[HiTech RedNeck]

Pieter, you so inexplicably dodge the gravamen of my point, which is time lines. Maybe it is because you know that such a thing is material to your accusations and you have nothing.

Even attorneys when they want to make a case against someone’s shady behavior, will construct time lines. That works better than a vague character smear in most courts.

(When I sued a neighbor who had exercised legal undue influence upon a now deceased aunt with Alzheimer’s in order to get her to change her will, that’s just what the attorney did. Time lines were constructed and sure enough, every time this neighbor had done something to push family off, then she shortly leaned upon the aunt. It made a case so strong that they settled out of court, for what I and the rest of her family wanted which was the aunt’s mementos.)

[PieterCasparzen]

Pieter, you so inexplicably dodge the gravamen of my point, which is time lines.

I painstakingly check timelines, that is essential to proving or disproving.

There are tons and tons of avenues to investigate; different businesses, people, governments.

Which storyline would make you take a second look ?

That is, for example, I can talk about the CFR, but many times as soon as you say CFR people immediately dismiss everything you say after that, regardless of timelines, characters, etc.