Let Us Treat Jim Fetzer with Kindness

[Jeffrey Orling]

My only *contact* with Fetzer was on this site and he even called me on the phone once. YIKES. He's clearly a bit of a fraud.... at least on 9/11. But that's not unusual as there are mostly people who don't know what they are talking about (including yours truly) but who insist that they get it. Jim doesn't and he's in over his depth. But he's slick and talks a good game and writes rather well.

He needs to go away and let people who have the skills (he doesn't) to solve the mysteries (he therefore can't). His reputation is not all that great to begin with, but he present time actions/writing are all one needs to know Fetzer is off the reservation. Yet he persists and manages to fool many people.

You [B]can [B]fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but [B]you [B]can not [B]fool all of the people all of the time.

[/B][/B][/B][/B][/B][B][B][B][B][B]I'm not fooled by Fetzer.[B][B][B][B][B][/B][/B][/B][/B]
[/B][/B][/B][/B][/B][/B]

[Seamus Coogan]

My only *contact* with Fetzer was on this site and he even called me on the phone once. YIKES. He's clearly a bit of a fraud.... at least on 9/11. But that's not unusual as there are mostly people who don't know what they are talking about (including yours truly) but who insist that they get it. Jim doesn't and he's in over his depth. But he's slick and talks a good game and writes rather well.

He needs to go away and let people who have the skills (he doesn't) to solve the mysteries (he therefore can't). His reputation is not all that great to begin with, but he present time actions/writing are all one needs to know Fetzer is off the reservation. Yet he persists and manages to fool many people.

You [B]can [B]fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but [B]you [B]can not [B]fool all of the people all of the time.

[/B][/B][/B][/B][/B][B][B][B][B][B]I'm not fooled by Fetzer.
[/B][/B][/B][/B][/B]

What concerns myself Jeff is Fetzers hanging around with a bloke called John Lear. Of course he's spinning shite about no planes.
But for those of you who don't know Lear has been around for years spouting all manner of bullshit concerning UFO's and Aryan aliens meeting Eisenhower. He's effectively the son of a rich Daddy and has nothing better to do.

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/0...Lear01.htm

This dipshit had been horsing around with that other tool Bill Cooper. Spouting off on all manner of crud including JFK getting shot by Greer that day. Anyhow, lets return to the alien stuff. Lear has long been mocked even in the often looney tune UFO field. Of course a crap reputation does nothing to deter dear Mr Fetzer. Anyhow, my suspicion is that JF, with the encouragement of Mr Lear, driven by his deep hatred of CTKA and DPF may well try and do a take on the ludicrous MJ-12 documents. I predicted a long time ago that Hankey would combine with Jim Fetzer, indeed I used to mock JF that one day he would combine forces. He eventually did so and it was totally hilarious. If Fetzer ever does go for this JFK-MJ12 guff or even entertains it. There'll be a few avenues open to him that he'll likely go down.

He may well enlist the Woods (who own all of the new batch of the JFK-MJ-12 documents) and he could always enlist Jim Marrs. Not that I am scared of that. Alien Agenda was pretty awful and Marrs has since steered clear of the documents. Or he could get Richard Dolan in on it (his work is also crap). But he could get really, really desperate and enlist the aid of the Aviary guys or the whole Kenn Thomas/Childress tribe to rally. What JF will likely do is come on strong as a raging JFK/9/11 hard on. The UFO crowd are to often very easily impressed, they won't check the forums to see that in reality JF is a sad joke in these parts. Thus charlatans like Dolan and charity cases like the Woods who cream themselves for some JFK back up will feel vindicated by this 'bit time' JFK researcher lol. I anticipate some ratty piece like he has done with John Hankey will magically appear. Fetzer may not go with the JFK stuff. Maybe he will but if Fetzer a man who loves to be the centre of attention all the time, isn't getting in JFK quarters or 9/11 anymore. Maybe he'll figure he can milk the poppy over there in the ever poor UFO zone.

Hey he can hang out with fellow cranks at Project Camelot.

[David Healy]

My only *contact* with Fetzer was on this site and he even called me on the phone once. YIKES. He's clearly a bit of a fraud.... at least on 9/11. But that's not unusual as there are mostly people who don't know what they are talking about (including yours truly) but who insist that they get it. Jim doesn't and he's in over his depth. But he's slick and talks a good game and writes rather well.

He needs to go away and let people who have the skills (he doesn't) to solve the mysteries (he therefore can't). His reputation is not all that great to begin with, but he present time actions/writing are all one needs to know Fetzer is off the reservation. Yet he persists and manages to fool many people.

You [B]can [B]fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but [B]you [B]can not [B]fool all of the people all of the time.

[/B][/B][/B][/B][/B][B][B][B][B][B]I'm not fooled by Fetzer.
[/B][/B][/B][/B][/B]

What concerns myself Jeff is Fetzers hanging around with a bloke called John Lear. Of course he's spinning shite about no planes.
But for those of you who don't know Lear has been around for years spouting all manner of bullshit concerning UFO's and Aryan aliens meeting Eisenhower. He's effectively the son of a rich Daddy and has nothing better to do.

http://www.thelivingmoon.com/41pegasus/0...Lear01.htm

This dipshit had been horsing around with that other tool Bill Cooper. Spouting off on all manner of crud including JFK getting shot by Greer that day. Anyhow, lets return to the alien stuff. Lear has long been mocked even in the often looney tune UFO field. Of course a crap reputation does nothing to deter dear Mr Fetzer. Anyhow, my suspicion is that JF, with the encouragement of Mr Lear, driven by his deep hatred of CTKA and DPF may well try and do a take on the ludicrous MJ-12 documents. I predicted a long time ago that Hankey would combine with Jim Fetzer, indeed I used to mock JF that one day he would combine forces. He eventually did so and it was totally hilarious. If Fetzer ever does go for this JFK-MJ12 guff or even entertains it. There'll be a few avenues open to him that he'll likely go down.

He may well enlist the Woods (who own all of the new batch of the JFK-MJ-12 documents) and he could always enlist Jim Marrs. Not that I am scared of that. Alien Agenda was pretty awful and Marrs has since steered clear of the documents. Or he could get Richard Dolan in on it (his work is also crap). But he could get really, really desperate and enlist the aid of the Aviary guys or the whole Kenn Thomas/Childress tribe to rally. What JF will likely do is come on strong as a raging JFK/9/11 hard on. The UFO crowd are to often very easily impressed, they won't check the forums to see that in reality JF is a sad joke in these parts. Thus charlatans like Dolan and charity cases like the Woods who cream themselves for some JFK back up will feel vindicated by this 'bit time' JFK researcher lol. I anticipate some ratty piece like he has done with John Hankey will magically appear. Fetzer may not go with the JFK stuff. Maybe he will but if Fetzer a man who loves to be the centre of attention all the time, isn't getting in JFK quarters or 9/11 anymore. Maybe he'll figure he can milk the poppy over there in the ever poor UFO zone.

Hey he can hang out with fellow cranks at Project Camelot.

Appears that your career here has focused on Dr. Jim Fetzer. Based on your posts alone may lead one to think you're simply jealous of Jim Fetzer's "center of attention" not to mention
Dr. Fetzer's publishing prowess... So Dude, are you an anti 1st amendment advocate or something? And speaking of cranks, what is your excuse for being here, again?

[Seamus Coogan]

Appears that your career here has focused on Dr. Jim Fetzer. Based on your posts alone may lead one to think you're simply jealous of Jim Fetzer's "center of attention" not to mention Dr. Fetzer's publishing prowess... So Dude, are you an anti 1st amendment advocate or something? And speaking of cranks, what is your excuse for being here, again?

Who or what is David Healey? I've seen this dude lurk around the Ed Forum before. Oh now I remember he's in the 'Great Zapruder Film hoax'. Big Banana's huh. This guy calls me a crank, yet he believes effectively that Abraham Zapruder never existed or actually never shot the Zap film. Hmmmmmm now exsqueeze me, sounds a little cranky to me doesn't it?

I secretly harbour jealousy WTF. If I really was jealous, I'd have a boner for a number of people who have bigger names than myself, Len Osanic, Jim Di, CD, GB, John Armstrong, JD, MH, Oliver Stone, Jim Douglas, Bill Davy, Larry Hancock, Lisa Pease and Gaeton Fonzi. Have you recieved any emails from me recently asking you or Mr Fetzer a question on any topic? No because you don't rate on my research radar to be worthy of any questions or communique. Bar one or two disagreements with the above peeps, I wish them all the best of luck in their endeavours. I think it's rather obvious that Mr Fetzer harbours huge resentment that these individuals command far more respect than he does. He still cannot figure out for the life of himself the fact that his making it onto the networks doesn't make him a better researcher. It makes him the resident straw candidate.

Hmmmmm Dave what was the last cranky thing I endorsed? Please tell me? You obviously wouldn't know shite because you have never read anything of mine. If you wanna know I am the anti kook himself, conservative to a fault and very, very proud of it. Ask Jan or CD I have some great little back and forths with them. The fact I am operating out of DPF itself, is a pretty sure sign I am kosher. However, I do have to ponder about what you are doing here? Did you read JF's defence of John Hankey recently? Did you see Mr Fetzer avoid pertinant questions I raised of him? Well the rest of the DPF did. Where were you at that time?

Am I obsessed with Mr Fetzer? That's a very, very good quesition. Yes and no would be the way to answer. One thing Fetzer defenders like you frequently do is forget to mention his obsession with CTKA. Trust me the guy has a boner I can't understand. He also has a very high profile far higher than CTKA's. Thus I am very worried about how he can spread discredited bullshit extremely quickly. It's hilarious practically everything CTKA has ever discarded, Mr Fetzer grabs and tries polishing his turds with. Nonetheless, I think it's very odd that of all the plethora of people who have gone on about JF here. You single myself out. This is very funny isn't it? Haven't you read any of the other threads here? Because you cannot argue the point, like Don Jeffries, you hide behind this freedom of speech rubbish. What you also forget is that JF badly abused his rights here by verbally abusing and attacking friends of his. People like Greg Burnahm, Dawn and CD who didn't deserve that shite.

Tell me where were you then hero?

I'd really love you to tell me about why I am so 'cranky' for criticising JF palling around with a guy who believes Eisenhower met with Blonde haired aliens. Dave you obviously endorse the idea? I mean can you blame me for thinking that? Further, JF can think what the hell he wants. However, I didn't spend months assembling and exposing the outright lies behind the JFK/MJ-12 documents. For their to be any debate in the issue other than their being totally fraudulent. Which I prove 100 percent plus. But of course this very long article, which you have likely never heard of, nor will ever read is beyond you're abilities as a researcher. Thus I have no doubt you're reply back will be about how much I have hurt you're feelings! How rude and rough I am. Oh dear me we have another one of the lets hold hands together fraternity!

You've screwed with the wrong guy. Thus I suggest moving along and making the best out of what's looking like a very sad life. It'll be made all the sadder by tangling with the likes of me.

[Don Jeffries]

Seamus,

I don't "hide behind" the First Amendment, I believe in it. It's not "rubbish," although unfortunately, probably the majority of Americans would agree with you at this point.

Re-read your post to David Healy. Healy and I have had exchanges in the past on the Ed Forum, so I'm not instinctively defending him. You come across again as beligerant and bullyish. How do you expect to be taken seriously when you use juvenile lines like "you've screwed with the wrong guy" or warning him against "tangling with the likes of me?"

It's laughable that you think Healy would be one of the "lets hold hands fraternity." If you read his posts, you'd understand that he's as combative as they come. He does raise a valid point though, which applies to someone like Josiah Thompson as well as you. Tink has appeared to have an obsession about Fetzer for years. He virtually never posts unless it's to challenge Fetzer.

Why is it so important to you to try and discredit the Fetzers and the Hankeys? Did you feel the same way about the late Jack White? He was probably even more "extreme" than Fetzer in his views. He was a high profile apollo moon hoax advocate. He also didn't believe in evolution. Shall we smear him, too? After all, these are hardly the views of "creditable" researchers.

Your aggressiveness in attacking others may very well come back to haunt you. If anyone ever desired to write an article smearing you, they'd get all the ammunition they needed by merely reviewing your old posts on this forum. You've expressed yourself too often in ways that any opponent could reasonably label as childish, profane, offensive, etc.

By dismissing Healy with your inference that he's a "nobody," and thus not worthy of your time, you invite the same attacks upon yourself. You also share your enemy Fetzer's unfortunate tendency to place undue emphasis on titles, degrees, and other visible trappings of "success." If a poster makes a valid point, what difference does it make if you've never heard of him?

You discredit yourself every time you appear to be asking other posters to figuratively "step outside and settle this." At least one time, you literally challenged another poster to a physical fight. No matter what you say about Fetzer, Hankey or anyone else, none of them ever did that to my knowledge. Now feel free to turn your acerbic pen in my direction.

I'm not attacking you, but since you feel free to drop my name in your posts whenever the spirit moves you, I feel free to comment on those posts. You may have the best of intentions, but your style is going to turn off a lot of people.

[Greg Burnham]

Seamus,

Although you have made amends for your early attacks on me--amends that I was pleasantly surprised to receive from you--that doesn't mean that your style
towards others with whom you take exception is well taken by those who read your posts.

David Healy is a very good man. I've known him for over a decade as an honorable, dedicated to the truth, researcher.

Your tendency to debunk the research of others, as opposed to conducting primary research of your own, can oftentimes be misconstrued.

I don't think that Charles posted this topic for the purpose of "kicking Jim while he's down" -- quite the contrary.

A word to the wise...

[Seamus Coogan]

I'll take it from you GB. But I won't take Don's sorry. In particularly not after that stunning intro he gave me lol. I have known about you're take on the Zap film which to my memory you share with Mr Healy. But I would much rather discuss or debate the issue with someone I respect like yourself. That's the rub. Why? Well because there's a chance I might learn something even if I disagree. I'd also dig it if we started up another thread or dug up a new one! That is if you want some back and forth. Further, I am not kicking a dog when he's down...well maybe I am lol. But I get you're point again. All I'll say bro is that an indicator of how far he has gone is his hanging with Lear. I actually think overall, I am pretty tame in comparison to a lot of other people out there.

Cheers Coogs.

[Charles Drago]

I don't think that Charles posted this topic for the purpose of "kicking Jim while he's down" -- quite the contrary.

Precisely, Greg.

[Albert Doyle]

I can't see how anyone could defend Fetzer's obvious insanity in his introduction of Dr Cinque into serious assassination debate circles.

[Seamus Coogan]

I can't see how anyone could defend Fetzer's obvious insanity in his introduction of Dr Cinque into serious assassination debate circles.

Hey Al thanks for coming in mate. But I do think that CD and GB are correct on the issue of this thread. It's more or less a thread concerning the state of JF and his fall from grace. My reply to Don and Healy is thus in the 'Danger of the Fetzer school'. Quite clearly however JF does have some issues concerning self delusion. Hence in fairness to our old sparring partner Don J. I don't think Don's really questioned the JF issue, he see's fault in his line as well and he is concerned over his decline. His issue is with me taking the piss more or less, which he may or may not have a point about. I'll see you on the other thread though mate.