If JFK had gone two terms...

[Sid Walker]

Thanks for the summary Sid. I'll get it from the library.

I saw Piper's brief sojourn on the forum a few weeks back when I originally got curious about his premise.

I got so turned off by his preemptive belligerence (not his theory, his behavior on the forum) that I backed off.

But I want to judge the material not the man so I'll read the book eventually.

Yes, I read through those threads also and I agree it was not Michael Piper's greatest moment.

On the other hand, I thought his treatment was, in general, shameful - and I've said so before. Before he arrived and had a chance to speak for himself, he was viciously attacked. I'm unaware that any other author invited to the forum has been treated with equivalent rudeness. It's behaviour to which he had already been sensitized. He blew his top. I think members might like to reflect on how long other authors would stay around on the forum if they were insulted in like fashion. What choice retorts might they make before making their exit?

You and I, Myra, were not members of the forum at that time, so we need feel no personal responsibility.

I gather Piper gave away copies of Final Judgment 6th edition to participants in the debate, friend or foe. A nice touch.

A pity his fine example is not more often emulated, IMO.

I have a few books on my wishlist written by members of the forum

Edited June 15, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Michael Hogan]

Yes, I read through those threads also and I agree it was not Michael Piper's greatest moment.

On the other hand, I thought his treatment was, in general, shameful - and I've said so before. Before he arrived and had a chance to speak for himself, he was viciously attacked. I'm unaware that any other author invited to the forum has been treated with equivalent rudeness. It's behaviour to which he had already been sensitized. He blew his top. I think members might like to reflect on how long other authors would stay around on the forum if they were insulted in like fashion. What choice retorts might they make before making their exit?

You and I, Myra, were not members of the forum at that time, so we need feel no personal responsibility.

I gather Piper gave away copies of Final Judgment 6th edition to participants in the debate, friend or foe. A nice touch.

A pity his fine example is not more often emulated, IMO....

I think your characterization of that Forum episode is accurate Sid. During those exchanges, I told Piper I had read the 2nd edition and asked him what new material he had included in the 6th edition. He responded by promptly sending me not only Final Judgement, but three or four other books he had written.

[Myra Bronstein]

Thanks for the summary Sid. I'll get it from the library.

I saw Piper's brief sojourn on the forum a few weeks back when I originally got curious about his premise.

I got so turned off by his preemptive belligerence (not his theory, his behavior on the forum) that I backed off.

But I want to judge the material not the man so I'll read the book eventually.

Myra, make sure you read the Sixth Edition which was copyrighted in 2004. Even if one chooses to disagree with Piper's opinions and final conclusions, Final Judgement contains a lot of very good information on President Kennedy's murder, and the footnotes and documentation are quite sound.

Thanks Mike. I wouldn't have known the difference between editions if you hadn't mentioned it.

Also thanks for the thumbs up on the footnotes. You're a far better judge of that than I.

[Myra Bronstein]

Yes, I read through those threads also and I agree it was not Michael Piper's greatest moment.

On the other hand, I thought his treatment was, in general, shameful - and I've said so before. Before he arrived and had a chance to speak for himself, he was viciously attacked. I'm unaware that any other author invited to the forum has been treated with equivalent rudeness. It's behaviour to which he had already been sensitized. He blew his top. I think members might like to reflect on how long other authors would stay around on the forum if they were insulted in like fashion. What choice retorts might they make before making their exit?

You and I, Myra, were not members of the forum at that time, so we need feel no personal responsibility.

I gather Piper gave away copies of Final Judgment 6th edition to participants in the debate, friend or foe. A nice touch.

A pity his fine example is not more often emulated, IMO....

I think your characterization of that Forum episode is accurate Sid. During those exchanges, I told Piper I had read the 2nd edition and asked him what new material he had included in the 6th edition. He responded by promptly sending me not only Final Judgement, but three or four other books he had written.

Seriously???

I wonder if it's too late to get a piece of that.

What did you think of the other books he'd written?

Were they also on the assassination?

[Peter McGuire]

Thanks for the summary Sid. I'll get it from the library.

I saw Piper's brief sojourn on the forum a few weeks back when I originally got curious about his premise.

I got so turned off by his preemptive belligerence (not his theory, his behavior on the forum) that I backed off.

But I want to judge the material not the man so I'll read the book eventually.

Yes, I read through those threads also and I agree it was not Michael Piper's greatest moment.

On the other hand, I thought his treatment was, in general, shameful - and I've said so before. Before he arrived and had a chance to speak for himself, he was viciously attacked. I'm unaware that any other author invited to the forum has been treated with equivalent rudeness. It's behaviour to which he had already been sensitized. He blew his top. I think members might like to reflect on how long other authors would stay around on the forum if they were insulted in like fashion. What choice retorts might they make before making their exit?

You and I, Myra, were not members of the forum at that time, so we need feel no personal responsibility.

I gather Piper gave away copies of Final Judgment 6th edition to participants in the debate, freind or foe. A nice touch.

A pity his fine example is not more often emulated, IMO.

I have a few books on my wishlist written by members of the forum

I am also glad that I was not a member of the forum at that time too. I read through some of the posts and they are pretty shameful.

If you ignore what Piper has to offer in this case you are not even close to solving it.

And that is what they are hoping for.

On that note, I think I am going to head for the fridge and have a cold one.

[Sid Walker]

What did you think of the other books he'd written?

Were they also on the assassination?

As far as I'm aware, all Michael Piper's other books are listed here

Best Witness, with an Intro by Mark Lane, is also available as a free download via this link.

Edited June 6, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Myra Bronstein]

What did you think of the other books he'd written?

Were they also on the assassination?

As far as I'm aware, all Michael Piper's other books are listed here

Best Witness, with an Intro by Mark Lane, is also available as a free download via this link.

Thanks Sid.

I added it to Dixie's thread "JFK Assn ebooks, Free Downloads" @

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry104936

[Peter McGuire]

What did you think of the other books he'd written?

Were they also on the assassination?

As far as I'm aware, all Michael Piper's other books are listed here

Best Witness, with an Intro by Mark Lane, is also available as a free download via this link.

Thanks Sid.

I added it to Dixie's thread "JFK Assn ebooks, Free Downloads" @

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry104936

In "Say Goodbye to That" by Grover Proctor he and Dr. James R. Black write:

As Peter Dale Scott put it so well, the assassination of President Kennedy was not fundamentally an aberration at all; it was simply a routine technical adjustment of the machinery of government. Such things have happened before; they will happen again; indeed, they happen all the time. That day in Dallas the machinery was just a bit more visible than usual, the target a bit more important than usual, the cleanup perhaps a bit sloppier than usual. And so for once the mask of state slipped, and the face beneath was revealed--but only to those who are not afraid to look.

http://www.groverproctor.us/jfk/

This leads me to believe that there would have to be a very big reason to put an operation into motion to kill an American President. Most of the reasons given so far just don't seem big enough. State Survival is big enough. (Israel's) And it isn't that the CIA or Johnson didn't want him gone it is just that I dont think they got the ball rolling, but happily went along.

Since the Secret Service was compromised it ultimately was from within. But we all know many people had the need to get rid of Kennedy and that does not preclude outside influence at some point. Kennedy could have also been an unfit President killed illegally under Amendment 25 of the Consitution, which wasn't ratified until after his death and didn't include murder as a means of removal.

Amendment 25 - Presidential Disability and Succession. Ratified 2/10/1967. Note History

1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

Edited June 7, 2007 by Peter McGuire

[Peter McGuire]

What did you think of the other books he'd written?

Were they also on the assassination?

As far as I'm aware, all Michael Piper's other books are listed here

Best Witness, with an Intro by Mark Lane, is also available as a free download via this link.

Thanks Sid.

I added it to Dixie's thread "JFK Assn ebooks, Free Downloads" @

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry104936

In "Say Goodbye to That" by Grover Proctor he and Dr. James R. Black write:

As Peter Dale Scott put it so well, the assassination of President Kennedy was not fundamentally an aberration at all; it was simply a routine technical adjustment of the machinery of government. Such things have happened before; they will happen again; indeed, they happen all the time. That day in Dallas the machinery was just a bit more visible than usual, the target a bit more important than usual, the cleanup perhaps a bit sloppier than usual. And so for once the mask of state slipped, and the face beneath was revealed--but only to those who are not afraid to look.

http://www.groverproctor.us/jfk/

This leads me to believe that there would have to be a very big reason to put an operation into motion to kill an American President. Most of the reasons given so far just don't seem big enough. State Survival is big enough. (Israel's) And it isn't that the CIA or Johnson didn't want him gone it is just that I dont think they got the ball rolling, but happily went along.

Since the Secret Service was compromised it ultimately was from within. But we all know many people had the need to get rid of Kennedy and that does not preclude outside influence at some point. Kennedy could have also been an unfit President killed illegally under Amendment 25 of the Consitution, which wasn't ratified until after his death and didn't include murder as a means of removal.

Amendment 25 - Presidential Disability and Succession. Ratified 2/10/1967. Note History

1. In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.

2. Whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the Vice President, the President shall nominate a Vice President who shall take office upon confirmation by a majority vote of both Houses of Congress.

3. Whenever the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that he is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, and until he transmits to them a written declaration to the contrary, such powers and duties shall be discharged by the Vice President as Acting President.

4. Whenever the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive departments or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President.

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall resume the powers and duties of his office unless the Vice President and a majority of either the principal officers of the executive department or of such other body as Congress may by law provide, transmit within four days to the President pro tempore of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office. Thereupon Congress shall decide the issue, assembling within forty eight hours for that purpose if not in session. If the Congress, within twenty one days after receipt of the latter written declaration, or, if Congress is not in session, within twenty one days after Congress is required to assemble, determines by two thirds vote of both Houses that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice President shall continue to discharge the same as Acting President; otherwise, the President shall resume the powers and duties of his office.

Sid:

Sorry. I didn't mean to piggyback your thread with the 25th amendment argument and kill it. That seems to be the second most unpopular argument to make. You notice that I do not say theory. What most of us say is not theoretical. It is based on facts. Or at least good research countering a bunch of lies that were made in the first place.

I am preparing something more in line with your original posting and will get back with it.

Peter

Edited June 13, 2007 by Peter McGuire

[Myra Bronstein]

"In "Say Goodbye to That" by Grover Proctor he and Dr. James R. Black write:

As Peter Dale Scott put it so well, the assassination of President Kennedy was not fundamentally an aberration at all; it was simply a routine technical adjustment of the machinery of government. Such things have happened before; they will happen again; indeed, they happen all the time. That day in Dallas the machinery was just a bit more visible than usual, the target a bit more important than usual, the cleanup perhaps a bit sloppier than usual. And so for once the mask of state slipped, and the face beneath was revealed--but only to those who are not afraid to look."

Peter Dale Scott did put it well Peter. So did Donald Gibson when he said (in Battling Wall Street) that JFK interrupted an ongoing process. I think that point is really important in understanding what happened in Dallas. As we know, the corporate fascists tried to overthrow FDR in 1933. And they were not punished so they got the clear message that there is no downside to trying to overthrow a president they dislike...

...

This leads me to believe that there would have to be a very big reason to put an operation into motion to kill an American President. Most of the reasons given so far just don't seem big enough.

...

Can't agree with that. I think almost every villain under every rock had their reason:

-War profiteers (Brown & Root, bankers who lend money to both sides, etc) long ago figured out that with war comes obscene profits. And President Kennedy was denying them wars in Vietnam, Cuba, and the Soviet Union. Not to mention snuffing out the Cold War with the partial test ban treaty.

-For those who actually bought into the Commie boogyman scenario (whereas I think of it as an excuse to force unregulated capitalism on the people), JFK was refusing to play along. While they're trying to scare the snot out of the public by depicting commies as devils, JFK is saying they're just mortals like us who love their kids.

-Texas oil barons were about to lose their oil depletion allowance. Wasn't that like 30% of profits or something huge?

-Racist knuckle-draggers like John Birch Society and KKK et al hated him for giving the nation away to, you know, "those people." Both Kennedy brothers were enforcing the civil rights laws, both the letter of the law (supreme court decisions) and the spirit (JFK stated in a televised speech that it was the right thing to do).

-LBJ was about to be destroyed by the Bobby Baker scandal, with hearings in session on November 22. And if that scandal didn't get him the Estes one likely would have. And he was getting dumped from the ticket anyway. He was toast, unless...

-J. Edgar Hoover may have been dumped by JFK after his reelection. But he was able to survive that potential crisis and be appointed FBI Director for life by his dear pal LBJ.

-He and Bobby famously went after the "mob." Hey, the "mob" was part of government, certainly part of the CIA.

-I believe Cuban exiles were miffed at him...

-He wanted to bypass the World Bank and give government loans to third world nations instead of mugging them like the IMF does.

-David Rockefeller was openly arguing with him about his economic policies.

-He slapped US Steel down by demanding they reverse their price increase and having his justice department sue them.

-He supported unions!!! His disgust with US Steel had a lot to do with the fact that the company executives mislead the union into accepting crummy wages, then they raised prices anyway.

-He planned to break the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter them to the winds.

-The Dr Strangeloves in the Pentagon wanted to use their nuclear toys, or at least conventional weapons; they needed a reason to exist to justify their jobs after all. But, again, JFK was "almost a peace at any price president" (as he called himself).

-He possessed and valued and promoted a lively intellect and critical thought as Rockefeller's minions were doing everything they could to (successfully) dumb down the nation to produce a nation of contented ditch diggers.

-His family represented a dynasty, potentially 24 years of Kennedy presidents between Jack, Bobby, and Ted. And they were breeding like bunnies.

He was a revolutionary progressive who could not be bought off, framed, or scared away from fulfilling his vision.

My god, almost everyone except the people wanted him dead.

You might be totally right about Israel having a motive; why should they be the exception?

But there were plenty of motives without Israel in the mix.

[Sid Walker]

Part of my thesis in this thread is that the murderers of JFK (those ultimately responsible) gained from his death.

Some of them, in old age, still hold positions of great power.

In this context, a mention of Simon Peres is not out of place.

This octogenarian villain has just been elected President of Israel.

'Twas he who told a bald faced lie to JFK's face about Israel's nuclear intentions, way back in March 1963.

Kennedy: You know that we follow very closely the discovery of any nuclear development in the region. This could create a very dangerous situation. For this reason we monitor your nuclear effort. What could you tell me about this?

Peres: I can tell you most clearly that we will not introduce nuclear weapons to the region, and certainly we will not be the first.

[Len Colby]

duplicate post

Edited June 18, 2007 by Len Colby

[Len Colby]

Piper is not an academic or mainstream journalist.

That’s putting it mildly he has spent his entire career working for Willis A. Carto father of the Holocaust denial movement and with numerous ties to neo Nazi and white supremacist groups. Carto once wrote that “If Satan himself, with all of his superhuman genius and diabolical ingenuity at his command, had tried to create a permanent disintegration and force for the destruction of the nations, he could have done no better than to invent the Jews." and on another occasion complained about the "niggerfication of America."

For more of the wit, wisdom and views of Piper’s long time boss click here see posts 35 - 9 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=48229

The Barnes Review the Holocaust denying pro-Nazi sister publication to “The American Free Press” where Piper work proposed Hitler for a posthumous Nobel Peace Prize.

Yet Piper hypocritically went on about how racism shouldn’t be tolerated despite hanging out with Carto and Chris Bollyn who agreed with David Duke that interracial marriage/dating/sexual relationships was a Jewish plot to “mongrelize as much [as possible] the populations they’re in contact with” (Bollyn’s words not Duke’s) http://www.davidduke.com/mp3/dukeradiobollyn30april05.mp3

So he confessed to being intellectually dishonest and is bigoted hypocrite. Does that mean he’s wrong? Perhaps not but it’s not a good sign. I wasn’t impressed by the chapters he made available for download.

From the first publication of Final Judgment in the mid 90s, he was either ignored or savaged by 'mainstream' JFK assassination investigators, both pro- and anti-conspiracy.

Perhaps there is good reason for that

Deborah Conway, I understand, offered to join a JDL picket to keep him out of a particular event.

Citation

I think the following is true of Piper's views.

He is not 'anti-Jewish' in the sense that he has a 'racist' laothing for Jews. He is, IMO. actually fair-minded and acknowledges many Jewish sources in his own writings.

[…]He is anti-Jewish in the sense that he has a deep dislike for - and distrust of - the Jewish religion in most of its manifestations.

He is strongly anti-Zionist.

Can we take it that this is an accurate description of your views as well?

There was talk that the Mossad had brought down the World Trade Center and 3 Israelis jumping up and down in glee. This is something I read on the Internet shortly after 9-11. And I recall Arab names not being on the manifest of the flights. There is a lot of info about 9-11 on the Internet

I agree with Sid that the thread he indicated is a good place to look to decide for yourself on the issue of the “Dancing Israelis” as for the flight manifests that was a bit of stupidity dreamt up by incompetent researchers.

http://www.911myths.com/html/no_hijackers_..._manifests.html

Though this has been shown to be false a well known member of this forum continues to push the idea on his site http://s911t.org/ see “Top 10 Reasons the Hijackers are Fake” the other 9 reasons are BS as well

Thanks Sid.

I added it [best Witness, with an Intro by Mark Lane] to Dixie's thread "JFK Assn ebooks, Free Downloads" @

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry104936

That book is a bit off topic for that list if however she (or someone else) starts a “Holocaust denial ebooks, Free Downloads" list it will fit right in.

EDIT - Substituted 'He' with 'Carto' for clarity.

Edited June 19, 2007 by Len Colby

[Sid Walker]

Piper is not an academic or mainstream journalist.

That’s putting it mildly he has spent his entire career working for Willis A. Carto father of the Holocaust denial movement and with numerous ties to neo Nazi and white supremacist groups. He once wrote that “If Satan himself, with all of his superhuman genius and diabolical ingenuity at his command, had tried to create a permanent disintegration and force for the destruction of the nations, he could have done no better than to invent the Jews." and on another occasion complained about the "niggerfication of America."

For more of the wit, wisdom and views of Piper’s long time boss click here see posts 35 - 9 http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=48229

The Barnes Review the Holocaust denying pro-Nazi sister publication to “The American Free Press” where Piper work proposed Hitler for a posthumous Nobel Peace Prize.

Yet Piper hypocritically went on about how racism shouldn’t be tolerated despite hanging out with Carto and Chris Bollyn who agreed with David Duke that interracial marriage/dating/sexual relationships was a Jewish plot to “mongrelize as much [as possible] the populations they’re in contact with” (Bollyn’s words not Duke’s) http://www.davidduke.com/mp3/dukeradiobollyn30april05.mp3

So he confessed to being intellectually dishonest and is bigoted hypocrite. Does that mean he’s wrong? Perhaps not but it’s not a good sign. I wasn’t impressed by the chapters he made available for download.

From the first publication of Final Judgment in the mid 90s, he was either ignored or savaged by 'mainstream' JFK assassination investigators, both pro- and anti-conspiracy.

Perhaps there is good reason for that

Deborah Conway, I understand, offered to join a JDL picket to keep him out of a particular event.

Citation

I think the following is true of Piper's views.

He is not 'anti-Jewish' in the sense that he has a 'racist' laothing for Jews. He is, IMO. actually fair-minded and acknowledges many Jewish sources in his own writings.

[…]He is anti-Jewish in the sense that he has a deep dislike for - and distrust of - the Jewish religion in most of its manifestations.

He is strongly anti-Zionist.

Can we take it that this is an accurate description of your views as well?

There was talk that the Mossad had brought down the World Trade Center and 3 Israelis jumping up and down in glee. This is something I read on the Internet shortly after 9-11. And I recall Arab names not being on the manifest of the flights. There is a lot of info about 9-11 on the Internet

I agree with Sid that the thread he indicated is a good place to look to decide for yourself on the issue of the “Dancing Israelis” as for the flight manifests that was a bit of stupidity dreamt up by incompetent researchers.

http://www.911myths.com/html/no_hijackers_..._manifests.html

Though this has been shown to be false a well known member of this forum continues to push the idea on his site http://s911t.org/ see “Top 10 Reasons the Hijackers are Fake” the other 9 reasons are BS as well

Thanks Sid.

I added it [best Witness, with an Intro by Mark Lane] to Dixie's thread "JFK Assn ebooks, Free Downloads" @

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry104936

That book is a bit off topic for that list if however she (or someone else) starts a “Holocaust denial ebooks, Free Downloads" list it will fit right in.

I think I'd give more regard to Mark Lane's view on Piper than yours, Len. Has Lane written an introduction to any of your books or essays?

However, you repeat many of the same slurs and accusations against Piper (especially of the 'guilt by association' kind) that have helped persuade many people his books aren't worth reading. This tactic worked - after a fashion - for several years. But all the people can't be fooled forever...

Piper's views are his own. I imagine, like most of us, they have evolved over time. One nuance I found interesting was that he was rather slow to come to the view that (1) 9-11 was a false flag operation and (2) Zionists were ultimately behind it. That does not suggest to me that he is reflexively anti-Zionist or anti-Jewish. It suggests someone who considers the evidence with some care, before he rushes to judgment. Doubtless you can find counter-examples, Len in his many written and spoken works - but I found the 9-11 case telling.

You are correct that Best Witness is not about the JFK assassination.

You asked about Deborah Conway. I heard the story from Piper on his radio show. When it began a year or so ago, Piper invited Conway to debate him on air. No answer was the harsh reply. A pity really, because if the tale about Conway threatening to join a JDL picket against Piper is not true, she'd have had a perfect chance to repudiate it, directly, on live radio.

A general observation about 9-11 disinfo. It has become clear, I think, to those who have kept a critical eye on the saga, that false negative stories have been planted at various stages. These are like mines for the unwary truth seeker. They have a tendency to explode and cause grief. Some of those responsible for seeding disinfo - such as Chris Bollyn - have now, effectively, been outed. Others are doubtless still working less conspicuously inside the '9-11 Truth Movement'.

One of their tactics has been to mix wheat with chaff. About a year ago, Bollyn came out with a spectacular series of 'exposes' that tended to confirm the suspicions of people like myself - suspicions that Israeli agents played a central role in 9-11. His stories were noticed because they contained details no-one else had uncovered. Some of this is doubtless spurious, but other bits and pieces may be genuine. It's like hiding jewels by mixing them with imitations.

Debunking false conspiracy trails that were laid deliberately - or in some cases unintentionally - also provides scope for new books. I gather Mr Bugliosi has done some work in this area in his recent JFK assassination tome. For that, if for nothing else, he probably deserves some thanks.

Edited June 19, 2007 by Sid Walker

[Len Colby]

It’s a little bit simplistic to tar me with the guilt by association charge. Piper has in fact spent his entire career working for and had all his books published by Wills A. Carto the fuhrer of the Holocaust denial/neo-Nazi movements and for many of those years happily worked alongside racist bigot Bollyn. If someone spends there entire career working for publications run by Communists it’s reasonably safe to assume they are are Communist or at least Socialist same goes for someone who works for neo-Nazi’s.

Considering his long association with Bollyn and Carto and the former’s openly stated views on interracial dating/marriage/breeding and the latter’s openly stated views on Jews and Blacks he was supremely hypocritical when ranted on this forum

Andy Walker endorses the work of Deborah Lipstadt, a squalid racist who says that Jews should not marry non-Jews.

I call upon all of the good anti-racists on this forum to denounce Deborah Lipstadt for her foul racist position that Jews should not marry non-Jews.

Then when Deborah Lipstadt finally rejects this hate-filled supremacist point of view (something spawned from the old lie that God places one group of people above another, that "Chosen People" nonsense), maybe we can start believing EVERYTHING she says about "the Holocaust Deniers."

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...ost&p=55441

Piper did opt to write a book glorifying his boss’s Holocaust denial (which is fine by you of course) and bragged on this forum to writing an essay that he thought was a “crock” in order to win a prize some money (so much for his claims of intellectual integrity).

Most people would define Piper’s views towards Jews as you define them as bigoted.

So your hero is an intellectually dishonest bigot who works for and with declared racists. Does that invalidate his book? Not in and of itself but they aren’t good signs especially when he has a pretty obvious ax to grind. I was rather unimpressed by the chapters he made available one basically consisted of ‘Guy Bannister (or someone else suspected of involvement in the assassination) knew “x”, “x” worked for “y” a Jew’’. Many of his claims were unsourced.

Is he “reflexively anti-Zionist or anti-Jewish”? From your previous description of his views and his statements on this forum the answer is a rather obvious yes on both counts. BTW you avoided answering my question if you share Piper’s views towards Jews.

Why doesn’t Conway want to debate Piper? I can imagine several possible reasons 1) she doesn’t want to grant him credibility 2) she has low tolerance for sleaze 3) he set unreasonable conditions 4) lack of time

As for Lane though he did good work on the assassination 40+ years ago he seems to long gone down the crackpot’s path serving as the in house attorney for the likes of Carto and Jim Jones.

Funny that you and Piper and the rest of Carto’s crew* only turned on Bollyn when he started criticizing Carto’s friends.

* Not meant to imply you are in any way associated with Carto