The comment about the letter suggests that my private correspondence with
Marina is any of your business. Stuff it, Leyden.
It's YOUR buddies who delight in posting private correspondence.
You know very well that I took "follow-up action," via researchers who
were close to her--and posted the results--something you omit, as usual.
As for Judyth's husband, you always fail to mention his e-mail and my
access to his summer 1963 correspondence--and his notoriously poor
memory (according to his children).
As for fraud, your declaration hardly establishes that.
Better a tiger than a jackal like yourself.
Martin
<JLeyden900@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:f2f4a51d-9736-437f-8f23-a9797068946e@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Jul 5, 2:16?am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> You're the one who admits not doing any research, Leyden.
> You can leave any time you want--but you just try to get others to
leave.
>
> Martin
Don't even mention the word "research," Shack. You promoted a NG
fraud -- the Judyth Baker fantasy -- in thousands and thousands of
posts but you were too lazy (or too scared of Judyth) to pick up the
phone and interview her husband. After all, he only lived with her
for approx. 25 years, so what could he tell you, right? As for
Marina, you said you sent her a letter (which you never posted in the
NGs) but you never took any follow-up action. Yeah, you're a real
tiger, alright.
JGL
>
> <JLeyden...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> news:2b3cd594-ca8a-4611-becd-8a865ff7b1cd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Jul 4, 1:43?am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > And the propagandist rants on.
> > This is the same Leyden who says he wants the subject to go away--but
> > only
> > on his terms, of course.
>
> > Martin
>
> No, what i want is for you to go away, Shack. ?You and Judyth are like
> Siamese twins now, joined at the hip. ?When you're here, she's here.
> You're not going to shake her. ?You've lost all credibility. ?Find
> another hobby -- one that doesn't require research.
>
> JGL
>
>
>
>
>
> > <JLeyden...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
>
>news:39ad9910-866a-47be-9921-a1fafcc7e7ac@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > On Jul 3, 7:30?am, "Martin Shackelford" <msha...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > I took a break from it. I found quite a few errors in the early
> > > ****tions,
> > > and will get back to it sooner or later. It wasn't all that
> > > impressive.
>
> > > Martin
>
> > Gosh, Shack, we found quite a few errors in the Judyth Baker account
> > -- the Cancun thing, for example -- but you just covered up for her
> > and kept right on going, promoting this fraud in thousands and
> > thousands of NG posts.
>
> > JGL
>
> > > "SecretServiceguy" <vincebet...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
>
> >
>news:23a744ca-49d3-48d3-92af-56973fcfe4e1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> > > > Martin,
>
> > > > I seem to recall reading last year somewhere on the newsgroups
that
> > > > you were reading Bugliosi's entire book (including the footnotes,
> > > > endnotes, disc, etc.) and were going to make a detailed *****sment
a
> > > > la your classic Investigator article on Posner's book. How is it
> > > > going? Are you able to debunk his book????
>
> > > > Vince Palamara
> > > >http://www.youtube.com/user/VincePalamara-Hidequoted
text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
|
