This is what I posted above:
"Rick wrote:
"But remember this isn't the first time Mr. Castro has been accused of making threats."
I do remember that, and wonder why the accusers are the same people, who have proven agendas against Castro. I don't condone threats, especially at gunpoint, but have to take a story by Jobe and posting by Katrina Island with just a little grain of salt. "
Maybe I was not clear. I am not saying that Katrina Island and Jobe are the only ones commenting on violence by Mike Castro. But the accusers (I should have said the accusers in this case) are the same accusers who do have agendas against Castro. Given the agendas and the motivations for them, I cannot simply assume that the stories are true and jump on the bandwagon. It would be wrong to do so in any case involving hearsay, regardless of whether the persons making the report had such agendas.
Who saw this happen? No one who posts here!!
Even in the J1299 incident, which definitely disturbed me (while Katrina Island was busy trying to paint Laughing Bear as the dangerous person in that case), I could not verify positively that Castro said exactly what was attributed to him. You never can with hearsay. That is my point.