25-10-2012, 05:21 PM
Albert Doyle Wrote:What point do you think you're making there vs the facts evidence you're using it to avoid?
Now THIS is the Albert we've all come to know and love!
|
Michael Piper and Final Judgment
|
 Now THIS is the Albert we've all come to know and love! 
25-10-2012, 06:17 PM
Charles Drago Wrote:Albert Doyle Wrote:What point do you think you're making there vs the facts evidence you're using it to avoid? :banghead: Oh yes!! 
25-10-2012, 06:52 PM
Don Jeffries Wrote:Albert, Thanks Don... much appreciated After years at Duncan's and EF and Lancer with the likes of DVP, Paul May (w/aliases), and Craig Lamson... these boys are at least civil and informed. Everyone is allowed their own analysis and conclusions... regardless... But when the responses start getting personal... it becomes way too obvious that they simply don't have faith in their argument, conclusions or the evidence that led them there... Ad hominem, the last refuge of a desperate argument "I may not agree with you but will defend your right to be wrong".... Badgeman is a great example...To some it's plain as day... to others, just a pattern in the leaves.... I have found, especially on these forums, that the poster can't hide from the evidence... They can rant and rave and misdirect and confuse... but when it comes right down to it, they can't convince or persuade if there is nothing credible to support them. Identifying things like "Mindset" and "would lead to's" and "could mean's" from the evidence results in pure speculation. Piper and these two are speculating based on the information THEY'VE chosen to read, and with very narrow interpretations. and finally Don... to your point that Piper is "short shrifted" by the JFK community due to his Israel stance is stopping too short on the explanation... he is short shrifted because the evidence does not necessitate the conclusion... it only barely suggests it as a possibility.. a possibility that one needs to review in the context of all the other possibilities... You are right Don, I firmly believe that many of the world's "bad guys", Mossad and international Jews included, would benefit from the removal of the "peace" president and would have "done their part if asked"... Oil, Military, Mafia, Birchers, CIA, FBI, SS, ONI, LBJ, JEH, etc.... all benefited from the removal of this man and his policies... Does Israel feel better when their Big Brother the USA has its finger on the button ready to blow up Arabs? of course... but that was not JFK's way. Personally, I think that Piper uses the anti-semitism as a marketing tool... for or against, it sells books and provides a virtually unassailable "raison d'etre" The book should stand on its own, and it doesn't - THAT is why we here have trouble with it... Sy Hersh as a key source is most definitely another. Quote:David refuses to answer what exactly did cause Ben-Gurion's nervous breakdown if it wasn't Kennedy's "aggressive and confrontational digging-in of his heels" in refusing to allow Israel nuclear weapons How in the world are YOU or Piper supposed to know what causes a man's nervous breakdown? I've been to every instance of Gurion's name in the book and the only thing that repeats is this "Sy Hersh" SECRET WAR where JFK refuses to allow Israel to build a weapons program, all the while BG is lying to the USA and JFK while doing it anyway. If anything, the book should be seen as an indictment of BG for turning his back on his greatest ally. and then to have FRANCE go behind our backs and provide the help is even more an indictment against DeGaulle and his lack of understanding of what it means to be an ALLY.... Quote:Just to make it clear I think Piper is wrong in his suggestion Ben-Gurion was the initiating sponsor of the assassination. Isn't this EXACTLY what I've been saying all along and explain above? or am I missing something? Piper IS WRONG Albert... yes... Israel was getting a bomb whether JFK liked it or not... and he STILL sold them Hawks. Piper says Israel/Mossad/BG/Lansky/Permindex were behind the Assassination and that ISRAEL'S NUCLEAR PROGRAM and JFK's insistance on inspection and cooperation was the reason... Dimona was the reason BG, the Mossad, Lansky/CIA/Permindex get together and plot JFK's death. Piper does not DISCOVER anything that was not already known... Permindex, as shown, was way more than some Lansky/Mossad/CIA clearinghouse... How does Piper forget about Nagy, the Italians and the hunt for communists and facists? Gladio is not mentioned ONCE in Piper's book... not once... How can an accurate history of the CIA/Mossad in Europe along with a "set up of the situation of the time" NOT include this secret army, it's purpose, its funding and its activities? Because with Piper/Al/Mark it's all Israel all the time.... (kinda like "3 bullets, no more no less") with that type of preconception of the events... how else can THREE bullets do all that damage but the SBT... ? Since the question includes the answer's assumption there is no arguing it... from: "The Warren Report, The Truth, and Arlen Specter" by Gaeton Fonzi http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/the_critics...ecter.html And when Specter is confronted with evidence which conflicts with his conclusions, he usesas the Commission Report often dida form of reverse logic to refute it. For instance: "Talk about the grassy knoll and shots?" he says. "The bullets didn't enter from that direction." Columnist Murray Kempton has said: "The case against Oswald badly needs an unimpeachable eyewitness." the case against Israel needs AUTHENTICATED proof, not just speculative coincidences and faith... from THAT argument on ANY topic, I will not back down Cheers DJ 
25-10-2012, 08:46 PM
Dawn, at 140, you set the table: positions are defined, map shows no movement.
Albert, at 141, you fire a 930-word salvo in response which is insulting. Piper places Israel at the crown of sponsorship. He has not made his case. He has drawn his scarf across the sultry face of sirens, Israel sold China the bomb, Ruby was likely Mossad. A bridge too far is the product of his work, and he and his proponents would burn it behind. Bugliosi says if Kennedy wasn't shot by Oswald alone then Kennedy didn't die. Piper says if Israel didn't kill Kennedy then Kennedy wasn't killed. It's a very, very, very small hill on which to die. The retreat in every instance is a barrage of insult and resort to tortured speculation. In the auras and penumbras of Kennedy's words and Ben Gurion's mind lies the proof. If only the fools had the gifts to see it.
25-10-2012, 11:25 PM
No matter where I look in Piper I find him misstating the facts and omitting key information...
Wish I could just let it go but the amount of venom these two threw at me, still without pointing to source material, keeps leading me back to Piper's book when I read about the times in other sources... Case in point: The references to de Vosjoli and the sources come from 1989 and 1991... in fact they come FROM THE SAME BOOK BY MANGOLD.... yet Piper decided that Mangold is enough sourcing for this concept... We need not explain WHY he refused to obey the order other than making it LOOK like it was related to the Mossad & Angleton. Instead of the REAL situation whereby de Vosjoli was concerned for his life at the hands of the KGB runned SDECE, he defects. Or the REAL need of the USA to find out why the French were helping Israel and what was going on to jeopardize JFK's Middle East desires Just another example of "IF", and "apparently" based on incomplete facts/information. ... {sigh} I will try to stay away... really I will... btw - in the entirety of Piper's book... which has a significant amount about Angleton, not a single word is written about Golitsyn,the most important defector of his time [size=12]Angleton, James Jesus 12, 64, 87, 95, 96, 97, 99, 100, 101, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 122, 193, 208, 214, 218, 219, 220, 224, 225, 226, 227, 242, 248, 272, 293, 298, 304, 328, 353-355, 358, 370-377, 388, 416, 498, 532, 533, 535, 536, 606 The Israeli Connection: Chapter 8 The CIA's war with JFK: Chapter 9 The Permindex Connection: Chapter 15 The E. Howard Hunt affair: Chapter 16 The French Connection: Chapter 16 The Death of William Colby: Appendix 6 Watergate and Dallas: Appendix 7 [/SIZE] Piper p302Ifindeed Philippe deVosjoli was one of those who handled the "investigation"for the Kennedy friend in British intelligence, the fact is that Vosjolihad a "long friendship [and] special relationship" with the Mossad's CIAloyalist James J. Angleton (650) to the point that deVosjoli not only refusedFrench orders to spy on the United States, but instead apparently helpedAngleton conduct espionage against France.651 (650) Mangold, T., Cold Warrior, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1991, p. 121 [size=12][size=12](651) Mangold, T., Cold Warrior, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1991, p. 127-129 According to Golitsyn, Soviet control over the SDECE was so complete that the French agency was already functioning as a virtual arm of the KGB. Based on reports he had seen before defecting, he predicted that the KGB would soon use the SDECE as a front for spying on American nuclear deployment. French officer Philippe de Vosjoli, who was liaison between the SDECE and the CIA, disbelieved Golitsyn-until a few months later, when he received precisely such an order to set up a spy ring to monitor US nuclear facilities. De Vosjoli refused to obey the order and, learning that he was targeted for assassination upon his return to France, defected to the United States.(18) (18) Epstein, E.J., Op cit.,pp. 65-66, 68-70 (Epstein, E.J., Deception, Simon & Schuster, New York,1989) The SDECE subsequently carried out the operation against the US under the code name BIG BEN(19) (19) Mangold, T., Cold Warrior, Simon & Schuster, New York, 1991, p. 131. [/SIZE][/SIZE]
26-10-2012, 09:04 AM
David Josephs Wrote:the case against Israel needs AUTHENTICATED proof, not just speculative coincidences and faith... from THAT argument on ANY topic, I will not back down Ah bollocks. There's no authenticated proof of any of the known or unknown suspects' guilt in JFK's murder. Why should the case against Israel require authenticated proof when nothing has been proven against anyone else to this day? David, I have no gripe with you personally but you have made some bizarre comments during the course of this thread. Albert and myself have been trying to keep you focussed on the issue, but you often meander off. Obviously this is an issue which divides people like few other issues do, but I respect your contributions (without necessarily agreeing with them). At least you don't throw rotten tomatoes from the cheap seats.
26-10-2012, 09:22 AM
Mark Stapleton Wrote:Ah bollocks. There's no authenticated proof of any of the known or unknown suspects' guilt in JFK's murder. "Authenticated" by whom?
26-10-2012, 10:44 AM
Charles Drago Wrote:Mark Stapleton Wrote:Ah bollocks. There's no authenticated proof of any of the known or unknown suspects' guilt in JFK's murder. Yes exactly.
26-10-2012, 11:32 AM
Charles Drago Wrote:If one were to search for a silver lining here, I submit it is to be discerned in the sudden, unprecedented improvement of Albert's literary skills. Discussing Israel's role in the assassination improves one's cognitive and literary skills. I thought you knew that Charles.
26-10-2012, 03:39 PM
Mark Stapleton Wrote:Charles Drago Wrote:If one were to search for a silver lining here, I submit it is to be discerned in the sudden, unprecedented improvement of Albert's literary skills. You may be right, Mark. However, in Albert's case, the improvement seems to come and go in a manner commonly associated with dissociative identity disorder. How else can we explain the claim that the author of "Utter mendacious rubbish designed to get around the truth. What David is really saying here in his backward, indirectly dishonest way, and by means of rogue travesty, is that Kennedy sensed that Israel had become an international liability because of that unilateral zealotry. He was also savvy enough to know how the CIA he was trying to control was involved in that process." also is the progenitor of "What point do you think you're making there vs the facts evidence you're using it to avoid?" Not that either sample would have made Gore Vidal envious, by the way. Forgive me, but I hope that Albert has retained the services of an amanuensis. Better intellectual dishonesty than mental illness. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)