Jump to content
The Education Forum

Greg Parker

Members
  • Content Count

    4,266
  • Joined

  • Last visited

2 Followers

About Greg Parker

  • Rank
    Super Member
  • Birthday 04/04/1958

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Australia

Recent Profile Visitors

29,079 profile views
  1. Greg, I'm interested in your comments regarding the multi-sate prostitution ring you referenced in a couple of threads. How can I find out more about "the Circuit"? 

    Thanks!

  2. This is an unsubstantiated accusation backed only by a patently phony anecdote. Why was my rebuttal removed but this accusation left up? James Gordon responded to why my rebuttal was removed with this: I would have thought it was clear that threads reflecting personal disputes by members are not allowed on the discussion forum. When detected they will be hidden. The PM function is available for that kind of conversation. This is not a matter for discussion: this is an administration privilege and interpretation. Apart from the fact that no one but James knows what an "administration p
  3. In a post made on Jan 28, Richard Gilbride made some pretty serious allegations against me and threatened to have criminal charges laid. Twice now I have started threads to rebut those charges. Both times those threads have disappeared while Gilbride's original allegations remain for all to see. The second thread disappearing was particularly troubling because it contained the proof that there was no substance to Gilbride's charges. Given the above, I will make no further posts on this forum until I receive a satisfactory response as to WHO took those threads down - and why. Is this 1984?
  4. Slightly out of your order Paul, for better flow 1. 5,000 is just a number. It says nothing of the meat of the question, nor does it compensate for lack of cross-examination. 6. "When you swear to do something, you're saying you will do it. This can be interpreted as a religously backed oath or as a sincere promise. [1] Either way, quakers object because they believe they're supposed to tell the truth at all times, and so they "do not swear, but we 'affirm' that we are being honest, as always". http://www.jefftk.com/p/quakers-and-affirming Paul, I never said she had IMMUNITY from lying.
  5. Not just flimsy, it's pure balderdash - as expected.
  6. 1. Up until she appeared at the Shaw trial, she had not been subjected to cross-examination and her words were left unopposed thanks to the credulousness of the commission. 2. Her memory of the phone call between herself and Michael belies other evidence. 3. Her memory of the phone call from the TEC belies other evidence. 4. Her story about Oswald giving them the phone number to N Beckley in case Marina went into labor, but then neglecting to tell them they should ask for "Mr Lee" lacks internal logic and is most likely self-serving. 5. Her willingness to lie on official government documen
  7. Never changed. Kinda like your times tables, eh Paul? Once LEARNED, it can't be unlearned. Pity human memory doesn't work like that. Witness veracity is tested in a number of ways. Is it supported by other evidence? Is it consistent (as opposed to inconsistent or rote)? Has the witness faced cross-examination? Does the testimony pass the smell test (e.g. does it advance personal agendas or is it in any other way, self-serving? ----------------------------------- Ruth's testimony fails on a number of indicators.
  8. Paul, In what way do you believe Oswald was an accomplice in the murder? What evidence is there for that? I would say he believes it in a rather twisted fashion, Sandy. It is really the only way one could believe it.
  9. Larry, What if Oswald wasn't actually standing at the Coke machine, but inside the vestibule, looking through the vestibule's outer door window to see who was coming up the stairs? --Tommy For crying out loud Tommy! Don't you get it by now? He was IN the coke machine. Spying. Oz mistook Craig for Baker later that day in Fritz' office. That's why he said "everyone will know who I am now". His (coke) cover was blown! That's why he had to be killed. He was now a liability to the Evil Geniuses at Pepper. ---------------- Vestibule: "a passage, hall, or room between the outer door and the
  10. Larry, What if Oswald wasn't actually standing at the Coke machine, but inside the vestibule, looking through the vestibule's outer door window to see who was coming up the stairs? --Tommy For crying out loud Tommy! Don't you get it by now? He was IN the coke machine. Spying. Oz mistook Craig for Baker later that day in Fritz' office. That's why he said "everyone will know who I am now". His (coke) cover was blown! That's why he had to be killed. He was now a liability to the Evil Geniuses at Pepper. ---------------- Vestibule: "a passage, hall, or room between the outer door and the
  11. You or Bob only need to take a leaf out of Tommy's book and it give it a bump. The defeat of the official version of events is spread out over several forums and 15 years worth of threads. That debate is done. The next phase has begun. Showing how the official narrative was created via the Reid Interrogation Technique.
  12. Larry, the debate on this ended long ago. Richard's take, much like McRae's "Prayer Woman" is merely the result of his own emasculation.
  13. Tommy, as you yourself allow, it may well be a female elvis impersonator - ergo it fails Jon's test of being right now as I type a provable hardcare no-doubt-about-it fact.
×
×
  • Create New...