Jump to content
The Education Forum

Jonathan Cohen

Members
  • Content Count

    43
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jonathan Cohen

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

5,830 profile views
  1. It's heartening to know there are consequences for what Mr. Pozner so accurately describes as "the pain and terror" Fetzer "purposefully inflicted" on him and other Sandy Hook families.
  2. Jack White may have been the nicest guy on planet earth, but his theories have been authoritatively proven wrong time after time, be it on the "Moorman in the street" issue, the moon landing "hoax" or his support for the preposterous and insulting claim that no actual airplanes hit the World Trade Center on 9/11. This is someone in whom you expect us to trust?
  3. So the entire thing is ... a fabrication? For what reason?
  4. This is the best illustration possible of the complete and utter nonsense that is duplicate Lees and Marguerites. But I'd still love to hear Armstrong defenders explain what happened to all these extra members of the Oswald family.
  5. This looks like something constructed for the autopsy scenes in the movie "JFK," as does the quite implausible/almost assuredly fake "new" photo in the recent Groden book.
  6. Great point, Larry. Just because the film was at NPIC doesn't mean it was altered in the way that so many believe.
  7. Bumping this up since not a single person replied. Tracy, thank you for joining the forum and for your work setting the record straight on the errors and illogical conclusions inherent in the Harvey and Lee theory.
  8. But we can know that she's lying, and she surely is. As Stephen Roy has demonstrated time and again, "she did not have a relationship - ANY relationship, ever - with Oswald, Ferrie, Sherman, Shaw, Ruby, etc. The whole story is untrue."
  9. Bernice, Not to take this thread off-topic, but Jack White consistently refused to offer any substantive, specific evidence as to how the assassination films could have been altered in the manner he said they had. Moreover, his experiment attempting to prove that Mary Moorman was standing in the street when she took her famous Polaroid has been shown to be completely incorrect.
  10. Could not agree more. It is baffling and incomprehensible that people actually believe this.
  11. >New research by Pilots for 9/11 Truth and others have established that none of the four crash sites was authentic, which means some kind of video fakery was taking place in New York >that we are now able to explain. (See “Fraud and Fakery in the ‘official account’ of 9/11”.) Why anyone continues to take absolute, utter nonsense of this ilk seriously is beyond me. It is an insult to the thousands of people who died that day.
  12. Professor Fetzer: Is it your claim that no planes hit the Trade Center towers that day? If so, how do you respond to the thousands upon thousands of people who saw the impacts with their own eyes? What did we all see, if not real planes? And do you also propose that the passengers on both planes are not actually dead?
  13. To "attack" your studies? So anybody who disagrees with your theories is automatically attacking you? I guess I'm not surprised you view it like this, considering the Clavius Web site (http://www.xmission.com/~jwindley/) has authoritatively refuted every single point that Moon hoax theorists like yourself believe is true.
×
×
  • Create New...