Jump to content
The Education Forum

Michael Clark

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    4,737

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Michael Clark

    Song Lyrics

    in Music:Resources

    Posted · Edited by Michael Clark

    The Camera Eye
     
    This Song demonstrares masterful use of common Poetic devices such as assonance, alliteration, plosives, and I can't even remember the names for many more.
     
     
    Lyrics
    Grim-faced and forbidding
    Their faces closed tight
    An angular mass of New Yorkers
     
    Pacing in rhythm
    Race the oncoming night
    They chase through the streets of Manhattan
     
    Head-first humanity
    Pause at a light
    Then flow through the streets of the city 
     
    They seem oblivious 
    To a soft spring rain 
    Like an English rain 
    So light, yet endless 
    From a leaden sky, yeah
     
    The buildings are lost 
    In their limitless rise 
    My feet catch the pulse 
    And the purposeful stride 
     
    I feel the sense of possibilities
    I feel the wrench of hard realities
    The focus is sharp in the city 
    ------
    Wide-angle watcher
    On life's ancient tales
    Steeped in the history of London
     
    Green and Grey washes 
    In a wispy white veil
    Mist in the streets of Westminster
     
    Wistful and weathered
    The pride still prevails
    Alive in the streets of the city 
     
    Are they oblivious 
    To this quality? 
    A quality 
    Of light unique to every city's streets 
     
    Pavements may teem 
    With intense energy 
    But the city is calm 
    In this violent sea
     
    I feel the sense of possibilities
    I feel the wrench of hard realities
    The focus is sharp in the city
     

    Out of curiosity

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Michael Clark
    Removed caps

    2 hours ago, Jim Root said:

    When the Movie JFK came out I had many students asking me about the assassination.  .......

    .........

    The beat goes on but my time today is limited......so much more.

     

    Jim Root

    That is absolutely fascinating Jim.

    My apologies to you Jim, but I have to ask the following rhetorical question, not to you, but to the wind...

     

    Why can't Paul Trejo bring anything, ever, new to the table. His signature says that his interest is in "research" into General Walker. Yet he neverstarts a thread with anything new or interesting. He says he has access to all of Walkers papers but nothing ever is presented from that trove. All we get is his muddying the waters of other threads, with the same stuff, over and over.

     

    Mr. Root, I am looking forward to seeing more from you.

     

    Cheers,

    Michael

    Ruth - a typewriter - 15 days

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Michael Clark

    37 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

    James,

    I'm not a zealot.  I debunked your nonsense about Ruth Paine -- not only in your Probe Magazine from the 1990's, but also in both editions of your "Destiny Betrayed."

    It's on record here in John Simkin's JFK Forum.  You didn't respond logically to my criticisms only because there is no logical response.

    Your only response is emotional -- to call me a Zealot and then quit. 

    Well, I think that lots of readers are watching this -- because lots of readers here have been reading JFK conspiracy literature for decades, and many have been influenced by Probe Magazine (myself included).

    But when it comes to Ruth Paine -- I don't take nonsense from anybody.  She's a good person down to this very day -- and all these public attacks on her are unfair and unkind.

    If you think I'm going to remain silent about defending Ruth Paine in public, you're wrong.

    You're wrong about Ruth Paine, you're wrong about Michael Paine, you're wrong about me, and you're wrong about the JFK assassination.

    'Nuff said,
    --Paul Trejo

    You are a zealot...... your comments and positions are the archetype for zealotry..

     

     

       On 10/27/2014 at 7:56 PM, Kathy Beckett said: 

    No one is getting anywhere.

    Once again, I suggest a 72 hour break, and a summary formulated and posted, if you wish, and then be done.

    ------------------------

    Paul Trejo wrote:

    Kathy, it's been 72 hours, so I presume it's OK to begin posting here again.

    My first post is a question to you, as Administrator. Why do you propose to be done with this thread? It seems to me that the thread has its own energy, and points are still being debated, and new information is still being presented.

    In my view, there is no way to make a summary at this time -- unless it's a one-sided and biased summary.

    Why would anyone wish to suppress further discussion on the topic of Harry Dean's account of the JFK murder? I don't understand. Please enlighten me.

    Best regards,

    --Paul Trejo

    ----------------------------

    Kathy wrote:

    I am not going to do anything with it. It is a part of the Forum. Nor am I trying to suppress anything.

    It's a same old, same old. You are at a stalemate. If you want to start a new thread about a specific topic , no one is stopping you, but it needs to be specific.If you need to draw from this thread for a point on the other thread, use a link to the specific post or posts you are referencing. 

    If you want to define your position, so folks will know what you think, so you don't have to type it over and over, I suggest that a blog would be ideal. You could put a link to it in your signature area, and anyone who wished could follow. 

    --------------------------------

    --------------------------------

    Paul, you should take Kathy's advice and start a blog. You could unload your tome their, and you won't have to leave your drivel around the forum. I know you don't have much to say, you simply say the same thing over and over and over. If you express yourself on your blog, you can simply remind us where we can find it, with a link. 

    You risk jamming another thread shut like the one from which I quoted above. There is no need for that. GET A BLOG!

    Ruth - a typewriter - 15 days

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    5 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

     Right, John Simkin.

    My point is, that if anybody on John Simkin's JFK Forum thinks he can just attack Ruth Paine willy nilly, without my challenging them for FACTS and EVIDENCE, then they can just forget it.

    I'm not a zealot.  I just demand the TRUTH, and not mere rumors or sloppy accusations.

    Regards,
    --Paul Trejo

     

     

     

     

     

    HECTOR

    But value dwells not in particular will;

    It holds his estimate and dignity
    As well wherein 'tis precious of itself

    As in the prizer: 'tis mad idolatry

    To make the service greater than the god

    And the will dotes that is attributive

    To what infectiously itself affects,

    Without some image of the affected merit. 

    Shakespeare's Troilus and Cressida

     

     

    Ruth - a typewriter - 15 days

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    9 hours ago, Chris Newton said:

    Ron, I agree that it's important to provide a balanced argument. But there's a limit to my goodwill and patience and it's gotten to a point where I think it suppresses more of the conversation than it creates. Some researchers here have presented brilliant arguments that have persuaded me to think about issues in a whole new light. On the other hand , if you allowed me to describe what other people were thinking and feeling, I could present dozens of scenarios and justify whatever the conspiracy "du jour" was. Would that be honest? No.

    I'm not interested in creating a fiction around this testimony. I am interested in understanding the questions that were asked, the responses, the misdirection, the subtle control of the subject matter that is being presented. I'm not a lawyer and I'm not providing a legal opinion, I'm just providing an experienced ear.

    Chris, this does not have to do with the letter. Built, like the letter, and the questioning of Michael Paine regarding the "We both know" call, it demonstrates the same thing that you are pointing out; namely that the WC and the Paine's were doing a careful and skillful tango in order to obscure the truth.

    On 5/18/2017 at 5:01 PM, Michael Clark said:

    My 199 page transcript, #1 (undated)'of Ruth Paine's WC Testimony comes-up with no results when I search for "Abt".

    My 20 page fragment of Ruth Paine Testimony makes no mention of John Abt.

    My July 23, 1964 fragment of Ruth Hyde Testimony makes no mention of John Abt.

    I found nothing in her affidavit.

    My 217 page WC testimony of Ruth Paine March 21, 1964, shows one mention of John Abt.:

    Mr. JENNER - At least your discussions with him do not enable you to proceed to the point at which to enable you to voice any opinions in this area or subject than you have now given?
    Mrs. PAINE - No.
    Mr. JENNER - Were you aware of the name John Abt before you received the telephone call you testified about from Lee Oswald?
    Mrs. PAINE - No; I had not heard that name.
    Mr. JENNER - And, therefore, you never suggested it to Lee Oswald?

     

    Is this the only mention of John Abt in Ruth Paine's testimony? There is no mention of his name from her at all. She doesn't even have to lie if it never happened!

    Mr. JENNER - Were you aware of the name John Abt before you received the telephone call you testified about from Lee Oswald?
    Mrs. PAINE - No; I had not heard that name.

     

     

     


     

     

     

     

     

    Ruth - a typewriter - 15 days

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    32 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

    .....

    it was rather useless other than it was necessary to counter the BS for anyone new to the subject, which is important in and of itself.

    There is the rub . When I joined, I was pleased that Paul was so ready to answer questions. Then the  "witnesses to beating Marina" thread came around and I saw that Trejo has no interest in being truthful or factual. Honestly, it made me angry, and it still bothers me that others are misled by him, like I was. I've been on a campaign to challenge him as often as I could, so ignoring him has not been an option. I have to assume that others are growing tired of my challenges towards him, so I will be shifting gears.

    Who was the nurse collecting the TRUE bullet falling from Connally's thigh?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Robert Harris said:

    There seems to be some technical issues, which are preventing me from editing an error in my response to Gary Murr.

    I entered this link twice. http://jfkhistory.com/ce842.jpg

    But the second time, I mean to enter this link, which shows the lower section of the envelope after I enhanced the image. Please excuse the error. I really did try to fix it.

    http://jfkhistory.com/ce842x.jpg

     

    Robert, there was a known problem. It is believed to have been fixed. If you are still having problems, James Groden has asked that it be reported.

    http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/24142-internal-server-messages-and-other-errors/

     

×
×
  • Create New...