Jump to content
The Education Forum

Glenn Nall

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,422

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Glenn Nall

  1. Glenn Nall
    and what the hell is a "CIA-did-it" theory anyway, Paul? I've mentioned this once before. I don't think there IS a CIA-did-it theory, Paul. I've never really heard one. Please explain to me (us) what that means. Or the "Mafia-did-it." These are not theories, and these are not presented by people who can think. There's a little more to most of these well pursued and long invested theories the good people in this forum offer. (key word being "offer," not "cram," or "shove"). can you expound a bit on what is meant by these particularly irresponsible phrases?
  2. Glenn Nall
    your views don't get a fair hearing because of the way you present them, the frequency with which you present them, the dogma and sanctimony with which you present them, and the logic and reasoning you've used to arrive at them and with which you vilify the others. that's why they don't get a fair hearing.
  3. Glenn Nall
    Paul. your convenient oversimplifications of Jame's claims and of the Paines' suspected "connections" are wrong. Michael Paine had more than one relative connected to United Fruit and the CIA, and more than one connection outside of his family to the CIA. As did Ruth Hyde Paine have several more than one connection to the CIA. Ruth Forbes Paine's relationship with Ms Bancroft requires a little more description than "childhood friend" once you actually read some things about its longevity and particulars. "Ruth lied." Oh God, then the case is lost. Your honor, I'm sorry I brought such a flimsy case before the court. I could never have foreseen that the defendant actually told a lie. Please accept my apologies and please do exonerate her of all suspicion. I've been drawing up an "outline" of these (and only about a thousand other) exasperatingly convoluted interrelationships for over a year. The Paine's curious interconnectedness with the agency cannot be ignored - but neither do I stake my house on the supposition that they were CIA. You're right - there's no real evidence that Ruth or Michael was a spy, but for the numerous people they hung out with, a fact that goes way beyond coincidence. For most people. Moreover, your steadfast antithesis to all things "CIA connected" might leave some people to wonder why "thou protesteth too much..." Or else wonder about your research techniques. Also, you misspelled de Mohrenschildt (or even DeMohrenschildt) twice in a row.
  4. Glenn Nall
    this little bit screams for so many comments. it's 9.30 in the morning; let me sober up and i will write some.
  5. Glenn Nall
    Paul, here is the crucial difference between your theory and mine - and many others, for that matter - my thoughts on what may have happened and what probably didn't happen leave room for particulars of others'. your theory does not. Like an Alabama Church of Christ credo, everyone else is just wrong.
  6. Glenn Nall
    I think you missed my point, James. or maybe not. I'm not sure.
  7. Glenn Nall
    Strictly in the interests of objectivity, James - with NO malice intended - in support of your own claims you cite your own review of Caufield's "travesty" as the standard against which Paul's references to it leave "much to be desired?" so one is to glean from your argument that that your review of this book is inarguable?
  8. Glenn Nall
    ok, so here's my question; perhaps an attorney might see the logic here - Hillary supporters will not: So I rob a convenience store. Which is against the law. I'm not caught, and i get away with 17 cases of Miller Light, a carton of Newports and $49.26 - my priorities being what they are as an armed robber of convenience stores. I tell my best friend about it. He snitches. I'm busted. With a case and a half of Miller Lite as the only evidence. My priorities being what they are... Is it the snitch's fault that I'm busted?
  9. Glenn Nall
    that's your interpretation, huh. mmm... doesn't it suck when inconveniences get in the way of perfectly enjoyable theories...?
  10. Glenn Nall
    in some ways they rely on being lied to. i've made legitimate and answerable charges to which he's responded none whatsoever. 'nuff said. right? just don't we effin' dare call Frank Sturgis an agent. egads. blows the whole "CIA did it" CT. i knew a "CIA did it" CTer once. He read a lot of L Ron Hubbard and James Patterson. and worked at KFC.
  11. Glenn Nall
    Paul. There IS NO "the CIA did it" conspiracy theory. no one in their right mind proposes that McCone "did it." you're skewering windmills, dude.
  12. Glenn Nall
    yet still, Paul, you're glued to the word "agent" when there are so many nuances of duties and expectations of CIA "connected" personnel which easily circumvent the standard role of "agent." [edit] IMHO. is this on purpose, or simple ignorance of facts?
  13. Glenn Nall
    meant to respond the other day, Kirk, just now getting around to it. Yes, you're right, I did "promise" such a list, and in fact have half of one that i slapped together one free quarter-of-an-hour i happened to have weeks ago. I have honest;ly had very few since; have been flat out swamped with a couple of projects for a while now. nearing an end, though, and have no problem posting some of Hillary's more colorful eloquence. There's plenty of it, it's just that the salivating and star-crossed media won't have anything to do with it. It's stuff objective people actually have to look for. But it's there to be found.
  14. Glenn Nall
    Sometimes I wonder just how distant what the public "knows" about Watergate is from the truth.
  15. Glenn Nall
    yes, i wondered why he lost/gave up the BOP project just previous. and Mexico City... he did have his friends, but he sure had his enemies...
  16. Glenn Nall
    "guesswork" you're pretty liberal with that term, too. me thinkest thou protesteth too much... and what the hell is this "that CT?" I have presented no "CT." I've presented factual evidence that Sturgis was aboard the Rex on Oct 31, and that he hung out with E Martinez and Hunt and as in Watergate, and - oh, hell, you know all this. You just don't like it. no. it's not time for a new conspiracy theory. it's time for a well reasoned one - a few of those which have stood the tests and which today gain momentum. it's the new ones which are most suspect. the evidence is old. the latest evidence is old. there is no new evidence but the old that has been revealed. novel CTers who think themselves smarter than the rest are as well suspect. and predictable.
  17. Glenn Nall
    yes. key word here being "planted." no doubt. but he was in charge of an awful lot of cuban mercenary money and ops, wasn't he...?
  18. Glenn Nall
    it matters to you to keep your theory intact. it matters to me because it were these "morons" who did the dirty work. you might be a little more conservative in your assignation of those who lack "brains." you'll find yourself surprised one day.
  19. Glenn Nall
    Larry, I'd be tempted to think that the Watergate burglary went a bit beyond politics into operations... wouldn't you?
  20. Glenn Nall
    "if anything it would be 180 degrees from it since that was his specialty." right. being as deceit is, after all, what they do for a living. and job titles tell me that certain roles are better suited to an "asset" or "talker" than to an officer...
  21. Glenn Nall
    I think Phillip's "inadvertent" admission during his debate with Mark Lane that O was never in Mexico is more telling than anything. IMHO. if nothing else, behold the skills of Mark Lane's oratory. one can understand how he whipped Hunt's ass in a Miami courtroom.
  22. Glenn Nall
    pretty sure Hunt was CIA. ergo, Sturgis. and Hall. and Martinez... birds of a feather, Paul. not like in novels. in the real world.
  23. Glenn Nall
    right.
  24. Glenn Nall
    you're absolutely positive Sturgis wasn't CIA? or Martino? or Hall? Sturgis on board the Rex on Oct 31, 63...? and these guys leading the training in Pontchartrain (and Big Pine)...? please. depends on how strict you want to get with the word "agents," doesn't it. i s'pose if it don't fit your theory, strictness is needed.
  25. Glenn Nall
    "Although Phillips presented this in the form of a novel, I nevertheless take it as a confession from a tortured soul." and yet...: "We need harder evidence." (2X in just this thread...) "We need more material evidence" in the form of a novel, "I nevertheless take it as a confession..." how novel.
×
×
  • Create New...