Assassination Porn Anonymous (meetings!)

[Cliff Varnell]

Hi! My name is Cliff...and I'm an Assassination Pornography addict.

["Hi Cliff"]

I want to thank the Deep Politics Forum and its co-founders for allowing me to establish the first branch of Assassination Porn Anonymous here at DPF.

I'm thinking about asking Charles to be my sponsor. Back in my days of making Assassination Porn I used to make fun of people who disagreed with me -- one flicker of 'tude from someone and off went the snark! The only redeeming value of my work was the ridicule I heaped on those who say and write stupid things about the JFK assassination. I want to assure Charles that while I refuse to debate the fact of conspiracy any more, the ridicule of those who disagree with me on this issue will not surcease.

I called this APA meeting today -- our inaugural -- because...well...frankly I'm having a few white knuckle moments when I go over to the EF and see so-called CTs saying stupid things and asking stupid questions about the back wound, the clothing evidence and the Dealey Plaza photos. Assassination Porn. Distorting the record. Engaging a blatant liar as if he had an argument!! (breathe...breathe...)...

I've only read a few posts. I'm not going there, to the EF. I'm not going back. Out of the 4 CTs I see posting on the Back Wound thread the only one holding his mud, near as I can tell, is Fetzer when he says the issue is settled -- the back wound is at T3.

Thank you Jim, no further questions on the subject of the T3 back wound. Anyone who questions the issue is insufficiently familiar with the evidence and betrays an ignorance of the root facts of JFK's murder.

Hey guys, you can't "argue" with bald faced liars! Even some of our leading lights would do well with an APA meeting.

Thank you for letting me share.

I'll be back...

[Charles Drago]

Assassination Porn -- lending new definition to the term "money shot."

[Cliff Varnell]

Assassination Porn -- lending new definition to the term "money shot."

We're having fun with this Charles, but I'm not kidding about white knuckling over the nonsense posted at the EF .

Now Fetzer is saying the Croft photo is altered? He's buying some insane non sequitur?

[recite serenity prayer]

All the pet theorists jump in to declare the issue in doubt. I have found this phenomenon fascinating since I first noticed it in 1997 -- the willingness of "CTs" to declare the location of the back wound in doubt.

For a long time I didn't get it.

It's T3 Denial. Pure and simple.

Now, I don't think T3 Denial is on par with Holocaust Denial. Those who deny the holocaust tend to be anti-semetic.

Those who question/challenge JFK's back wound location tend to be researchers married to their pet theories. The T3 back wound threatens lots of pet theories. It forecloses further debate as to the fact of conspiracy, therefore it forecloses on the glory some researchers feel when they develop "The Case for Conspiracy" on ground other than the T3 back wound.

That's why a whole lot of CTs are closet Lamsonites.

Poor bastards...

[Cliff Varnell]

Poor bastards...

"Conspiracy in the murder of JFK is not an issue to debate but a fact to observe."

Well and good, but if we do not supply a clear observation we are begging the question, are we not?

This is the same observation Gaeton Fonzi forced Arlen Specter to make back in 1966 -- the same observation Vincent Salandria has spent his career making...he even wrote that you'd have to be a "vegetable" not to see it.

Allow me to amend that: you have to be a fucking vegetable not to see it!

To wit:

Please look down at your right shoulder and (I'm assuming you're wearing a common pliable fabric upper body garment) slowly raise your right arm to wave like JFK.

Please observe the fabric of your garment indent along the right shoulder-line.

T3 Deniers claim JFK's shirt didn't (maybe) do that. JFK's shirt jacked up entirely above the base of the neck without pushing up on the jacket collar resting at the base of the neck.

Ludicrous in the extreme. Intellectually contemptible. The lowest form of Assassination Porn.

&Yet T3 Denial is rife in the JFK Assassination Critical Community. Go figure.

[Cliff Varnell]

Allow me to amend that: you have to be a fucking vegetable not to see it!

Here's the Croft photo below. Please observe the white band around JFK's neck -- JFK's shirt collar. The reason we see the shirt collar is because JFK's jacket collar was in a normal position resting at the base of his neck.

According to Craig Lamson the observable fold in JFK's jacket was caused by 3+ inches of shirt fabric and 3+ inches of jacket fabric bunched up entirely above the base of JFK's neck -- without pushing up on the jacket collar...at the base of the neck...

And Jim Fetzer and Jim DiEugenio buy this?



Note to Lamsonites -- Campbell Soup is trying to reach you!

[Cliff Varnell]

APA meeting #1 adjourned.

Thank you all for listening.

[Charles Drago]

Cliff,

Please refrain from debating with individuals who do not have the privilege to posting on DPF.

Your points are well-reasoned and clearly expressed. There is nothing to be gained from carrying over to DPF personal grudges with EF correspondents.

Thanks.

[Cliff Varnell]

Didn't I say I needed Charles as a sponsor?

Cliff,

Please refrain from debating with individuals who do not have the privilege to posting on DPF.

Such was not my intent, Charles. I post nothing to debate. I'm not debating anything. I'm making The Observation.

"Conspiracy is not an issue to be debated but a fact to be observed."

Your points are well-reasoned and clearly expressed. There is nothing to be gained from carrying over to DPF personal grudges with EF correspondents.

Thanks.

My beef is with the greater JFK Assassination Critical Community. The other forum will not be mentioned going forward.

[Cliff Varnell]

My beef is with the greater JFK Assassination Critical Community.

This beef has been made before, as with the case of E. Martin Schotz's robust critique of a Gary Aguilar article.

http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back..._apx1.html

Seems to me the JFK Assassination Critical Community is adept at churning the waters of uncertainty unnecessarily.

[LR Trotter]

What I have viewed or not viewed, I have no desire or need to debate. And, certainly not on this forum. But, I fail to see anything positive about associating pornography with assassination research. JMO, and I am not interested in debating the contents of this post. But, I will read any opposing view in case I missed something.

:thumbsdown: