You managed to repeat in your post #85 an argument from the very same that book that I had just cited in post #84, without having any clue that you had done it.
That’s an achievement rarely accomplished by anyone, particularly when the book quoted argues against their own case. Congratulations.
Either you don’t read (likely) or you don’t understand a word of what you do read (even more likely).
Anyone else would be slowed down after having pulled a stunt like yours, but you’re a trooper who has filled his noggin with the finest of conspiracy junk and you’re eager to share it. I’ll get the tin foil out and wade in!