JFK Researchers: Divergent Thinkers?

[Nic Martin]

Nic,

I always thought you seemed a bit Goth.  LOL

Tim

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Haha, no, just a screwed up, whiny teenager. Some would say I still am a screwed up, whiny, teenager. At least I dress better now.

[Dawn Meredith]

Great thread, fantastic posts.

John J. McCloy was the SEVEN SISTERS oil conglomerate attorney. Or was it McCone, the Atomic Energy Chief? McCloy was the US Oil Mouthpiece..........Before World War Two brought him immense influence in the world of MILITARY INDUSTRIAL CONGRESSIONAL COMPLEX,  JACK MCCLOY was with CROMWELL & SULLIVAN, I believe, the New York international law firm that was the legal face of this post-Versailles treaty material (posted) , this firms agents masked and papered over the international agreements (with the Nazis, and post 1933, and post 1939 ) Patents and worldwide production and sales rights on leaded fuels, chemical additives, rubber synthetics and other war materials.

The US and the Germans shared and fought over Nylon, fuel additives, dyestuffs, materiel.. petrochemical products made by the seven giant american oil companies, monsanto, dow, dupont and ashland (synthetic coal based gasoline technology) Lots of industrial espionage and sanctioned US German intertwinings.

Jim Root and Ron Ecker and Jon Korienek are all confirming each other mutually, not as much dissention as portrayed, a cor consensus on this exists here... they show the ugly connections US elites had with I.G. Farben and the Krupps Thyssen industrial complex...thats the whole shadowy settlement, this international legal and commando action linked to Harriman Brown Bros. and Prescott Bush.  McCloy was near willing to give up a second gunman, he knew Oswald was farce.

Please, John Simkin, glad you asked....my philosophy of life in 39 seconds:

Critical thinking. Incisive use of reason. Self-awareness.  Tendency to corgi-like yipping into the face of authority... where did I develop it?

The great books, protestant anti-clerical theory, whig theory, media political agenda theory, critics like Aldous Huxley, George Orwell, Ginsburg and Kerouac and Gary Snyder, also Alan Watts... Lewis Carroll and Edward Lear...  Artists and songwriters, poets, radical independents.  My father was a Nixon antagonist exta ordinaire, the father is the source for much political variance.

I have always been contrarian. I read Oscar Janiger, Vance Packard, the logic of political participation theory, the rhetoric of the founders and Lincoln, the rhetoric of MacCaulay and Bishop Gilbert Burnet, Rene Descates...Samual Clarke and Issac Newton, Montesquie, DeToqueville and Voltaite. Jean jacque ROUSSEAU...

Irish Bishops, ancient martyrs, native American myth and tradition, British tradition (Boadicca, Bran, Caroadoc, Linus, Coel, and the Silurian Court in first century Rome) Madoc ObGwinet 1170 AD, Saint Patrick, Saint Augustine of Hippo, the first autobiography and a pious Victorian grandmother who was insistent on sanitation and church on Sunday.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

__________________________

Great thread, interesting to read differing views of how we all arrived here.

I began questioning authority as a child in Sunday School. By the time I was 14 on 11/22/63 I could not believe that every one I encountered just accepted what was clearly, to me, a mass cover-up. I had grown up reading murder "who -done-its?", so all the information about LHO so fast, so much, the media and LBJ so certain. All I could think was "this is not how the real world works,this is a lie". Having no one to discuss this with at the time, (my family thought this thinking was outrageous), I remember many months late at night, while staying with relatives in Quincy MA. having what I then considered "conversations with God".

I wonder what the 60's, 70's would have been like had there been no murder of JFK: No Viet Nam, so therefore no anti-war movement. Would there have been the huge counter culture movement? How about the drugs? (Anyone read Marty Lee's "Acid Dreams"?).

Speculation on what could have been is perhaps rather futile, but consider the thought : two terms or JFK, then two terms of RFK. Then contrast that with our historical reality and present situation: two terms of W with Jeb waiting in the wings, (Bush 41 as much as admitted this last week).

I disagree with John that our divergent thinking is the reason for all the arguments. Healthy debates yes, but the arguments of distraction have two purposes: to casue dissension through planted utilization of red herrings, and to bog us down in trivial disagreements. When people ask me who I think killed JFK I tell them that the question to ask is: who benefited? what changed? It's amazing where this course of conversation can lead. People who have had their views formulated by mainstream media and never question this have no clue, often of very fundamental truths of this case. Just explain to such a person the total impossibility of the SBT, for example. The response I have generally received is "No way".

But for many of us I agree that it originated in our childhoods, with a general questioning of authority. In my case my Dad was totally opposed to JFK because of his opposition to Catholics. (Believed the Pope was the anti-Christ). My rebellion against his view of JFK was to argue for the intelligent idealism that Jack projected, even on our little black and white tv in Springhill, Nova Scotia.

We have never been there since. And that is why this case is still so important.

Dawn

[Shanet Clark]

Democracy suffered a setback at the hands of the nationalist authoritarian set.

Who could not respond to this evidence?

[Tim Carroll]

Nic,

I always thought you seemed a bit Goth.  LOL

Tim

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Haha, no, just a screwed up, whiny teenager. Some would say I still am a screwed up, whiny, teenager. At least I dress better now.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hopefully not in "pink" as Denis said.

[Shanet Clark]

Nic - we crusties in the states really are glad you are here.

Gibson Vendodotti the legal minor is another wonderful onlike participant and fully contributing Education Forum Member, as is Geraghty.

We welcome everybody! Don't panic about the rules, if your under 18 don't post personal stuff just deal with the administrator discreetly and we all understand.

If you're a wary adult, post the minimum he requires...

but you can't be Batman13@pluto.velcro or anything like that and thats good.

I've posted a new sworn biography and sworn my photo, for that matter.

Tim, this personal philosophy of success is very healthy =

I use a transactional analysis within a universal humanist critical life sensitive approach.

Give a post Bourdieu, post Derrida, post Foucault post on the state of the critical cultural historian.

Your seminar has about a thousand readers, you know......that whole Bay of Pigs thing........

Edited December 6, 2004 by Shanet Clark

[Tim Carroll]

I wish the seminars still appeared on the assassination debate forum.

Edited December 6, 2004 by Tim Carroll

[John Simkin]

I wish the seminars still appeared on the assassination debate forum.

They have always been here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=197

[Tim Carroll]

I wish the seminars still appeared on the assassination debate forum.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They have always been here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=197

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The seminars do not appear on the debate forum, unless one hits "view new posts."

[John Simkin]

I wish the seminars still appeared on the assassination debate forum.

They have always been here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=197

The seminars do not appear on the debate forum, unless one hits "view new posts."

It is better if you access the JFK Forum here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=163

Then you will see the JFK Forum is divided into three sections:

JFK Assassination Debate

JFK Online Seminars

JFK Books

Jim Marrs and William Reymond are the latest authors to agree to discuss their work on the forum. I am involved in negotiations with several other authors.

[Tim Carroll]

I wish the seminars still appeared on the assassination debate forum.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

They have always been here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=197

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The seminars do not appear on the debate forum, unless one hits "view new posts."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It is better if you access the JFK Forum here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=163

Then you will see the JFK Forum is divided into three sections:

JFK Assassination Debate

JFK Online Seminars

JFK Books

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

My point exactly! As I said at the beginning: "I wish the seminars still appeared on the assassination debate forum," and not only in a section of their own, which is not as routinely accessed.

[Shanet Clark]

John

To quote Oscar Wilde: “Disobedience in the eyes of any one who has read history, is man’s original virtue. It is through disobedience that progress has been made, through disobedience and rebellion.”

  Of the commissioners I find John J. McCloy the most interesting:

"As for myself, I don't want to overemphasize it, but I spent 10 years of my life on a case which people have now forgotten about, but it was a rather famous case at one time. It was called the Black Tom case. It involved litigation--you probably heard of it--it had international and national prominence, at one time. It is hard to conceive of any experience that required any more exacting or more sustained investigative work than that litigation did. The outcome of it finally didn't take place until just before the beginning of World War II. It related to crimes that had been committed by the German Government in this country while we were neutral in World War I-murder, arson, explosions, and sabotage were involved. I won't go into all the details of it, but it took years of my time and experience, and I had rather extensive investigative training as a result of it."

TESTIMONY OF JOHN J. McCLOY before the HSCA

McCloy spent ten years of his own life uncovering a German governmental coverup involving spies, "murder" and "sabotage."  What better man to have on the commission?  And we concentrate on who was in Dealy Plaza instead of the big picture.  I think McCloy would appreciate that.

Jim Root

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I Agree with you Jim, this deserves a lot more attention, I am unawared of this litigation between parties and between the wars.

Shanet

[John Simkin]

The seminars do not appear on the debate forum, unless one hits "view new posts."

The JFK forum has now accumulated a great deal of material. Much of it is not being accessed. The reason is that most people only look at those threads found on the first page of the listed items. You can use the search facility but this is very time consuming. Therefore I decided to organize the JFK Forum into three sections.

The JFK Assassination Debate section is for general postings. The problem with this section is that once it goes off the first page it will not be accessed very much.

The JFK Online Seminars is what it says. These seminars have to be approved before they appear. If people post in this section by mistake, the thread will be moved to the Assassination Debate. The main idea for this section is to enable researchers to easily find material that has been produced in an academic way. It time, I hope to have a seminar thread for every major part of the case.

JFK Books enables us to discuss books on the case with their authors. So far I have persuaded Larry Hancock, Jim Marrs, Donald Gibson, Nathaniel Weyl and William Reymond to discuss their books on the forum. Hopefully, several others will join us over the next couple of weeks.

The JFK Forum can now be found here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showforum=163

An added complication is that we have had to add a new security system to the forum. Over the last few months we have come under constant attacks by groups who dislike what we are doing on the forum. What they do is to use software that demands thousands of pages per second from our forum. The impact of this is that it blocks the forum for members and other visitors. Eventually this software uses up all our bandwidth and the forum goes down.

The only way we have found to deal with these attacks is to install a security system where every person who asks to see a page of the forum is sent to the home page. The system then identifies who you are. After a two second delay you can move to wherever you like. The software that is being used against the forum cannot cope with this and is blocked. This only happens at the beginning of each session.

Therefore to access the JFK Forum you first need to visit our home page first:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?act=idx

Scroll down the page and you will see the JFK section. Wait for two seconds and then you can visit any part that you want.

[Tim Carroll]

The seminars do not appear on the debate forum, unless one hits "view new posts."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

The JFK Assassination Debate section is for general postings. The problem with this section is that once it goes off the first page it will not be accessed very much.

The JFK Online Seminars is what it says. These seminars have to be approved before they appear.... JFK Books enables us to discuss books on the case with their authors. So far I have persuaded Larry Hancock, Jim Marrs, Donald Gibson, Nathaniel Weyl and William Reymond to discuss their books on the forum. Hopefully, several others will join us over the next couple of weeks.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

John:

I like to cut to the chase, as we say here in America. I'm a bottom-line kind of guy. That is why I cut out much of the gobbledy-gook rationalizing in your above post. You invited me to produce a seminar which is well-grounded academically, and I've done so, but would not have if I had anticipated its being relegated to a less accessible area. When I first noted that, "I wish the seminars still appeared on the assassination debate forum," you misleadingly replied, "They have always been here" (with the link to the seminars). Until the past day, the seminars also appeared within the debate forum. Please forgive my obstinance on this matter, but scholarly work does not deserve relegation to less accessibly locations. That just isn't cricket. They deserve the extra memory to be both in the debate and seminar sections. Once interest wanes, then the law of nature will relegate it, rather than it happening administratively. I am, after all, by the definition of this very thread YOU POSTED, a "divergent thinker."

As for your distracting babble about "JFK Books," the last time I looked, Hancock's is self-published - meaning he goes to Kinkos or some such copy store and prints them off as they're purchased. I could give you one in a moment with an index and the other accroutement of scholarly work. But the way this is set up, those areas are dead-end cul-de-sacs. Please forgive this outburst from a rebellious, "divergent thinker."

Tim

[Denis Morissette]

"  Please forgive this outburst from a rebellious, "divergent thinker."

Tim

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim, you have proven without the shadow of a doubt that you're an authentic "divergent thinker". I am sure John won't resent you, but will rather be proud of you!

[John Simkin]

Tim, you have proven without the shadow of a doubt that you're an authentic "divergent thinker". I am sure John won't resent  you, but will rather be proud of you! 

I would not describe this outburst as an example of divergent thinker. I would call it something else.

I like to cut to the chase, as we say here in America.  I'm a bottom-line kind of guy.  That is why I cut out much of the gobbledy-gook rationalizing in your above post.  You invited me to produce a seminar which is well-grounded academically, and I've done so, but would not have if I had anticipated its being relegated to a less accessible area.  When I first noted that, "I wish the seminars still appeared on the assassination debate forum," you misleadingly replied, "They have always been here" (with the link to the seminars).  Until the past day, the seminars also appeared within the debate forum.  Please forgive my obstinance on this matter, but scholarly work does not deserve relegation to less accessibly locations.  That just isn't cricket.  They deserve the extra memory to be both in the debate and seminar sections.  Once interest wanes, then the law of nature will relegate it, rather than it happening administratively.  I am, after all, by the definition of this very thread YOU POSTED, a "divergent thinker."

As for your distracting babble about "JFK Books," the last time I looked, Hancock's is self-published - meaning he goes to Kinkos or some such copy store and prints them off as they're purchased.  I could give you one in a moment with an index and the other accroutement of scholarly work.  But the way this is set up, those areas are dead-end cul-de-sacs.  Please forgive this outburst from a rebellious, "divergent thinker."

I cannot understand the reason for this outburst. I am only attempting to make the material in the forum more accessible to visitors. The Online Seminars section now has a link from the home page. As I explained, because of the security system, everybody has to go to the home page at the beginning of every session.

Even if I have made the wrong decision. Why do you have to be so aggressive about it? Do you think this approach is more likely to get me to change my mind about this? If you do think this, you have no understanding of my personality.

Why the attack on Larry Hancock? Someone Would Have Talked is in my opinion the best book written about the assassination of JFK. It does need an index and Larry is working on that at the moment. It is not self-published (JFK Lancer). Even it was, does it matter. It is the quality of the work that matters. In my humble opinion, it is a great book.