Boycott the nutters!

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, Robert Card said:

He's doing a cheap imitation of Snopes in muddying up the waters. 

If you saw my contract with the Lone Nut Disinformation Agency, sir, you would not describe me as a "cheap" imitation.  Not only am I handsomely compensated, but I am promised all the Guinness Extra Stout I can drink and all the Blue Corn Doritos I can eat while directly engaged in disinformation activities. 

For those unfamiliar with the Vatican-Jesuits-Knights of Malta angle on the assassination that Robert seems to be enthusiastic about, this will give you the idea: http://whale.to/b/phelps3.html. (Lee Harvey Oswald was a Roman Catholic?  I confess the whole V-J-KOM thing was new to me.) 

Someone asked me on another thread if I would ever call out an over-the-top Lone Nutter, and I said absolutely.  Since I have now taken a vow not to refer to any CTer as a loon, I am stumped as to how to respond here and thus will leave it to the CTers - does conspiracy thinking make bedfellows that strange?

Edited December 26, 2018 by Guest

[François Carlier]

1 hour ago, Lance Payette said:

If you saw my contract with the Lone Nut Disinformation Agency, sir, you would not describe me as a "cheap" imitation.  Not only am I handsomely compensated, but I am promised all the Guinness Extra Stout I can drink and all the Blue Corn Doritos I can eat while directly engaged in disinformation activities. 

For those unfamiliar with the Vatican-Jesuits-Knights of Malta angle on the assassination that Robert seems to be enthusiastic about, this will give you the idea: http://whale.to/b/phelps3.html. (Lee Harvey Oswald was a Roman Catholic?  I confess the whole V-J-KOM thing was new to me.) 

Someone asked me on another thread if I would ever call out an over-the-top Lone Nutter, and I said absolutely.  Since I have now taken a vow not to refer to any CTer as a loon, I am stumped as to how to respond here and thus will leave it to the CTers - does conspiracy thinking make bedfellows that strange?

If you could only write in English ! 😁

[François Carlier]

2 hours ago, Robert Card said:

JFK was murdered, he had two brothers murdered, he had a sister murdered, and his son was murdered.   there's a whole lot more out there that the LNer's are trying to keep everyone from learning more.

His son was murdered too ?
I thought he died in a plane crash because he was disoriented.
I must be an idiot. Boycott me !

Edited December 26, 2018 by François Carlier

[Guest]

On ‎12‎/‎25‎/‎2018 at 10:08 AM, Sandy Larsen said:

"Lone nutter" is not a derogatory term, as "lone nut" refers to LHO and not the person who believes he was a lone nut. In contrast, "conspiracy loon" is a derogatory term for a CTer.

Let's run that up the etymological flagpole and see who salutes:  I don't know anyone who holds to the theory of a lone assassin who actually believes that Oswald was a "nut."  I at least believe he was far from a nut.  Moreover, Lone Nutter does not refer to Oswald but to those who believe Oswald was the lone assassin.  Moreover, if you will consult a dictionary you will find that, entirely apart from anything to do with the assassination of JFK, the term "nutter" has a meaning that is identical to - wait for it - "loon," to wit:   "madman/madwoman, maniac, lunatic, eccentric, loony, nutcase, nutjob, cuckoo, fruitcake, head case, basket case, headbanger, schizo, crank" (geez, what a rude dictionary!).

Ergo, I hereby revoke my previous vow and reserve the right unto myself and my heirs and assigns to characterize anyone who refers to me as a Lone Nutter as a conspiracy loon and/or fruitcake if the shoe fits.  My preferred terminology is Lone Assassin Truth-Bearer.

[David Von Pein]

2 hours ago, François Carlier said:

His son was murdered too ?
I thought he died in a plane crash because he was disoriented.

You have it exactly right, Francois. JFK Jr. was not "murdered". He was killed by the weather/atmospheric conditions and his lack of experience as a pilot in dealing with such adverse conditions. But in the last few years at my YouTube channel, I have been regularly encountering some of these conspiracy-thirsty fantasists who love to comment on my JFK videos about how they think John Jr., in addition to his father, was also killed via a conspiracy plot. Whenever I encounter these crazy people on my YouTube videos, I just laugh and move on. (But I don't delete their silly comments, as insane as those comments might be, unless they use profanity of some kind.)

http://dvp-video-audio-archive.blogspot.com/2016/06/the-death-of-john-f-kennedy-jr.html

 

Edited December 26, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Robert Card]

7 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

If you saw my contract with the Lone Nut Disinformation Agency, sir, you would not describe me as a "cheap" imitation.  Not only am I handsomely compensated, but I am promised all the Guinness Extra Stout I can drink and all the Blue Corn Doritos I can eat while directly engaged in disinformation activities. 

For those unfamiliar with the Vatican-Jesuits-Knights of Malta angle on the assassination that Robert seems to be enthusiastic about, this will give you the idea: http://whale.to/b/phelps3.html. (Lee Harvey Oswald was a Roman Catholic?  I confess the whole V-J-KOM thing was new to me.) 

Someone asked me on another thread if I would ever call out an over-the-top Lone Nutter, and I said absolutely.  Since I have now taken a vow not to refer to any CTer as a loon, I am stumped as to how to respond here and thus will leave it to the CTers - does conspiracy thinking make bedfellows that strange?

I didn't mean 'cheap' in the way you've taken it, and I'm sure you're highly compensated.  Very few lawyers work for free.  I'm saying that you're almost as good as David Mikkelson of Snopes, and I guess that's pretty good with disinfo, so please scratch the word 'cheap'.

The only place where critical thinking is taught is in law school, while in public schools, it's regurgitation.  I guess the nutwork doesn't want many critical thinkers out there questioning things.  My mother was a legal secretary, so i met a lot of lawyers in my life, and everyone of them was a CTer, or at least saw some things very wrong with the WC.  

'promised all the Guinness i can drink'..........hmm, wasn't Arthur Guinness one of the financial backers of the Catholic Emancipation of 1793?  The Order of Malta, or some such?  ah hah, i knew it.

[Robert Card]

6 hours ago, François Carlier said:

His son was murdered too ?
I thought he died in a plane crash because he was disoriented.
I must be an idiot. Boycott me !

Yes, his son was murdered.   He was talking to atc just before his plane stalled, and he was talking calmly with no mention of a problem, and did not ask for directions.   There was an 8 mile visibility.  Radar shows that he was well above stall speed when he fell out of the sky.  He was not inexperienced either, he had 40 hours on that plane, but 300 hours altogether and that's enough for a commercial license.

What you thought Francois, is based on disinfo placed in the mainstream media.  just like when a young cub reporter in Dallas, Dan Rather, eventual Council on Foreign Relations member,  after being one of only 4 people that saw the Zapruder film that weekend, stated that JFK's body went 'violently forward' when it went back and to the left.  I know, I know, you have all kinds of rebuttals.  Don't waste your time, instead google Operation Mockingbird.

There's much, much more, like who's responsible for the murder of John Jr, but I'm not going into that with you three.   The point of this thread is to explain why no one should be conversing with  you LNer's.  All you're going to do is go into denialism like DVP,  or heap on the ad hom, or both.   Whoever is running this site is doing a lousy job.

Scientific Method states that anyone can ask any question about any subject at any time.  Initially, anyway.   you can't do scientific method on this site without being personally attacked.

 

[David Von Pein]

58 minutes ago, Robert Card said:

Whoever is running this site is doing a lousy job.

I'm sure the forum owners will appreciate that hateful comment very much. You're sweet.

BTW, I disagree with you. I think the owners/moderators of this site have done a good job in recent years.

Edited December 27, 2018 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

........

Edited December 27, 2018 by David Von Pein

[David Von Pein]

49 minutes ago, Robert Card said:

you can't do scientific method on this site without being personally attacked.

Some conspiracy theorists just need to grow a thicker skin. (IMO.)

[David Von Pein]

1 hour ago, Robert Card said:

He [JFK Jr.] was talking to atc just before his plane stalled...

Where on Earth did you pick up that piece of misinformation?

Per Wikipedia....

"Except for the take-off portion of his flight, Kennedy did not contact any air traffic controllers; during the flight, he never requested help or declared an emergency. Under the conditions of his flight, Kennedy was not required to file a flight plan, and because he did not, no one knew his exact route or expected time of his arrival."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_Jr._plane_crash

Edited December 27, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Robert Card]

21 hours ago, David Von Pein said:

Where on Earth did you pick up that piece of misinformation?

Per Wikipedia....

"Except for the take-off portion of his flight, Kennedy did not contact any air traffic controllers; during the flight, he never requested help or declared an emergency. Under the conditions of his flight, Kennedy was not required to file a flight plan, and because he did not, no one knew his exact route or expected time of his arrival."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_Jr._plane_crash

I think i see what your problem is with evidence.   Wikipedia is not evidence in a point of view article like in politics.   There are plenty of studies to show that wiki is biased, and that article is total evidence of this.  In your John Jr link, it’s a little more than bias, it’s basically BS.

 

In another thread, I just showed how Wikipedia is editing out info, like with Admiral Morrison on the USS Liberty incident:

http://www.hugequestions.com/Eric/TFC/FromOthers/Jim-Morrison-update-2016.html

another wikipedia edit i found recently is on Carlos Hathcock, legendary sniper of the Vietnam war, and chief sniping instructor at Quantico, said that after the assassination, he and his friends tried to duplicate the shot that LHO did, and none of them were able to do it.  I don’t know the circumstances here with Hathcock, but that story has been removed from wikipedia after being there since the beginning.  Nice.

Wikipedia is ok for a non-point of view article, but worthless for controversy.  They are clearly biased towards the network.

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

According to Coast Guard Petty Officer Todd Burgun, John Jr contacted the control tower at 9:39pm, shortly before he was to land.  He did this live on Channel 5 TV Boston.  Plenty of written media sources like UPI, also backed this up, this UPI quote is from a book, so you’ll have to search for it yourself:

 

 At 9:39 p.m. Friday, Kennedy radioed the airport and said he was 13

miles from the airport and 10 miles from the coast, according to WCVB-TV

news in Boston. He reportedly said he was making his final approach. 

   Moments later, radar operated by the Federal Aviation Administration

showed the plane went into a dive and dropped 1,200 feet in just 12

seconds, according to ABC News.

   In his final approach message, WCVB-TV said Kennedy told controllers

at the airport that he planned to drop off his wife's sister and then

take off again between 11 p.m. and 11:30 p.m. for Hyannis Airport.  

 

Burgun’s story is in complete agreement with FAA data, and surely, unless Burgun is an incredibly lucky guesser, he had to get this info from the FAA.  Burgun was re-assigned in the middle of that night, never to be heard from again.  Couldn't have Burgun repeating the story that John Jr called the control tower.

 

So why did the govt have to lie about whether or not John Jr called the control tower?   Once John called the control tower, he would have been entered into FAA computers through his transponder.  So then, if he doesn’t land within 5 minutes, or goes below 100 ft, an alarm will go off.  So the FAA had to say there was no communication so they could say there was no knowledge of him asking to land, and therefore, they didn't know about the crash right away.   A lie.

 

Let’s go further:  why did it take 15 hours to find the wreckage?  Some of Lauren Bessett’s friends were waiting at the airport to greet her, and when she didn’t show up by 10pm, they notified an employee, and he called the FAA to describe the situation.  Nothing was done.

 

Sen Ted Kennedy, a Senator for chrissakes, called the FAA at 11pm, was ignored and nothing happened, no search had begun.

 

Around 2am, the family gave up on the FAA, and called the Coast Guard.  So at this point the FAA had to do something and called the Air Force.  The Air Force did nothing but to tell the Coast Guard to go and search an area far from the approaches to the airport.  Needless to say, they found nothing.

 

7am, a now totally frustrated Sen Kennedy calls Clinton Chief of Staff, John Podesta for help.   Podesta immediately calls Clinton, and Clinton orders him to call the Air Force and begin a search within 15 minutes.

 

So did the Air Force begin searching?  No.  the AF tells the Coast Guard to take two boats and two helicopters and go on a wild goose chase across 20,000 sq miles of ocean.  Did the Coast Guard come up with anything?   No.

 

BTW, Channel 5 Boston showed a map that night pinpointing where the crash would be, right near the airport, and this area was not searched.  John’s plane had activated his crash-activated emergency locator transmitter, so the FAA, Air Force knew where the crash was immediately, and all along.

 

By lying and maintaining that John Jr never called the control tower they could then claim that they didn’t know where the crash site was, and they didn't know where he was, even though he was lined up for a landing a short distance from the airport.

 

In fact, the FAA, Air Force never found anything.  By chance,  the Coast Guard found some luggage in the water, and that’s how John Jr was found, 15 hours after the crash.  Even the mainstream/dupe news was screaming that they were being lied to, and why did it take so long for the search to begin.

 

Alright David, I’ve presented the evidence, and I’m really not asking you to believe everything I write, but you should at least acnowledge that there’s a lot wrong with the govt story, and it’s quite possible that john jr was murdered, otherwise, you're proving Cliff Varnell correct.  Why don't you read a book on the subject.

Edited December 28, 2018 by Robert Card

[David Von Pein]

3 hours ago, Robert Card said:

In your John Jr link, it’s a little more than bias, it’s basically BS.

Yeah, yeah, sure it is, Bob. Whatever you say.

[David Von Pein]

3 hours ago, Robert Card said:

Alright David, I’ve presented the evidence, and I’m really not asking you to believe everything I write, but you should at least acnowledge that there’s a lot wrong with the govt story, and it’s quite possible that John Jr. was murdered. .... Why don't you read a book on the subject[?]

Because those books are full of nothing but crap---and that's because they were written by rabid conspiracy theorists. I wouldn't believe a single thing that a "JFK Jr. Was Murdered" conspiracy theorist said. Just as I wouldn't even begin to believe a single solitary thing uttered by the super-wacko CTers who think that no airplanes at all hit the World Trade Center or the Pentagon on 9/11.

Those type of conspiracy theories are every bit as bad as the garbage churned out by The National Enquirer every week.

Edited December 28, 2018 by David Von Pein

[Robert Card]

43 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Yeah, yeah, sure it is, Bob. Whatever you say.

i don't know who you are, David.   You could be working for someone, and then again you could be a True Believer.  If a True Believer, than there's absolutely nothing that anyone can say that you will accept as a fact.  you don't see things because you don't want to see them.

Cliff Varnell's solution is the correct one.