Posted on 03/01/2002 4:04:47 PM PST by FresnoDA
Do you have your own test for this? How do you go about determining this?
That's Fresno's MO Kim.
When someone walks in and shakes up his little fiefdom, either he, or one of his sycophants taunts you into a flame war while the rest push the abuse button on you.
Don't bother him with facts, he's not into facts. Just look at the two letters after Fresno...think of a not-too-smart donkey.
Sorry, Luis, nice try. On the other hand, I have no doubt Danielle's brothers are devastated. They have no hand in the awful things that probably went on in that household. And whatever they were, one suspects we'll start hearing about from less impeachable sources soon. (Not that any of you would accept it even if it came from the Pope himself.)
Thanks for the MO warning. I kind of figured that out... I guess jim rob would have to spend all day keeping that kind of attitude off of his forum. (DA?? LOL!)
I think I'll go buy a National Enquirer today! ::wink::
11. February 8, 2002
SWINGING:"Nothing would get in between me checking on my children. It's a rumor. I don't know why people would want to be hurtful."
On top of dealing with a missing child, the van Dams are the subject of rumors that they are involved in a swinging club, where couples typically engage in sex with other couples. "This is in no way related to the investigation," Brenda van Dam said. "Nothing would get in between me checking on my children. It's a rumor. I don't know why people would want to be hurtful."
It appears to me that the dates are not coincidental.
It's really scary to see so many people following a local DJ whose ratings are soley based on inflammatory subjects. Even when the OJ conspiracies sprang forth (OJ was set up don't ya know), or the oklahoma bombing conspiracies (McVeigh had help from foreigners)..most of the people speculating, guessing and almost believing the conspiracies had the guts to admit they could be wrong. They weren't in it to look good. They didn't have their reputations on the line..although some taunters did try to insult them. They simply surmised their own theories, and debated based on things NOT from the enquirer..I can tell you that much for sure.
Yah, I thought not, too.
For those who are confused about what a discussion forum is, please do check your English-to-English dictionaries, it's right there under "discussion" and "forum." People come to these boards to...well...discuss. It is not a court of law. It's a court of public opinion. (Sorry if some of us don't hold your opinions, but them's the breaks, as they say.) People toss out ideas, mull them over, discard some that don't meet the smell test, and toss out a few more.
Unfortunately, however, there are some people who never met a counter-theory they wouldn't flame. Some will come right out with it (and end up taking a "time-out"), others are more sneaky, insinuating that anyone who would believe one set of rumors over another set of rumors must be somehow "gossipmongers."
I used those words carefully--because so far, in public and officially, police and other officials have been very tight-lipped--perhaps to protect their case. So the only official statements we have about what went on that night came from people who might (or, to give certain people the benefit of the doubt, might not) have a self-serving reason to say what they did. In many ways, that makes them less valid than rumors.
Westerfield, if guilty, has many reasons to paint himself in a certain light.
The VDs, if the so-called rumors are true, also have many reasons to paint themselves in a certain light.
Rick Roberts might, as some have suggested, be trying to pump up his ratings. Then again, the radio station and Roberts himself is at risk if these stories are lies. Saying they can't be sued because of the 1st Amendment is poppycock: it's happened here in Oklahoma, and it's happened elsewhere. Rick Roberts doesn't strike me as a person who will sit in a jail cell somewhere rather than give up his source(s). And the VDs don't strike me as the kind of people to take this...well...lying down.
The one group of people who have no real reason to alter the truth of what went on that night have not yet spoken, but I suspect they will. Those are the people who know the parties involved, those who were at the bar, and those who lived close-by. Perhaps a swinger or two will come out of the woodwork, but I doubt it. Nevertheless, one way or the other, I think over the next few weeks and months, we're going to find out a lot more. Ready or not, here it comes.
Did you notice that all the "guys" connected with this story have that "van gogh" mustache/beard deal?
It's almost as though they think that if they change it a little bit here, and a little bit there, maybe no one will really notice all the discrepancies. Many here obviously do not, so apparently it's working fairly well so far. Clintonesque, almost.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.