Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?

From the webs forum.


1 2 3 Next »

Lee Farley Administrator Posts: 537	A number of years ago the highly opinionated know-it-all par excellence known as Charles Drago set about a campaign to 'out' Albert Doyle as a pseudonym posting at Deep Politics Forum. Charlie's rationale concerning what he was terming the "Albert Doyles" problem was less than impressive although I did agree with him that there was something decidedly dodgy about the man. On the surface it looked like one know-it-all was having his nose put out of joint by another know-it-all but digging beneath the surface and on a gut-instinct level Charlie wasn't wrong on this one.   Well, it turns out old CD's days were numbered after this and was soon banned. He had a penchant for wanting to 'out' every single person who joined Deep Doo Doo, obviously running the supposition that if you accuse everyone of being a disinformation agent then you're bound to catch one sooner or later.   Drago was booted and Doyle stayed.   Doyle is a man who continuously mixes up "truth" and "facts" and is odd within the research community because I have not once witnessed him enter into ANY collaborative research with ANYONE. This guy will start with an opinion or, within his psyche, the "truth" of an issue, and then pitches very selective evidence in a very aggressive debating style to try and bolster his individual "truth." What you will never get from Doyle is the full picture. Nothing more than a cherry-picker extraordinaire he will steadfast refuse to deal with ANYTHING that contradicts his perspective. And here's the funny bit - - he will then accuse you of doing the thing that he himself does.   He is without doubt one of two things. He is either a complete and utter idiot or he is a very intelligent manipulator and agent provocateur. My money is now on the second option. His MO is to make himself an authority on JFK matters. He will support very reasonable assessments and conclusions and he will vocalise this support across Deep Doo Doo and on Amazon.com. But here is what is somewhat strange about old Bertie Doyle. He also supports some utter bullshit such as the William Pitzer story and Ralph Yates CIA doppelgänger theory and throws into the mix some of the most radical and controversial conclusions that are part of this case, none more so than "the Jews killed JFK."   And so, for many years I have butted heads with Albert Doyle both head-to-head at JFK Lancer and by proxy across different forums and know first hand what an obstinate and obtuse bullshitter he is. Years ago I labeled him nothing more that a fantasist with some sort of obsessive-compulsive problem who craved attention. These days I'm not so sure. On a platform such as Amazon.com I'm sure digging out individuals with pretty controversial opinions and beliefs will be of benefit to certain interested parties. What better way than to have a reviewer support some of these views and wait for the bait to be taken? So I'm now left with a question.   Who is Albert Doyle?    If anybody can send me the name of any other single human being within this community who has met this man I would be incredibly grateful. I now have doubts that he actually exists. I propose that Albert Doyle is a game-player. What the stakes are in his games are anyone's guess but until we get to the bottom of a very specific issue then I proclaim that Albert Doyle be genuinely outed as an imposter   Greg started a thread here yesterday describing how his review of John Armstrong's book at Amazon.com had been left a comment from an Amazon.com member named Ralph Yates. I went and visited the page and read the comment left behind like a skid-mark in a fresh pair of white underpants. The pseudonym Ralph Yates writing over at Amazon.com is our very own Albert Doyle. And in addition to having an account in the name of Ralph Yates he also has an Amazon.com account in the name of Albert Doyle.    And here is where things begin to get a little bit odd.   The Amazon.com profile in the name of Albert Doyle is a "Real Name" account. This means that the reviews of the person associated with the profile has been verified because the profile details match the credit card details of the person and all associated reviews are linked to this verified account. There are 47 reviews on this account profile. Albert Doyle's location is listed as Sanibel, Florida.   Many of the reviews are related to Deep Foo Foo Doyle's areas of interest such as the death of Jimi Hendrix, the murder of John Lennon, JFK matters and a host of books that would be defined as anti-Semitic and in some cases holocaust denial.  Also included is a review for Jim DiEugenio's book.   So I was curious to see a couple of books reviewed by Albert Doyle in his profile related to Northern Ireland and Irish affairs. One of which was by Father Sean McManus called My American Struggle for Justice in Northern Ireland. The Albert Doyle who wrote the review claimed to be associated with certain groups in the United States who fought for the same aims as Father Sean McManus. The review, once again linked to the profile of Albert Doyle, was signed Albert Regan Doyle.   A cursory Google search for Albert Regan Doyle pulled up results that surprised even me.   You see, Albert Regan Doyle who wrote this review died in January 2014.   Why is there a review associated with Deep Foo-Foo's Albert Doyle by a dead man who had the same name and by coincidence also lived in Sanibel, Florida?   Looking over the searches I have made for Albert Regan Doyle and I'm left with the impression that he was neither an anti-Semite or a denier of the holocaust. Although, strangely, he does have many of the same interests as Deep Doo Doo's Doyle such as Palestine.  I have taken screen shots of all of these reviews associated with the account.  Who is the breathing Albert Doyle? Does he really exist? Is it a pseudonym and, if so, why does he use one? Why are his reviews at Amazon.com mixed in with those of a dead man?   Time for the real Albert Doyle to stand up. And considering I don't believe dead men can come back to life I doubt an innocent explanation will be forthcoming...   http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/A31B0EGWC42OIS/ref=cm_aya_bb_pdp EDIT: I spoke too soon about the views of Albert Regan Doyle who had/has the exact same opinions as the living Albert Doyle when it comes to both the Jews and to Auschwitz.
	March 9, 2015 at 1:19 PM Flag Quote & Reply

Brian could give you a timeline when he crosses back from the Sanibel Sun Plane outside the Doyle garage

Eat shit Doyle. No more freebies for you, asshole.

(in your best german accent)

"I'm sure the feelings mutual mein fuhrer.
Your argument that the film changed hair color in the shade was admirable.
Lets not worry about it ruining your reputation again.
Time for a pill?"

Who can  ever forget  Deep FooFoo's resident  rotund  hipster cum counterintelligence  expert , and  his hapless  attempts to  " out" our favourite  Sanibelite  as a  " multi headed disinformation  spewing  hydra"?

Apart from  Gilbride's ( a sponge  like organism  reeking of turpentine) and  Larrytrotter's ( a bizarre anthropomorphic  specimen ,  think R2 DJew in  an anti semitic  Troma produced  porno  spoof of  Star Wars) the only  heads ever to darken the  malodorous  depths of the basement were the  ones Brian  swiped from  Sanibel Islands  Waxworks , specifically from   the  notorious if short lived " Torture  Through the  Ages" exhibit..

" ROKC haven't  managed to  locate Sarah Stanton in Altgens/ Weigmann " has replaced  Chris Davidson  and  his woman's face/ metadata  as his mantra of choice of late..

Brian is the embodiment of  Hitchens  Razor,  relying upon  non existent   unfalsifiable  " evidence " ( the Buell Frazier  video that was  mysteriously  deleted,  the vanishing  threads and countless other examples)  reeks of  charlatanism. 

Along with his chums in the  minuscule  H and L cult, Brian , and his  idiosyncratic  style of  " research " has become nothing more than an impediment. 

Its impossible to hold any sort of rational debate with someone who insists ( noisily, and  aggressively ) that  an image, clearly a male figure with a dark, obviously  receding  hairline , is in fact a  light haired, 300lb diminutive  woman. 

Like  Jimbo Baggins and his blind, almost   self  destructive  devotion to the  Doppelganger  Cult, Brian's  obsession with this forum,  and  for " winning " internet arguments  has become part of the problem,  rather than the solution. 

Along with  Lifton's macabre  delusions  , Fetzers  various attempts  to  internetify  the  Theatre of the Absurd , Juddufki,  the Driver shot JFK brigade and countless other  offshoot sects, Brian and Baggins have transformed themselves  into  a couple of the most effective  propagandists , their  illogical  arguments and their preposterous  theories  help  reinforce the  original  Warren Report lie..

For Brian  it's all about  Brian,  and winning,  and  trying to stymie  the  progress this forum has made,  and is still making.  For Jimbo it's all about  reeling in a couple more suckers / potential recruits...

That lying twat still cannot reconcile the info handed to him months ago...... he is that thick! 
Take another prescribed bunch of pills Doyle you need them.
Fuck him
Forget him
Total waste of space.....

Brian, the  reason I pay  no attention  to  your claims  regarding  Stanton  in the  Altgens/ Weigmann  images are multi fold.

Primarily because I  think ( and ive seen it  demonstrated on countless separate occasions) that  it's completely futile to attempt to make positive identifications from  decades old blurred and pixelated  reproductions of photographs. Especially when most of the  photos  in question are many generations removed from the original,  while a considerable minority are of uncertain provenance. 

Its pseudo  research at its very worst. Look at Cinque and Butler.  

Also,  and I'm sorry to be so blunt,  I don't believe  you possess the requisite skills,  never mind the impartiality  to make such a judgement. 

Also considering the fact  roughly half of the platform in Altgens is obscured by the Secret Service  agents in the foreground , I don't see how anyone could seriously make any such sweeping , definitive  claims. 

And  , perhaps most importantly , the whole question  seems redundant , in light of the far more compelling  evidence that exists. 

Primarily the blatant disparity between  Mrs Stanton and the images in question. A fact you seem unable to admit,  much  less come to terms with. Not to mention Mrs Stanton's own  statement.  And, to a lesser extent,  Buell Frazier's various statements. 

Whomever the figure turns out to be  , he's not a  light haired  300lb woman. 

Are the images clear enough to make a positive identification? In my opinion,  no. 

But they are clear enough to distinguish certain characteristics. 

If you claim to see obese hands, dresses, buttons and oversized handbags,  more power to you. If that's your opinion,  fair enough.  Your opinions are not proof. People are not criminals or congenitally  dishonest agent provocateurs because they disagree with you.  You seem unable to grasp this basic reality. 

Go ahead,  vent your spleen over on acjfk,  call me a troll, a liar and a British bastard. It's going to make no difference. 

Arguing that  Prayerman is Sarah Stanton is like arguing about H and L. A complete waste of time.  Both ideas( and I use the term in the closest possible sense) have been thoroughly debunked.  Their only remaining  purpose appears to be to act as   seemingly  insatiable  repositories of pure 24 carat  comedy gold , for troll punks,  disinfo goons and  government sponsored satirists...

I know you probably won't believe me,  but if I thought you had a valid argument I'd have no problems agreeing with you. 

Ultimately  any kind of research , or any attempt to understand history shouldn't involve  egos,  or  personalities,  or  embattled embittered  defences of treasured pet theories. It should be about an honest dispassionate appraisal of the available facts. 

I have to be honest Brian,  I find it almost impossible to take most of your claims seriously.  How can you possibly expect me, or for that matter,  anyone to consider evidence they haven't seen?

Would you believe me if I said I'd  seen a video of Buell Frazier claiming  Prayerman was definitely Oswald? Or PMs from Jimbo Baggins and  Fezzo  saying they  didn't believe in H and L? 

Would you still believe me if I said the videos and threads had all been mysteriously  deleted  , so you couldn't see them yourself?

Of course you wouldn't.  And quite rightly so. 

The rest of your regular repertoire; about  James Gordon,  Greg and  various other moderators , your allegations regarding  cabals of conspiring mods, determined to keep your superior evidence banned , not to mention your regular  diatribes  against us Britishers,  just make you look pathetic,  prejudiced and small minded. 

I don't understand your obsession with the Education Forum? Apart from a couple of notable exceptions it's now crammed to its  overfed gills with a  soul deadening  melange of  glib hucksterism, milquetoast non entities,  wide eyed  true believers,  gimlet  eyed  conspiracy touts , not to mention a couple of the most  incredibly  gullible and uninformed characters if ever had the misfortune of encountering.

Bullseye!
"..their illogical arguments and their preposterous theories help reinforce the original Warren Report lie.."

And or make the whole subject toxic thus only attracting those already suffering from assorted ills.

This case needs an enema.

I am squeezing it right in there as we speak...................... 

Will it help against delusional sightings of people in certain pix, I seriously doubt that. This is the point where Cinque and Doyle are getting a room.

That lube may come in handy.......