American Dream wrote:Also Doogie, more than once you have just palin ignored my question regarding what your position actually is vis a vis Michael Riconosciuto. Please show me the courtesy of responding to the question when you do reply.
Sigh...
From November 20, 2009, I wrote:
"...I would not presume to speak for Rachel, but it has been my observation that she listens to what Gunderson or Mike R. has to say, but then uses only that which can be independently confirmed.
When you are looking into shadowy areas, sometimes you have to deal with shadowy people.
My own experience with these two has been limited. I had some email dealings with Ted concerning the Johnny Gosch case, but he lost me when I discovered a post on his website talking about how the Illuminati were in cahoots with E.T.'s to kidnap children as slaves to work in mines below Area 51. And my contact with Mike R. has been one email concerning PAT that I never received a response...
...
Both say things that I do not trust, but I personally would listen to either of them and evaluate if what they say may be true...
...I should also explain why I would listen to these two while I would NOT give anything that McCullough says a listen.
Ted and Mike say things that are pretty far out there, but I have not detected an organized attempt to deceive. VM will subtlely, but purposely, twist information with the obvious goal of disinfo. Both Ted and Mike may ultimately prove to be disinfo agents, but I am still open to the possibility that some of what they say is true. Not so with VM - the jury is in!... "
On November 30, 2009, I wrote:
"I have, elesewhere on the web, made numerous posts concerning Ted and what I believe are his "kooky" beliefs - so many that I long had a reputation as a "Ted-basher". The passage of time has led me to moderate my opinion, only in the sense that I feel no need to openly mock his beliefs. I still believe that he is a "kook", but I see no purpose in shouting it from every hilltop at every chance I get because most people who study these type of subjects as dealt with here, I suspect, have come to a similar conclusion.
As stated before, my interactions with Mike R. are minimal, consisting of one email sent to him through his website which was not answered.
His claims are intriguing, but seem questionable since he appears to have been the Forrest Gump of conspiracies - always showing up in the middle of every major story for the last thirty years. That, to me, points toward him having an active imagination.
But both of these men seem to have been eyewitnesses to the activities on the Cabazon Reservation and the principals involved. And as such, what they say is worthy of review even if some of what they say is obvious nonesense. I do not remain undecided about the men - it is their information that I remain undecided about.
While Rachel Begley has publicly said that she has had contact with these two men, I do not see that any of her case is dependent on the veracity of either man...
...I am telling you that I believe that he is a kook. If you choose to believe that he has a more sinister agenda, go for it - you may be correct and I may be wrong. But neither conclusion has one iota of importance on whether Jimmy Hughes was involved in the Alvarez/Octopus triple murder.
You seem to have some sort of litmus test for other conspiracists which is certainly your perogative. I personally reject this idea that the only way anyone's opinion here can be valid is if it first contains the equivilent of a loyalty oath: "I do not, nor have I ever, believed anything that has ever come out of Ted Gunderson's mouth." I just don't see him as the boogeyman that you seem to, nor do I see him as really having much to do with the case that we are discussing.
TG and MR may or may not have provided information that effected the investigation of Hughes, but their information would have only pointed investigators in a particular direction. As a purely hypothetical example, lets say MR said that so-and-so owned land near Indio that related to the case. Based on this info, investigators do a deed search that shows this information to be correct. It would be the deed, not the supplied tip, that is of value as evidence.
Ninty percent of what TG and MR may be BS, but it is the other ten percent is what interests me. Conversely, ninty percent of what KD and VM write may be true, but it is the other ten percent that concerns me. The NMN site provides much more information about certain cases than the mainstream media, but I believe that the offending ten percent is designed to shape public perception of these events in a manner to ultimately distort reality."
December 13, 2009, I wrote:
"
AD, do you look under your bed before you go to sleep to see if the boogeymen TG and MR are hiding there?
Really, how much of the case against Hughes is based on anything that either of these two guys has said? The honest answer is we don't know since the details of the indictment are sealed, but realistically, probably NONE of it. So whether Ted or Michael are prophets or lunatics or frauds is immaterial to the Hughes case.
You asked me this question before and I answered it. However, you responded by quoting the rule against making claims that members here are disinfo agents. So forgive me if I do not fall for the same stunt again."
So, AD, I believe that you should plainly see that I have clearly stated my opinion of Michael over and over again:
*As an eyewitness to the events at Cabazon, he should be listened to, but not necessarily believed.
*I believe that he has an active imagination.
*I believe that his testimony is not the basis for the indictment against Hughes. As a result, I am less concerned about him (either way) than you are.
So there it is, AD. I have answered your question NUMEROUS times, only to have you reask it again-and-again, and then claim that I am avoiding your question. So please, for the sake of whatever dignity that you have not yet squandered while playing the role of Virginia's lapdog, stop asking the same question. It has been answered.
by American Dream » Sat Feb 06, 2010 2:02 pm 
