Jump to content

Campsite Destroyed


Guest

Recommended Posts

^^^^^^ his sunglasses might allow him to see BF even with very little illumination......

Edited by clubbedfoot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've got a warning burning a hole in my pocket if this name calling stuff doesn't cease and desist.

There is no name calling, nothing is directly implied.

 

We need to be able to call out people in a civil manner, but be direct.

 

Don't mess with the Wag? Everyone knows you don't mess with the Wag.

 

There are big poopi-piles going on, and I'm quite frankly tired of it.

 

I gots me a shovel, and I'm-a shovelin' as hard as I can here.

 

Oh, and guys cannot do ''girls'' very well on forums BTW. The male brain has patterns, Eventually, after enough posts, you show your hand.

 

Now, who is going to pony-up for the show here? $$$ I'm sick of working for free. :fan:

Edited by chelefoot
Remove political references
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest diana swampbooger

Wag , I'm deeply offended at being called a male as I was born with a fully functioning female parts.
Kindly recheck your male brain pattern book.



PS I highly recommend The Art of War by Sun Tzu. It's necessary when running a business &/or being a new member on a forum.

Edited by diana swampbooger
Removed alternate name, removed inappropriate comment
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gee, your correct"

 

PS I highly recommend The Art of War by Sun Tzu. It's necessary when running a business &/or being a new member on a forum.

 

Well acquainted with Sunny-boy, that's why you don't mess with the Wag.

 

Yes, your good at running a business, Sas Chron, well, I already commented on it.

 

But you cannot win a fake argument with the Wag, its always going to be a loosing proposition.

 

You cannot bluff the Wag, you cannot insult the Wag. Wag is totally awesome.

 

There should be a newcomer rule about the Wag, and messing with him, its like, just don't do it. :aikido:

 

Doubling down is not going to win the day here.

 

All I have to do is....well... :music:

Edited by Wag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest diana swampbooger

Wrong again, Wag . I've nothing to do with SasChron in any capacity.

My license is through the Department of Health ... perhaps that's why I'm interested in the A&P of a booger dissection.

Edited by diana swampbooger
Rremoved alternate name
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would you mind linking me to that rule Wag? I don't believe I have them memorized yet so I very well may have overlooked the Wag Rule.

 

I thinks it's more like a general rule of thumb formed by experience than an actual rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong again, Wag. I've nothing to do with SasChron in any capacity.

My license is through the Department of Health ... perhaps that's why I'm interested in the A&P of a booger dissection.

Right, but the question of the rigid defense of questionable characters in the BF world remains.

 

You stated bodies in videos, and go out on a limb to defend them in a hoaxing thread.

 

So, stop the nonsense and defend them.

 

No one in the BF world jumps up and down like a cheerleader defending these characters. That suggests, in obvious fashion, something smells in Denmark.

 

So go ahead and defend them. It looks like a subterfuge agenda, but prove me wrong. Knock the Wag down, Wag is awsome.

Edited by chelefoot
Edited post
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Divergent1

I thinks it's more like a general rule of thumb formed by experience than an actual rule.

I was being sarcastic :sarcastichand:

There is no name calling, nothing is directly implied.

 

We need to be able to call out people in a civil manner, but be direct.

 

Don't mess with the Wag? Everyone knows you don't mess with the Wag.

 

There are big poopi-piles going on, and I'm quite frankly tired of it.

 

I gots me a shovel, and I'm-a shovelin' as hard as I can here.

 

Oh, and guys cannot do ''girls'' very well on forums BTW. The male brain has patterns, just as you can't fake being Liberal or Conservative or whatever. Eventually, after enough posts, you show your hand.

 

Now, who is going to pony-up for the show here? $$$ I'm sick of working for free. :fan:

If you don't mind being called a cupcake far be it from me to interfere, Wag away.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Divergent1

Wag , I'm deeply offended at being called a male as I was born with a fully functioning & glorious vagina.

Kindly recheck your male brain pattern book.

PS I highly recommend The Art of War by Sun Tzu. It's necessary when running a business &/or being a new member on a forum.

I've read that book too. Many members here use names that aren't specific to their gender so it really doesn't matter either way. A few pages back you stated that you found it too distasteful to discuss the mutilated remains that you said was in the video. Then I saw where you insisted that the body was there and listed time stamps for better viewing. After that you stated it wasn't the original video and you thought the scenes had been edited out.

 

One of the staunchiest defenders of the incident comes back in and states he got word from colleagues that there is nothing to these claims. So exactly what was your purpose in claiming that there was a death associated with this incident and that there was a ripped up body stuck in a tree? If you stand by what you are saying then it shouldn't be hard to present the evidence. Please enlighten us.

Edited by Divergent1
Edited quote
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've read that book too. Many members here use names that aren't specific to their gender so it really doesn't matter either way. A few pages back you stated that you found it too distasteful to discuss the mutilated remains that you said was in the video. Then I saw where you insisted that the body was there and listed time stamps for better viewing. After that you stated it wasn't the original video and you thought the scenes had been edited out.

 

One of the staunchiest defenders of the incident comes back in and states he got word from colleagues that there is nothing to these claims. So exactly what was your purpose in claiming that there was a death associated with this incident and that there was a ripped up body stuck in a tree? If you stand by what you are saying then it shouldn't be hard to present the evidence. Please enlighten us.

 

I don’t know about staunchest, but I’d like to think I am my own person, I think for myself preferring to lead not follow. I did reach out to ask and the question was answered. It may not have been what I expected but it was candid and forthwith. 

 

This is what I know with absolute certainty the practice of calling in favors and reaching out to friends and associates across the country is a fact of life and it thrives in most job settings and law enforcement is no exception. Besides an unspoken respect mutually shared among those past and present in that brotherhood, it’s extremely territorial. Generally speaking your network of contacts gets increasingly smaller as you retire and doors once open close as your contacts retire and they are replaced by new younger people. 

 

 In so far as the Garrett event is concerned, small towns have long memories and local secrets and stories that aren’t easily given up for outsiders and the first lesson is you don’t go snooping around in somebody's back yard rhetorically speaking without announcing yourself or without proper invitation.  Whether I rely on what was messaged to me is determined by me and it was just that, a response to my question from another perspective and it shall be taken under advisement.  So therefore I would caution anyone against inferring too much into that, because in the end, I determine right or wrong, good or bad, righteousness or deception. I am me with parameters I set when I look at particulars of an event. The response has garnered some thought for reconsideration but hasn’t changed my initial feelings about the matter or Bigfoot in the least and I firmly hold the position that expert disinformation was in play.  Determining where or who originated it is something still remains a big unknown. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Gumshoeye
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t know about staunchest, but I’d like to think I am my own person, I think for myself preferring to lead not follow. I did reach out to ask and the question was answered. It may not have been what I expected but it was candid and forthwith. 

 

I think if you reread the majority of these posts you will find that there are a whole lot of leaders here and not followers who take whatever some podcast says to be the truth.  And, I don't feel that people are "jumping on the bandwagon" because they disagree with someone's point of view regarding a sighting or video.  This has little to do with detective work and more to do with a jury weighing the evidence that is presented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...