Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Tim Carroll

Members
  • Content count

    994
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tim Carroll

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 11/16/1954

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.myspace.com/waterbro

Profile Information

  • Location
    Chico, California
  • Interests
    Whitewater activities, scuba diving, public legal advocacy for land use and environmental issues, politics and history. I have a Masters Degree specializing in International Relations.

Recent Profile Visitors

11,097 profile views
  1. Tim Carroll

    I heard from the head of the transplant team at Stanford a couple of days ago and haven't been able to make sense of what he was saying. He informed me that I have a coronary lesion over the left ventricle which would lessen the chances of a successful outcome from a single lung transplant. Since my family history has had me convinced that there was a coronary element to all of this, and because a lung transplant is one of the most dangerous and extensive surgeries being performed, I countered with the whole shebang: how about a heart/lung transplant? His response was that I am now too ill to withstand that surgery. I have read too many case studies of lung transplant patients who died due to the damage to the heart caused by the lungs to be able to elect a surgery with such poor odds and with new problems being found in my heart. David, I will definitely send you my e-mail address and would welcome a visit. My daughter and granddaughter live just minutes from SF, in Alameda, and I hate to think that I've seen SF for the last time, so perhaps we could get together for lunch without you having to drive the three hours to Chico. I enjoyed our exchange at the Adolphus Hotel at the '04 seminar, when I cited Allard Lowenstein as a counterpoint to Jeff Morley's assertion about RFK's relationship with the NY liberals, and discussed with you the seldom considered notion that Bobby and Jack weren't necessarily working off the same page. By the way, I enjoyed your article in Salon about Chris Matthews. He was obviously livid and treated you very badly on his own program which had you debating Bugliosi. Between Matthews' animosity and Bugliosi's prosecutor-on-meth behavior, you were hardly allowed to speak. Ter: mi casa es su casa. If I'm actually able to make the Oregon trip during the first week of July, I will certainly be home for those dates. I have to work on my caregivers to prescribe a bit of an upper for such special occasions so that I can be at my best for an hour or two (which is pretty much the limit). Thank you all for your kind wishes and expressions of sympathy.
  2. I agree that the massively extensive roster of possible conspirators has significantly contributed to the general ridicule of conspiracy theorists. While I generally agree with the above points numbered 1-4, the exception is the complexity of the sheepdipping performed on Oswald. The representation of Oswald as a disgruntled, sexually-inadequate stock clerk just doesn't hold water. As if the production by the CIA of the misidentified Mexico City Saul photos wasn't enough, how about the invoice, initialed by Hoover ("JEH") while Oswald was in Russia, naming Oswald as the buyer in Florida of a number of trucks on behalf of an anti-Castro organization? Tim
  3. Tim Carroll

    I am currently reading Talbot's book and will certainly comment when I am able. Attending the Dallas COPA conference in '04, when he was a presenter, he made a point to tell me that he appreciated my assertion that it is too easily assumed that the brothers were on the same page on all matters. On a personal note, the widow of Peter Benchley (author of Jaws), who died from the disease assaulting me (IPF), was caused by bad scuba air which, at "99' deep, is driven into the lungs at four times the surface level. I wish I had the time to develop and promote a personal device for testing the tank air, especially in some of these fleabag Third World scuba operations. Such a device makes a world of sense and, given divers' general love of gadgetry, would sell like hot cakes! We could call it a Scuba Quality Unit Air Tester (SQUAT). But on a more personal note even still, after all of the above, my brother died of a heart attack just last night. I kind of thought that the end of my own life was the only big drama left. Just goes to show that it ain't over until the fat lady sings. To David: I'd love to get together for lunch if possible when you come through the Chico area in a few weeks. I'm not able to use the personal message function on the forum, but I see my e-mail everyday, the address being posted in my profile. The scuba photo was taken just last year, showing me waving to you all across time and space from a place called Joy. Thank you all so much for your kindness and devotion to our mutual interest. It has really been an honor to have the chance to work on so important an issue with you all. My special thanks to John Simkin for allowing me that chance. Tim
  4. Tim Carroll

    While I don't want to be dismissive at all of the power of prayer and loving best wishes, I have acquired something appropriate to my personal weirdness: Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis. Many diseases are incurable and many diseases have unknown causes, but this one is unique in that there is no treatment. It also happens to offer one of the ugliest deaths I can imagine. I read one case study which described a 50 year old man's last day as suffocating and panicky. As Dawn mentioned, Tosh had a unique thought about the cause, which could possibly be right on target, but it doesn't matter because the damage is already done and there is no known remedy to stop the destruction. I have less than 20% of my lungs left, if they could be saved, but that small percent still has to process the oxygen from small spots still left, winding through the maze of what is referred to as "honeycomb lung." When I spent a week at Stanford University, which is supposed to be the Olympus of transplants, on the last day of testing, an 80% blockage was found in the left ascending artery to my heart. They fixed that right then with a couple of stents, but it did throw a wrench into my candidacy for transplant. I haven't heard back yet with any decision. The committee was to meet on May 7, so I still don't know what to think about having not heard back. The hospice people come in to set up the house this Monday and I will require 24/7 care, ultimately dying from sepsis-caused morphine usage. A legal client of mine who I helped years ago has arranged everything and there is a loving karmic aspect to that. So with the damage to my lungs already pervasive and with the unlikeliness of a transplant, I hope the prayers and well-wishes will influence a gentle crossing of the river. I'm very emotional these days and especially touched by expressions of affection and remembrance. To see that I have had a fairly full life already, please check my website at www.myspace.com/waterbro. My Kennedy essay is located there as well. One of the oddest things about this disease is that it bloats the fingertips, making typing a frustratingly difficult activity. Thus, my ability to participate is diminished. All of us here share a passion for exposure of the truth about the JFK assassination. This is especially true for patriots who believe that Dallas was a coup d'etat. While Tony Summers' newest and retitled edition, Not In Your Lifetime, applies to me, I urge all forum members to not let this go; please keep up the good fight. It's so important. Tim
  5. Gary Mack and the Sixth Floor Museum

    Tim, have you ever wondered why it is that crime scenes are supposed to be well documented as they were found? It's because circumstances beyond control can cause them to change over time, thus a record of the original event is most always all we have to go on. Now what you have not said about the trees in the plaza is that they have been trimmed back several times in the past. The people who oversee their care have specialist come in and trim them as far back as possible without damaging the tree itself. Either Bill is falling down on his reading comprehension or is creating a straw man issue in order to divert the issue with a personal attack. His own remarks would be better addressed to his alter ego, Gary Dunkel/Mack. As was quoted above, Mack acknowledged that "it is a shame that such an effort to keep the foliage trimmed needed to be initiated long ago. Obviously, no trimming is going to be done to replicate the lighting existent at the west end of the colonade back in '63." In other words, in landscaping terms, it is too late. So there is an asserted effort to maintain the Plaza, as best as possible, in its 1963 condition. The two trees in which this effort has been ignored in the extreme are two particular Live Oaks, the one shading the "west end of the colonade" (grassy knoll) and the one blocking the supposed sniper's nest view. Tim Carroll
  6. Gary Mack and the Sixth Floor Museum

    Tim, have you ever wondered why it is that crime scenes are supposed to be well documented as they were found? It's because circumstances beyond control can cause them to change over time, thus a record of the original event is most always all we have to go on. Now what you have not said about the trees in the plaza is that they have been trimmed back several times in the past. The people who oversee their care have specialist come in and trim them as far back as possible without damaging the tree itself. Either Bill is falling down on his reading comprehension or is creating a straw man issue in order to divert the issue with a personal attack. His own remarks would be better addressed to his alter ego, Gary Dunkel/Mack. As was quoted above, Mack acknowledged that "it is a shame that such an effort to keep the foliage trimmed needed to be initiated long ago. Obviously, no trimming is going to be done to replicate the lighting existent at the west end of the colonade back in '63." In other words, in landscaping terms, it is too late. So there is an asserted effort to maintain the Plaza, as best as possible, in its 1963 condition. The two trees in which this effort has been ignored in the extreme are two particular Live Oaks, the one shading the "west end of the colonade" (grassy knoll) and the one blocking the supposed sniper's nest view. Tim Carroll
  7. Gary Mack and the Sixth Floor Museum

    Despite the governmental findings of a conspiracy, the Sixth Floor Museum promotes books that are counter-historical. As in the following, one can see Pat Speer equates this judgment to the practicalities of commerce, neglecting the self-designation as a "museum." Granted, a fair rendition of the history may not fit well with the Dallas Citizens Council's desired self-image. The museum, being a non-profit entity, is prohibited from engaging in any activity which promotes a particular political perspective. A conservative perspective of the Kennedy assassination is the Lone Nut Theory, which also conveniently absolves the "City of Hate" from any responsibility for the "Wanted For Treason" flyers, General Walker's activities and the extreme right-wing politics of the City's leaders, such as H. L. Hunt, Clint Murchison and Ted Dealey. That perspective is political. The landlord of the Museum is the County of Dallas. Is the Museum realistically independent of its sugar daddy landlord? The "seal of approval" implicitly applied to the books sold in the Museum's bookstore amounts to a predatory propagandizing of a general public largely unaware of the complexities of this matter. Yes, the webcam. And what does it show? A Live Oak tree that has been allowed to overgrow and eliminate the possibility of anyone gaining an accurate view of the conditions in 1963. When I was in Cozumel recently, and saw the repair efforts following the three days Category 5 Hurricane Wilma hung over the island in October, the tree trimming and replacement was extensive. Yet we are to believe that this highly profitable non-profit Museum, which has enough money to loan to other city refurbishments, can't afford to apply the slightest landscaping effort to trimming a few particular trees as part of its stated goal of preserving the Plaza to reflect its 1963 condition. We also know that the "sniper's window," which is a glass-enclosed exhibit unquivocally stating that it is the window through which Oswald shot, has at times been claimed to be genuine by Gary Mack and times he has admitted that he cannot be sure. Yet the presentation of the questionable evidence maintains its certainty. Gary Mack has said: "Even the city, which is responsible for upkeep of Dealey Plaza, rarely makes a move without checking with the Museum first. Yes, it is a shame that such an effort to keep the foliage trimmed needed to be initiated long ago. Obviously, no trimming is going to be done to replicate the lighting existent at the west end of the colonade back in '63. If it can be done safely, then it probably will be done. The restoration of the Plaza is a long-term project that is only partly funded." So the Museum generates enough profits to provide loans to other resoration projects in the City, but just can't manage to "keep the foliage trimmed." Is that credible? No. And neither is Gary Mack credible as a curator. He carries the water for the Dallas Citizens Council, runs a non-museum as if it were a store-front, located on the top floors of the Dallas County Building, and dutifully represents the assassination according to the dictates of the the Boss Hogs of Dallas. If he suddenly grew a conscious, how long would he last with the political appointees who issue his paycheck? Tim
  8. CIA stooge Max Holland in town...

    Tim, As I recall ... it was during that time that you were the one who was thinking the sunspots on the wall of the shelter was the "classic gunman" [bill convinced me that the spot of light that would be in the left arm position remained long after; he did not convince me that there was no Classic Gunman. If he believes that people who research light and shadow in the photos and films deserve ridicule, he needs to include his own belief in Badge Man]. I also recall you thinking that Mack drove some white van [bill can produce the quote in which I ever had Dunkel driving a "van" or admit he's either mistaken or lying now], which he did not and that somehow the city of Dallas controlled him [there are other threads which detail why my evaluation of this holds more water than Bill's], which they do not. Now I do not know the specifics of your conversation with Mack concerning me [my wife does, ask Dunkel], but what I post concerning the information I request from Gary most always comes from direct quotes unless I say otherwise [and Bill's witnesses are whom?]. And if I ever got carried away about anything [as Dunkel said] ... it is the way I express my disatisfaction over some of the poor research practices and ridiculous way you jump to conclusions that I have witnessed in your postings [but it's lying if Bill quotes Dunkel as saying it and Dunkel says he did not].Is this Bill speaking, or Gary speaking thru Bill? I can't tell anymore. Myra isn't the only person who has experienced difficulty distinguishing which statements are Miller's and which are Dunkel's. I know, face-to-face, that Dunkel doesn't stand by all of Miller's so-called quotes. Tim
  9. My ONE Simple Unanswered Question !

    Thanks Charles. I will do my best to maintain a semblence of a sense of humor here. The reason I chose this thread was the inticing language of "ONE simple unanswered question." But the thing about the Kennedy assassination is that it falls into the more you know, the more you know you don't know category. I now take the title of Anthony Summers' book, Not In Your Lifetime, very personally. While having been guided by Carl Oglesby's The Yankee And Cowboy War for over three decades, I believe that Carl might also agree that there was a mutuality of interests served by killing Kennedy. While he was more Eastern Establishment, he was still only one generation away from The Irish Need Not Apply era. As Carl describes it, the Senate hearings rigged against Howard Hughes (the persona of the military industrial complex) by the corporatist monopolists, well portrayed in the movie The Aviator, was the opening salvo in the struggle between the Yankees and Cowboys. Of course, Hughes' wealth was highly liquid, as was the wealth of the others of the new breed of wildcatters such as H. L. Hunt. This is an important contrast when one follows the money, especially as it was being doled out to the anti-Castro mercenaries who felt so betrayed by JFK. On the other hand, we have the specific example of Clare Boothe Luce with a heavy finger in that pie. During their last lunch with JFK, the Luces stormed out. When Kennedy made a Secret Deal to remove our missiles from Russia's border to resolve the Missile Crisis, he committed what many mainstream Americans would have at the time considered treason. An agreement by Yankees and Cowboys that Kennedy was unfit to wield the nuclear deterrent (a theory well-presented by Shanet Clark), either because of his drug-taking, his risk-taking that last year with an East German spy, or his actual fear of using the nuclear arsenal, would have been met by the military with an eager, can-do plan to fix the problem. Tim Carroll
  10. CIA stooge Max Holland in town...

    Bill Miller serving as Gary Dunkle/Mack's mouthpiece are numerous and ongoing. I have had the experience of asking Gary, to his face and in the presence of my wife, about quotes attributed to him by Bill. He disavowed the wording, if not the substance, alluding to how Bill can get pretty carried away sometimes. Now, in this case, we have Dunkle calling Jack White a xxxx through a deniable third party. That is despicable. If Jack's story is not true and Gary wanted to refute it without crossing his self-imposed line of posting on forums, he could provide the best evidence available to Bill Miller and then Bill could report the evidence on its own merits, without resorting to the "Gary said" bastion. I welcome clarifications, and Gary Mack is in a position to provide them at times, but if he is unwilling to do so without using buffers, then he should just let them go. Plenty of misrepresentations are made about Robert Groden, but you don't see him sending out a deniable mouthpiece to defend himself. Tim
  11. My ONE Simple Unanswered Question !

    I thought I was asking about Charles Black's assertion of certainty, not Terry Mauro's. Nor do I understand the underlying reason for her answering for Mr. Black. I understand that Terry gravitates to the Sullivan and Cromwell axis, representatives of old monied eastern establishmentarians such as the Rockefellers, Harrimans, United Fruit, etc. My question was addressed to the following statement: Not true! It was Time that sold the film back to Zapruder for $1.00. How can one so single-mindedly support film alteration and simultaneously support the advancements James Richards has made? Charles' proposition that finding who controlled the Zapruder Film is intrinsic to finding the conspirators has plenty of merit. I have felt the same way about the autopsy photos. But to blame Groden rather than the government (not just the Luce empire) is rather like killing the messenger. Why was the American public kept from seeing the film for almost 12 years? I believe that Groden performed a deed of patriotism, as did his accomplices Dick Gregory and Geraldo Rivera, when they showed the film to the public late one night in March, 1975. It's viewing singularly reawakened the public to the duplicity of the cover-up. I can't really respond to views of Bill Miller as they relate to Bernice Moore's support or lack thereof. That would be basing one's view of history on who they hang out with in the schoolyard. I have had vociferous arguments with Bill Miller, and consider him too often to take on the role of shill for Gary Mack. But I do recognize his expertise with the film work and do not consider his opinions to be the products of a dishonest promotion of the Secret Government. Finally, regarding which matters Dawn and Terry "agree to disagree," I have to assume that, according to Carl Oglesby's framework, Dawn considers it Cowboys and Terry considers it Yankees. I am closer to Dawn's position on that one and find the subsequent history to be supportive of the idea that the nouveau riche Big Oil, now aligned with the Saudis, overthrew President Kennedy's Yankees. Tim
  12. CIA stooge Max Holland in town...

    But if they looked at Altgens 6 and put the bogus issue to rest then they couldn't use it as yet another tool to muddy the water with so many conflicting contrasting confounding theories and counter-theories that the general public recoils from the subject and concludes it's unsolvable. That wouldn't suit their objective. Holland's theory is the same as Posner's, simply replacing the metal traffic arm for the Live Oak tree. But the way Gary Mack goes along with such nonsense whenever there's abit of air-time to be had leaves one to wonder if he isn't so crooked he has to screw his pants on one leg at a time. Tim
  13. My ONE Simple Unanswered Question !

    Point taken. Charles has no use for education. What seduced my interest in this thread was the title about "ONE simple unanswered question." Rather than finding a single such a question, I found numerous issues raised, ranging from film alteration to the nature of all centuries-old evidence being first person witnessing. Rather than finding a simple question, none was ever posed. I do see a particular emphasis on the Parkland witnesses and their appropriate standing with regard to subsequent evidence from the Bethesda autopsy and the use of altered films of the events in Dealey Plaza. My "critique" of Charles' writing style was/is directed at the heavy-handed attack on so many sincere researchers who don't consider these matters "simple," and whose efforts were treated in the opening post of this thread as easily dismissible. While admittedly having a strong respect for education and its emphasis on development of critical reasoning, I consider the only "simple" thing about this case to be those who consider it simple. The condescending attitude toward anyone who disagrees with Charles on any point is glaring. I am ill beyond my own ability to absorb the prospects, and have now acquired a laptop so that I may occupy my time from bed. I tried to find the "ONE simple question" and sincerely could not. I see references to earlier threads, of which I'm admittedly not familiar, and shouldn't have to be, given the title of this thread. But now that I have really tried to "infer" the intended point I can easily say that Ron Ecker's point about Jackie possibly closing the head flap truly is the Occam's Razor explanation. Similarly, Pat Speer has done excellent work toward understanding how the Parkland witnesses could have gotten plenty wrong. I made my own point about how so many witnesses could have heard so few shots without any acknowledgment from Mr. Black. Gee thanks. After working through this thread following the false inducement that it came down to "ONE simple question," I do have a question as to the identity to which you refer when you assert absolute certaintly about who ordered the assassination. W-H-O W-A-S I-T ? (I also found the assertion that there is no room for doubt about Zapruder's complicity quite astonishing). Another question: do intend to be so smugly dismissing the work of James Richards, Larry Hancock, Bill Miller, Robert Groden, ad infinitum? As for your repeated questioning of my contribution to an understanding of this case, if you have looked at the seminars you've seen that the one I wrote on "The Whole Bay Of Pigs Things" had far more viewings and participation of any seminar by anyone who isn't a forum administrator. Tim Carroll
  14. My ONE Simple Unanswered Question !

    I could find in the above verbiage not "ONE single" question, answered or not, other than the final sentence: "How many of you, at this moment, expect to hear what you consider to be acceptable and believable answers?" A simple question is neither compound nor run-on. What is this question whose answer is so elusive that even the direct asking of it appears to be beyond the abilities of the questioner? Tim While I consider it absurd that I should "have at least thanked [Charles] for providing [me] the opportunity of disecting [his] post in order to give the forum a journalistic lesson regarding [his] "verbiage," I certainly will address the assertion that other than myself, Charles doesn't feel that many failed to grasp what may have been [emphasis added]his "inferred" question when I find a great many of the non-film alterationists absent. Charles asserted that he "will attempt to explain ... the question which if too "compound and run on" he was in fact attempting to infer and relay. A "simple" question (Charles' word, not mine) is not compound and doesn't assume a particular inference by a reader. Charles proceeded to refer to his "compound question," thereby admitting that it wasn't "ONE" question at all. He seems to be implying that the witnesses were undermined by manufactured evidence, which might well be true, but it is far from proven, and I have long been disturbed by the numbers of witnesses who reported hearing only three shots. As to the final question of whether or not I consider that my "prior post aided in any way the research and analysis of this assassination?: It has very little to do with the research and analysis of this assassination, but plenty to do with refining the nature of historical discourse. Conversely, unfounded assumptions have done a great deal to harm the research and analysis of this assassination. Charles's entire thread was based on "ONE simple question" which is now admitted to be a "compound question" which is "complicated" and more of an assumed inference than a question at all. Charles can feel free to thank me for this lesson in historical discourse and manners. Tim
  15. My ONE Simple Unanswered Question !

    I could find in the above verbiage not "ONE single" question, answered or not, other than the final sentence: "How many of you, at this moment, expect to hear what you consider to be acceptable and believable answers?" A simple question is neither compound nor run-on. What is this question whose answer is so elusive that even the direct asking of it appears to be beyond the abilities of the questioner? Tim
×