16-01-2013, 04:32 AM
(This post was last modified: 16-01-2013, 04:48 AM by Jim Hackett II.)
[Begin QUOTES]
Originally Posted by Charles Drago
"I do not believe in a JFK conspiracy."
Originally Posted by Greg Burnham
"Me either."
Originally Posted by LR Trotter
"What about the JFK Assassination? There seems to be two major camps, Lone Gunman, and Conspiracy. Although the Conspiracy Camp is "somewhat divided", to put it mildly. Just curious."
Originally Posted by Charles Drago
"NO!
There is the truth -- conspiracy.
And there is ignorance, impairment, and/or criminality -- LN.
When anyone implies that the conspiracy and LN positions are equally worthy of consideration and respect, he or she acts as an accessory after the fact to the murder of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Charles Drago"
[End QUOTES]
This point of "equal consideration" for conspiracy and LN positions is vital. Maybe once upon a time long, long ago when the evidence was hidden and contrived (not that the evidence is not still hidden and contrived) it was a valid exercise in critical thinking to examine the assassination from all sides. However, that time has long since passed.
Ms. Sylvia Meagher demolished the Warren Commission using primarily only its own evidence, or its public evidence circa 1967. It was this work and Mr. Mark Lane's Rush to Judgment using the statements of various witnesses the Warren Commission ignored brought the topic to more common conversations.
The housewives from all over America started before most anybody else clipping articles from newspapers and pooling data for what some would now call peer review. Slowly the American people and people all over the world began asking the right questions. The questions the Warren Commission refused to address or even admit existed as more than "conspiracy nut" issues.
By controlling the verbiage, the promoters of the bogus WC endorsed LN "position", promoted a good/bad label on the whole discussion. Conspiracy believers = nuts and malcontents, while the true believers that still took the Government bowl of crap as reality = good honest citizens.
For a time because of the contrived and manufactured ignorance of the people, some valid reason to examine both ideas was possible. In the absence of the evidence and in the absence of the application of the "truth engine" that real jurisprudence must be, doubt could be. LN as a theory could be.
The lack of Justice led citizens to investigate on their own. All through the rest of the 1960s and all though the 1970s the independent researchers broke new ground developed new evidence and leads that should have been pursued in 1964. Leads and evidence that had the Warren Commission been honest would have been pursued in 1964. Citizens doing the job of the Government - imagine that!
It is my opinion that by the time of the House Select Committee on Assassinations of 1978-9, more than enough "new" evidence had been developed to condemn the LN position to the trash heap permanently. It was the contrast between what was freshly exposed (in the short burst of real investigation before Blakey replaced Sprague) and the Report that gave away the game. The HSCA was Warren Report 2.0 updated to account only for the new evidence the HSCA could NOT ignore. The Lying and the Cover-Up went on with USGovernment approval.
When the intervening years from 1980 to the present bring as much once covered up evidence there is no room for LN presumptions not based in evidence but mired in BS.
There is and always has been truth and it equals conspiracy at a very high level of power being a motive force behind the murder of Our President in the November Coup.
There is and has always been untruth and it equals the advocating of and/or promotion of any other explanation of the murder in the face the evidence.
Behind that untruth lies one of two conditions.
First the cognitively impaired that for whatever reason cannot perceive the paucity of evidence to support the LN "theory" and still cannot support anything other than "Oswald did it alone."
Second the asset that adopts the position of the LN supporter for another reason than cognitive impairment. For example to impair discussion of other researchers or to do other foul deeds done dirt-cheap.
I am not a theorist, to be a theorist about conspiracy would be an insult to my fellow researchers that have over the decades provided the evidence I needed to conclude the conspiracy as a fact amply supported.
Knowing those self same facts I cannot accept that coincidence (i.e. LN crap) played any role in the assassination but only as a tool of my enemies the engineers of the murder and the cover-up.
FWIW
Jim
Allen Dulles was wrong some of WeThePeople read the damn thing.
Originally Posted by Charles Drago
"I do not believe in a JFK conspiracy."
Originally Posted by Greg Burnham
"Me either."
Originally Posted by LR Trotter
"What about the JFK Assassination? There seems to be two major camps, Lone Gunman, and Conspiracy. Although the Conspiracy Camp is "somewhat divided", to put it mildly. Just curious."
Originally Posted by Charles Drago
"NO!
There is the truth -- conspiracy.
And there is ignorance, impairment, and/or criminality -- LN.
When anyone implies that the conspiracy and LN positions are equally worthy of consideration and respect, he or she acts as an accessory after the fact to the murder of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
Charles Drago"
[End QUOTES]
This point of "equal consideration" for conspiracy and LN positions is vital. Maybe once upon a time long, long ago when the evidence was hidden and contrived (not that the evidence is not still hidden and contrived) it was a valid exercise in critical thinking to examine the assassination from all sides. However, that time has long since passed.
Ms. Sylvia Meagher demolished the Warren Commission using primarily only its own evidence, or its public evidence circa 1967. It was this work and Mr. Mark Lane's Rush to Judgment using the statements of various witnesses the Warren Commission ignored brought the topic to more common conversations.
The housewives from all over America started before most anybody else clipping articles from newspapers and pooling data for what some would now call peer review. Slowly the American people and people all over the world began asking the right questions. The questions the Warren Commission refused to address or even admit existed as more than "conspiracy nut" issues.
By controlling the verbiage, the promoters of the bogus WC endorsed LN "position", promoted a good/bad label on the whole discussion. Conspiracy believers = nuts and malcontents, while the true believers that still took the Government bowl of crap as reality = good honest citizens.
For a time because of the contrived and manufactured ignorance of the people, some valid reason to examine both ideas was possible. In the absence of the evidence and in the absence of the application of the "truth engine" that real jurisprudence must be, doubt could be. LN as a theory could be.
The lack of Justice led citizens to investigate on their own. All through the rest of the 1960s and all though the 1970s the independent researchers broke new ground developed new evidence and leads that should have been pursued in 1964. Leads and evidence that had the Warren Commission been honest would have been pursued in 1964. Citizens doing the job of the Government - imagine that!
It is my opinion that by the time of the House Select Committee on Assassinations of 1978-9, more than enough "new" evidence had been developed to condemn the LN position to the trash heap permanently. It was the contrast between what was freshly exposed (in the short burst of real investigation before Blakey replaced Sprague) and the Report that gave away the game. The HSCA was Warren Report 2.0 updated to account only for the new evidence the HSCA could NOT ignore. The Lying and the Cover-Up went on with USGovernment approval.
When the intervening years from 1980 to the present bring as much once covered up evidence there is no room for LN presumptions not based in evidence but mired in BS.
There is and always has been truth and it equals conspiracy at a very high level of power being a motive force behind the murder of Our President in the November Coup.
There is and has always been untruth and it equals the advocating of and/or promotion of any other explanation of the murder in the face the evidence.
Behind that untruth lies one of two conditions.
First the cognitively impaired that for whatever reason cannot perceive the paucity of evidence to support the LN "theory" and still cannot support anything other than "Oswald did it alone."
Second the asset that adopts the position of the LN supporter for another reason than cognitive impairment. For example to impair discussion of other researchers or to do other foul deeds done dirt-cheap.
I am not a theorist, to be a theorist about conspiracy would be an insult to my fellow researchers that have over the decades provided the evidence I needed to conclude the conspiracy as a fact amply supported.
Knowing those self same facts I cannot accept that coincidence (i.e. LN crap) played any role in the assassination but only as a tool of my enemies the engineers of the murder and the cover-up.
FWIW
Jim
Allen Dulles was wrong some of WeThePeople read the damn thing.