JFKA Horshoe Theory: 'The Radical Left' and 'Extreme Right' come together to blame Israel, Zionism and Zionists for JFK's Assassination

The proper title for Bergman, is Rise and Kill First.

8 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

Good grief... Tell us what "slander" you have ever experienced here, Ben.

Are you referring to people criticizing your persistent, redundant denials of Donald Trump's January 6th mob attack on Congress?  Your repeated insistence that J6 was merely a "scrum?"

Your later, redundant claims that J6 was a Deep State "Patriot Purge" to make Trump look bad?

There's a big difference between Mathew Koch's libel-- misquoting and making false, defamatory statements about Education Forum members-- and accurate, critical comments about the content of your erroneous posts.

Do you understand the difference?

 

I joined the forum because I felt like you guys bullied Ben, and I have said that before on the Forum. If that bs 56yrs later thread that has largely been debunked is also why I joined to counter the politics that was very biased and one sided. 

You are doing what Jim is doing and not citing specifics. Cite where I miss quoted you  and made a false statement. You are basically projecting what you are doing on to me because you are the one make accusations which unless you cite are baseless. 

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Another series of false, libelous comments here by Mathew Koch, mods.

The comment about the Talmud and DNA -- which Mathew Koch has falsely attributed to me-- was a direct quote of the official Amazon paragraph describing Ronen Bergman's book about Mossad assassinations, Rise First and Kill.

Bergman is a respected Mossad historian who happens to be Jewish.

Mathew Koch continues to post libelous comments on the forum, claiming that I am "Anti-Semitic" for posting a reference to a book about the history of the Mossad.

This is nonsense, and should be a violation of Education Forum norms.

It isn't Anti-Semitic to discuss the history of Israel, and U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East.

It isn't Anti Semitic to question if Israel or Mossad was involved if you can make a case for it and not just infer and based on leaping logic like Dimona. 

Here is the comment so anyone can see what I objected to which I don't think was that out of line especially now seeing that William 'Harvard Class of 88' Neiderhut very "Scholarly" cited a book review from Amazon.com that backed up his bias. Sorry, While I don't subscribe to Reformed Judaism citing Religious texts without footnotes to say "The Talmud says: “If someone comes to kill you, rise up and kill him first.” This instinct to take every measure, even the most aggressive, to defend the Jewish people is hardwired into Israel’s DNA."

I was suspended by Mark for objecting to that comment not kidding. 

So @W. Niederhut here is you asscioating with people who have been shown to have antisemtic opinons you have reposted what I consider and does meet the dictionary defintion of anti semtism and I am not doing what you constantly and malicously do with your Anti Trump water cooler buddies and use very abstarct reasoning to blame others and connect them to racism of tha past that they weren't involved with and it isn't "Orthodox Christian" Behavior and I can cite those religious texts you are violating becasue Orthodoxs are almost identical to the Catholic Catecism. 

You know how much better the forum would be if you Ron, Matt, Kirk and the other water boys could just not comment with your political hackery?!? Seriously you guys are ruining this forum and when the mirror is shown on your hypocrisy you literally cried Mod like a little child. Which further illustrates how you have wrecked this forum because the Mod system has been corrupted by litterly you!!! 

I'm a 911 researcher who has worked on something that was published, was part of We Are Change Denver, I do know people like Fran Shure who is a real psychologist from Denver who is cited in 911 work, I was apart of 911 visibility that put 911 documentaries like Architects and Engineers on Local Public Access and made national news, I along with other people did have our clips stolen by Jason Bermas and Alex Jones and featured in the terrible documentary NEW WORLD ORDER, I do know Luke Rudkowski and other notable people in the movement because I was in the movement and stuck my neck out. 

Meanwhile you allegedly were apart of 911 scholars for truth, which I doubt because you learned about 911 from a patient and that organization was very quickly defunct and was only made up of people like Jim Fetzer because they were professors hence the scholars term. So you're going to have to prove to me that you were in it. Which is also hilarious because of what happened with Morgan Reynolds who later went on to work with Judy Wood who Jesse Ventura works with, LOL. Guess what Ryan Dawson and the people on here do exactly what you did and cite who benefits from Dancing Israelis.. meanwhile in reality Pakistani ISI, Saudi Arabia GID, Israeli Mossad, MI6, CIA, Pentagon are all involved so maybe that's why I might know when you say "Who benefits" you don't know enough to know you are taking from a place of not knowing ; ) 

William why don't you watch this 911 video I made taking Ryan Dawson down on his 911 Flip Flops and tell me what I got wrong or took out of context. 

https://rumble.com/v2fbzay-ryan-dawsons-911-flip-flops.html

46 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Well, it appears you might be right about Mark Knight using your last name against you. I can't say for sure because it looks like you're just going from memory.

But I certainly didn't did use your last name. That's just not something I do.

But I do recall making an observation like what you describe, comparing your politics to Ben Cole's. The reason being that, on the surface his and yours seem very much the same with Trump/MAGA like qualities. I said something like, Matthew is MAGA but Ben only wants to be. He can't because he doesn't like Trump.

What I said was meant to be in jest.

The point that I am making is that as a person of authority those comments that may have been made in jest, but are unacceptable from a Moderation standpoint. Now if you weren't a mod I would take that and forget about it because alot worse stuff was said to me on the thread. But that was when I was a new member and I also don't think you guys made a good first impression which then whether true or not caused me to view your moderation as biased toward people on the right like Chris B made a thread about. 

So like I said earlier on the thread I am sorry for the hurtful things I said to you to get suspended and I am willing to extend an olive branch and let water go under the bridge. But the forum has got to get off of politic and back to the way it was when Richard Simpkin ran the place which is why it attracted authors which then would cite researchers and symbiosis would occur. But what's happening now with the Water Cooler people brigading thread and mass reporting them has caused this forum to become like reddit which is basically a shell of it's former self..  

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

The proper title for Bergman, is Rise and Kill First.

Jim,

    I haven't read Bergman's book, I merely referenced it recently, in response to a claim by a Ben Cole that Israel is a small country that lacks the resources to conduct assassinations(!)

    I did recently post an excellent essay (on the Political Discussion board) published by Bergman in the New York Times a few years ago, about the history of Netanyahu's longstanding goal of bombing Iran.

Meanwhile, Mathew Koch is now posting more comments about me that are simply false and, frankly, confused.

I have stated on more than one occasion here on the Education Forum that I was always skeptical of Michael Collins Piper's theory that the Mossad was involved in the JFK assassination.   I specifically said that, in my opinion, Piper's book, Final Judgment, seems "big on theories and small on data."

Secondly, it sounds like Mathew Koch has been active in the 9/11 Truth movement here in Denver. 

I have never been formally involved in any 9/11 Truth organizations, or even attended any 9/11 Truth seminars, meetings, etc.   At most, I have read some scientific articles by Stephen Jones, and other scientists involved in the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth organization.  I do believe that the WTC was demolished by explosives on 9/11.

I have theories about what really happened on 9/11, and I also had a somewhat famous patient who was involved in 9/11 issues that the general public knows little about.

I have never been at liberty to discuss that case, and I never shall be.  It's confidential.

1 hour ago, Matthew Koch said:

the way it was when Richard Simpkin ran the place

John Simkin.

William,

No serious researcher that I have ever met took the Collins Piper book seriously.  That is just pure hogwash.

At best, it was so strained it was kind of a joke.  At worst it was pernicious.  Someone once told me that he overheard the late author say, "If I could just have 20 minutes with Jim DiEugenio!" Nope.  If I spent like seven hours reading your book and found it completely unconvincing, how is 20 minutes going to change that?

When I say that book was pernicious, I mean it in two ways.  First, because it is so weak, it makes JFK critics look really silly and marginal. Secondly, because of that, it makes us targets.  When Collins Piper was speaking out here in the LA area before he passed on, the LA Times used that to do a front page story ridiculing him and JFK researchers at the same time. Even my graduate studies professor mentioned it to me.

Go all the way back to the beginning with say Meagher and Garrison, all the way down to this day, with all the people we featured in JFK Revisited. Show me one prominent, respected writer/researcher who ever advocated that the Mossad killed Kennedy.

(Sound of crickets in the night.)

Because there is none, Koch has to desperately grab at Jeff Morley's description of Angleton's governance of the Israel account.  I know Morley and have read almost all of his stuff.  He has never said the Mossad killed JFK. We interviewed him for Stone's film for an hour.  I have talked to him over the phone, via email, and have read all of his Kennedy books.  He has never even hinted at that.  If I describe Kennedy's Middle East policy and how it changed from Dulles and after with LBJ, that does not mean I think the Mossad killed JFK. I have never said that because I have never been able to find any evidence for it. I mean after 30 years I think I would have found something if it was there. Don't you? 

So what Koch is selling here is pure moonshine. Hopefully, you and me and Ron will be able to neutralize the guy.

And BTW, how are Talbot, Morley and me part of the radical left?  I have always considered myself a Kennedy Democrat. You know, like maybe Howard Dean?

31 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

So what Koch is selling here is pure moonshine. Hopefully, you and me and Ron will be able to neutralize the guy.

And BTW, how are Talbot, Morley and me part of the radical left?  I have always considered myself a Kennedy Democrat. You know, like maybe Howard Dean?

What does "Nuetralize" mean get a Mod who is sympathetic to you to either delete or move my thread  or suspend me? 

Isn't that a violation of forum rules? 

Doesn't that illustrate why someone shouldn't be a mod and doesn't that illustrate malicious intent on your part? 

On 6/9/2024 at 6:17 PM, Matthew Koch said:

The point of this thread is to

A.) show that the Israel killed JFK theory is rapidly gaining popularity amongst Left and Right extremists. . . .

It is mostly the radical liberals in this forum who peddle this embarrassing, fringe theory. I haven't seen any conservatives advance this awful theory. As you probably know, most of the liberals here who peddle the theory also defend and praise L. Fletcher Prouty, who spoke at two conferences held by anti-Semitic, pro-white-supremacy groups (Liberty Lobby and the IHR), who appeared 10 times on Liberty Lobby's sleazy radio program (a program that routinely included Holocaust deniers and white supremacists as "guests"), who praised the IHR's Holocaust-denying journal, etc., etc. 

Quote

@Matthew KochBut it seems that after looking at your Gaza thread that a lot of people on this forum do believe this conspiracy theory and do have sympathy for any theory that blames America and its "Fascist" allies like Israel.

Bullseye. You'd think that if ever there were an event that would reveal Hamas's true nature and Israel's innocence, it would be Hamas's barbaric October 7 attacks. Hamas murdered about 1,200 Israelis, many of them women and children, along with committing numerous rapes and acts of mutilation of the rape victims, and also taking hundreds of hostages. 

But, nope, true to form, radical liberals ignore or whitewash the October 7 attacks and actually fault the Israelis for their response to the attacks, as if Israel somehow "had it coming" and as if Israel's response was nothing but wonton destruction (when in fact Israel made a genuine effort to minimize civilian casualties, but that is hard to do when Hamas uses Gazan civilians as human shields).

When I have recited profusely documented history regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict, such as the Palestinian leadership's rejection of the 1947 UN partition plan that would have given the Palestinians a homeland, some of these same radical liberals have accused me of posting "fake history." 

17 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

It is mostly the radical liberals in this forum who peddle this embarrassing, fringe theory. I haven't seen any conservatives advance this awful theory. As you probably know, most of the liberals here who peddle the theory also defend and praise L. Fletcher Prouty, who spoke at two conferences held by anti-Semitic, pro-white-supremacy groups (Liberty Lobby and the IHR), who appeared 10 times on Liberty Lobby's sleazy radio program (a program that routinely included Holocaust deniers and white supremacists as "guests"), who praised the IHR's Holocaust-denying journal, etc., etc. 

Bullseye. You'd think that if ever there were an event that would reveal Hamas's true nature and Israel's innocence, it would be Hamas's barbaric October 7 attacks. Hamas murdered about 1,200 Israelis, many of them women and children, along with committing numerous rapes and acts of mutilation of the rape victims, and also taking hundreds of hostages. 

But, nope, true to form, radical liberals ignore or whitewash the October 7 attacks and actually fault the Israelis for their response to the attacks, as if Israel somehow "had it coming" and as if Israel's response was nothing but wonton destruction (when in fact Israel made a genuine effort to minimize civilian casualties, but that is hard to do when Hamas uses Gazan civilians as human shields).

When I have recited profusely documented history regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict, such as the Palestinian leadership's rejection of the 1947 UN partition plan that would have given the Palestinians a homeland, some of these same radical liberals have accused me of posting "fake history." 

Indeed, JFK's advisers thought the peace cause was likely hopeless, there would be no peaceful return of Muslims to Israel proper, as the Arabs only wanted that Israel be destroyed. 

It may be Israel never finds peace, and must survive as a garrison state. 

The Sunnis and the Shiites had a falling out in 632 AD, and when Saddam's regime in Iraq was destroyed in 2003, the Sunnis and Shiites were at each other's throats again, making Hamas look like sissies. 

Sunnis and Shiites have 1,400 years of mutual violent and lethal religious animosity. Still going on. 

Israel may have a looooonnnnggg wait for peace. 

3 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

It is mostly the radical liberals in this forum who peddle this embarrassing, fringe theory. I haven't seen any conservatives advance this awful theory. As you probably know, most of the liberals here who peddle the theory also defend and praise L. Fletcher Prouty, who spoke at two conferences held by anti-Semitic, pro-white-supremacy groups (Liberty Lobby and the IHR), who appeared 10 times on Liberty Lobby's sleazy radio program (a program that routinely included Holocaust deniers and white supremacists as "guests"), who praised the IHR's Holocaust-denying journal, etc., etc. 

Bullseye. You'd think that if ever there were an event that would reveal Hamas's true nature and Israel's innocence, it would be Hamas's barbaric October 7 attacks. Hamas murdered about 1,200 Israelis, many of them women and children, along with committing numerous rapes and acts of mutilation of the rape victims, and also taking hundreds of hostages. 

But, nope, true to form, radical liberals ignore or whitewash the October 7 attacks and actually fault the Israelis for their response to the attacks, as if Israel somehow "had it coming" and as if Israel's response was nothing but wonton destruction (when in fact Israel made a genuine effort to minimize civilian casualties, but that is hard to do when Hamas uses Gazan civilians as human shields).

When I have recited profusely documented history regarding the Arab-Israeli conflict, such as the Palestinian leadership's rejection of the 1947 UN partition plan that would have given the Palestinians a homeland, some of these same radical liberals have accused me of posting "fake history." 

What utter nonsense-- like almost all of Michael Griffith's posts on this forum.

I don't know a single "liberal" who was not shocked and appalled by the October 7th terrorist attacks on Israel.

Not one.

And most "liberals" have also been shocked and appalled by the right-wing Netanyahu government's retaliatory carnage in Gaza-- 37,000 slain civilians, (including women and children) and 56,000+ demolished buildings, (including schools, hospitals, and mosques.)

The most accurate, honest commentaries about Netanyahu's war crimes have come from progressive Democrats, including Bernie Sanders and Norman Soloman, who happen to be Jewish.

Netanyahu's claim (echoed in the right-wing U.S. media) that critics of his IDF war crimes are "Anti-Semitic" is downright Orwellian.

Bernie Sanders, himself, published the most eloquent rebuttal of Netanyahu's false "Anti-Semitic" trope.

NEWS: Sanders Responds to Netanyahu’s Claim that Criticism of the Israeli Government’s Policies is Antisemitic » Senator Bernie Sanders (senate.gov)

5 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

It is mostly the radical liberals in this forum who peddle this embarrassing, fringe theory. I haven't seen any conservatives advance this awful theory. As you probably know, most of the liberals here who peddle the theory also defend and praise L. Fletcher Prouty, who spoke at two conferences held by anti-Semitic, pro-white-supremacy groups (Liberty Lobby and the IHR), who appeared 10 times on Liberty Lobby's sleazy radio program (a program that routinely included Holocaust deniers and white supremacists as "guests"), who praised the IHR's Holocaust-denying journal, etc., etc. 

 

Israel didn't get the Nuclear capability until like 67'ish so while I think Jim and Oliver are trying to make the point that Israel never would have gotten the bomb had JFK lived.

I highly doubt anything different than what happened in the Middle East. Kennedy's policy was to aid both sides and he was attempting to win over the Nationalist from the Soviets which Jim apparently doesn't understand how the Secret Speech at the Kremlin influenced JFK's policy in the Un Aligned world. Like I said earlier this and Indonesia were so important almost no one in the Administration who later wrote biographies wrote about this. And this is a way for Oliver to not get criticized by the radicals on the right and left because he got an Israeli Arms dealer to fiancé his films including JFK. 

I now see acceptable discourse, like how America was before 911. Where basically from Trump to JFK was acceptable Overton window discussion. We have radicals fighting for the middle.. sadly

But ever since the phony Iraq War Neo Cons like Bush and Cheney, and the reemergence of the radical left through Barack Obama (who had Weather Men Undergrounders writing his books) Hillary and Bill Clinton and a foreign policy that was still aligned with PNAC aka Wall $treet. Since WWII there has been a strategy of War is Peace but war isn't declared so the Military Industrial Complex profits and we as Americans have basically had a racketeering gang take over the country via Continuity of Government and Wall Street. Which is known as the Deep State.

The thing that Oliver, Jim, Good, Sachs, etc need to catch up to is that this "American Deep State" doesn't control and Empire like they want to think. It is a deep state that connects to other deep states like Rome, London, Berlin, Tel Aviv, and alot of other power sectors in the world. Traditionalism like JFK believed in was replaced with the New Age. This is an important fact that Jim, Sachs, Good, and Stone are in denial of" in JFK's President and the Press speech (Which they never cite because it's anti communist. JFK says what is the point of continuing our nation if our traditions don't continue with it. [Emphasis added] I'm sure there is a reason why Oliver hasn't included any of the Dictators he ate cocoa leaves with praising JFK or his Alliance for Progress (I"ve had communists in my past cite that as blame for ruining South America) It's revisionist history if you are going to say JFK's politics align with my hippy radical Saul Alinsky opinions. Like when in JFK when Jim Garrison says JFK was a Radical (Barf) 

Other than virtue signaling and patting themselves on their own back I don't understand why bring up Dimona and the Israeli Account (Mossad) if you aren't imply cui bono 'Who Benefits" then they go further with saying there would be no Neo cons? Who are the Neo Cons? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoconservatism 

by this definition Barry Goldwater is a Neo con. This is why I'm making this thread to point out how this nuance when you understand it, it's like Zionist it's an unfair charterazation which is being used for a different word that the people don't want to catch flak for saying.

Most zionists are christian zionists like Mike Pompeo. India and 9 out 10 hindus are Zionists. Freemasons are Zionists. This word like what "Anti Semitic" has come to be used as because The Big Three Abrahamic religions are semitic. Both word have been interchanged into basically; "People I don't like and People who don't like me" What I was hoping was a dialogue instead of a lobbying of cliches to smear the other side and I actually was hoping for Liberal people to come together and work to get this Zionists killed JFK for Israel crap out. What I don't think Jim understands is that Ryan Dawson had 200K more followers on Twitter than Jim does so it is important imo to counter misinformation theories like this.

But Jim and Niederhut seem like they want to continue to play unfair politics and smear their political rivals as Fasicst when the Palestinians were aligned with the 3rd Reich. (in fairness so were the first Israeli settlers via Havara agreement) 

This is how the Radicals see themselves about being called Anti Semitic btw: 

I will spend time today and rewatch Ryan's Fresh N Fit appearance where James DiEugenio is brought up and and I will post it because this is the point I'm making is that Destiny Betray and Dimona are being cited by Ryan who I posted an interview with him and James so I'd say I'm being as fair connecting this to him as they are connecting JFK assassination to Israel and the Palestinian conflict. Which as we have seen in this thread has to leave a lot out to make it seem plausible that Utopia would be going on there had JFK not been killed by CIA and people associated with Israeli Account. [Emphasis added]

On 6/10/2024 at 6:53 AM, Matthew Koch said:

Well, the forum needs to return to research

I waded through all the Twitter feeds and repetition in this thread, trying to figure out what the point is, and it doesn’t really seem like research. 

It seems like an excuse to preach about contemporary politics under the guise of relevance to the JFKA. 

13 hours ago, Matthew Koch said:

why I joined to counter the politics that was very biased and one sided. 

I’m not sure that’s the best reason to join what’s supposed to be a JFK research forum, but at least you’re honest about it. 
 

On 6/9/2024 at 5:17 PM, Matthew Koch said:

A.) show that the Israel killed JFK theory is rapidly gaining popularity amongst Left and Right extremists 

B.) provide a place for people to provide counter evidence that JFK's Death isn't a Zionist Conspiracy 

C.) show that people who express this theory or sympathy for this theory do so because of their own biases and not based on evidence and logic. 

Ok. That seems reasonable. Where are your contributions to this objective though? Posting a bunch of embedded links and twitter nonsense with barely any refutation looks more like you are giving these people a platform vs. providing counter evidence. 

I do not think that is your intent, but you are coming off as someone whose only goal here is to loudly promote their own biased political views, which you basically admitted is true. 

Do you have any interest at all in discussing the actual JFK case, or is your plan to continue to post threads trying to connect JFK to some current event so you can lecture everyone on right-wing politics? 

Tom, unlike you and those two, I have attended almost every major conference since 1991.

No one has ever voiced any such opinion, namely that the Mossad killed Kennedy. The Final Judgement by Collins Piper  had no impact on the critical community, for reasons stated above.

Therefore, I  stand by what I said, what Koch is doing is a provocation, about the same street theater level as Griffith.  

I think part of it is to detract from what the IDF is doing in Gaza right now. William was quite right to post Bernie Sanders' eloquent reply to that brutality and its bizarre anti -semitic accusation.

But that does not alter the calculus of Dallas on November 22, 1963. End of story.

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

I waded through all the Twitter feeds and repetition in this thread, trying to figure out what the point is, and it doesn’t really seem like research. 

Tom this is the Debate forum not the research section. 

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

I waded through all the Twitter feeds and repetition in this thread, trying to figure out what the point is, and it doesn’t really seem like research. 

It seems like an excuse to preach about contemporary politics under the guise of relevance to the JFKA. 

Tom why didn't you ever express this opinion on all of the threads that went the other way? I clearly remember you commenting on the thread where Lesie and the Water cooler thread that is being taken to task tried in vain to kick me off the Forum. Leslie made a story up that I called her answering machine and left a threatening messaged with the term Corcicans to imply a death threat. Afterwards you had problems with Lessie didn't you? But here you are again and your "INTENT" is to pile on like Niederhut and others and derail the thread. 

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

Ok. That seems reasonable. Where are your contributions to this objective though? Posting a bunch of embedded links and twitter nonsense with barely any refutation looks more like you are giving these people a platform vs. providing counter evidence. 

My contribution is this thread [Emphasis added] I am making a case that these people are wrong and connected to this kind of facts and the case and I'm leaving it open for others help make the case that Zionists and Israel didn't kill JFK. 

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

I do not think that is your intent, but you are coming off as someone whose only goal here is to loudly promote their own biased political views, which you basically admitted is true.  

Please look at the Dave Smith debate I posted because the same thing is happening here. If people I have mentioned don't want to be associated with the unintended consequences of their language or the topics they put in their documentary. Need to make the case why they shouldn't be associated with or why they don't think the same as these people especially since I have posted a video of Jim with Ryan Dawson in the same room. 

1 hour ago, Tom Gram said:

IDo you have any interest at all in discussing the actual JFK case, or is your plan to continue to post threads trying to connect JFK to some current event so you can lecture everyone on right-wing politics? 

I do discuss the actual case but because of Water Cooler people who have weaponized JFK research to blame their political enemies. This thread has used a concept of Murphy's law of Combat: "When your enemy is in range, so are you" 

I have established that people like Laurant Guarant have been cited by William Niederhut and others on the forum. And that Ryan Dawson interviewed James DiEugenio and has a similar Anti Neo Theme. 

*Please cite what Right Wing Politics I've been lecturing people that isn't in line with what people are already doing in threads? Tom why don't you join the Sachs thread and counter the cited information about the John F. Kennedy New Frontier Administration I have made unfair "RIGHT WING" opinions about? 

You wanna accuse me of not discussing the JFK case I've read more books than you. Challenge me on something that isn't using vague language about my political ideology that you have shown on privious threads that your a Hick lib that associates me with the worst country racist right wing people. Which you are incorrect about and I don't know what you are correct about because when I offered to help you with the Dallas PO Box and Area Code map I have and you ignored and ghosted my reply so sorry if I don't think you are being genuine with what you are saying in this thread ; ) 

16 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Tom, unlike you and those two, I have attended almost every major conference since 1991.

This smacks of elitism where not bringing this up because it was mentioned at JFK Lancer once upon a time it's because your premise is that had JFK lived there would be peace in the Middle East. Make the case then because you are just doing hit and run attacks to try to be like a lawyer and get something thrown out on a technicality. YOU are in a video interviewing Anti Neo Con Repost Ryan Dawson. I have a picture of when he did this: