Jump to content
The Education Forum

Bobby Kennedy Jr. and Conspiracies to kill JFK & RFK


Recommended Posts

Did this some how qualify him to pull off a feat no one else has been known to pull off? With all that’s been uncovered about MK Ultra and other programs I never heard about the CIA etc being able to pull something like this off.

You need to do some more reading then.

I'm sure you can fill in the blanks then. Why keep citing the Hardrup case if you have documented cases of the CIA being able to do this? And no, I don't think people freaking out and jumping out windows after being surreptitiously slipped acid counts.

Also I'm curious, did you or didn't you know previously that Hardrup later said he made it up?

Why would he have said this if it were untrue?

Funny if you could site numerous other cases I would have thought you would have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

My, my you do get snippy when pressed to come up with evidence to back your claims. That you resort to pointing out an obvious typo (of a word I’ve repeatedly spelt correctly) is a sign of the weakness of your case. I’m a bit lexdysic shoto me! I find it funny when people spend more time and energy making excuses rather than answering my inquiries would take IF they had good answers and then use ‘lack of time’ as an excuse.

Funny you say there are numerous cases but I’ve asked you twice and you’ve yet to cite a single one. If one of the signs of my “staggering ignorance” is my unfamiliarity with any such cases what does that make you who claims to be knowledgeable about the subject but can’t cite one? Why do you and others keep bringing up an obscure case from Denmark as a sort of ‘proof of concept’ if you had documented cases of the CIA doing this? They certainly didn’t seem to be capable of controlling Olson nor the KKK, Ken Kesey’s Krew, a few years later. I find it hard to believe they were paying beatnicks to drop acid if they were only a few years away from developing a Manchurian Candidate/Jason Bourne/Stepford Agent.

As for Olson I stand corrected that should have been “I don't think people freaking out and jumping out windows OR BEING MURDERED BY THE CIA after being surreptitiously slipped acid counts.”

Actually it would have been better for your case if had killed himself because that would show that 15 years before the RFK assassination being MK Ultraed/Articoked could lead people to do things they otherwise wouldn‘t.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in my previous post “I find it funny when people spend more time and energy making excuses rather than answering my inquiries would take IF they had good answers and then use ‘lack of time’ as an excuse.” I’m not of course disputing that MK Ultra and Artichoke took place, this is a matter of historical record. What I have yet to see is real evidence that were successful in programming some one to do their bidding.

Now if you really had as much evidence as you claim (15 years of research) I can think of no good reason for you not to post it, you should be able to almost effortlessly, but you only offer excuses and insults. The ruse is wearing a bit thin. Also once again if you had solid evidence of the CIA or other US government agencies being able to program a “Jason Bourne” why do you an others cite instead an obscure case from Denmark in which the “Manchurian candidate” didn’t even act as programmed?

Two more questions I imagine you will choose to ignore.

1) Did you know when you made your posts about Hardrup that he’d recanted?

2a) If so, why didn’t you mention this?

2b) If not, doesn’t that indicate your sources were either i) intellectually dishonest or ii) poor researchers?

As for our respective standing amongst our peers here, go to your profile page they have given you the lowest possible rating, why do you think that is?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in my previous post "I find it funny when people spend more time and energy making excuses rather than answering my inquiries would take IF they had good answers and then use 'lack of time' as an excuse." I'm not of course disputing that MK Ultra and Artichoke took place, this is a matter of historical record. What I have yet to see is real evidence that were successful in programming some one to do their bidding.

Now if you really had as much evidence as you claim (15 years of research) I can think of no good reason for you not to post it, you should be able to almost effortlessly, but you only offer excuses and insults. The ruse is wearing a bit thin. Also once again if you had solid evidence of the CIA or other US government agencies being able to program a "Jason Bourne" why do you an others cite instead an obscure case from Denmark in which the "Manchurian candidate" didn't even act as programmed?

Two more questions I imagine you will choose to ignore.

1) Did you know when you made your posts about Hardrup that he'd recanted?

2a) If so, why didn't you mention this?

2b) If not, doesn't that indicate your sources were either i) intellectually dishonest or ii) poor researchers?

As for our respective standing amongst our peers here, go to your profile page they have given you the lowest possible rating, why do you think that is?

What does this have to do with the subject of this thread: RFK, Jr. and the conspiracies to kill JFK and RFK?

I would think that Jan, who has already established bonifies on MKULTRA research, doesn't have to answer Colby's antagnistic questions that don't further our knowledge of anything.

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in my previous post "I find it funny when people spend more time and energy making excuses rather than answering my inquiries would take IF they had good answers and then use 'lack of time' as an excuse." I'm not of course disputing that MK Ultra and Artichoke took place, this is a matter of historical record. What I have yet to see is real evidence that were successful in programming some one to do their bidding.

Now if you really had as much evidence as you claim (15 years of research) I can think of no good reason for you not to post it, you should be able to almost effortlessly, but you only offer excuses and insults. The ruse is wearing a bit thin. Also once again if you had solid evidence of the CIA or other US government agencies being able to program a "Jason Bourne" why do you an others cite instead an obscure case from Denmark in which the "Manchurian candidate" didn't even act as programmed?

Two more questions I imagine you will choose to ignore.

1) Did you know when you made your posts about Hardrup that he'd recanted?

2a) If so, why didn't you mention this?

2b) If not, doesn't that indicate your sources were either i) intellectually dishonest or ii) poor researchers?

As for our respective standing amongst our peers here, go to your profile page they have given you the lowest possible rating, why do you think that is?

What does this have to do with the subject of this thread: RFK, Jr. and the conspiracies to kill JFK and RFK?

I would think that Jan, who has already established bonifies on MKULTRA research, doesn't have to answer Colby's antagnistic questions that don't further our knowledge of anything.

BK

Colby can't help himself...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in my previous post “I find it funny when people spend more time and energy making excuses rather than answering my inquiries would take IF they had good answers and then use ‘lack of time’ as an excuse.” I’m not of course disputing that MK Ultra and Artichoke took place, this is a matter of historical record. What I have yet to see is real evidence that were successful in programming some one to do their bidding.

Now if you really had as much evidence as you claim (15 years of research) I can think of no good reason for you not to post it, you should be able to almost effortlessly, but you only offer excuses and insults. The ruse is wearing a bit thin. Also once again if you had solid evidence of the CIA or other US government agencies being able to program a “Jason Bourne” why do you an others cite instead an obscure case from Denmark in which the “Manchurian candidate” didn’t even act as programmed?

Two more questions I imagine you will choose to ignore.

1) Did you know when you made your posts about Hardrup that he’d recanted?

2a) If so, why didn’t you mention this?

2b) If not, doesn’t that indicate your sources were either i) intellectually dishonest or ii) poor researchers?

As for our respective standing amongst our peers here, go to your profile page they have given you the lowest possible rating, why do you think that is?

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

Jan-- a badge of honor. Len is the only one I have seen here who has even noticed or mentioned the "rating" button. What does that suggest about who voted in THAT particular Ohio county?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Gary Loughran
As I said in my previous post “I find it funny when people spend more time and energy making excuses rather than answering my inquiries would take IF they had good answers and then use ‘lack of time’ as an excuse.” I’m not of course disputing that MK Ultra and Artichoke took place, this is a matter of historical record. What I have yet to see is real evidence that were successful in programming some one to do their bidding.

Now if you really had as much evidence as you claim (15 years of research) I can think of no good reason for you not to post it, you should be able to almost effortlessly, but you only offer excuses and insults. The ruse is wearing a bit thin. Also once again if you had solid evidence of the CIA or other US government agencies being able to program a “Jason Bourne” why do you an others cite instead an obscure case from Denmark in which the “Manchurian candidate” didn’t even act as programmed?

Two more questions I imagine you will choose to ignore.

1) Did you know when you made your posts about Hardrup that he’d recanted?

2a) If so, why didn’t you mention this?

2b) If not, doesn’t that indicate your sources were either i) intellectually dishonest or ii) poor researchers?

As for our respective standing amongst our peers here, go to your profile page they have given you the lowest possible rating, why do you think that is?

C'mon Len. Profile ratings indeed. A lesser indicator of forum standing, I can't imagine. I can't believe you are serious.

As a matter of interest, do you believe that if MK Ultra etc. had the desired and provenly workable result of 'programming' assassins and more that an intelligence document would be available - unless of course you believe that the 'lack of real evidence' - forthcoming from intelligence agencies, demonstrably proven, to be dishonest and to have acted to, at least facilitate, heinous crimes, - is evidence of anything at all . It is my opinion that it is reasonable to speculate (within reason) that there were successes in the mind control area and I'm open minded to total failure as well.

[As an aside I believe that one of Ashton Gray's prime reasons behind Watergate and the break ins was a cover for a new programme - remote viewing. I won't prarphrase how passionately he believed that the 'mind control' and extended programmes were the most secretive and dangerous of all the intelligence programmes - but it is evident in his posts. Although difficult (for me) to truly get my head around (as demonstrated in the threads :rolleyes: ) the timelines he produced are interesting reading a the very least. This is by-the-by]

In your opinion are the various continations and iterations of 'mind control' programmes evidence of failure, hence try something new or demonstrative of success and newer/better evolutions?

I think the continual call for proofs etc. in subjects such as this is laudable but ultimately a block to progress. To each his own in deciding if the dots exist or need to be joined. I'll not be putting my head in the sand, though, and awaiting a CIA a document on the matter - moreover why on earth would this convince me of anything - given their track record, some would say necessarily of so, of duplicity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for our respective standing amongst our peers here, go to your profile page they have given you the lowest possible rating, why do you think that is?

:rolleyes::lol::ice:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Having only just discovered it, I see you've been a frequent visitor to my Profile Page. Have you been spending all your time neg-repping me just so you could post the above?

Puerile puerile puerile.....

Why are these attack dogs permitted to just insult our best members? Don't the mods ever wonder why these characters are really here?

Disgusted.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for our respective standing amongst our peers here, go to your profile page they have given you the lowest possible rating, why do you think that is?

Having only just discovered it, I see you've been a frequent visitor to my Profile Page. Have you been spending all your time neg-repping me just so you could post the above?

Puerile puerile puerile.....

Why are these attack dogs permitted to just insult our best members? Don't the mods ever wonder why these characters are really here?

Disgusted.

Dawn

I imagine the irony of Dawn classifing others as "attack dogs" is lost on her :lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I said in my previous post “I find it funny when people spend more time and energy making excuses rather than answering my inquiries would take IF they had good answers and then use ‘lack of time’ as an excuse.” I’m not of course disputing that MK Ultra and Artichoke took place, this is a matter of historical record. What I have yet to see is real evidence that were successful in programming some one to do their bidding.

Now if you really had as much evidence as you claim (15 years of research) I can think of no good reason for you not to post it, you should be able to almost effortlessly, but you only offer excuses and insults. The ruse is wearing a bit thin. Also once again if you had solid evidence of the CIA or other US government agencies being able to program a “Jason Bourne” why do you an others cite instead an obscure case from Denmark in which the “Manchurian candidate” didn’t even act as programmed?

Two more questions I imagine you will choose to ignore.

1) Did you know when you made your posts about Hardrup that he’d recanted?

2a) If so, why didn’t you mention this?

2b) If not, doesn’t that indicate your sources were either i) intellectually dishonest or ii) poor researchers?

As for our respective standing amongst our peers here, go to your profile page they have given you the lowest possible rating, why do you think that is?

C'mon Len. Profile ratings indeed. A lesser indicator of forum standing, I can't imagine. I can't believe you are serious.

My bad you’re right - the worst part is that I was serious at the time! I guess I’m not immune to falling into the trap of occasionally putting too much importance on weak evidence that seems to support my POV.

As a matter of interest, do you believe that if MK Ultra etc. had the desired and provenly workable result of 'programming' assassins and more that an intelligence document would be available - unless of course you believe that the 'lack of real evidence' - forthcoming from intelligence agencies, demonstrably proven, to be dishonest and to have acted to, at least facilitate, heinous crimes, - is evidence of anything at all . It is my opinion that it is reasonable to speculate (within reason) that there were successes in the mind control area and I'm open minded to total failure as well.

Our positions aren’t that far apart, though I suspect that if they’d been successfully more concrete evidence than what I’ve seen would have turned by now. However I don’t completely discount the possibility that they succeeded but did a very good job of covering it up, and Sirhan was one of their ‘products’ .

All the evidence I’ve seen so far only indicates they were trying. But the Nazi’s tried to develop atomic weapons (among other projects) and the Soviets tried to put Cosmonauts on the moon without success. I would not be surprised if there were memos from the scientists to their bosses overstating their success especially if they wanted more money/resources nor if a researcher could get one of those scientists long past his glory days to exaggerate his/their accomplishments.

[As an aside I believe that one of Ashton Gray's prime reasons behind Watergate and the break ins was a cover for a new programme - remote viewing. I won't prarphrase how passionately he believed that the 'mind control' and extended programmes were the most secretive and dangerous of all the intelligence programmes - but it is evident in his posts. Although difficult (for me) to truly get my head around (as demonstrated in the threads ) the timelines he produced are interesting reading a the very least. This is by-the-by]

I didn’t follow his postings much, they normally left me befuddled as well. As for remote viewing I would recommend The Men Who Stare At Goats, by Jon Ronson

In your opinion are the various continations and iterations of 'mind control' programmes evidence of failure, hence try something new or demonstrative of success and newer/better evolutions?

I didn’t understand the question. We’re you asking me if `absence of evidence is evidence of absence’? I would say up to a degree, yes but it isn’t proof of absence.

I think the continual call for proofs etc. in subjects such as this is laudable but ultimately a block to progress. To each his own in deciding if the dots exist or need to be joined. I'll not be putting my head in the sand, though, and awaiting a CIA a document on the matter - moreover why on earth would this convince me of anything - given their track record, some would say necessarily of so, of duplicity.

That is a reasonable answer but Jan implied there were documented cases of Manchurian candidates. If he acknowledge that this wasn’t the case our exchange probably would have ended there.

I think other things besides documents would constitute evidence of success, namely a person who it could reasonably be shown was transformed by the CIA or some other intelligence or military agency into a Manchurian candidate.

Bill wrote:

What does this have to do with the subject of this thread: RFK, Jr. and the conspiracies to kill JFK and RFK?

As to the relevance of the Hardrup case and MKULTRA to the specific question of this thread you should direct that question to Jan since he’s the one who brought them up here. Their relevance to the RFK assassination should be obvious.

I would think that Jan, who has already established bonifies on MKULTRA research, doesn't have to answer Colby's antagnistic questions that don't further our knowledge of anything.

I fully acknowledge he is far more knowledgeable about the topic that I. That doesn’t justify implying he had evidence he didn’t. I think asking him for documentation and whether or not he knew Hardrup had recanted were fair questions.

Jan wrote:

Then, Colby has the sheer gall and ignorance to demand a piece of paper, on CIA letterhead, detailing the programming and operational use of a Manchurian Candidate by named CIA officers.

Strawman, I never asked for a CIA document but any documented cases of them creating a Jason Bourne

We have already had one important thread - about the anthrax attacks in the US - destroyed by an attack dog.

Rubbish, he obviously referring to Craig here. Nathaniel made a series or historically incorrect statements about the attacks and Craig called him on it.

This thread has been derailed by another attack dog,

I can’t figure out if he is referring to Scott or me in either case its more rubbish. The former politely pointed out that Nathaniel was wrong and I politely asked him to clarify and document his position. He showed no objection to the question and said he would look into it. It seems Jan defines questioning a theory even politely as the act of an attack dog.

and all the important conversations are happening in private correspondence, rather than openly on the Education Forum.

As I wrote in post#52, Colby is destroying the Education Forum as a home for meaningful research,

There are numerous forum we’re dissenting opinions are not allowed or at least strongly discouraged. Only allowing one POV would truly destroy THIS forum. Some people it seem don’t like having their pet theories held up to scrutiny.

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest David Guyatt
As I wrote in post#52, Colby is destroying the Education Forum as a home for meaningful research,[/b]

Jan is a long way from being alone in this assessment, which is why I recently offered to set up a new forum that would restrict membership to those who can meaningfully and intelligently contribute to debate, rather than simply engage in a Monty Pythonesque chip-on-your-shoulder "argument clinic" featuring contradiction.

That offer is being further explored - financially and time-wise - following personal messages.

It is a truly great pity that numerous intelligent and knowledgeable posters have either left (or no longer care to post) or have fallen foul of other measures.

***

http://www.mindspring.com/~mfpatton/sketch.htm:

The Argument Sketch

From "Monty Python's Previous Record" and "Monty Python's Instant Record Collection"

Originally transcribed by Dan Kay (dan@reed.uucp)

Fixed up and Added "Complaint" and "Being Hit On The Head lessons" Aug/ 87

by Tak Ariga (tak@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu)

The Cast (in order of appearance.)

M= Man looking for an argument

R= Receptionist

Q= Abuser

A= Arguer (John Cleese)

C= Complainer (Eric Idle)

H= Head Hitter

M: Ah. I'd like to have an argument, please.

R: Certainly sir. Have you been here before?

M: No, I haven't, this is my first time.

R: I see. Well, do you want to have just one argument, or were you thinking of taking a course?

M: Well, what is the cost?

R: Well, It's one pound for a five minute argument, but only eight pounds for a course of ten.

M: Well, I think it would be best if I perhaps started off with just the one and then see how it goes.

R: Fine. Well, I'll see who's free at the moment.

Pause

R: Mr. DeBakey's free, but he's a little bit conciliatory.

Ahh yes, Try Mr. Barnard; room 12.

M: Thank you.

(Walks down the hall. Opens door.)

Q: WHAT DO YOU WANT?

M: Well, I was told outside that...

Q: Don't give me that, you snotty-faced heap of parrot droppings!

M: What?

Q: Shut your festering gob, you tit! Your type really makes me puke, you vacuous, coffee-nosed, maloderous, pervert!!!

M: Look, I CAME HERE FOR AN ARGUMENT, I'm not going to just stand...!!

Q: OH, oh I'm sorry, but this is abuse.

M: Oh, I see, well, that explains it.

Q: Ah yes, you want room 12A, Just along the corridor.

M: Oh, Thank you very much. Sorry.

Q: Not at all.

M: Thank You.

(Under his breath) Stupid git!!

(Walk down the corridor)

M: (Knock)

A: Come in.

M: Ah, Is this the right room for an argument?

A: I told you once.

M: No you haven't.

A: Yes I have.

M: When?

A: Just now.

M: No you didn't.

A: Yes I did.

M: You didn't

A: I did!

M: You didn't!

A: I'm telling you I did!

M: You did not!!

A: Oh, I'm sorry, just one moment. Is this a five minute argument or the full half hour?

M: Oh, just the five minutes.

A: Ah, thank you. Anyway, I did.

M: You most certainly did not.

A: Look, let's get this thing clear; I quite definitely told you.

M: No you did not.

A: Yes I did.

M: No you didn't.

A: Yes I did.

M: No you didn't.

A: Yes I did.

M: No you didn't.

A: Yes I did.

M: You didn't.

A: Did.

M: Oh look, this isn't an argument.

A: Yes it is.

M: No it isn't. It's just contradiction.

A: No it isn't.

M: It is!

A: It is not.

M: Look, you just contradicted me.

A: I did not.

M: Oh you did!!

A: No, no, no.

M: You did just then.

A: Nonsense!

M: Oh, this is futile!

A: No it isn't.

M: I came here for a good argument.

A: No you didn't; no, you came here for an argument.

M: An argument isn't just contradiction.

A: It can be.

M: No it can't. An argument is a connected series of statements intended to establish a proposition.

A: No it isn't.

M: Yes it is! It's not just contradiction.

A: Look, if I argue with you, I must take up a contrary position.

M: Yes, but that's not just saying 'No it isn't.'

A: Yes it is!

M: No it isn't!

A: Yes it is!

M: Argument is an intellectual process. Contradiction is just the automatic gainsaying of any statement the other person makes.

(short pause)

A: No it isn't.

M: It is.

A: Not at all.

M: Now look.

A: (Rings bell) Good Morning.

M: What?

A: That's it. Good morning.

M: I was just getting interested.

A: Sorry, the five minutes is up.

M: That was never five minutes!

A: I'm afraid it was.

M: It wasn't.

Pause

A: I'm sorry, but I'm not allowed to argue anymore.

M: What?!

A: If you want me to go on arguing, you'll have to pay for another five minutes.

M: Yes, but that was never five minutes, just now. Oh come on!

A: (Hums)

M: Look, this is ridiculous.

A: I'm sorry, but I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid!

M: Oh, all right.

(pays money)

A: Thank you.

short pause

M: Well?

A: Well what?

M: That wasn't really five minutes, just now.

A: I told you, I'm not allowed to argue unless you've paid.

M: I just paid!

A: No you didn't.

M: I DID!

A: No you didn't.

M: Look, I don't want to argue about that.

A: Well, you didn't pay.

M: Aha. If I didn't pay, why are you arguing? I Got you!

A: No you haven't.

M: Yes I have. If you're arguing, I must have paid.

A: Not necessarily. I could be arguing in my spare time.

M: Oh I've had enough of this.

A: No you haven't.

M: Oh Shut up.

(Walks down the stairs. Opens door.)

M: I want to complain.

C: You want to complain! Look at these shoes. I've only had them three weeks and the heels are worn right through.

M: No, I want to complain about...

C: If you complain nothing happens, you might as well not bother.

M: Oh!

C: Oh my back hurts, it's not a very fine day and I'm sick and tired of this office.

(Slams door. walks down corridor, opens next door.)

M: Hello, I want to... Ooooh!

H: No, no, no. Hold your head like this, then go Waaah. Try it again.

M: uuuwwhh!!

H: Better, Better, but Waah, Waah! Put your hand there.

M: No.

H: Now..

M: Waaaaah!!!

H: Good, Good! That's it.

M: Stop hitting me!!

H: What?

M: Stop hitting me!!

H: Stop hitting you?

M: Yes!

H: Why did you come in here then?

M: I wanted to complain.

H: Oh no, that's next door. It's being-hit-on-the-head lessons in here.

M: What a stupid concept.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I recently offered to set up a new forum that would restrict membership to those who can meaningfully and intelligently contribute to debate,"

I'm confused David, why would you want to set up a forum you would be ineligible for? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest David Guyatt
"I recently offered to set up a new forum that would restrict membership to those who can meaningfully and intelligently contribute to debate,"

I'm confused David, why would you want to set up a forum you would be ineligible for? :)

The state of confusion you speak of is what many of us here lamentably witnesses in your daily diatribes that usually stand out as being wholly uncontaminated by knowledge or insight.

Hence the call for a Colby free forum...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for our respective standing amongst our peers here, go to your profile page they have given you the lowest possible rating, why do you think that is?

:):lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Having only just discovered it, I see you've been a frequent visitor to my Profile Page. Have you been spending all your time neg-repping me just so you could post the above?

Puerile puerile puerile.....

Seeing as how Len is so into visiting bios, I urge forum member to look carefully at his: one of the activities he

claims he did was book shows and videos for one GG Allin. Check out this act. There is a utube online but I am not sure I can post it here, it may violate rules. GG Allin is on an old Jerry Springer show and bragging about in his rock shows he gets a woman out of the audience and RAPES her. Also assaults people.

Now we've all gotta make a living but, geez. I sure would not list this on my bio. But it does provide insights.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 months later...

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...