Jump to content
The Education Forum

Deep Politics Forum

William Kelly

By William Kelly
in JFK Assassination Debate

 Share

Recommended Posts

Len Colby Rookie

Len Colby

Posted
Posted

I have had these emails from ... Charles R. Drago. Do members think we should delete these postings?

Dear Mr. Simkin,

Further, you do not have my permission to publish copyrighted material owned by me. Again, should you do so, I shall seek legal remedies.

Sincerely,

Charles R. Drago

cc:

Dennis J. McCarten, Esq.[/color]

A word of wisdom for Dennis J. McCarten, Esq.,: Don't expect much of a fee from this case, Dennis. Any claim by Mr. Drago for breach of his copyright belongs in SMALL CLAIMS COURT!

According to http://www.valleybreeze.com/Free/CUM-violin-guy Dennis left the practice of law years ago and now makes violins. Maybe he could play one while CD tells his sad tale to the small claims court.

LOL :P:rolleyes::D:ice

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 169
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Evan Burton Newbie

Evan Burton

Posted
Posted

Nice to see they are still upholding their standards: attack anyone who does not conform.

http://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?5720-Nelson-s-LBJ-Mastermind-book&p=31114#post31114

http://deeppoliticsforum.com/forums/showthread.php?5720-Nelson-s-LBJ-Mastermind-book&p=31130#post31130

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Robert Morrow

Guest Robert Morrow

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hey, I am just pointing out the truth. And some people .... just... can't .... handle ... the ... truth. Especially, that JFK was an out of control sex freak and it cost him.

Edited by Robert Morrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David G. Healy Collaborator

David G. Healy

Posted
Posted

well, at least they haven't shut a thread down as you've been known to do when it strikes your fancy..... and frankly, Mr. Morrow and his incessant LBJ opines are muchado about nothing... this board seems to be the only place he's gets positive attention...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
John Simkin Newbie

John Simkin

Posted
Posted

The problem would be the expense of defending the forum, since it hosted in and most of the DPFers live in the US presumably that is where they would bring suit which would be quite burdensome for John.

JOHN - IIRC Gratz got booted for threatening legal action against the EF, should the Gang of 5 be given the same treatment?

The reason that Tim Gratz was stopped from posting for a short period (he did return but left on his own accord later) was that he threatened to serve me with a writ the next time I stepped on American soil. As a debarred lawyer he knew that even though he had no real case against me, he could make life very difficult for me next time I was in America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Gary Loughran

Guest Gary Loughran

Posted
Posted

well, at least they haven't shut a thread down as you've been known to do when it strikes your fancy..... and frankly, Mr. Morrow and his incessant LBJ opines are muchado about nothing... this board seems to be the only place he's gets positive attention...

As I understand it Mr Morrow was championed into the JFK community as a passionate and informed JFK researcher by one of the co-founders of the DPF.

I suppose not calling people xxxxtards, telling them to xxxx off, calling them idiots and saps, etc. must obviously mean they get positive attention here. The moderators and administrators on this board don't pick and choose which members are deserving of our civility - that attriubute, like good manners, is free.

As to your other misinformed notion that the DPF don't shut down threads or make them disappear, I suggest you do a little more fact checking.

Your distaste for this forum, for whatever reason, is apparent in your and one or two other members postings of late. I would be interested to know if you have any constructive views which would help improve the running of this forum. Simply saying get rid of Burton, Colby and everyone you disagree with isn't really sensible - lest we turn into a forum where we post views and heartily agree with one another until you're told not to do so???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cliff Varnell Mentor

Cliff Varnell

Posted
Posted

Is this all you've got, Evan?

Looks like one member freaking out, not "they."

Here's what a DPF Admin. wrote on the thread:

Robert, we know Lyndon was a psychopath and not normal.

Oh my, what an intemperate remark! <_<

I'm certainly glad that the Ed Forum doesn't allow a moderator to permanently shut down discussion of

another forum from which said moderator is banned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dawn Meredith Newbie

Dawn Meredith

Posted
Posted

well, at least they haven't shut a thread down as you've been known to do when it strikes your fancy..... and frankly, Mr. Morrow and his incessant LBJ opines are muchado about nothing... this board seems to be the only place he's gets positive attention...

As I understand it Mr Morrow was championed into the JFK community as a passionate and informed JFK researcher by one of the co-founders of the DPF.

I suppose not calling people xxxxtards, telling them to xxxx off, calling them idiots and saps, etc. must obviously mean they get positive attention here. The moderators and administrators on this board don't pick and choose which members are deserving of our civility - that attriubute, like good manners, is free.

As to your other misinformed notion that the DPF don't shut down threads or make them disappear, I suggest you do a little more fact checking.

Your distaste for this forum, for whatever reason, is apparent in your and one or two other members postings of late. I would be interested to know if you have any constructive views which would help improve the running of this forum. Simply saying get rid of Burton, Colby and everyone you disagree with isn't really sensible - lest we turn into a forum where we post views and heartily agree with one another until you're told not to do so???

Gary I think you understand it quite incorrectly. I never once said Robert was an "informed JFK researcher". Quite the opposite. He is newbie. He is passionate and buys a lot of books on the subject but it has become increasingly clear that he is not interested in anything but the sex lives of people, espicially JFK and LBJ. That is very sad.

On the JFK case he has a very limited understanding. Indeed he is a one note wonder: LBJ did it, and he is entitled to his opinion even when he is shown evidence to the contrary. This is not to say that I believe LJB was not deeply involved, just not any "mastermind".

He has been asked to cease the sex talk at DPF, both on the forum and privately, by me.

If he presists there will be consequences. We are not a porn site. Many members have already complained both privately and on the forum.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cliff Varnell Mentor

Cliff Varnell

Posted
Posted (edited)

Is this all you've got, Evan?

Looks like one member freaking out, not "they."

Here's what a DPF Admin. wrote on the thread:

Robert, we know Lyndon was a psychopath and not normal.

Oh my, what an intemperate remark! <_<

I'm certainly glad that the Ed Forum doesn't allow a moderator to permanently shut

down discussion of another forum from which said moderator is banned.

Cliff,

I have to respectfully disagree. My opinion is that the behaviours we are witnessing today from this "one member" have germinated from the behaviour of the "Leadership" especially Charles Drago. People generally look up to see how to act. If the "founders" think its okay to dish out insults then it firmly sets the expectations that this type of behaviour is justifiable or excusable.

I crossed the line on here once. I got a simple one sentence e-mail from John. My behavior changed. That's called leadership.

Lee

Lee,

Insults happen on any JFK forum. Those are the crackers that come with the soup. We don't tar John Simkin with the egregious invective Craig Lamson gets away with, do we?

Charles Drago shouldn't have called John Bev a xxxx, and he paid a price for it.

I disagree with Myra B's insistence that Charles should have been banned from a forum he co-founded because he lost his temper with a notorious pain in the ass.

And if Evan Burton wants to hang Keith Millea's puerile remarks around the necks of DPF moderators, do we also hang Lamson's spew around the neck of Evan Burton?

Charles Drago is a passionate fellow, I'll grant you that. I've had a sharp disagreement or two with the man over the years, but it always remained amicable. I find the charges leveled against DPF on the petty side, just my opinion.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Gary Loughran

Guest Gary Loughran

Posted
Posted

As I understand it Mr Morrow was championed into the JFK community as a passionate and informed JFK researcher by one of the co-founders of the DPF.

Gary I think you understand it quite incorrectly. I never once said Robert was an "informed JFK researcher". Quite the opposite. He is newbie. He is passionate....

Dawn

Sincerest apologies Dawn and I mean that. I was going from memory and without checking, then or now, thought a phrase including 'informed' was used. Which is ironic and embarassing considering the context of my post which I can amend if you would like and apologise again.

More generally, of course, the greater point being the difficulty in running and moderating a forum with concerted campaigns being waged from armchairs.

What is going on at Spartacus? is not helped by campaigns baiting and ill informing members privately and publicly, the legal threats by ambulance chasers acting in the same way governments use the threat of National Security to conceal the truth. Threats to contact administrators workplaces (and when this is a school you can imagine how serious this can be viewed and the subsequent actions better understood if not agreed with) and research into peoples background because you don't like them and wish to demonise, victimise and harass. It is all unseemly, no one wins.

To be sure, in my opinion, Myra and Peter Presland's accounts of what happened seem well evidenced and to be true - they both have different chronological start points which change the context of their truths, though not the ultimate actions and neither is classy or covered in glory, but that is understandable especially in the critically important area of the deep political war eh!?

No-one here or anywhere had to ask what's going on at DPF? Everyone knew and those who didn't were quickly brought up to speed. It is admirable how well the constituency of the DPF was controlled during that period and I mean that as a compliment.

Jim DiEugenio went over there knowing (If he didn't know he should do now) people like the founders of the DPF would want to take his side in any abuse of the EF. And man did they ever.

Now there are too many threads on this messy issue. Which has nothing to do with Kennedy's death.

John Simkin may be missing in action for personal reasons on occasion (God forbid! he has a life too). Whilst every single person who uses email has things, if made public, would embarrass them; but I doubt anyone can produce a private mail from John with the levels of vitriol, hatred, lack of integrity and dripping in treachery the type of which have been published elsewhere from other forum leaders.

Whilst I doubt John ever wore gloves to have to take them off - I know who I would want beside me in the trenches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Gary Loughran

Guest Gary Loughran

Posted
Posted

I was very clear as to what I objected to with the mods here.

Evan says it was taken into consideration and overruled.

Does that mean I don't stand by my complaint?

No it does not.

For the life of me, I don't understand what DPF vs MB has to do with who killed JFK. Neither does the astute MR. Dunne.

Jim, you are and have been quite right and clear with your complaints. They have not been ignored by anyone I assure you. Though it might have been courteous and certainly less inflammatory, but I accept you might not have known the reception it would get, to have asked what is what is going on at Spartacus...at Spartacus; though it's a very minor point.

I can also assure you and all memebers that as a group the moderators and administrators have been working very hard behind the scenes for some time now on a plan of action to resolve many of your and others concerns. This had been bitty, but since new blood has come into the team it has invigorated lazy folk like me to to something!

We hope to publish something formal soon and I hope you can continue to contribute to the betterment of the forum.

Thanks,

Gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dawn Meredith Newbie

Dawn Meredith

Posted
Posted

As I understand it Mr Morrow was championed into the JFK community as a passionate and informed JFK researcher by one of the co-founders of the DPF.

Gary I think you understand it quite incorrectly. I never once said Robert was an "informed JFK researcher". Quite the opposite. He is newbie. He is passionate....

Dawn

Sincerest apologies Dawn and I mean that. I was going from memory and without checking, then or now, thought a phrase including 'informed' was used. Which is ironic and embarassing considering the context of my post which I can amend if you would like and apologise again.

More generally, of course, the greater point being the difficulty in running and moderating a forum with concerted campaigns being waged from armchairs.

What is going on at Spartacus? is not helped by campaigns baiting and ill informing members privately and publicly, the legal threats by ambulance chasers acting in the same way governments use the threat of National Security to conceal the truth. Threats to contact administrators workplaces (and when this is a school you can imagine how serious this can be viewed and the subsequent actions better understood if not agreed with) and research into peoples background because you don't like them and wish to demonise, victimise and harass. It is all unseemly, no one wins.

To be sure, in my opinion, Myra and Peter Presland's accounts of what happened seem well evidenced and to be true - they both have different chronological start points which change the context of their truths, though not the ultimate actions and neither is classy or covered in glory, but that is understandable especially in the critically important area of the deep political war eh!?

No-one here or anywhere had to ask what's going on at DPF? Everyone knew and those who didn't were quickly brought up to speed. It is admirable how well the constituency of the DPF was controlled during that period and I mean that as a compliment.

Jim DiEugenio went over there knowing (If he didn't know he should do now) people like the founders of the DPF would want to take his side in any abuse of the EF. And man did they ever.

Now there are too many threads on this messy issue. Which has nothing to do with Kennedy's death.

John Simkin may be missing in action for personal reasons on occasion (God forbid! he has a life too). Whilst every single person who uses email has things, if made public, would embarrass them; but I doubt anyone can produce a private mail from John with the levels of vitriol, hatred, lack of integrity and dripping in treachery the type of which have been published elsewhere from other forum leaders.

Whilst I doubt John ever wore gloves to have to take them off - I know who I would want beside me in the trenches.

No problem Gary.

No-one can be expected to remember the amount of info all the mods here and at DPF have to

keep stored.

FWIW Robert is actually a friend of mine and I do hope he continues to study this case in ernest.

That and all deep political issues. He knows I take issue with his need to be sexual. He's a thick skinned person.

I just wish he'd read JIm DIEugenio's wonderful article re JFK's alleged sexlife.

If I appear to be "on here" or on DPF at length is is becasue everytime I open either place the phone rings.

I'm in the office working and just take a moment here and there to look at the forums and facebook.

I have said since day one at this forum: It is my desire that people who care about the murders of the 60's and other dark political events would be well-served to focus on all that we do agree on. All the infighting in the critical community has driven me to tears many times in the now almost 48 years I have been studying this stuff.

Healthy debate is fine, but mudslinging serves only our common enemies: The conspirators.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Robert Morrow

Guest Robert Morrow

Posted
Posted (edited)

Jim, you are wrong. I just got off the phone with DOUG CADDY, who was the lawyer for Jack Worthington. You ought to give him a PM on this issue over at Education Forum.

In my opinion that odds are 99% that Jack Worthington IS the son of John Kennedy. Do you believe everything you read in the paper? That "denial" is really just an embarassed mother denying it in her old age.

Worthington's mother is old Southern lady and does not want to deal with the embarassment of 1) having an affair with John Kennedy and 2) being the MOTHER of another one of his sons.

So that "family denial" does not mean squat. Worthington's mother was approached by Vanity Fair before the article ran to comment. She refused to speak to the reporter when she could have easily issued a denial then. It was only AFTER the Vanity Fair article on Worthington ran, that she issued this statement in an attempt to salvage her reputation.

The embarrassed mother's disinfo: http://www.canada.com/theprovince/news/story.html?id=400c225f-0b04-455f-83c6-2096da3f566f&k=78369

Worthington is the SPITTING IMAGE of John Kennedy and he was TOLD by his now embarassed and now publicly lying mother that he was JFK's son back in the 1980's. (Reminds me of Jackie and Robert Kennedy pretending to support the Warren Commission farce for public consumption.)

#2 As for Bill Clinton's extremely well documented and completely out of control sex life... you may be the ONLY person in the country (in 2010) defending him and denying the reality of Bill Clinton's sexual addiction. I can understand being fooled in 1992 like I personally was, but in 2010 you would have to be deaf and blind to not know of Bill Clinton's gargantuan sexual appetite and addiction. You could fill a high school gym will all the women Bill Clinton has screwed. Larry Nichols "list" should have been about a 100, not five women.

#3 Two words for you: EVELYN LINCOLN, JFK's personal secretary for 11+ years. Is she some sort of CIA slut, too? Evelyn Lincoln explicitly says that Lyndon Johnson and Hoover were using sexual blackmail to get LBJ on the 1960 Democratic ticket. Obviously, John Kennedy had a gargantuan and out of control sexual appetite. Way too many sources on this topic to be denied.

When it comes to JFK's and Bill Clinton's sex lives, it is not a "smear" if its the ugly truth. The CIA and the Kennedy haters revel in exposing Kennedy's sexual escapades. Why is that? Because they can't tell you

why they REALLY murdered him: 1) Cuba 2) Vietnam 3) detente with Russia 4) personal/political immolation of Lyndon Johnson.

So they talk about the sex lives as diversionary tactics.

I prefer to deal with reality, even if it is the ugly reality. The question I have for some folks: Are you a Kennedy groupie and flack or are you a groupie for the truth?

Edited by Robert Morrow
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...