Jump to content
The Education Forum

Lifton attacks Fetzer over 9/11 and Israeli complicity


Guest James H. Fetzer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Jim...I think it appropriate to mention that "Jews" care about truth in the JFK case in disproportionate numbers,

beginning with Mark Lane. Then there were Harold Weisberg, Robert Groden (heritage only), and of course

David Lifton. Others include Mae Brussell, Sylvia Meagher (???), Edward Epstein, David Scheim, Bud Fensterwald (???),

Cyril Wecht, and many others I could name but am not sure of. I include Meagher and Fensterwald because I was

once told they were Jewish in a discussion with a leading researcher as we discussed this subject.

Few know that Groden was an adoptive child and raised in a Christian family, but retained his family name,

as I understand it.

Jack

Disproportionate to what numbers, Jack? I don't understand your point. For instance, IMO, generally speaking, AMERICANS as a whole care about truth in the JFK case in disproportionately LOW numbers. Perhaps I missed what you meant...

The people I named included nearly ALL of the early authors. All were Jewish. Americans as a whole did not do

early research nor write leading early books. I THOUGHT MY MEANING WAS VERY CLEAR. The early authors were

disproportionately Jewish. This is merely an observation, not a racist statement.

Thanks.

Jack

Thanks, Jack. I didn't accuse you of anything! I just didn't "get it" -- that's all. You were saying that a disproportiontely HIGH number of the early JFK researchers and/or authors were Jewish. Like I said, maybe I missed your point. Obviously, I did. Thanks for pointing that out...

Edited by Greg Burnham
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 240
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Fetzer keeps repeating statements that are false, and I do not feel obligated to continually repeat the refutations.

He is also trying to turn this thread into some kind of Alice-in-Wonderland Smalls Claims Court.

Nonetheless, here is a good example of why I do not trust Fetzer's "accounting."

Consider what Fetzer posts as a description of one of the checks he supposedly sent me:

QUOTING FETZER:

My checkbook notation:

#1313 David S. Lifton (DVDs/Pittsburgh Conference) $200.00

Duplicate check notation:

#1313 4 March 2005

David S. Lifton (DVDs/Pittsburgh Conference) $200.00

UNQUOTE

Now the problem with that notation is that I never sold to anyone --Fetzer or anyone else--any DVD's of Dr. Wecht's "Pittsburgh Conference." And I say that because I didn't have any such videos. I couldn't have sold what I never owned.

Yet Fetzer's "checkbook notation" claims exactly the opposite--it states that I sold him such an item on 4 March 2005, and that he wrote me a check for that sale.

That's just one example: I'm not going to waste time posting others. But here's still another, and this is from memory: in one case Fetzer has a thousand dollar item listed two different ways--once as a royalty payment, another time as a loan. As I noted in a previous post: Fetzer kept two different bank accounts, at two separate institutions. Now that thousand dollar item can't be both. Of course, Fetzer counts it twice. Furthermore, either in that case, or another, items had the same check number (!); when I queried Fetzer, he claimed that to be a "coincidence." What nonsense.

As to his statement that I said he was an anti-Semite, that is also false. To the contrary, I repeatedly said that, on a personal level, I did NOT think he was an anti-Semite. HOWEVER, I pointed out that those who were his co-developers on the Rediscover911 website were virulent anti-Semites and holocaust deniers. That's just a plain fact. I'm not going to go through all their nasty quotes again. For whatever reason, Fetzer was associating with trailer trash.

To drive this point home, I wrote a satire and have posted it now twice--about Fetzer swimming what I called the "dirty duck pond". How he was tryihg to have it both ways: he associated with them, but he really wasn't one of them. In the satire, I said that He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck, but insisted he was not a duck.

Now, if that's the way he wants to conduct his life--that's his business. I was just pointing out the obvious. If he was enough of a fool to think he could swim in that dirty duck pond and come out clean as a whistle, then he lives in some kind of a dream world.

As to why Fetzer's "receiver" is tuned to certain frequencies, and not others, I have no idea. I can't force Fetzer to read the English language correctly. As I have noted, he apparently has a congenital problem in accurately perceiving reality. How else, I would like to know, does a person arrive at the conclusion that no planes struck the World Trade Center on 9/11, that the video evidence was faked, that the hijackers are still alive, that a missile, not a plane, hit the Pentagon, and that we didn't go to the moon. By the normal standards of society, these would be evaluated as the views of a crank or a crackpot.

But returning to the more narrow issue at hand:

There is, finally, Fetzer's demonstrably false and absurd charge that I accused him of anti-Semitism AFTER he tried to collect money from me.

What nonsense. What self-pitying crybaby nonsense. The reality is that Jim Fetzer instituted his attempt to collect money from me--money which, to repeat, I do not believe I owe him---in the immediate aftermath of my writing some strongly worded posts, on the Judyth thread, stating that I did not believe Judyth's story about being Oswald's girlfriend. If Fetzer wants to believe her story, that is his right.

But make no mistake about it: that's when all this started (and not a minute before).

Somehow, in Fetzer's mind, that sequence has been reversed. It has been transmuted in Fetzer's imagination into something entirely different, which he repeatedly posts in his typical "oh woe is me!" fashion: the self-pitying notion that I accused him of anti-Semitism AFTER he wanted me to pay him money which I did not (and do not) feel he is owed.

Fetzer may not be an anti-Semite but, based on my experiences with him, his arguments are weak and illogical, oftentimes false, and much of this can be traced back to the fact that this man who sports a Ph.D in philosophy and taught critical thinking for 35 years has a tenuous relationship with what most normal people would call "reality."

DSL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Lifton is blowing smoke. He is alluding to an early email I sent in which I had a check listed

incorrectly. That is no longer the case, which he knows. The other example he cites is a check

that does not even figure in the royalties/loans dispute. He and I previously discussed it, and

we both agreed we were not sure what it represented. My accounting may not be flawless, but what

I have published here in response to Pat Speer is correct. I have given Lifton at least $2,500 in

royalties and advances in royalties. At 25% I would have to have received (or be due) $10,000

from the publisher for Lifton to be entitled to that amount. As a nice illustration of his integrity, I

have asked him, if I have overpaid him, will he reimburse me, to which his response has been silence.

Now he tells us that he has never claimed that I am "anti-Semitic"! Does anyone here believe that? I

have protested this FROM THE FIRST POST THAT INITIATED THIS THREAD. Now I am responding

to post #469! Does anyone believe that, if Lifton were speaking the truth, he would not have pointed

that out before 468 additional posts? He must think we are all idiots! Lifton is obviously lying--and

wants to weasel out of repaying me for loans I voluntarily extended to him when he was in need. As

I have explained, it was in anticipation of the symposium in London, which occurred on 14 July 2010,

that led me to request repayment. This was not a form of punishment for his refusal to provide his

recording of his conversation with Judyth! That is about as bizarre an explanation as I can imagine.

Consider, after all, that if that were true, then why did I not request that Lifton repay me long ago?

The Judyth thread has been dormant for months. Why didn't I launch this "punitive campaign" against

Lifton then? Not only is he grasping after straws, but I made several efforts to settle this between

us privately and only made it a public issue after it became obvious that he was trying to stiff me.

He is a disreputable brute who cares only about himself and will wreak any damage he wants to futher

his own selfish interests. Post #403 shows that the check he disputes here, #1313, does not figure

in my calculations. I seem to have written the wrong notation. BUT LIFTON RECEIVED THE CHECK AND

NEGOTIATED IT ANYWAY. How's that for hypocrisy? Again he turns benefits I have bestowed against me.

It is certainly true that I consider his withholding of the Judyth tape as the suppression of evidence.

I regard his attacks upon me as utterly reprehensible. I have only benefited him and, as post #403

reveals, he has received $5,210 from me. Yet when I seek to recover the $1,300, he launches vicious

and unfounded smears against me for being anti-Semitic! NOW HE DENIES HE HAS CALLED ME "ANTI-

SEMITIC" AFTER 468 ADDITIONAL POSTS? And, as I have also remarked, he is unwilling to share copies

of Zapruder film slides in his possession which he acquired from Moe Weitzman long ago, a precious

resource that he wants to keep for the exclusive benefit of David S. Lifton! Anyone who wants to

continue to believe in him after this post cannot claim they haven't been warned. The man is scum.

Fetzer keeps repeating statements that are false, and I do not feel obligated to continually repeat the refutations.

He is also trying to turn this thread into some kind of Alice-in-Wonderland Smalls Claims Court.

Nonetheless, here is a good example of why I do not trust Fetzer's "accounting."

Consider what Fetzer posts as a description of one of the checks he supposedly sent me:

QUOTING FETZER:

My checkbook notation:

#1313 David S. Lifton (DVDs/Pittsburgh Conference) $200.00

Duplicate check notation:

#1313 4 March 2005

David S. Lifton (DVDs/Pittsburgh Conference) $200.00

UNQUOTE

Now the problem with that notation is that I never sold to anyone --Fetzer or anyone else--any DVD's of Dr. Wecht's "Pittsburgh Conference." And I say that because I didn't have any such videos. I couldn't have sold what I never owned.

Yet Fetzer's "checkbook notation" claims exactly the opposite--it states that I sold him such an item on 4 March 2005, and that he wrote me a check for that sale.

That's just one example: I'm not going to waste time posting others. But here's still another, and this is from memory: in one case Fetzer has a thousand dollar item listed two different ways--once as a royalty payment, another time as a loan. As I noted in a previous post: Fetzer kept two different bank accounts, at two separate institutions. Now that thousand dollar item can't be both. Of course, Fetzer counts it twice. Furthermore, either in that case, or another, items had the same check number (!); when I queried Fetzer, he claimed that to be a "coincidence." What nonsense.

As to his statement that I said he was an anti-Semite, that is also false. To the contrary, I repeatedly said that, on a personal level, I did NOT think he was an anti-Semite. HOWEVER, I pointed out that those who were his co-developers on the Rediscover911 website were virulent anti-Semites and holocaust deniers. That's just a plain fact. I'm not going to go through all their nasty quotes again. For whatever reason, Fetzer was associating with trailer trash.

To drive this point home, I wrote a satire and have posted it now twice--about Fetzer swimming what I called the "dirty duck pond". How he was tryihg to have it both ways: he associated with them, but he really wasn't one of them. In the satire, I said that He walked like a duck, quacked like a duck, but insisted he was not a duck.

Now, if that's the way he wants to conduct his life--that's his business. I was just pointing out the obvious. If he was enough of a fool to think he could swim in that dirty duck pond and come out clean as a whistle, then he lives in some kind of a dream world.

As to why Fetzer's "receiver" is tuned to certain frequencies, and not others, I have no idea. I can't force Fetzer to read the English language correctly. As I have noted, he apparently has a congenital problem in accurately perceiving reality. How else, I would like to know, does a person arrive at the conclusion that no planes struck the World Trade Center on 9/11, that the video evidence was faked, that the hijackers are still alive, that a missile, not a plane, hit the Pentagon, and that we didn't go to the moon. By the normal standards of society, these would be evaluated as the views of a crank or a crackpot.

But returning to the more narrow issue at hand:

There is, finally, Fetzer's demonstrably false and absurd charge that I accused him of anti-Semitism AFTER he tried to collect money from me.

What nonsense. What self-pitying crybaby nonsense. The reality is that Jim Fetzer instituted his attempt to collect money from me--money which, to repeat, I do not believe I owe him---in the immediate aftermath of my writing some strongly worded posts, on the Judyth thread, stating that I did not believe Judyth's story about being Oswald's girlfriend. If Fetzer wants to believe her story, that is his right.

But make no mistake about it: that's when all this started (and not a minute before).

Somehow, in Fetzer's mind, that sequence has been reversed. It has been transmuted in Fetzer's imagination into something entirely different, which he repeatedly posts in his typical "oh woe is me!" fashion: the self-pitying notion that I accused him of anti-Semitism AFTER he wanted me to pay him money which I did not (and do not) feel he is owed.

Fetzer may not be an anti-Semite but, based on my experiences with him, his arguments are weak and illogical, oftentimes false, and much of this can be traced back to the fact that this man who sports a Ph.D in philosophy and taught critical thinking for 35 years has a tenuous relationship with what most normal people would call "reality."

DSL

Edited by James H. Fetzer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree completely with Jim's remarks. He goes where others fear to tread.

I agree with all the facts and opinions he presents...but not always with his methodology of presentation.

He needs to control his passions more. A calm and reasoned approach will gain a better following than

a fiery sermon.

Jack

Jack is too generous. Most of the 9/11 community would cite David Ray Griffin as the leading expert on

9/11. Griffin has published at least seven books on the subject, including some very thorough critiques of

THE 9/11 COMMISSION. What I do that Griffin and others do not is tackle the most controversial aspects

of 9/11, including who and why. In "9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda" and "Is 9/11 research 'anti-Semitic'?",

for example, I have addressed indications of Israeli complicity in 9/11. Griffin has not gone there. In my

work on what happened at the South Tower, I have been aggressive in laying out the case for video fakery.

Griffin will not go there. I have shown that no Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon in "What Didn't Happen at

the Pentagon" and elsewhere, but I believe that most students of 9/11 would agree with me about that.

Perhaps most significantly, I have challenged the contention of Steve Jones and his clique that thermite

played a significant role in the destruction of the Twin Towers. I have offered many critiques of his work,

including "The Manipulation of the 9/11 Community", which can be found under "The Science of 9/11",

and "An Analysis of the WTC on 9/11", which can be found by going to http://911scholars.nign.com and

entering the title. Griffin, Gage, Jones, Ryan, and others are promoting a theory that, in my opinion,

cannot possibly explain the conversion of those 500,000-ton buildings into millions of cubic yards of

very fine dust. And for that I have been viciously attacked (though not by Griffin or even Gage) and

attempts made to isolate me within the 9/11 community. They haven't worked but they are still ongoing.

Check out "Wikipedia as a 9/11 Disinformation Op". Most of my most important articles on 9/11 are now

archived on my blog at http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com. These include several Powerpoint presentations,

which combine my (then latest) efforts to expose video fakery, the use of unconventional methods for the

destruction of the Twin Towers, and what happened at the Pentagon, where, as I explained as long ago

as my first serious study of 9/11, "Thinking about 'Conspiracy Theories': 9/11 and JFK", I believe that a

Boeing flew toward the building and then swerved over it while a much smaller plane approached it and

fired a missile to take out the budget experts who were attempting to track the missing $2.3 trillion.

One of the most effective methods that my critics employ is to present caricatures of my positions by

calling them "no planes", "space beams", and other tripe. They never cite any sources for those views,

because anyone who actually reads what I've written will know better. I encourage the study of alternative

explanations because we don't know how it was done. But that is not how disinformation and propaganda work.

I am also doing my best to expose the charades that undermine research into conspiracies, including (most

recently) "Conspiracies and Conspiracism", which, even if you have no interest in 9/11, every one on this

forum should read and study, because it will enable you to defuse attacks on us as "conspiracy theorists".

Because I deal with the complex and controversial aspects of 9/11, I am a target for those who are less

familiar with the evidence or driven by an agenda. Some of those here, alas, have been taken in and, to

my surprise, even after viewing some of my presentations, seem to be unable to think things through for

themselves. Well, after spending 35 years teaching logic, critical thinking, and scientific reasoning, I am

doing my best to explain how to reason about these complex and controversial issues. I would like to think

I am making progress. But I agree with Thurgood Marshall who, when asked how he would like himself to be

remembered, said, "He did what he could with what he had." And that is what I would like for myself as well.

Dr. Fetzer is absolutely correct. I have checked his website, and it is filled with accurate evidence and

apt conclusions. I am convinced that he is the world's foremost authority on 911. He may have a few

minor mistakes, but it makes little difference. If he is "only" 95 percent right, that is pretty impressive.

His critics should check his URLs and learn something, and limit their complaints to facts that they

believe wrong...not what someone else interprets as the Fetzer position.

He correctly stands up to his critics, and in some cases his retorts are perhaps too mild. There is

something wrong when the evidences is available and critics refuse to examine it.

Jack

Your brain has been hijacked by your friends, who are turning you into a stooge. I have repeatedly

challenged you to show that any argument of mine, including about video fakery in New York or the

assault on the Pentagon, is flawed. You haven't done it. And, in my view, for a very good reason:

there is nothing wrong with my analysis of video fakery or the assault on the Pentagon. So if you

want to redeem yourself, come to grips with the evidence and show what I have right or wrong. OK?

"What Didn't Happen at the Pentagon"

http://jamesfetzer.blogspot.com/2010/01/what-didnt-happen-at-pentagon.html

"New Proof of Video Fakery on 9/11"

http://www.opednews.com/articles/New-Proof-of-Video-Fakery--by-Jim-Fetzer-080729-132.html

"Thinking about 'Conspiracy Theories': 9/11 and JFK"

http://www.scholarsfor911truth.org/fetzerexpandedx.htm

As jim DiEugenio states when he paraphrases Jim Garrison, "If the CIA had pictures of Oswald entering or leaving the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City, they would have put it on the front of the Warren Report." Isn't this also true of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon? It wouldn't come close to answering the many questions that exist concerning this event would it would certainly put to bed one of them.

Lee

I swore off this lousy thread, but since I am mentioned here, I think I should reply.

THis comparison would be apt except for two things:

1. Rumsfeld started the whole missile hit the Pentagon hoax in the first place.

2. If you believe, as I do, that the 9-11 movement was hijacked by agents like Reynolds, Shayler, Lear etc. in order to reduce it to absurd claims about the physical evidence, then you might want to keep the video secret to encourage those absurd claims.

So its not quite the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest James H. Fetzer

Colby suggests that I was wrong to identify John Bolton as a neo-con with dual

US-Israeli citizenship. If that is indeed the case--and let us assume that it is--

then I thereby committed an error. In comparison with David Lifton's duplicity in

this thread--and even in the very post to which Colby draws attention--however,

it appears to be a minor matter when it is compared to Lifton's egregious conduct.

The solitary sentence in which Lifton says he does NOT think I am anti-Semitic--

only incredibly stupid, a dupe, and a fool--is overridden by a host of claims in

which he strongly implies the contrary. He and Colby appear to be trying to find

SOME BASIS for rejecting what has become manifest from his ongoing assaults

on me in his effort to evade repaying loans. Consider the following in the same post:

> And then, finally, on the remaining pages, I am inserting the various

> imagery that is shown, on Fetzer¹s podcast, as he reads from ³Stranger than

> Fiction.² It is all virulently anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic

> propaganda‹really low class junk. Yet there is Jim Fetzer, reading from

> this book, while all this inflammatory anti-Semitic imagery is flashing on

> the screen.

>

> Of course, a collateral mystery (or ³mystery²) is just who is ³Albert D.

> Pastore, Ph.D.² who, as Fetzer points out, has ³some connection² (I think

> his words were) with philosophy.

>

> The imagery used by Fetzer appears at the end of the attached memo. It is

> violently anti-semitic and highly inflammatory.

Here Lifton clearly claims that I HAVE USED "violently anti-Semitic and highly

inflammatory" imagery in a series of videos WHICH I DID NOT MAKE. If I have

wrongly identified one of the neo-cons, such as John Bolton, as holding dual

US-Israeli citizenship, then I made a mistake. BUT CONSIDER THE BLUNDER

LIFTON HAS COMMITTED HERE. They are not remotely in the same league.

Colby discounts what is known as "conversational implication", where, even

without directly saying so, an opinion, attitude, or request is conveyed. If

a guest is visiting your home and remarks, "Gee, it's a bit cold in here!",

she is insinuating--as a matter of conversational implication--that it would

be desirable for you to turn up the temperature to make it more comfortable.

No one who has read this thread could possibly imagine that that sentence in

passing carries the burden of conveying Lifton's attitude toward me. Long after I

have explained that I was not the producer of the videos to which he has taken

such exception--of which I am not enamored, either--he has yet to acknowledge

that HE WAS WRONG, for the obvious reason they are his best weapon against me!

This is an unethical action--or, strictly speaking, inaction--on his part, which has

left the enduring impression that I created a series of highly anti-Semitic and very

inflammatory YouTube videos. What in fact happened is that someone took what I

had read over "The Real Deal" and produced them. That Lifton has never admitted

as much and that Colby continues to perpetrate this crass fraud speaks volumes.

Anyone who doubts that Colby is conduction an operation against me should find it

fascinating that he would reach back to my report of watching as Payne Stewart's

plane was intercepted within 20 minutes by the Air Force or the Florida Air National

Guard. My recollection of the facts has proven correct, even if I really was wrong

about my whereabouts at the time. But who would have thought to bring it up here?

My posts are voluminous and run into the tens of thousands of sentences. Yet in

all the time I have been making those posts, most of which have been devoted to

some of the most controversial aspects of 9/11 and JFK research, this is the best

they can do? A sentence Lifton tossed away, a faulty recollection of where I was

at the time, and the mis-description of the citizenship of a neo-con? Unbelievable.

Make no mistake about it. This is an ongoing attempt to perpetrate a deliberate

smear. I have no doubt it is related to my efforts to expose falsehoods and reveal

truths about 9/11 to the American people. Lifton may be acting out of self-interest

because he was to evade a $1,300 debt. But Colby is an entirely different matter in

these exchanges, where by comparison Lifton's motives appear to be relatively pure.

Now he tells us that he has never claimed that I am "anti-Semitic"! Does anyone here believe that? I have protested this FROM THE FIRST POST THAT INITIATED THIS THREAD. Now I am responding to post #469! Does anyone believe that, if Lifton were speaking the truth, he would not have pointed that out before 468 additional posts? He must think we are all idiots! Lifton is obviously lying--and wants to weasel out of repaying me for loans I voluntarily extended to him when he was in need...Yet when I seek to recover the $1,300, he launches vicious and unfounded smears against me for being anti-Semitic! NOW HE DENIES HE HAS CALLED ME "ANTI-SEMITIC" AFTER 468 ADDITIONAL POSTS?...The man is scum.[/b]

Amazing Fetzer despite your advanced degrees your reading comprehension is below that of my more advanced students who are not native speakers of English. See the relevant portion of what Lifton said with emphasis added for the slow. Show us where he said you were anti-Semitic

I listened to several of the podcasts‹it is the ³Israel did it² line, but much more: a rather broad based revisionist history going back to the early 20th century, about the creation of Israel, how the Jews are responsible for the financial woes of the world (and the U.S.); for U.S. financial policy; how the Jews are responsible for World War II (which Hitler did not want, at all, according to this author‹i.e., it was all the fault of the Jews) ‹and finally, of course, how Israel is responsible for 9/11.

As Fetzer reads the book, there is an assortment of anti-Jewish and anti-Israel illustrations‹some might call it anti-Semitic political pornography. Each person will have to judge this for himself (or herself).

I HAVE TO SAY (AT THIS POINT) AND JUST TO CLEAR THE AIR‹THAT I DO NOT THINK JIM FETZER IS ANTI-SEMETIC. What I do believe (and most unfortunately) that he is not sufficiently discriminating (some would say indiscriminating) in choosing what to believe. In this issue, I do not think he is an enlightened radical; I think he is behaving like a complete fool.

I’m begining to think your mental faculties are declining.

1] About a year ago you claimed that you watched 1999 intercept of Payne Stewart’s wayward LearJet live on TV while living in Florida when in fact you had not lived in the state for over a decade prior.

2] April 22, 2008, you posted an essay entitled 9/11 and the Neo-Con Agenda and in it make the untrue claim that various members of the Bush administration (one of whom is Christian) were Israeli-American dual nationals.

June 17, 2009 you posted an essay entitled, “Is 9/11 Research "Anti-Semitic"?” In it you quoted the passage about the supposed dual nationals from the 2008 article.

July 12, 2010 Referring to the passage about the supposed dual nationals from the 2009 essay I wrote “ In an essay on the site he quoted one of his previous essays:”. A later your replied, “Len is a little retarded. I did not "quote one of my previous essays". The essay was reprinted there. This is such an easy matter to verify that he must be dissembling. Check out, "Is 9/11 research 'anti-Semitic'?"

To make a long story short you forgot what you had written 13 months earlier

http://www.opednews.com/articles/1/opedne_jim_fetz_080421_9_2f11_and_the_neo_con.htm

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Is-9-11-Research-Anti-Sem-by-Jim-Fetzer-090615-95.html

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FETZERclaimsDEBUNK/message/4030

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colby suggests that I was wrong to identify John Bolton as a neo-con with dual

US-Israeli citizenship. If that is indeed the case--and let us assume that it is--

then I thereby committed an error.

No you were not just wrong about Bolton, who is a Christian, you were wrong about the entire list. Why are you only willing to admit error wih him, do you assume that all Jews have dual citizenship? Provide documentation for your claim the others have Israeli citizenship.

Here Lifton clearly claims that I HAVE USED "violently anti-Semitic and highly

inflammatory" imagery in a series of videos WHICH I DID NOT MAKE. If I have

wrongly identified one of the neo-cons, such as John Bolton, as holding dual

US-Israeli citizenship, then I made a mistake. BUT CONSIDER THE BLUNDER

LIFTON HAS COMMITTED HERE. They are not remotely in the same league.

He incorrectly assumed that you were responsible for making the videos, but he was right about the text you reading it was "violently anti-Semitic and highly

inflammatory". I noticed you are stearing clear of the other thread.

Colby discounts what is known as "conversational implication", where, even

without directly saying so, an opinion, attitude, or request is conveyed. If

a guest is visiting your home and remarks, "Gee, it's a bit cold in here!",

she is insinuating--as a matter of conversational implication--that it would

be desirable for you to turn up the temperature to make it more comfortable.

If some says to you "I'd love a beer but I can't have one because I'm taking anti-biotics" they are not "insinuating" that they want to get a Hieniken for them. He said you were blind to understand the comport of what you were reading.

Anyone who doubts that Colby is conduction an operation against me should find it

fascinating that he would reach back to my report of watching as Payne Stewart's

plane was intercepted within 20 minutes by the Air Force or the Florida Air National

Guard. My recollection of the facts has proven correct, even if I really was wrong

about my whereabouts at the time.

No it has been proven wrong, contemporary news accounts said the intercept took over a hour, the NTSB report said it took over an hour. The point however was they you seem to going senile.

Edited by Len Colby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Probably because of Bolton's extreme fealty to the security of the state of Israel, imperiled as he views it to be, there are s number of online references to his dual citizenship.:

http://www.billslinksandmore.com/Billsblog/2008/07/13/dangers-and-deceptions-of-dual-citizenship/

Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Lawrence (Larry) Franklin, Douglas Feith, Kenneth Adelman, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Elliott Abrams, Ari Fleischer, Joshua Bolton, John Bolton and Mark Weinberger are just a few members of the Bush administration who have dual Israeli-American citizenship. The American government is largely controlled by people with dual citizenship.

The source for the "dual citizenship" of John Bolton most widely quoted is.:

http://www.viewzone.com/dualcitizen.html

This opinion comes from a conservative site.:

http://volokh.com/posts/1217108478.shtml#405873

DG:

And the trolls are out! That last post (by Ephraim) was taken right from a bizarrely anti-Semitic conspiracy website, viewzone.com. They also believe in UFOs and think that the ghost of Abraham Lincoln killed JFK. Apparently, naming a bunch of Jews (and some non-Jews, like Larry Franklin) and then claiming they hold Israeli citizenship is considered journalism. Ah, the democratizing power of the Intraweb!

7.28.2008

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably because of Bolton's extreme fealty to the security of the state of Israel, imperiled as he views it to be, there are s number of online references to his dual citizenship.:

http://www.billslinksandmore.com/Billsblog/2008/07/13/dangers-and-deceptions-of-dual-citizenship/

Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, Lawrence (Larry) Franklin, Douglas Feith, Kenneth Adelman, I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Elliott Abrams, Ari Fleischer, Joshua Bolton, John Bolton and Mark Weinberger are just a few members of the Bush administration who have dual Israeli-American citizenship. The American government is largely controlled by people with dual citizenship.

The source for the "dual citizenship" of John Bolton most widely quoted is.:

http://www.viewzone.com/dualcitizen.html

This opinion comes from a conservative site.:

http://volokh.com/posts/1217108478.shtml#405873

DG:

And the trolls are out! That last post (by Ephraim) was taken right from a bizarrely anti-Semitic conspiracy website, viewzone.com. They also believe in UFOs and think that the ghost of Abraham Lincoln killed JFK. Apparently, naming a bunch of Jews (and some non-Jews, like Larry Franklin) and then claiming they hold Israeli citizenship is considered journalism. Ah, the democratizing power of the Intraweb!

7.28.2008

Yes I think Fetzer cited a "source" like that, one hallmark of crackpots is that they unquestionlly accept the claims of anyone who tells them what they want to hear no matter how questionable their reliability.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

why is this thread in the jfk section?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good point, John.

Over the next few days we'll cull out the Apollo / 9-11 posts and put them into their own thread on the PC board.

Sorry for not doing it earlier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's cool, Evan. (Nothing to be sorry about imo). It's been puzzling me for a while.

I think moving them there is a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't want to act unilaterally, for I'm sure some would accuse me of "censoring" them or other such twaddle. I've asked other moderators regarding their opinion and ask them to take the actions required.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not. I was referring to Galileo, who took up where Copernicus left off in opposing the

Vatican's flat earth and geocentric universe. Columbus had nothing to do with it. He was looking

for easy access to the riches of the Orient. Columbus was not a scientist. Galileo was.

Jack

Indeed, Galileo is my hero. His crime was looking up for truth. "I call on the resting soul of Galileo, King of Night Vision, King of Insight..."

His soul may be resting, but the middle finger of his right hand is in a jar at a museum in Firenze,Italy (Florence). Weird, but true....

Barb :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not. I was referring to Galileo, who took up where Copernicus left off in opposing the

Vatican's flat earth and geocentric universe. Columbus had nothing to do with it. He was looking

for easy access to the riches of the Orient. Columbus was not a scientist. Galileo was.

Jack

Indeed, Galileo is my hero. His crime was looking up for truth. "I call on the resting soul of Galileo, King of Night Vision, King of Insight..."

His soul may be resting, but the middle finger of his right hand is in a jar at a museum in Firenze,Italy (Florence). Weird, but true....

Barb :-)

And the significance of the middle finger is.............?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course not. I was referring to Galileo, who took up where Copernicus left off in opposing the

Vatican's flat earth and geocentric universe. Columbus had nothing to do with it. He was looking

for easy access to the riches of the Orient. Columbus was not a scientist. Galileo was.

Jack

Indeed, Galileo is my hero. His crime was looking up for truth. "I call on the resting soul of Galileo, King of Night Vision, King of Insight..."

His soul may be resting, but the middle finger of his right hand is in a jar at a museum in Firenze,Italy (Florence). Weird, but true....

Barb :-)

http://catalogue.museogalileo.it/object/MiddleFingerGalileosRightHand.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...