I spare you quite a bit of the drivel that spurts from the MichaelTDA collective.

The MTDA/Team Gillard secretions exude from various dubious, dynamically-assigned IP addresses around the globe.

Here are a couple which the Honourable StephenJ has considered.

Responses

1. Its the vibes, Michael , the vibes.

2.So Neal makes a big point about it not being his signature but cunningly doesn’t mention the fact that he authorised someone to sign on his behalf.

Not only that but he gets them to sign in a fashion that allows him to corroborate the fact that it wasn’t his signature years later. Just in case anyone asks.

3. Yes and the name has been disclosed on the website. You find it!

4. She didn’t give evidence that she received the letter. How could she when it was a forgery and wasn’t produced until 1995.

She said she had no recollection of it.

But she did know it didn’t correctly describe how it got  incorporated. She treated it as if it was genuine. Ergo she mislead the RC.

Even an inverted intellectual like you  MTBK should be able to follow that.

The victims never complained  either because they never knew about it or didn’t want to get involved.

You know who they are. Why don’t you pick up the phone and ask them.

Whether the RC accepted it or not is a matter for them.

What does that have to do with whether they are forgeries or were referred to by Gillard in a misleading way.

Some things are so obvious that they don’t need to be said eg you are a rank Shill for Gillard, the Neal letter is a forgery.

Ok I’ll meet you half way. It’s a genuine forgery.

The only response he deserves is one dripping with contempt.

His aim has never been to put up counterarguments.

It has always been to drive away posters who get sick of answering his dribble.