14-12-2012, 11:01 PM
CD - I am much thicker skinned than most....
Your approach is yours... I get it and am rarely put off by it...
as long as you don't pull a Fetzer and believe you are automatically rightsimply because you've said it, wrote it and/or posted it.
You too could understand that "yada yada yada" was not a diss on youranswer, I just didn't feel like rewritting it... simple.
I assumed we both know that second part is the crux of Deep politics....
As for NARROW IMPRESSION - I welcome you sharing your thoughts on what YOUTHINK the plan was at the outset...
and for you empahtically state "Neither" seems to me a bit arrogantof your insider knowledge of the origins and planning of the assasination...
I will revist Scott's Phased approach to see where I am missing the boat....
WHY you disagree with my "pick and choose" scenario is much morehelpful than just informing me you disagree....
Now, why can't I be serious about the CIA/FBI boys messing with each other? Given the extreme behaviors - your dismissal is abit short sighted imo...
You don't think some agents had it out for other agents and did things just to "F" with them?
I have been talking DOUBLES from the very beginning... in fact I am fairly sure there were TWO SETS OF TRAMPS as well
We are on the same page there and will continue to be....
-----------------------
I am hoping you are of the caliber of person who can be challenged, respectfully, and reply with support, links, evidence and an argument worthy of this forum.
I don't like to be insulted nor do I believe my opinions backed with what I feel is strong evidence should be ridiculed or dismissed offhand...
you have done NONE of these things to me and I appreciate it... only Fetzer and Albert, with a bit of Mark thrown in has approached me in this manner...
and we see what the results were.
I will continue to show all the members of this forum the respect deserved....
and I expect the same.
I know I reside a few rungs below the "experts" in their fields of study in the different areas of this case... yet I also believe I have a VERY BROAD knowledge base,
some photoanalytical skills, and can find what I need to support, defend or destroy my arguments as well as others.
I try to post under the assumption that there are MANY reading, lurking, etc... that require more of the story, more of the background... so I usually include it
in my replies... not to belittle the knowledge of those I am replying to - but to keep CONTEXT at the forefront of these conversations.
There is a core group that does the heavy lifting here... as with any group dynamic.... I hope to become part of this core group in the areas I excel
I wil continue to offer my POV and defend it as best I can...
I simply ask that if you or anyone believes I am wrong about what I post... TEACH and DIRECT....
I'm here to learn and share and theorize, just like every one else...
styles and approaches not withstanding...
Cheers
DJ
Your approach is yours... I get it and am rarely put off by it...
as long as you don't pull a Fetzer and believe you are automatically rightsimply because you've said it, wrote it and/or posted it.
You too could understand that "yada yada yada" was not a diss on youranswer, I just didn't feel like rewritting it... simple.
I assumed we both know that second part is the crux of Deep politics....
As for NARROW IMPRESSION - I welcome you sharing your thoughts on what YOUTHINK the plan was at the outset...
and for you empahtically state "Neither" seems to me a bit arrogantof your insider knowledge of the origins and planning of the assasination...
I will revist Scott's Phased approach to see where I am missing the boat....
WHY you disagree with my "pick and choose" scenario is much morehelpful than just informing me you disagree....
Now, why can't I be serious about the CIA/FBI boys messing with each other? Given the extreme behaviors - your dismissal is abit short sighted imo...
You don't think some agents had it out for other agents and did things just to "F" with them?
I have been talking DOUBLES from the very beginning... in fact I am fairly sure there were TWO SETS OF TRAMPS as well
We are on the same page there and will continue to be....
-----------------------
I am hoping you are of the caliber of person who can be challenged, respectfully, and reply with support, links, evidence and an argument worthy of this forum.
I don't like to be insulted nor do I believe my opinions backed with what I feel is strong evidence should be ridiculed or dismissed offhand...
you have done NONE of these things to me and I appreciate it... only Fetzer and Albert, with a bit of Mark thrown in has approached me in this manner...
and we see what the results were.
I will continue to show all the members of this forum the respect deserved....
and I expect the same.
I know I reside a few rungs below the "experts" in their fields of study in the different areas of this case... yet I also believe I have a VERY BROAD knowledge base,
some photoanalytical skills, and can find what I need to support, defend or destroy my arguments as well as others.
I try to post under the assumption that there are MANY reading, lurking, etc... that require more of the story, more of the background... so I usually include it
in my replies... not to belittle the knowledge of those I am replying to - but to keep CONTEXT at the forefront of these conversations.
There is a core group that does the heavy lifting here... as with any group dynamic.... I hope to become part of this core group in the areas I excel
I wil continue to offer my POV and defend it as best I can...
I simply ask that if you or anyone believes I am wrong about what I post... TEACH and DIRECT....
I'm here to learn and share and theorize, just like every one else...
styles and approaches not withstanding...
Cheers
DJ