The Fiasco of Spartacus

[Dawn Meredith]

Quite a list against H&L... they can't prove any of the meat of the evidence false, but can be against it none the less.

Just an FYI...

Pro-H&L

Hargrove
Josephs
Gaal
Blank
Mitcham


Against-H&L

Parker
Parnell
Sorensen
Graves
Brancato
Kamp
Loney
Kinaski
Tidd
Carroll
Laverick
Speer

Of course I am totally pro H and L but I don't waste my time arguing with trolls. They are there TO waste your time. My time is valuable. I work full time and time spent on forums is to learn, share etc. I was going to start a thread about the agenda of the anti JA folks but that would just feed into it. That is quite a list. Is "Kinaski" that guy whose first name is Karl (hard to remember). He wanted to join DPF, if this is who I am thinking of but if he is another coming here with an an anti JA agenda, then we don't need him here.
Dawn

[Dawn Meredith]

Well, that poll is meaningless.

Its quite a negative achievement to revive Tracy Parnell, I mean he is an Oswald did it guy from years and years ago.


Pat Speer and Graves are Ok, and they sometimes do good work, but they are quite conservative in their approach.

I mean, please do not tell that that the Carroll guy is Ray Carroll? The guy who said he had a tape of Mark Lane backing down from him at the Wecht Conference? But never produced it? I mean please say it is not him.

Ya it's Ray Carroll. And John told me on Sat that Parnell used to write glowing stuff about H and L. He was going to find some after we got off the phone and email it to me. Oh well. I guess he must be reading the stuff over there. (I forgot to ask).

[Dawn Meredith]

Hello Jim, nice to meet you.

As I said, I have the utmost respect for you and CTKA. But I'm surprised at the position you are taking over EF and the Armstrong debate.

Would you not like to see a debate between Mr Armstrong and Mr Parker on Black Op Radio? Wouldn't that be an appropriate place to air the opposing views?

I know who Mr Parnell and Ray Carroll are, thanks. I have not said anything in support of Mr Carroll.

Oh great just when Kamp seems to have gone we have a new anti Armstrong character. Why should John waste his time arguing with Parker? He is still actively doing research. And he presents FACTS not theories. It would be like me debating David V. Pain. Why would I bother? I knew JFK's assassination was a conspiracy day one at age 14. People who refuse to see the truth yet post on these forums all the time have an agenda. Like dear Vince Salandria observed long ago "they will wear you down".

[Albert Doyle]

Why should John waste his time arguing with Parker?

You're right. Anyone who tries to get away with saying Oswald's driver's license was an application is a pathetic troll. And any room that doesn't call him on it isn't credible.


I realize from Parker's response that it is a mistake to feed a denial troll any opportunity to practice his deceit. Armstrong obviously isn't giving the dignity of attention to a pathetic troll. Driver's application - sheesh. The reason Parker isn't credible is because while accusing others of not entertaining other options he ignores that the Oswald dopplergangers seen driving around in cars would need a driver's license. This is why David Josephs pretty much beat him in debate and why the EF deniers have to resort to polls to overcome it. Parker's obviously desperate for attention for his blowhard bully skepticism which equals Lone Nuttery. Last post on this since Parker's drivers application bs and the lack of anyone calling him on it should be enough to convince serious researchers to not take him seriously. There's no way the professionals at the Texas Safety & Highway Dept who were trained to identify those things would miss the difference. Both Armstrong and Josephs are quite safe from this creep.


FYI: I didn't open his sycophant troll link.


.

[David Josephs]

Thanks moderator. Although I can't help feeling the warning about attacks on individuals could have come quite a few posts earlier.

All I'm proposing is a fair debate on neutral ground.

https://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/sho...post100336

Let's take this off this EF thread and see what you got to offer Ms. Loney...

DJ

[Jim DiEugenio]

The thing that bugs me about this is that John's book is something like 982 pages of text.

I mean how many of these people have actually really read it? And the accompanying CD.

Maybe about as many as have read RH?

But unlike with RH, there is a lot of valuable information in John's book. To this day, I think his treatment of the rifle issue is the best in the literature. And his 100 page chapter on Mexico City is up there with the Lopez Report and John Newman's work on the subject. And that is just two points among many of distinction.

[David Josephs]

The thing that bugs me about this is that John's book is something like 982 pages of text.

I mean how many of these people have actually really read it? And the accompanying CD.

Maybe about as many as have read RH?

But unlike with RH, there is a lot of valuable information in John's book. To this day, I think his treatment of the rifle issue is the best in the literature. And his 100 page chapter on Mexico City is up there with the Lopez Report and John Newman's work on the subject. And that is just two points among many of distinction.

Let's please not forget there are over 2000 notebooks at Baylor and spools of microfilm that are not shown anywhere...

Weeks at the Archives yearly for over year 10 years produces documents in these notebooks which are not seen anywhere, unless you;ve been to the archive.

It remains one of the most thorough accounts of the corruption of the evidence available and serves as a basis for most anyone trying to dig deeper in any area of the assassination.

We don't hear them talking about that... only some fanatical need to poorly attack that which is not understood...

[Don Jeffries]

What's truly incredible are all the good researchers who continue to ignore Greg Parker's irresponsible allegations. He has blatantly accused Jack White of doctoring an Oswald photo, and no one outside of David, Jim H. and I even objected to that. I guess he is confident that none of Jack's survivors are lawsuit-happy. I'm not an attorney, but that borders on slander imho.

Robert Charles-Dunne is a supporter of Parker's, as is Sean Murphy. They are both top-notch researchers, in my view. What is it they're seeing? As I just posted on the EF, almost everything Greg posts serves to dilute the case for conspiracy. I realize he's obsessed with destroying Harvey and Lee, but to reject all the obvious Oswald impersonations, including Sylvia Odio?

I would urge Jim DiEugenio, Albert Doyle, Peter Lemkin and any other interested parties here to rejoin the EF. The management is different now, and they desperately need new voices of reason.

[David Josephs]

What's truly incredible are all the good researchers who continue to ignore Greg Parker's irresponsible allegations. He has blatantly accused Jack White of doctoring an Oswald photo, and no one outside of David, Jim H. and I even objected to that. I guess he is confident that none of Jack's survivors are lawsuit-happy. I'm not an attorney, but that borders on slander imho.

Robert Charles-Dunne is a supporter of Parker's, as is Sean Murphy. They are both top-notch researchers, in my view. What is it they're seeing? As I just posted on the EF, almost everything Greg posts serves to dilute the case for conspiracy. I realize he's obsessed with destroying Harvey and Lee, but to reject all the obvious Oswald impersonations, including Sylvia Odio?

I would urge Jim DiEugenio, Albert Doyle, Peter Lemkin and any other interested parties here to rejoin the EF. The management is different now, and they desperately need new voices of reason.

Don is so very right here... Is H&L that toxic to so many as is Lee & Me which gets the same type of approach yet has example after example of inauthentic evidence. Having a 15:1 AGAINST for tonsil regrowth are pretty high odds to be making definitive statments as fact.... these are not isolated incidences with no other anomolies... What does Major Gorsky have to gain by claiming Oswald was discharged in March 1959 with all his records sent to DC afterward versus the Sept 11 hardship release... for the OTHER El Toro base... the one in Santa Ana.
-----------------------------

What he does regarding the Odio evidence is Specter-like and terribly irresponsible. His argument is that the name "OSWALD" was never spoken that day. and proceeds to try and say her priest lied about her saying so to him...

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you tell Father McKann that the name Oswald was never used in your presence by any of these men?
Mrs. ODIO. Never was used e[B]xcept to introduce me, and the time when they left.[/B] They did not refer to him as Oswald.
Mr. LIEBELER. But they did in fact, introduce him as Leon Oswald?
Mrs. ODIO. And I shook hands with him.

Thank you Mr. Leibeler

He then goes on to claim that since Annie never heard "Oswald" it never happened.... I get the impression that the English language and the nuances of word meanings are lost to this man.
Words/phrases like "except", "in fact", "repreated twice", "They did not refer"

while the actual testimony is really quite obvious

And he said, "We wanted you to meet this American. His name is Leon Osw[B]ald." He repeated it twice. [/B]Then my sister Annie by that time was standing near the door. She had come to see what was going on. And they introduced him as an American who was very much interested in the Cuban cause.

So when/if Loney decides to show her stuff maybe we can get a sense of the difference between the man and the others.

[Vanessa Loney]

Hello Jim, nice to meet you.

As I said, I have the utmost respect for you and CTKA. But I'm surprised at the position you are taking over EF and the Armstrong debate.

Would you not like to see a debate between Mr Armstrong and Mr Parker on Black Op Radio? Wouldn't that be an appropriate place to air the opposing views?

I know who Mr Parnell and Ray Carroll are, thanks. I have not said anything in support of Mr Carroll.

Oh great just when Kamp seems to have gone we have a new anti Armstrong character. Why should John waste his time arguing with Parker? He is still actively doing research. And he presents FACTS not theories. It would be like me debating David V. Pain. Why would I bother? I knew JFK's assassination was a conspiracy day one at age 14. People who refuse to see the truth yet post on these forums all the time have an agenda. Like dear Vince Salandria observed long ago "they will wear you down".

Hello Dawn, nice to meet you too (although I have a feeling you'll be as pleased to meet me as Mr Di E. was).

Just for the record I am not an anti-Armstrong character at all. What I'm proposing is that the two main protaganists JA and GP actually debate the issues GP has raised. And in a forum that is fair to both and accessible to all like Black Op Radio. Seems like a perfectly reasonable suggestion to me.