11-01-2012, 02:04 AM
Hey Coogan,
Why do you want "a united kick-ass group"? Why can't each individual think for himself and form his own opinions?
Don took my side, and yet, you were mighty patronizing to him. Hmmm. I've seen brown-nosing before, but, you're really good at it.
But let me point out to you, Coogan, that you didn't say one thing that addressed any matter of substance in anything that I have said. You discouraged him from supporting me because, after all, you want a united kick-ass group, but you didn't delve into any point of contention that I make, not one fact that is at issue, and not one controversy. In other words, you really didn't say anything.
And that makes me wonder about your motives. What exactly do you care about? Where does the truth about JFK's murder place in your hierarchy? You don't seem to want to talk about the details of it, certainly not with me. If I raise an issue, you just go mum and get rotten and nasty.
Well, I don't know Don, but I have a feeling that your brown-nosing is going to bounce off of him. And that's because he's not going to just read that; he's going to read everything. Don addressed my issues. He dove into the discussion, the whole inquiry about Doorway Man. You didn't. You haven't. You have only disparaged me from the beginning. Hey, if you had argued something materially, it might have been respectable. I certainly would have respected you more than I do now.
You know, the idea that Oswald was Doorway Man is not preposterous. It's not like I am the only one who says it. You hardly have the right to be dismissive about it. And like Don says, what does it hurt to look at it again? Would it kill you? I, for one, will never understand your attitude and that of others here.
What are you afraid of, Coogan? You've called me a punk, but I know punks when I see them. My interest is in looking at and discussing the evidence.
Why do you want "a united kick-ass group"? Why can't each individual think for himself and form his own opinions?
Don took my side, and yet, you were mighty patronizing to him. Hmmm. I've seen brown-nosing before, but, you're really good at it.
But let me point out to you, Coogan, that you didn't say one thing that addressed any matter of substance in anything that I have said. You discouraged him from supporting me because, after all, you want a united kick-ass group, but you didn't delve into any point of contention that I make, not one fact that is at issue, and not one controversy. In other words, you really didn't say anything.
And that makes me wonder about your motives. What exactly do you care about? Where does the truth about JFK's murder place in your hierarchy? You don't seem to want to talk about the details of it, certainly not with me. If I raise an issue, you just go mum and get rotten and nasty.
Well, I don't know Don, but I have a feeling that your brown-nosing is going to bounce off of him. And that's because he's not going to just read that; he's going to read everything. Don addressed my issues. He dove into the discussion, the whole inquiry about Doorway Man. You didn't. You haven't. You have only disparaged me from the beginning. Hey, if you had argued something materially, it might have been respectable. I certainly would have respected you more than I do now.
You know, the idea that Oswald was Doorway Man is not preposterous. It's not like I am the only one who says it. You hardly have the right to be dismissive about it. And like Don says, what does it hurt to look at it again? Would it kill you? I, for one, will never understand your attitude and that of others here.
What are you afraid of, Coogan? You've called me a punk, but I know punks when I see them. My interest is in looking at and discussing the evidence.