Embarrassing questions

[David Von Pein]

Hopefully Dale Myers will write a column tomorrow and you will then retract the whole thing.

Jimbo still thinks I got nothing "new" out of Myers' article, I see.

Well, like they say: It's very hard to teach an old Anybody-But-Oswald conspiracy monger new tricks.

You must be the poster boy for that slogan, Jim.

Edited August 18, 2010 by David Von Pein

[Dean Hagerman]

Anybody who thinks J. E. Hoover, of ALL people, would have wanted to frame an INNOCENT Lee H. Oswald for JFK's death is not thinking clearly at all.

Just like Hoover didnt frame an INNOCENT Bruno Hauptmann?

[Steve Duffy]

Still would like an answer to my question, as I asked Francois.

Oswald did it advocates believe the findings of the HSCA except the part were they mention a 95% certainty of conspiracy. Why?

Edited August 18, 2010 by Steve Duffy

[François Carlier]

DVP: Only the most gullible person imaginable could actually believe the FBI called Tomlinson and told him

to "shut up".

This is why I called him the Colbert of the JFK community.

Oh I get it Dave/Colbert. See, the FBI never did anything wrong in this case. Because your hero VB said they did not. Right. Therefore it must be true.

Therefore, Specter never tried to confuse or intimidate any witness e.g. like Jean Hill.

The FBI never tried to intimidate or manipulate any testimony either. So therefore Dean Andrews, Bruce and Lynn Carlen, Marina Oswald, and Nelson Delgado and W. Litchfield are all liars.

Except they all lied to the same effect. Just like all the other evidence I posted points to the fact that the FBI switched the stretcher bullet for CE 399.

In the world of DVP/Colbert and RH, the actual publicity for that snake Hoover is to be believed and all the innocent people he sen to jail and got deported are to be forgotten.

Jim, with all due respect is it really worth it? He's not going to answer honestly. In fact we can predict exactly what he is going to say. Yes he's slightly more eloquent than his alter-ego Francois, but not much. He will add absolutely nothing to this debate except distract you and others from sharing real information: that's why he is here. I must say that the quality of LN on this forum is absolutely appalling...

Arguing with professional idiots is just a complete waste of time!

Talk of bad faith and dishonesty !!!

Mister Laverick, you asked me some questions. I answered you with calm and respect. I focused on the topic.

And what do you do ? You realize that your accusations were wrong, you realize that I was able to answer you, you realize that what I say makes sense. So you escape. And you resort to bad faith. You insult both David Von Pein and me. You have found a trick : you call us "professional idiots" (and YOU are the one who requested NO INSULTS, what a joke !) to use it as an excuse for not answering the points we raise.

Surely, the other members of the conspiracy community will like you. That's probably what you wish...

Let me then answer your last sentence, and return it against you : Arguing with bad-faith, gullible people beyond help is just a complete waste of time!

/F.C./

Edited August 18, 2010 by François Carlier

[François Carlier]

Still would like an answer to my question, as I asked Francois.

Oswald did it advocates believe the findings of the HSCA except the part were they mention a 95% certainty of conspiracy. Why?

Very easy question.

I'm going to work, I'll answer you tonight.

/F.C./

[Bernie Laverick]

DVP: Only the most gullible person imaginable could actually believe the FBI called Tomlinson and told him

to "shut up".

This is why I called him the Colbert of the JFK community.

Oh I get it Dave/Colbert. See, the FBI never did anything wrong in this case. Because your hero VB said they did not. Right. Therefore it must be true.

Therefore, Specter never tried to confuse or intimidate any witness e.g. like Jean Hill.

The FBI never tried to intimidate or manipulate any testimony either. So therefore Dean Andrews, Bruce and Lynn Carlen, Marina Oswald, and Nelson Delgado and W. Litchfield are all liars.

Except they all lied to the same effect. Just like all the other evidence I posted points to the fact that the FBI switched the stretcher bullet for CE 399.

In the world of DVP/Colbert and RH, the actual publicity for that snake Hoover is to be believed and all the innocent people he sen to jail and got deported are to be forgotten.

Jim, with all due respect is it really worth it? He's not going to answer honestly. In fact we can predict exactly what he is going to say. Yes he's slightly more eloquent than his alter-ego Francois, but not much. He will add absolutely nothing to this debate except distract you and others from sharing real information: that's why he is here. I must say that the quality of LN on this forum is absolutely appalling...

Arguing with professional idiots is just a complete waste of time!

Talk of bad faith and dishonesty !!!

Mister Laverick, you asked me some questions. I answered you with calm and respect. I focused on the topic.

And what do you do ? You realize that your accusations were wrong, you realize that I was able to answer you, you realize that what I say makes sense. So you escape. And you resort to bad faith. You insult both David Von Pein and me. You have found a trick : you call us "professional idiots" (and YOU are the one who requested NO INSULTS, what a joke !) to use it as an excuse for not answering the points we raise.

Surely, other members of the conspiracy community will like you. That's probably what you wish...

Let me then answer your last sentence, and return it against you : Arguing with bad-faith, gullible people beyond help is just a complete waste of time!

/F.C./

Bye then......

[Bernie Laverick]

DVP: Only the most gullible person imaginable could actually believe the FBI called Tomlinson and told him

to "shut up".

This is why I called him the Colbert of the JFK community.

Oh I get it Dave/Colbert. See, the FBI never did anything wrong in this case. Because your hero VB said they did not. Right. Therefore it must be true.

Therefore, Specter never tried to confuse or intimidate any witness e.g. like Jean Hill.

The FBI never tried to intimidate or manipulate any testimony either. So therefore Dean Andrews, Bruce and Lynn Carlen, Marina Oswald, and Nelson Delgado and W. Litchfield are all liars.

Except they all lied to the same effect. Just like all the other evidence I posted points to the fact that the FBI switched the stretcher bullet for CE 399.

In the world of DVP/Colbert and RH, the actual publicity for that snake Hoover is to be believed and all the innocent people he sen to jail and got deported are to be forgotten.

Jim, with all due respect is it really worth it? He's not going to answer honestly. In fact we can predict exactly what he is going to say. Yes he's slightly more eloquent than his alter-ego Francois, but not much. He will add absolutely nothing to this debate except distract you and others from sharing real information: that's why he is here. I must say that the quality of LN on this forum is absolutely appalling...

Arguing with professional idiots is just a complete waste of time!

Talk of bad faith and dishonesty !!!

Mister Laverick, you asked me some questions. I answered you with calm and respect. I focused on the topic.

And what do you do ? You realize that your accusations were wrong, you realize that I was able to answer you, you realize that what I say makes sense. So you escape. And you resort to bad faith. You insult both David Von Pein and me. You have found a trick : you call us "professional idiots" (and YOU are the one who requested NO INSULTS, what a joke !) to use it as an excuse for not answering the points we raise.

Surely, the other members of the conspiracy community will like you. That's probably what you wish...

Let me then answer your last sentence, and return it against you : Arguing with bad-faith, gullible people beyond help is just a complete waste of time!

/F.C./

You do remember that you posted, not 48 hours ago, an edict declaring that from now on you were not at any price EVER going to communicate with me Dean, Lee and Greg, don't you?

"Surely, the other members of the conspiracy community will like you".

Francois EVERYBODY likes me, I'm a nice guy!

[François Carlier]

DVP: Only the most gullible person imaginable could actually believe the FBI called Tomlinson and told him

to "shut up".

This is why I called him the Colbert of the JFK community.

Oh I get it Dave/Colbert. See, the FBI never did anything wrong in this case. Because your hero VB said they did not. Right. Therefore it must be true.

Therefore, Specter never tried to confuse or intimidate any witness e.g. like Jean Hill.

The FBI never tried to intimidate or manipulate any testimony either. So therefore Dean Andrews, Bruce and Lynn Carlen, Marina Oswald, and Nelson Delgado and W. Litchfield are all liars.

Except they all lied to the same effect. Just like all the other evidence I posted points to the fact that the FBI switched the stretcher bullet for CE 399.

In the world of DVP/Colbert and RH, the actual publicity for that snake Hoover is to be believed and all the innocent people he sen to jail and got deported are to be forgotten.

Jim, with all due respect is it really worth it? He's not going to answer honestly. In fact we can predict exactly what he is going to say. Yes he's slightly more eloquent than his alter-ego Francois, but not much. He will add absolutely nothing to this debate except distract you and others from sharing real information: that's why he is here. I must say that the quality of LN on this forum is absolutely appalling...

Arguing with professional idiots is just a complete waste of time!

Talk of bad faith and dishonesty !!!

Mister Laverick, you asked me some questions. I answered you with calm and respect. I focused on the topic.

And what do you do ? You realize that your accusations were wrong, you realize that I was able to answer you, you realize that what I say makes sense. So you escape. And you resort to bad faith. You insult both David Von Pein and me. You have found a trick : you call us "professional idiots" (and YOU are the one who requested NO INSULTS, what a joke !) to use it as an excuse for not answering the points we raise.

Surely, the other members of the conspiracy community will like you. That's probably what you wish...

Let me then answer your last sentence, and return it against you : Arguing with bad-faith, gullible people beyond help is just a complete waste of time!

/F.C./

You do remember that you posted, not 48 hours ago, an edict declaring that from now on you were not at any price EVER going to communicate with me Dean, Lee and Greg, don't you?

"Surely, the other members of the conspiracy community will like you".

Francois EVERYBODY likes me, I'm a nice guy!

Yes, I did say that I didn't want to have anything to do with four people (including you), because I had found that they had a bad attitude.

Then you wrote a message, asking me a question, and challenging me to answer.

And then I thought I might reconsider my position, that maybe you had become more mature (you did say you wanted no insult), that maybe I should give you a second chance, that maybe I should show all of the forum members (who may be interested in learning something) some respect by answering you.

So I wrote two messages to answer you.

And what did you do ? Unable to reply seriously (since your ludicrous conspiracy theories lead nowhere) and aware that my answers made sense, you :

- 1. resorted to insults (although you had said you didn't want any insult and my messages focused on the evidence and I didn't insult you)

- 2. refused to answer altogether, not even bothering to answer my questions to you, showing no respect at all.

Well, I've got to admit, you fooled me. Yes, you did. You tried to pretend you were a mature person, but it turned out you are not. I was fooled, I admit. I thought you deserved an answer, but as a matter of fact, you didn't.

So, I had been right to include you on my list, in the first place.

Well, as I always say : "If a man deceive me once, shame on him, if twice, shame on me."

You deceived me once.

Shame on you !

Now everybody has seen that you are a coward.

And then I read that you had started a thread that was erased by the moderators for use of "inappropriate words" (that's an understatement). You are definitely a low-level guy whom we should all keep away from !

/F.C./

[Dean Hagerman]

Yes, I did say that I didn't want to have anything to do with four people (including you), because I had found that they had a bad attitude.

Your first post on this forum had the worst "bad attitude" I have ever seen in my entire life

Now you claim that your going to ignore the 4 of us because we have a "bad attitude"

You are losing your mind Frank

[François Carlier]

James DiEugenio wrote :

As per the Z film controversy, to say that all the critics should agree on each issue is to ignore the mess made by the WC. The Commission never did any in depth study of the chain of possession of each and every piece of evidence that went from the DPD to the FBI and was then used by the WC. When they did do so, like in the case of the palmprint, they got some interesting results. Which they then ignored to make their case against Oswald.

To blame the critics for creating that evidentiary mess, which is something they had nothing to do with, is to play the stupid junkyard dog role of the MSM. The dog that barks at people who are trying to put things back as well as those who are trying to steal.

In all deference, Sir, I consider that you show a cowardly attitude, here.

To blame the Warren Commission for a so-called mess allows you to take any position on any topic, without being criticized.

But let's be frank and honest. Jim Fetzer has several books (anthologies) that he claims "prove beyond any doubt" that the Zapruder film was altered.

Now, it is very easy for anybody, let alone someone like you (who, I must admit, are very knowledgeable in the Kennedy assassination case and are an avid reader who has reviewed countless books, orally or in writing, not to mention your long review of RH) to read Fetzer's books.

Then, it should be easy to say whether the arguments put forward in those books (by Mantik, Fetzer Lifton, etc.) are valid or not.

You very well know that Groden reject that theory and you are aware of his arguments.

If you are honest, then tell us whom you believe. You should be able to reach a sane conclusion. Don't hide.

I say Groden is right, period. What do you say ?

My question to you is not difficult, is it ? I swear I am being very humble and truthful, here, not trying to play around.

(Now, I have spent pages and pages in my book laying my arguments, and I cannot translate all of it tonight in this post, but you are well aware of the arguments given by Zapruder-film-authenticity defenders).

I suspect you don't want to tell us because you don't want to make enemies within the conspiracy community.

/F.C./

[François Carlier]

Pat Speer wrote :

Your critical thinking argument is worse than critical; it's dead on arrival. Did you forget that Fetzer taught critical thinking for decades? If reading books on critical thinking helps one learn how to interpret evidence, and build reasonable theories based on that evidence, then you should recognize that he is your better, and defer to his judgment. Your failing to do so will only reveal what we already know--you are a typical single assassin theorist, kneeling before the "experts"...until they tell you something you don't want to hear.

I was expecting it, but this has to be the most stupid thing I have heard in years.

You see, mister Speer, I have read books about critical thinking for years. Books by the best in the world.

Then, in 1996, I went to Dallas (I had registered to both the JFK-Lancer and the COPA conferences). I had a lengthy talk with Jim Fetzer and (sorry for the vocabulary I am using) it didn't take me five minutes to realize that guy is a nut.

Then I came back to France and read an issue of the Assassination Chronicles (I was then a subscriber), and there was an article by Fetzer on critical thinking. I read it. It was appalling. It was bad. It was awful. I remember thinking : "that guy doesn't know what he is talking about"

Fetzer knows critical thinking as well as I know cooking ! To paraphrase a line by Wanda (in the movie "A fish called Wanda"), I've know sheep that could outwit Fetzer !!!

Come on, Mister Speer, you can do better, can't you ?

I can tell you something : I have read hundreds of articles and books by people such as Martin Gardner, James Randi, Paul Kurz, Kendrick Frazier, Ray Hyman, Philip Klass, Carl Sagan Joe Nickell, etc. I can tell you for a fact that Fetzer is nowhere near them.

Come on, Mister Speer, Jim Fetzer's "skills" (what a joke !) lead him to such beliefs as : the Zapruder film was altered, there was no plane into the Pentagon, Man did not go to the moon, etc.

On all these topics, he is alone. No other critical-thinking specialist agrees with him. Doesn't that tell you something ?

I mean, check for yourself, on all these subjects, what I think and say and write is exactly what Martin Gardner, James Randi, Paul Kurz, Kendrick Frazier, Ray Hyman, Philip Klass, Carl Sagan, Joe Nickell think, say and write.

So, on one side you have François Carlier, Martin Gardner, James Randi, Paul Kurz, Kendrick Frazier, Ray Hyman, Philip Klass, Carl Sagan, Joe Nickell, etc.

And on the other side, you have Jim Fetzer, on his own.

Now, you can choose whichever side you want to join. It doesn't matter to me.

/F.C./

[Bernie Laverick]

Francois:

What were the two questions Bernie would not answer?

JIM D

Jim this clown has a website whose sole purpose is to rubbish ALL conspiracy theories. I asked a simple question, and this goes to all LNs.

Has there ever been a conspiracy in the history of the USA involving any section of its government? If so, which?

His reply went like this... "Not that I know of" followed up in the next sentence with "There are several famous ones".

How do you converse with such a professional idiot like this?

[François Carlier]

Francois:

What were the two questions Bernie would not answer?

JIM D

What about this one ?

I copy/paste :

David Lifton claims that there was a conspiracy involving the highest echelons of the US government, and most likely the Secret Service (his sentence : "I don't know who altered the body but I know who had the body" ...) to kill President Kennedy and thus remove him from power. The scenario involved killing him from the front, then take the body unnoticed, then alter the wounds so that autopsy doctors would conclude he had been shot from behind. I repeat (it's so incredible !) : kill him from the front and change the wounds to make it appear he had been shot from behind. (And I can think of the conspirators having a meeting beforehand and preparing THAT plan !!! Wasn't there anybody to differ?)

My question : do you know of any occasion, in history, at any time, anywhere in the world, in any country, when such a conspiracy, such a plot, such an assassination existed ?

Give me one example in history where conspirators decided to shoot a public figure from the front, then change the wounds, then pretend he had been shot from behind ?

/F.C./

[note : I had made a mistake in my original message. I had written "Wasn't there anybody to defer ?" instead of "Wasn't there anybody to differ ?")

[François Carlier]

Francois:

What were the two questions Bernie would not answer?

JIM D

Jim this clown has a website whose sole purpose is to rubbish ALL conspiracy theories. I asked a simple question, and this goes to all LNs.

Has there ever been a conspiracy in the history of the USA involving any section of its government? If so, which?

His reply went like this... "Not that I know of" followed up in the next sentence with "There are several famous ones".

How do you converse with such a professional idiot like this?

Laverick, you're beginning to get on my nerves.

It's easy to insult people through a computer. Weak people do that !

I'd like to see you talk in front of me !

You are so stupid you don't even realize you are contradicting yourself.

I said I don't know of any conspiracy by the American government.

I then gave two examples of known conspiracies, one in Germany, one in Rome. Well, guess what, neither Germany nor Rome are the American government. But you are too stupid to tell.

Poor man !

/F.C./

[Bernie Laverick]

Francois:

What were the two questions Bernie would not answer?

JIM D

What about this one ?

I copy/paste :

David Lifton claims that there was a conspiracy involving the highest echelons of the US government, and most likely the Secret Service (his sentence : "I don't know who altered the body but I know who had the body" ...) to kill President Kennedy and thus remove him from power. The scenario involved killing him from the front, then take the body unnoticed, then alter the wounds so that autopsy doctors would conclude he had been shot from behind. I repeat (it's so incredible !) : kill him from the front and change the wounds to make it appear he had been shot from behind. (And I can think of the conspirators having a meeting beforehand and preparing THAT plan !!! Wasn't there anybody to differ?)

My question : do you know of any occasion, in history, at any time, anywhere in the world, in any country, when such a conspiracy, such a plot, such an assassination existed ?

Complete fabrication. He's just made that up. I can't believe he has the brassneck nerve to fabricate such a baseless lie!

I asked has there ever been in the history of the USA a conspiracy involving the US government?

And the clown answered "NOT THAT I KNOW OF". Immediately followed by "There are many famous ones"

Give me one example in history where conspirators decided to shoot a public figure from the front, then change the wounds, then pretend he had been shot from behind ?

/F.C./

[note : I had made a mistake in my original message. I had written "Wasn't there anybody to defer ?" instead of "Wasn't there anybody to differ ?")

Edited August 18, 2010 by Bernie Laverick