Jump to content
The Education Forum

Don Jeffries

Members
  • Content Count

    1,204
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Don Jeffries

  1. I guess I shouldn't be surprised by some of the replies here, but I still am. Why should any American support the imprisonment of a non-violent individual simply because he holds an unpopular opinion and insists on stating that opinion publicly? I maintain that this issue is the ONLY issue that brings out this kind of hard-line reaction in otherwise open-minded people. Well, okay, maybe child pornography; but at least we all recognize the obvious danger to children posed by that. Even there, though, I would venture to bet that the idea of NAMBLA having the right to exist freely in America d
  2. Ian, You and I both know that if this were any other belief, every person on this forum would be outraged that someone was being imprisoned for stating it. It's irrlevant if a jury found that Zundel couldn't "prove" his opinion; since when should anyone have to "prove" their ideas and opinons? As I stated before, if "denying the holocaust" is a ridiculous and uncredible position, it should be easy to demonstrate that and those advocating it should soon be rendered powerless and obsolete. Censoring them and even throwing some of them into prison doesn't prove they're wrong; in fact, it makes p
  3. John, What a thoughtful, refreshing perspective. This is very close to my own views on the subject, except for the fact that I have, as indicated in an earlier post, been persuaded by the Leuchter Report that the revisionists have some very valid points. At the very least, I am apalled at the imprisonment of teacher Ernst Zundel in Canada, and the whole notion of making it illegal to "deny" any part of "official" history. After all, is it that far of a stretch to suppose that what JFK assassination researchers are doing is "denying" the official story of November 22, 1963?
  4. Shanet, The link you left didn't provide any real rebutal to Leuchter. It had a lot of vitriol and character assassination, and little data to refute his research. It reminded me very much of LN rebuttals to the work of Warren Commission critics. And debating the holocaust isn't what I meant to do, anyhow, when I posted a defense of the RIGHT to "deny the holocaust," or the official version of any historical event. Do you think that people should be imprisoned for "denying the holocaust?" How is it fair and just for a teacher like Ernst Zundel to be kept in SOLITARY CONFINEMENT for two year
  5. I hesitate to post my comments, at the risk of being branded a "nazi," but here goes. First of all, let me say that this is John's forum, and he certainly has the right to set the rules. I appreciate very much his efforts and value the forum as an educational tool. That being said, I also believe completely in free speech and a free press. The whole issue of WWII has become increasingly sacrosanct, even among those who are willing to debate and discuss the most controversial topics imaginable. This does not merely apply to the holocaust, but to such tangential issues like Pearl Harbor, and the
  6. Steve, I think we have to be careful when we link together various right wing "extremist" groups. I have always felt that more than "anti-Castro" Cubans, or Minutemen or John Birch Society types, or devoted followers of Gen. Walker were behind the assassination of JFK. I believe this for a couple of reasons. First of all, these groups are not, IMHO, powerful enough to pull off the kind of coverup that has transpired for over 40 years and is still going strong. They are also not powerful enough, IMHO, to compel the likes of the FBI, the CIA, the Secret Service, etc., to cover up their crime. H
  7. To anyone concerned with the other side of the whole Judith Campbell Exner story, I suggest reading a great piece by Jim DiEugenio. This should still be available online, and it was in the archives of either Probe or Fair Play magazines. Exner's story was swallowed whole by almost everyone, with little scrutiny and no delving into the question of her credibility.
  8. I can't believe we're seriously arguing the possibility that Castro was the power behind the JFK assassination. As the always insightful Robert-Charles Dunne has pointed out here so well, everything tells us that Castro would have preferred JFK to any potential successor and had no motive to kill him. I reject this theory on the same basis that I reject the theory, held by many here, that some consortium of "anti-Castro" and extreme right-wing forces were behind the assassination. In each case, I think the nature of the ensuing coverup proves that those who killed JFK were powerful enough to n
  9. Happy New Year to all from the U.S. The first two witnesses I would love to interview would be Ruth and Michael Paine, who are both still alive and, IMHO, very crucial to understanding the framing of Oswald. Another living witness who undoubtedly knows something is James Hosty, although he's spoken out a lot and is probably not going to tell the truth regardless. I would like to really grill Eugene Boone about the finding of the rifle on the 6th floor, and why both he and Seymour Weitzman signed sworn affidavits identifying it as a German Mauser. I have mentioned a fascination with Weitzman be
  10. A friend handed me an obituary for filmmaker Larry Buchanan earlier this week, and he was surprised that I didn't know who he was. While I enjoy wonderfully bad sci-films from the '50s and '60s very much, and this guy directed a couple of real "classics" ("Mars Needs Women" and "The Eye Creatures"), I had no idea of his connection to the JFK assassination. There is a mention in the obituary that Buchanan directed a flim entitled "The Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald" in 1964, but it appears to have had limited play and was pretty much suppressed afterwards. Since I haven't heard anything about this
  11. I am intrigued by Seymour Weitzman, the Dallas constable who was in on the discovery of the rifle on the sixth floor of the TSBD, found a piece of the president's skull and made an interesting early report from behind the pickett fence. To my knowledge, Weitzman was never interviewed by any of the early critics. He appeared to disappear from public view after the assassination, and the next (and last) we hear of him is when the House Assassinations Committee wrote a followup report to a lengthy interview with a psychiatrist from a mental institution where Weitzman had been for quite some time.
  12. I feel Marina Oswald has been deceptive about almost everything. Without her contradictory but damaging testimony before the Warren Commission, the official fairy tale would have no foundation. Virtually everthing we know (and most of us accept without question) about Oswald's actions during the weeks leading up to the assassination come from two sources; either Marina or the even more suspicious Ruth Paine. I can accept that Marina was coerced to lie before the authorities after the assassination, and out of understandable fear told them what they wanted to hear. However, when she suddenly ch
  13. I have been researching the JFK assassination since the mid- 1970s. As a teenager, I was the co-chairman of a local chapter of Mark Lane's Citizens' Commission of Inquiry. I communicated several times with Penn Jones during the early 1980, and he published an article I wrote in his fine little newsletter "The Continuing Inquiry" in 1983. I consider myself a populist-ilbertarian hybrid, and have a web site called "I PROTEST," which unfortunately I haven't updated in a few years. One of the pages off that site is my JFK page, "JFK: Murder In The Streets." http://members.tripod.com/bigunreal/IP
×
×
  • Create New...