User:Contrivance

Contrivance current ambition is to stalk and harass 3 people on Wikipedia. Check for yourself on the user contributions by the number of edits.67.85.126.95 (talk) 06:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

7-16-08 My current ambition is to make a factual, even-handed narrative of the William Rodriguez story. Willie is a larger-than-life personality, and I find his story fascinating, and also an interesting window into the maturing 9/11 Truth movement.

Among the challenges is that few of the sources are well regarded. In my opinion, since they represent the opinion of the 9/11 Truth movement, their credibility as to the facts is not the issue--rather their illustration of Movement attitudes about William Rodriguez is. So even though American Free Press and prisonplanet statements are a poor source with respect to factual veracity, they are an excellent source as a snapshot of attitudes of the truth movement at the time they were made.

And you still quote unreliable sources. So if you continue to do so, we can use then same sources to attack your opinions.69.116.203.23 (talk) 23:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC) Another challenge is that several of the people currently editing this page are clearly limited in their ability to write in English, and thus presumably in their ability to read English also. We must maintain open, honest, and clear communications between all parties editing the William Rodriguez page. Having lived as a foreigner among strangers speaking a language I speak clumsily, I'm sensitive to the tensions this situation introduces.

Hmm, I did not know it was a requisite to be American and to speak English fluently the requirement for posting. Your clear divisiness will not stop us on providing our time to the page. We have enough time as you do and enough desire to nmake it right. Not a vehicle of your agenda to poke holes around.69.116.203.23 (talk) 23:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

As to accusations involving real-life names and places (Sharphdmi has mentioned "xxx" and a "xxx"): If I wanted to use my real name I would use it. I use "Contrivance" for privacy. More than a hundred people share my IP address. It is my policy not to respond to people who accuse me of being Karl Krepsbach from Knoxville. If idiots want to think they know who I am, let them waste time pursuing their delusions. xxx, I'm sorry if my policy brings you any trouble. If it does, you can know that you're serving freedom, even if you've been drafted to the task. Many of the pamphleteers in the American revolutionary period published anonymously. Anonymous publication has a long and honorable history, and no doubt speculating on the identity of anonymous publishers has an equally long and dishonorable history.

Contrivance (talk) 06:01, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Ha, what a bunch of BS, we know exactly who you are. Sensibilities? you have none. Like your Mexican food joke. Wrong again about "100 peoplle share my IP", much less than 20 actually.69.116.203.23 (talk) 07:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

"We"? Who's "We?" You mean you and Jrandi and Sharphmdi and WtcSurvivor? Thanks for admitting there's no way you know who I am. You greatly underestimate the pool of people who might be Contrivance since you have no way of knowing who among the pool might be an internet user and who might not. The Mexican food joke was not mine, but that of the hosts of the radio show Sharphdmi cited as explaining all (she backed away from that claim fast!). Perhaps your inability to distinguish the one who told the joke from the one who reported the joke reflects a lack of reading comprehension in English. Speaking English fluently is not the issue because grammatical errors can be fixed, but if language limitations make it difficult for you to understand questions and to weigh the evidentiary value of various source material, that can cause problems. Contrivance (talk) 06:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Are you planning to start your fucking harrassment again? we can start all over and never finish. Your call.67.85.126.95 (talk) 19:47, 18 February 2009 (UTC)