The Death of Vince Foster - What Really Happened? (1995)

BeAChooser said:

Isn't it amazing how NONE of those showing up on the other side of this debate want to discuss/debate the actual facts in the case?

Perhaps because the few who have, so far, had their honesty and credibility destroyed by my fact-filled responses?

Click to expand...

No, I haven't joined in because I think you're delusional and other members are doing a perfectly good job of attempting to put you in your place.
As that is clearly not working and my own abilities would certainly not be up to the task, I am resolving instead to simply not get involved. It is my hope that like the delusional man who occasionally shows up at my door spouting that aliens stole his uretha and the government lied about it, that you will soon toddle of somewhere else.

BeAChooser said:

ANTPogo said:

In fact, you yourself admitted that Foster's doctor was concerned about Foster's depression, and considered his level of insomnia a symptom of that depression.

Click to expand...

LIAR. Nothing I posted admitted any such thing. Go ahead, Truther, try to prove that claim by quoting me. Bet you can't.

Click to expand...

Dishonestly editing my posts again, I see.

ANTPogo said:

Strangely, in the very same post that you quote-mined my statement above from, I once again point out that admission to you (you'd been ducking it for a while), and ask you to explain why you were trying so hard to dissociate Foster's insomnia from his depression, backpedalling furiously from your admission that they were connected (something you never did explain).

Click to expand...

See the above? You edited it out, so I know you saw it. And you quoted from the post mentioned there, and edited out the relevant quotes I provided, so I know you saw that. This is at least the third time you've denied you said that, called me a liar for bringing this up, and demanded quotes. And I first replied to you with the relevant quotes in this post, from December of 2008. December 2008!

So, let's see just how far you'll go in denying and backpedaling and falsely accusing me of lying (in yet another example of you projecting your own pathological problems onto others).

A little cutting and pasting from that December '08 post, and:

In post 184 of this thread over here, gdnp posted "You have repeatedly said that Foster showed no signs of depression." He reproduced a list of depression symptoms from WebMD, including insomnia.

In the very next post, 185, I ask you a direct question: "Why would the doctor ask, unprompted, if Foster was depressed, do you think?"

In post 190, you reply to gdnp, mocking the idea that Foster's insomnia was in any way related to depression, quoting his WebMD symptoms list and saying "Sorry gdnp, you are still avoiding the facts. Foster's family, friends and work associates, when interviewed immediatedly after his death, said he was not depressed ... that they saw no signs of depression. Starr lied when he later claimed they did."

In post 193, you answer my direct question: "Because Foster wasn't sleeping? "

Let me repeat that. I ask you "Why would the doctor ask, unprompted, if Foster was depressed, do you think?", and you reply "Because Foster wasn't sleeping?"

In other words, you yourself made the connection that Foster's doctor thought Foster might be suffering from depression to a degree that he, as a doctor, was concerned about, because of Foster's insomnia.

You apparently realized that what you said contradicted the case you were trying to make, that Foster's insomnia wasn't in any way symptomatic of depression, and certainly not symptomatic of a depression severe enough to worry a doctor who might prescribe an antidepressant, because in post 199 I press you about the connection that, again, you yourself made: "Now, what does insomnia and anorexia have to do with depression? In other words, what about insomnia and anorexia might have prompted Foster's doctor to ask him about depression?"

In post 204, you start backpedaling furiously from that connection you made, saying "That's you conjecturing ... while ignoring the documented fact that the doctor prescribed the drug for insomnia, not because of depression."

Except that what you were attacking was your own conjecture, not mine, and I tell you that in post 208: "I'm not conjecturing anything. I'm asking you why YOU posted what you did, and what YOU think Foster's doctor was thinking when he (presumably) asked Foster about depression.

A question you still haven't answered."

That's the question you are still avoiding, after almost two years, because you recoil from the implications of what you yourself suggested.

So, BAC...how are you going to duck and weave around this yet again, this time around? I'm honestly curious.

angrysoba said:

I am saying it is delusional to assume that every rational person reading the thread who hasn't commented must be in agreement with you.

In fact you even define a rational person as someone who hasn't tried to challenge you and made a number of assumptions about their thought processes.

I think that is delusional. However, I will eat humble pie if the silent rational majority out there would stop being coy and chime in to say that they agree with BeAChooser.

Click to expand...

I'll chime in and say BAC is delusional. I have read the thread and am not swayed by his points.

ShadowSot said:

No, I haven't joined in because I think you're delusional and other members are doing a perfectly good job of attempting to put you in your place.

Click to expand...

I will bet that you didn't even bother to read the thread before posting.

ShadowSot said:

As that is clearly not working and my own abilities would certainly not be up to the task, I am resolving instead to simply not get involved.

Click to expand...

And yet, here you are getting involved, taking sides.

ShadowSot said:

It is my hope that like the delusional man who occasionally shows up at my door spouting that aliens stole his uretha and the government lied about it, that you will soon toddle of somewhere else.

Click to expand...

LOL! Writes a poster with all of 325 posts to his credit to someone with over 8000.

Let me guess, you refuse to debate the actual facts in the Foster case, too. Your approach will be to rely only on making personal attacks.

BTW I am currently taking TraZODone, and my dosage started at 50mg. It was originally perscribed to me for insomnia caused by depression. In the past when I had simple insomnia I was given sleeping pills, usually over-the-counter pill such as Unisom.

It can take a while for them to have an effect on the system, so I wouldn't be surprised if a higher dose was perscribed, followed by a lower dose on the next refill. He may have also been given sample packs by the physician.

Also, as I learned when I was first diagnosed, Male depression can manifest itself in ways other then being "bummed out." A person can have a short temper and lash-out for no reason. So asking a non-physician if a person was "depressed" may not be the best testimony.

ANTPogo said:

Originally Posted by ANTPogo
In fact, you yourself admitted that Foster's doctor was concerned about Foster's depression, and considered his level of insomnia a symptom of that depression.

Originally Posted by BeAChooser
LIAR. Nothing I posted admitted any such thing. Go ahead, Truther, try to prove that claim by quoting me. Bet you can't.

Dishonestly editing my posts again, I see.

Click to expand...

Not at all. I quoted EXACTLY what you said. Word for word. As anyone can see in reading your latest post, you haven't backed up that lie with quotes from me. You haven't shown that I "admitted that Foster's doctor was concerned about Foster's depression". In fact, I've quoted over and over to you the only statements the doctor reportedly made in this case and in both of them he clearly showed a LACK OF CONCERN about the seriousness of Foster's mental state and any depression he *might* have had. Nor did the doctor say anything that might be construed as suggesting he considered Foster's "level of insomnia a symptom of that depression". You are just just continuing to make things up and lie, ANTPogo. Just like a Truther.

ANTPogo said:

In post 184 of this thread over here, gdnp posted "You have repeatedly said that Foster showed no signs of depression." He reproduced a list of depression symptoms from WebMD, including insomnia.

Click to expand...

LOL! As I told gdnp then, "No, I said that when asked by investigators at the time of his death, his family, friends and work associates all said he showed no signs of depression." And that's absolutely true. I've also stated more than one occasion exactly what the doctor said … that if Foster had any depression, it was "mild" at best. It was not the clinical depression that Starr and you Vince Foster Truthers keep claiming because you need that to be true to sell this fiction he and you've created to the public.

As I told you before, I'm not going to continuing playing this game, ANTPogo. I'm not going to respond to each and every one of your comments and claims, all of which have been adequately addressed previously in our exchanges as reading this and other threads will prove to anyone interested. If you want to continue digging a hole for your credibility, you go right ahead. Continue to do what you've been doing here which is to lie, take statements completely out of context and distort their meaning, obfuscate, and throw out more strawmen and red herrings. That will come to not because the facts stand on their own. And the only facts that matter are these:

- Foster's behavior did not come close to meeting the DSM diagnostic guidelines for clinical depression as I clearly proved above. Starr lied about this.

- Foster's family, relatives and friends clearly and definitively stated that Foster was NOT showing ANY signs of depression before his death. Starr lied about this.

- Only three of those people later changed their story to claim Foster had been depressed before his death, and all three did so more than a week after the death, after they attended (or their spouse attended) a meeting in the Whitehouse. And Starr showed absolutely no interest in finding out about that meeting, or exploring why the three so radically changed their views.

- The doctor stated very clearly that the reason Foster sought his help was for insomnia and that the medication he prescribed Foster was for insomnia at a dosage that the literature clearly indicates is for insomnia … not depression. Starr lied about this.

- The doctor clearly stated that IF Foster had depression it was mild at best. That what he needed to do to get better was sleep better. Starr lied about this.

- Lisa Foster very clearly stated that Foster was concerned about becoming addicted to sleeping pills he'd been prescribed earlier and that he was "fighting [that] prescription". Starr tampered with that evidence and wrote in his final report that Lisa told FBI agents that Foster was "fighting depression".

In short, the claim of clinical depression is a concocted fantasy.

And I could go on and on listing facts that point to a coverup, that you continue to simply ignore or distort, in your Truther-like quest to defend the Clinton administration and Ken Starr. But I don't need to. They've already been pointed out on this and the other Foster threads, so if someone really wants to learn about them, they can. If they aren't interested, I can't help them. I've tried my best to create a spark of interest in a forum of folks who think themselves *skeptics* and can do little more.

And now we've come to the crux of the matter … that this Forum is now clearly invested with Vince Foster Truthers (with more coming all the time). And these Truthers show seem to have 10 characteristics. Here they are again, with you as an example, ANTPogo:

One. Vince Foster Truthers invariably focus on a very narrow set of what they claim to be the facts and ignore the vast body of demonstrable facts. For example, they will focus on the three eyewitnesses who changed their story and began claiming Foster was depressed, but ignore the fact they changed their story, what they originally said and that a dozen other close family members, friends and work associates said Foster was not depressed. They will focus on the doctor's mention of mild depression and do everything they can to make it sound like that depression was severe enough to cause him to commit suicide, but ignore the fact that the doctor stated it was "mild" at best and that what Foster just needed was sleep, that Foster came in complaining of insomnia and was treated for insomnia. Just like you've done, ANTPogo.

Two. Vince Foster Truthers simply ignore the vast majority (95+ percent) of the sourced facts that are offered to support the Vince Foster allegation. They don't want to talk about the other use for trazadone. They don't want to talk about the doctor clearly stating that he was treating Foster for sleeping problems. They don't want to talk about Foster's problems with a previous sleeping pill prescription. They don't want to talk about what other people (besides those few who changed their story a week after his death) said about Foster NOT being depressed. They don't want to talk about what witnesses, doctors, EMTs and a photo indicated was the true nature of Foster's wounds. They don't want to talk about the true nature of the gun and the fabrication of evidence where that is concerned. They don't want to talk about what Starr's own investigator said about the investigation being a coverup. They don't want to talk about the numerous investigators who said the body appeared to have been moved before the photos that Fiske and Starr show the body as it was found were taken. They don't want to talk about what the man who first found Foster's body said under oath ... that there was no gun in either of Foster's hands and that the position of the body was different in the photos than what he saw. They don't want to talk about the missing photos and x-rays. They don't want to talk about the obvious lies by Dr Bergan regarding the wound and x-rays. They don't want to talk about the bogus suicide note. They don't want to talk about the alteration of Lisa Fosters statement to the FBI. They don't want to the intimidation of other witnesses such as Patrick Knowlton. They don't want to talk about Clinton staffers removing material from Foster's office then lying under oath about doing it. They don't want to talk about $286000 payment made to Lisa Foster. They don't want to talk about what Foster was working on for the Clintons. And I could go on and on and on regarding facts that they simply don't want to talk about. Whereas a reading of this thread and the others will prove, I don't ignore what the other side claims. I have attempted to directly address and rebut every one of their claims at one time or another. But I don't care to keep having to address those claims over and over when the other side doesn't listen and just repeats them ... even lies about what response I gave the first couple times they made the claim. I've finally gotten tired of dealing with Truthers like you, ANTPogo, who keep repeating the same stuff over and over, don't listen and completely ignore 95% of the sourced facts in the case.

Three. When Vince Foster Truthers do present what they claim are facts, they often distort them or lie about them. I've proven this over and over on this thread. I've proven you've lied about the facts and distorted them over and over, ANTPogo. How else are we to interpret claims by you that 150mg is "the depression dose, not the insomnia dose", that "insomnia dosages for trazodone are 25 to 50 mg, rarely exceeding 100mg", and that "his doctor gave him a prescription for an anti-depressant, for a dosage higher than that normally given for insomnia"? The facts that have been presented here, and earlier in this and other Foster threads, clearly show those are nothing less than lies. Just some of a few that you've uttered over the past year, ANTPogo.

Four. The response of Vince Foster Truthers to my fact filled posts is to regurgitate the same cherry picked and often dishonest claims, long after they've been debunked. And here you go again, ANTPogo. Doing just that.

Five. Vince Foster Truthers are also very illogical beings. They think a witness list that includes the first (and only) doctor to see Foster at the death site, all the EMS personnel, the first person to find Foster's body, another civilian who was at the park at the time Foster supposedly was killed, several Park police officers who witnessed the death scene, the FBI agents who took the statements of Foster's family members and his personal doctor, three experts in handwriting, and Starr's own top investigator before he quit the IOC in disgust charging a coverup, is a "poor" witness list. They think a "good" witness list is one consisting solely of Starr's 3 story-changing eyewitnesses to Foster's *clinical* depression, a doctor who lied about taking x-rays and a finding a hole in the back of Foster's head, and a so-called *expert* in depression who claimed he was "100% certain" Foster killed himself. You believe what those "good" witnesses claim, don't you, ANTPogo?

Six. Vince Foster Truthers concoct all sorts of imaginary scenarios out of thin air as their substitute for dealing with the actual evidence. Your statement that "his doctor gave him a prescription for an anti-depressant, for a dosage higher than that normally given for insomnia" certainly qualifies as such a imaginary scenario. Your claim in this thread that "Foster was prescribed a dose much higher than the insomnia dose, but fully in line with the depression dose" is a fictional scenario. It's either your imagination run wild or you outright lying. Take your pick. Your claim that "Starr had to let anyone mentioned in the report submit their own statement" is another fiction. There was no legal requirement at all that Starr attach anything to his report. He was ORDERED to attach the Knowlton addendum by the three judge panel, over his protests. And I could name dozens of others example, but I think I'll give that challenge to our readers now. Go back and read ANTPogo's posts, folks. One point for each imaginary scenario in ANTPogo's posts. Not sure what the prize is yet but I wonder who will score a hundred first?

Seven. Vince Foster Truthers often rely on demonstrably untrustworthy witnesses and *experts*. You certainly seem to be relying on them … since the entire claim that Foster was clinically depressed rests solely on the 3 witnesses who changed their story after a meeting in the Whitehouse, a pathologist who lied about his x-ray machine and concocted a huge hole in the back of Foster's head that over two dozen other professional and medical personal must have missed rolleyes, and a scientific expert on depression who said he was "100% certain" on the basis of he now admits very limited and incomplete data. For that matter, you seem to trust Ken Starr, even after all his lies and tampering with evidence that I've noted. Speaking of which, I can't help but notice you continue to simply ignore the green oven mitt (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4706310&postcount=173 ), even though I've asked you repeatedly about it.

Eight. Vince Foster Truthers fall back on personal attacks when their presentation of claimed facts falls flat on it's face. Now I don't recall you overtly attacking me with them (and I don't care to spend the time looking back to see if you did), but you certainly have tried to smear Knowlton in an ugly fashion.

Nine. Vince Foster Truthers like to play the innocent game and accuse their opponent of sinking to the level of debate they are actually already at in the debate. You do that a lot in this thread as any casual reading will show. For example, ANTPogo, do you remember claiming that "I feel a moral duty to help fight ignorance. You make it difficult to do that, though, when you completely ignore everything we've said in both this thread and the previous one". Do you remember writing in response to my asking if "you can explain why they quote Lisa Foster in the report saying Foster was 'Fighting Depression' when the hand written FBI notes from the night she was interviewed clearly indicates she said he was 'Fighting Prescription'?", the following: "Why are you back here posting the same insinuations about that, as if all our explanations just washed off you like water off a duck's back?" Pot. Kettle. Black.

Ten. Finally, Vince Foster Truthers often try to link their opponents to other unrelated matters or groups, that they think will discredit their opponents, rather than deal with the actual facts in the case at hand. Remember mentioning the "Birther thing", ANTPogo? Remember bringing up and linking the "Clinton Death List" when I mentioned another death specifically connected to Vince Foster?

The consequences for the forum of this infestation will be sad for the reputation of this forum. But I'm still puzzled as to the motivation of those doing it. I understand why 9/11 Truthers do what they do. Because they either hate Bush, hate the US government or hate America. But why are people like you, ANTPogo, wasting so much of your time trying to attack a conspiracy that you and the others have already said went nowhere, is going nowhere and noone cares about? Seems to me, if that were true you could just ignore it and would die on the vine without your help.

As I said before, I think most people can understand my motives for pursuing this given all the facts I've brought to light in this thread regarding the dishonesty and sloppy work of the FBI, Fiske and Starr. And I'm concerned about what the Clintons did to this country and the fact that they and many of their people are still working in the top echelons of our government.

But what are your motives? Previously you claimed it's because you don't like ignorance, but that response just doesn't seem to hold any water consider all the ignorance you've helped foster (sic) here. So what are your real motives? Are you a democrat? Are you worried that if the truth about this came out, even now, it would severely damage democrats? What drives you to show up on Foster threads so regularly? Let's have some honesty for once, ANTPogo. If that's even remotely possible coming from you.

Disbelief said:

I have read the thread

Click to expand...

I don't believe you.

As a test, let's see you rebut the green oven mitt concern I raised.

Let's see you rebut the "fighting depression" issue.

Let's see you rebut ANYTHING specific with some specifics.

Or will you, like so many others, slink away now that you added your two, I suspect very biased, cents to the thread?

CptColumbo said:

BTW I am currently taking TraZODone, and my dosage started at 50mg. It was originally perscribed to me for insomnia caused by depression. In the past when I had simple insomnia I was given sleeping pills, usually over-the-counter pill such as Unisom.

It can take a while for them to have an effect on the system, so I wouldn't be surprised if a higher dose was perscribed, followed by a lower dose on the next refill. He may have also been given sample packs by the physician.

Also, as I learned when I was first diagnosed, Male depression can manifest itself in ways other then being "bummed out." A person can have a short temper and lash-out for no reason. So asking a non-physician if a person was "depressed" may not be the best testimony.

Click to expand...

Here we go again ... concocting imaginary scenarios to explain away facts.

There is NO evidence that Foster was given any "sample packs" and had any contact with Trazodone before the prescription he was given immediately before his death.

There is NO evidence that Foster was acting any different before his death (other than claims made by three people who all went to a meeting in the Whitehouse or had a spouse attend that meeting, and then changed their stories 180 degrees from what they'd been claiming the week prior to that meeting).

There is considerable evidence that Foster was not acting any different ... not "bummed out", didn't have a short temper, and wasn't lashing out for no reason.

You are just creating imaginary scenarios, CptColumbo. Why?

Plus, you are nothing more than electrons posting anonymously and you could claim anything you want and we wouldn't know if it's true or not. For every claim like yours, I can go on the internet and find dozens claiming a much higher dose for the treatment of depression, and a dosage just like Foster got for insomnia. I know because I've done that in debates.

And by the way, the use and dosage of TraZODone has changed since the time of Foster's death. You need to go look at the way Trazodone was used and prescribed almost 2 decades ago. A lot has changed.

BeAChooser said:

Not at all. I quoted EXACTLY what you said. Word for word. As anyone can see in reading your latest post, you haven't backed up that lie with quotes from me. You haven't shown that I "admitted that Foster's doctor was concerned about Foster's depression". In fact, I've quoted over and over to you the only statements the doctor reportedly made in this case and in both of them he clearly showed a LACK OF CONCERN about the seriousness of Foster's mental state and any depression he *might* have had. Nor did the doctor say anything that might be construed as suggesting he considered Foster's "level of insomnia a symptom of that depression". You are just just continuing to make things up and lie, ANTPogo. Just like a Truther.

*mass snip*

Click to expand...

All that, and you still haven't answered the question. So, let's try again.

I asked you "Why would the doctor ask, unprompted, if Foster was depressed, do you think?", and you replied "Because Foster wasn't sleeping?"

Why did you post that reply, and what do you think Foster's doctor was thinking when he asked Foster about depression in relation to Foster's insomnia?

But what are your motives? Previously you claimed it's because you don't like ignorance, but that response just doesn't seem to hold any water consider all the ignorance you've helped foster (sic) here. So what are your real motives? Are you a democrat? Are you worried that if the truth about this came out, even now, it would severely damage democrats?

Click to expand...

I am not currently registered as a Democrat, nor have I ever been registered as a Democrat in any of the places I've ever lived. I'm a proud handgun owner with a CCW permit. I'm a strong supporter of the military, whose father, uncle, grandfather, and great-grandfather all served. I'm no fan of the Clintons - I never voted for Bill, and preferred McCain in 2000, and even after the Sarah Palin debacle would have voted for him over Hillary (I would have voted for anyone before voting for Hillary).

What drives you to show up on Foster threads so regularly?

Click to expand...

At this point, morbid amusement.

Let's have some honesty for once, ANTPogo. If that's even remotely possible coming from you.

Click to expand...

All right, you caught me. I killed Vince Foster, and I'm just miffed that you keep trying to blame it on the Clintons instead of giving me the credit I deserve.

kookbreaker said:

When I nominated BAC for a Stundie for his declaration that everyone who doesn't argue with him must be agreeing with him he immediately tried to nominate me using a rather unamusing line. BAC was then told to stop abusing the Stundie for his flame wars.

Click to expand...

Since in lieu of rebutting the facts in the Foster case, you've decided to try and use what happened on the Stundie thread against me here as your argument, I think it only fair that I respond by posting what was removed from that thread in response to your attack on me there ... for posterity's sake:

***********

POST 1

***********

Now now, KB. Tell the whole story. We need to put my comment in context. And your behavior as well.

And that context is that

- You've refused to honestly debate any of the Foster case evidence showing that the FBI and Starr tampered with evidence, tampered with witnesses, and lied in reports.

- You've refused to debate any of evidence showing that Foster's family, friends and work associates all said Foster was not depressed in the week after his death.

- You've refused to debate the fact that although Starr claimed Foster had "clinical" depression, his behavior does not come close to meeting the DSM guidelines for "clinical" depression and that Starr outright lied about what Foster's doctor and family said concerning Starr and depression.

- You've refuse to debate the fact that it wasn't until a week after his death that just 3 people (out of all the family, friends and associates who said he was not depressed) suddenly switched to saying he had been depressed and that they changed to claiming that only after a meeting that two of them (the third was a spouse of one) attended in the Whitehouse.

- You've refused to discuss the facts that show a torn up, forged *suicide* note was placed in Foster's briefcase and was only *discovered* about a week after his death even though the briefcase had been searched in front of Park Police the night of his death.

- You've refused to discuss the Green Oven Mitt which conclusively proves Starr tampered with the evidence.

And I could go on and on listing facts that suggest a murder and a coverup ... facts that you've consistently and repeatedly refused to even discuss.

In fact, if folks take a close look at that thread you linked, they will find that you were very active before I showed up attacking posters and the Foster allegation. When I did appear, my first post (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4687393&postcount=132) proved that you had outright lied about a number of the facts in the case. Misrepresented the truth. You then disappeared for a hundred posts. When you reappeared, you substituted a low-class personal attack on me (even lower than the one you are now attempting) for any factual attempt to defend yourself against the proof that you completely distorted the facts in the case.

And further misrepresentation of the facts, further lies, further instances of you refusing to debate significant facts, and further personal attacks characterize your posts from that point on in the thread. Our readers need only look to see I'm telling the truth.

The fact is, in Truther-like fashion, you just keep repeating the "official" story … that is, the lies by Starr that all those facts I've provided clearly disprove.

According to you, a witness list that includes the first (and only) doctor to see Foster at the death site, all the EMS personnel, the first person to find Foster's body, another civilian who was at the park at the time Foster supposedly was killed, several Park police officers who witnessed the death scene, the FBI agents who took the statements of Foster's family members and his personal doctor, three experts in handwriting, and Starr's own top investigator before he quit the IOC in disgust charging a coverup ... is a "poor" witness list.

But a good witness list in your view consists of the 3 eyewitnesses to Foster's *clinical* depression who all happened to tell the FBI and Park Police for days after Foster's death that he showed absolutely no sign of depression, but who all changed to saying there was serious depression immediately after a meeting a week later in the Whitehouse that was attended by two of the three witnesses (the third being the spouse of one of them) and their Clinton provided lawyers.

That, KB is Truther-like behavior. And after I pointed that out to you, along with a bunch of other misrepresentations, lies, illogic and personal attacks on your part, you ran from the thread again.

You came back only to defend yourself from the Truther accusation … not to debate the facts in the Foster case. And I responded to you (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5598602&postcount=306 ), providing more examples why you were behaving like a Truther. I might add that about that time, I also pointed out to other posters how they were acting like Truthers (for example, here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5598552&postcount=303 ). You fit the description in that post just as well, KB.

Then you made the claim "The only person trying to 'identify' people as Truther-like in this thread is you," which I showed is yet another lie in post: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5605544&postcount=332 . In that, I showed that you were the one who first introduced the Truther *attack* to the thread, by attacking me with the term. And I warned you that if you want to continue discrediting yourself by acting like a Truthers, I can't stop you.

And now, since it's become more than apparent on that thread that your side of the argument can't win by honestly debating any of the facts with me, you've decide you'll try another Truther tactic … to smear me in this underhanded manner.

Well, KB, my response to that is to nominate YOU for the Stundie. Because you've demonstrated all the characteristics we've come to laugh at where Truthers are concerned. And by the way, a whole bunch of others should receive the *award* on that thread as well. But you should get the first, KB, for all the absolutely [... snipped ...] things you said on that thread. But don't feel honored. And just remember ... you started this.

*************

POST 2

*************

KB, I don't think I'll have any problem proving that you truly deserve the October Stundie. Perhaps even a Lifetime Achievement Stundie.

Afterall, which group receives most of the Stundie nominations here? Why 9/11 Truthers, of course. And you display ALL of the characteristics of a 9/11 Truther in the way you have debated the Foster allegations.

Let's go over them:

One. 9/11 Truthers invariably focus on a very narrow set of what they claim to be the facts and ignore the vast body of demonstrable facts. Above, I cited just a portion of all the factual material I posted on Foster that you've ignored. You fit that description to a T, KB. In fact, I would bet you that I've posted at least 95% of all the Foster related facts on the Foster thread you linked (and on many other threads debating Foster). You and your side have posted and focused on *perhaps* just 5% of the facts relevant to the case, or at least what you claimed were facts. You act like a Truther in your desire to cherry pick the data, KB.

Two. I bet I could prove that you and your ilk have completely ignored 95-99% percent of the sourced facts that I've offered in support of my position. Whereas I have directly addressed/disputed *at least* 95% of the claims of fact your side has made. That ratio proves you act like a Truther, KB.

Three. When Truthers do present what they claim are facts, they often distort them or lie about them. My first post to you on the thread you linked (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4687393&postcount=132 ) destroyed the absolutely false claims that you and another had been making. Specifically, you made these claims:

Originally Posted by kookbreaker
The man suffered from clinical depression and had even told his doctor it had gotten real bad the day before.

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by kookbreaker
The evidence shows that Foster was very depressed and committed suicide.

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by kookbreaker
He was practically non-functional with depression.

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by fullflavormenthol
He had a history of clinical depression, that is on record.

Click to expand...

Originally Posted by fullflavormenthol
He was prescribed Trazodone by his doctor shortly before his death, and in fact there is evidence of years of struggling with clinical depression.

Click to expand...

Those are outright lies, KB. And I proved that easily in my post to you. You lied like a Truther, KB. Or at least showed the sort of ignorance of the real facts that we've come to expect from Truthers.

Four. Your response to that post wasn't to challenge my facts, but to go on regurgitating the same claims. And you did that time and time again on that thread, long after your so-called statements of fact had been proven false. That's Truther behavior, KB.

Five. Truthers are also very illogical beings. You displayed that characteristic repeatedly in that thread. For example, to call a witness list that includes the first (and only) doctor to see Foster at the death site, all the EMS personnel, the first person to find Foster's body, another civilian who was at the park at the time Foster supposedly was killed, several Park police officers who witnessed the death scene, the FBI agents who took the statements of Foster's family members and his personal doctor, three experts in handwriting, and Starr's own top investigator before he quit the IOC in disgust charging a coverup ... a "poor" witness list … is beyond silly. To imply that a "good" witness list is one consisting solely of Starr's 3 eyewitnesses to Foster's *clinical* depression, all of whom told the FBI and Park Police for days after Foster's death that he showed absolutely no sign of depression and then changed their account 180 degrees a week later after a meeting in the Whitehouse … is beyond silly. It's Truther-like, KB.

Six. Truthers concoct all sorts of imaginary scenarios out of thin air as their substitute for providing evidence. And you've done that over and over. In fact, what are your claims of fact about Foster's depression but a string of imaginary scenarios? And related to this, Truthers toss out all sorts of red herrings and strawmen during a debate. That's not a tactic I use. But your side employs that tactic all the time. In order to deal with the lack of blood at the location where Foster's body was found. In order to deal with the fact that Hillary and her staff were deeply implicated in tampering with material evidence in the case (for example, removing files from his office and the so-called suicide note). And you were one of those using that Truther-like tactic, KB.

Seven. Truthers often rely on demonstrably untrustworthy witnesses and *experts*. And you've certainly done that in the Foster case. I already noted the indication of unreliability in the 3 *key* witnesses used to claim Foster was depressed. The *doctor* that Starr uses as his expert, Dr Berman, on depression has been proven in the Foster thread you linked to be highly unreliable and to make absolutely unscientific claims. The pathologist (Dr Beyer) who you rely on to support Starr's claim that the exit wound was a 1" x 1-1/4" hole in the back of Foster's head is proven to be not only unreliable but a liar in my posts. And never mind the fact that every other witness in the case, many of them medical professionals, directly contradicted the doctor's claim. You ignore all those expert witnesses but accept only the 1 witness who is a demonstrable liar. And you did that in numerous other examples. You ignore all the experts who stated that the so-called suicide note was forged. You ignore the statements of Starr's top investigator. You ignore the statements of the Foster's doctor. You ignore the statement of the expert on suicides that I offered in response to Dr Berman's silly claims. I'm the one quoting the witness statements gathered by Park Police and the FBI. You think everyone is lying except your cherry-picked couple of demonstrably unreliable witnesses. I hate to tell you, but yours is the behavior of a Truther, KB.

Eight. Truthers fall back on personal attacks when their presentation of claimed facts falls flat on it's face. I offer your nomination of me for a Stundie as prima facie evidence of that behavior. And that thread you linked contains many other examples of smears and personal attacks posted by you in leui of debating the actual facts. For example, as I pointed out, rather than defend yourself from the charge I made that you lied in making the above quoted claims regarding Foster's depression, you came back and the only thing you posted was a crude personal attack on me (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4715710&postcount=229 ). To which I responded by DESTROYING the argument you'd tried to make: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4750992&postcount=234 .

Nine. Truthers like to play the innocent game and accuse their opponent of sinking to the level of debate they are actually already at in the debate. For example, as I indicated above, you accused me of starting the Truther accusations on that thread, when in fact, as proved in a link above, you were the first to call someone a Truther on the thread … specifically, me.

Ten. Finally, Truthers often try to link their opponents to other unrelated matters or groups, that they think will discredit their opponents, rather than deal with the actual facts in the case at hand. You, for example, seem to want to link the birther movement to the Foster case and me. Even though they are unrelated issues and my comments with respect to the birther movement only show a healthy degree of skeptism. And you tried to link me with Galileo, a poster on the linked thread, even though I don't know him from Adam. Your's is a time-tested, Truther tactic, KB.

So look at that list. You fit the description of a Truther. There is no escaping the obvious, KB. Just accept your Stundie with grace.

***********

POST 3

***********

kookbreaker said:

A Stundie nomination usually involves submitting an appropriately funny quote.

Click to expand...

Well how about this one, regarding Vince Foster, KB?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4637808&postcount=25

Originally Posted by Galileo
What evidence. Most evidence shows he wasn't depressed and did not committ suicide.

Are you kidding me? He was practically non-functional with depression.

Click to expand...

That's such a complete lie, so unsupported by known facts, that it definitely has that Truther-like quality of being divorced from reality that we've all come to laugh at over the years where Truthers are concerned.

I think that should more than qualify you, KB.

**************

ANTPogo said:

I asked you "Why would the doctor ask, unprompted, if Foster was depressed, do you think?", and you replied "Because Foster wasn't sleeping?"

Why did you post that reply, and what do you think Foster's doctor was thinking when he asked Foster about depression in relation to Foster's insomnia?

Click to expand...

First of all, you forgot the emoticon ... ... that was at the end of my reply to you. Take that as your clue that I wasn't taking your question all that seriously, Truther. Afterall, you were making up stories when you claimed the doctor asked "umprompted" if Foster was depressed. NOTHING the doctor stated in his statement to the FBI suggests that. Even the questionable note Starr *discovered* by the doctor years later doesn't say that. You are just acting like a Truther.

ANTPogo said:

At this point, morbid amusement.

Click to expand...

So all this time you are wasting is just for amusement?

And originally? Can you link us to your first posts on the issue?

BeAChooser said:

First of all, you forgot the emoticon ... ... that was at the end of my reply to you. Take that as your clue that I wasn't taking your question all that seriously, Truther.

Click to expand...

Considering that you liberally scatter emoticons all over your posts, that's not exactly a useful guide. Unless, of course, you don't want us to take anything you say seriously. Which is almost the case anyway.

Though I find it curious that you waited almost two years to pull out the "oh, I was just kidding!" excuse. You certainly never said that at the time, and indeed got rather indignant and accused me of "conjecturing" when I simply repeated your words back to you.

It's almost like you were attempting to backpedal two years ago, spent the rest of that time conspicuously avoiding the whole exchange, and only just now that I'm pressing you on it again whipped up this "see, I used a smiley!" excuse.

Afterall, you were making up stories when you claimed the doctor asked "umprompted" if Foster was depressed. NOTHING the doctor stated in his statement to the FBI suggests that. Even the questionable note Starr *discovered* by the doctor years later doesn't say that. You are just acting like a Truther.

Click to expand...

I was actually trying to be charitable to your "theory". Because if Foster's doctor didn't raise the issue of depression during that phone call, then that means Foster himself did. And that torpedoes your theory even worse.

So all this time you are wasting is just for amusement?

Click to expand...

Not solely. It's also to ensure that people who are coming into these threads without wanting to slog through pages and pages of your dross are aware that you're simply regurgitating things that have indeed been addressed and debunked. Otherwise they might be misled into thinking you actually have anything resembling a coherent argument.

And originally? Can you link us to your first posts on the issue?

Click to expand...

Need help using the forum search function, BAC?

As a lurker who doesn't even know who the person for whom this thread is dedicated is, I'll just chime in as some people have used the "invoke the lurkers" canard normally used by twoofers and other CTists.

There is one person in this thread acting like a twoofer. Ironically it's the person accusing everyone else of it.

BeAChooser said:

I see you are still avoiding any discussion of the facts, Truther.

What's that?

You don't even care to challenge the assertion that Starr's oven mitt *evidence* proves he tampered with the evidence?

Just giving up that quickly?

Click to expand...

I find the simple phrase: "anyone who thinks that an oven mitt is sufficient proof that Starr covered up a murder by the Clinton administrationand thus was in cohorts with has serious problems with evaluating evidence."

Nothing more needs to be said, really.

ANTPogo said:

Because if Foster's doctor didn't raise the issue of depression during that phone call, then that means Foster himself did.

Click to expand...

Except that nothing in the doctor's statement to the FBI indicates that either the doctor or Foster raised the issue of depression during the phone call. All the FBI interview statement says is that the doctor

did not think that Foster was significantly depressed nor had Foster given the impression that he was 'in crisis.' From what Foster told him, Foster's condition sounded mild and situational.

Click to expand...

Notice, that it doesn't say that Foster said he was depressed and it doesn't say that the doctor asked Foster if he was depressed. And the only reason depression is mentioned in that statement at all could be because the FBI agent asked the doctor, point blank, the same question they asked all the other witnesses: *did Foster show any signs of depression?"

Also notice that the statement says Foster didn't give the doctor "the impression" that he was "in crisis". It says the doctor concluded that Foster's "condition" was mild and situational, from whatever he actually did say. Foster was not the suicidal person you and Starr claim he was, and you keep ignoring that fact because you are a classic example of a Vince Foster Truther, and no matter what evidence is provided to you, you will go on claiming Foster had clinical depression and committed suicide because that's what VFTs do.

ANTPogo said:

Need help using the forum search function, BAC?

Click to expand...

Well let me put it this way. Did you EVER question the theory that Vince Foster committed suicide?

uke2se said:

As a lurker who doesn't even know who the person for whom this thread is dedicated is

Click to expand...

Well there's nothing quite like taking sides in an issue you admit to being completely ignorant about.

uke2se said:

There is one person in this thread acting like a twoofer. Ironically it's the person accusing everyone else of it.

Click to expand...

LOL! So you are claiming that your one rule for Truthers (their invoking lurkers) beats my 10 rules (you can go read them if you haven't) any day of the week. I see. I bet you won't stick around long enough to defend that outrageaous claim.

Did you take a look at the list of Truther characteristics I made? Which of those would you like to claim don't apply to 9/11 Truthers? Any of them? And if they do apply to 9/11 Truthers, then if someone on this thread is doing the same things, why wouldn't you admit they are behaving like Truthers?

I clearly listed examples where certain posters are engaging in those types of behavior in this discussion, citing specific things they said or did. Would you care to take the examples I gave for one of those people ... say kookbreaker or ANTPogo ... and prove me wrong? Or will you be another to scurry back into the shadows after imparting your *wisdom*?

BeAChooser said:

Here we go again ... concocting imaginary scenarios to explain away facts.

There is NO evidence that Foster was given any "sample packs" and had any contact with Trazodone before the prescription he was given immediately before his death.

Click to expand...

I'm not an expert on how a Doctor records such things, are you?

There is NO evidence that Foster was acting any different before his death (other than claims made by three people who all went to a meeting in the Whitehouse or had a spouse attend that meeting, and then changed their stories 180 degrees from what they'd been claiming the week prior to that meeting).

There is considerable evidence that Foster was not acting any different ... not "bummed out", didn't have a short temper, and wasn't lashing out for no reason.[/quote]What is your proof of that?

You are just creating imaginary scenarios, CptColumbo. Why?

Click to expand...

What scenario did I create? I was mearly stating my own experience with Depression and TraZODone.

Plus, you are nothing more than electrons posting anonymously and you could claim anything you want and we wouldn't know if it's true or not. For every claim like yours, I can go on the internet and find dozens claiming a much higher dose for the treatment of depression, and a dosage just like Foster got for insomnia. I know because I've done that in debates.

Click to expand...

And I have no proof that you even exist.

And by the way, the use and dosage of TraZODone has changed since the time of Foster's death. You need to go look at the way Trazodone was used and prescribed almost 2 decades ago. A lot has changed.

Click to expand...

kookbreaker said:

I find the simple phrase: "anyone who thinks that an oven mitt is sufficient proof that Starr covered up a murder by the Clinton administrationand thus was in cohorts with has serious problems with evaluating evidence."

Nothing more needs to be said, really.

Click to expand...

So, in order words, you refuse to discuss the oven mitt evidence.

Folks, here is what Truther KB First Class is REALLY saying:

- that it's meaningless that a big green oven mitt, that barely fit in the glove compartment of Foster car (you can see a picture here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=4706310&postcount=173 ), wasn't listed as being part of the contents of that glove compartment by the Park Police when they "officially" inventoried every item in the glove compartment after Foster's death.

- that it's meaningless that the "official" timelines and photos made by the Park Police at the time of Foster's death directly contradict what the photo that Starr put in his report shows, the oven mitt in the glove compartment at a time when there was no debris on the passenger side floor.

- that it's meaningless that the Park Police officer who searched the car testified in July 1994 that there was "nothing out of the ordinary" in the glove compartment. How many of you have a oven mitt in your glove compartment?

- that it's meaningless that the FBI, Park Police and Fiske's investigation all failed to note even the existance of this oven mitt in their reports … an oven mitt that Starr found essential to his theory of why the gun had no fingerprints on it.

-that it's meaningless that the explanation given by Starr for Foster's gun having no finger prints is this oven mitt, yet Foster, wearing no gloves, would have had to take the gun out of the oven mitt, carry the gun to the suicide location, and then hold it while he shot himself.

Seriously, doesn't that sound like the arguments of a Truther?

CptColumbo said:

I'm not an expert on how a Doctor records such things, are you?

Click to expand...

No, but I can read what the doctor is indicated to have stated. You are also clearly not an expert on trazodone, despite being a user. Again, it's best we rely on what the doctor said and what dozens and dozens of medical websites state. Don't you think?

CptColumbo said:

There is NO evidence that Foster was acting any different before his death (other than claims made by three people who all went to a meeting in the Whitehouse or had a spouse attend that meeting, and then changed their stories 180 degrees from what they'd been claiming the week prior to that meeting). There is considerable evidence that Foster was not acting any different ... not "bummed out", didn't have a short temper, and wasn't lashing out for no reason.

What is your proof of that?

Click to expand...

Good grief. Have you bothered to actually read any of this thread? Or did you just jump in thinking you know it all? The answer to your question is the numerous quoted, verifiable statements of the many relatives, friends and work associates of Foster that have been posted several times on this thread alone. I suggest you go and read this thread and the other Foster threads, and educate yourself before commenting further.

CptColumbo said:

What scenario did I create? I was mearly stating my own experience with Depression and TraZODone.

Click to expand...

No, you suggested that Foster was given "sample packs" of the medicine, that a higher dose was actually prescribed, and that he might have had a short temper or been lashing out for no reason at those around him in the days before his death. There is no evidence to support any of this, and evidence to the contrary.

CptColumbo said:

And I have no proof that you even exist.

Click to expand...

You are reading the evidence I exist. I don't question your existance. But if I told you I had such and such a medical condition and took such and such a medication, you wouldn't know if that was true or not. Believe it or not, there are people on the internet who make up things … even false personas.

BeAChooser said:

So, in order words, you refuse to discuss the oven mitt evidence.

Click to expand...

I am saying I do not need to. Your assertions about what it means (Starr covering for the Clintons) go way beyond what you have. You can call me truther all you want, it just makes you look more absurd.