QXCI Defamation Attempt By One Desperate Steve

Bad apples?..Nelson?..what a stetch? When you go on like that, your motives become very very suspect Steve.

Did you forget that some of the other people that you mentioned like Hulda and Ed also faced their share of suing and other legal combatants? Yet you have an issue with the QXCI, so THIS unproven case supports your desperate need. Hmmm, interesting.

You see it is easy to stick up for a couple alternative things and go after the one you have in your sights. In deceptive propoganda tactics, that is similar to the 80/20 rule. You tell people 80% of what you know they want to hear and then do damage with the other focused 20%. Gain trust and go after what you had in your sights all along. Sound about right Steve?

Your entire arguement is that due to a lopsided case where Nelson has been named as one of the possible parties, he has somehow harmed a person that didn't seek treatment because they were not diagnosed properly? What other details do you have? Was the guy actually told what he had and ignored it out of embarassment? Did he not hear the analysis correctly. Lots of possibilities. Is he looking for a scapegoat? Is he being paid to try to bring negative light to the QXCI? Again lots of possibilites. But you're already condeming aren't you. Why, based on what little is known? Steve's kangaroo court. Good thing real courts don't work like that, not even in you dreams Steve.

I therefore find you suspect because you focus on heresay and condemn Nelson and the QXCI before anything is even really known. All conjecture at this point that you try to fly as fact.You took a registered court suing and spun it to suit your need for defamation. For all you know, the appellant is only out for a buck. For All we know, so are you, in trying to defame Nelson.
Your own personal vendetta against the QXCI and its inventor Dr. Nelson is interesting. Actually strange. What else do you know about the device other than the obvious and suspect mudslinging you bring to the table?

Also, what was with the posting under a number instead of your name? Just curious. Care to explain that little deception on your part or would you rather deny it was you? Trying to seem like more than one person shares your view. Cmon Steve. Again your deceptive nature is way to obvious.

"I had a close friend utterly left-out-to-dry by the QXCI "business oportunity"."

According to you or your freind. More details please.

Also, when it came to the trial, I initially said that the first case you referred to may not exist because you brought it up with dubious quackwatch as your only reference of proof (mail fraud). I never commented that the second case that appeared, after your frantic dirt digging, was not real. I did menation that it was not a decision but you keep trying to spin that in your favour. (discrediting Nelson and the QXCI) Just like you spin everything.

Then you found evidence for an entirely different case which you must have jumped for joy when you found it because you must feel it holds some kind of creedance (which it doens't), because anyone can sue anyone else for any lame reason. All claims are heresay until proven otherwise, but you seem to want to fly them as the gospel at this point. So you see I didn't deny this case because, like you, I didn't know it even existed until you brought it to the table. But your comment is designed to spin things (as usual)which implied I denied this case when in fact I didn't. I suggested that the first case may not have been accurate vased on where you dug it up from. We still don't have any credible info on that one yet do we?

All in all this entire escapade of yours is nothing more than a pathetic witch hunt Steve. What were your motivations again for condemming Nelson and the QXCI? Refresh my memory. You seem desperate to make what little you have stick.
Flail away. We can all use a little breeze.
Tweet