[fobrien1]

thanks ben i thought i knew patrick , turns out i do . as i recall patrick nad myself exchanged a good few posts . as you know patrick frm youtube you probably know the sort of behavior that goes on there from our lone nut friends . ignoring of facts and proof , and widespread dismissal of evidence is pretty common place . its no the best forum for discussion but there is an awful lot of jfk material on youtube . ive had or attempted debate with many lone nutters on there including patrick but its usually a futile exercise because it decends into the usual farce , ad hominein and lies that you come to expect from many LN .

there is a guy on there with a video called CONSPIRACY THEORISTS LIE , his name is james k lambert . myself and another poster (who i am very familiar with ) exposed the serious problems with his logic , his video , and the comments he made on his video thread . in essence he ignored facts , irrefutable proof , dfismissed anyone and anything that he didnt care for , and when all that failed started with insults and falseley labeling us holocaust deniers , neither of us are and neither of us posted a single word about the holocaust . james deleted every post by the two us that proved him wrong , i saw this and posted my review of his video again (by the way he asks his viewers to send him money lol ) and he stopped comments . he later allowed comments again so i returned and questioned him about his deleting of facts proving him wrong , he lied and denied doing it , in fact he denied that he deleted any posts save for the odd one that was "abusive " . but he had posted previously threatening to delete my posts for no other reason than he was tired of my comments lol .

most recently ive been spending time on a video thread owned by david emerling , an intelligent and knowledgeable man (jfk wise ) but as with an LN he has no choice but to repeatedly post what he knows is inaccurate or untrue . as a prime example he repeatedly posts (in reply to newbies or people that he may sense are less well researched) that the pathologists studied jfks wounds for 4 hours and that as such there is no one better to tell us about his wounds . but i got him to admit that he doesnt believe the pathologists n regards jfks head entry wound position . he doesnt believe the people he says studied the wounds for 4 hours lol , instead he believes the clark panel (and later the hsca) who placed the entry wound 4 to 5 inches higher up in the crown of the head despite the vehement protest of dr humes . every time he posts the above i post and remind him and inform the person that he is talking to that david in fact doesnt believe the very pathologists he so often says were the best people to tell us about the wounds .

talk soon