+- Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora)
+-- Forum: Deep Politics Forum (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-Deep-Politics-Forum)
+--- Forum: JFK Assassination (https://deeppoliticsforum.com/fora/Forum-JFK-Assassination)
+--- Thread: It's All Been a Tremendous Lark (/Thread-It-s-All-Been-a-Tremendous-Lark)
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - Lauren Johnson - 25-03-2013
Dawn Meredith Wrote:Lauren Johnson Wrote:other than assuming a role as Op-Ed contributor who sends in his copy and goes about his life. When Magda said he would drive everyone away, she was correct. He simply could not tolerate comments for any number of reasons. He wanted to cull out the membership and purify the stock, no matter what the cost.
I hope he starts his own Forum and I would look forward to it. He would be wise, in my view, to cut off comments, as is often the case amongst other bloggers.
I consider your sudden intrusion into the JFK part of this forum rather suspect, If you know as little about the assassination of JFK as you do 9-11 I would kindly ask you to go back to your studies and let us sort out our internal affairs.
And follow your own advice: start your own forum.
Dawn
Ouch! Nice one, Dawn. Right to the heart. You covered all the bases in one sentence.
But I don't think you need to be suspicious of me in the JFK forum. I have not and do not intend to enter into substantive matters with the JFK assassination. I consider it case closed as defined by James Douglass. That isn't to say that there are many more things to settle, I don't have a dog in that hunt. Zero. I am reading DiEugenio's book and do not intend to participate in any reviews. That is best done by people who actually know something. And regarding the JFK issue, that is a tall order.
I don't recall you ever addressing me here at DPF about anything, but you have apparently stored up quite a bit of rancor toward me over the years. Sheesh. Regarding 9/11, I would actually be interested in what you have to say about my opinions about 9/11. Most of what I said here was directed at Jeffrey Orling's ROOSD theory. I don't recall you ever entering into that topic one way or the other. Send an IM. Seriously. I am always ready to be enlightened!
About settling out your own issues here about CD. Having read thousands of his posts since I joined in 12/09, and having communicated with him via IM and email over the years, I would have thought I had something to contribute. I agree with you. I should keep my yapper shut. Done.
Finally, a word to the Mods. If you agree with Dawn and want me gone, see ya. Most of what I post as you might note are articles of interest and not a lot of opinion. When I do express opinion, it is in the context of Sponsor/etc. model, strategy of tension, usually in the context of financial manipulation, warfare, and money laundering.
As a matter of fact, I am so surprised by your post, I guess I would need to hear some words of encouragement by others to continue to post here by others, or I will be taking Dawn's advice.
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - Magda Hassan - 25-03-2013
I have no problems with your posts Lauren. Your contribution is valued.
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - Jan Klimkowski - 25-03-2013
As the bard Pynchon once scribed:
"Paranoids are not paranoid because they're paranoid, but because they keep putting themselves, fucking idiots, deliberately into paranoid situations."
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - David Josephs - 26-03-2013
Jan Klimkowski Wrote:As the bard Pynchon once scribed:
"Paranoids are not paranoid because they're paranoid, but because they keep putting themselves, fucking idiots, deliberately into paranoid situations."
Hats off to Mr. Pynchon... yet that's akin to stating that Diabetics are so since they put themselves into diabetic situations.... that those suffering from depression are fucking idiots for placing themselves into depressing situations
(one might even say that living life is a depressing situation so we all have cause to be depressed)
Paranoia is a real mental disease... "BEING PARANOID" may mean they are afflicted with an illness or there is a real danger that requires real caution and concern....
Starting a Forum to discuss the Deep Politics of the world's events past, present and future constitutes a REAL DANGER of being overtaken and directed against the very efforts it was founded for...
Charles concern over this REAL DANGER is fully warranted and MUST be taken to heart.
Was Angleton paranoid for going after a mole... was it an irrational mental condition or REAL DANGER? Guess it matters who writes the book.
Charles has more than enough experience to ferret out a REAL DANGER to this forum. Yet he reminds me of an orthodox jewish POV... that anyone not adhereing to the Orthodox teachings and behavior is sabotaging the Jewish religion... there is not room for discussion. A reformed Jew hurts Judaism... as does a Conservative... since it takes from the needs and expectations of the religion when that religion is not followed to the intended (Orthodox) level of commitment.
If talking about the micro details of the conspiracy validates the opposite - that no conspiracy is one potential result of the anaylsis... then we are to NEVER discuss the details... ala Salandria...
We are only to talk about the Deep Politics... not the nuances of the evidence.. the obviousness of the plots to thwart exposure... the behaviors of individuals - UNLESS in the context of Deep Politics.
Would we say that "Dotting the Eye" is a Deep Politics subject? The TSBD rifles? The Tramps? Can we FIND a DP angle within these subjects?
Deep Politics is a framework infinitely more diffucult to remain within than the "evidence" and all the other BS.
A small handful of people can converse in that language... those of us who are not as fluent cling to the evidence as something tangible to investigate, to discuss, that keeps us informed and involved, hoping to SOLVE the already solved without letting known WE KNOW it is a conclusion, not a question that there was a conspiracy...
So maybe, just maybe... Charles and others can look at the "stickie" topics and add one about the core belief systems of Deep Political Thinking?
I see photo libraries, video libraries, timelines, faces, etiquette and Mary Farrell...
I too want to explore the evidence within the DP framework... and do so without being toyed with as if a spider....
DP is a language and a thought process which, if one searches, can be defined and shown by example... if one searches and reads and digests and attempts to understand...
Just saying "within PDScott's concepts of this or that" and not defining such concepts, or the framework within which to think and discuss these topics... leaves too much room for subjective interpretation
I'm afraid that CD and others with just as much passion to safeguard against REAL DANGER will have to first fight off paranoia...
How many "agents" are interested in or conversant in Deep Political discussion without it being obvious... how does an "enemy agent" steer Deep Political conversation
without it once again being obvious... Stating "Doorman is Oswald" and taking hundreds of pages to argue it... is NOT Deep Political thought or discussion... it's Trolling... simple.
Finally... if the "enemy agent" was good enough to discuss DP thought... really good... you suppose anyone here would be able to notice them pushing the discussion toward the possibility of a Conspiracy without it, once again, being obvious?
Charles is, imo, caught between a rock and hard place... the demons ARE there. They are just not behind questions like, "could you please explain what you mean" or "please support your premise with something substantial"...
For if he is seeing demons in these places... one might want to look into the other definition where REAL DANGER turns the mind on itself...
It's a fine line....
Diagnostic Features:
Paranoid Personality Disorder is a condition characterized by excessive distrust and suspiciousness of others. This disorder is only diagnosed when these behaviors become persistent and very disabling or distressing. This disorder should not be diagnosed if the distrust and suspiciousness occurs exclusively during the course of Schizophrenia, a Mood Disorder With Psychotic Features, or another Psychotic Disorder or if it is due to the direct physiological effects of a neurological (e.g., temporal lobe epilepsy) or other general medical condition.
Complications:
Individuals with this disorder are generally difficult to get along with and often have problems with close relationships because of their excessive suspiciousness and hostility. Their combative and suspicious nature may elicit a hostile response in others, which then serves to confirm their original expectations. Individuals with this disorder have a need to have a high degree of control over those around them. They are often rigid, critical of others, and unable to collaborate, although they have great difficulty accepting criticism themselves. They often become involved in legal disputes. They may exhibit thinly hidden, unrealistic grandiose fantasies, are often attuned to issues of power and rank, and tend to develop negative stereotypes of others, particularly those from population groups distinct from their own. More severely affected individuals with this disorder may be perceived by others as fanatics and form tightly knit cults or groups with others who share their paranoid beliefs.
Comorbidity:
In response to stress, individuals with this disorder may experience very brief psychotic episodes (lasting minutes to hours). If the psychotic episode lasts longer, this disorder may actually develop into Delusional Disorder or Schizophrenia. Individuals with this disorder are at increased risk for Major Depressive Disorder, Agoraphobia, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Alcohol and Substance-Related Disorders. Other Personality Disorders (especially Schizoid, Schizotypal, Narcissistic, Avoidant, and Borderline) often co-occur with this disorder.
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - Don Jeffries - 26-03-2013
I don't quite understand why CD suddenly decided to leave the forum, and to issue one of those all too common dramatic farewell messages in the process. I've seen many others over the years leave forums in this manner, and it always baffles me. You're free to post or not to post. But what is causing you to leave? Because others disagreed with you?
CD and I have had our differences on this forum, but they seldom revolved around issues of substance. I agree with him politically on most issues. He understands deep politics as well as anyone. He has a keen mind and much to offer to this community and the world at large. We can all see that he is a very intelligent man. If only he'd just stop reminding us of this on a constant basis....
We all share a common enemy. However, you become like the boy who cried wolf when you infer that all those who challenge you on the forum are "agents" or working for the powers of darkness. All we can do is fight for the truth as best we can with our limited resources.
Let go of your ego once in a while, Charles, and realize that none of us are perfect. None of us have all the answers. Don't take it personally when someone has a slightly different view about some bit of data. Don't be too proud to explain yourself- some of your statements seem purposefully esoteric. But now I'm lecturing again...sorry about that.
I might humbly suggest that CD start his own blog- write what you want, the way you want, without debating with others. You've been at this for quite a while, and I'm sure you have some great stories. I know I wouldn't be the only one to read it with interest.
Seriously, it just seems ridiculous for you to leave the forum you helped establish. Especially when there is no clear reason for you to do so. I join the others in encouraging you to reconsider.
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - Dawn Meredith - 26-03-2013
Lauren Johnson Wrote:Dawn Meredith Wrote:Lauren Johnson Wrote:other than assuming a role as Op-Ed contributor who sends in his copy and goes about his life. When Magda said he would drive everyone away, she was correct. He simply could not tolerate comments for any number of reasons. He wanted to cull out the membership and purify the stock, no matter what the cost.
I hope he starts his own Forum and I would look forward to it. He would be wise, in my view, to cut off comments, as is often the case amongst other bloggers.
I consider your sudden intrusion into the JFK part of this forum rather suspect, If you know as little about the assassination of JFK as you do 9-11 I would kindly ask you to go back to your studies and let us sort out our internal affairs.
And follow your own advice: start your own forum.
Dawn
Ouch! Nice one, Dawn. Right to the heart. You covered all the bases in one sentence.
But I don't think you need to be suspicious of me in the JFK forum. I have not and do not intend to enter into substantive matters with the JFK assassination. I consider it case closed as defined by James Douglass. That isn't to say that there are many more things to settle, I don't have a dog in that hunt. Zero. I am reading DiEugenio's book and do not intend to participate in any reviews. That is best done by people who actually know something. And regarding the JFK issue, that is a tall order.
I don't recall you ever addressing me here at DPF about anything, but you have apparently stored up quite a bit of rancor toward me over the years. Sheesh. Regarding 9/11, I would actually be interested in what you have to say about my opinions about 9/11. Most of what I said here was directed at Jeffrey Orling's ROOSD theory. I don't recall you ever entering into that topic one way or the other. Send an IM. Seriously. I am always ready to be enlightened!
About settling out your own issues here about CD. Having read thousands of his posts since I joined in 12/09, and having communicated with him via IM and email over the years, I would have thought I had something to contribute. I agree with you. I should keep my yapper shut. Done.
Finally, a word to the Mods. If you agree with Dawn and want me gone, see ya. Most of what I post as you might note are articles of interest and not a lot of opinion. When I do express opinion, it is in the context of Sponsor/etc. model, strategy of tension, usually in the context of financial manipulation, warfare, and money laundering.
As a matter of fact, I am so surprised by your post, I guess I would need to hear some words of encouragement by others to continue to post here by others, or I will be taking Dawn's advice.
Lauren, please accept my apolopgy as I actually had you confused with someone else. I have enjoyed your posts and know almost nothing about you not even if you are male or female. Having just returned from a relaxing vacation I have come home to mountains of work - (am an attorney with no paralegal to assist) Then all this came up and I should have just kept my focuss
where it was needed- playing catch up with work. So in my haste at seeing you tell CD to leave and start his own forum I somehow got you confused with someone who does post a lot on the 9-11 section. And shot from the hip. Someting I am not given to do. I am usually very concilitory but this cluster fuck has had me in
over my head time wise. I do not want you to leave. I won't mention who I confused you with. That would just make this worse. Needless to say it hit me in bed last night that I had possibly made this error, and I awaked far to early, hoping I had replied to the person whom I BELIEVED had made the post.
That said I still totally disagree with what you wrote about CD but my response was wholly inappropriate.
Dawn
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - Magda Hassan - 26-03-2013
Dawn Meredith Wrote:Lauren, please accept my apolopgy as I actually had you confused with someone else. I have enjoyed your posts and know almost nothing about you not even if you are male or female. Having just returned from a relaxing vacation I have come home to mountains of work - (am an attorney with no paralegal to assist) Then all this came up and I should have just kept my focussPhew! I thought it must be some thing like that. Or you'd had a nasty bump on the head and gone loopy or such. You came back from holiday too soon and to such chaos.
where it was needed- playing catch up with work. So in my haste at seeing you tell CD to leave and start his own forum I somehow got you confused with someone who does post a lot on the 9-11 section. And shot from the hip. Someting I am not given to do. I am usually very concilitory but this cluster fuck has had me in
over my head time wise. I do not want you to leave. I won't mention who I confused you with. That would just make this worse. Needless to say it hit me in bed last night that I had possibly made this error, and I awaked far to early, hoping I had replied to the person whom I BELIEVED had made the post.
That said I still totally disagree with what you wrote about CD but my response was wholly inappropriate.
Dawn
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - John Mooney - 26-03-2013
Ah.. come on Charles... no need to leave.
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - Jim DiEugenio - 26-03-2013
I too am glad Dawn just said what she said.
I am all for getting as many new people who are trying to get up to speed on the case involved.
As per Don:
I think that what happened is that the other owners warned CD about his abrasive style. And how this was turning off new people and resulting in a declining membership. Apparently, CD is CD and that is part of him. So he decided to leave. If I am wrong, please correct me.
IMO, DPF is the one forum that can rival Spartacus. It has that wide of a range plus it has some interesting posters. And most of all, there are no Von Peins, Gary Macks, and Ray Carrolls here. And I think that is what the owners designed it as.
One of the problems we have is that it is not easy to get new people interested. Mainly because there is so much disinfo out there. Which, in my view, is deliberate. But if people are exposed to the correct info, most of them understand what is important and relevant. THe problem as I perceive it from what people like Magda and Jan have written is that CD's approach was so harsh that the forum suffered overall. I mean, the guy even attacked me.
I understand CD's frustration and how it can explode in anger. And although its harder to comprehend, I also think I understand what happened to Fetzer. (I think Greg made a good stab at that.) But this is the 50th. If we are going to get new people interested, now is the time. Its a good opportunity for DPF. And I think they want to maximize it.
It's All Been a Tremendous Lark - Albert Doyle - 26-03-2013
The form of our American democracy was based on the free flow of information available to anyone on an equal basis.
The founding fathers were wise enough to create a system where no group or consensus of the powerful was above facts.
I don't think Dawn is being honest. Since Don was defending me, any apology to him is in fact an apology to me. It's just my opinion but I think the biggest harm to Deep Politics would come from creating a political group consensus above facts and using that consensus to disparage people and falsely label them agents provocateur and then successfully intellectually and physically exile them based on those false accusations. I believe Dawn called Charles' accusations "paranoia". I myself am more interested in the facts that induced that "paranoia" on a Deep Political basis. Is this a Charles soap opera or a site that discusses Deep Politics? It's my opinion that those Deep Politics should always be soundly based on the truth.