Deep Politics Forum

Full Version: Fetzer gets a listing in Urban Dictionary: 'Fetzering' is a term for talking balls.
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
I have Assassination Science (1998) and Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000).

When I suggested the attention span of America could not accommodate JFK, 911, JFKJR, Wellstone, Moon Landing, and the rest of the Niagara of attic cleaning, he was arrogant and abrupt, insisting upon it.

That's his personal propensity.

I find the subtle connectivity to be persuasive enough.

That Manson marks a pivot on which Bugliosi and Polanski and Specter and Ira the Unicorn do a Seven Days in May Dance.

Fetzer is the perennial professor taking the opposite tack, contrarian, eccentric.

Twenty books on philosophy has developed a set of skills straining for a run around the track.

The body which would target him is distracting from its illegal distribution of technology from its Ames research center.

And from other of its enterprises in Shadowland.

It mocks him at its peril, and only until the audience realizes it's the fiftieth anniversary of a stage act based on such distraction.
Am I "universally shunned by conspiracy advocates"?

Have I described myself as a "chief spokesperson" for any group?

Care to share specifics, mate?


Wow Charles, as others said, Seamus was referring to Fetzer. Whew, calm down.

And I don't think its a crap thread. I mean what has happened to Fetzer is really something I think. Maybe we can take it back even further than Baker. We may be able to take it back to his incredibly incendiary blood feud with Tink Thompson over the Z film.

In the 9-11 field, which I do not follow that closely, I was not aware of what he was doing until Joe Green told me about the whole Judy Wood, dustification, giant hologram idea.

But the question is: Why was Fetzer attracted to these extremes? Which were not at all necessary to prove conspiracy? And why did he maintain them?

I think its a waste of a talented guy who could have done some real good.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Am I "universally shunned by conspiracy advocates"?

Have I described myself as a "chief spokesperson" for any group?

Care to share specifics, mate?


Wow Charles, as others said, Seamus was referring to Fetzer. Whew, calm down.

And I don't think its a crap thread. I mean what has happened to Fetzer is really something I think. Maybe we can take it back even further than Baker. We may be able to take it back to his incredibly incendiary blood feud with Tink Thompson over the Z film.

In the 9-11 field, which I do not follow that closely, I was not aware of what he was doing until Joe Green told me about the whole Judy Wood, dustification, giant hologram idea.

But the question is: Why was Fetzer attracted to these extremes? Which were not at all necessary to prove conspiracy? And why did he maintain them?

I think its a waste of a talented guy who could have done some real good.

Thanks Jim

Jesus I turn my back for a second and the Punch and Judy show begins.

I meant 'Fetzer' I'll probably have to repeat this for Dawn 'Fetzer'". Dawn did you get that? Remember back to JFK Jr and John Hankey? You clearly are having one of your infamous 'phantom author' moments once again. I am surprised you haven't accused the late Jimmy Savile of writing 'Anne of Green Gables'.

As for CD I suggest you see a shrink for your low self esteem and persecution complex. After seeing this utter garbage one has to ask. Where the hell would this forum be without Jan and Magda? Seriously, people where the hell would it be? Not in a very good state, that's all I can say.

CD, has basically said that the dark forces trying to discredit us, are manifest in the term 'fetzering'. Now CD's point they are trying to paint us with Fetzer, is not in question. They bloody well are! But not in this instance, Frank Cassano told me that he posted it. Now while Frank loathes CD (well CD has that effect on people). Frank is an excellent researcher, I agree with CD he could have worded the Urban Dictionary entry better. Indeed, I will have a word in his ear about it. However, Frank has disliked Fetzer for even longer than I have and he's a tough nut. Now if CD asked him to change it (in his own undiplomatic and idiotic way). Frank would likely make an entry about the DPF just to piss him off. The Urban dictionary is no Wikipedia type site, I am pretty sure anyone could take the piss out of just about anything on there. However, of course I'll get no thanks for doing a job with a stubborn bugger like Frank, a job that because of CD's paranoia and inability to do anything but act like a tin lion. Would turn into a disaster, indeed CD is a PR disaster for this entire forum. There's some good stuff indeed great stuff here, but CD has shat far to often in his own house. Oh what this forum could be if CD learned that its importance, far outweighs his use of it as his personal pulpit to make a fool of himself. Me being me, I don't really like being around people who shit in their own houses. If you keep going CD you will find many people eventually leaving your property. Hell, I know some very good researchers and genuinely interested others that won't sign up because of you. I think we all do, indeed I've discouraged people in the past not to join up. Hell I am a member and how can that be a good thing?

Magda and Jan don't suffer fools in any way. But they don't become as bad as the fools they kick out either.

Killing off your own forum isn't very 'smart'. Nor is shitting on organizations like CTKA. A group who has supported yourself and this forum, time and time again. We have also stuck up for you when casual observers contact us and ask "Who is that wanker Drago?". I have actively prevented a number of people who run rather popular blogs from taking the piss out of your forum posts. Now that I really don't give a crap, they can go for broke.

Madga could you please delete my account.
Watch me get rid of him:

LAST CALL!

Or, for the Brits:

TIME, GENTLEMEN! YOU TOO, SEAMUS!!!
Charles Drago Wrote:Watch me get rid of him:

LAST CALL!

Or, for the Brits:

TIME, GENTLEMEN! YOU TOO, SEAMUS!!!

Oh you don't have to show me the door. I am out of your blazing inferno with the utmost joy.
The reasons I consider this to be a shite thread are:

i) there is already an existing DPF bans Professor James H Fetzer thread, which lays out the arguments and counter-arguments, and at least started trying to do so without gloating;

ii) just as DPF discourages thread after thread about the Education Forum, so personally I am absolutely opposed to thread after thread about Jim Fetzer. One dump thread is better than endless new ones which lead to the arguments being rehearsed over and over again, essentially spamming up the forum;

iii) Fetzer is like the English sandwich spread, Marmite. You either love him or hate him. Or more recently, you either deify his work and declare it infallible, or you pity his work and declare it demented. There is little middle ground, and the threads ALWAYS end up in bitterness and conflict;

iv) as this thread, in its inglorious evolution and triggerhappy anger, demonstrates.

There was a major independent documentary about De Beers & the diamond cartel, shown by the BBC in the 90s. A great film, which exposed the whole shameful scam.

Unfortunately, one line in the film - alleging trading with the enemy in WW2 - could not be factually substantiated.

Corporate lawyers sued - not for damages, but rather for an undertaking that the film was never broadcast again.

And it never has been.

One small error prevented the repeated publication of a larger truth.

Or, to put it another way, the larger truth was contaminated by a single error.

With Fetzer, we are no longer talking about single errors.

Fetzer's multiple and manifold errors contaminate the battle to communicate the larger truth.

Here, once again, is the statement from the DPF founders:

The Moderators Wrote:DPF Bans Professor James H. Fetzer: The Rationale.

The Oswald Innocence Campaign, in their own words, is "a gathering of researchers, and concerned individuals, committed to spreading the truth that Lee Harvey Oswald was the "Man in the Doorway" in the famous photo, by Ike Altgens, which thereby exonerates Oswald of having shot at President Kennedy. In this case, a picture really is worth a million words, since it trumps the massive media effort to the contrary. We are taking a stand for what, upon close examination, the photo clearly reveals and cannot be denied by rational thinking people. The founding of the OIC marks a sea change in JFK research. A new breed of JFK researcher has emerged. Nevertheless, there are those on the internet, such S.V. Anderson and other "lone gunman" shills, who comb internet forums and cannot quite figure out why I, and others, of this new breed of conspiracy theorist, are so persistent and will not be silenced. The moment for the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth has come."

As research on the Deep Politics Forum and elsewhere has demonstrated, the photograph known as Altgens 6 is simply incapable of being used as "proof" that Lee Harvey Oswald was standing in a doorway on the streets of Dealy Plaza, and thus could not have been on the sixth floor shooting at President Kennedy. There is not enough "information" in the image to make the definitive judgement claimed by Fetzer and co. The claim also contradicts the most reliable witness evidence, which places Oswald in the vicinity of the Book Store's coke machine.

However, more fundamentally, such analysis of Altgens 6 is entirely irrelevant to Oswald's innocence. Decades of research into the life of Lee Harvey Oswald, into the circles in which he moved, into the plots prior to the assassination, into the nature of the deep political coverup after the assassination, and into the real historical context of JFK's presidency, expose the claim that "a picture really is worth a million words" as crude disinformation.

This promotion of "Oswald in the doorway" as the smoking gun that proves Oswald's innocence is deeply disturbing, as it will inevitably be shown as a massively overstated interpretation of the available evidence and thus tarnish the efforts of the entire research community.

Indeed, why is it that just before the 50th anniversary of the public slaughter of JFK, Fetzer and co announce the ridiculous vehicle known as the "Oswald Innocence Campaign"?

It feels more media stunt than serious research effort, and perhaps belongs in the faux and ephemeral sphere of the Blair Witch Project - an Oswald Innocence Project to entertain and titillate the masses.

We, the founders and owners of DPF, are deeply suspicious.

Here is how it is likely to play out.

MSM will be delighted to invite the sexily named Oswald Innocence Campaign members into newsrooms and onto anniversary documentaries. MSM will be delighted precisely because they know this supposed smoking gun, the interpretation of Altgens 6 as proof that Oswald was in the doorway, can be demolished in a moment. The claim can be demolished because the research community, of which DPF is a part, has already destroyed it.

Fundamentally, Altgens 6 cannot support the weight of interpretation placed upon it by the OIC.

End result: MSM has its cake and eats it. The self-proclaimed "Conspiracy Theorists" of the OIC are invited to make their best case, they put forward Altgens 6, MSM feigns interest then destroys the argument without raising so much as a sweat. And thus the meme that "you can't trust a Conspiracy Theorist to get anything right" is reinforced.

The circus continues.

The show goes on.

Fetzer and co chirp: "The founding of the OIC marks a sea change in JFK research. A new breed of JFK researcher has emerged."

Indeed. An incredibly stupid breed.

For some time, the founders and owners of DPF have been dismayed at the declining quality of Jim Fetzer's research in all deep political areas. The ludicrous and thoroughly debunked "Oswald in the doorway" theory is the final provocation.

We, the founders and owners of DPF, remain committed to shining light into the dark and shadowy reaches of deep political structures.

We also remain committed to exposing disinformation publicly, in stark daylight.

Once disinformation has been exposed, we will refuse to allow DPF to be used for the purposes of propaganda or Sunsteinian psy ops.

After reflection and discussion, we have decided upon the following courses of action:

i) to lock the "Oswald in the Doorway" thread, so it is not open to further comment. However, it will remain online in the interests of public education and exposure of the theory's total lack of credibility;

ii) to ban Jim Fetzer, as we have now concluded, with sadness, that his self-proclaimed "Conspiracy Theories" are the very worst examples of that discredited form, causing only damage to legitimate, considered, rigorous research.
I should straighten out a misunderstanding.


Frank Cassano did not originate the Fetzering entry at the online dictionary. He told me this himself.

Seamus is gone?

Why? It was Charles who was wrong about what he said.

But I understand the not wanting to double down on Fetzer. This should have been attached to the other thread.
If Seamus is "gone," it is by his choice.

I am not exerting an iota of pressure to have him forcibly removed from DPF. He has done nothing to deserve that.
Thanks for that clarification Charles.

Speaks well of you.
Jan

Your explication of the forum stance vis-a-vis Fetzer is very helpful.

Elsewhere I did 150 words on the single most compelling item of evidence of conspiracy.

Like a haiku or sonnet in iambic pentameter, the constraint is a discipline to conciseness

whereas the Fetzerian movement is to fixate upon the abstruse and mock those who don't see a laughing cow in a cloud formation

I sometimes think Charles and Seamus do endless variations on the Jack Nicholson "can't we all just get along" scene in Mars Attacks

[video=vimeo;40140338]http://vimeo.com/40140338[/video]

Fetzer is a fog machine, and this is war; the fog of war obscures justice

Hence eschewing Fogster in lieu of clarity such as Jan's statement is a path with heart

The contest on another forum was as stated below, with my answer:

Question: (A)"What is the ONE main item of evidence (ie Magic bullet etc.) that convinces you that JFK was assassinated as the result of a CONSPIRACY?

Answer in one hundred fifty (150) words:


Dr. Morton S. Mason, director of the Dallas County Criminal Laboratoroy, had processed Oswald's paraffin casts. Dr. Mason's report on the cast of Oswald's right cheek showed no trace of nitrates.

The casts were tested by the Atomic Energy Commission's Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the findings were negative, consistent with Dallas Dr. Morton Mason's testing results reported November 23, 1963.

Testing at Oak Ridge of the rifle allegedly used disclosed that every time the Mannlicher-Carcano was fired the paraffin tests showed positive for barium and antimony, gunpowder residues, on the test shooter's hands and right cheek.

FBI firearms expert Cortland Cunningham's protestations that the "chamber of the Mannlicher-Carcano was so tightly sealed that it prevented any blowback" to the contrary notwithstanding.

If Oswald did not fire the gun, there is no lone gunman; QED there is conspiracy.

Gerald D. McKnight, Breach of Trust, pages 209-212, notes 77-85, pages 422-3.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9