How Are The Mighty Fallen

[Jeff Leahy]

We have now been over and over and over the above two points you have made on the thread ad nauseum.Move on!

In these last three pages "Paul and Pirate "or "Pirate and Paul" , have made , under the one posting name of " Pirate", a number of other "points" and "assertions" -too numerous to quote-which bring about a certain unease and a sense of being 'hoodwinked" by someone backstage who is "pulling the strings".This is because there is usually a "mismatch" between the tone and quality of one part of the post, written in a serious polemical style and the rest of the post written in the style of a joker! Its like being at a "Punch and Judy" show where the puppet master never actually makes an appearance but we all know he is there urging us all to hiss and boo and egging Punch on to whack someone with a totally inept swing that misses its target by a mile!
Could we stop being treated to this charade please.
Thankyou,
Norma

Not that tiered old mantra. It's ridiculous and dragged up everytime you lose the basic arguement.

You made a miss-take about Anderson calling a 'press conference'.

get over it and own it.

I think you all have seriously under estimated me if you think Paul has had anything to do with my posts.

yes I talk to Paul regularly, yes Paul has explained his position to me.

Anyone can get the same by asking him or studying the odd book. indeed asking the right questions...

What's really niggling you all (anti-Anderson camp), after all is that I have presented a clear and reasonable argument that you have no answer to...

I suggest you get out the theology books written by Anderson and start doing some research, and answer Begg's fundamental question in relation to Fido's conclussion, as this is your only logical move forward.

I'll leave you to sleep on that. Stick to the FACTS and the topic or resort to personal abuse and lose

Pirate

[Natalie Severn]

Not that tiered old mantra. It's ridiculous and dragged up everytime you lose the basic arguement.

You made a miss-take about Anderson calling a 'press conference'.

get over it and own it.

I think you all have seriously under estimated me if you think Paul has had anything to do with my posts.

yes I talk to Paul regularly, yes Paul has explained his position to me.

Anyone can get the same by asking him or studying the odd book. indeed asking the right questions...

What's really niggling you all (anti-Anderson camp), after all is that I have presented a clear and reasonable argument that you have no answer to...

I suggest you get out the theology books written by Anderson and start doing some research, and answer Begg's fundamental question in relation to Fido's conclussion, as this is your only logical move forward.

I'll leave you to sleep on that. Stick to the FACTS and the topic or resort to personal abuse and lose

Pirate

Thanks for nothing then Pirate, Paul or Jeff,.
Will Martin be appearing on the show shortly too?

[Jeff Leahy]

Oh I am sorry, you must be completely clueless around me. I don't give a rat's butt if someone is down. I am not a hypocrite. Paul being ill does not in anyway change what Paul has done. Everyone is ill, everyone is dying, it's pretty much the human condition. But when you defend him, and defend his petty acts like that ridiculous book review, you show that you are the one who is talking utter tosh.

If you want people to stop telling a few home truths about Paul, seeing as how he is so down and all, why don't you quit with the rabid over-caffeinated cheerleader routine. He's not going to meet you behind the bleachers no matter how much you Begg.

Paul has done a great deal of damage and has fostered a great deal of ill-will. And frankly, what goes around, comes around. Maybe the title of this thread is apt after all.

No it doesnt but then it wasnt me that bought up paul being unwell in the first place it was the Anti Anderson camp who did so.

I simply confirmed what they were saying is true.

It also makes a mockery of your other allegations.

Why don't you simply take on board what Begg is saying?

If you wish to dispute Martin Fido you need to address his reasoning about Anderson and his conclusions and stop spewing out pointless and irrelevant mantra.

Stop trying to turn this into a circus about personality when there is a serious debate being had.

Pirate

[Ally]

q Stick to the FACTS and the topic or resort to personal abuse and lose

Pirate

Considering you were the first person who resorted to personal abuse, and you have lost, I'd say that's apt.

[Jeff Leahy]

Thanks for nothing then Pirate, Paul or Jeff,.
Will Martin be appearing on the show shortly too?

Get real Norma. This level of debate is surely beneith you. I only expect it from Ally.

Pirate

[Natalie Severn]

Hey Jeff----that was your post!I recognised your style!
And the most perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black I have ever seen -Unbelievable! Punch took a first!

[Jeff Leahy]

Considering you were the first person who resorted to personal abuse, and you have lost, I'd say that's apt.

Was I? No I don't seem to remember that?

indeed I have been fairly careful in avioding any personal abuse aimed at anyone and been fairly consistant in trying to stear things to the debate in hand..

Did Anderson LIE? has he fallen?

Its you that dont have a clue or anything to add on that subject. Because Ally Ryders posts are purely about personal abuse. They contain no substance because she dosn't have a clue about what is being discussed.

Pirate

[Jeff Leahy]

Hey Jeff----that was your post!I recognised your style!
And the most perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black I have ever seen -Unbelievable! Punch took a first!

Get real Norma. Do you have anything to contradict Martin Fido's reasoning?

[Ally]

[QUOTE=Pirate Jack;130894]

No it doesnt but then it wasnt me that bought up paul being unwell in the first place it was the Anti Anderson camp who did so.

Wrong. It was you :

He does post on JtRforums. But has not done so for some time due to ill health.

also

Stewart I have no interest in antagonizing or upsetting you. You have something completely wrong.

I’m aware that like Paul you have also been unwell.

Blatant attempts to drum up sympathy for Paul and to quash any hard questions.

Why don't you simply take on board what Begg is saying?

Because unlike you, I have a functioning brain of my own and don't just accept it as gospel because it comes from the mouth of Paul.

If you wish to dispute Martin Fido you need to address his reasoning about Anderson and his conclusions and stop spewing out pointless and irrelevant mantra.

I have already done so. I refuted it. You replied with personal insults calling me the Wicked Witch of the West, rather than addressing the reasoning and the conclusion, proving you are more capable of personal invective than logical argument.

Stop trying to turn this into a circus about personality when there is a serious debate being had.

You have got to be kidding; with your idiotic youtube videos and clown performances, you actually have the gall to tell someone else that this is a serious debate? You were dropped on your head repeatedly as a child weren't you?

[Jeff Leahy]

[QUOTE=Ally;130901]

I have already done so. I refuted it.

Well obviously we all missed your breakdown of Martin Fido's flawed reasoning perhaps you'd like to re-enlighten us so the serious debate you are so keen on, can commence and we can all stop this childish personal mud slinging (which as usual serves no purpose but yours) and stick to the Facts about Sir Robert Anderson.

Ally's next post should be one we are all eagerly waiting fore

Pirate

[Ally]

Notice how when it is pointed out that Leahy is wrong, and has said something factually untrue he glides right on over that? He demands others apologize for the inaccurate statements, but he is completely incapable of doing the same.

I already posted the argument against Martin's conclusions. Norma pointed out to you that I posted the reasoning against Martin's conclusions.

Rather than behaving like a total jackass, why don't you try going back and READING what people have already written rather than using the boards as your own personal little stage to engage in your own egotistical drama. It's the post right before you called me the wicked witch of the west.

If you cannot be bothered to actually READ what the people on these boards are ACTUALLY saying because you are too wrapped up in your one-man show, what's the point of anyone even attempting to have a conversation with you?

Go back and read what I wrote Leahy. Prove you aren't just a dancing monkey.

[Jeff Leahy]

I already posted the argument against Martin's conclusions. Norma pointed out to you that I posted the reasoning against Martin's conclusions.

NO YOU HAVE NOT. Post them and stop trying to aviod the piont of this discussion.

Stick to the FCATS and the Subject

Why not prove that you can also deliver some substance instead of banality

[Ally]

The facts are these. It was just pointed out that you made a factually untrue comment and accused the "anti-anderson" brigade of doing something they didn't do.
Where is YOUR apology that you have demanded of others when they post something untrue.

The facts are these: I posted a rebuttal and you ignored it in favor of calling me infantile names and posting you tube videos.

I am NOT, going to repeat myself for your convenience because you are too damn stupid and lazy to read something the first time, or find it when you need it.

We aren't here to perform to your direction Leahy. This isn't YOUR show.

Your every post proves more and more you are nothing but a joke, completely unable to maintain a rational and logical discussion.

Whenever you are cornered you duck and you dodge and you play the fool.

My post is there. GO back and read it. Respond to what I have ALREADY posted. Refute what I have ALREADY posted.

If you can't do that simple thing, you are nothing more than what you have accused me of being. A sht stirrer who has no real interest in this case except to cause trouble.

I at least made a rational argument. You have yet to do the same in response.

[Natalie Severn]

Sure. Being an expert in Victorian Literature doesn't give one a special magical window into the soul of a man who lived during that time. It does not qualify one to make judgments on which situations a man would or would not tell lies. Martin's opinion that Anderson wouldn't tell lies to increase his own reputation is an opinion of no more weight than anyone else's. He has absolutely NO idea what situations Anderson would or would not have lied in, and he could have degrees in every single facet of Victorian life and it still would not make him more able to judge the character of a single, unique individual in that period than the average lay person. Anderson told lies. We know this. We cannot parse it out and say oh, he never would have lied in this situation...we don't know for the simple reason that none of us, Martin included, knew the man. And even if we had actually KNOWN the man, people have a way of surprising you with what they are willing to do to increase and protect their own precious reputations.

This is Ally"s concise and superb summary of the flaws in Martin Fido"s reasoning about the question of whether or not Robert Anderson could have lied about his claim to have known who the ripper was.

Apologies Ally .Our posts crossed.

[Jeff Leahy]

The facts are these. It was just pointed out that you made a factually untrue comment and accused the "anti-anderson" brigade of doing something they didn't do.
Where is YOUR apology that you have demanded of others when they post something untrue.

The facts are these: I posted a rebuttal and you ignored it in favor of calling me infantile names and posting you tube videos.

I am NOT, going to repeat myself for your convenience because you are too damn stupid and lazy to read something the first time, or find it when you need it.

We aren't here to perform to your direction Leahy. This isn't YOUR show.

Your every post proves more and more you are nothing but a joke, completely unable to maintain a rational and logical discussion.

Whenever you are cornered you duck and you dodge and you play the fool.

My post is there. GO back and read it. Respond to what I have ALREADY posted. Refute what I have ALREADY posted.

If you can't do that simple thing, you are nothing more than what you have accused me of being. A sht stirrer who has no real interest in this case except to cause trouble.

I at least made a rational argument. You have yet to do the same in response.

Yardy yardy yarda

Again, no surprise, your post contains no substance. Becasue you dont actually know what Fido based his reasoning about Anderson apon.

So you go round and round the mulberry bush with groundless accusations.

What does Pauls health have to do with Fido's reasoning. NOTHING.

What does it matter if i have a dalek sitting behind me telling me what to write. NOTHING.

The only thing that matters is discussion about the subject matter. Something that Ally Ryder has never contributed towards.

If she had anything to add about Martin Fido (dont hold your breath)

Then she would actually have to do some real thinking and reasoning about the subject, which she wont do because for Ally Ryder throwing about mindless abuse is simply the easy option.

Pirate