On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 18:18:41 +0100, Keith Willshaw wrote:

Tom wrote:
On Sat, 8 Oct 2011 16:51:08 +0100, Keith Willshaw wrote:

..whether one agrees or not, David
Wilcock is far from being ignorant. Neither is Fulford.

Because you may disagree with them may mean kooky to you, that is
your choosing but ignorant they are not.

Do I assume correctly that you do not believe the essence of the
DUMB destruction/story?

Thats putting it mildly.

Put it bluntly then.

Its a crock of s**t dreamt up by conspirowhackos and believed
by imbeciles.

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps not. To be right, you would have to submit
more than your opinion regarding the content of the article in question.
You would have to propose that the DUMBs are intact.

Assailing the writer(s) is extremely weak sauce as surely you are aware.
Personal attacks in lieu of facts is the realm of the, how should I say
this, imbeciles and whackos.