“There’s very little common courtesy, and the one freeper with whom I had the longest, most productive FRiendship told me that I shouldn’t have engaged in a p+ssing contest with her, after she circulated my private mail to a ping list she admitted was 150 long.
“Were you on that list, Seizethecarp? Is that how you became so knowledgable all of a sudden? Because the person who offered to keep the material safe off-site circulated it? While we were still checking leads...”
Fred Nerks:
As was pointed out to you several times on the Mal-Val thread, it was you, yourself, who revealed your big secret that your “researchers” were pushing Valerie Sarruf as Barry’s mom based on nothing more than a morphing video put up by Polarik.
As to my being more broadly “so knowledgeable all of a sudden,” am a careful student of your claims, which I regard to be non sequitur conclusions piled onto previous non sequitur conclusions.
To All:
Fred Nerks’ Mal-Val narrative violates numerous basic forensic principles of investigation and also violates elementary rules of logic.
Key delusional lynchpins of the Mal-Val narrative:
1. Mary Toutonghis’ 50-year-old memory of the age of her own child when she babysat a child in Seattle supports a conclusion that the babysitting event took place in January 1961, not January 1962. (Not!)
2. BHO Sr. sitting next to an Asian woman named Anne (and actually ID’d with a Japanese last name by the Cambodian, IIRC) validates a claims that BHO Sr. was married to a Filipina named Anna S. and had a child by her that was taken to Seattle in January 1961 and appeared in Polk and had her baby babysat by Mary Toutonghi. (Not!)
3. The fact that, in baby pictures, Barry resembles his half-brother David is PROOF that David didn’t exist and that Barry is actually David. (Not!)
4. The fact that a man in Ghana, Roman Obama, with the same last name as Barry happening to be within one year of Barry’s age but no factual family connection in evidence, leads by twists and turns to a conclusion that Roman is the son of BHO Sr. born in 1960 to a Filipina wife of BHO Sr. despite having no Filipino features and a total absence of evidence or testimony to any such wife or connection to BHO Sr. (Not!)
5. The fact that pictures of Barry cant morphed into pictures of Malcolm X and Valerie Sarruf supports an a priori claim that it must be true that they are his parents. (Not!)
Your position on the substance of the actual events here is a sufficiently extreme rejection of the substantive evidence that no one is really paying much attention to you. You are so far off reality that the general consensus is that you are probably a Zero supporter and engaged in attempt to defuse the effort to smoke out additional hard data.
To be fair, the pictorial image manipulation and attempted identification of relationships based on images is not a reliable method of achieving proof--although in Zero's case, his skin color and features are very much like his mother and her family.
However there is now a fairly substantial body of hard information out there that constitutes a pretty conclusive rejection of virtually all the elements of the fairy tale and supports an alternative story that will be seen at some future date.
I have a huge problem with that statement, everything you throw at me is nothing but the conclusions you've reached yourself from the images and sources I have posted. If you didn't read the private mails that were circulated, which were originally intended to be kept off site as part of the research repository, that's the only other way.
I've shown what Mary said in her own words many many times, I've shown the mistake Charlette Le Fevre made about the date, I've shown the photograph of two little boys and asked 'who do you think they might be?' side by side with composites of the two children they resembled to the extent that anyone with an open mind might see who they were, I didn't beat anyone over the head with it. Yes, I indicated that there never was a David, but I also made it clear that no one else had been able to find him either.
People can make up their own mind, they have eyes. I showed the Background Search document from the PI which, when he placed a certain name into Search with nothing more than name and a STATE IN THE US - brought up the birthdate and details of an indvidual whose ethnicity was shown as Equatorial Guinea, which was the stated origin of the 31 year old student who was interviewed at the Lumumba University on Moscow in 1992. He said he planned to work for the World Bank, which is where he ended up for a time, and then showed at the Equatorial Guinea Consul in Accra, Ghana.
I don't recall issuing any proclamations that this man was the same man, I simply showed his photographs, the article and documents, and that allows the reader to reach their own conclusions.
The Polarik video was created by Polarik, he was carrying out his own research, he gave me the link, I found it of interest, I posted the link into FR comments, I had very little to say about it, the video asked it's own questions.
There's more, I could go on all the way through what you have written, and show that all I ever did was try to provoke THINKING to get out of the
his mother was SAD, she had the hots for an ugly black man 35 years older and had to go to Kenya to have a baby because her mother would have been so embarrassed
...bunkum, which is all you've ever had to offer, and about which you will attack anyone who doesn't come to heel over. Your tactic is painfully obvious, you run every cockamamy charge you make into a litany of unanswerable mush, you do that because you know, that were you to frame your comments into indiviual questions, I have the documents, the links to articles and the photographs to go with them...and would blow your unfounded accusations out of the water. You are, on this thread, for example, pulling rabbits out of hats that any newbie has never seen before and can't hope to know what breed or colour they are...but that's your MO, isn't it, RIDICULE because you know it works, so you keep repeating BS out of context because what you want more than anything, is for the reader NOT to be allowed to THINK.
I sure hope who-ever you are working for is paying you enough, I would hate to think you are a successful OBSTRUCTIONIST for nothing.
You gotta keep repeating yourself because you don't want me to show freepers any more. I planned a further segment on the question of who might Lolo Soetoro have been, but you don't want me to do that, do you? You ridiculed that in advance by your convoluted charge that the Indonesian story was going to involve a Lebanese context, a right-regular piece of BS misinformation that was, and no one, not even you could be that stupid, so it had to be deliberate.
Why does the potential truth scare you that much? Why the desperate need to destroy the credibilty of the only freeper on these threads who writes about who he might be and where he might have come from?
Remember, I'm only on the thread because you pinged me, if only to once more attempt to belittle me. You're a bully, and your tactics work because your disgusting behaviour drives any decent, honest freepers away. So, in their absence, I won't be adding any further information here. Like I already said, the only time you get any oxygen is when it comes from me, you boring little man.