- Vinny
- Posts : 2623
Join date : 2013-08-27
Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Mon 21 Nov 2016, 2:19 am
From the webs forum.
1 2 3 Next »
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. | |
| ||
_________________
Out With Bill Shelley In Front.
- Ed.Ledoux
- Posts : 2953
Join date : 2012-01-04
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Wed 23 Nov 2016, 6:07 am
Brian could give you a timeline when he crosses back from the Sanibel Sun Plane outside the Doyle garage
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Wed 23 Nov 2016, 12:34 pm
Eat shit Doyle. No more freebies for you, asshole.
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Thu 16 Jun 2022, 2:54 am
I just don't like being compared to a nitwit that's been thrown out of all kinds of forums
You are a fucking nitwit that has been thrown out of forums.
_________________
Prayer Man Website. Prayer Man On FB. Prayer Man On Twitter. Prayer Man On YouTube
- Ed.Ledoux
- Posts : 2953
Join date : 2012-01-04
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Thu 16 Jun 2022, 2:42 pm
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Mon 20 Jun 2022, 1:37 am
- Ed.Ledoux
- Posts : 2953
Join date : 2012-01-04
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Mon 20 Jun 2022, 6:09 am
(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?"
"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?"
- alex_wilson
- Posts : 1021
Join date : 2019-04-10
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Tue 21 Jun 2022, 9:32 pm
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...
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...
_________________
A fez! A fez! My kingdom for a fez!!
The last words of King Richard HARVEY Plantagenet III
Bosworth Field 1485
Is that a doppelganger in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?
Artist, poet, polymath, cancer research prodigy Judyth Vary Baker's first words to Lee HARVEY Oswald. New Orleans April 1963
For every HARVEY there must be an equal and opposite LEE
Professor Sandy Isaac Newton Laverne Shirley Fonzie Larsen's
Famous 1st Law of Doppelganging
" To answer your question I ALWAYS look for mundane reasons for seeming anomalies before considering sinister explanations. Only a fool would do otherwise. And I'm no fool" The esteemed Professor Larsen From his soon to be published self help book " The Trough of Enlightenment "( Trine Day Foreword Vince Palamara)
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Wed 22 Jun 2022, 4:18 am
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.....
Take another prescribed bunch of pills Doyle you need them.
Fuck him
Forget him
Total waste of space.....
_________________
Prayer Man Website. Prayer Man On FB. Prayer Man On Twitter. Prayer Man On YouTube
- alex_wilson
- Posts : 1021
Join date : 2019-04-10
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Wed 22 Jun 2022, 4:19 am
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.
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.
_________________
A fez! A fez! My kingdom for a fez!!
The last words of King Richard HARVEY Plantagenet III
Bosworth Field 1485
Is that a doppelganger in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?
Artist, poet, polymath, cancer research prodigy Judyth Vary Baker's first words to Lee HARVEY Oswald. New Orleans April 1963
For every HARVEY there must be an equal and opposite LEE
Professor Sandy Isaac Newton Laverne Shirley Fonzie Larsen's
Famous 1st Law of Doppelganging
" To answer your question I ALWAYS look for mundane reasons for seeming anomalies before considering sinister explanations. Only a fool would do otherwise. And I'm no fool" The esteemed Professor Larsen From his soon to be published self help book " The Trough of Enlightenment "( Trine Day Foreword Vince Palamara)
- Ed.Ledoux
- Posts : 2953
Join date : 2012-01-04
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Wed 22 Jun 2022, 9:19 am
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.
"..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.
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Wed 22 Jun 2022, 3:12 pm
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.......

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.......
_________________
Prayer Man Website. Prayer Man On FB. Prayer Man On Twitter. Prayer Man On YouTube
Re: Will The Real Albert Doyle Please Stand Up?
Yesterday at 10:40 pm
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
|
|