How Are The Mighty Fallen

[Stewart P Evans]

Oh

The Facts, page 359 - "Frederick Porter Wensley, who served in H Division during his junior years and was the first man to rise through the ranks to the elevated position of chief constable, CID..."

Oh, I thought that accolade went to Adolphus Frederick Williamson many years earlier.

[Stewart P Evans]

You

BEGG "Much depends on the character of Anderson and Swanson and here next to no work has been done?"

He's talking about you here of course.

[Jeff Leahy]

BEGG "Much depends on the character of Anderson and Swanson and here next to no work has been done?"

[Stewart P Evans]

Or...

Or the date of Kosminski's committal.

The Facts, page 346 - "...does not correspond with Aaron Kosminski, who was committed to an asylum in February 1892."

[Jeff Leahy]

PS this may help get you started:

BEGG "Anderson is a complex character and no doubt subject to all the failings and foibles that beset all human beings. But after reading Andersons secular and theological writings, and with a knowledge of the morals and mores of the times, as well as an understanding of Anderson’s complicated religious beliefs and how they would have influenced his thinking and actions, the author Martin Fido completely rejected any idea that Anderson would lie in self-interest.”

[Stewart P Evans]

Facts

...
If i debate you. And you get facts incorrect, there is nothing wrong with checking those facts through another source.
...

True, but be careful which facts you get checked out. For example where Annie Chapman lodged.

The Facts, page 80 - "Given that she [Chapman] was drunk when she left the lodging house at 35 Hanbury Street..."

[Jeff Leahy]

I am not bound to answer a straightforward question when you have consistently failed to do so. There has been absolutely no reasoning of MArtin's put forth on this thread whatsoever. There has been an opinion of his, with absolutely no reasoning behind that opinion whatsoever.

I have rebutted Martin's opinion. No where is there reasons given that support this opinion.

So I ask you again. What specific facts has Martin ever stated that support his opinion that Anderson wouldn't lie? Again, I'll wait for you to go ask Paul.

You are asking me to rebut his reasons. Until you actually show he HAS reasons, it is impossible to do.

The answer is in the question. That is the way forward.

Pirate

[Ally]

I am not bound to answer a straightforward question when you have consistently failed to do so. There has been absolutely no reasoning of MArtin's put forth on this thread whatsoever. There has been an opinion of his, with absolutely no reasoning behind that opinion whatsoever.

I have rebutted Martin's opinion. No where is there reasons given that support this opinion.

So I ask you again. What specific facts has Martin ever stated that support his opinion that Anderson wouldn't lie? Again, I'll wait for you to go ask Paul.

You are asking me to rebut his reasons. Until you actually show he HAS reasons, it is impossible to do.

[Jeff Leahy]

Two lies in one statement. What did Paul not tuck you in yet.

Let me ask you this:

What FACTS has Martin ever held up to support his opinion that Anderson wouldn't lie.

I'll wait for you to ask Paul.

You were asked a straight forward question. Demonstrate where Martin Fido's reasoning was incorrect and where he drew the wrong conclusion.

Stop trying to shift the subject into some silly and irrelevant argument about who said what to whom.

The question is there, either respond with something that makes sense or shut up. I'll give you 24 hrs. Good Night.

Pirate

[Ally]

It is now late hear. I will continue tomorrow. But I only intend to stick to the subject. Anything personal is on my ignore button.

Two lies in one statement. What did Paul not tuck you in yet.

Let me ask you this:

What FACTS has Martin ever held up to support his opinion that Anderson wouldn't lie.

I'll wait for you to ask Paul.

[Jenni Shelden]

Was Robert Anderson ever mighty?
Raaaaaa HE-man!

[Jeff Leahy]

No I am not going anywhere but I am not having an argument by proxy either.

I have asked you twice now.

Do you have any actual thoughts of your own on the subject.

I think it is clear from your response that you do not.

And your every response with no thought of your own just proves it more and more.

Paul's a coward, and you are his beard.

You should both be proud.

Yardi yardi yarda

Have you actually some criticism of Martin Fido's assessment of Sir Robert Anderson or Not?

That really is the only problem that you need trouble your head with at present.

Clearly you are not debating Paul. If you make up any porkies, like Anderson calling a press conference. I will ask his opinion.

Stick to the facts, for once, and we should be fine.

Pirate

[Ally]

No I am not going anywhere but I am not having an argument by proxy either.

I have asked you twice now.

Do you have any actual thoughts of your own on the subject.

I think it is clear from your response that you do not.

And your every response with no thought of your own just proves it more and more.

Paul's a coward, and you are his beard.

You should both be proud.

[Jeff Leahy]

No Leahy. Absolutely not. I am frankly sick of the pretense. I am not having a debate with Paul Begg through you.

Where are YOUR actual thoughts and opinions on the subject?

This is not about you "consulting" Paul. Consulting means you ask SEVERAL people what they think, assess their replies, assimilate them and form your own conclusions.

That is not what you are doing. You are parroting verbatim Paul's words.

Do not pretend YOU are having any sort of reasoned debate on the subject. You have yet to put forth one valid, logical, fact based assessment of your own.

Why people want to continue the pretense that you are anything more than an empty mouthpiece for Paul is beyond me. And I for one refuse to have an argument by Proxy because Paul wants to pretend he's above it all.

Don't be so melodramatic. You are either interest in a debate or you are not.

The truth simply is..

If i debate you. And you get facts incorrect, there is nothing wrong with checking those facts through another source.

If your to scared to debate me thats your problem.

If you stick to normal form you will storm off in a huff fairly soon anyway..

But seriously it snow past midnight

[Ally]

No Leahy. Absolutely not. I am frankly sick of the pretense. I am not having a debate with Paul Begg through you.

Where are YOUR actual thoughts and opinions on the subject?

This is not about you "consulting" Paul. Consulting means you ask people what they think, assess their replies, assimilate them and form your own conclusions.

That is not what you are doing. You are parroting verbatim Paul's words.

Do not pretend YOU are having any sort of reasoned debate on the subject. You have yet to put forth one valid, logical, fact based assessment of your own.

Why people want to continue the pretense that you are anything more than an empty mouthpiece for Paul is beyond me. And I for one refuse to have an argument by Proxy because Paul wants to pretend he's above it all.