In an effort to present the research of Jim Imbecile, Tim's brother, it is first necessary to delve into the circumstances surrounding the life and death of Jim's brother Tim. Sadly, we lost Tim this past June in a neck-stretching contest at the semi-annual "Take Your Grandfather To A Park" festivities which were held down by the old horse barn near town. A good time was had by all (except for Tim of course, because he had died in the neck-stretching competition).

Tim was not new to controversy, since he'd begun his career -- like so many -- as a member of the ultra-conservative Young Americans for Freedom. He soon left that august body because it "wasn't ignorant enough," but still found time to fight like the dickens for the presidential campaign of Barry Goldwater in 1964. (And never gave up his deep-seated contempt for President Lyndon Johnson, whose socialist aspirations were unknown to all but a few people who had very narrow foreheads [approximately 3/4" from eyebrow to hairline]; and whose degenerate ways were known to all once he'd pushed through progressive domestic legislation and tried to emancipate Negroes [again], despite their better interests.)

After a brief flirtation with the George Wallace campaign of 1968, Tim said he'd found Jesus somewhere, and it wasn't because he'd simultaneously discovered the herb marihuana as a medicinal comfort to him in times like these. (It was also at this time that Tim first saw the Patterson film and concluded that Bigfoot was mostly likely the reincarnation of Eleanor Roosevelt.)

Time went by, as time often does, and Tim found himself happy -- elated, actually -- during the years of Ronald Reagan's presidency; but Tim, like so many others, found that he was unable to tell the difference between President Reagan and Jesus Christ, Our Lord And Savior. (For one thing, they both had the same haircut; for another, they shared the only proper political perspective known to humankind since its inception in the Garden of Eden (NOT a few millenia ago in Africa!!).

Tim eventually found himself in the world of conspiracy research, even though friends and family said, "Haven't you been involved in enough odd crap in your frickin' life???" (Tim's answer was, "Go away.") But somehow Tim was able to sublimate his natural inclination to invest all his theorizing with his admittedly peculiar political beliefs, and eventually turned up some possibly helpful information in a variety of subject areas. Ultimately, however, he became obsessed with what he said was "an even bigger and really quite large conspiracy within The Conspiracy Research Community itself!!!" This was his idea that "Extremist Researchers" who would otherwise appear to make the entire research effort look like something of a bizarre and silly sideshow, were always being coddled and supported by "Respectable Researchers" (who had an apparently endless supply of arcane information, as well as the tattoo on their biceps that marked them as top researchers).

Jim Imbecile, Tim's brother, was cut from different cloth (well, actually it's only an expression, since neither of the brothers were really cut from cloth but were born as humans on the planet Earth, just like most everyone else). Jim was more likely to be a follower of Malik al-Shabbazz [look it up] than Barry Goldwater, and he'd flirted with the once semi-popular and semi-credible idea that Ronald Reagan was the Antichrist we'd all been waiting for ...... excuse me -- the Antichrist for whom we'd all been waiting, to use proper English. Despite his nausea at the very thought of his brother's political beliefs, Jim soon found himself involved in conspiracy research as well; but he was unfortunately unable to "crack the club" of "Top Researchers" since he had an independent mind and didn't like tattoos. He was however willing to continue to help his brother Tim in Tim's less independent and more tattoo-aspiring endeavors, and they were working on some new theories when Tim finally met his untimely demise (he was only 72) in the neck-stretching competition. (Also, they recently reached some accomodation on the politics issue, once "that black man" had been nefariously elected as US president; Jim has taken to packing his 9 mm Glock and his modified M-60 around to presidential town hall meetings, in order to "show them" they can't take away his gun rights and his right to vastly over-priced, privately-run, unregulated healthcare in this great country in this great land of ours. [Curiously, he never actually served in the armed forces of the United States of America, and no one knows how he got an M-60; but apparently he likes guns, is a patriot, and supports the troops. That's all that really matters in this great country in this great land of ours.])

Tim and Jim's most recent research involves some controversy, in that it involves some controversial things. This past Spring they had noticed that a once-promising internet discussion forum had apparently become moribund the previous Spring:

http://www.chaletbooks.com/hearthsideforum/index.php

They had also noted that it was about this time that a brand new, extra-special internet discussion forum had been created, ostensibly to talk more honestly and correctly about things which were not able to be discussed at the UK-based Education Forum (i.e., where you are now, if you're reading this). This raised the serious question whether the members of the defunct forum had mostly been posting there under pseudonyms and had since "taken their business" to the newer, better forum (and using the names they were more commonly known by ......... by which they were more commonly known ....... in the Conspiracy Research Community). Indeed, numerous questions were raised about the activities of "conspiracy researchers" and who among them one could ever trust. It even brought Tim back around to the whole issue of the pseudonymous "Ashton Gray" character, once so highly lauded by so many as like unto a god among researchers and writers of stuff, and whether or not this pseudonymous entity did not in fact serve as a kind of foil for stirring things up, as situations required; and even whether this pseudonymous character might not in fact be someone more well known as ...................... ERK!!! ............... they got me ............ please ...................... please, spread the word .......... spread the word ......... Fight on! ............... the fight must go on ...................................

 please ...................... please, spread the word .......... spread the word ......... Fight on! ............... the fight must go on ...................................
[/quote]

great post....beyond what most will understand..but...


interesting to see you get the same exact screen on the heathsidefourm as I do....did...for trying to discuss with Ashton and his mentors.

Tim must have a very long neck by now....

Right...Fight On....

I will in time be posting in detail about conspiracy theory and its pernicious corrosion of American intellects, but for the next 7 days I have the pleasure of a holiday away from all computers - in the mean time you boys are invited to play without me - the emphasis however in is on 'play'

As I lay convalescing in (the) hospital from a knife attack, I received this message from Jim Imbecile:



You didn't do a very good job of showing the significance of the research. It's not just that the Hearthside Forum went dormant in the Spring of 2008 and another conspiracy forum was created shortly thereafter; this might only be a coincidence. The thing is that the newer forum might have been created out of necessity, because the original forum didn't get off to a good start -- i.e., didn't get the proper publicity so as to bring in new members. Take a look at the member index:

http://www.chaletbooks.com/hearthsideforum...39ea9235bb0d800

Almost all the members joined about the same time and then that was it; the last posts were made in early May 2008, and a couple months later it appears that "spam members" took over. That may look like the forum was undone by spammers, but seems more likely it was abandoned first and then spammers took it over (since there was no resistance from the supposed administrators of the forum). This points to a change in strategy and a belated recognition that a better job needed to be done on the public relations for an internet forum.

If that analysis is correct, this is a key point: an original "rival forum" (to The Education Forum) had turned out to be a bit of a failure and it was thought that something more dramatic was needed in the launching of a new rival forum -- say, in instigations of "controversy" by very zealous persons who would have no truck with "provocateurs and disinformation agents," eventually making the issue a matter of "integrity" and "remaining unsullied" and so inviting everyone to come to a new forum where all could be washed clean ...........

That the pseudonymous Ashton Gray eventually popped back in briefly to The Education Forum (making a public complaint about how his membership application was handled at the new forum) is important if one thinks of the character as primarily a foil for stirring things up; in his reappearance he definitely helped stir things up and would've helped increase interest in the new forum:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13574

Essentially, then, if the Ashton Gray character is only another pseudonym being used, this means the whole thing is like a counterintelligence (con) game being played in the way that agents provocateur have always played: they create "incidents" and then spin their webs from there......


Also, there were some spelling and punctuation mistakes in your post. It should read "that Bigfoot was most likely the reincarnation of Eleanor Roosevelt," not "mostly likely." I assume you meant to write a slash between "the Garden of Eden" and "NOT a few millenia ago in Africa!!" instead of having three parentheses marks in the sentence. And the name of Malcolm X has only one b in it -- Malik al-Shabazz, not Shabbazz.

As for the alleged nephew of Rafal, that's probably the right way to go about it -- keep playing the game as if the issues alluded to don't involve oneself; that one "understands" where "most" will not; and that you and he see things similarly in regards to the now-moribund Hearthside Forum ........ assuming the latter is what was meant by getting "the same exact screen" [???]. Remember what I told you, that the first biography of Rafal was written by a Holocaust Denier; I wouldn't be surprised if this is just part of the same process, trying in various ways to discredit the good name of Rafal. You may be right that some of them are "only crazy" to varying degrees, but in the world of Far Right racists it seems almost anything is possible and there's nothing they won't do to further their agenda .... This particular game makes about as much sense as a very public "extreme leftist radical" teaching at a business school where he no doubt rails on and on about the evils of America and capitalism to students aiming for that Master's in Business Administration, or as much sense as a nephew of Rafal writing to David Irving for help in getting historical information ..................


Good luck with that throat injury. If you don't survive, you can rest assured that your involvement in this stuff might've been worth it and for a good cause......... Somehow.............. Maybe.



Good luck,

Jim Imbecile




And that was about it. Jim's not the most sentimental pers---- OW!!


....... they got me again .......... MEDIC! ................... medi

Maybe I'm a bit 'slow' today...or maybe you are being too cryptic. I am a nephew of Raphael Lemkin, met him often and remember him well. When he died in 1958 his unfinished encyclopedia of Genocide [now finished] lay in our basement for years. I used to read it. We also had original Nuremburg evidence in the basement. All that I could prove. Whatever....and what does that have to do with Hearthside or Andy?

What does Hearthside and/or Ashton have to do with Andy?

Ashton's real name is known by some people I know. I never pushed them on it. He claims to use on Forums his nom de plume - I believe he may have more than one. As to his being an A.P.......I'd have said not, until he and I crossed swords at Hearthside [after his invitation to me there]. I saved the exchanges and someday may post 'em somewhere....they were bizarre, and most bizarre were posts from the 'moderators' who I think were also editors there. By the way, anyone seen or read Ashton Gray's Watergate book?...or did Hearthside go belly-up with the Forum?

Anyway, he had a nice hat...if that was his hat....alas, the internet is not easy to know who is real and who is not....

The phrase "known by some people I know" is not exactly the strongest evidence imaginable. The only thing any of this has to do with Andy is that I had no title for my thread when I was going to post it, but noticed Andy putting down conspiracy theory; since it was the last thing in my head, I entitled it along those lines. And this is the second time I've read where you said Rafal Lemkin died in 1958; any cursory look-up on the internets shows his death occurred the following year (1959). It seems odd a nephew would get that wrong.

Andy, I'm an American. I remember Nov.22, 1963. There are a multitude of grooves in my brain, neuropathways, dealing with that day and the Assassination. I guess I'm idealistic. But I'm wondering, who do you think killed President Kennedy that day?

Please answer when you get back from vacation.

Kathy C

Between 1933 and 1963 only Eisenhower was not the target of assassins. Perhaps you should be asking yourself what it was about dysfunctional 20th century American society which produced so many 'lone gunmen'?

Perhaps better advice would be to follow the evidence in each case before deciding if it was a "lone gunman" or not. (Never depend on what the government tells you, whether it's on an assassination, weapons of mass destruction, or who needs a massive taxpayer bailout right now.)

Andy you fudged the data quite creatively there were only 4 presidents in that time frame. The attempt on Truman definitely was not by a lone gunman. I agree that the guy who tried to kill FDR probably was but you are down to 1/3 of JFK's predecessors being targeted by a LN as evidence that he was as well. I can fudge numbers as well. 1902 - 1962 there was only one LN attempt on 9 presidents.

Well, now that the lack of reason behind the title has been established, the last thing on the mind of a lone nut, it should be pointed out to Andy the Duffer that more historical conspiracies have been hatched on the golf course than anywhere else.

BK

Ordinarily I would object to being called "a lone nut," but that's pretty small potatoes in the wider world of the Conspiracy Research Community. On the other hand it isn't true that there was "lack of reason" behind the title -- the reasoning is in the satirical aspects, since there's so much that's silly in these venues. I'm glad you enjoyed it.

That's fighting talk! $100 a hole any time you like

Daniel, can you expound on your posts here, please. They have intrigued me since I first read them and, rather than jump in, I tried to recall where I had read something similar to your synopsis - and had given up. Eventually, tonight, and incidentally, I was re-reading some personal web mail from around the time period you're referencing and stumbled upon some relevant material. Which, whilst nearly identical, in summation, to what you're suggesting, the sender of the mail, unless I'm reading it totally wrong, represents an opposite position, in terms of personnel, to your thesis (if that makes sense - which I suspect it won't) .

To say more, at this stage, and until I understand more of your source's or your own position (beyond the cryptic, of which, apparently, only Peter has a stated understanding), would be to give this, potential ruse, more worth than it may deserve

Peter, I can't believe, as a researcher, your curiosity (at the very least - lest it be an idle boast) didn't cause you to push your sources on the real name of Ashton Gray! anyway could you...and let us know, hopefully you won't need to enact National Security - or force requestors down the FOIA route - in order to preclude us from this clearly non-critical information?

It always seemed to me, at a cursory glance, lacking in class/out of step, when, amongst others, Charles and Myra refused Ashton posting privileges on their forum, yet Ashton facilitated their membership at Chalet/Hearthside.

------------------------------------------------

I wasn't aware that Charles and Myra were invited to the Chalet Forum. I know I was by Ashton. At that time he and I had even exchanged a few private emails. By the way, anyone seen his book on Watergate? In it, apparently, he named one of the Watergate 'crew' as having been directly involved in the events of Dallas [and hinted he had some good evidence - though others have concluded the same about this man], and wanted me to confirm something related to this through Plumlee, who I'm in contact with - at times. I only know that when I refused to answer a specific question put to me as to who told me a certain piece of information, I was banned. They had some forum rule that one couldn't refuse to answer a direct question to which one had knowledge of....sounds more like a court than a Forum. I actually have saved in a now crashed hard drive the exact exchanges. It is undergoing data recovery [may you never have to afford it!!!!] so can't get nor remember the exact specifics. As to Ashton's real name, there are two I know who know for sure. I was not given that name and I did ask once. At that time the person I asked felt protective of him and begged-off the request. I didn't push. For his Hearthside books he was using yet another name [not Gray and not his own], as I understand it. One current poster on this Forum would know it, I believe - as they once belonged to the same group at senior levels. I will leave it up to them, if they choose [and see this thread] to disclose or not. The being called Ashton Gray on this Forum lives in the greater L.A. area, and plays guitar, as well as being a writer/researcher. More of interest to me is if the hat was real.





NB - Gary, sorry, hit the edit rather than reply [on moderator screen the edit is where reply once was] by mistake. SORRY...didn't change anything....will be more careful!

Cheers Peter. I could well be wrong about Charles and Myra's membership - I thought I had seen their names on the members list at Chalet. Though that doesn't really prove much.

I'll try to get back to you in a week or so, Gary. Today is the first Sunday for professional American football and for some of us it's as much of an obsession as "normal" football is for people in the rest of the world. Take care

It may be true. I don't know and haven't 'investigated'. It certainly is true that 'Ashton' was denied rights to post on the DPF precisely because all the people who run it knew he was trying to register under a name other than his own - a rule not allowed there. The Chalet Forum had a very short shelf life....I wonder if the publishing house did, as well. 
Ashton might have been a bit contentious to some and a bit odd to others, but he was NO fool and I believe he did come up with some interesting new facts. I have little idea of his basic theory on Watergate and would be interested to see his book - if it is out - anyone seen or read it?! He was at one time [I've heard from reliable sources] once connected with Larouche, but apparently left [if in disagreement or not, I know not].

Thanks Daniel,I look forward to hearing from you. I'm a 'Phins fan. Looking forward to a 9-7/10-6 season, starting shortly in Atlanta.

Hmmmm, I still have bad memories from 1972-73 (Super Bowl VII: Dolphins 14, Redskins 7), but Miami was perfect that year so I won't hold that against you. (I also think very highly of Pennington and Ronnie Brown and the Dolphins' defense. But it's tough to open the season against a play-off caliber team that has a dome-field advantage. About as tough as opening at the Meadowlands.)

Sorry for the delay. I'll start by saying that much of this thread was in the interests of satire and silliness, as I'm sure you know. Beyond that, it might serve as an example of how far (out) some thinking in these venues can go; but it's also possible there's some truth in here somewhere. That said, Tim and Jim Imbecile's thinking goes something like this:


The entity known as Ashton Gray (not to be confused with the Len Colby entity, of which much has been said elsewhere) had an encyclopedic knowledge of circumstances surrounding the Watergate scandal, and generally focused on Scientology, the CIA, and what he believed/argued were linkages between CIA and Scientology in mind control programs and programming. Ashton eventually moved on to an interest in the John F. Kennedy assassination, later suggesting (apparently sincerely) that President Kennedy might have survived having part of his head blown off had it not been for persons at Parkland Memorial who were set up to make sure that he was dead. But the main issue for this discussion is that when Ashton first entered this forum, he was greeted with much adoration and car-door-slamming by three members in particular: Dawn Meredith, Terry Mauro and John Gillispie.

Ashton would later depart from this forum and become involved in the Chalet/Hearthside publishing house, with its own forum. As noted in a previous post, that forum became dormant around May 2008. A few months later the Deep Politics Forum was launched by those who would not be sullied by the provocations of agents provocateur and ne'er-do-wells at The Education Forum. In the course of publicizing the DPF's all-new, all-different alternative, several identical threads were started in different sections of EF's "Controversial Issues," all entitled "Introducing the Deep Politics Forum." Shortly thereafter the Ashton Gray entity resurfaced briefly (at the Watergate section's "Introducing DPF" thread) to complain of his mistreatment in being invited (by Dawn Meredith) to join the DPF, only to find out that his application was subject to a vote by the DPF's Central Committee.

Jim Imbecile (and Tim Imbecile, if he were still with us) argue that we must look "deeper" into this and ask whether or not the mostly anonymous membership at the Chalet/Hearthside Forum are the same core members who formed the Deep Politics Forum a short while after the Chalet/Hearthside Forum had been abandoned. If that's the case, it points to a possible need on their part to have a "bigger bang" in the launching of the new forum. For instance, by instigating "controversies" about how the Education Forum is run -- and over-run by agents provocateur in sinister ways beyond the ken of mere mortals. In this way, interest in the new forum might've been created and members who were relatively satisfied here could be drawn into choosing sides between this forum and the newer and shinier Deep Politics Forum.

And along those same lines, the reappearance of Ashton Gray might have served to ignite still more controversy and interest, in that the Watergate section's "Introducing DPF" thread would grow and grow, eventually giving Charles Drago the opportunity to challenge Andy Walker to some sort of debate about some sort of still-undefined subject, with Dawn Meredith throwing in some gasoline (Br., petrol) to keep things going, which would include two new threads that were started after Andy had locked the Watergate thread. Which raises the question whether Ashton Gray had always only been a pseudonym used by one of the DPF "conspirators"; this point is seemingly plausible since it was clear that Dawn Meredith and Terry Mauro (among others) exhibited a great admiration and adoration for Charles Drago (evidently the commanding general in a kind of war, and admittedly the sort of fellow that ladies swoon over), which must have greatly injured Ashton Gray since Dawn and Terry's adoration had previously been reserved entirely for him.


And that's basically it, Gary. It serves as an example of the lengths to which "conspiracy thinking" can go, in that those who most fervently talk about conspiracy are themselves suggested to be involved in some kind of conspiracy -- using pseudonyms to mess with people's heads, instigating controversies as "public relations" techniques, and so on. My opinion of these things is that some people in these venues are only a bit touched in the head -- clinically depressed and paranoid. I assume Ashton Gray is no more than an ex-Scientology member whose head was never safe again except in being able to part from Scientology. I assume Dawn Meredith is only predisposed to a slavish devotion to men like Charles Drago, and not necessarily doing his bidding in whatever he commands. And I assume Terry Mauro and Peter Lemkin aren't joined at the hip in trying to play interference with others' postings, coming up with new threads all the time or making sure their posts effectively drown out other threads. I even assume Mr. Lemkin is only a bit bent in happily keeping company with DPF members who can't post anything without providing a link that points to a big Jew Threat (Peter Presland, among others) while also claiming to be the nephew of Rafal Lemkin, who worked so hard and sacrificed so much to establish genocide as an international crime against humanity. (But then, as Jim Imbecile pointed out, the International Bigot Conspiracy shouldn't be underestimated and its members aren't known for being lacking in inventiveness, which is wh -- ERK!!

Dan, If you keep this up I will be forced to resurrect my "Egypt" thread, and nobody want that again do they?



Hows every little thing Sir?

http://www.life.com/image/first/in-gallery...piracy-theories

Stephen, please do resurrect Egypt thread and don't forget News From An Insane Planet.

I wouldn't mind it, as long as it doesn't become some kind of platform for spreading untruthfulnesses about the insidious NHS. Also, naturally I'd like to hear much, much more about the role of Jews in it all.

there are no Jews in Egypt Dan, But Isreal is full of them, I understand. Perhaps that will be the next place my Brother won't visit.

FYI, NOT ONE of those who formed the DPF were in any way involved with the Chalet/Hearthside Forum. I believe I'm the only person who ever posted on both and then only for a very short few posts, until I was banned by rule #I forget, about answering all questions if there is reason to believe you know the answer.....which made me wonder what they were up to. With your post, above, one might start to wonder what game you are up to......while some of the 'villains' in your play I might agree with, others are grossly maligned, others misrepresented. But I don't care to play the game to tease it all apart.

Fair enough then, and at least we have it on unimpeachable authority that one of the main issues is inaccurate. Jim Imbecile will have to re-examine his theories (and those of his brother Tim, who we lost in the neck-stretching competition).