tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3244976080430727763.post4536983328660355654..comments2024-03-25T07:23:41.144-07:00Comments on Maxwell C. Bridges: Prelude to NookiedooMaxwell C. Bridgeshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14620436348190992398noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3244976080430727763.post-18350555313263885982016-04-08T11:42:15.158-07:002016-04-08T11:42:15.158-07:00Here is a postscript to the 2014-04-10 comment x33...Here is a postscript to the 2014-04-10 comment <a href="http://maxwellbridges.blogspot.com/2014/04/prelude-to-nookiedoo.html#x33" rel="nofollow">x33 <i>compelled to tell lies to bolster your arguments</i></a>.<br /><br />+++ Begin Quote<br /><i>{Mr. Rogue / Mr. Whitten} knew how I was using {Dr. Judy Wood's} book to inspire rational discussion with leaders of the 9/11 Truth Movement well ~before~ an offer with conditions was eventually extended{...} It was a test of objectivity. I was attempting a sincere effort to get two opposing sides on the same literal page in order to legitimately and objectively review Dr. Wood's work.<br /><br />Who knows why you accepted?<br /><br />Prior to receiving the book, you were disparaging it. Maybe you only accepted the offer as a cheap trick to get out of being constantly reminded that you had no standing for negatively evaluating it if you'd never read it. Maybe you thought it would be a cake walk to find all bad and acknowledge no good. Maybe you were unprepared for how little bad there was in comparison to overwhelming amounts of good. At the end of the day, what matters is how you played it.<br /><br />You ran out the clock on reading it. When pressed, you said you didn't finish reading it and weren't going to "because it was so bad." Huh? If it was so bad, why didn't you document the many instances that made it bad, as was the assignment that you agreed to? Pressed further, you try to send it back, but pay-it-forward or pass-it-along were the conditions, not return-to-sender. <b>Pressed further, you violently ripped it apart to be used as bird-cage liner so that nobody could obtain any further benefit from it, least of all yourself when the book cycled back into discussions.</b><br /><br />Does any of this make rational sense?<br /><br />It tells me that <b>you were never sincere</b> in the first place. You thought you were playing me and avoiding for as long as possible a legitimate and objective review of Dr. Wood's work (and the evidence contained therein.) {...} I could not have imagined that I would get so much milage out of a book, one that I know has issues.</i><br />+++ End Quote <br /><br />I had written much earlier on <a href="https://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2013/02/19/questions-about-911-conference-end-with-its-cancellation-pentagon-proposal-has-to-wait/#comment-16656" rel="nofollow">March 5, 2013 at 3:28 pm</a>:<br /><br /><i>My money is betting that the above [destruction of Dr. Wood’s book for bird cage liner] is just another fucking lie from Agent Rogue {Mr. Whitten}. I can wait a very long time before this lie is exposed, …</i><br /><br />Sure enough much later and after I am soft-banned from Truth & Shadows, Mr. Whitten writes on <a href="https://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2015/08/18/truth-and-shadows-turns-five/#comment-33511" rel="nofollow">August 24, 2015 at 1:34 pm</a> in a discussion with a new T&S participant: <i>"I have the BOOK [from Dr. Judy Wood]."</i> Then Mr. Whitten demonstrates on <a href="https://truthandshadows.wordpress.com/2015/08/18/truth-and-shadows-turns-five/#comment-33693" rel="nofollow">August 31, 2015 at 2:39 pm</a> intimate knowledge of its content that could only be obtained from an intact book. <br /><br />Here we have it: a blatant ~LIE~ from Mr. Whitten dutifully maintained for nearly 2-1/2 years in lieu of acknowledging any good in Dr. Wood’s book?!!<br /><br />The silver bullet fatally pierces Mr. Whitten's integrity and character. <i>"Unfaithful in the small things…"</i><br /><br />// <br />M. C. Brueckehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11749873350461333806noreply@blogger.com