Charles Black Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 This is a thread which requires no response ! I post the following only because "my cowardice" of not expressing what I truly believe, would leave me personally impotent, to the extent that future participation in this forum would be meaningless to me personally, and I would feel that I had taken my final vows, in my ordaination as an accepted "sheep" ! I can accept being called or thought of by some, or even many, as idiotic, foolish, out in left field, unknowledgeable of my subject matter, and a general fool..... If such thoughts or judgements are backed by ANY semi-sound reasoning. In my opinion, which I long ago acknowledged means little on this forum, the lack of "consideration" of a "new idea", by a group which associates itself with the true meaning of the word "EDUCATION", speaks volumes regarding that groups "right", to in all fairness, associate itself with such a title. I have observed and publicly noted what I, and I feel many others, have even acknowledged as "dribble"....or what I call "fodder for fools". This "fodder" has filled this forums with hundreds of thousands of wasted words regarding what has been acknowledged by most (even here), as a waste of costly space and even more costly time. I am certain that some have already acknowledged, that I am referring to a thread which I submitted first on June 14, I think, which was followed by a near shameful series of "personal pleas", on my part, for a response. I even invited "substantiated ridicule" ! If one realistically studies MOST that is discussed on this forum, this subject, by the very nature of its magnitude, and the many misleading theories that have purposely been introduced, does openly invite a great deal of "speculation"....so stating that because my theory is speculative, it therefore does not warrant "consideration".... falls on my deaf ears. I am referring to my thread which is and was titled ["updated approach ?", what do we really know?] This thread was originally submitted, as I have mentioned, on June 14th. There were but two answers that I could imagine as being an unacceptable response, and those of you who are well versed in this subject, understand why. 1) This subject is ridiculous because it has "been proven" that undetectable alteration of this film is impossible ! 2) Your proposition is "purely speculative" ! My purpose was to have you, with your vast knowledge of most of the factors thought to be involved in this case, explain to me, even however harshly, the ridiculousness of my proposition....Or how is it less viable than The/A lone gunman or the Magic Bullet theories, which have preoccupied most, in my opinion ridiculously, for 43 years? My opinion is that considering all venues in which this topic has been considered, a failure of response ( by all but a very few ), casts doubt that the educated members of this forum have not, CLOSED THEIR MINDS, as they have so often accused their opponents in this debate. Charles Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 Charlie...don't despair. I read all of your posts. I agree with most of them. Usually there is not much to add, since your points are usually well considered. When I have nothing to add, I don't take the time to respond "I agree" as that seems a waste of time. If you crave responses, pick more controversial subjects. For instance, a posting on Judyth Baker will get loads of responses, both pro and con. But talking about her is also a waste of time. KUTGW. Jack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Black Posted June 29, 2007 Author Share Posted June 29, 2007 Hello Jack Thanks for the response and you are right ! I will in the future address the events and subjects that are more meaningful and interesting. Yes ! LHO's covert "love life" is something which needs further study. Also the possibility of JFK having been purposely shot by Agent Greer, or his being mistakenly shot by the Agent brandishing an automatic weapon in the follow up car, are more suitable subjects which also could use much more detailed study. Possibly even "more years" of such study. I have always suffered the inability of being able to differentiate the truly pertinent speculation from some of my "fairy tale" conjectures! I will not burden the forum with further "foolishness" ! There are those areas rcognized by all to be much more pertinent. Until I become much more knowledgeable about this particular subject matter, I have decided to do everyone a favor.....by reading all of the more pertinent posts and try to learn a little more of what is of "true value", while attempting to more "limit" my posts only to those areas. I hope that the forum members will accept my heart felt apology for having wasted valuable space and time. I will do my utmost to more sensibly direct any questions to those areas requiring true study, other than my foolish and no doubt selfish whims of fantasy ! Charles Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Evan Burton Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Charles, As you may know, I have no opinion on JFK, so I have to ask: are you a whinger? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack White Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Charles,As you may know, I have no opinion on JFK, so I have to ask: are you a whinger? Whing´er n. 1. A kind of hanger or sword used as a knife at meals and as a weapon. The chief acknowledged that he had corrected her with his whinger. - Sir W. Scott. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dolva Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 (edited) Charles,As you may know, I have no opinion on JFK, so I have to ask: are you a whinger? Whing´er - n.1.A kind of hanger or sword used as a knife at meals and as a weapon. The chief acknowledged that he had corrected her with his whinger. - Sir W. Scott. I suspect Evan is using a particular OZ slang or 'strine': "to complain, whine." "A whinger complains ...regarding minor, trivial complaints...In the Australian ethos there is considerable social stigma attached to "whinger". The antisocial, ineffectual behaviour of a whinger is strongly reproved. In contrast, the underdog, the struggler and "the little Aussie battler"...are admired and romanticised. Negativity and pessimism are frowned upon whereas tolerance, a positive attitude and an optimistic outlook in the face of adversity is encouraged, as shown by the catchphrases: "against the odds", "cop it sweet", "she'll be right, mate", "hang in there" and the older phrase "she'll be apples", these last two phrases giving assurance and meaning "everything will be fine". There is also the phrase "it's all good" from American English that is emerging in Australian English, similar to "no worries". Observers remark on the value traditional Australian culture places on toughness and resilience (Wierzbicka 1986:361; Goddard 1998:157). These qualities are reflected in the above idioms...Whinger has connotations of weakness, self-pity and the inability to cope with the pressures of life in a mature manner." It is also used in politics between left and right, unions and business, where often the best unionists are british and the right attemps to degrade them with their own term like "whingeing pom". Often it's a misused term, but it's real meaning is approprately applied to those who one may assume to be able to "cop it sweet" or "hang in there" and do not, instead trying to get others to fix their problems. Edited June 29, 2007 by John Dolva Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Black Posted June 30, 2007 Author Share Posted June 30, 2007 Charles,As you may know, I have no opinion on JFK, so I have to ask: are you a whinger? EVAN Since you claim to "Have no opinion on JFK"..... Why would you care to have an opinion regarding me? A "whinger"? I don't know, as I am fluent only in English ! But if you mean "whiner"....yes I definitely am ! And I do take considerable offense to "wise asses" who must needlessly interject their comments where they are not needed....particularly in areas in which they claim "No Interest" ! Charles Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Black Posted June 30, 2007 Author Share Posted June 30, 2007 (edited) Charles,As you may know, I have no opinion on JFK, so I have to ask: are you a whinger? Edited June 30, 2007 by Charles Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now