JFK Jr

[Greg Burnham]

Bullshit alert: http://www.rense.com/general78/reas.htm It's not that I don't have questions about JFK Jr's death. I do. But this is the kind of ridiculous, one-person-said without any documentary evidence whatsoever crap that exhibits the worst of the worst re conspiracy theory. Anyone can make this stuff up, and plenty of idiots will fall for it. I'm not sure whether Hankey is inventing this or falling for it - but either way, it's useless crap that does not raise to even a minor level of credibility. Move along. Don't waste your time.


The Reason JFK Jr Was Murdered

www.rense.com

Lisa just pasted this comment on her FB page concerning Hankeys JFK Jr stuff.

Seamus,

Suffice to say: You have a lot of research to do before I will take you seriously on this issue. I am CERTAIN that I have done more primary research on this subject than...errr--anyone I know of besides Sherman Skolnick with whom I collaborated, Scott Myers with whom I collaborated separately, and John DiNardo...

Sometimes the appearance of impropriety is just that--ONLY an appearance.

[Seamus Coogan]

Bullshit alert: http://www.rense.com/general78/reas.htm It's not that I don't have questions about JFK Jr's death. I do. But this is the kind of ridiculous, one-person-said without any documentary evidence whatsoever crap that exhibits the worst of the worst re conspiracy theory. Anyone can make this stuff up, and plenty of idiots will fall for it. I'm not sure whether Hankey is inventing this or falling for it - but either way, it's useless crap that does not raise to even a minor level of credibility. Move along. Don't waste your time.


The Reason JFK Jr Was Murdered

www.rense.com

Lisa just pasted this comment on her FB page concerning Hankeys JFK Jr stuff.

Seamus,

Suffice to say: You have a lot of research to do before I will take you seriously on this issue. I am CERTAIN that I have done more primary research on this subject than...errr--anyone I know of besides Sherman Skolnick with whom I collaborated, Scott Myers with whom I collaborated separately, and John DiNardo...

Sometimes the appearance of impropriety is just that--ONLY an appearance.

So what is Greg trying to say here? I really like GB. But sometimes as is the case here folks my frustration boils over and I think I have a fairly decent excuse to get a little bit ratty. Though I don't actually think GB was really meaning to tick me off or offend me throughout this thread. However folks it is what he has invariably done.

So here goes.

Greg is effectively saying that I am hiding behind some 'impropriety' on behalf of individuals like himself and Dawn. Why? It seems to Greg that its some ruse to get myself out of some sticky research corners concerning JFK Jr.

Am I reading that assertion correctly Greg?

This thread was not intended as an IQ test for forum members. Help, if it was some people have failed rather dismally. This is a bit of a shame, I find Greg to be a very intelligent individual...at least most of the time.

If one peruses this thread folks, it's pretty obvious that Greg failed to understand a number of simple explanations I gave repeatedly. He then blamed it all on my being from NZ. Yes sadly he reduced himself to making what I felt to be petty racist slurs. However, a number of people including the mods here have been able to translate what I have been trying to say. Namely 'I have not done any research on JFK Jr at CTKA in no way shape or form'.

What part of other people getting my point you did not Greg?

Further that, what research on JFK Jr do I have to do before you trust me on the issue? I trust Lisa Pease. Take it out on her. Unless you read carefully GB, that comment was actually taken from Lisa's FB page.

What Greg doesn't get is this. JFK Jr, bar the odd comment, is not an issue I have given much thought about. I am very comfortable in saying so. Greg is trying to imply somehow that 'I am' or 'I should be'. However, I have been trying to tell Greg (on a number of occasions throughout this thread as you have seen) that I have always found Lisa Pease's writings on the JFK Jr topic rather intriguing. Considering Hankey's track record on GWB I prefer her take on the topic rather than his. Is that so damn hard for you to figure out Greg? Is it so hard for you to comprehend, that people with minimal interest can believe in something fishy going in the JFK Jr arena without endorsing John Hankeys version of events? Or is that concept just to abstract for you?

Well Greg if that was to left field for you, you then the next part will totally blow your mind.

Lisa also believes some spooky stuff went down. Yes, Greg she does! Isn't that exciting?

For all Gregs research on the topic he has obviously never read Lisa's take on it. Instead he seems to think I was using her opinion on Hankey too simply flay JFK Jr conspiracy believers. And Greg accuses me of making knee jerk reactions? What part of hypocrisy don't you get Greg?

One day Greg (when I have time or the inclination) I would very much like to read what you have on the JFK Jr case. Indeed all you needed to say was "Hey Seamus check out my stuff on JFK Jr or if you have any questions ask me?" You know, it's a pretty nice way of getting people interested in what you have to say. As it is Greg I am just going to have too 'trust' that your writings display more intelligence than anything you have posted here during the last few days.

Maybe an idea would be to post your JFK Jr stuff on another thread (omitting any reference to myself)?

Do you get me or is this idea all just a little to much for you?

In case you don't get my request to post JFK Jr stuff on another thread I also have some other requests.

Greg could you please tell me what the working title of this very thread is? Greg can you understand this question?

Greg please tell me and the other posters here where I put JFK Jr in that thread bar denying any involvement in the study of JFK Jr? Once again can you understand this question?

Greg for the final time it was DAWN who bought up this JFK Jr stuff. Can you understand this simple little point Greg?

Greg please tell me about quality versus quantity in the JFK debate...That was the key topic in my opening post on this thread. Did you read that post? You clearly failed to see that I actually congratulated yourself, Don and Dawn for not letting Morrow and Cahalan's bollocks on the Ed Forum turn it into a pathetic tirade against CTKA.

Greg can you understand my grave concerns about your levels of comprehension? Can you understand why myself and some others would have these concerns?

Can you grasp for one small second why I am a tad frustrated with your comments?

[Don Jeffries]

The Hankey video on JFK, Jr. is a great piece of research (and entertaining, besides) imho. What does Lisa find uncredible about it? He goes over thoroughly all the points that make people doubt the official story. The 9:39 call, the fuel safety valve being left in the "off" position, the original reports there was a flight instructor on board, the belated account from a flight instructor that JFK, Jr. to him "he wanted to fly alone," contradicting his earlier testimony, and many other things.

The film does share a major drawback with Hankey's JFK II video- an unconvincing attempt to force Bush into the role of major conspirator in JFK, Jr.'s death. But Hankey's obession with Bush doesn't detract from the solid information for conspiracy he does present in the film.

[Albert Doyle]

You would think there would be more information on this suicide flight instructor than guesses.

[Don Jeffries]

Albert,

There were several early reports that a flight instructor was on the plane. More significantly, Carole Radziwill, who was married to JFK, Jr.'s first cousin and best friend, allegedly said there was a flight instructor on board when she made one of the first calls to the FAA, who were curiously unresponsive. I am trying to contact her to verify this, but so far without success.

Keith,

I think there has been way too much infighting among members of the research community for decades. It's only become worse with the internet, for the reasons I delineated earlier (huge egos, difficult personalities, etc.) There are few of us who follow this case who don't offend someone else who does.

People should just ignore those comments they find offensive.

[Dawn Meredith]

Bullshit alert: http://www.rense.com/general78/reas.htm It's not that I don't have questions about JFK Jr's death. I do. But this is the kind of ridiculous, one-person-said without any documentary evidence whatsoever crap that exhibits the worst of the worst re conspiracy theory. Anyone can make this stuff up, and plenty of idiots will fall for it. I'm not sure whether Hankey is inventing this or falling for it - but either way, it's useless crap that does not raise to even a minor level of credibility. Move along. Don't waste your time.


The Reason JFK Jr Was Murdered

www.rense.com

Lisa just pasted this comment on her FB page concerning Hankeys JFK Jr stuff.

Seamus,

Suffice to say: You have a lot of research to do before I will take you seriously on this issue. I am CERTAIN that I have done more primary research on this subject than...errr--anyone I know of besides Sherman Skolnick with whom I collaborated, Scott Myers with whom I collaborated separately, and John DiNardo...

Sometimes the appearance of impropriety is just that--ONLY an appearance.

This is getting all too weird. If anyone says anything about about the work done on this case our boy Seamus goes all wacky. (See the next post now he's attacking Greg). I respect Lisa and Jim's work enormously but to see that there was a murder here takes less than a day on the net. I look forward to a book, with sources. Sherman was the king of airplane crash investigations so he got on this immediately.

Seamus doth protest too much. Of course there is also made up stuff on the web on this case, like the True Ott emails which is clearly a false trail because no one puts this stuff on letterhead. Is Ott lying? He sounds credible but the file he allegedly had was contrived.

I look most forward to the work of Greg and Don J. Two terrific reaearchers who in my opinion will do justice to the murder of JFK jr.

I am not going to post further on this matter becasue Seamus is correct I do want the CT more united, less divisive, alas...This is also war
and the community is filed with many who are not what they pretend to be. Onward.

Dawn

[Charles Drago]

DISCIPLINE!

Lack of investigative discipline ravages our work -- over and over again.

First determine the "how" of JFK JR's death.

Until you have done so, do NOT speculate as to the "who" and "why" of the event. At least not publicly.

For if the "how" is established beyond reasonable doubt, only then are you empowered to begin a classic process of elimination to narrow the field of suspects.

"Who" among likely suspects could NOT have done it as it was done?

Have we learned nothing from our countless failures?

[Seamus Coogan]

Dawn it puzzles me how you cannot see how frustrating the previous exchanges were for myself.
They started off in good humor but got progressively nastier. The nastiness and the inaccuracies had nothing to do with me.

However, I guess thats as good as an apology I am going to get lol. I guess Jim and Lisa should also be grateful.

But once again what part of that last post of mine did you not get?

Dawn, you have now gone from (A) Saying I should write a book about JFK Jr to put my money were my mouth is (B) Then accusing me of lying about not writing anything on CTKA concerning JFK/Hankey. Then to © Accusing me of denying that I wrote JFK II. Which you then (D) Used to justify your criticism of me for Hankeys JFK Jr piece. If that's not all bizarre enough, you are now rather clearly saying IMO that I am rallying against anyone who has ever had a differing opinion on JFK Jr!!! Nope that is totally untrue. I would like to read the work of Greg B and the others you mention. Lisa is not the last word, but she's the only one I have really had the chance to read on the topic. I also know she dislikes Hankeys take. I posted her comments as evidence of this. Very simple stuff okay.

I would just like the JFK Jr stuff to be removed to another thread. Further, I don't want any mention of my name to do with the subject to be in it. Considering how hard it is to dissuade people from their obsession with myself and JFK Jr, I really would dig it if the mods could help me out here. The inability of some people to argue the merits of quantity versus quality in this debate in a dedicated thread are rather concerning.

[Greg Burnham]

Seamus,

I don't have anything for you to read. I worked behind the scenes with Skolnick and with Myers. I conducted a tremendous amount of research into the matter, but others compiled my work with theirs into various essays. I am more than willing to discontinue associating your name with JFK Jr. research.

BTW: I think you misunderstood my comment about impropriety. I was referring to your perception that Hankey's article had the appearance of impropriety, not you.

[Magda Hassan]

Seamus said:

I would just like the JFK Jr stuff to be removed to another thread. Further, I don't want any mention of my name to do with the subject to be in it. Considering how hard it is to dissuade people from their obsession with myself and JFK Jr, I really would dig it if the mods could help me out here. The inability of some people to argue the merits of quantity versus quality in this debate in a dedicated thread are rather concerning.

I'm trying to clean up the thread as requested by Seamus. Would you Seamus and any other interested participants please check and review that I have the right JFK jr posts here then I will delete from the other original thread.