Exterminator:
The martini glass reference came from Linda's group? Provide proof.
You voted to keep me around?
You are the one who sent me (PMed) the supposed "agreement" to look out which I never received and which your Father "publicly" mentioned on the eve of my termination that it was apparent that I was not accepting it. I replied "what agreement?".
After that, he said that I publicly put it out there and it was off the table. Your not perfect and he is not either. I have no quarrel with your Father but then I might perhaps with you.
Apparently you did go to the Hut for you lifted the avatar and posted it.
I have explained where the source of the nickname Mikado came from. Your insistence in posting references to a Gilbert and Sullivan play to defame me is very humorous but it demeans the man that gave me that moniker.
When someone has to attack someone and twist their name in an attempt to ridicule then they are out of ammunition (read here intelligence) to launch an intelligent attack. Of course Linda's group is just as guilty of such (hobbit, littleenki, fruitbat) and you have joined with them.
How does it feel to be a part of Linda's group?
Not sure about the year...
As to "egos", they are a nuisance...<g>.
And as one last statement:
Linda Brown is WHO SHE STATES SHE IS.
But in light of it all, I am no one and my word wouldn't purchase a cup of coffee at the local HoJo's.
I had them as Mr and Mrs Smith in a split second.
Lovers tiff?
Well Exterminator, you stated above - "gotta love it when those who really seek the truth take the time to come ask". Is that what you did to me on the Pegasus back in July? One of the "things" you did was to accuse me of being an RVer for the CIA only because of my Avatar. In fact, it was more stated as a fact, remember?
I told you that if you would have asked before coming to a wrongful conclusion you would have been told what it was.
So, do you really wish to seek truth? Truth can only be had when one asks a question to the universe and you ...sweetheart...from past experience, are quick to be judgemental.
My opinion only
=Mikado;98423 I have only offered something to end this confrontation.
It it is what it is - providing credentials. Like it or not, you seem to not understand that the name of Townsend Brown is in the public domain. You are claiming to be his daughter and if someone wants proof, that is referred to as providing the necessary credentials.
author=Mikado link=topic=1945.msg21103#msg21103 date=1340596137
It should be noted that :
"Did you vouch for Morgan and O'Reily?" is not acceptable in a due-diligence situation since Linda, posing as Elizabeth Helen Drake was instrumental in the writing. It needs to be a third party that has no bearing on the book, profits from the book etc.
David Jones
Linda Brown, I did not have access to this part of the forum for a day or so, and I have taken the time to read the ‘due diligence’. To quote you from earlier in this forum thread (#150) you said –
“When someone questions your own credibility I think that it is only right to know who they are and why they are doing that. Don't you?”
Where in the due diligence was your credibility questioned?
In the same post in response to my question about vouching for Morgan and O'Reily, you stated –
“Absolutely and still do! Wholeheartedly”
You were the research assistant and vouched for these two individuals to the author, and yet in a post (#176) you said -
“Mikado says.....somehow....Twigsnapper and Morgan supplied Paul with inaccurate information.
My only response to that is...." Too bad! Paul should have done a proper job.... He should have done the rewrite. He should have been the professional writer that he presented to me before I signed that contract.”
You imply with the phrase ‘too bad’ that you accept the information was inaccurate – information provided by two individuals you vouched for.
You have also said that the author was not intended to include the 'story' of these two individuals in the book - why then was he provided the information?
I am looking at this cold and do not understand your objection to people researching the information contained within the authorized biography of your father. Any information that can be verified by facts and corrects previously incorrect information has to be of benefit for researchers that are to come.
DJ
author=Linda Brown link=topic=1945.msg21843#msg21843 date=1340834626]
When Mikado decided that it was important to do this due diligence.... ( so that he could show that Paul had gotten untrustworthy information.... and by his logic which he has expressed many times.... if Paul was wrong there then how much MORE of the book is bunk?
author=Linda Brown link=topic=1945.msg22301#msg22301 date=1340978403]
David Jones,
This is a direct invitation to you. Perhaps you would have enough interest in all of this to help me out a little.
I have decided that I need to look carefully at Paul Shatzkins book " The Parallel Universe of T Townsend Brown...." On a chapter to chapter review.... and wondered if you would like to join me on this wander through what was actually written. I think with your interest you might be able to see other questions that need to be asked that I might overlook.
I hope that you have already found the thread that I established. I have only covered the first ... I think... eight chapters.... and this might give us a chance to talk about that " due diligence " that you were concerned about.... By being on the inside of Pauls book looking out..... instead of outside looking in!
So if you have the energy for it I invite you to join me there. This could be a lot of fun and your viewpoint would be greatly appreciated.
Linda
If you don't know anything.... why is it so important for you to express such negative opinions toward me? Have I ever done anything that even remotely deserved this kind of attention from you? Or do I have to come to the conclusion that you are just following orders here?
author=Mikado link=topic=1410.msg19092#msg19092 date=1339549975
Just remember this, and those reading this, just because Linda claims to have seen him doesn't mean it is true for her record of truthfulness with a group of individuals has been anything less than stellar and in a court of law, a single testimony can be objected to as "hear say".
My money is riding on the fact that it is fabricated by two individuals, those that had a financial stake in the success of the book.
The facts will remain and stand on their own merit and it should be noted that information supplied by two anonymous individuals to date has been coming up as being false and Linda has vouched for these individuals as well.
Occam's Razor....use it.
Mikado
You have never read my book.... yet you are telling people that " other people" think poorly of it?
I am still waiting for that apology from you by the way. I haven't forgotten. But apparently its easy for you.....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?