Achilles is a name he likes to use occasionally - it's a family name - father's side and all. People like JA act as though they are above the law. A bit of name reengineering here and there I expect would be just something he does. Besides, what's the law got to do with things when you've been getting away with murder for so long and Obama and the Clintons have got your back?
yes but we need to apply standards of evidence. We have a potential collateral damage situation. If James Achilles is unrelated to Alefantis and we as a community destroy his reputation and business it will be OUR MOVEMENT that suffers in loss of credibility
So i repeat, we need to make that connection in evidence before we make the ASSERTION. We are entitled to conjecture- conjecture is what drives enquiry - but we must be circumspect about our assertions, which the title of this thread categorically fails to do
no, see YOU have no credibility, because you used an ad-hominem attack on me , rather than addressing the merits of the evidence.
See how that works? Its called investigating and debating.
view the rest of the comments →
MolochHunter ago
This should be flagged accuracy in question until we have a more credible proof that James Achilles is actually Alefantis
PizzaGate711 ago
Achilles is a name he likes to use occasionally - it's a family name - father's side and all. People like JA act as though they are above the law. A bit of name reengineering here and there I expect would be just something he does. Besides, what's the law got to do with things when you've been getting away with murder for so long and Obama and the Clintons have got your back?
MolochHunter ago
yes but we need to apply standards of evidence. We have a potential collateral damage situation. If James Achilles is unrelated to Alefantis and we as a community destroy his reputation and business it will be OUR MOVEMENT that suffers in loss of credibility
So i repeat, we need to make that connection in evidence before we make the ASSERTION. We are entitled to conjecture- conjecture is what drives enquiry - but we must be circumspect about our assertions, which the title of this thread categorically fails to do
Birdzeyeview ago
newsflash, you already have NO CREDIBILITY
MolochHunter ago
no, see YOU have no credibility, because you used an ad-hominem attack on me , rather than addressing the merits of the evidence. See how that works? Its called investigating and debating.
Birdzeyeview ago
all you muppets here cannot 'investigate' your way out of a soggy wet paper bag!
as you were...