[1] AIRES: I had personally met the Archbishop in 2004 and sought his intervention. As requested by him I had also submitted a written complaint to him with ALL THE FACTS
[2] jc: Assuming that Aires was in possession of ALL THE FACTS, mainly because he (Aires) was present when the alleged incident allegedly occurred, would Aires please confirm the Day and / or Month in 2004 that he personally met with the Archbishop? It is possible that he knows why this question is being asked. [3] FALCAO: Is the above query in line with the message being conveyed in Aires’ post? JC coment: The answer to Falcao's post ........YES. It is self evident. (The rest of Falcao's post is ignored as it lacks reason and smacks of paranaoia; Aires' follow-up post is 'hash-brown' as far as I am concerned.) The question I have asked - is simple and straightforward. There can be four methods of dealing with the question: a: State that the question has been answered before; b: Duck the question; c: Obfuscate d: Answer it in plain and simple terms. jc
