiences that deserve better than what MB has reduced them to. Doyle, I'm not really sure how to approach this, for example, because I admitted to his little game, in a sense, it gave him a reason to run with it, however, if I were to walk right into a police station and confessed to killing someone I wouldn't be charged for murder. You see, this has me in a quandary, I mean, although I did admit to playing his game, he elected to run with it with a priori assumption of the admittance and not seek the truth. I could consider that to be slander on his part.
10-12-2016, 11:13 PM
If your witnessing does contain serious evidence towards the conspiracy it would be wrong to deny it.
|
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
