Thomas Graves Posted February 3, 2018 Share Posted February 3, 2018 (edited) James, With all due respect, would you please address these two questions? 1) What is your theory as to how we ended up with an anti-EU, anti-NATO, anti-CIA, anti-FBI, Russian mobbed-up, blackmail-able, expendable, "useful idiot" of Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin for President? 2) Do you agree with our intelligence services that Kremlin operatives Cozy Bear, Fancy Bear, and Guccifer 2.0 (I should add Julian Assange, too, but I don't want to be overly "sarcastic") not only hacked DNC's and Podesta's and RNC's e-mails, but parceled out during the campaign only Hillary-damaging e-mails from DNC and Podesta? December 2016 CIA report (Wikipedia) On December 9, the CIA told U.S. legislators the U.S. Intelligence Community had concluded, in a consensus view, that Russia conducted operations to assist Donald Trump in winning the presidency, stating that "individuals with connections to the Russian government", previously known to the intelligence community, had given WikiLeaks hacked emails from the DNC and John Podesta.[117] The agencies further stated that Russia had hacked the RNC as well, but did not leak information obtained from there.[118] These assessments were based on evidence obtained before the election.[119] See also --http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/nation-world/article/Russia-Hacked-Republican-Committee-but-Kept-Data-10787385.php -- Tommy PS Please be advised that if you (or anyone else who may want to "contribute") don't respond directly to my two questions, above, I probably won't respond to any of your off-topic, rhetorical "but ... but ... but ... what about ... ?" rebuttals. Edited February 6, 2018 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 Do you read anything Tommy besides the neocons? If so that could explain how you ended up with such a nutty version of the JFK case. I just gave you a history lesson on how Putin actually rose to power. Many months ago, I wrote about Trump in reply to a stupid cover story was so factually biased it could have been written by Fred Hiatt. This is what I wrote https://kennedysandking.com/articles/how-the-atlantic-monthly-and-kurt-andersen-went-haywire As per your other idea, again, your information is quite narrow and constricted, and again I think this reflects on your whole gestalt knowledge base. VIPS has has down some work on the whole DNC thing and they came to some interesting differing conclusions based on technical data which, at a the very least, makes the original verdict suspect. If you have not read it, then that is your fault not mine. I actually posted it here awhile ago. As per replying to me or not, its no great loss if you don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted February 4, 2018 Author Share Posted February 4, 2018 (edited) On 2/3/2018 at 7:16 PM, James DiEugenio said: Do you read anything Tommy besides the neocons? If so that could explain how you ended up with such a nutty version of the JFK case. I just gave you a history lesson on how Putin actually rose to power. Many months ago, I wrote about Trump in reply to a stupid cover story was so factually biased it could have been written by Fred Hiatt. This is what I wrote https://kennedysandking.com/articles/how-the-atlantic-monthly-and-kurt-andersen-went-haywire As per your other idea, again, your information is quite narrow and constricted, and again I think this reflects on your whole gestalt knowledge base. VIPS has has down some work on the whole DNC thing and they came to some interesting differing conclusions based on technical data which, at a the very least, makes the original verdict suspect. If you have not read it, then that is your fault not mine. I actually posted it here awhile ago. As per replying to me or not, its no great loss if you don't. James, With all due respect, what is a "neocon"? Is it something bad? If so, why? Could you please give me some examples of "neocons" you think (or maybe even know) that I'm reading? Is Wikipedia "neocon"? How about mediabiasfactcheck. com? https://www.mediabiasfactcheck.com ? Masha Gessen?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masha_Gessen How about that evil, evil, evil Tennent H. Bagley? http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08850607.2014.962362 BELLINGCAT? https://www.bellingcat.com ? When you scan the lists on mediabiasfactcheck. com (above), do you find you're attracted to oodles and gobs of "news sources" in the "Pseudo-Science/Conspiracy" category, and lots and lots of those that aren't, but which ARE rated in the main thingy as having only "Mixed" factual reporting, regardless of their Left (which you probably prefer) or Right bias? Are there any news sources you like that are rated as having "High" factual reporting by mediabiasfactcheck. com ? -- Tommy Edited February 6, 2018 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 You know full well what a neocon is. If you do not want to admit you are influenced by them, fine. I think many people here are beginning to understand that. Have you seen this film or read what I wrote about it? https://consortiumnews.com/2017/02/13/a-documentary-youll-likely-never-see/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted February 4, 2018 Author Share Posted February 4, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: You know full well what a neocon is. If you do not want to admit you are influenced by them, fine. I think many people here are beginning to understand that. Have you seen this film or read what I wrote about it? https://consortiumnews.com/2017/02/13/a-documentary-youll-likely-never-see/ James, With all due respect, don't get all paranoid on me now. I did look up the term "neocon" once about a year ago when one of my Trump, Putin, and Assad-loving FB "friends" (Kevin Mastro) more or less accused me of being one. The only thing I remember now is that it has a bit of a negative connotation. Are "neocons" anathema to Tinfoil Hat Conspiracy Theorists? Perhaps I should look it up again? -- Tommy PS The day that I requested that you "friend" me on FB, I noticed that you have no profile photo of yourself there. You aren't worried that the evil, evil Deep State "Agent Smiths" or George Soros or the CIA or The Boys From Brazil will see it there and ... track you down, are you? Regarding VIPS's "take" on the DNC hack, if you believe that, then I gotta ask, "Have you always been an incredibly gullible and uncritical thinker, James?" December 2016 and July 2017 memos (From the Wikipedia article on VIPS) In December 2016, VIPS released a memorandum criticizing allegations of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections as "evidence-free". The memorandum asserted that the 2016 Democratic National Committee email leak was the result of an internal leak and not a Russian hack.[10] On July 24, 2017, VIPS released another memorandum which also argued that the DNC was not hacked, this time based on a forensic analysis conducted by the anonymous entity "Forensicator" with whom they communicated via retired IBM employee Skip Folden. This analysis was based on DNC files released by Guccifer 2.0.[11] According to Patrick Lawrence's article in The Nation, the memorandum argued that the metadata in these files were altered to add Russian fingerprints, and that file transfer rate reportedly proved they were transferred locally.[12] Brian Feldman, writing in the New York Magazine, criticized the report for relying on "the 'metadata' of 'locked files' that only [Forensicator] had access to" pointing out that these phrases were meaningless. Feldman described the claims in Patrick Lawrence's article as "too incoherent to even debunk" and criticized its use of "techno-gibberish".[13] According to John Hultquist of FireEye: "The author of the report didn't consider a number of scenarios and breezed right past others. It completely ignores all the evidence that contradicts its claims." Rich Barger, director of security research at Splunk, pointed out that the VIPS theory "assumes that the hacker downloaded the files to a computer and then leaked it from that computer" but overlooks the likelihood that the files were copied several times before they were leaked, potentially creating new metadata each time. Barger's comments were echoed by other cyber-security experts.[14] The Guardian Project founder Nathaniel Freitas independently reviewed Lawrence's article on behalf of The Nation, concluding that while "the work of the Forensicator is detailed and accurate," it did not prove the conclusions VIPS and Lawrence derived from it. Freitas stated that the high throughput suggested by the relevant metadata could have been achieved by a hacker under several different scenarios, including through the use of a remote access trojan, and that the leak hypothesis also requires "the target server ... to be physically on site in the building": "If the files were stored remotely 'in the cloud,' then the same criticism of 'it is not possible to get those speeds' would come into play." In sum: "At this point, given the limited available data, certainty about only a very small number of things can be achieved."[15] Edited February 4, 2018 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Jeffries Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 Donald Trump was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, as virtually all members of the One Percent are. He has been influenced by "Russia" as much as Thomas Graves has. No matter how many times you repeat the "Russian mobbed-up" talking point, it's as meaningless as the millions of msm references to Russian "collusion" in the election. As I covered extensively in Hidden History, this country has a sordid tradition of electoral fraud. The "Russians" have never had anything to do with it. The only demonstrable fraud in the 2016 election was the early efforts of the Republican party to stop Trump from getting their nomination, and the clear, irrefutable documentation produced by Wikileaks (as always, not by any professional "journalist") revealing that the DNC conspired against Bernie Sanders to deny him the Democratic nomination. It'a laughable to see the same people who demanded Detente and "peaceful coexistence" with the Russians, when they were taking over other sovereign nations and subverting liberty everywhere, suddenly seeing a "Russian" behind every tree. "It's the Russians" has become the pat response to any allegation of corruption on the part of the Clintons, Obama, or any other Deep State criminal. This is exactly how the Right used to find "subversion" on the part of any freethinker in Hollywood or elsewhere back in the 1950s. None of this has anything to do with the JFK assassination, of course. But it does demonstrate how Thomas Graves firebombs nearly every thread on this forum with his purposefully incomprehensible nonsense. If he hasn't already done so, I would urge him to contact Cass Sunstein about that program to place disruptive trolls all over the internet. And no, I'm not a fan of Trump's. He's become a veritable Goldstein for our collapsing society, for the proles to either take out their two minutes of hate on, or hold out false hope as an opponent of the overwhelming corruption everywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 (edited) 56 minutes ago, Don Jeffries said: Donald Trump was born with a silver spoon in his mouth, as virtually all members of the One Percent are. He has been influenced by "Russia" as much as Thomas Graves has. No matter how many times you repeat the "Russian mobbed-up" talking point, it's as meaningless as the millions of msm references to Russian "collusion" in the election. That Trump has been laundering Russian Mafia money for years is meaningless? Quote As I covered extensively in Hidden History, this country has a sordid tradition of electoral fraud. The "Russians" have never had anything to do with it. The only demonstrable fraud in the 2016 election was the early efforts of the Republican party to stop Trump from getting their nomination, What about the 7 million minority voters who were disenfranchised by Voter ID laws, impossibly long lines at polls in minority precincts, and programs like Crosscheck? https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/features/the-gops-stealth-war-against-voters-w435890 https://www.democracynow.org/2016/11/8/greg_palast_in_ohio_on_gop Quote and the clear, irrefutable documentation produced by Wikileaks (as always, not by any professional "journalist") revealing that the DNC conspired against Bernie Sanders to deny him the Democratic nomination. I'm a Bernie Sanders guy. Voted for him in '16 and plan on voting for him again in '20. But he lost the Dem nomination by 3.7 million votes, which can't be blamed on anything the DNC did or didn't do. Quote It'a laughable to see the same people who demanded Detente and "peaceful coexistence" with the Russians, when they were taking over other sovereign nations and subverting liberty everywhere, suddenly seeing a "Russian" behind every tree. "It's the Russians" has become the pat response to any allegation of corruption on the part of the Clintons, Obama, or any other Deep State criminal. This is exactly how the Right used to find "subversion" on the part of any freethinker in Hollywood or elsewhere back in the 1950s. If there's nothing going on between Trump and the Putin why do Trump and his people lie constantly about their contacts with the Russians? Edited February 4, 2018 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 (edited) If you read my review, or saw that fine film Ukraine on Fire, you will see the utter and sickening hypocrisy of the Neocons. It is A OK if they interfere with elections all over the map through their differing NGO fronts and their reps in the State Department like Victoria Nuland, Kagan's wife. And by backing a bunch of neo Nazi thugs who then shoot innocent people in the streets. That is fine and dandy, and very few people, except the late, great Robert Parry, will report it. Or even print information about it. Even though it is proven! Geez TG, so I guess you think that is just OK because its America doing it? Kill a few people, burn a few buildings with people trapped inside, hey that is OK because its the USA, right? Edited February 4, 2018 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Jeffries Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 Cliff, You know I respect you, and we're on the same page regarding the JFK assassination. But.... We are seeing an entirely different set of facts here. Whatever money Trump might have accepted from Russians over the years in no way differentiates him from any other corporate One Percenter. His primary focus all his life has been making money, in any way he can. In this regard, he is no different than any other billionaire. There's an old adage about it being impossible to become a billionaire honestly. I think that's very true. By focusing on the "Russians," we diminish our own massive domestic corruption. And this goes for Hillary Clinton as well. I don't think she "colluded" with the Russians, either. We are more than capable of subverting and conspiring without the help of the Russians or anyone else. Voter ID laws are not "racist." They are completely necessary in order to prevent anyone voting multiple times, or using a dead voter's name. Everyone has an ID- even illegal immigrants, which effectively allows them to vote at least in California, and also diminishes any remaining value left in American citizenship. If you don't have to be a citizen to vote, then what is the benefit of being an American citizen? This has become a new calling card for the pro-war, anti-union establishment Left. Everything is "racist," and nothing else matters. Identity politics, and the social justice warriors that enforce it, is one of the primary reasons behind Trump's election. His support was generated largely because so many people are tired of being lectured about being "racist" and about having some kind of "privilege" which translates into working paycheck to paycheck, losing pensions, and being unable to retire. I think too many Americans are falling into this phony "left" and "right" paradigm, which restricts debate and causes contention over issues like transgender bathrooms, which effect only a minute fraction of the population. We are able to "choose" between an establishment left that loves war, trade and immigration policies that have killed American industry and crushed working class wages and benefits, and an establishment right that loves war, wants to exploit the cheapest labor possible, and thinks rich people should be called "job creators." There's not much "choice" between authoritarian social justice warriors who want people fired for the slip of a tongue, and greedy Ayn Rand disciples who want to eliminate minimum wage and bring back child labor. Sorry to ramble. None of this has anything to do with the JFK assassination. Except that it does illustrate how far we've sunk as a society just over fifty years later. Those on the left who believe the "Russian" conspiracy theory (the only conspiracy theory the msm has ever pushed) cannot possibly be a fan of JFK's American University speech, which I still feel was the greatest political speech in American history. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Jeffries Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 Jim D. is exactly right here. How can Americans lecture Russia about interfering in other elections, when we have specialized for decades in overthrowing regimes, invading and occupying small sovereign nations? But then again, how can we lecture certain countries about having nuclear weapons, when we are the only ones who ever used them on another nation? And as for North Korea, while we continue our escapades in Iraq and Afghanistan, they have never even invaded South Korea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 You guys are impeaching CE-399 the hard way. JFK's back wound had no point of exit and no bones were hit , which leaves out the possibility of a 6.5 FMJ strike. One can accomplish in less than 38 words what James DiEugenio did in 38 pages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 Which was in Epstein's book in 1966. And? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Don Jeffries said: Cliff, You know I respect you, and we're on the same page regarding the JFK assassination. But.... Don, I relish the discussion of politics with a long-time ally. Quote We are seeing an entirely different set of facts here. Whatever money Trump might have accepted from Russians over the years in no way differentiates him from any other corporate One Percenter. Aha! Why was Trump doing business with an organized crime enterprise? Because none of the other Point Oh One Percenters would do business with him. That's what differentiates Trump -- he became an agent of the Russian Federation out of financial necessity. Quote His primary focus all his life has been making money, in any way he can. In this regard, he is no different than any other billionaire. There's an old adage about it being impossible to become a billionaire honestly. I think that's very true. By focusing on the "Russians," we diminish our own massive domestic corruption. And this goes for Hillary Clinton as well. I don't think she "colluded" with the Russians, either. We are more than capable of subverting and conspiring without the help of the Russians or anyone else. It won't last long...but at this point we're on the same page, my old friend. Putin punked the American public but it would have ranked as a mere prank if the Republicans hadn't kicked millions of people off the voter rolls, and had James Comey not further rigged the election. 2016 saw a voter suppression campaign of unprecedented scope. Quote Voter ID laws are not "racist." Look, Don, this is an area you seriously need to do additional research. Voter ID laws have the practical effect of disenfranchisng millions of people of color. I find this treasonous. Quote They are completely necessary in order to prevent anyone voting multiple times, or using a dead voter's name. They studied a billion votes and found 40 (or was it 4?) such instances. Are you saying 7 million Americans are to be deprived out their most basic right because a handful of people out of a billion broke the law? This is treason. Quote Everyone has an ID- even illegal immigrants, which effectively allows them to vote at least in California, and also diminishes any remaining value left in American citizenship. Factually incorrect. Voter ID laws in many states deprive millions of people of color of the right to vote. Older folks don't have drivers licenses, so they don't get to vote. It's just another in a long line of Republican treasons. Quote If you don't have to be a citizen to vote, then what is the benefit of being an American citizen? 40 cases out of a billion? Quote This has become a new calling card for the pro-war, anti-union establishment Left. Factually incorrect -- it's THE modern civil rights issue. Quote Everything is "racist," and nothing else matters. So you're saying there is no such thing as racism? It's just a coincidence that the Voter ID laws have the practical effect of depriving millions of people of color of the right to vote? Quote Identity politics, and the social justice warriors that enforce it, is one of the primary reasons behind Trump's election. The Right has been pushing white identity politics since Nixon in '68, the true pioneers of of the racially charged wedge. Quote His support was generated largely because so many people are tired of being lectured about being "racist" and about having some kind of "privilege" which translates into working paycheck to paycheck, losing pensions, and being unable to retire. Getting poor whites to resent people of color is a long-standing Republican practice -- it doesn't take any input from liberals to get stoked. Quote I think too many Americans are falling into this phony "left" and "right" paradigm, which restricts debate and causes contention over issues like transgender bathrooms, which effect only a minute fraction of the population. If you personally knew any transgender people I don't think you'd dismiss their concerns. Quote We are able to "choose" between an establishment left that loves war, trade and immigration policies that have killed American industry and crushed working class wages and benefits, That's the corporate wing of the Democratic Party. But the base of the Democratic Party is anti-war and pro-labor. The struggle is to force the Corporate Dems to do the right thing. It's hit and miss, but at least there stands a chance of the right thing getting done. You have a problem with Obama opening to Cuba? the Iran nuke deal? net neutrality? gay marriage? access to affordable health care (for me anyway!)? As far as immigration goes -- unless you're a Native American you don't have room to beef. Millions of Europeans migrated to North America and millions of Mexicans migrated to the United States. That's the kind of stuff that happens with human beings. Unless you want to pay 5 bucks for a head of lettuce, why gripe? Quote and an establishment right that loves war, wants to exploit the cheapest labor possible, and thinks rich people should be called "job creators." There's not much "choice" between authoritarian social justice warriors who want people fired for the slip of a tongue, A gross exaggeration, with all due respect. One can find totalitarian personalities in all ideological stripes. Nobody wants to see people fired for a slip of the tongue. Quote and greedy Ayn Rand disciples who want to eliminate minimum wage and bring back child labor. False equivalencies must be rejected as much as false dichotomies. The corporate wings of the Dems and the GOP are tools of the Globalist Proto-Autocracy, which seeks to make the world safe for bankers. The base of the Democratic Party is anti-autocracy. The evangelical base of the Republican Party are the soldiers of the Dominionist Proto-Autocracy, which seeks to make the world safe for the return of Jesus. In order to keep its base happy, the GOP must answer to the Dominionists. In order to keep its base happy, the Democrats have to ring up the occasional progressive achievement that the base had to fight hard to make happen. The American ruling elite is non-hegemonic. In my book the Dominionists are the far more pernicious. Edited February 4, 2018 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paz Marverde Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 21 hours ago, Thomas Graves said: James, With all due respect, would you please address these two questions? Thomas Graves, With all due respect, what about HRC rigging against Bernie Sanders? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted February 4, 2018 Author Share Posted February 4, 2018 (edited) 4 minutes ago, Paz Marverde said: Thomas Graves, With all due respect, what about HRC rigging against Bernie Sanders? "Politics is dirty. Always has been, and always will be." -- Tommy PS Are you a Putin supporter? Edited February 4, 2018 by Thomas Graves 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