Best Spokespersons for the Truth for 50th Anniversary

[Betty Chruscielski]

Jim

How blew out the president's brain from the rear if not a shot from the front

Finck, who ordered you not to transect the throat wound

Tere's hno statute of limitations on the murder of peace

The serial killer is still at large

Armed and dangerous

What is meant by the line, "Finck, who ordered you not to transect the throat wound"?
I thought Finck commented at the Garrison trial that he thought the throat wound should have been transected? Humes had explained that he didn't transect the throat wound because there was no tract to dissect. To dissect the wound he would have had to tear the muscle apart making a false tract. The reason could have been the muscles were in a different position from when the person had been shot.

[Betty Chruscielski]

[quote=Phil Dragoo]Jim



Dr. Finck is known to be corrupted before he faced the bar in Jim Garrison's case against Clay Shaw, but Big Jim and his staff didn't know that at that time in 1969.

Just the efforts expended against the truth over the decades is proof of guilty conduct in the contrived cover-up isn't it? Circumstantial evidence if nothing else.

From Mr. Marchetti we know that concern about aborting the Clay Shaw trial went to the upper levels of command authority of the Langley Criminal Gang of the CIA.

From day One the cover-up closed around the entire affair and continues today. Mr. Specter was replaced by Pose-ner and the circus rolls on. ...

Why do you think Dr. Finck was corrupted?

[Charles Drago]

Disinformation agents often work in pairs.

Such is the case with "Betty Chruscielski" and "Albert Doyle."

For further enjoyment of the "Chruscielski"/"Doyle" tag-team, go to

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...#post61341

Further be advised that "Chruscielski" argues that JFK was shot by a gunman in the motorcade's lead car and that Greer fired the head shot.

I share with you the following observations which I made on June 6, 2011:

The Greer and Lead Car "arguments" have been exposed for what they are -- fictions designed to distract and fragment JFK assassination investigators.

Is "Betty Chruscielski" simply a well-intentioned fool? An agent of disinformation? A real person or a composite identity?

In the final analysis, "her" intentions and identity are of keen interest. But "her" presentations here must be treated with utter disdain.

Expose the falsehoods. Laugh "her" out of the room.

But under no circumstances engage "her" in debate.

If we do, then the killers of JFK win the day.

[Betty Chruscielski]

Disinformation agents often work in pairs.

Such is the case with "Betty Chruscielski" and "Albert Doyle."

For further enjoyment of the "Chruscielski"/"Doyle" tag-team, go to

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...#post61341

Further be advised that "Chruscielski" argues that JFK was shot by a gunman in the motorcade's lead car and that Greer fired the head shot.

I share with you the following observations which I made on June 6, 2011:

The Greer and Lead Car "arguments" have been exposed for what they are -- fictions designed to distract and fragment JFK assassination investigators.

Is "Betty Chruscielski" simply a well-intentioned fool? An agent of disinformation? A real person or a composite identity?

In the final analysis, "her" intentions and identity are of keen interest. But "her" presentations here must be treated with utter disdain.

Expose the falsehoods. Laugh "her" out of the room.

But under no circumstances engage "her" in debate.

If we do, then the killers of JFK win the day.

Charles, Since I joined this forum I have grown. I no longer believe that Kennedy was shot by the driver. I do believe that something was shot out the back window of the lead car, but I've said this before but you refuse to listen. I did listen to a talk you gave at the 1999 JFK conference. You were saying how we all need to unite in one theory and not have our own pet theories. I do not understand this point of view. I was taught that a person brings their argument and supportive facts and then presents them. We do not name call or character assassinate. You have said there were multiple shooters. I would love to read your argument that their were. Please let me know where I can read argument and I will. Betty

[Charles Drago]

Charles, Since I joined this forum I have grown. I no longer believe that Kennedy was shot by the driver. I do believe that something was shot out the back window of the lead car, but I've said this before but you refuse to listen. I did listen to a talk you gave at the 1999 JFK conference. You were saying how we all need to unite in one theory and not have our own pet theories. I do not understand this point of view. I was taught that a person brings their argument and supportive facts and then presents them. We do not name call or character assassinate. You have said there were multiple shooters. I would love to read your argument that their were. Please let me know where I can read argument and I will. Betty

PLEASE NOTE: I am not responding to "Chruscielski."

Rather, I am pointing out the disruption tactics being used here by the "Chruscielski" entity.

1. I NEVER made any such suggestion as has been alleged above.

2. I am not a conspiracy "theorist," and I will not allow the "Chruscielski" entity's efforts to label me as such go unredressed.

3. An effort is being made by an entity I have identified as a disinformant to establish a de facto equivalency between its phantasmagorical "something was shot out of the back window of the lead car" disinformation and the LONG-established, fact-supported conclusion -- not a theory, but rather a statement of fact -- that at least two gunmen fired at and hit JFK.

4. For this go-around, one of the primary missions of the "Chruscielski" entity is to establish a dialogue with me and others who are on record as refusing to engage disinformants.

"Chruscielski" and "Doyle" are indeed a tag team.

And whatever they're being paid is too much.

Learn from these exchanges; they stand as invaluable lessons in how the enemy works.

One more curious fact: A Google search reveals that there is a Betty A. Chruscielski, BSN, RN, CEN who is active in JFK and 9-11 research. This person happens to live and/or work in Duluth, Minnesota. I don't know if she is the "Chruscielski" entity who haunts DPF. But I can point out that Duluth happens to be the stomping ground of a very well known JFK/9-11 researcher -- a certain professor whose recent, well-deserved fall from grace -- and possible connection to "Doyle" -- have been covered in detail in DPF.

I mention this in passing.

[Jim Hackett II]

Thanks Charles,
"Somebody just saved {me} a ton of work".

I figure now the choir already knows of Dr. Finck's corruption.
I was trying to look up a cite for it.

[Phil Dragoo]

From 124 above:

Charles, Since I joined this forum I have grown. I no longer believe that Kennedy was shot by the driver. I do believe that something was shot out the back window of the lead car, but I've said this before but you refuse to listen.

Already been discussed and dismissed:

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...-lead-car.

Also from 124:

I was taught that a person brings their argument and supportive facts and then presents them.

Decker with something out the back window of the lead car.

"argument and supportive facts" to follow

As the allegation was made twenty-one months ago

there has been some delay in delivery

The Onion is not forthcoming with the original photos

which in itself is highly suspicious

[Greg Burnham]

Greg Burnham
Greg makes great presentations. Whupped up on Paul McAdams Nolan in debate .... ran the turd to silence on radio. Why does he do that which he (Nolan-McAdams) does?

Did one helluva a job in 2000 Conference in SoCal.

And Or:

Oliver Stone,
His Showtime "docu-series" Untold History of the U. S." is pretty good and positively holds a DP view of 20th and 21st Century history.

Jim

As an aside about the books and theft of intellectual properties issue. I just replaced Jim Garrison's "A Heritage of Stone" from Amazon. I paid a price 6 times the price on the dust jacket for 1970 dollars. I am not displeased.
It is a powerful book and I am glad to have it.

However I, even if I could, would not give a couple of hundred dollars for other books no matter how much I value the original author and works.

Penn Jones Jr. is one of four heroes to me and I dearly wish his original works were available at a lower cost so I too could enjoy FMG again. I spent a lot of time filling out the missing issues from the Baylor archives of "The Continuing Inquiry", but that is legal.

I am not endorsing the thefts, I am raising a bitch about prices for the 99% and or those living on fixed income far below the "federal poverty level".

It is a decision forcing one to examine the internal moral compass and make a choice. Does the fact of FMG being near impossible to find and impossible to find at reasonable cost make it proper to pursue the free downloads? I doubt it.
But I'd be lying if I did not admit temptation.

Thanks for the kind words, Jim. Sorry for the late reply, but I am recovering from surgery still and the computer tends to cause spasms if I am on it for very long.

One of the many reasons I was reluctant to talk about the "other film" years ago is because I would prefer advancing our cause through my other talents, be known as a reliable researcher, and stand up for the truth. I never want to be known as "that guy who claims he saw another film, but won't tell us how, why, or where..." -- that's not for me. The mere subject of the "other film" tends to be divisive even among researchers who are otherwise strongly allied.

I would love to take another crack at McAdams--on the air--in a debate. Or better yet, Bugliosi, who can reclaim his ass (currently owned by David Mantik) on a silver platter when I'm done with him.

[Jim Hackett II]

Know I send absolute best regards and hopes for full and quick recovery.
Appreciate any input as you can or do.

I too, even knowing of the "other film", don't see this as the "it" - primary point to be made media-wise.
Too much great positive proof of conspiracy besides the issue of the Z toon.

Could that be an issue to be exposed? The mass of level headed people of all descriptions united to say 'look we all can prove the conspiracy existed to kill JFK and we can prove another conspiracy to obstruct justice. There is no debate any more after 50 years of lies.'

A plethora of proofs we must make matter aside from the films.

Those wiser in msm-land ops would know best.

Continued best regards and get well soon Greg.

[John Mooney]

"Best Spokespersons for the Truth for 50th Anniversary"

Phil.

Phil and his assassination beat poetry.

Is the world ready?

"Beat Spokespersons for the Truth for 50th Anniversary"