Kirk Gallaway

This is what I mean by wacko conspiracies theories. The people who made a film containing a salacious scene involving JFK couldn't just be out to make money? Ben never considers the profit motive. Ben:The left-wing, Donk-centric Daily Beast seems devoted to altering the public perception of JFK, even as the JFK Records are deep-sixed in perpetuity by Donk President Biden. Why? Is there a larger game plan? This couldn't just be one person writing a movie review. Not,according to Ben from Thailand. This is the left who have now become part of the government globalist "deep state" ( a phrase Ben has used more frequently than anyone on this forum) and is now besmirching the reputation of their 60 year old icon of World Peace because, why? What are you alleging Ben? That they think he was too soft on the Russian threat back in the 60's? If you read your articles in the link you provided. Their lead article and most currently relevant article "What the Cuban Missile Crisis Can Teach the U.S. About How to Deal With Russia and Ukraine" praises JFK and Khrushev and their handling of the Cuban missile crisis against all their advisors and says that Biden and Putin should do the same. This is pro JFK! The same regurgitated "human interest" stories about Marilyn Monroe and the mob, and it's easy to see why they do it because it even generates some interest here! But another article among the links you've provided to presumably make your case is entitled. "How JFK Became the Poster Boy for Idealism and Hope" And under it the caption says, "There is a shared sense among historians that Kennedy was on his way to greatness when he died. An excellent new biography says the greatness was there all the time." Are you reading your links? Are you disappointed because you insist that all articles written about JFK, whether true or not, have to be positive? Ben:What drives The Daily Beast and its coverage of JFK? Why now...as the JFK Records are under review? I guarantee you. This article about this movie will have absolutely no effect on the release of JFK records. I seldom read the Daily Beast,You're making an assumption that the Daily Beast opposes the release of JFK records. I've checked earlier articles This is just plain false! Ben: Why? Is there a larger game plan? Ok, I know citing articles, from links that you provided that tended that exalt JFK rather than scandalize him will not persuade you. What are you alleging is the Daily Beast larger game plan, Ben? Be specific, go into some detail. Who are they ideologically aligned with?

I have here on the forum, very elaborately gone into my reactions about first hearing of the assassination in the 7th grade. I had, maybe the only teacher in the 7 half day home room class rooms, who had a radio and was listening to coverage in class to the announcement of JFK's death. The story on that Sunday, was a little more commonplace. I saw it live , having just got back from church. Everyone in my family was just stunned. My Mother was the only woman left in the house with 3 boys, of which I was the youngest, and she was very upset the entire weekend. My Dad was a socially liberal fiscally conservative Republican who voted for Nixon in 1960.. I know it shocked him. But he said nothing. But that was the way he was. He didn't offer much unless you asked him. I don't think it was for another 10 years that I really brought the issue up with him. But by that time, we had had a lot of disagreements about the Vietnam War. It might have been just the age I was going through. But it was almost as if, such a whirlwind of events happened over those next years , there never seemed to be that much time for anyone to reflect.

Joe, But it was Nixon who appointed Ford! If Nixon is fighting for his political life from the "Deep state", wouldn't he just be giving them greater incentive to remove him from office by appointing their presumed "lackey" from the Warren Commission as VP to succeed him?

Paul:I always presumed that Agnew’s indictment was part of a move to get him out and put Ford in so that Nixon would be pardoned by someone with credibility. I'm not sure why? I said they've been investigating Agnew since 1966! Of all possible new VP's, what guarantee would there be that Nixon would pick Ford? There was no obvious conclusion he was going to pick Ford. So you think the whole end point was that whoever these powers be,they could be sure that Ford would pardon Nixon? How could they be sure of that? I'm trying to understand Ben's assertion. If Nixon is fighting for his political life from the "Deep state", wouldn't he just be giving them greater incentive to remove him from office by appointing their presumed "lackey" from the Warren Commission as VP to succeed him? I'm just trying to logically play out, what it sounds like your assumptions here. That doesn't mean I necessarily accept them.

Agnew was indicted because he was a crook. They got him on criminal conspiracy, extortion , bribery and tax fraud. The DOJ had been looking into Agnew since 1966 for bribes,long before Nixon picked him out of nowhere in 1968. Nobody predicted Nixon would pick a relative unknown like Agnew. .He plead to a deal to avoid prison. He resigned before Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre. So Nixon picked Ford to appease your "Deep State"? Nixon's still battling for his job.Why? I bet he never once considered Ford on the WC as a reason but wanted a malleable, perfect centrist, rather than a bad cop ideologue like Agnew. He was trying to come back to center by picking none other than the Republican Minority Leader Ford because he knew he was going to need him in his fight to remain in office, That was the political logic of it. But let's take your logic that almost could have come through. Ben, you were living at this time, but you don't mention he appointed none other than Nelson Rockefeller as his VP! Which could have been perfect according to your plan.Except, the last DUMPED VP of an incumbent was none other Nelson Rockefeller when Gerald Ford picked Bob Dole as his VP in 1976. There goes the perfect coup! Apparently Rockefeller wasn't that powerful! But politically, All this can be explained logically.

I'm in favor having a thread. When i made that comment/joke about deregulation, I was saying something similar to John and I think now Chris in that I think the mods should have stepped in sooner in these last few months, and established guidelines. But the blame game is over. What's done is done. Obviously the sooner we stop bitching at each other or at the mods, the sooner that's likely to happen.

Yeah I'm banned too. No, not really. But I am currently out of the U.S. at an undisclosed location. I got the word from my good buddy Peter Thiel and we got our funds out just before he yelled "fire!" in our Texas Theater. heh heh I guess the deregulation of the forum didn't work out so well. But there are some naysayers who said it was working out fine. But I still be believe in intellectual capitalism. But you do need some intellectual honesty. Or people will run it into the ground. ******** No, I got out of here soon because it was getting too crazy. Ok, everybody shares some blame. But now we have a guy who personally trashed a few people here unlike I've seen before. And he has no problem even casually saying he's sorry and even deleting his post yet he knows he can go right back to attacking others with impunity, and is incapable of learning anything. JMO There was a guy here who was banned for refusing to apologize for outrageously slandering a public figure with no evidence. He had a choice, and he's probably reading this now because he realizes any other website he's gone since with people who were just like him has degenerated into wacko boundlessness. Just my guess. But both these guys just laughed at the undeserved suffering of people they thought to be on the other side of their politics. And this guy much earlier had called me an as-h-le in huge letters, and I didn't report the guy. I just ignored him. Later, I was among the people who protested to the mods what he said. Of course other people who might have felt an ideological affinity with him or thought anything he said should be tolerated still could have had a conversation with him about his conduct and decorum. Whatever you think about free speech. We don't live in a inhuman. barren wasteland. That's what I would have done. I would have PMed him and told him he was screwing it up for our side. I would express my solidarity with his view but I would caution him that he could screw it up for everybody. Again, I don't mean to end this just totally blaming the other side. I would stand by the 56 year thread as a great time capsule for at least 2 years since it's inception in April 2020? About the the time of the beginning of the covid pandemic was it? There were a lot of good people who put a lot of good work in it. I think it has a more unique perspective than other political threads (though honestly I'm no expert in that I haven't participated in a lot of political threads) in that everyone in it believed that the JFK assassination was a conspiracy. That's a unique subset of people.

Leslie , I'll tel you why it didn't take long at all for these little ninnies to start their misogyny rant. They're followers of Jordan Peterson who has made a very lucrative business of cattle farming young and apparently even middle aged white males who find themselves being rejected by more educated and better trained woman, who aren't near ADD as them, and in this case not as prone to spending a 100 hours a week, 52 weeks a year on conspiracy forums. In reality, this is a serious problem that's not to be made light of. If they could be more honest with themselves and approach others in a spirit of humility. They might be surprised how much compassion others may have for them. But the way they're choosing to lash out is just a dead end.

W. made a reference to this. Paul, I guess just got turned on to a 9 month old article about Naomi Wolfe. If this isn't a case of someone not seeing the forest from the trees. He obviously heroically sees himself as striking a dagger at the heart of American liberals! But honestly all I know is about Naomi Wolff is she's a feminist. Now you make me have to research her a little more to see around the same time she had a vision of Jesus and became an anti vaxxer. Which i guess is a great comfort to you Paul. But unlike you, that hardly adds credibility for me. She strikes me as a gullible idiot, who was never very discerning. That you would find this relevant and noteworthy to post here, doesn't say much for you either. Besides, the less of this tabloid consciousness about who said what, the better. But isn't it curious that it's always the right wing that looks at the left as the "experts" and so celebrates their turning to the other side? Maybe you should stick to your home country Paul, about petty matters such as this. Because I've yet to find anybody even residing outside the U.S. having any real perspective or sense of proportion on what's going on in the U.S. It does after all, have 5 times the population and so 5 times the input of the U.K., which if you weren't brought up in , you would probably find staggering. Paul:I suspect Kirk is a more dedicated follower of Kenneth Williams – he of "Infamy, infamy, they've all got it in for me" They've all got it in for me! a-ho ho! Oh really Paul?, well I don't have a million conspiracies to rationalize why my life hasn't worked out or why so few of my calculations or predictions turn out to be true. h h

Chris seconds Matthew's recommendation of "Everything I don't like is Hitler" I'm sorry my time zones and proclivities don't match up much at this time. Let's be clear here. I've never called anyone here a Fascist. All my opposition being voiced now just represents their uneasiness at being asked more probative questions about where their leanings lie. So I see I now have successfully sucked in, and outed some posters here to their true leanings. Yet interestingly enough what lead to this great revealing was a really petty intolerance crying to the mods about a one sentence offhand very indirect reference to a "misunderstood historic figure" such as Hitler. I guess my silly comment about someone's personal "struggle" turned out to in fact be "a prophecy"of a second coming now to the forum of what we might have previously thought a "crypto" right wing ideology, but now coming to the fore! I say "crypto" because Chris by never identifying the leanings of his most esteemed writer certainly doesn't give reason for others to trust him. Le Bon's leanings are important. Most of us are not so impressed by Chris's repeated recommendations and don't have the time to research Le Bon. Why not just say who he is? Why specifically you like him?, and how does it specifically apply to today? Those were always opportunities. But these are questions I found Chris can never answer. But on the other hand of course would cry, to the mods to censure, if he thought he was being unjustly maligned! What a surprise! Go ahead, Chris, just bury the mods in endless controversy because you take offense at the slightest thing, but can't explain in any depth what your ideas really are. Make into a game, where all the mods have to take time out and study your complaints. So Chris, Paul and Matthew, You're saying Hitler wasn't as bad as everyone thought. I don't have time to read your recommended reading. You have the forum. What did Hitler get right? How is he misunderstood? I fully suspect Paul to be the most articulate, if he doesn't launch into the stratosphere and race away from us commoners.

And your silly little profile picture Matthew? Hiding behind a light and trying to portray yourself as some sot of enlightener. And like I asked Chris, how did that work out ? If I were a mod here, I wouldn't have allowed that from the onset! But I'm willing to let that all go Matthew, if you would consent to be play the lead role in my newest indy film. It's a biography about Mr. Peanut. Oh, by the way , are those shoulders or a folded lounge chair?

I've been on an all night flight. Quite a firestorm here. About Chris's fixation on Fascist, Le Bon. Chris:Think about it, it’s been a manual for understanding the popular mind and how people behave in a group. You’ve just named some of the most famous effective propagandists in history. Learning how its done will help you identify when the techniques are being used on you. That was my primary reason for reading it. Again, stop bs'ing us Chris. You've showcased this Le Bon probably 5 times. And there's never been a mention of even, "This is a quote from Gustave Le Bon, who was actually an influential writer to both Hitler and Mussolini. I posted this so we should always be aware of the rhetoric Fascists may use to influence people." But never was there a word about him being a fascist. That was just immaterial, wasn't it Chris? Of course you didn't say that.You never gave any real explanation of why you were such a fanboy of Le Bon , but somehow you were confident in your thinking , just the weight of these words will resonate with everyone here, which was one in just a series of miscalculations you've made. This is the most quoted statement that you over and over have declared on this forum for yourself. Could Leslie be any more right about Chris being the forum's foremost pseudo psychologist? Something about the Old World rigidity of 100 year old European fascist writing has a rather corny ( or maybe corn syrup?) strange appeal to you. Even though by today's standards, it's not the least sophisticated and seems almost midieval. Ok, let's digress a bit. You rail on, curiously with Cotter about equality of outcomes in life, as if that's such a profound concept. Oh duh, who in this life has ever seen equality of outcome.? What is important, and it's not to say it always happens, is that all people should have equal rights before the law and it's apparent to anyone with any kind of trained mind that this asshole is giving his justification and scheming to disenfranchise people by hook or by crook, and sees them as only a means to an end. And you're trying to rewrite your history that all along you were only trying to warn us about how fascist's control people? We've had about 7 year real life education on this, thank you! Again, stop bs'ing us Chris, you really eat up on this sh-t, like a dog with a bone. and that's the way you've always portrayed it, before Le bon was exposed.. We've had people sort of like this in the U.S. There was Lee Atwater and Karl Rove, they also were scumbags, but they are historically small time up to now, and were willing to abide by elections. But this guy was an inspiration to Adolf Hitler and Mussolini. Ok, but, but you admire his powers of manipulation, Do you Chris? Do you really aspire to such power? So how's that been working for you on the forum? heh heh.

i make no allegations here. But another researcher here has brought to my attention the history concerning Chris's most quoted writer here,. Gustave Le Bon through just a quick researching that I suppose I could have done myself. Here is an excerpt of his notes below. Adolf Hitler is known to have read The Crowdand in Mein Kampf drew on the propaganda techniques proposed by Le Bon. "my earlier sense that there was some European vaguely fascist ideology underlying ... there it is. From the wikipedia article on Le Bon: "George Lachmann Mosse claimed that fascist theories of leadership that emerged during the 1920s owed much to Le Bon's theories of crowd psychology. Adolf Hitler is known to have read The Crowdand in Mein Kampf drew on the propaganda techniques proposed by Le Bon.[46][47] Benito Mussolinialso made a careful study of Le Bon..." Here an article on Le Bon and Trumpism: https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/07/trump-le-bon-mob/493118/ etc. Dark view of the world as you note is right.

Chris i don't see you particularly as a person who thirsts after truth. Or at least, i don't see you as a person whose very in touch with himself. I think you see yourself as a person whose reached a pinnacle of logic where you' re supremely beyond emotion (as if that's so admirable)and you quickly characterize and pigeonhole other people's thought processes and often accuse others thoughts as being clouded by emotions. You tried this just last night with Matt. And yet when your ideas are questioned or brought up to scrutiny, you lash out and become a hothead. And now what I've seen you've written, just illustrates my point. You answer with a lot of anger and disain and condescension. , Chris; I guess that is rather wishful when people like yourself and William in your twilight years have been conned, coerced, scammed, bamboozled and beguiled your whole lives by the political elite and MSM This is what I've been saying, Like the world and people will never understand you because in your mind, you're so much above them. I think we can get sidetracked if we bring in a lot of this political stuff, though i agree with some of it. We couldn't just have a different view than you? It's relevant in that it shows this same alienation to about everybody and society at large. I have some of that. Chris:I do keep posting it in the hope that the superficially read, the ignorant, or those suffering from mass-psychosis will actually pick up the book and have a read. But this isn't genuine. if you were really sincere in your stated quest of communication here. You wouldn't be deriding, belittling , and demeaning the people you supposedly are seeking to improve. Chris: PS each time you are triggered, you give away another tell which enables me to agitate and target you going forward. You make it so easy for me. I have to come to the conclusion that you have an underdeveloped mind. I mean that respectfully. Oh yes, so respectful! Does your hostility ever end Chris? Is this the vitriol of someone whose so above his emotions? This is really dark, really stiff.. I see your processes as static. i don't think you're energy flows freely at all. Is there really much here but anger and hostility, Chris? I

Chris , But it's not just the Democrats. This is at least the 5th time you've posted this. So you find this inspiring? Does it give you confidence? It's just the kind of shallow self reinforcement i see among really insecure perpetual conspiracy advocates.to convince themselves that they're smarter than everyone else. Ok, I could see it once or twice, but by the fifth time, you're boring your audience. Do you know why you need to keep posting this?

They keep coming! Ingenuine generations of kiss ass devotional fanboys! A sign of the times! These are from Carlson's e mails on Jan 4th, 2021 Carlson: We are very, very close to being able to ignore Trump most nights. I truly can’t wait. Carlson: I hate him passionately. And this is Carlson with Trump only last August! Carlson: Trump has two weeks left. Once he’s out, he becomes incalculably less powerful, even in the minds of his supporters. Carlson: He’s a demonic force, a destroyer. But he’s not going to destroy us. I’ve been thinking about this every day for four years. Pfeiffer: You’re right. I don’t want to let him destroy me either. [REDACTED]. The Trump anger spiral is vicious. Carlson: That’s for sure. Deadly. It almost consumed me in November when Sidney Powell attacked us. It was very difficult to regain emotional control, but I knew I had to. We’ve got two weeks left. We can do this.

Yeah, now any reference to someone's personal "struggle" is off limits? Noo noo noo, Matthew the word was obligatorily censored, because of the your new hybrid, pansy ass,screaming for mommy, right wing kiddie kancel kulture. Oh , did I spell that wrong? Damn!, cancelled again! In the future, can I speak in anagrams? heh heh heh ho ho Or clinically stated , generations that have been mistakenly coddled from the slings and arrows of life until now they are screaming out with vengeance!. Matthew:. What leftoids don't understand is that most Trump supporters don't really like Trump as a person, we just like the funny stuff he says and that he does the things we want him to do.. Oh yeah, is that the inside Q word? Is that why they're either a crazy cult of loonies or the most cowardly party in the 250 year history of the U.S. and won't say anything because they fear they'll upset their strong man? Well then, You might as well use your free will to vote for Republican Sonny Bono or if you're really hep, George Santos and get him to claim he's Donald Trump. Matthew, I'm a traditional Catholic! Yes we figured out long ago you were a virgin, Matthew. Stop bragging! We don't need to be continually dog whistled anymore about your "virgin experience." heh heh heh

Matt, I've heard the story before, as i recall, Carlson's Mother broke up with the father when Tucker was 6 years old, when she refused to move to San Diego from LA when Tucker's Father got a news casting job. She was a bohemian artist type who eventually moved to France. Tucker's Father eventually married up to a Swanson TV dinner's heiress.. When Carlson's Mother died in 2011 , she left Tucker and his brother Buckley $1 each for their inheritance! Tucker and his brother took it to court in California , and after 5 years of litigation got a settlement from her s estate.though I never heard what the settlement was.

Ok, Chris, This is by far the most distant reference to N-z-sm in a post that I've ever seen pulled on this forum. This is as the result of the right wing cancel culture that has come on this forum, and you are perhaps an unwitting party to it. At least from what I've seen it's now Matthew and Lance, both right wingers. What Lance did to you, as I understand it, it was unfair. I've never believed Lance's contention that people have to give their full resumes, because I've seen a history here of nuts invading people's privacy and it's happened to me even recently. I personally have never been moved to investigate anyone here. Though it's true it has been done and revealed many times. I used to remember Di Eugenio doing it rather frequently for my taste, on his ideological enemies.. You were obviously able to read it. You ascribe a lot of malice to me. I understand you could think that. But I try to deal in facts and the facts the subjects have told me. I'm going to post this now but I'll leave out my skepticism about who you portray yourself to be,which I assume anybody can read back at Matthew's point of crying for censorship. But more importantly, I'll take out the specific reference Matthew had censored. That case in point involves what I see as your intolerance and lashing out to people who have divergent opinions to what you wrote, and realizing that this is your own internal struggle, and not the fault of those disagree. And how, as i see it , in this specific example. the work you spent constructing your "20 points" ended up being used only as a tool of intolerance to pigeonhole someone who wanted to delve into it further with you. Though i know you don't see it that way.

Yes, you know something's rotten in Feudalville when John seeks "full spectrum umbrella" coverage from Matthew. Yes I've noticed John, you were the one who said you have an extensive Beavis and Butthead video library, right? Aren't you a little old to be Matthew's groupie, John? So you're trying to find your lost youth? John: Teriffic satire Matthew! Oh yeah, that level of sophistication could only come from Plato's hallowed Guardian Class! Right John Yes, it must be a "full spectrum" rejuvenating process for you, watching all those swell youtube videos! Matthew's my groupie, he has an insatiable curiosity to know me more and more and shadow me. Particularly because I'm not here 100 hours a week, like him! So I guess I'm top dog, huh? jej jej jej je j jej A little shout out, to my Spanish speaking audience!

Ho!, foo foo John! Indeed! John often fondly recalls his feudal past! Where a past lives reader told him he was a King, ruler over all Overlords! Now he's fumbling trying to find the "ignore" button. I've been noticing you guys across the pond have been silent about this. I see now that that the U.K. regrets Brexit by 55% to 34%!! It looks like that defiant little romp in College against Mother and Father Europe has turned into a "full spectrum debacle". Are you going to beg to come back home and get your old room back? Any thoughts on that? .

John: Can you not see that there were objective grounds for Russia to brutally invade Ukraine and murder civilians? No, we can't see your list as legitimate justification, John.You should know that by now. Where I will agree is that Russia won't abide by pre war borders, John to Mark:And please deal with the self-explanatory concept of "full spectrum dominance" rather than, as others here have done, disingenuously avoiding the concept by focusing on its wording. Ok, let's break this down. John:And please deal with the self-explanatory concept of "full spectrum dominance" Oh, So Mark supposed to inculcate your phrase in his answer? Stop BSing us John! Really! Should Mark address you as "Mr. Cotter". John: And please deal with the self-explanatory concept of "full spectrum dominance" rather than as others here have done, disingenuously avoiding the concept by focusing on its wording. That has entirely nothing to do with the wording, John. It's your repetitive use of apt phrases as a crutch. You obviously forgot as your using it twice again. That's fair game! "Disingenuous"! oh boo hoo! Wrong again! If you remember, I did address you and said I didn't think your definition was complete! You forgot that too. Since I did review and answer your concept, and you're so demanding. John, then for the third time, "please deal" with the characters concept of Western Hegemony in the meme example I've used asking for your comment. Do you need to see it again? *** John has been very vigilant against the brutality of the West, with his warnings in his repeated mantra against " Phil Specter dominance" . Yes John, the naysayers mocked you , but you were right all along! Or was that "full rectum dominance?" Maybe we're going to have to get our U.S. "cat paw" out and get that stick out of your ass. But that's going to be tough! Then maybe we'll have to "full spectrum" high tech it, and use our "jaws of life!" heh heh It's a joke John. Since you're so much into "terrific satire". I did the best I could. wink wink

Kathy, probably Matthew can tell you why it's May 11 because it's probably based on a Q anon numerological gematria which Matthew claims he's an expert, and said earlier he wanted to give all of us on the forum a presentation about. Probably the predicted return of JFK and JFK Jr. to Dealey Plaza had some numerical gematria significance to a Qball as well. Ben , since we know now from his January 2020 tweet that globalist Trump seems to be covering up for Xi at the very earliest moments of Xi's alleged discovery of the Wu Han lab breakout! Is this the hard evidence you were looking for of Chief Executive Trump's globalist cronies silence and complicity in the XI coverup? Well check this clip, where Jamie Raskin eloquently confronted your cohort Lauren Boebert saying that Trump defended XI no less than 20 times publicly during this period that the Chinese were trying to cover up the alleged fact that they let a deadly virus out in the world as you contend. Raskin also takes on Trump's attempts at censoring twitter, and takes on Gym Jordan's attempt to use his influence to bully AT&T into carrying Newsmax! The hypocrisy! You just can't make this stuff up!

I dunno. W. You have to get up pretty early in the morning to pull the wool over Ben and I's eyes! America's globalist elites love doing business with China! Trump does globalist bidding!

Because you are so political, Ben! You're the "voice of noise" about this, and you can't prove anything! All I'm hearing is a lot of noise online like "you guys all thought this"!. Excuse me, i never "opposed " any idea about it. Mostly because i don't think we're ever going to know positively about it anyway. Ben now hypothesizes the virus was so benign. The Chinese figured they'd just give it a small trial run through the population! Yes, so emboldened are the Chinese! Next Ben will get his wet dream war with China. This is what having a hundred hours a week in Thailand to spend on a JFK conspiracy forum produces. ***** And then the "Tucker outrage!" If Tucker was really impressed with it. How come he didn't bring it up for another 2 years? Tucker/Roger Stone story followup on the JFKAC over the last 2 and a half months was about what I expected as well. ***** I saw a very timely thread on the JFKA side. "Confused and looking for Ben, Matthew and Chris's brain." heh heh ******** Ok, Let's try changing the subject. I bet you can't for 2 days, Ben.. Your favorite congressman Thomas Massie is also making history of sorts. Only Marjorie Taylor Greene and Thomas Massie vote against a resolution that mourns the loss of life in Turkey and Syria caused by the earthquakes Mourning's for babies, right Thomas! Very macho! Very cool statement! Besides If all those Turks would just arm their families, like Massie. . Maybe this all wouldn't have happened to them!