Ron Rosenbaum fires the first Salvo

[Charles Drago]

Perfectly understandable, Jim.

I am not calling into question the obvious value of your contributions to our shared struggle.

Points taken.

But your earlier assurance that "it will be a war" for Dealey Plaza seems at variance with your -- in my opinion -- more accurate statements to the effect that, carrying forward the "war" metaphor, we are out-manned and out-gunned.

When the fellow who proposes utilization of the "three-finger" gesture (something about one digit per official shot fired) as a viable form of weaponized propaganda (my term, not his) in Dealey Plaza tried to make his case on DPF, I laughed him out of the room. Or at least I tried to.

Others thought it to be just a ripping idea!

Out of my utmost respect for our comrade Bill Kelly, I refrained from commenting on the merits of his endorsement of letter writing/petition signing initiatives.

And through it all, I might add, I have been privately, repeatedly, and at times almost violently vilified by otherwise bold and insightful comrades who want no part of my "fucking war."

And just what have I accomplished?

Please know that when I take to task the Dealey Plaza Irregulars for any number of failures to win battles, let alone the war, I count myself among the most culpable.

For whatever that may mean to you.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Jim - I apologise in advance if I end up disrupting your original thread about Rosenbaum.

Out of my utmost respect for our comrade Bill Kelly, I refrained from commenting on the merits of his endorsement of letter writing/petition signing initiatives.

And through it all, I might add, I have been privately, repeatedly, and at times almost violently vilified by otherwise bold and insightful comrades who want no part of my "fucking war."

And just what have I accomplished?

Please know that when I take to task the Dealey Plaza Irregulars for any number of failures to win battles, let alone the war, I count myself among the most culpable.

For whatever that may mean to you.

Back in 2008, Charles Drago, Dawn Meredith, David Guyatt, Magda Hassan and I created DPF.

We agreed on some rules, including majority voting of the founders before any significant decision - such as banning a member - could be taken. Those rules can be seen here, in slightly corrupted fashion caused by an act of treachery by our original sixth founder, now thankfully departed.

They include the following philosophical statement:

14. Our fundamental objective is for DPF to be an arena where research can be seriously discussed, and thoroughly refuted if appropriate, without name-calling or member abuse. It is acceptable to be robust and even dismissive of the arguments of other members, if analysis and evidence are provided. It is acceptable to state that a particular argument serves the agenda of the powerful, again if analysis and evidence are provided. However, since DPF is primarily intended as an arena where serious informed research can be developed and debated, it is not acceptable to describe another member as, for instance, an agent provocateur.

15. The deep politics forum is not an arena for the right and the left to bait each other. There are plenty of forums on the internet for keyboard warriors to call political opponents names, or to post crude propaganda.

DPF will close the membership of any poster whose rationale, as revealed through their posts, is to engage in crude political baiting, and who shows no understanding of, and no desire to learn, about deep politics.

This is, and will remain, the deep politics forum.

We, the founders, also agreed that none of us could individually claim to speak for DPF.

We each have different temperaments, different specialisms, different world views, different degrees of tolerance.

Where we need to speak as DPF, we insist upon a majority vote of the founders, and then agree a statement which is placed online by the fictional DPF member known as The Moderators.

An example of this can be seen in the original post of the following thread:
[URL="https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?10926-DPF-Bans-Professor-James-H.-Fetzer-The-Rationale"]
DPF Bans Professor James H. Fetzer: The Rationale[/URL]

Finally, we do not do DPF business, founder business, in public.

We leave rock stars to trash hotel rooms....

So, I will speak for myself, not for DPF.

I am not at war with the killers of JFK.

Or not solely so.

I am at war with Power and Hypocrisy, with the Grotesque, wherever it is manifested.

My war is with those who rape, torture, maim, impoverish, exploit and murder - whether by their own hand or by their orders.

I want DPF to be an arena for the exploration and development of deep political ideas, of insights, of hunches. Where a hypothesis can be tested, revised, refined, junked if necessary, proven beyond reasonable doubt if the evidence permits.

And sometimes perhaps merely spark another, better, more insightful hypothesis.

Unlike other forums, DPF from its foundation did not allow agents provocateurs to disrupt debate. Nor did it allow snake oil salesmen to peddle their wares.

If the founders suspect that a Sunsteinian psyop is being run, we will pool our thoughts, expose the ploy and cast out the perpetrator.

But 99 percent of DPF members are our friends and colleagues.

I may on occasion disagree with their judgements. I may be frustrated at the resurrection of matters long since settled.

But I will save my fire for our real enemies - those who are briefly visible when the Grotesque manifests itself. Those on whom a cold, harsh, unforgiving light needs to be shone.

I greatly respect Charlie Drago's War.

But we each choose our own fight.

[Jim DiEugenio]

To be fair, Mark Prior was not saying to put up three fingers.

That makes no sense at all.

He said it should be four fingers to mean the WC was wrong.

Now, by my going after Rosenbaum, at least now, he knows someone is out there fighting him.

And hopefully, just hopefully, people will go ahead and post this around. Someone besides Nathaniel.

DPF is fine and its a salutary endeavor. But between now and then, I hope our foot soldiers, if we have any, will spread out and try and engage the other side on neutral territory.

Rosenbaum is a very good target.

[Phil Dragoo]

Yes, of course.

Was it Marcus Aurelius (Andy mentions Ray Marcus) who advised

concern yourself with that which is within one's power

Joe Walsh in Rocky Mountain Way claims

we don't need the ladies cryin' 'cause the story's sad

The story is monstrous

Hastings drives into a tree rather than tell it (was driven?)

Snowden is snowed under trying to tell it

Tell it everywhere

I told the Mormons coming with their card

and they listened for half an hour

Do they know their Utah neighbor is not benign

They're not dreaming of electric sheep

The opposition is borgian

The best David to the Goliath might be Victor Borge

For the young, that would be Richard Pryor before the freebasing

To arms

(to better handle the QWERTY triggers
suggesting the Yamamoto might've-said
a rifle behind every tree)

JFK 1991 was a Fat Man
we need now the Little Boy

Hearts minds popcorn JFK Act
matinee villains exploded
to the parking lot
laughing

Will NSA be hacked
Can Troy stand
inviolate

It's only ever been about ideas
I am in the company of the best idea people

[ATTACH=CONFIG]4941[/ATTACH]

[Charles Drago]

I am not at war with the killers of JFK.

Or not solely so.

I am at war with Power and Hypocrisy, with the Grotesque, wherever it is manifested.

My war is with those who rape, torture, maim, impoverish, exploit and murder - whether by their own hand or by their orders.

As is mine. And while Jan and I may differ in our approaches to waging the war, I remain honored to count him among my most trusted and respected comrades-in-arms.

I greatly respect Charlie Drago's War.

But we each choose our own fight.

If my primary focus remains on JFK, it also shifts to the broader spectrum as Jan describes it.

Onward.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Phil - you are a deep political bard.

Charles - your insights stretch from Custer to Snowden, so there is bandwidth a plenty.

[Charles Drago]

Phil - you are a deep political bard.

Charles - your insights stretch from Custer to Snowden, so there is bandwidth a plenty.

Many thanks.

Agreed about Phil.

As for me -- the struggle always will be to develop band depth ...