Jump to content
The Education Forum

Don Jeffries

Members
  • Content Count

    1,204
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Don Jeffries

  1. First, let me also urge Paul to stay on. This forum needs more valuable posters, not less. I wasn't aware my pm box was full- haven't used it in a while. I cleared out a lot of space, so should be able to receive messages now. I don't care if Mark Lane or Harold Weisberg was posting here, no one voice should be dominating what passes for discourse here.
  2. If David was banned for not using a capital "T" for Tommy Graves' name, that would set a new standard. One of the most irritating things about Thomas Graves is his long-time tendency to mock others in his passive-aggressive way, and this certainly includes their names. But I guess since he prefaces nearly every response now with "With all due respect," he's following the rules. Could some moderator explain why David Josephs can't post here?
  3. Well, I tried to ask this question of my fellow moderators, too. They hid my thread on the subject, and the other one started by Paul Brancato drew predictably few responses. Assuming I'm still a moderator, I was never asked to vote on moderating David Josephs in any way. But then again, maybe I'm not a moderator any more. None of them answer my emails, so I'm not really sure. If David Josephs has been banned from the forum, that is a true outrage. He is one of the most knowledgeable and coherent researchers left in this fractured "community" of ours. It looks like the modera
  4. I was able to read the hidden thread. To clarify, I wasn't even sure I was still a moderator. I haven't been posting much over the past few years, and frankly I'm not sure why I'm doing so now. I wasn't advocating that anything be done to Thomas Graves or any other poster, just as I never voted to ban Jim Fetzer, Greg Parker, or anyone else over the years. I merely ask for consistency. And yes, I waited for an answer to my email, but since I haven't received any replies to my emails to the moderation team for quite a while, I decided to post. If the moderation is to be basically ha
  5. Yes, what happened to my thread? There is no point in emailing the moderator group- they never reply back. For the record, I am not advocating that Thomas Graves or anyone else be moderated or whatever. I am merely pointing out the glaring inconsistencies of the moderation here, as I have done repeatedly to my fellow moderators. Instead of just deleting threads, why not provide a reasonable explanation?
  6. Kirk, I can't pretend to understand the dog and pony show that passes for our political discourse today. On the surface, the Mueller investigation is typical partisan politics at work, and by "partisan" I mean at the gutter, mud-slinging level. Huey Long called them Tweedledum and Tweedledee for good reasons; the Dems and Republicans will never get "partisan" about war, for instance, or any significant kind of corruption. I am still undecided if Trump ever had any sincere principles, or if his populist rhetoric was theater, to rally segments of the populace behind a message that tou
  7. People often ask me if I think everything is a conspiracy. I respond that our leaders have been overwhelmingly corrupt and/or incompetent for a very long time, and the manner in which they conduct important business is simply organized corruption. That's a pretty good definition of conspiracy. As Truman administration James Forrestal once said, before he "jumped" out of a window at Bethesda Naval Hospital, if things were random, once in a while a mistake would be made in favor of the common people. If true outsiders could ever attain power in this country, then we'd have someone good ris
  8. And by the way, trying to claim the "commies" were funding Mark Lane is straight out of the CIA handbook. It also eerily corresponds to how the "Russians" are now used by the establishment left as bogeymen that can be conveniently blamed for any and all dissent in America. Tommy, was Joe McCarthy right? After all, in his day, the Soviets were a lot more powerful....
  9. I think I'm still a moderator here. Either way, is it true that Robert Charles Dunne can't post here? He just posted for the first time in quite a while. Considering how the nonstop, often laughable stream-of-consciousness output of Thomas Graves is tolerated here, it would be a sad reflection on this forum if there is some kind of limitation placed upon a person of RCD's caliber.
  10. Jim, Remember that Arianna Huffington permitted no talk of "conspiracy theories" in her organization, and Jesse Ventura lost his place as a columnist with them because of that. Arianna would later lecture Luke Rudkowski of We are Change when he brought up the subject.
  11. To my knowledge, there isn't a single mainstream media outlet that doesn't have an editorial policy of "no conspiracy" regarding the JFK assassination (or any other event, outside the ludicrous Russian "collusion" nonsense.). Even formerly open-minded Geraldo Rivera and Bill O'Reilly are now loud and proud lone nutters. I also can't think of a single mainstream journalist who doesn't buy the lone assassin fairy tale, outside of David Talbot or Jefferson Morley. It's almost like they have to sign some kind of contract about this subject when they enter the field.
  12. RCD, It's great to see you alive and posting again. I hope you'll chime in more often. This place certainly needs more people like you.
  13. Sandy, I'd like to compliment you on your good research. You're one of the few in this community now who are asking important questions, and approaching the subject with an open mind. As I've said before, those dismissing Harvey and Lee out of hand are not interested in the whole truth. Whether his entire theory is correct or not, John Armstrong conducted a massive amount of research, all out of his own pocket. How many who post on this forum have done any independent research on this subject?
  14. As I showed in Hidden History, the establishment Left has always despised the Kennedys. The liberal blogosphere is thus no different in this regard. I have known several loyal Democrats, for instance, who vote the party line every time. Except when a Kennedy runs, that is. Then they actually vote for the Republican opponent.
  15. Getting back to the classroom photo- I too have long wondered about the circumstances behind this photo. Oswald blackening out his teeth is a ridiculous notion, but how (and why) this picture was taken is I think an important question. I never remember a single instance of anyone taking a photograph inside a classroom during my twelve years of public education. I'm not sure cameras were even permitted in schools, and one would guess that the teacher (or a student) would have noticed the photographer getting his camera out and snapping the picture inside this classroom. If the idea was to
  16. And if Putin is awful because he was once KGB, what was the KGB like when it really had power? Why would the same "liberals" who seemingly want us to go to war with Russia now, and in fact supported sanctions against them, have been so desirous of peace with the Soviet Union? And why do they seem so cool with China?
  17. Jim D. is exactly right here. How can Americans lecture Russia about interfering in other elections, when we have specialized for decades in overthrowing regimes, invading and occupying small sovereign nations? But then again, how can we lecture certain countries about having nuclear weapons, when we are the only ones who ever used them on another nation? And as for North Korea, while we continue our escapades in Iraq and Afghanistan, they have never even invaded South Korea.
  18. Cliff, You know I respect you, and we're on the same page regarding the JFK assassination. But.... We are seeing an entirely different set of facts here. Whatever money Trump might have accepted from Russians over the years in no way differentiates him from any other corporate One Percenter. His primary focus all his life has been making money, in any way he can. In this regard, he is no different than any other billionaire. There's an old adage about it being impossible to become a billionaire honestly. I think that's very true. By focusing on the "Russians," we diminish our own mas
  19. Tommy, You sound more and more like an old-line anti-Soviet guy, circa 1956. Surely you must have a revisionist opinion of Joseph McCarthy at this point? For the record, Putin has put out a decree that any Rothschilds entering Russia are to be arrested on the spot. He has banned GMOs from Russian food. He has made inferences that the JFK assassination was the result of a conspiracy. Much of what he says sounds a lot more reasonable than the tired rhetoric we get from our own homegrown Republicrat politicians. If you think Putin is so bad, what must you have thought of Lenin or
  20. Donald Trump was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, as virtually all members of the One Percent are. He has been influenced by "Russia" as much as Thomas Graves has. No matter how many times you repeat the "Russian mobbed-up" talking point, it's as meaningless as the millions of msm references to Russian "collusion" in the election. As I covered extensively in Hidden History, this country has a sordid tradition of electoral fraud. The "Russians" have never had anything to do with it. The only demonstrable fraud in the 2016 election was the early efforts of the Republican party to sto
  21. Why do any of you treat Thomas Graves as a serious researcher? His every post is filled with sarcastic jabs and unsuccessful attempts at humor. He has become much more than just another John Armstrong-basher, as he promulgates the only conspiracy theory the establishment has ever loved- the "Russians did it" nonsense. He is also becoming some kind of outlandish grammar cop. From what little I can decipher out of his multitude of posts, Graves now believes disinfo agent/lone nutter Edward Epstein was essentially right. He is promoting the Oswald-did-it mantra, just in a more subtle way th
  22. Jim DiEugenio is one of the few people in the JFK assassination research community who seems to understand just how putrid our professional "journalists" are in this country. If we had an independent mainstream media, with curious reporters, editors and producers who desired to publish the truth, then I would not have been able to write a book like Hidden History. Forget any muckrackers out there, feverishly trying to expose corruption. I'd settle for a media that simply questioned official sources. High-paid journalists, along with what I call the court historians, are tremendously vest
  23. This odious piece of cinematic disinformation cannot be compared in any way, shape, or form to Oliver Stone's JFK. Stone took very little dramatic license; he basically combined a few characters to create the fictional Willie O'Keefe, couldn't use Ruth Paine's real name for fear of a lawsuit, and idealized Jim Garrison a good deal because he needed a single protagonist. The Post takes real events and skewers them beyond all recognition. It makes a heroine out of Katherine Graham, who was an obnoxious One Percenter that was never any kind of true liberal zealot, despite the histrionics of
  24. There must be more to the document, Jim, but the part about airing only what is "consonant" with the FBI report has been out there for a long time. The rest of the document would be new, and certainly interesting.
  25. This is par for the course with Trump. He likes to excite his base, make them continue to think he's an outsider, then ultimately act exactly the same as his predecessors.
×
×
  • Create New...