Jump to content
The Education Forum

Jack: I suggest that Colby, Burton, and Lamson be hung by their thumbs...all day


Len Colby

Recommended Posts

I like the title of this thread. Makes good sense to me.

If people keep replying, we can get the message to stay atop the board for a long time.

Thanks.

Jack

The fact that you’re proud of your disgraceful statement shows that your “moral compass” is even more defective than your ability to understand photographic images. Speaking of which you’ve yet to explain how a photo in which the western faces of building are in direct sunlight could have been taken before 10:28 AM when solar noon was at 12:58 PM. I’ve pointed this error out to you several times but you continue to post it and you claim to admit error and make corrections when proven to be wrong. It just goes to shows you can’t be taken at your word.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...c=14642&hl=

I agree we should keep this thread "atop the board for a long time" nothing that anyone else could say about you puts you and your buddies at the DPF (who approved) in such a bad light.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 48
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Acj, years ago, had some good debates. Now, it is one of the most vile newsgroups I've ever seen...The only thing exposed over there is who has the more vulgar mouth, and all that does it make the poster look bad.

Sounds even worse than the DPF, however unlike the latter it sounds like it allows opposing viewpoints.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Acj, years ago, had some good debates. Now, it is one of the most vile newsgroups I've ever seen...The only thing exposed over there is who has the more vulgar mouth, and all that does it make the poster look bad.

Sounds even worse than the DPF, however unlike the latter it sounds like it allows opposing viewpoints.

at acj it's a known fact CT's trounce lone nut-trolls on a regular basis, which is why xxxxx cowards stay away, they don't know the evidence, they can't debate same, pure and simple! Evidently, Ms. Becket seems is under the sophomoric impression that vulgar mouths, tough attitudes have no place in today's society? Yet trashing lone nutter-xxxxx, disinformation deweebs is beyond the pale? Hang tough at Lancer, girl....

btw, who said ACJ was for debate? Such a foolish, naive, nutter-xxxxx idea?

Being passed over at DPF really has your bean out of joint, doesn't it? Have your professional talents gone to waste? :rolleyes: What do you think Redd Foxx would have to say 'bout that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Acj, years ago, had some good debates. Now, it is one of the most vile newsgroups I've ever seen...The only thing exposed over there is who has the more vulgar mouth, and all that does it make the poster look bad.

Sounds even worse than the DPF, however unlike the latter it sounds like it allows opposing viewpoints.

at acj it's a known fact CT's trounce lone nut-trolls on a regular basis, which is why xxxxx cowards stay away, they don't know the evidence, they can't debate same, pure and simple! Evidently, Ms. Becket seems is under the sophomoric impression that vulgar mouths, tough attitudes have no place in today's society? Yet trashing lone nutter-xxxxx, disinformation deweebs is beyond the pale? Hang tough at Lancer, girl....

btw, who said ACJ was for debate? Such a foolish, naive, nutter-xxxxx idea?

Being passed over at DPF really has your bean out of joint, doesn't it? Have your professional talents gone to waste? :rolleyes: What do you think Redd Foxx would have to say 'bout that?

Could I have a translation please??

Link to post
Share on other sites
Acj, years ago, had some good debates. Now, it is one of the most vile newsgroups I've ever seen...The only thing exposed over there is who has the more vulgar mouth, and all that does it make the poster look bad.

Sounds even worse than the DPF, however unlike the latter it sounds like it allows opposing viewpoints.

at acj it's a known fact CT's trounce lone nut-trolls on a regular basis, which is why xxxxx cowards stay away, they don't know the evidence, they can't debate same, pure and simple! Evidently, Ms. Becket seems is under the sophomoric impression that vulgar mouths, tough attitudes have no place in today's society? Yet trashing lone nutter-xxxxx, disinformation deweebs is beyond the pale? Hang tough at Lancer, girl....

btw, who said ACJ was for debate? Such a foolish, naive, nutter-xxxxx idea?

Being passed over at DPF really has your bean out of joint, doesn't it? Have your professional talents gone to waste? :rolleyes: What do you think Redd Foxx would have to say 'bout that?

btw, who said ACJ was for debate? Such a foolish, naive, nutter-xxxxx idea?

You just did..see what you wrote:

CT's trounce lone nut-trolls on a regular basis, which is why xxxxx cowards stay away, they don't know the evidence, they can't debate same, pure and simple

I just don't see that calling someone a name does a whole lot of good. The way to "trounce" someone is to prove what they say in incorrect.

Kathy

Link to post
Share on other sites
Acj, years ago, had some good debates. Now, it is one of the most vile newsgroups I've ever seen...The only thing exposed over there is who has the more vulgar mouth, and all that does it make the poster look bad.

Sounds even worse than the DPF, however unlike the latter it sounds like it allows opposing viewpoints.

at acj it's a known fact CT's trounce lone nut-trolls on a regular basis, which is why xxxxx cowards stay away, they don't know the evidence, they can't debate same, pure and simple! Evidently, Ms. Becket seems is under the sophomoric impression that vulgar mouths, tough attitudes have no place in today's society? Yet trashing lone nutter-xxxxx, disinformation deweebs is beyond the pale? Hang tough at Lancer, girl....

btw, who said ACJ was for debate? Such a foolish, naive, nutter-xxxxx idea?

Being passed over at DPF really has your bean out of joint, doesn't it? Have your professional talents gone to waste? :) What do you think Redd Foxx would have to say 'bout that?

Could I have a translation please??

at acj it's a known fact CT's trounce lone nut-trolls on a regular basis, which is why xxxxx cowards stay away, they don't know the evidence, they can't debate same, pure and simple!

Translation: Mr. Healy asserts that it seems to be the case ("it's a known fact") that certain persons who believe in conspiracies (CTs, conspiracy theorists) routinely win arguments with people whom Mr. Healy doesn't like ("lone nut-trolls") at the alt.conspiracy.jfk newsgroup website (acj). And further, that this is the reason people Mr. Healy doesn't like ("xxxxx cowards") stay away from that newsgroup, adding that they don't know the evidence (of conspiracy) and can't debate that evidence. He emphasizes that this is obvious to anyone ("pure and simple!").

Evidently, Ms. Becket seems is under the sophomoric impression that vulgar mouths, tough attitudes have no place in today's society? Yet trashing lone nutter-xxxxx, disinformation deweebs is beyond the pale? Hang tough at Lancer, girl....

Translation: Mr. Healy questions why Ms. Becket(t) thinks it is inappropriate to have vulgarity and bad manners in public discussions wherein people whom Mr. Healy doesn't like ("lone nutter-xxxxx, disinformation deweebs") are "given hell" or "trashed." (And/or why she would think vulgarity and bad manners are inappropriate in society in general?) Mr. Healy seems to take this as a naive attitude on Ms. Becket(t)'s part, and suggests that she is more comfortable in the presumably more genteel atmosphere of the JFKLancer Forum.

btw, who said ACJ was for debate? Such a foolish, naive, nutter-xxxxx idea?

Translation: Mr. Healy asks parenthetically why someone would think the alt.conspiracy.jfk newsgroup site is a place for debate. Apparently this is a misunderstanding of what that site is for; and apparently Ms. Becket(t) is a foolish, naive, nutter-xxxxx herself for thinking it was.

Being passed over at DPF really has your bean out of joint, doesn't it? Have your professional talents gone to waste? What do you think Redd Foxx would have to say 'bout that?

Translation: It seems Mr. Healy either has information that Ms. Becket(t) applied for and was turned down for membership at the Deep Political Farum, or that he is making an assumption that this occurred. He feels that this is a cause of consternation and envy for Ms. Becket(t) ("your bean out of joint"), and suggests that she is now afraid not being able to be a member there means either that she will not be able to rub elbows with the finest top researchers on earth, or alternatively that she will not be able to practice her intelligence agency tradecraft (presumably in spreading "lone-nutter" disinformation?). Mr. Healy then enigmatically asks what a man who's been dead for some time would say about this situation; presumably this is some obscure allusion to the comedian Redd Foxx as having a foul mouth?

This post has been edited by David G. Healy: Today, 08:47 AM

Translation: It seems that Mr. Healy had some reason to edit his post.

Glossary item: lone nut-trolls/lone nutter-trolls/etc = people who don't agree with all conspiracy beliefs held by David Healy, or alternatively just people he doesn't like

Thank you that was most thorough and most helpful especially for those, like me (and I fear you), who are not citizens of the planet Dippy (aka 'lone nutter trolls').

It is now my intention to try and slip the rhythmical phrase 'lone nutter xxxxx disinfo deweeb' more into everyday conversation.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Being passed over at DPF really has your bean out of joint, doesn't it? Have your professional talents gone to waste? What do you think Redd Foxx would have to say 'bout that?

Translation: It seems Mr. Healy either has information that Ms. Becket(t) applied for and was turned down for membership at the Deep Political Farum, or that he is making an assumption that this occurred. He feels that this is a cause of consternation and envy for Ms. Becket(t) ("your bean out of joint"), and suggests that she is now afraid not being able to be a member there means either that she will not be able to rub elbows with the finest top researchers on earth, or alternatively that she will not be able to practice her intelligence agency tradecraft (presumably in spreading "lone-nutter" disinformation?). Mr. Healy then enigmatically asks what a man who's been dead for some time would say about this situation; presumably this is some obscure allusion to the comedian Redd Foxx as having a foul mouth?

Good translation except I think this part was addressed to me. He keeps bringing up Redd Foxx because I caught him plagiarizing the comic here. He'd would have you believe they played poker together (or something like that)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Boy, am I glad I've been on holiday whilst this has been going on. Here is my 2c worth (and that is what it is worth):

- Jack has made many mistakes in various Apollo / 9-11 studies. These have been pointed out to him by many people - including people who have no association with this board.

- Jack has a track record of not addressing the Apollo / 9-11 rebuttals but instead either ignoring them (and repeating his original claims) or claiming the people making the rebuttals are somehow participating in some type of an organised campaign against him / his claims.

- Jack has a track record of claiming those who vigorously rebut his Apollo / 9-11 claims are acting on the behest of governments or secret agencies.

- I'd like to point out I make no claims - and indeed have stated I am but a layman and have shown little, if any interest - in the area of JFK, in which Jack is considered to be an expert by many people.

- The DPF have banned my IP, even though I have not even tried to become a member there. In my opinion, this speaks volumes about the controlling group's idea regarding openness.

- I believe in letting everyone present their own opinions and evidence for their opinions, and allowing others to attack the said opinions (i.e. the opinion, not the person). The resulting debate allows others to determine the veracity of the statements made by the various posters.

- If I make opinions / statements with which other members disagree with, I expect to be taken to task over them and asked to defend them to the best of my ability. To be asked to do so is not an attack on me, but rather an expected trial by which all ideas should be subjected.

- Play the ball, not the person. When the person refuses to defend their posted opinions, however, they should expect that the lack of defence reflects poorly on the poster and their willingness / ability to defend their stated argument. Comment on that unwillingness - in moderation and restraint - should not be considered to be a personal attack.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Stephen Turner

Daniel, I'd like to help out in this fascinating enterprise, but I'm afraid that I'm on rota today for a bit of the old Grannie killing. And later I'm helping HRH deliever some crytal meth to the local orpanarium.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Daniel, I'd like to help out in this fascinating enterprise, but I'm afraid that I'm on rota today for a bit of the old Grannie killing. And later I'm helping HRH deliever some crytal meth to the local orpanarium.

Whats the dead granny count at your hospital this month? Meeting the quota from the NHS?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Being passed over at DPF really has your bean out of joint, doesn't it? Have your professional talents gone to waste? What do you think Redd Foxx would have to say 'bout that?

Translation: It seems Mr. Healy either has information that Ms. Becket(t) applied for and was turned down for membership at the Deep Political Farum, or that he is making an assumption that this occurred. He feels that this is a cause of consternation and envy for Ms. Becket(t) ("your bean out of joint"), and suggests that she is now afraid not being able to be a member there means either that she will not be able to rub elbows with the finest top researchers on earth, or alternatively that she will not be able to practice her intelligence agency tradecraft (presumably in spreading "lone-nutter" disinformation?). Mr. Healy then enigmatically asks what a man who's been dead for some time would say about this situation; presumably this is some obscure allusion to the comedian Redd Foxx as having a foul mouth?

Good translation except I think this part was addressed to me. He keeps bringing up Redd Foxx because I caught him plagiarizing the comic here. He'd would have you believe they played poker together (or something like that)

plagarizing? Redd Foxx? You silly man you, you certainly don't know him or his material as well as you think you do.... and of course that part was for you! What on earth makes you think Ms. Becket is going to waste much of my time (she isn't Wild Bill Millah, ya know - or is she?), you too for that matter?

BTW, NO my Redd Foxx autographs are NOT for sale. See if I impart any more of Redd's poker table witticism to you in the future.

You 'still' shaken from Roland Zavada putting you in your place (concerning an issue on this forum) a few years back? So, how are your thumbs, son? Granted, I felt 'slightly' embarrassed for you, I got over it in 10 seconds though, but thanks for asking.....

and NO Mr. Dunn I'm not a Vegas dealer, spent many, many years there.... and a mighty partake of it's fruits, if you will!... No blushing Ms. Becket(t)!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes Craig, its all going according to plan. Soon I will be the only one left AHHA HAA HAA.

Now that you have become a grandpa yourself, someone will take care of you too, won't they?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes Craig, its all going according to plan. Soon I will be the only one left AHHA HAA HAA.

Thanks so much for posting my quote as it illustrates the depth of the denial of the NHS supprters. None of you can refute my statement and that speaks volumes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes Craig, its all going according to plan. Soon I will be the only one left AHHA HAA HAA.

Thanks so much for posting my quote as it illustrates the depth of the denial of the NHS supprters. None of you can refute my statement and that speaks volumes.

Its not 'denial' Craig. You have made unsustained and unsustainable allegations about the NHS and others are laughing at you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...