Roginsky concedes defeat without firing a shot.
Jacob Rogisnky – supporting the official story of Sept 11- has already conceded defeat.
This began because Roginsky challenged anyone who was prepared to take him on to debate the events of Sept 11. I accepted the challenge. We set up this blog, so that we would have a forum free from interference. A chance to go one on one.
I made my opening statement. In response, Roginsky went ballistic, claiming that I had violated debate protocols. Rogisnky wanted to impose a condition that I not be allowed to post anything without his permission. He claimed that by posting something without his permission I had displayed unethical debating practice.
Still, what else can you expect from someone loony enough to believe the official story of Sept 11? The article below was written about people like Roginsky.
“Watch out for mad conspiracy theories” http://members.iinet.net.au/~holmgren/mad.html
I’ve met some loonies in my time, but I think this is the first time I've met someone who believes that a debate is conducted by one side vetting the posts of the other. Here is the email which Rogisnky wrote to me, after I posted my introductory statement.
BEGIN ROGINSKY EMAIL
Gerard:I have not posted any opening statements at all, and find it impossible to move forward with you as a debating partner. I am astonished at your continued one-sided, self-serving, and ungentlemanly approaches to this debate. As seen from the below posts, I repeatedly complained of your disregard for the minimal norms of setting up and conducting a debate, and I have repeated that our agreeing on the focus and rules of the debate must come before we begin to debate. Now you ignored my sentiment once more by proceeding to post your "opening statement" to the web site, without checking with me first as to my readiness to begin, willingness to allow you to go first, and my willingness to forgo the aforementioned preliminaries. In addition, your "opening statement" contains the totality of your theories and arguments. Even if the theories and arguments were meaningful and correct -- I will not concede that -- such an opening statement belies the essence of the opening statements. Moreover, it is in the nature of the statement dumped by peddlers of conspiracy theories, who swamp the reader with tons of "information" so that no intelligent, sophisticated people -- almost always a busy person -- could afford to put in the time to understand and debunk the nonsense. You should remember that I repeatedly stressed that I would only debate my opponent one issue at a time. I will conclude by saying that your debating tactics are unprofessional, amateurish, and underhanded, and that I have neither time nor reputation to waste on the ridiculous pursuit you have in mind as our "debate." My challenge to APFN was to let me debate the best debater the 911 conspiracy movement has. If you are it, my already dim view of the movement has been overrated.
END ROGINSKY EMAIL
Well... so sorry for writing without your persmission, Jacob.
I was under the misconception that a debate was each person putting forward their evidence and arguments. Apparently I misunderstood the concept. Apparently only one side is allowed to do that.
But it gets better. I told Jacob that he could write whatever he wanted on this blog - just like me, but that if he was going to use this pathetic excuse to back out of the challenge which he himself had issued, then I was not going to keep it a secret. That I would publish his email on the blog so that people would know why the great debate never took place.
Well…if you thought he was angry that I had the temerity to write a post without his permission, then things were only just warming up.
Here’s his ballistic response to my notification that I would post the email on the blog.
BEGIN ROGINSKY EMAIL
should you add your titles to my post, or change anything else in it, or declare it to be my capitulation, the web site of A Matter of Justice, which is well known and well-visited, will have a page for you, your fraud, your manipulations, your dirty tricks, your crackpot theories, and the comments others in the 911 movement have made about you -- some warned me that you would behave the way you turned out to behave here. You want war, you will get war!Jacob Roginsky
END ROGINSKY EMAIL
Shaking in my shoes…
This was meant to be a debate about Sept 11, but only one person wanted to debate those facts.
Would somebody else like to try ?
Or is Jacob Rogisnky the best that the official conspiracy theory has to offer ?.