Please take this discussion off list. While I see that it involves a conspiracy, it sounds like a private matter and distracts from the important material normally posted by those of you caught up in this argument. Please move on!

Teresa

On Tuesday, September 30, 2003, at 08:21 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

In a message dated 9/29/03 11:04:49 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


ector-


I have stated quite clearly that two forged emails were used in a campaign against myself, EIR and the CIA-Drugs group. I never said that anyone else said that. I quite clearly stated that you, Eastman and webfairy were involved. 


When you make the charge, without a shred of evidence, that I was involved in a conspiratorial and secretly coordinated campaign against you and cia-drugs with two forged emails, you are making a FALSE charge.  You are either deluded or lying.  And you are seriously damaging your credibility among those who know the truth.

 

Go jump, McFraud. The record is quite clear, you, Eastman and Webfairy tried to use forged emails in attempt to sabotage the CIA-Drugs list and still are using the actions to try and besmirch myself.  Gee, could this have to do with my writing and publishing activities? Hmm, I am being threaten by the Special Forces Association for Dan Marvin's Expendable Elite and have book exposing the secret societal control over our Republic coming out next month.
No shred of evidence? Let see, First Webfairy posts an "edited" email from Brian and then Eastman posts a purported email with a list of cc recipents, of which three didn't receive. That is proof enough for me to make that charge. You have done nothing to show that my charges are incorreect. NOTHING. If you have proof then post it, take me to court. In my opinion you are nothing but a shill and a fraud. Eruditness don't mean shit.







Mark Urban has reported some peculiar problems with Brian's snail mail.  Have you ever considered the possibility that the bad guys were interfering with Brian's snail mail AND email, and that might be the reason that much of his email didn't reach its intended targets?


Yeah, right, let us blame some "bad guys" skimming just some of the cc's off an email. Hmm, and i guess if some bad guys did it, You must be a "good guy.' What a bunch of crap, McFraud.  Whatever happened to occam's razor?






 

There are many folks who are still not convinced that Brian's death was accidental.  He was taking many more risks in his public statements than anyone else on cia-drugs.

 

And I am sure that you will shamelessly keep that alive and continue to use Brian's death for you own agenda. And you have no guts to make public statements do you McFraud?



You still haven't explained how the messages you assume were forged contain any material that didn't express Brian's real views. 
There would have been no possible benefit to anyone in forging such messages.

 



Post the messages and I will show you, if ya want, McFraud.



It's really a shame you've dug yourself into such a deep hole on this issue.  You owe the people you have falsely accused an apology, although you are no more likely to admit your error than Bush or Blair are to admit theirs in Iraq.

 

What hole, you are the one that has no crediblity, McFraud.





There's a basic rule of thumb in conspiracy research and life in general: never make a serious charge, especially one that is damaging to other people, without having the solid goods to back it up.  Not only is doing so unfair and unjust, but you will then have to live with a set of righteously aroused adversaries that you don't really need.






Another rule of thumb is to not lay down with dogs, McFraud. Go play with Eastman, webfairy and your other shills.

 

With regard to S&B: the basic conflicts between the Bush I circle and the neocons are an open book for anyone who takes the trouble to read it.  Bush I is no doubt seriously distressed by the mess his son has made for himself by following the bad advice of the neocons.  If Bush I thought that invading and occupying Iraq was a good idea, he would have done so during the Gulf War over a decade ago.  He explained clearly why he chose not to do so in his memoirs, co-written with Brent Scowcroft.  The key quote is all over the net.  You can look it up in Google if you don't know it already.

 

Yeah, right McFraud, Bushies always tell the truth in their public pronouncements.



To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om 2">

Reply via email to