Of all of the strange ideas the JFK conspiracy addled mind promotes the one that argues this (this place?) is a psyop and that there are disinformation agents out here covering up the assassination is near the top of my lengthy list (the JFK bodyalteration claim can't be topped). This is the same person, David Drumond, who says the media covered up what actually happened - Operation Mockingbird and all that - while simultaneously citing the abuses and conspiracies by the government, e.g.,
So how did we learn about these abuses, these other conspiracies? From the same media he says was controlled by the CIA. In this world, the CIA covered up the murder of JFK but let the media destroy it through their reports on their abuses in otherareas. Why would they do that? It's completely illogical. But in conspiracy world it doesn't have to make sense it just has to support their conspiracy.
And with that, as with John, let's move on. Good luck, Bud. Really enjoyed your sense of humor.
It's December 20, 2023, and it's still a virtual anomaly of nature to be a conservative in this country AND believe LHO acted alone.
On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 4:59:50?AM UTC-5, Gil Jesus wrote:
On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 12:41:09?AM UTC-5, David Drummond wrote: >>> Funny thing is based on my travels and people I've met, I've found it's almost IMPOSSIBLE to find five people on earth who are both well-versed in this case evidence AND believe LHO acted alone.
And they seem to follow the CIA's 1967 directive on "Countering Criticism of the Warren Report" almost to a "T".
Yet there are like a dozen of them all converged here.
Fucking psyop farm, this place.
Hi Gil. Merry Christmas to yourself and Ben!
On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 10:59:52?AM UTC-5, David Drummond wrote: >>>
Very true, it's just that in the year 2023 (ie., in a post-Trump
It's December 20, 2023, and it's still a virtual anomaly of nature to be a conservative in this country AND believe LHO acted alone.Yes, while it's true that conservatives in general care more about
truth (while liberals care more about feelings), I wouldn't put a
political spin on this - as people from all sides of the aisle accept
a conspiracy in this case.
Good to see you back!
landscape) conservatives should have a more personal understanding of
how the Deep State can target an enemy, and the power of flooding the
mainstream with misinformation narrative. Some Liberals may be able to
see it, but they're not experiencing it because they're not currently
the target.
Only a conservative would understand that, metaphorically, the
entire state of Colorado just became Dealey Plaza.
The Colorado Supreme Court is part of the "deep state"? Is this what you see?
Then the phrase "deep state" has no meaning, it's just a slogan to
cover your dislike of events.
Second, the US Supreme Court will, I'll suggest, strike this down.\
And that will be the end of it. So where is the "deep state" then?
On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 11:01:24?AM UTC-5, David Drummond wrote:
Hi Gil. Merry Christmas to yourself and Ben!
Merry Christmas to you and your family as well and best wishes for a safe, healthy and prosperous New Year.
On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 11:43:13?AM UTC-5, David Drummond wrote:
Steven must have gone to one of Bud's aforementioned college courses.
No he teaches them.
He's one of those college professors who teaches that males can be females, that the earth is really flat and that men can get pregnant.
On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 11:43:13?AM UTC-5, David Drummond wrote: >>>conspiracy mind; things don't happen, events don't take place: no they must be part of some grand design. Hank's being paid, this place is a psyop. Colorado Supremes (four of them) are deep state agents.
The Colorado Supreme Court is part of the "deep state"? Is this what you see? Then the phrase "deep state" has no meaning, it's just a slogan to cover your dislike of events. The only way you seem to be able to process information is through your
Only a conservative would understand that, metaphorically, the entire state of Colorado just became Dealey Plaza.
But that's what Langley tells me to write.Trump will, if this stands, be off the Colorado ballot. He had no chance of winning the state anyway (he lost it in 2020 by 55-40) so how disallowing him on the ballot is part of some "assassination by state supreme court rulings" act is mystifying.
Second, the US Supreme Court will, I'll suggest, strike this down. And that will be the end of it. So where is the "deep state" then?Steven chimes in to demonstrate that he doesn't understand the word "metaphorically."
Steven must have gone to one of Bud's aforementioned college courses.
I understood ...
And to put a bow on this again...
On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 12:03:24?PM UTC-5, Steven Galbraith wrote: >> On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 11:43:13?AM UTC-5, David Drummond wrote: >>>>conspiracy mind; things don't happen, events don't take place: no they must be part of some grand design. Hank's being paid, this place is a psyop. Colorado Supremes (four of them) are deep state agents.
The Colorado Supreme Court is part of the "deep state"? Is this what you see? Then the phrase "deep state" has no meaning, it's just a slogan to cover your dislike of events. The only way you seem to be able to process information is through your
Only a conservative would understand that, metaphorically, the entire state of Colorado just became Dealey Plaza.
But that's what Langley tells me to write.Trump will, if this stands, be off the Colorado ballot. He had no chance of winning the state anyway (he lost it in 2020 by 55-40) so how disallowing him on the ballot is part of some "assassination by state supreme court rulings" act is mystifying.
they don't like by ascribing them to powerful forces secretly acting behind the stage. That would be yours again.I understood the usage which is why I, in turn, wrote that the ruling to you was some kind of "assassination by state supreme court rulings." It seems that the person having trouble understanding figures of speech is not me.Second, the US Supreme Court will, I'll suggest, strike this down. And that will be the end of it. So where is the "deep state" then?Steven chimes in to demonstrate that he doesn't understand the word "metaphorically."
Steven must have gone to one of Bud's aforementioned college courses.
But I'll repeat again: the idea of yours that this ruling is indicative of some sort of act by the "deep state" to prevent Trump from being elected can only come from a conspiracy confused mind. That would be yours. One that can only understand events
We have an independent judiciary, Congress, political parties, independent press, et cetera. All of this prevents the type of "deep state" you think exists. The idea that all of this - this bureaucracy and branches and people - could do what you think isThe framers of the constitution understood that, as Madison said, "men are not angels." They can and will abuse power. So they created a government with checks and balances, different branches, "mechanisms" (as they called it) to prevent that abuse.
Okay, so you understand what an analogy is, you just don't understand the analogy itself.
He's one of those college professors who teaches that males can be females, that the earth is really flat and that men can get pregnant.
This would have been a prediction that people would have thought you
were crazy if you'd said this was coming just 20-30 years ago...
I often find when people are so invested in portraying someone as a
kook, it's often because the "kook" is correct and the accuser is
scrambling to clean up a public relations mess until they have the institutional support to back them up.
Once their support goes mainstream, they get a lot more brazen. Goes
from, "We just want to teach inclusion" to "Yeah, we believe your
children can sexually consent; what are you going to do about it?"
The JFK assassination is much the same. Because the public still overwhelmingly believes in a conspiracy, critics still need to be
dealt with rather than swept aside and ignored.
They all have their own little world...
Well, that’s the logical fallacy ...
Oh, you're just fooling. I guess this mean I won't get my 10%?
Right, I'm the idiot.
Right, I'm the idiot.Indeed true.
They're not honest very often...but when they are they really nail it.
I'm trolling idiots.
He thinks this forum...
Interesting. And have you called Roger Craig a kook today?And here’s the logical fallacy of a red herring.
Nice try.
All this running, no insight offered.
But enough about yourself, let's get back to the topic of why some ad hominem negates a position while some is totally fine.
On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 3:13:34?PM UTC-5, David Drummond wrote:
All this running, no insight offered.
And yet you somehow think...
On Wednesday, December 20, 2023 at 4:30:22?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:...
Watch out! Huckster's the leading expert in this forum for logical
fallacies, both spotting them, and using them.
I spot when you use them.
On Thursday, December 21, 2023 at 3:41:17?PM UTC-5, Ben Holmes wrote:
On Thu, 21 Dec 2023 12:22:28 -0800 (PST), Hank Sienzant
<hsie...@aol.com> wrote:
You've claimed that the "A.B.C.D." in the Autopsy Report is the
description of the *location* of the large head wound.
Yet you refuse time and time again from QUOTING the preceding
paragraph that describes what this ACTUALLY is. Why is that?
You've also claimed that the prosectors dissected the throat wound.
Why do you continue to refuse to cite any evidence for this?
Why have you CONSISTENTLY run away each time I raise this issue?
Now you've quite stupidly insisted that the bullet entered JFK's back,
and exited the back of his head.
More cowardice, more stupidity, more dishonesty.
Are you proud of yourself?
Avoid the topic you yourself to introduced much?
Then why won't you discuss...
converged here. Fucking psyop farm, this place.“
Let me add it back.
You wrote: “Funny thing is based on my travels and people I've met, I've found it's almost IMPOSSIBLE to find five people on earth who are both well-versed in this case evidence AND believe LHO acted alone. Yet there are like a dozen of them all
I'll concede, Henry. I don't think any LNer in this place is well-versed in the case evidence.
Then why won't you discuss the Lifton Theory with me?
I already did. I said it doesn't matter what he said; all that matters is there was at least one shooter in the front. And it doesn't take Lifton to prove that.
According to you, you should be able to establish in short order Lifton’s theory is reasonable and makes perfect sense.
lol "according to me"...I haven't mentioned him once.
And I don't know why you think you can browbeat me into discussing a theory that was raised several days before I even got here. As you like to say, I'll respond to any post I want, when I want, if I want. And you can put any theory you want on trial,either Lifton's or Douglas Horne or Mark Lane or Harrison Livingstone or the proctologist that twice monthly has to surgically remove the stick from your ass. It doesn't matter who's correct and who's not. All that has to be correct is there were more
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/9pPHYlVUIls/m/jcLg-Tv-AQAJ
Not all of them had to be used in the assassination. Just one. But as Ben would say...Anything more than that, and you've lost.
On Thursday, December 21, 2023 at 5:38:56?PM UTC-5, Hank Sienzant wrote:
But yet you, Ben, NTF, and Gil have all declined to engage in any discussion of Lifton’s theory.
I decline because I have no idea what you're talking about.
This is the first I've heard that Lifton had a theory that all the shooters were in front of the car.
I don't know anything about it, I haven't studied it and ( unlike you ) I prefer not to discuss things I haven't studied or have no knowledge of.
Most of my research is on the evidence in the case against Oswald.
What's next ?
The theory that Greer turned around and shot Kennedy ?
The theory that Hickey shot Kennedy ?
The theory that the Mafia killed Kennedy ?
The theory that the Russians did it ?
The theory that is was Castro ?
What about the theory that Jackie had JFK killed ?
You see, I don't get involved in theories, just like I don't get involved in interpretations of pictures.
Interpreting pictures is like a Rorschach test: different people can see different things.
All it is is a rabbit hole and I don't go down those.
So pardon me if I excuse myself from your little debate about Lifton's theory. >It's just not something I know anything about.
On Tuesday, December 19, 2023 at 11:41:09?PM UTC-6, David Drummond wrote:
Funny thing is based on my travels and people I've met, I've found it's almost IMPOSSIBLE to find five people on earth who are both well-versed in this case evidence AND believe LHO acted alone.
At least you believe Oswald was complicit.
Yet there are like a dozen of them all converged here.
This place was fun. Too bad it's going away.
Ben thinks JFK's body was hijacked for a secret autopsy...
Fucking psyop farm, this place.
Indeed. Unintentionally funny--as you frequently have been over the years--but this place is indeed a psyop farm.
Only for those too cheap to be able to pay.
This place was fun. Too bad it's going away.
Henry will still be here. He can write the cost off as a work expense.
On Friday, December 22, 2023 at 12:01:11?AM UTC-5, Chuck Schuyler wrote:
Gil fantasizes about being Oswald's Johnny Cochrane and getting Oswald "off" on various technicalities, despite the many reminders to Gil that we don't try dead people for crimes in the Untied States.
But haven't you proclaimed Oswald as "historically guilty " ?
And you came to that conclusion after the Warren Commission "tried" him in the court of public opinion after he was dead.
You can't have it both ways.
Remember those 19 men who were convicted by Henry Wade ? Weren't they also "historically guilty" by your standards ?
And yet their convictions were overturned on DNA evidence. >https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna25917791
I don't care about technicalities. The conduct of the police in this case is consistent with their framing an innocent man for crimes he did not commit.
And I'd say that if it were the assassination of JFK and the murder of J.D. Tippit, or the theft of some chicken out of a barnyard.
Those 19 wrongful convictions prove that this wasn't the only case in which they framed the suspects.
John Stickels, a University of Texas at Arlington criminology professor and a director of the Innocence Project of Texas, blames a culture of "win at all costs."
"When someone was arrested, it was assumed they were guilty," he said. "I think prosecutors and investigators basically ignored all evidence to the contrary and decided they were going to convict these guys." ( ibid. )
They weren't interested in convicting the right person, THEY WERE INTERESTED IN CONVICTING THE PERSON THEY ARRESTED.
That's why when Oswald was arrested in the theater, one of the cops yelled out, "Kill the President will you ?" ( 7 H 6 )
They didn't know he killed the President, but he was the guy they were arresting and he was the guy ( in their minds ) who was going to be guilty.
This is the way they did business. They called it "police work".
In 2005, Craig Watkins was elected DA in Dallas County. He said, "Clearly it was a culture. A lot of folks don't want to admit it. It was there" ( ibid. )
So blow it out your ass, Chuck. There are REAL problems with this case, not the least of which has to do with the credibility of the police and the DA.
There are problems with the way the authorities handled Oswald.
There are problems with the way the authorities handled the evidence.
There are problems with the way the authorities handled the witnesses.
There are problems with the way the authorities handled the autopsy.
Add to that the problem that the authorities seemed to be, "historically guilty" of framing innocent defendants.
They arrested the wrong guy and let Ruby kill him before it could be proven in court.
Then the FBI took over the investgation and covered up that fact.
Boy you Lone Nutters are really blind. You can't see the forest for the trees.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 124:40:03 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,212 |
| Messages: | 5,334,769 |