12-09-2011, 04:06 PM
(This post was last modified: 12-09-2011, 07:20 PM by Charles Drago.)
Ken Rahn's mission is two-fold:
1. Prolong the suffocating uncertainty upon which the JFK assassination cover-up is predicated. Remember: The primary mission of post-assassination cover-up Facilitators is not to bring the world to overwhelming concensus on this matter, even if said concensus were to be that the conclusions presented in the WCR are correct; rather, it is to defeat at all costs the spread of the notion that absolute knowledge in this and thousands of related matters is attainable under any circumstances.
One of the most important methods utilized to prolong uncertainty is to create the illusion of equal merit for irreconcilable hypotheses by bestowing upon each the imprimatur of scientific respectability. Stalemate is the name of the game, and it matters not to the resolution of the JFK matter that Chris Dolmar and Steward Galanor have demonstrated beyond all doubt and to degree of metaphysical certitude that Ken Rahn's JFK-related work is fatally flawed.
Cover-up Facilitators -- witting and otherwise -- simply present to current and future generations a "he said-he said" scenario designed to prolong debate on long-settled issues. Thus, in the example at hand, each time we agree to "debate" the likes of Ken Rahn on the SBT -- a wholly discredited hypothesis -- we implicitly support the cover-up and join the ranks of its unwitting Facilitators.
The alternative is not to ignore Rahn and his ilk. Instead, we must respond by treating them and, by extension, their disreputable methods and unsupportable conclusions with the contempt and derision they so richly deserve.
In so doing, however, we also must understand that presentation of scientific proofs for conspiracy and falsifying hypotheses to the contrary absent deep political context does nothing but support the "he said-he said" cover-up. Accordingly we are duty-bound to include deep political science (how's that for a course title?) as a critical element in our responses.
In other words, and if you'll pardon the technical jargon, while tearing Rahn and his ilk new anuses, we also must include discussion of the deep political subjects touched upon in this post -- and related subjects, of course -- each and every time we are confronted with the lies and errors.
Begin by embracing this truth:
Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in the JFK assassination case who does not conclude that the crime was conspiratorial in nature is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.
2. The University of Rhode Island undergraduate critical thinking/JFK assassination course as taught by Rahn was created as a weapon of mass indoctrination. It and similar weaponized pedagogy are targeted on young people -- representatives of new generations to be misinformed, disinformed, and thus controlled by the heirs of the Sponsors of the Kennedy murder and their renewable Facilitator class.
The sheer affrontery of Rahn and his comrades and their controllers evident in the labeling of the spread of propaganda as an effort to develop "critical thinking" skills is all but unbearable -- as is, I might add, the ignorance of the chair of the URI Political Science Department who at the time abrogated her in loco parentis responsibilities when she abused and neglected her undergraduate charges by turning them over to the not-so-tender mercies of a merciless cover-up Facilitator.
Do not forget: During the period when the aforementioned Providence conference was being planned, Rahn was telling all who would listen that he was presenting to his students a level playing field for pro- and anti-conspiracy points of view.
Do not forget: The aforementioned Poindexter was awarded an "A" for blatantly and fatally flawed critical thinking only because it reflected his loving professor's blatantly and fatally flawed point of view.
I'll close with an anecdote relating to the Providence conference. On the evening before the formal proceedings were scheduled to begin, Rahn assembled a small group of presenters in the board room of URI's Providence facility (in the former Shepherd's Department Store; the main campus is in Kingston). Among us was Martin J. Kelly, Jr., a self-described former stand-up comedian who early in his life was a liberal and conspiracy theorist, but who now had "matured" into an entirely different animal.
From Kelly's self-generated conference bio: "[He is] a professor of psychology in the Psychology Department of Hobart & William Smith Colleges in Geneva, New York. He is interested in visual perception, Freud and psychoanalysis, intellectual history, and how unfounded ideas can prevail for long periods in the popular culture. His recent work has focused on the psychology of believing in conspiracy in the JFK, RFK, and MLK assassinations and on the popular belief in UFOs, alien abductions, and the recovery of repressed memories of systematic abuse. His paper, entitled 'To Bury JFK,' critiques the JFK critical movement.
I know that Kelly was present to take me on directly. Here is a relevant portion of the Abstract he wrote for his presentation:
"This paper is a critique of the JFK conspiracy movement. It discusses the incoherence of most major objections [leaving how many coherent and thus probative major objections?] to the Oswald-as-assassin position. The discussion draws informally on clear understanding of the implications of everyday scientific statements, on simple logic in formulating theories, on the historical record, and on notions of cognitive impairment vivified by contemporary psychology." [emphases and comment added by Drago]
At the time, my "Anyone with reasonable access" line had been widely distributed and discussed among JFK researchers. My use of the term "cognitively impaired" within it was lifted and targeted by Kelly.
Fair enough.
At the table that night, Kelly made a point of sitting directly across from me. Conversation became reasonably heated. Kelly touted the virtues of urologist John Lattimer's defense of the LN position -- in particular the SBT. I begged to differ. The following exchange (if not verbatim, then damn close) took place immediately after my spirited attack on Lattimer's methods and possible motives:
KELLY: "For God's sake, the man's a war hero. Use your head!"
DRAGO: "I'd be more impressed if he had been a conscientious objector."
KELLY: "What the hell does that have to do with the value of his work?"
DRAGO: "About as much as the fact that Lattimer was a war hero."
Subject changed. Not by me.
(Tape recordings of all this and of Stewart Galanor's destruction of Rahn and his SBT defense are said to exist. Any leads out there?)
Appreciate Kelly's gambit as a stunning example of the calibre of critical thinking of which Rahn approves and which earned Poindexter his "A" in Rahn's critical thinking class.
Think of Ken Rahn as what I have concluded he truly is: one of the bad guys.
1. Prolong the suffocating uncertainty upon which the JFK assassination cover-up is predicated. Remember: The primary mission of post-assassination cover-up Facilitators is not to bring the world to overwhelming concensus on this matter, even if said concensus were to be that the conclusions presented in the WCR are correct; rather, it is to defeat at all costs the spread of the notion that absolute knowledge in this and thousands of related matters is attainable under any circumstances.
One of the most important methods utilized to prolong uncertainty is to create the illusion of equal merit for irreconcilable hypotheses by bestowing upon each the imprimatur of scientific respectability. Stalemate is the name of the game, and it matters not to the resolution of the JFK matter that Chris Dolmar and Steward Galanor have demonstrated beyond all doubt and to degree of metaphysical certitude that Ken Rahn's JFK-related work is fatally flawed.
Cover-up Facilitators -- witting and otherwise -- simply present to current and future generations a "he said-he said" scenario designed to prolong debate on long-settled issues. Thus, in the example at hand, each time we agree to "debate" the likes of Ken Rahn on the SBT -- a wholly discredited hypothesis -- we implicitly support the cover-up and join the ranks of its unwitting Facilitators.
The alternative is not to ignore Rahn and his ilk. Instead, we must respond by treating them and, by extension, their disreputable methods and unsupportable conclusions with the contempt and derision they so richly deserve.
In so doing, however, we also must understand that presentation of scientific proofs for conspiracy and falsifying hypotheses to the contrary absent deep political context does nothing but support the "he said-he said" cover-up. Accordingly we are duty-bound to include deep political science (how's that for a course title?) as a critical element in our responses.
In other words, and if you'll pardon the technical jargon, while tearing Rahn and his ilk new anuses, we also must include discussion of the deep political subjects touched upon in this post -- and related subjects, of course -- each and every time we are confronted with the lies and errors.
Begin by embracing this truth:
Anyone with reasonable access to the evidence in the JFK assassination case who does not conclude that the crime was conspiratorial in nature is cognitively impaired and/or complicit in the crime.
2. The University of Rhode Island undergraduate critical thinking/JFK assassination course as taught by Rahn was created as a weapon of mass indoctrination. It and similar weaponized pedagogy are targeted on young people -- representatives of new generations to be misinformed, disinformed, and thus controlled by the heirs of the Sponsors of the Kennedy murder and their renewable Facilitator class.
The sheer affrontery of Rahn and his comrades and their controllers evident in the labeling of the spread of propaganda as an effort to develop "critical thinking" skills is all but unbearable -- as is, I might add, the ignorance of the chair of the URI Political Science Department who at the time abrogated her in loco parentis responsibilities when she abused and neglected her undergraduate charges by turning them over to the not-so-tender mercies of a merciless cover-up Facilitator.
Do not forget: During the period when the aforementioned Providence conference was being planned, Rahn was telling all who would listen that he was presenting to his students a level playing field for pro- and anti-conspiracy points of view.
Do not forget: The aforementioned Poindexter was awarded an "A" for blatantly and fatally flawed critical thinking only because it reflected his loving professor's blatantly and fatally flawed point of view.
I'll close with an anecdote relating to the Providence conference. On the evening before the formal proceedings were scheduled to begin, Rahn assembled a small group of presenters in the board room of URI's Providence facility (in the former Shepherd's Department Store; the main campus is in Kingston). Among us was Martin J. Kelly, Jr., a self-described former stand-up comedian who early in his life was a liberal and conspiracy theorist, but who now had "matured" into an entirely different animal.
From Kelly's self-generated conference bio: "[He is] a professor of psychology in the Psychology Department of Hobart & William Smith Colleges in Geneva, New York. He is interested in visual perception, Freud and psychoanalysis, intellectual history, and how unfounded ideas can prevail for long periods in the popular culture. His recent work has focused on the psychology of believing in conspiracy in the JFK, RFK, and MLK assassinations and on the popular belief in UFOs, alien abductions, and the recovery of repressed memories of systematic abuse. His paper, entitled 'To Bury JFK,' critiques the JFK critical movement.
I know that Kelly was present to take me on directly. Here is a relevant portion of the Abstract he wrote for his presentation:
"This paper is a critique of the JFK conspiracy movement. It discusses the incoherence of most major objections [leaving how many coherent and thus probative major objections?] to the Oswald-as-assassin position. The discussion draws informally on clear understanding of the implications of everyday scientific statements, on simple logic in formulating theories, on the historical record, and on notions of cognitive impairment vivified by contemporary psychology." [emphases and comment added by Drago]
At the time, my "Anyone with reasonable access" line had been widely distributed and discussed among JFK researchers. My use of the term "cognitively impaired" within it was lifted and targeted by Kelly.
Fair enough.
At the table that night, Kelly made a point of sitting directly across from me. Conversation became reasonably heated. Kelly touted the virtues of urologist John Lattimer's defense of the LN position -- in particular the SBT. I begged to differ. The following exchange (if not verbatim, then damn close) took place immediately after my spirited attack on Lattimer's methods and possible motives:
KELLY: "For God's sake, the man's a war hero. Use your head!"
DRAGO: "I'd be more impressed if he had been a conscientious objector."
KELLY: "What the hell does that have to do with the value of his work?"
DRAGO: "About as much as the fact that Lattimer was a war hero."
Subject changed. Not by me.
(Tape recordings of all this and of Stewart Galanor's destruction of Rahn and his SBT defense are said to exist. Any leads out there?)
Appreciate Kelly's gambit as a stunning example of the calibre of critical thinking of which Rahn approves and which earned Poindexter his "A" in Rahn's critical thinking class.
Think of Ken Rahn as what I have concluded he truly is: one of the bad guys.