Michael Schweitzer Posted June 9, 2012 Author Share Posted June 9, 2012 Michael, I’m curious when did you stop practicing law? Len, I'm curious why you have not posted the required profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted June 9, 2012 Share Posted June 9, 2012 Michael, I’m curious when did you stop practicing law? Len, I'm curious why you have not posted the required profile. ???? There is a link to my (auto)bio at the bottom of all my posts, exactly where it is supposed to be, your link however is missing. So this is a case of the (cast iron) pot calling the stainless steel kettle black. So once again when did you stop practicing law? And if you could be so kind answer/address the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Schweitzer Posted June 10, 2012 Author Share Posted June 10, 2012 Michael, I’m curious when did you stop practicing law? Len, I'm curious why you have not posted the required profile. ???? There is a link to my (auto)bio at the bottom of all my posts, exactly where it is supposed to be, your link however is missing. So this is a case of the (cast iron) pot calling the stainless steel kettle black. So once again when did you stop practicing law? And if you could be so kind answer/address the rest. There is no link at the bottom of your post, and you're not worth my time. educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showuser=6382 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 I should have googled it first. From amazon reviews I've learned -relearned- it is about international bankers and the NWO. Since this was my first book, I was not yet aware of details regarding such things. I went straight from that book however to learning all about the international bankers, and ties to Nazis etc. ...from various authors. Maybe I will reread this sometime. Dawn No worries Dawn.... from the macro, people are people with their flaws.... mega wealthy "people's" flaws simply affect more "other" people.... add the desire to organize and have an overriding purpose to control and IMO, we have the core group that JFK's PEACE would have affected the most. Hrnce they had the most to both gain and lose.... All the other players were just that... players on stages at so many levels and inter-dependencies one gets the feel;ing that we, they nor anyone actually knew what was going on... Peace DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 (edited) Michael, I’m curious when did you stop practicing law? Len, I'm curious why you have not posted the required profile. ???? There is a link to my (auto)bio at the bottom of all my posts, exactly where it is supposed to be, your link however is missing. So this is a case of the (cast iron) pot calling the stainless steel kettle black. So once again when did you stop practicing law? And if you could be so kind answer/address the rest. There is no link at the bottom of your post, and you're not worth my time. educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showuser=6382 ????? The link has been there since shortly after I joined the forum, since have trouble finding it I uploaded the images below. Either you have extremely poor observation skills or you looked for my bio link while offline, signatures only appear when you are logged in, which would still give poor observation skills since you failed to notice this. And since you are such a stickler about the rule about bios, you should know you are supposed to post a working link into your signature, YOU are in breech, I’m not. So why don’t you tell us when you stopped practicing law, why are so averse to answering that question? Edited June 10, 2012 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter McGuire Posted June 10, 2012 Share Posted June 10, 2012 (edited) You had me going there Michael, up until you got to the part about Ruby firing a blank and the CIA killing Oswald in the ambulance. The CIA was only one of a number of government intelligence agencies that included individuals with the motive, power and capacity to kill the president, and just because whatever happened at Dealey Plaza can be shown to have been the result of a cover intelligence operation, that doesn't mean it had to be the CIA who pulled it off. To me, blaming the CIA is a cop-out, an easy way out of really determining the individuals who did it, and Allen Dulles was out of the loop at the time. The CIA were just as much a Patsy as Oswald, and those individuals really responsible for the murder got away with it. BK JFKcountercoup Have you read Mark Lane's recent "Last Word: My Indictment of the CIA in the Murder of JFK"? Of course, Mr. Lane has only been researching the Kennedy assassination since 1964. Your comment says you've majorly surpassed him. Mark Lane, like Vince Salandria and others, often blame the CIA for anything that was a covert action, when in fact, the military has been doing covert - need to know - plausible deniable operations years, centuries before the CIA came along. I have not yet read Lane's Last Word, but of course it won't be the last word we hear from Lane. Are you familiar with Lane's role at Jonestown? Or know of his defense of Posner's plagerism? I don't know what how long one has been investigating the case has to do with anything. I have been researching the assassination since 1969, when I was a teenager and didn't know anything. You may be right, depending on what majorly means. BK JFKcountercoup Bill, John Simkin has spoke to the word "CIA" in the past as a term that includes all intelligence organizations in the US. This is what I have adopted and I am sorry if I have not made that clear in my posts. I want you to know that I have been following your work for a long time and have appreciated it. I too, believe that when used literally, the "CIA" is a patsy of sorts, part of the layering that was formed early in the plot. I guess where we move away from each other is in the matter of Mr. Lane. I am surprised that you of all people try to discredit him because of other things that he has done. The man has been in the field interviewing actual witnesses since day one, and gave up his law practice to do so. After a while he probably felt the need to earn some money and took on paying jobs in addition to gathering evidence in the JFK case. I have questions too - one is why Mr. Lane is not mentioned in a CNN report on Jonestown when we know he was there. But that does not change what witnesses he interviewed said, or any other basic research on his part that has helped us understand the JFK case. I could have said that after reading countless books on the subject, reading Last Word would not be necessary, and I do not for a minute put myself at your level in this case , Mr. Kelly, but Last Word reads with a certain clarity not found anywhere, including even The Unspeakable. ( which is also an excellent summary of the case ) I also apologize for not knowing the posters here anymore, and you may have reasons that I do not know of, for writing what you do. Edited June 10, 2012 by Peter McGuire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Schweitzer Posted June 11, 2012 Author Share Posted June 11, 2012 You had me going there Michael, up until you got to the part about Ruby firing a blank and the CIA killing Oswald in the ambulance. The CIA was only one of a number of government intelligence agencies that included individuals with the motive, power and capacity to kill the president, and just because whatever happened at Dealey Plaza can be shown to have been the result of a cover intelligence operation, that doesn't mean it had to be the CIA who pulled it off. To me, blaming the CIA is a cop-out, an easy way out of really determining the individuals who did it, and Allen Dulles was out of the loop at the time. The CIA were just as much a Patsy as Oswald, and those individuals really responsible for the murder got away with it. BK JFKcountercoup Have you read Mark Lane's recent "Last Word: My Indictment of the CIA in the Murder of JFK"? Of course, Mr. Lane has only been researching the Kennedy assassination since 1964. Your comment says you've majorly surpassed him. Mark Lane, like Vince Salandria and others, often blame the CIA for anything that was a covert action, when in fact, the military has been doing covert - need to know - plausible deniable operations years, centuries before the CIA came along. I have not yet read Lane's Last Word, but of course it won't be the last word we hear from Lane. Are you familiar with Lane's role at Jonestown? Or know of his defense of Posner's plagerism? I don't know what how long one has been investigating the case has to do with anything. I have been researching the assassination since 1969, when I was a teenager and didn't know anything. You may be right, depending on what majorly means. BK JFKcountercoup Bill, John Simkin has spoke to the word "CIA" in the past as a term that includes all intelligence organizations in the US. This is what I have adopted and I am sorry if I have not made that clear in my posts. I want you to know that I have been following your work for a long time and have appreciated it. I too, believe that when used literally, the "CIA" is a patsy of sorts, part of the layering that was formed early in the plot. I guess where we move away from each other is in the matter of Mr. Lane. I am surprised that you of all people try to discredit him because of other things that he has done. The man has been in the field interviewing actual witnesses since day one, and gave up his law practice to do so. After a while he probably felt the need to earn some money and took on paying jobs in addition to gathering evidence in the JFK case. I have questions too - one is why Mr. Lane is not mentioned in a CNN report on Jonestown when we know he was there. But that does not change what witnesses he interviewed said, or any other basic research on his part that has helped us understand the JFK case. I could have said that after reading countless books on the subject, reading Last Word would not be necessary, and I do not for a minute put myself at your level in this case , Mr. Kelly, but Last Word reads with a certain clarity not found anywhere, including even The Unspeakable. ( which is also an excellent summary of the case ) I also apologize for not knowing the posters here anymore, and you may have reasons that I do not know of, for writing what you do. Peter, first please note I use the term "CIA" as shorthand. The Agency never acts as a whole, but through compartments. As to clients Mark Lane represents, he also represented the ultra-right wing Liberty Lobby in a defamation action. Why? Because the plaintiff was E. Howard Hunt, and as counsel, Lane could take "discovery" - coerce Hunt to provide information and documents otherwise unobtainable. Judge Lane not by the parties he represents, but by the parties he opposes. As a researcher, it's a brilliant tactic to use legal procedure to force truth into the open. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 Michael, I’m curious when did you stop practicing law? Len, I'm curious why you have not posted the required profile. Michael, I’m curious: - when did you stop practicing law? - why you have not posted the required profile? Funny that you me about mine, even though 1) my link is exactly where it is supposed to be and 2) you have not yet posted yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Knight Posted June 11, 2012 Share Posted June 11, 2012 Colby, I'm curious: -why must you sidetrack these discussions in order to question the credentials of the other posters? -why can you not simply allow the arguments to stand or fall on their own, rather than worrying about how many professions the other posters have had, and when they started/ended those occupations? I stopped being a welder, except on a hobby basis, when the plant at which I was employed closed in 2005. [by providing you that information now, you shouldn't need to interrupt any of MY discussions to ask that question about MY employment/profession.] NOW... why not let it rest, and let the thread return to the discussion topic? Speaking for myself, I don't care about Michael's profession...OR yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted June 12, 2012 Share Posted June 12, 2012 Reasonable question Mark but it seems to indicate you were not paying close attention. I wrote 600+ word post asking Mike about various aspects of his ‘theories’ he chose only to reply to that last 9-word question. But he dodged it rather than answer it. Odd that he shifted the focus to the supposed absence of my bio link since it has been exactly where it´s supposed to be for years and he hasn’t bothered to post his yet. His professional background was not by any means the focus of my doubts about his ‘theories’ but is relevent because he cites it to lend creedence to them. You’re correct your profession is not relevant, nor is mine, but for example if you started opining about the WTC collapses and cited your work history to beef up your claims it would become so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 http://members.calbar.ca.gov/fal/Member/Detail/107208 Current Status: Inactive This member is inactive, but is eligible to become active. Status History Effective Date Status Change Present Inactive 1/1/1996 Inactive 12/29/1995 Active 7/31/1995 Not Eligible To Practice Law .... Len, what newcomer, in his right mind, if he is a regular reader of this forum, would ever want to sign up for membership and post actively in this forum? What current member would ever want to volunteer to be a forum moderator here? Is what you are doing in this, thread, in the Nathan thread, just to name only two, constructive or relevant? BTW, I accidentally clicked on your bio profile thread. Have you ever replied to Tink or to John? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 (edited) http://members.calba...r/Detail/107208 Current Status: Inactive This member is inactive, but is eligible to become active. Status History Effective Date Status Change Present Inactive 1/1/1996 Inactive 12/29/1995 Active 7/31/1995 Not Eligible To Practice Law .... I fail to see how any of the above contradicts anything in my previous post in anyway. Len, what newcomer, in his right mind, if he is a regular reader of this forum, would ever want to sign up for membership and post actively in this forum? What current member would ever want to volunteer to be a forum moderator here? Is what you are doing in this, thread, in the Nathan thread, just to name only two, constructive or relevant? If there is a simple explanation for Michael’s claimed to be a “recently retired as an attorney” when his license expired 17 years ago there’s no reason for him to offer it nor do I see why you consider it such an imposition on Nate to tell us what happened to his FB account. Don’t you think readers of the forum seeing that personal attacks directed their next of kin are allowed here might also be reluctant to join? But apparently you did nothing to put a stop to it. I agree that being a moderator here is a difficult and thankless task. I think for the most part John and the other admins. made good choices; I’ve only complained about two mods. Lemkin (who was obviously unfit) and you. As with Lemkin my criticism was richly deserved, mods. and admins. should there upmost to make sure they follow the rules they enforce but you: i) started a thread on this forum that had NOTHING to do with the JFK assassination ii) questioned my motives a few hours after you admonisted David and edited one of his posts for doing THE EXACT SAMETHING. You have never even bothered to justify the latter. BTW, I accidentally clicked on your bio profile thread. Have you ever replied to Tink or to John? How is that relevant? I believe I replied to Tink by e-mail, as to John's question I said on various threads I'm not related to William Colby Edited June 15, 2012 by Len Colby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Knight Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 Interesting that so many threads on the JFK Assassination forum are turning to Colby threads...is there ANYONE that Mr. Colby DOES get along with? Why can't Mr. Colby use PM's to question those things which are NOT related to the JFK assassination, rather than taking up valuable forum bandwidth? Moderators, is there a problem with "suggesting" very strongly that Mr. Colby refrain from displaying his "personal problems" with others on these threads, and thereby leave the threads to the subjects to which they were originally intended? Or is that entirely too much to ask? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Colby Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Interesting that so many threads on the JFK Assassination forum are turning to Colby threads...is there ANYONE that Mr. Colby DOES get along with? Why can't Mr. Colby use PM's to question those things which are NOT related to the JFK assassination, rather than taking up valuable forum bandwidth? Moderators, is there a problem with "suggesting" very strongly that Mr. Colby refrain from displaying his "personal problems" with others on these threads, and thereby leave the threads to the subjects to which they were originally intended? Or is that entirely too much to ask? Two threads is "so many"? How is asking Nate what happened to his FB account diverting a thread about the deletion of his account? I asked Michael several questions about his 'theories' he chose to only reply the question about his profesional background and not even answer it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 Michael, I’m curious when did you stop practicing law? Len, I'm curious why you have not posted the required profile. Michael, I’m curious: - when did you stop practicing law? - why you have not posted the required profile? Funny that you me about mine, even though 1) my link is exactly where it is supposed to be and 2) you have not yet posted yours. "funny that me about mine". Is this poetry? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now