Jump to content
The Education Forum

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Today
  2. Jacqueline Kennedy has an understandalbe excuse for skipping the movie, but Carly Simon should be ashamed of herself.
  3. At the Nov. 22, 2013, Dallas commemorations, when the city kept dissidents out of Dealey Plaza so Bonesman David McCullough could give a speech, and thousands of us were protesting on surrounding streets, Alex Jones was ranting on a streetcorner to draw TV cameras and distract attention from the legitimate critics of the official version of the JFK/Tippit murder case. That is how the system is played.
  4. He need's a lawyer to defend his books from the little I've read about him. https://www.amazon.com/JFK-Who-How-Why-Solving-Greatest/dp/0998262595/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=fetzer&qid=1571289303&s=books&sr=1-1 If Judyth Baker is a contributor...
  5. Watergate had some things in common Jim but really do you see an equivalence between the two? It's not even close.Nixon did not obstruct the Congressional investigation to the extent that Trump is and has done with Mueller. This clown is far more corrupt than Nixon, for all to see!! His supporters and enablers see their own skins at risk and it's that simple. This garbage about how lilly-white Don-Don is getting picked on is so ridiculous because there's enough to convict him on his and his minion's PUBLIC statements. Nobody is yet addressing this and you have skirted it also: To repeat for comment: Why should a person who can not be indicted or prosecuted, has the power of offering any bribe, advancement, pardon or anything in the world, be allowed the same considerations as a normal person under investigation? Because of the MDA they can negotiate any agreement they want with co-defendents (subjects) to falsify testimony and not have to pay any consequences due to the DOJ memo and pardon powers. FWIW A President being unindictable is not a part of the Constitution as far as I'm aware. What line can he cross where he would be indictable? Can he kidnap and detain the Supreme Court and declare martial law? Is that how we roll now? Can't touch him cuz he's The Monarch? And when/if he refused to recognize the Constitutional duty of HOR to vote to impeach him can he just ignore them and refuse to answer to subpoenas? I'm just curious to see how far this goes.
  6. Counter or not, full screen is best: https://www.bing.com/search?q=beatles+revolution&form=PRUSEN&mkt=en-us&httpsmsn=1&refig=f0acac9b540048209de33e65c29e7117&sp=1&qs=AS&pq=beatles+rev&sk=PRES1&sc=8-11&cvid=f0acac9b540048209de33e65c29e7117
  7. Jim I think you are right. I recall reading he answered the Complaint himself and I recall looking it up and reading it thinking he really needed to hire an attorney.
  8. Never claimed you were not thinking for yourself. You asked a question. I answered. I also corrected you since it appears you did not know the difference between a civil case and a criminal case. I was trying to help you understand this case accurately; it was not semantics as you said. I see Jim also tried to explain this to you so you don't need to be defensive. Let me add, understand the right to free speech applies to the government. People are not allowed to say whatever they want about others. Hence, defamation. What you appear to suggest is people can lie or make untrue statements generally about others and it should be protected. You can feel that way but luckily that is not the law. So to again answer YOUR question, I don't think this type of tort is a "bs charge". If the judgment went this way there had to be a legal merit to the claim. It might be overturned.
  9. Sandy, If I told you how this happened its stranger than fiction, really. As per the number of interviews, its at 25. And will, in all probability, go up to 30. As some of the technical guys said, this is one heck of a credit for them. Because, between the director, Oliver Stone, and the cinematographer, Bob Richardson, that is six Oscars.
  10. I'll be thinking for myself today, thank you very much. And I'm not once to argue about semantics on the internet - the bottom line is, somebody was legally dealt a punishment for their speech over no good reason at all. IMO free speech laws should be stronger.
  11. Micah it is a civil case not criminal so there are no charges. Under the tort of defamation, this case does not infringe on free speech anymore then someone copying anothers work and facing a suit for copyright violation. There are limits to speech.
  12. David Lifton's been working on a follow-up to Best Evidence for several years, gathering material that refines his earlier work and could contribute to this project. Any thoughts on involving him?
  13. A. Freedom is more important than feelings. B. "Inciting harassment" is a BS charge, there is no way free speech can exist while that is a serious charge. Fetzer never tried to repeatedly contact anybody after being asked not to, so there was no harassment and he is only a scapegoat. Especially here where the father CONSENTED to becoming a public figure/celebrity by granting media interviews. C. Because the father has chose to use his feelings as a weapon against freedom of speech, I believe he is an evil danger to society, and I frankly don't have any sympathy for him.
  14. It was a defamation lawsuit Micah. Fetzer said something pretty ugly about the father that he could not demonstrate to be accurate. Namely that the father was cooperating in a murder hoax about his son. I warned about this when I wrote my long article about Fetzer a long time ago. He is the kind of guy who the MSM can use that smear rubric Conspiracy Theorist about, and be justified in doing so.
  15. Dennis, Let me respond to this ROCOR comment and your previous comment about Putin's annexation of the Crimea in a single post. 1) CRIMEAN ANNEXATION Putin's military occupation and annexation of the Crimea in 2014 was illegal on multiple accounts-- and continues to be regarded as illegal by the international community. The Russian referendum in Crimea, itself, was illegal-- and was conducted after Russian troops had illegally occupied sovereign Ukrainian territory. The Crimea was a part of the sovereign, indissoluble nation of Ukraine in 2014-- and was subject to the Constitutional laws of Ukraine, which, among other things, required a nationwide referendum on matters pertaining to the secession or annexation of Ukrainian territory. 2) ROCOR HISTORY (Hint: Don't trust Wikipedia on this one-- the FSB has aggressively edited the true history of the ROCOR since 2007.) The Bolsheviks assumed total control of the Russian Orthodox Church in Russia by 1921, after poisoning Patriarch Tikhon (arsenic) and murdering or imprisoning most of the Metropolitans, Archbishops, and Bishops in concentration camps like the former Solovki Monastery. Many Russian Orthodox Churches throughout the U.S.S.R. (including the Spaasky Cathedral near the Kremlin) were demolished by explosives, and even more were converted into skating rinks and gyms. Meanwhile, the Bolsheviks re-organized what was left of the Russian Church hierarchy under the nominal supervision of Metropolitan Sergius Stragorodsky and other NKVD puppet bishops and priests (including the eventual KGB Moscow "Patriarch" Alexey II and the current Patriarch Kyril.) The concept was to use the outward form of the "Church" to advance the agenda of the atheistic Soviet state-- which did not preclude using the confessional as a form of state surveillance of the citizenry! So, following the Bolshevik murder of St. Tikhon and the Church hierarchy, and the torture and "conversion" of Metropolitan Sergius Stragorodsky to atheistic Bolshevism, the Russian Orthodox bishops in exile organized the ROCOR Synod outside of Russia to preserve what was left of "Holy Russia." To describe them as advocating "armed rebellion against the USSR" is tantamount to accusing Jewish refugees from Nazi Germany of advocating armed rebellion against the Third Reich. It's a patently absurd statement. The main difference is that everyone today knows the horrifying details of the Nazi Holocaust, but very few people know much about the worst genocide in world history-- the Bolshevik genocide perpetrated against Russians and Ukrainians in the Soviet Union (including the Ukrainian Holodomor.)
  16. Yesterday
  17. Stone just posted on Facebook, they’ve shot more than 20 interviews for it already, and hope to shoot more. They apparently hope to finish production by March/April next year. Articles suggest it’s a full series like his UNTOLD HISTORY show, which is great news, as it will be longer and have more of an impact.
  18. https://abcnews.go.com/US/wisconsin-man-ordered-pay-450k-sandy-hook-father/story?id=66318604&cid=social_twitter_abcn
  19. You guys take your talking points from Donald Trump's tweets.
  20. I am really puzzled by this comment from McConnell: https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/16/mcconnell-impeachment-trial-senate-048599 Pelosi has not even had a formal impeachment hearing yet. Is he just trying to tell her, "Hey, its all sound and fury signifying nothing anyway?" I think so, since there is no way I think you could do it that fast.
  21. No, the Trump Administration kept the key witness to Trump's obstruction, former White House Counselor Don McGahn, from testifying. Going to court to force his testimony would take so long that impeachment became untenable. Those who closely follow the news understand this. Nobody cares about the Steele Dossier. Mueller barely mentioned it in his report. Those who closely follow the news understand this.
  22. Now, take a look at this new story: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/never-before-seen-trump-tax-documents-show-major-inconsistencies_n_5da767ebe4b0a9a0f1d0c715 I think this would tie in with the emoluments case would it not? AOC actually touched on this in her examination of Cohen. Why Trump did not put his holdings in a blind trust is really puzzling to me.
  23. Pure bovine offal. Here's the thread where DiEugenio put me on ignore: No, Jim DiEugenio started ignoring the physical evidence in the JFK murder case at least a decade ago. I regard this as historical malpractice. Or Aljazeera, which I quoted. Jim DiEugenio accuses someone of being an egotist! The irony is rich. As opposed to an over-rated self-aggrandizing hustler? DiEugenio denounces Fascists in Ukraine while he carries water for Fascists in America. Go figure.
  24. That's fine. Next would be a sync for both films near the underpass. If you know the Bell (progressive) frame count between this location and the previous z435 location, this will give you a FPS ratio from Bell to Z using 18.3fps per Z.
  25. As per Maria Butina https://newrepublic.com/article/153036/maria-butina-profile-wasnt-russian-spy When a region or state votes overwhelmingly to save themselves from being taken over by a bunch of paramilitary Neo Nazi thugs and murderers who are intent on making Ukraine into a mini Fourth Reich, then that is not annexation from outside but inside. Crimea is a beautiful, well frequented resort area. They did not want any part of being tied in with a bunch of criminals and Fascists. Its that simple. I have CV on ignore because he is a broken record on the JFK case: Harriman and JFK's custom shirts. I started yawning on that stuff about five years ago. On this issue, we may as well be listening to the Podesta Group or NY Times. So its the same thing. The examples above are what he thinks is "ass kicking". 😉 Therefore he is also an egotist. Why waste the time on someone I consider a t-r-o-l-l.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...