Skeptic Project

Jimbo, you make a good point, and it's an illustration of what I think VTV has demonstrated we are dealing with regarding the Zeitgeist Movement. The movement says it's about one thing, but it's really about something else.

This is sort of like Amway. Talk to an Amway distributor and you'll hear lots of stuff about how you're going to be independently wealthy selling soap and nutritional supplements. But the real business is selling motivational books and tapes.

I believe there are people in the ZM who honestly believe the Venus Project is a good idea. But because it owes almost all of its publicity to a conspiracy film created by a 9/11 Truther, that clientele has to be catered to or they'll leave.

VTV argues that conspiracy theories have nothing to do with a resource based economy. In one sense he's right: organically the two concepts are totally different. The only reason they've become entertwined is that Peter Merola, a conspiracy theorist and 9/11 Truther, decided to latch on to the Venus Project. Since he's the star of their movement and he refuses to repudiate conspiracy theories, the two are now inextricably linked.

From what he has posted here, I believe VTV is a conspiracy theorist. He's said he doubts the "official story" of 9/11--no one who is NOT a conspiracy theorist uses those words "official story"--not to mention other buzzwords like "false flag." Certainly the position he's taken about 9/11, either that what happened is unclear or that it's debating it is irrelevant, is a position commonly taken by 9/11 Truthers who don't want to appear overtly "Truthy" for one reason or another. What he has not done is to make unequivocally clear that he is NOT a 9/11 Truther, which I find very telling.

So what we have is a probable conspiracy theorist (VTV) as the official (?) spokesman of the Zeitgeist Movement, which was founded by a conspiracy theorist and named for a movie that strongly promotes conspiracy theories, and he is here trying to convince us that our focus on conspiracy theories is a misjudgment of the ZM. And as several people have pointed out, the ZM continues to promote conspiracy theories and continues to use Zeitgeist 1 as a recruiting tool.

This is eerily the kind of Bizarro world you end up in when you ask an Amway distributor what the deal is with all those books and tapes.

"Now I am going to go actually participate in my life. Later.
Posted 47 minutes ago #" -VTV

"Re:Note from BrentonEccles regarding ban. 20 Minutes ago" - VTV on the ZM forums.

"Re:Note from BrentonEccles regarding ban. 6 Minutes ago" - VTV on the ZM forums.

Well, at least we know what VTV's life consists of: avoiding questions here.

I think VTV has an honesty problem. It might explain his constant accusations of everyone else being liars.

"However, I didn't make an ass of myself here."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect

If the Movement had any semblance of competence, it would kick you to the curb. This angry conspiracy theorist act you put on totally betrays the image of TVP.

If ZM has any hope of success if will boot all the VTVs and just keep the Brentons. At least with Brenton I believe he actually has good intentions. I wouldn't want you anywhere near any power. You have a pretty long tack record of being associated with fringe, crazy stuff. In some cases rightwing crazy stuff like Ron Paul.

VTV

Just because you reply to someone doesn't mean you are addressing peoples points. I also think you are evading the issues because when you reply to me you ignore what I'm actually saying to you!

The only point you have ever properly dealt with that I have brought up has been regarding the Venus Project's promotion of Zeitgeist 1 (and therefore conspiracies) and that merely consisted of saying you'll ask them.

You have NOT explained what Peter meant in his ban message to me. (see page one again for my reply you ignored for more details.

You have NOT explained how the Zeitgeist Movement is open to criticism on their forums when they say if you are not a member you will be banned.

You have NOT explained how Zeitgeist Movement isn't about conspiracies when you also are fine with promotions of conspiracies both with Zeitgeist 1 being shown on Z-Day and other Zeitgeist events, by Peter himself saying its the number one marketing tool and by people on the forum that are allowed to say whatever they like so long as its PROMOTING conspiracy theories.

You have NOT explained how yours and the Zeitgeist Movements rhetoric that charity work is pointless and a waste of time DOESN'T mean that the environment and people's lives will be ruined and wasted if more and more people involved in charity work are convinced of this view and shift their attention to promoting the ZGM.

@Nanos:

---------------

"I'm very keen on instead of giving people fish to eat, to give them a fishing rod and teach them how to fish to solve things." - nanos

---------------

Well following that analogy then... if your plan is to give some starving person a fishing rod I think he'd much rather take the frozen fish from the store thank you very much if you are going to take a hundred years or more to give him the means to catch his own. (Ie. he'll be long dead by then.)

I'm sure the people in need of urgent medical attention in Haiti would be very sympathetic to that argument... don't you think? How many people do you estimate would have died in Hati or New Orleans alone if no charitable people helped any of them on the principle that it was a waste of time to just "patch work" the problem?

---------------

"To be fair, it is expensive to start up, if you've limited funds, you go for the easy option of a grid connection and pay the electric company." - nanos

---------------

Yes it may be expensive. But Fresco is meant to be some big shot designer / engineer right?

Why has he not actually done anything to get money to get renewable energies that he promotes in his own movement? He could even design his own! But no it has to wait for the Zeitgeist Movement members to get together and get him that stuff out of their own pocket. Because getting them to use renewable energies THAT way looks GREAT for their credibility, doesn't it?

But it goes on, why hasn't he earned the money to be able to afford to make working prototypes? Ah but that's because its a "waste of time" of course, just like everything else I suggest that makes perfect logical sense apparently.

Its obviously far better to toil away for decades in virtual obscurity making little models, drawing pictures and doing tours explaining your hypothetical society until some conspiracy theorist finds you and has a vast following of conspiracy fans and wants to help you so forms a "Movement" around your ideas. Instead of using that as an opportunity to change your ways the most logical decision is you just tell them to do what you've been doing for years, spread the word... and yes, please make some CGI models for us so we can make a movie to spread the word even more. etc.

Fresco is either not such a great engineer or he is incredibly incompetent. Take your pick or provide a good explanation that makes sense, any kind of sense.

@VTV,

"It's funny how much you guys hammer on Peter for in your opinion being debunked for "conspiracy theories" based on nonsense when all I keep hearing is "theories" about who I am" - VTV

----------

"You guys" refers to exactly 2 people on this forum...

Stop using this as an excuse to evade and ignore real issues and if you say "what issues?" that will be a case in point, I even layed some of them out for you A-G-A-I-N on a post on this very page.

I'd like to know why VTV is such a greasy fat fuck.

@Ed

This is one of the reasons I don't like forums for communication. I have answered your points over and over again and it's easy to just say I haven't three pages later because it takes a lot of work and effort for me to prove you wrong. Particularly since this forum does not have a quote function. But to set this straight I am once again going to requote myself.

"The only point you have ever properly dealt with that I have brought up has been regarding the Venus Project's promotion of Zeitgeist 1 (and therefore conspiracies) and that merely consisted of saying you'll ask them."

I did more then that. I linked you video backing up my statement about Jacque's position. The rest I can't deal with until they come home.

"You have NOT explained what Peter meant in his ban message to me. (see page one again for my reply you ignored for more details."

Now, here is a collection of the answers I have already given to you that I can find.

1. (From Page 2) Again Ed, nobody banned you for making false claims, namecalling, or any of that. You were banned because it was clear you were not a member of the movement anymore and that you had no purpose on the forum other then to detract from the movement. You keep putting words in my mouth and thoughts in my head that are not there. You can feel free to say it is bullshit over and over again but I gave you the answer.

2. (Also from page 2) I didn't say you were namecalling anyone. Meurtos suggested that supposedly Peter has been totally debunked on everything and I said that I have seen a lot of "debunking" that amounts to little more then namecalling. I didn't say "ed was namecalling" at any point during my post. I also didn't say you were banned for namecalling. I explained why you were banned.

3. (From page 1) Ed was banned as it was clear his only purpose on the forum was his anti-conspiracy agenda. He had no interest in the movement and didn't contribute anything else.

4. (Also from page 1) If you no longer considered yourself a member of the movement then what purpose did you have to be on the forums other then to detract from it?

(Same post)
I already explained this position and I agree with it. If people want to come there to question things that is fine. Once it becomes clear that they are just there to spread an anti-ZM agenda then there is no reason for them to be on our forums. There is a whole internet where people can do that. And it is a huge waste of our energy to deal with people who are clearly so brainwashed by the current system that they do not get what we are doing and likely will never. We still hear criticisms. It takes a while before people are kicked out generally depending on how destructive they are being. Our forums are for members to discuss the goings on of the movement and how to communicate our ideas better. Not for detractors who in most cases haven't even bothered to actually research.

(Same Post again)
In your own words you stopped being a member about five months ago. You were allowed to stay on for a long time after that.

Found this one while I was composing other answers, but this is from another page:

5. Yes, I have addressed it. Over and over and over. You just admitted that you stopped being a member of the movement about five months ago. YOUR WORDS. The forum is for members of the movement or people who are thinking about joining but want to know more first. Since you don't fit into either category you were banned. Regardless of whatever else went on that is the policy that caused you to be banned. You don't like the answer. But stop repeating that I supposedly haven't addressed it as that is actually the UNTRUE thing.

6. (From Page two) Again Ed, nobody banned you for making false claims, namecalling, or any of that. You were banned because it was clear you were not a member of the movement anymore and that you had no purpose on the forum other then to detract from the movement. You keep putting words in my mouth and thoughts in my head that are not there. You can feel free to say it is bullshit over and over again but I gave you the answer.

So that is a collection of six different places in this very thread I have already answered this question. You may not like or agree with the answer but your attempt to continually say that I have not addressed it is a lie. Period.

Your next question you have lied about saying I have not answered:

"You have NOT explained how the Zeitgeist Movement is open to criticism on their forums when they say if you are not a member you will be banned."

So here all the times I have answered this:

1. (From Page 1) First of all, I would say that the vast majority of people I have seen claiming that they were banned for politely disagreeing have turned out to be lying. Most of them are banned for engaging in personal attacks and ad hominem. We do discuss our disagreements with people who are actually there to learn. Eventually if they just keep posting anti-ZM stuff and it's clear that is all they are posting for we ban them. The forum is for members of the movement and perspective members of the movement.

2. (Also from page 1) I already explained this position and I agree with it. If people want to come there to question things that is fine. Once it becomes clear that they are just there to spread an anti-ZM agenda then there is no reason for them to be on our forums. There is a whole internet where people can do that. And it is a huge waste of our energy to deal with people who are clearly so brainwashed by the current system that they do not get what we are doing and likely will never. We still hear criticisms. It takes a while before people are kicked out generally depending on how destructive they are being. Our forums are for members to discuss the goings on of the movement and how to communicate our ideas better. Not for detractors who in most cases haven't even bothered to actually research.

Next question you have lied in claiming that I didn't answer or address it:

"You have NOT explained how Zeitgeist Movement isn't about conspiracies when you also are fine with promotions of conspiracies both with Zeitgeist 1 being shown on Z-Day and other Zeitgeist events, by Peter himself saying its the number one marketing tool and by people on the forum that are allowed to say whatever they like so long as its PROMOTING conspiracy theories."

1. (From Page 1) I have already provided video of Jacque's opinion of the first Zeitgeist film. (Posted link to the video of Jacque Fresco stating that Zeitgeist 1 was a conspiracy theory he could not get behind.

2. (Also from Page 1) I actually actively discourage people from using that film in promotion of the movement. I have addressed the issue of it being mentioned on the Venus Project website and can't get you any more information on that until Jacque and Roxanne come home.

3. (Alsom from Page 1) I have already made my opinion on the matter known in the forums. And spoken to him personally about it. I also don't feel it was "THE" prime motivator.

4. Again. All of that stuff gets moved to the Miscellaneous section where other material irrelevant to the movement goes. Pro-conspiracy theory or against it.

5. I really don't care about any of that Ed. My opinions of the 911 issue have nothing to do with the Venus Project. Jacque Fresco doesn't care about these things either. It's not relevant. And even if 911 truth were absolutely true or absolutely false it does not validate or invalidate the Resource Based Economy model.

Five answers there.

The final question you lied and claim I didn't address or answer:

"You have NOT explained how yours and the Zeitgeist Movements rhetoric that charity work is pointless and a waste of time DOESN'T mean that the environment and people's lives will be ruined and wasted if more and more people involved in charity work are convinced of this view and shift their attention to promoting the ZGM."

1. (From Page two) Ed, your basically creating a scenerio that is never going to occur and then asking me to justify a position I don't have. This is a strawman. We don't tell people in the ZM to stop being involved in whatever other activism they are part of. It is just not what the ZM itself is focused on. I have members in my own chapter who are Environmental activists, members of the Green Party, Civil Rights organizations, etc. We don't do what we are doing in exclusion of these things but it is not what our organization is about. You don't show up at a Civil rights organization meeting and insist that they help you save whales or they won't be effective. There is nothing wrong however with you being in "Save the Whales" AND the "Civil Rights" group.

2. (Also from page 2) If it is a solution it will end the problem. Not perpetuate it.

3. (Also from page 2) Ed, I think we are getting to the point that you are so upset that we are not really exchanging information. Your kind of arguing with yourself and your not really listening to my responses all the while claiming that I am not listening to you. If for some reason every activist on the planet stopped doing the charity work they were doing I think you over-estimate the effect this would have. If the charity work continued I think you also over-estimate what effect it is having.

We do care about all of these things. The problem is the dam needs to be re-built entirely. Not patched.

So here I have answered all of these things you are claiming that I did not MULTIPLE TIMES. Then you have the gall to go on to say that I am ignoring everything that YOU say. It sounds to me like nothing short of me just agreeing with everything you say will satisfy you. You have become irrational as is obvious from what I just had to spend all this time quoting. Let me know when you have new questions.

@Anticultist

"@VTV You forget I am an ex member I watched your useless banter over the year day in day out on the forums chatrooms and radio shows [you have utterly exposed yourself to the outside world in your personal life and your character], thats given me a pretty sharp insight into you as an individual."

The funny thing is you claim my banter is useless but I get far more positive feedback about it then I ever get negative. (Far more positive in the HUNDREDS and negative in the less then a dozen) And most of the negative is from insecure little children like you who can't stand how useless you really are and feel the need to lash out. All the while projecting that it is the people your attacking who have fragile egos and whatever.

What a sad wee little troll you are.

@VTV:

Actually the forum does have quote function but I don't know how to use it either :)

---------------------

VTV says:
"I did more then that. I linked you video backing up my statement about Jacque's position. The rest I can't deal with until they come home. "

---------------------

See this is what I'm saying about ignoring what I'm saying...

I already told you back on the very thread I was banned on that I already am aware of Fresco's opinions on 911. I already knew he said he didn't agree with the 911 conspiracies for example. I based my position on the principle that he didn't agree with it, why is proving that to me more going to help that?

So yes thanks for showing me that video for making it more CLEAR what his views are, but I also said that IF HE DOESN'T agree that conspiracy theories are factual that almost makes him worse than Peter in that Peter probably at least believes his own bullshit, yet Fresco apparently has no problem promoting a film like Zeitgeist anyway even if he thinks its promoting false claims.

---------------------
VTV says:
"Now, here is a collection of the answers I have already given to you that I can find. "
--------------------

(Regarding my banning.)

<snipped comments by VTV>

Yes I saw all those comments you said at the time and you ignored by FOLLOW UP comments, you even went back to page 1 to copy and paste your own quotes here so why didn't you scroll down to see if I actually replied to them?

What you said about me was a LIE, what Peter wrote was a LIE and hypocritical. Go back and look for my post, to make it easy I even took a picture of it for you:
http://img43.imageshack.us/img43/5360/vtvreply.png</p>

---------------
VTV says:
"The forum is for members of the movement or people who are thinking about joining but want to know more first. Since you don't fit into either category you were banned. Regardless of whatever else went on that is the policy that caused you to be banned. You don't like the answer. "
-----------------

This answer isn't at all what Peter said but you're trying to twist to sound slightly better in your head, its interesting watching you rationalise this.

-----------------
VTV says:
"You were banned because it was clear you were not a member of the movement anymore"
-----------------

Because if you are not a member you are banned. If you have criticisms you are banned, that's what I keep saying.

-----------------
VTV says:
"And that you had no purpose on the forum other then to detract from the movement."
-----------------

Thats a lie and you know it.

And btw Peter said that's ALL I had been doing the ENTIRE time I was there and ignored everything I had done and didn't even acknowledged I was ever a member. Why do you have no problem with that?

-----------------
VTV says:
"You may not like or agree with the answer but your attempt to continually say that I have not addressed it is a lie. Period. "
-----------------

Stop throwing the word lie around when you don't know what it means.

When I said you were ignoring my responses I said what I MEANT when I said you haven't addressed the point. That is still true and the fact that you had to do it again writing your post here says a lot.

-----------------
VTV says:
"First of all, I would say that the vast majority of people I have seen claiming that they were banned for politely disagreeing have turned out to be lying."
-----------------

What have some random trolls got to do with it?

Its NOW in the RECENTLY UPDATED rules that if you are not a member you will be tolerated only and then Peter comes right and and says that I am banned because I am not a member. You even admitted it in this very post, but for some reason you can't remember what you say.

-----------------
VTV says:
"I already explained this position and I agree with it. If people want to come there to question things that is fine. Once it becomes clear that they are just there to spread an anti-ZM agenda then there is no reason for them to be on our forums."
-----------------

But you just said that if you aren't a member you will be banned unless you are newcomer looking for answers.

How can you say you agree with the point being made when you actively agree with the exact OPPOSITE of the point and defend a guy like Peter Joseph who is clearly 100% against any reasonable questioning of the Movement or his films? I mean come on he even admitted in his post that he thinks that if his films bring in members, how can they be bad? Therefore factual accuracy is irrelevant to him, how does that make you feel?

-----------------
VTV says:
"Next question you have lied in claiming that I didn't answer or address it:
"You have NOT explained how Zeitgeist Movement isn't about conspiracies when you also are fine with promotions of conspiracies both with Zeitgeist 1 being shown on Z-Day and other Zeitgeist events, by Peter himself saying its the number one marketing tool and by people on the forum that are allowed to say whatever they like so long as its PROMOTING conspiracy theories."
1. (From Page 1) I have already provided video of Jacque's opinion of the first Zeitgeist film. (Posted link to the video of Jacque Fresco stating that Zeitgeist 1 was a conspiracy theory he could not get behind. "
-----------------

Firstly, as you keep talking about the Zeitgeist Movement NOT being the Venus Project, which is why you said you cant find any conspiracy stuff on the Venus Project website (only... there was). But if the Venus Project and Zeitgeist are comparable NOW as you are doing here, then they are also just as guilty as Zeitgeist is in promoting conspiracy theories BECAUSE Zeitgeist does it.

Secondly, as I said earlier (again), if someone makes claims or supports the promotion of claims they KNOW are false that makes them a liar by definition. Do you really want to admit that Fresco is a dishonest liar or do you want to rethink using this point against what I said?

-----------------
VTV says:
"2. (Also from Page 1) I actually actively discourage people from using that film in promotion of the movement. I have addressed the issue of it being mentioned on the Venus Project website and can't get you any more information on that until Jacque and Roxanne come home.
-----------------

But why discourage people from showing it?

That's completely against what Peter says and one of the reasons he thinks I'm so very wrong about it, remember? He says its the number one reason people join the Zeitgeist Movement, so Zeitgeist: The Movie is the Movement's number 1 marketing tool! You should be promoting the hell out of it, or maybe you should all tell Peter why he shouldn't actually be promoting it? Even the Venus Project agree with Peter, which is why they promote it on their reading list and tell people to screen both films. What answer do you think they are going to give you that can possibly be different to that? A "mistake" maybe? Are they that stupid?

Also don't forget Peter acted like I was some kind of idiot for suggesting Zeitgeist 1 is a "blight" on the Movement and yet here you are also suggesting people shouldn't promote it. Why didn't you say you disagreed with him on the forum? Worried you might get banned as well?

-----------------
VTV says:
"3. (Alsom from Page 1) I have already made my opinion on the matter known in the forums. And spoken to him personally about it. I also don't feel it was "THE" prime motivator.
-----------------

And what did he say?

Did he agree with you or did he explain that Zeitgeist will continue to be promoted because it brings in so many people? There's no way you can rationalise using Zeitgeist AT ALL. All of the conspiracy crap has to go by default. You say you are a Movement based on science and yet you have so much irrelevant credibility destroying crap.

Peter claims I'm "wasting bandwidth" talking about 911, yet allows all kinds of retarded threads especially in the religion section to go on and on and on and also allows people to promote conspiracy theories as much as they like apparently. How does that make sense to you?

-----------------
VTV says:
"4. Again. All of that stuff gets moved to the Miscellaneous section where other material irrelevant to the movement goes. Pro-conspiracy theory or against it.
-----------------

How many anti-conspiracy threads did I start VTV? 99% of all my debates about 911 were RESPONCES to pro-conspiracy posts. The only one I started to debunk 911 conspiracy theories was locked straight away.

Peter also said that people should go somewhere else to talk about 911, yet only bans me and allows the conspiracy theorists to continue posting about 911 even letting one guy continue to post an argument directly to me even though he knew I couldn't reply. And you can't see any hypocrisy or contradiction in that at all?

And finally you say I "lied" about you ignoring what I said about charities then reposted all the same evasive crap you did before. I already replied to all that VTV, THAT IS WHAT I am telling you you are ignoring.

Stop telling people they are lying when they clearly aren't. You say... "So here I have answered all of these things you are claiming that I did not MULTIPLE TIMES."... all you really did here VTV is show all the things I've already replied to that you ignored in the first place. Like the charity thing, the first response you gave completely ignored my actual point, I then explained it to you and then you didn't reply. Now you're claiming you answered me anyway. I mean... do you even understand how discussions WORK?

> if you are going to take a hundred years or more to give him the means to
> catch his own.

I think in total it may well take that long to help the entire world, but we can start today to help at least some people, thats better than doing nothing as we are at the moment.

> How many people do you estimate would have died in Hati or New Orleans alone if
> no charitable people helped any of them on the principle that it was a waste of
> time to just "patch work" the problem?

I don't particularly have a problem with urgent patchwork, emergency situations that is. But I would hope that along with those patches for things such as feeding people, we might include some long term solutions. An example of that might be instead of tents to use concrete canvas structures because they last longer.

http://www.concretecanvas.co.uk

> Why has he not actually done anything to get money to get renewable energies
> that he promotes in his own movement?

I don't think he knows how to be honest.

> why hasn't he earned the money to be able to afford to make working prototypes?

I don't think he has that ability.

I've met talented folk like him before, genuises in one area, but duds in others. Is why they work best as part of a team, where they can focus on what they are good at, whilst someone else can help with the money making aspects.

> please make some CGI models for us so we can make a movie to spread the word
> even more. etc.

To be fair, they might have listened to my suggestion about producing a film, so that ultimately might be my fault :-) Now if they would just listen to my other money making ideas, then we might get someplace too..

> Fresco is either not such a great engineer or he is incredibly incompetent.

Incompetent as I mentioned above.

It looks like members/former members of TZM are joining this group just to ask VTV questions. hahaha

> It looks like members/former members of TZM are joining this group just to ask
> VTV questions. hahaha

Yep!

Having repeatedly asked similar questions on the TZM forums and not always got much in the way of a reply, I thought perhaps I might make more progress here. At the very least there are intelligent folk around here who will critise me and give valuable feedback who aren't allowed on the TZM site, whose input would be most valuable. (Particularly to keep me in check and stop me acting like an idiot, which is so easy to do when your surrounded by yesmen.)

> Can anyone just declare themselves the official spokesman of The Venus Project?

I believe thats how it works yes, if your first in the queue, then you get to decide..

Well, I imagine Fresco had something to do with it as well, but I get the impression he isn't necessarly good at spotting good/bad eggs and just goes with whoever wants to help.

To be fair, VTV doesn't do a completely awful job, in many ways his help is better than nothing at all, which we had before. (It is my hope he will learn to improve, or that we'll find someone better, but it always seems hard to replace staff in organisations with better folk, but then no one else has really stepped up to say they can do it better and is willing to help..)

Anyhow, my hope is that rather than we spend our money on rents and mortgages, we can instead spend them on building communities around the world, so instead of landlords getting rich off our fat, we can invest the money in reducing our costs and helping others at the same time.

Until the day that everyone has moved into our neighbourhood and the other world is a ghost town..

> I think you'd be better off with nothing at all.

See, I remember the days before VTV, when we didn't get Fresco on Radio shows at all really, nor did we have the chance to get our questions so easily put to him.

> I did. I appointed myself the new official spokesman.

Well, if your serious about that..

Do you by chance live near to Fresco ?

> My landlord is a nice guy, a much nicer guy than VTV is.

Thats a pretty rare landlord then :-)

As to the question of how nice is VTV, well, my analysis, born from years of chatting with political folk is that VTV talks like one of those kind. Those folk live in a quite a combative environment with people always slagging them off, and he's quite able to fight back with words to defend his position, so appears at times not to be nice.

When you talk to him in a more civil manner (Like I do most of the time..), he is actually quite nice back.

Now, his failings, are that for some reason (Maybe his time in politics, who can tell, I don't know what he was like before that.) anyone anyone disagrees with him, he takes it as a personal attack very easily, and goes guns blazing to defend himself, or what he stands for. (A very political response.)

Sometimes I see a glimar of hope in that he doesn't misunderstand a situation straight away and everythings fine, but so often discussions are heated and the other side says something less than civil towards him, and he's at their throat in an instant.

Its perhaps, because in his world, people are at each others throats all the time, lets say its his environment that at fault :-)

Now, once he and others are into that slanging match, it doesn't really stop, he says something nasty, someone else responds, and this only reinforces his belief that everyones out to get him and hate him and what he stands for.

When in truth, its just a storm in the teacup most of the time thats got out of hand.

He would be ideal for dealing with journalists, just less than ideal for dealing with joe public who ask awkward questions..