|
|
Post by Cyrellys on Jan 12, 2012 15:56:48 GMT -7
Announcement: Dan Smiths board has been moved to more prominently display on Compass Morainn's main board. Both Special Guest Dan Smith: Best Possible World, and the Lucianarchy OMF Members board has been moved on the main page to the Special Guest Category. See here: compassmorainn.proboards.com/index.cgi All current links should still be fully functional. I may be emailed if this has caused any problems at: cyrellys@dishmail.net |
|
|
|
Post by ur2 on Jan 12, 2012 16:09:54 GMT -7
Funny how the king of socks says he doesn't know of any  Toon, Cartoonsyndicate, generalstryker, boycotteverything, etc, etc.....LOL I'm sure there are more. I believe he even signed up as a woman one time. Somebodies sister. |
|
|
|
Post by mur on Jan 12, 2012 16:35:23 GMT -7
He hasn't been back there in years.
And what he said was that he knew of no coordinated sock attacks coming from amkon.
This is true because there were none.
I however did keep coming back with socks.
Maybe 10 or 15.
So what?
Don't blame the demise of omf on a few socks accts..
That's not honest
|
|
|
|
Post by Cyrellys on Jan 12, 2012 16:37:09 GMT -7
I have to step out for a while...bbl. Cy Can't wait....... You never answered regarding how lying to the oathkeepers is any different than lying to the ufo community. So if there was a source x....disclosing secret info to the oathkeepers...who claim to be active military....and was passing you info in a public forum anonymously....and you discovered he was a fraud...you would just keep that to yourself? You would go ahead and let others believe the lies? Answer the question for once instead of dodging it. You are going off topic Mur. And the sort of question you are asking gets into to Confidentiality Agreements. I will only explain this: For starters - I will state a third time, OathKeepers isn't involved here and wasn't involved at OMF. Secondly, it is common practice for forums to be used for backchannelling...such practices sometimes result in truth, sometimes falsehoods, and sometimes combinations of both. No one except you takes any offense in such business. You pointed out the DS show yourself and even named some of the parties on the public side of it. What do you think that is? Just because you're not directly involved in it, doesn't mean it doesn't go on. The various power groups throughout the world all use out of the way places to hold cordial, civil conversations without the constraints that make more formal ones between their respective environments essentially impossible. Many wars have been prevented by such activities. That is the only information for public consumption. Anything else is none of your business Mur. Cy |
|
|
|
Post by dan on Jan 12, 2012 16:39:22 GMT -7
Sounds good to me.....
Ooops, maybe this went on the wrong thread. I'm being distracted by the dogs and howlers competing for bandwidth in Manuel-Antonio.
|
|
|
|
Post by mur on Jan 12, 2012 16:45:13 GMT -7
Can't wait....... You never answered regarding how lying to the oathkeepers is any different than lying to the ufo community. So if there was a source x....disclosing secret info to the oathkeepers...who claim to be active military....and was passing you info in a public forum anonymously....and you discovered he was a fraud...you would just keep that to yourself? You would go ahead and let others believe the lies? Answer the question for once instead of dodging it. You are going off topic Mur. And the sort of question you are asking gets into to Confidentiality Agreements. I will only explain this: For starters - I will state a third time, OathKeepers isn't involved here and wasn't involved at OMF. Secondly, it is common practice for forums to be used for backchannelling...such practices sometimes result in truth, sometimes falsehoods, and sometimes combinations of both. No one except you takes any offense in such business. You pointed out the DS show yourself and even named some of the parties on the public side of it. What do you think that is? Just because you're not directly involved in it, doesn't mean it doesn't go on. The various power groups throughout the world all use out of the way places to hold cordial, civil conversations without the constraints that make more formal ones between their respective environments essentially impossible. Many wars have been prevented by such activities. That is the only information for public consumption. Anything else is none of your business Mur. Cy Thanks for dodging the question again. No wonder the oathkeepers movement is full of hoaxes |
|
|
|
Post by ur2 on Jan 12, 2012 16:49:46 GMT -7
He hasn't been back there in years. And what he said was that he knew of no coordinated sock attacks coming from amkon. This is true because there were none. I however did keep coming back with socks. Maybe 10 or 15. So what? Don't blame the demise of omf on a few socks accts.. That's not honest Not saying that. Just think it's funny with his pile of socks is all. Heck I think he even had more that you  And this had nothing to do with OMF. Exactly why it went down may never be known fully. It is strange that all that criticized OMF and wanted it gone, are now the ones crying the most and want to know why. Look back mur, you are one of those. Well I just stopped by by way of a link. Didn't plan to stay and I won't. Enjoy your tragedy all. Time heals most wounds. |
|
|
|
Post by Cyrellys on Jan 12, 2012 16:57:09 GMT -7
You are going off topic Mur. And the sort of question you are asking gets into to Confidentiality Agreements. I will only explain this: For starters - I will state a third time, OathKeepers isn't involved here and wasn't involved at OMF. Secondly, it is common practice for forums to be used for backchannelling...such practices sometimes result in truth, sometimes falsehoods, and sometimes combinations of both. No one except you takes any offense in such business. You pointed out the DS show yourself and even named some of the parties on the public side of it. What do you think that is? Just because you're not directly involved in it, doesn't mean it doesn't go on. The various power groups throughout the world all use out of the way places to hold cordial, civil conversations without the constraints that make more formal ones between their respective environments essentially impossible. Many wars have been prevented by such activities. That is the only information for public consumption. Anything else is none of your business Mur. Cy Thanks for dodging the question again. No wonder the oathkeepers movement is full of hoaxes That wasn't a dodge at all Mur. It was very straight forward with you. You implied you didn't know how your world works or what goes on behind the scenes. Now you know. And you know from my prior posts that when you engage in unbecoming conduct, you then will not be allowed to see the details of anything that may or may not occur behind the scenes in present-tense, past-tense, and future tense. Particularly, if you do so much unbecoming conduct that you gain an Internet-wide reputation for being a head-hunter with chronic blood-lust. You also implied that you wanted to know what I thought of whatever I may have learned about one case's presentation; past, present, or future. And I told you outright that it's none of your business. Unlike you, I don't bend on Confidentiality, Mur. It doesn't matter to me if something is good or sour. I live by the Principles I preach. End of story. Cy |
|
|
|
Post by Cyrellys on Jan 12, 2012 16:59:50 GMT -7
Welcome to Compass Morainn ur2. Cy
|
|
|
|
Post by mdonnall2002 on Jan 12, 2012 17:51:49 GMT -7
I'll catch up when I am able to secure some time to organize thoughts properly...
|
|
nibs
Full Member
Posts: 8
|
Post by nibs on Jan 12, 2012 18:44:36 GMT -7
I for one don't see any reason to defend OMF but I will say this... Stephenville was hosted there and anyone that thinks that was just another hoax needs to get their head examined..
The site was loaded with heaping tons of personal contact with beings from other worlds , dimensions etc that I'd say in every such account could not be supported by evidence. Not the kind of evidence Mur wants.
Stephenville, ricky sorrells, anjolina etc.. is IMO one of the strongest UFO accounts to date- supported with Radar tracking. And it took place at OMF. And so to say everything there took place to gain a 6000 + membership is non sense....
|
|
|
|
Post by mur on Jan 12, 2012 18:51:05 GMT -7
He hasn't been back there in years. And what he said was that he knew of no coordinated sock attacks coming from amkon. This is true because there were none. I however did keep coming back with socks. Maybe 10 or 15. So what? Don't blame the demise of omf on a few socks accts.. That's not honest Not saying that. Just think it's funny with his pile of socks is all. Heck I think he even had more that you And this had nothing to do with OMF. Exactly why it went down may never be known fully. It is strange that all that criticized OMF and wanted it gone, are now the ones crying the most and want to know why. Look back mur, you are one of those. Well I just stopped by by way of a link. Didn't plan to stay and I won't. Enjoy your tragedy all. Time heals most wounds. No worries....I never said I wanted it gone....at least I don't remember saying that. But no doubt I was very critical of the way it was run. Thanks for your imput |
|
|
|
Post by mur on Jan 12, 2012 18:57:31 GMT -7
Thanks for dodging the question again. No wonder the oathkeepers movement is full of hoaxes That wasn't a dodge at all Mur. It was very straight forward with you. You implied you didn't know how your world works or what goes on behind the scenes. More Bullshit.....no aren't even a good liar Now you know. And you know from my prior posts that when you engage in unbecoming conduct, you then will not be allowed to see the details of anything that may or may not occur behind the scenes in present-tense, past-tense, and future tense. Particularly, if you do so much unbecoming conduct that you gain an Internet-wide reputation for being a head-hunter with chronic blood-lust. Funny how you can't give an example of unbecoming conduct or even an example of would you would do in similar context. All I know about you is that some lies fit your agenda. That's a shame You also implied that you wanted to know what I thought of whatever I may have learned about one case's presentation; past, present, or future. And I told you outright that it's none of your business. Yeah....I got your answer....so did everyone else Unlike you, I don't bend on Confidentiality, Mur. It doesn't matter to me if something is good or sour. I live by the Principles I preach. End of story. Cy My work here is almost done |
|
|
|
Post by mur on Jan 12, 2012 19:03:40 GMT -7
I for one don't see any reason to defend OMF but I will say this... Stephenville was hosted there and anyone that thinks that was just another hoax needs to get their head examined.. The site was loaded with heaping tons of personal contact with beings from other worlds , dimensions etc that I'd say in every such account could not be supported by evidence. Not the kind of evidence Mur wants. Stephenville, ricky sorrells, anjolina etc.. is IMO one of the strongest UFO accounts to date- supported with Radar tracking. And it took place at OMF. And so to say everything there took place to gain a 6000 + membership is non sense.... Did I say that? The Texas case was a good one.. I never claimed hoax for that. And I never said that every one who wanted to post their experiences needed to back it up with proof either. But when someone makes extraordinary claims, over an extended period of time....on their own board....should an attempt not be made to fact check? Does anyone think fact checking is important? |
|
|
|
Post by mur on Jan 12, 2012 19:15:19 GMT -7
Besides Cy of course....we know she feels that fact checking is totally unnecessary....as long as it suits her agenda
|
|
