Who would you choose as the "face of JFK research" for the 50th Anniversary

[David Von Pein]

DVP, can you refute this:?

"I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man." -- J. Edgar Hoover.

I love that quote from J. Edgar, because it destroys the notion that Hoover was "in" on a cover-up and a "Let's Frame Oswald As The Sole Assassin" plot.

What's to refute? I love it.

Plus:

JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/Hoover And Oswald

Edited February 5, 2013 by David Von Pein

[Craig Lamson]

The prima facie case precludes rebuttal. There is no fact-based challenge to the T3 back wound/clothing evidence.

Sure there is, you are simply too incompetent to understand that the simple rays of the sun destroy your half baked claims.

Deal with it. You lost.

[John Dolva]

I actually think a re release of the Stone film is not a bad idea. But only as a way of BEGINNING the conversation.

You know, as a lead in to saying, "That film caused the release of over 2 million pages of documents and look what we discovered about the case because of it."

I am not sure Stone would be all that excited about it though. I have talked to him about this matter. He really did not appreciate what happened to him over the film and I doubt he would want to be in the forefront of another controversy. Also, understandably, he does not keep up on these things. So he would not be a really good spokesman for our side.

I agree. I wonder if anyone has some access or way of influencing the small alternative cinemas to run it. Likewise movie clubs, community tv et.c. I think to expect it has to be grass roots . Bigger players might join in if there's wide enough interest shown that might tickle their hip pocket*.

edit add *or perhaps even conscience

______________

search keywords : secret cia rfkjr censorship climate change cuba gun terror police state moral rebel etc

Edited February 5, 2013 by John Dolva

[David Josephs]

Call the search party off. Tom Scully is alive and well.

Now you are stating that my comments regarding your TWO RECENT jumbled and confusing posts are "concerning." Whatcha gonna do, David? Accuse me of being an "Albert?"

A little paranoid are we?

I know there is a theory out there that the DPF member known as Albert Doyle is a multi-entitied creature who loves to endlessly argue with all and sundry in an effort to derail threads, so may I point out for the record that I, Lee David Farley, am not Albert Doyle nor a manifestation of "Albert Doyles." Just in case David thinks this is an avenue to pursue concerning his "concern."

For weeks you and Doyle went on and on for page after page arguing over the merits of the book Final Judgment. A book that has the backing of so few people you'd be hard pressed to fill a toilet stall with them. Reading that back and forth was enough for me to sit and ponder the question as to whether water boarding is really the most effective way to torture people.

If you paid just the littlest bit of attention to the posts in that thread you’d know that what I did was post the actual documentation of the time as well as excerpts from that terrible book to illustrate the point we ALL were making. But since this is all about you all the time… you probably missed all that.

I have passed comment on two posts you have made and like a man possessed you now thrash about claiming I have disrespected all of the "work" you have done in the past. Then you claim that I exude "self-importance" and that you are "concerned" by my comments. Ha ha ha ha

Laugh all you want Lee… all you’ve done with me is whine like a child. Soooo sorry you don’t get it. Can’t follow that HOOVER agrees that there was a conspiracy, and says so?

Too bad so sad… I care whether you GET IT or not… especially when you behave like a little child.

I really cannot be arsed arguing with you. The last person to demand respect from me because of the things that they had done previously was David Lifton and we all know what happened there.

Yes Lee… YOU are not to be trifled with. We’re all trembling dude… I’m sure Lifton is up nights worried about YOU.

Bark your challenges and demands elsewhere because the current absence of moderators here is giving me itchy fingers in telling you exactly what I think of you.

GFY.

Wow… and so stealthy too. Must be so proud of yourself here Lee. I present an argument that you either can’t understand or cannot find it in yourself to stay on topic and comment about… you have a cow, take everything as if YOU are the center of the universe and it’s everybody else’s fault? And then you revert back to the Lamson/May techniques…. Insult and then run off … GFY?? LMAO.

I'm done with you. I’m heartbroken… By all means write what you want to write and feel free to make it as jumbled up and as poorly written as possible and use as many fonts, colours and ellipses as you like - but don't ever put words in my mouth again. Thanks Lee… but you can shove your permission. I’ll post what I want and you can either deal or run away… up to you… Backtracking with some half-arsed attempt to say you had written it poorly simply proves my point. Understand? {yawn}

You’ve been ANGRY for months now Lee… shall we “back track” and find where you lost your sh!t and walked away from the forums? PLEASE do me the favor of ignoring me… whatever it is that crawled up your @$$ has turned you into a most unpleasant person…

ALL THIS cause you couldn’t follow my post… cause YOU didn’t like what I was saying, or how I was saying it ?…

It's impressive watching a "communicator" blame the person being "communicated to" for not "getting it." Real simple and understandable, eh? Will this be your technique when members of the public look at you cross-eyed?

Lee… continue to piss into the wind, it’s become quite entertaining. I disagree with the JFK the movie idea… sorry my opinion affects you so much. Didn’t realize how much you cared {smooch}.

And still, to this point, no one, including you, can write a few sentences that are more effective at exposing a conspiracy then:

HOOVER BELIEVED IN A CONSPIRACY THAT WEEKEND and said so, repeatedly.

I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man.

So let’s play our games… organize our “events” and let’s get the entire choir and congregation to give an “AMEN” with each and every bit of minutia WE can prove. Prove Salandria correct yet again. We don’t need to PROVE conspiracy to Joe Simple as that assumes there is a valid argument on the other side… there is not. JFK the Movie is chock full of micro-analyzed proofs… each of which can be argued against.

That you can’t fashion an argument that discounts Hoover’s statement or physical evidence is all I need to know I’m right. Your little "conversation" (talk about putting words into other's mouths and then go right out and do it yourself - and not very well to boot) is a figment of YOUR imagination... If that's the best you got... {yawn, again}

Every other argument is EASILY dismissed and/or completely mind numbingly complex.

All the movie did was open the door for real research into the minutia… and then, less than 10 years later, THEY do it again with 9/11 and we stand around surprised THEY could do it in OUR FACE without fear of ANYTHING (didn’t you see JFK? Don’t we now know THEY are out to get us?)…since we are all so busy showing Bledsoe was wrong, Brennen was a joke, Tippit was killed with auto shells, CE399 was not in Dallas, the rifle was 36” long, there was no paper bag…. ad infinitum…

Always had and always will have a respect for your work and analysis. That you chose THIS to make a stand over is, well, surprising. You want to harbor ill will toward me… have at it, that kinda stuff just eats away at YOU, not me. I KNOW what it is to disagree and still remain civil… All I did in my original post was to offer an option… my opinion… something that solidifies our message and is impossible to refute as a basis from which to fashion a message… I’ve helped companies generate BILLIONS $$ in sales thru these marketing processes and helped owners of companies see that their message and their desired results were not in sync. “JFK”’s message is not, repeat NOT the message to achieve our desired results, it is simply fuel for the WCR apologist’s fire…

DVP loves it when we start talking specifics… as each “specific” can easily be mitigated, or at least be made to appear nowhere near as SOILD as when presented - without DVP’s opposing argument.

DVP nor McAdams has an argument for this… as there is none. That you need to fashion a "Scene" as Lamson fashions his BS experiments is also - a surprise. but hey... play your games. Brighter minds than yours can grasp the direction and understand the significance of these declarations...

..............

MY conversation begins with, "Did you know HOOVER also believed the JFK assassination was the result a consiracy and warned LBJ about it that week? I wonder how HE knew?"

I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man. –JEH 12/12/64 (speaking past tense)

"The tyranny of power is here. Current events tell us that those who killed Kennedy can only perpetuate their power by* promoting social upheaval both at home and abroad. And that will lead not to revolution but to repression. I suggest to you, my friend, that the interests of those who killed Kennedy now transcend national boundaries and national priorities. No doubt we are dealing now with an international conspiracy. We must face that fact -- and not waste any more time micro-analyzing the evidence. That's exactly what they want us to do. They have kept us busy for so long. And I will bet, buddy, that is what will happen to you. They'll keep you very, very busy and, eventually, they'll wear you down."

[David G. Healy]

DVP, can you refute this:?

"I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man." -- J. Edgar Hoover.

I love that quote from J. Edgar, because it destroys the notion that Hoover was "in" on a cover-up and a "Let's Frame Oswald As The Sole Assassin" plot.

What's to refute? I love it.

Plus:

JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/Hoover And Oswald

uh-huh right... that's like you saying you're open to other shooters in Dealey Plaza, give us a break, willya!

Hoover conspired with LBJ to cover up the murder of JFK on the streets of Dallas, Texas Nov 22nd 1963. There is no other answer.

[David Josephs]

DVP, can you refute this:?

"I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man." -- J. Edgar Hoover.

I love that quote from J. Edgar, because it destroys the notion that Hoover was "in" on a cover-up and a "Let's Frame Oswald As The Sole Assassin" plot.

What's to refute? I love it.

Plus:

JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/Hoover And Oswald

uh-huh right... that's like you saying you're open to other shooters in Dealey Plaza, give us a break, willya!

Hoover conspired with LBJ to cover up the murder of JFK on the streets of Dallas, Texas Nov 22nd 1963. There is no other answer.

[Cliff Varnell]

I love that quote from J. Edgar, because it destroys the notion that Hoover was "in" on a cover-up and a "Let's Frame Oswald As The Sole Assassin" plot.

It was the "Let's Frame Oswald As A Castro Agent" plot that Hoover was "in" on.

The lone nut bit was strictly an assignment he was ordered to carry out.

[David Von Pein]

It was the "Let's Frame Oswald As A Castro Agent" plot that Hoover was "in" on.

The lone nut bit was strictly an assignment he was ordered to carry out.

Is that why Hoover urged the WC to NOT declare Oswald the lone gunman?

Or was JEH just talking through his hat when he (supposedly) said that?

Edited February 6, 2013 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

To the point that Liebeler told Odio that heck, even if we find evidence of a conspiracy--which she certainly was--Warren told us to shove it under the rug.

Anyone who could possibly believe that Wesley J. Liebeler said any such thing to Sylvia Odio is a bigger fool than the fools who think Greer shot Kennedy. (And that's a pretty big fool.)

Can anyone even imagine (for even one second) Liebeler being so stupid as to say something like that to a witness like Odio? It's insane, absurd, and downright ridiculous. It never happened. But DiEugenio is just gullible enough to believe that it did. (What a surprise.)

Edited February 6, 2013 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

...this necessitated Plan B for Edgar and Lyndon: Oswald as the misfit loner.

No need for any "Plan B" in this regard, Jimbo. Oswald was a misfit loner.

I wonder how telling the truth about the assassin somehow equals: Hoover's in on a cover-up?

Only in the wacky and wonderful world of JFK conspiracy theorists could such an equation be justified.

Edited February 6, 2013 by David Von Pein

[Michael Hogan]

......Warren did so in spades. To the point that Liebeler told Odio that heck, even if we find evidence of a conspiracy--which she certainly was--Warren told us to shove it under the rug.

And did they ever.

.......the best evidence that Oswald could fire his rifle as fast as he did and hit the target is the fact that he did so.

(From what is known as the Liebeler Memorandum)

[Cliff Varnell]

Like I said, when SImkin let the fruity Von Pein on this site it was a signal to that he wanted bread and circuses for all.

And then you became Von Pein's major dance partner, the lead clown in said circus. Now you want him thrown off.

Hypocrite much, Jim?

I engage Lamson only on occasion to watch his head explode. Why waste any more than one issue on an LNer?

DiEugenio's approach to establishing the fact of conspiracy is incoherent. He should stick to the cover-up, the area of his expertise.

[Cliff Varnell]

For emphasis:

Like I said, when SImkin let the fruity Von Pein on this site it was a signal to that he wanted bread and circuses for all.

And then you became Von Pein's major dance partner, the lead clown in said circus. Now you want him thrown off.

Hypocrite much, Jim?

I engage Lamson only on occasion to watch his head explode.

Why waste any more than one issue on an LNer?

DiEugenio's approach to establishing the fact of conspiracy is incoherent. He should stick to the cover-up, the area of his expertise.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

Why waste any more than one issue on an LNer?

DiEugenio's approach to establishing the fact of conspiracy is incoherent.

In the latter regard, Jim builds a range of evidentiary molehills blown hard into...the Sierra DiEugenio.

[Craig Lamson]

I engage Lamson only on occasion to watch his head explode.

ROFLMAO!

http://www.google.co...35&tx=120&ty=49

Edited February 6, 2013 by Craig Lamson