320 Years of History
Gold Member
For intent, I already reiterated to depotoo how that cannot be verified,
so I want to stick to points that can be.
Thanks again!
The verifiability was the aspect that has been made quite clear in several prior posts, post #13 being the first, and that is what I had in mind when I replied in post #57. That's why I asked if s/he'd been following the discussion. A "no" answer would have adequately explained why that pre-investigation video was offered at this point in the discussion. And frankly, that would have been just fine. When the answer to a question like that is "no," it just is, and "no" says all that need be said.
I'm a critical reader, there's no denying that, but I'm not an unreasonable or unegalitarian person. Honest and direct responses to my honest questions always work with me.
Not to worry 320 Years of History
The above notwithstanding, your magnanimity seems to eclipse my reasonableness. LOL