Ive kinda gone in and out of these Montreal threads for a while since Montagna et al; it seems like certain people just keep throwing out so many theories that, when one of them tenuously sticks or fits the mould, they feel that they can hold it up and "safely assume" that they have deduced the truth of the matter.
There's either the clinical even-handedness of the figures or the "You have no idea how sneaky these guys are :wink wink:" approach. The best posts come from the guys that can admit there needs to be more information released before they can completely form a solid opinion. The "A leads to B, and therefore confirms C because THATS WHAT IVE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG" posts are ridiculous enough in themselves.
Having said that, there's obviously a handful of guys across the board that continuously post insightful and illumininating. Like antimafia and Laurentian. Especially those guys.
Isn't this what these forums are supposed to be for, Mickey? Theorizing and discussing things? Maybe we should all lay back and don't make posts at all because obviously we don't know shit...
Nope, you're missing the point of my post. Its not so much the endless theorising, its more the assumption that said theories are anything more than that. Like some random guy in The Netherlands or Italy has a better grasp of whats going in Montreal than any other person who reads the same books, articles and press releases.
EDIT: Re-reading the post, it kind of sounds like Im attacking you Sonny. Thats was very much NOT my intention. You're actually one of the better posters, and Ive liked you well enough since Ive started reading your posts. My beef is more about people going out on limbs by claiming they've got it all figured out, until the next development, when they either admit they're as lost as anyone else, or dig themselves deeper by trying to weave the event into supporting their claims.
