I have no dog in this fight but one: Finding out the truth.
You have stated, as fact, that Bob Rohner has made a claim of having achieved over unity in his device (as distinct from Papp's claim for the device Rohner's company merely fabricated to Papp's spec and as distinct from John Rohner's claim for having achieved over unity in John Rohner's device). If you have no supporting evidence for such a claim of fact then you are risking actual damage to Bob Rohner. On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 12:12 PM, Jones Beene <[email protected]> wrote: > Are you a shill for Bob, as it now seems from your admitted personal > relationship?**** > > ** ** > > Are you willing to confront the FBI with your concerns?**** > > ** ** > > If not, then why are you engaging in this kind of mysterious puppetry, > Bowery? **** > > ** ** > > Why not do a technical defense, instead of a personal attack on Bob’s > critics?**** > > ** ** > > It is clear you have a slant that goes far beyond science, logic or common > sense. Are you a licensee of Inteligentry? Do you have another financial > interest in this story?**** > > ** ** > > Otherwise, you supportive stance is indefensible. Show us your facts or > get lost.**** > > ** ** > > Jones**** > > ** ** > > ** ** > > *From:* James Bowery **** > > ** ** > > At this point your apparent inability to read the difference between the > words "Bob" and "John" is beyond plausible.**** > > ** ** > > Why are you engaging in this obfuscation, J. Beene?**** > > Jones Beene wrote:**** > > ** ** > > Rohner made the claim, but no one is under an obligation to provide Bowery > with documentation. > > Obviously, whoever filed the complaint with the FBI presented them with > adequate information to make the raid. > > If Bowery wants to confront the FBI with his belief that Rohner is in the > clear, more power to him > > Jones**** > > > > **** > > ** ** >
