Steve Clarke has JUDGED you all!

[Mikado14]

I saw this post wags but wasn't too sure where it was from and it was due to the last sentence:

"As it happens in my little world I have recently been identified as a "security risk" (and removed from my position as a result of that insight too!) yet at the same time I am being shown that some people do take note of what I have to say! Life is indeed full of paradoxes, and I feel you are right indeed, to eschew "either/or" thinking."

I wasn't sure if this may have been a private message or not. To have fruitbat mention "security risk" I wasn't sure what he was referring to. IF I was to assume that it was determined by Linda and as his being a "mod" or more then I would say the end is inevitable. He too will be as hobbit and a host of others.

He may have asked one too many questions or his, what he may call "objective" analysis, was determined to be getting too close to the truth.

In any event, he is already a victim of Linda's. Where once he was trusted and given a position he is now no longer trusted....why?

We may never know until the other shoe has dropped.

Mikado

[wags]

I saw this post wags but wasn't too sure where it was from and it was due to the last sentence:

"As it happens in my little world I have recently been identified as a "security risk" (and removed from my position as a result of that insight too!) yet at the same time I am being shown that some people do take note of what I have to say! Life is indeed full of paradoxes, and I feel you are right indeed, to eschew "either/or" thinking."

I wasn't sure if this may have been a private message or not. To have fruitbat mention "security risk" I wasn't sure what he was referring to. IF I was to assume that it was determined by Linda and as his being a "mod" or more then I would say the end is inevitable. He too will be as hobbit and a host of others.

He may have asked one too many questions or his, what he may call "objective" analysis, was determined to be getting too close to the truth.

In any event, he is already a victim of Linda's. Where once he was trusted and given a position he is now no longer trusted....why?

We may never know until the other shoe has dropped.

Mikado

I had missed that observation of that paragraph, I was taken with the and/or though (The programmer I guess). But it inspired another post of Linda's about coincidentally FB's post.

I am not certain what he means as I have no facts and I had assumed more a 'real world' thing than cyber.

[StarCat]

If he's been deemed a security risk at the Token, and demoted, it would fit the dream that I had a couple of months ago. If another shoe exists, it will likely drop eventually.

Cat

[wags]

If he's been deemed a security risk at the Token, and demoted, it would fit the dream that I had a couple of months ago. If another shoe exists, it will likely drop eventually.

Cat

Sounds an interesting dream, and where the shoe comes in sounds quite surreal. I think any 'other shoe' may as you say drop eventually.

[FM No Static At All]

I am reading the exchange in philosophical views and psychological musings and I laugh. Not merely chuckle, but a hearty guffaw. All of this stems from one source and once source only.

Linda Leach nee Brown.

There is no other point of contention. Many of us invested energy, money, and time into supporting Linda Brown and a book about her father. We supported the effort on Paul Schatzkin's TTBrown.com forum, and continued when Andrew Bolland was kind enough to open up a 'place for Linda' called Lights on the Runway or something like that. In conversations it was 'revealed' to me that Andrew was a 'security risk' and Linda needed a new place to use as a springboard for HER book, 'The Goodbye Man'.

All was well until one day in Las Vegas when a 'black sub' was trailing us, according to Mrs. Leach. Linda 'felt' there was a security risk. As it turns out, I was one of them. And when Mikado discovered that I wasn't Linda called him a TRAITOR. A turncoat like Benedict Arnold. Excellent analogy but not quite accurate. See, Arnold turned because he invested so much of his own fortunes in the cause and Congress constantly denied his reimbursement requests. But the blow was when he was led to believe that George Washington himself had betrayed him. All lies of course, but there was no internet or cellphones back then and word traveled slow even when the word was false.

Linda convinced many of the devoted followers how bad Mikado and Fred were, and many no longer associated with us. All I can say is, "Your loss!" Mikado was so loyal, that he probably risked my friendship in taking Linda at her word. I am a patient man (usually) and allowed the time to pass. Mikado and I still talk about once a week and I value that time we can spend together.

Linda on the other hand has never attempted to reconcile, to the contrary, she became obsessed with making Mikado look like the devil himself. All lies. Harassing phone calls, publicly making libelous statements regarding Mikado and Kim, going so as to suggesting that Mikado may have had a part in the death of Kim's son. Oh there are so many things that I have witnesses over these several years, the death of my wife, my good friend Bill, Mr. Trickfox, and a few others.

Nothing mattered to Linda, everyone and everything was fair game if you dared to question or criticize her father or her. When I realized that her sister-in-law (her late bother Joe's wife) was close enough for me to interview, I was a risk and had to be 'taken' out.

For those who didn't know, I was the original Hut Master. But that is irrelevant. The important fact is that all of this stems from perpetuating a false narrative regarding the real Dr. Thomas Townsend Brown. As each discovered the lies, we had to eliminated and made a pariah so that the 'loyalists' would not learn the truth, or even be aware that there WAS a truth yet untold.

And that is the REAL story behind the story.

[wags]

FB has sold himself short on the number of people he spoke to about the science concerning lifters. I am disappointed he forgets the endless hours of discussion and my technician input recording a few of the readings.

Granted there are differences in what constitutes a constructive conversation or indeed definition of 'science'. I proscribe to a more orthodox approach and science. At present I see little scientific rigour something that I concede was extremely infuriating to FB, but conversely it is irksome to those who have carried out scientific experiments in a controlled manner and spent time doing the statistical maths, graphs and though review of all available data. There are no short cuts to doing science.

In relation to FB's experiment, I recall many discussions on the design of and adoption of a standard modular lifter. This would have provided a good base ro test different materials (does a conductor with lower resistance increase pr decrease the effect.). to isolate the affect. What is the efficiency of such designs. for example how much energy is required to lift and maintain?. I have gathered this has never been addressed.

[wags]

In answer to Linda's question as to my motive of bothering to comment on FB's post. Well it is quite simple:-

Regardless any other considerations, your influence (Linda) is of concern. He asked me to look at this forum science and I have done my best as his friend to help him work out whatever it is he is trying to find out. I am pretty agnostic on this and can at least appreciate different even if somewhat odd ideas (to me) Even though he may not appreciate it, I am here to help him despite himself.

[wags]

FB,

I do not think you appreciate friendship in it's full measure.

I sought no solution from you only a safe friendly and place, and the last thing I needed was exposure to this cyber-bullying environment, that granted you were unaware of at the time but you are now.

If you think that this is not a cyber-bullying environment then you do not appreciate the subject any more than I know anything about TTB. But bullying is a subject I understand and helping targets even you is a cause not an act of any individual friendship, but my social obligation to unmask sociopathic types.

You asked me to find out, I did you don't like the answer but I don't like the 'shooting the messenger (especially your own) approach. It was a waste of my time, if even after the avalanche of evidence you were never minded to change your opinion. You were anxious, you asked, I got involved. I told you I am independent and no ones poodle / sock puppet.

I gave you good advice over Kevin, a case were you allowed your wishes to conduct a discussion a certain way, and not tolerating a radically different universal view. I find that particularly ironic as this whole sub-culture is bound up with radically divergent and or pathological science. I am obviously more sceptical but I can quite easily accommodate tangential behaviour, (I have hundreds of hours of accommodating one ADHD sufferer's tangential lifestyle. preventing getting a hot meal when one was a necessity).

I feel abused by this and much more, just because I might say nothing does not mean I had not noticed. Which of course reminds me of a certain Jupiter Ace...

[kevin]

FB,

I do not think you appreciate friendship in it's full measure.

I sought no solution from you only a safe friendly and place, and the last thing I needed was exposure to this cyber-bullying environment, that granted you were unaware of at the time but you are now.

If you think that this is not a cyber-bullying environment then you do not appreciate the subject any more than I know anything about TTB. But bullying is a subject I understand and helping targets even you is a cause not an act of any individual friendship, but my social obligation to unmask sociopathic types.

You asked me to find out, I did you don't like the answer but I don't like the 'shooting the messenger (especially your own) approach. It was a waste of my time, if even after the avalanche of evidence you were never minded to change your opinion. You were anxious, you asked, I got involved. I told you I am independent and no ones poodle / sock puppet.

I gave you good advice over Kevin, a case were you allowed your wishes to conduct a discussion a certain way, and not tolerating a radically different universal view. I find that particularly ironic as this whole sub-culture is bound up with radically divergent and or pathological science. I am obviously more sceptical but I can quite easily accommodate tangential behaviour, (I have hundreds of hours of accommodating one ADHD sufferer's tangential lifestyle. preventing getting a hot meal when one was a necessity).

I feel abused by this and much more, just because I might say nothing does not mean I had not noticed. Which of course reminds me of a certain Jupiter Ace...

Wags,
What was the "advice over Kevin"?
Because the consequence was a blind dog called Myles ( backed up by fruitcake)
Accusing Me of operating against Linda ( whatever the f^^^ing hell that is supposed to be??????)

I do realise how off the screen, as such ,I must seem to a skeptic such as Yourself, but You see thats what this whole shooting match is all about.
Things ain't what they seem to be....it's all more fabulous than anyone has ever dreamt.

Kevin

[wags]

Kevin,

advice was switch the foe mode on to avoid getting frustrated. Myles is a Linda subterfuge to create mutual hostility between you both feeding on the frustration of people searching for answers such as you and FB. The causation is again the same.