A Beginner's Guide to the Conspiracy Game

[Robert Card]

10 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

  Buckley was no great hero of mine, but his "pompously erudite" delivery was always enjoyable to me. 

Lance, that's Knight of Malta William F Buckley Jr.   He should be on my list.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Robert Card

[Guest]

12 hours ago, Robert Card said:

John McAdams from Jesuit Marquette Univ.

Gerald Posner from Jesuit Loyola Univ

Lee Iacocca, Jesuit Knight of Malta, Ford exec took control of SS-100-X after the FBI

Ah, yes, the Knights of Malta!  There are only about 40 of us in my little town, but we have a lot of fun.  We have a Thursday night bowling league and pretty regular Sunday potlucks, if anyone is interested (gotta wear your funny hat, but you can easily find a used one on eBay for about $20).

11 hours ago, Karl Hilliard said:

So..it looks like you have become quite a legend in your own mind.

Because I have put forth this level of effort, which I have, this makes me "quite a legend in my own mind"?  This is the sort of thing Conspiracy Game enthusiasts say when they have no substantive response.  It sounds better than "Duh."

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

In an evidentiary manner, it becomes the Bermuda Triangle. All the normal rules are turned upside down.

Possibly the first wise things Jim D. has ever said on one my threads!  Were these Freudian slips?  The analogy between the Conspiracy Game and the Bermuda Triangle is so excellent that I am going to work it into my outline.  "All the normal rules are turned upside down" - bingo, that's pretty much the Conspiracy Game in a nutshell.

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

"an utter joke" … "nothing but a cover story" … "the fix was in" … "the dead giveaway" … "phony CBLA junk science"

This is Conspiracy Game Lingo.  I'm going to have to add a sub-paragraph to my outline.  Jim D., who fashions himself as some sort of Runyonesque tough guy of the Conspiracy Game, reads a lot of Mickey Spillane novels to stay hip.

The thread has officially gone off the cliff.  (I might say that every thread on which Cliff participates goes off the cliff, but the new and improved me is above such lowly puns.)  Anyway, it was interesting while it lasted.

 

 

 

Edited September 3, 2019 by Guest

[Paul Bacon]

7 hours ago, Robert Card said:

I used to give out Rise of the Fourth Reich as a gift to friends and family that wanted to go deeper into the study of the Nutwork.  It's a basic start, it covers complex subjects briefly, and it's all true, but you can go much, much further down the rabbit hole.   So far in fact, that it might be better to not go there, as I will be leaving this world a sad, and bitter man.   The world doesn't have to be this way, and they're being too harsh on us slaves living on a tax plantation.   The poverty here in Colombia is something the average North American cannot comprehend.  There was one man in my lifetime that knew who the Nutwork was and tried to stop them, and his name was President John F Kennedy.  You haven't heard any other President giving a Secret Societies speech, have you?

On the other hand, a person can make a damn nice living in the options markets if they know 'the plan.'  It's tax-free income, too.   The problem is everywhere you look you'll see the deviousness of the Nutwork, whether it's a weather weapon named Dorian, a pedophile worth $600 million, 700 metric tons of the Queens' coke shipped out of Colombia, or some crybaby elites that lost a court case involving extracting oil out of Brazil, and now are burning the place down.

Be careful with how many of those books you read, it may make you sick someday.

 

 

I know Robert.  It's depressing, very depressing.  I agree with you.

We did have a chance with John Kennedy.  We can hope for another chance, by way of another president with similar personal courage (FWIW, my money's on Elizabeth Warren).  But one thing, to me, is sure: enough Americans will have to continue to pay very close attention, after the election to the machinations of those vested interests trying to continue "business as usual".  What I'm trying to say, is that it's going to take more than a leader with immense personal courage to turn this ship around.  It's going to take courage from everyday Americans as well. 

[Cliff Varnell]

Mickey Spillane is the square's idea of tough-guy cool.

Raymond Chandler, Jim Thompson, James Ellroy and Iceberg Slim are way hipper.

Just say'n...

[Guest]

12 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Bill Turner, a former FBI agent, told me that all he had to do was read through several reports and he understood the fix was in.  

For the uninformed - and as yet another example of how the Conspiracy Game works - that would be this "Bill Turner":

Mr. Turner worked as an FBI special agent for 10 years until Hoover fired him in 1961 for testifying before Congress, calling for an investigation into the bureau’s extensive wiretapping.  

After leaving the FBI, Mr. Turner worked as a freelance journalist, writing investigative pieces on the JFK assassination. That led to him becoming a part of the controversial assassination investigation led by New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison.

In 1968, while living in Mill Valley, Mr. Turner ran unsuccessfully for the Democratic nomination for Congress in the Sixth District as an anti-Vietnam War candidate. He also called for a new investigation into the Kennedy assassination and for the reform of the CIA, citing “the over-inflation of our so-called security establishments and the right-wing mentality that directs it.”

https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/01/06/william-turner-bay-area-fbi-agent-who-criticized-j-edgar-hoover-dies-at-88/

“I think what happened was a capacity for assassination was set up by (a) CIA base in the Everglades called Point Mary. That’s where they trained Cuban snipers,” said Turner.

He says two of those Cuban snipers were sent to assassinate the president.

https://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2013/11/16/did-the-cia-assassinate-jfk-former-fbi-agent-dedicated-to-case-believes-he-knows-answer/

Oh, the "Hoover fired him" mantra?  As we say in the real world, "Not exactly."  A full and even somewhat sympathetic description of Mr. Turner's checkered career is found in the FBI Encyclopedia by Michael Newton, https://books.google.com/books?id=R73eCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA343&lpg=PA343&dq="william+turner"+fbi&source=bl&ots=f-T8OQOl7-&sig=ACfU3U1pRfaEYvwiUUW79HY0s9sfMQsNnQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwipiJfU57TkAhXQna0KHWbCBJo4ChDoATABegQICRAB#v=onepage&q="william turner" fbi&f=false.

The FBI brought six charges against Turner, the Civil Service Commission upheld two of them, a federal district court affirmed the dismissal, and the Supreme Court declined to review the case.

But Turner wasn't just a rabid anti-FBI crusader:  "Turner also has participated in various panel discussions where he has proven himself to be a dedicated enemy of law enforcement.  He has made numerous unfounded charges about improper activities of various law enforcement agencies in his comments and writings. Turner's book, "The Police Establishment, " published in 1968, is a bitter and unfounded attack against law enforcement."  See  https://archive.org/stream/foia_Committee_For_Public_Justice-HQ-EBF-8/Committee_For_Public_Justice-HQ-EBF-8_djvu.txt

See how this works, folks?  Sure, Turner is the sort of character I'd look to for an analysis of the FBI's handling of the JFK assassination - if I were a 32nd-degree Conspiracy Game enthusiast, that is.

Keep drinking that snake-oil flavored Kool Aid, gang - Jim D. is counting on it.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Guest

[Michael Cross]

I thought you left.

[Guest]

I will issue a challenge that has been issued repeatedly before:

For all of the supposed historians and medical experts playing the Conspiracy Game, I have not found that they have caused so much as a ripple in any area of serious scholarship.  This is as true of John M. Newman as of John Armstrong, Jim DiEugenio and everyone in between.

There are literally scores and scores of serious, mainstream, scholarly, peer-reviewed historical, medical and forensic journals.  Take your assassination-related "research" to one of them and convince the committee it is worthy of publication and those of us in the real world might take you more seriously.

You don't need to take your entire theory.  Just take Oswald's molars or Cliff's Irrefutable Solution or your Knights of Malta stuff or your expose of Hoover or your proof of Oswald's CIA affiliations or whatever makes you happy.  Convince a genuinely scholarly peer-review committee that you are saying something serious and worthwhile.

Literally everywhere I have turned in the conspiracy literature, I have found with even the most minimal checking that it does not withstand scrutiny.  Jim D.'s "former FBI agent" took me about 90 seconds to expose.  Yeah, the entire FBI investigation of the assassination was bogus because Bill Turner said so.  See how far that gets you in the world of serious scholarship.

2 minutes ago, Michael Cross said:

I thought you left.

Apparently you thought wrong.  It is my thread, after all.  But thank you for your insightful contribution.

[Karl Hilliard]

56 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

   It is my thread, after all.  But thank you for your insightful contribution.

Dear members____Mr Payette is obviously quite delusional. Trolls usually are. It is not his thread. Threads here belong to the forum...it became everybody's thread the instant it was posted. Am I not correct? 

[Guest]

Because this stuff is kind of a hoot and I do want you to be fully informed, here is the transcript of a fairly massive 1962 interview with Turner while his suit relative to his termination was pending in the federal district court in D.C.:  https://vault.fbi.gov/solo/solo-part-45-of-45  It is entirely self-serving, of course, but the two interviewers weren't idiots and it's kind of interesting.

Ironically, Turner's suit had to be styled as William W. Turner v. Robert F. Kennedy, Attorney General of the United States, et al.  This is ironic because Turner later became one of the leading proponents of a conspiracy in the assassination of RFK (and MLK), which Jim D. will be delighted to tell you about.

Turner was terminated because statements he made in letters to a Senator and a Member of the House of Representatives "regarding his treatment in his position, and other personnel conditions in the agency, were false, irresponsible and unjustified, demonstrating his unsuitability for continued employment in and impairing the efficiency of the agency."

Bear in mind, he had a hearing within in the FBI, an appeal to the Civil Service Commission, a lawsuit in the federal district court (where he lost on summary judgment, meaning the court found no genuine material issue of fact or law), and an appeal to the federal court of appeals for the D.C. Circuit (where the court issued a two-line per curiam opinion and denied his petition for a rehearing, 332 F.2d 304).  I might mention that Turner was represented by Edward Bennett Williams, who wasn't exactly Cousin Vinny.

Nevertheless, Turner is veritable Conspiracy Saint, at least on Jim D.'s site.  And he may well have been.  My point is simply "Don't cite someone with quite such a level of bias and quite such an obvious axe to grind as your authority for the entire FBI investigation into the assassination being completely bogus."  You are playing the Conspiracy Game a little too obviously.

16 minutes ago, Karl Hilliard said:

Dear members____Mr Payette is obviously quite delusional. Trolls usually are. It is not his thread. Threads here belong to the forum...it became everybody's thread the instant it was posted. Am I not correct? 

Certainly, my overly serious fellow.  It is "my" thread only in the sense that I started it.  So I can hardly be chided for still being here.  This makes me a "delusional trolloid" in your weird little corner of Conspiracy World?  I guess I'll have to be careful about referring to "my original post" or "my above post" as well or there's no telling what Karl will call me.

Edited September 3, 2019 by Guest

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Lance Payette said:

There are literally scores and scores of serious, mainstream, scholarly, peer-reviewed historical, medical and forensic journals.  Take your assassination-related "research" to one of them and convince the committee it is worthy of publication and those of us in the real world might take you more seriously.

There's something you don't understand Lance, but fortunately it was explained to me when I suggested the same thing. They can't do that because the mainstream authorities you mentioned are all in on it. The tip off is the term "mainstream" which indicates they are part of the dreaded establishment (insert preferred qualifying term here-military industrial, media, CIA, etc.) who perpetrated the plot.

[Karl Hilliard]

14 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:

 

   It is "my" thread only in the sense that I started it.  So I can hardly be chided for still being here.  

Not at all. You can be here. No one is telling you to leave. However if you would choose to finish this thread..I guess it should be all yours and then you can roll it up and twirl on it for all I care.

Have a good one.

[Cliff Varnell]

3 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

I will issue a challenge that has been issued repeatedly before:

Always issued by flummoxed nutters gagging on the evidence shoved down their throat.

[Robert Card]

6 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

 

Mr. Turner

Lance, that's Bill Turner from Jesuit Canisius College.   bwhahaha

[Robert Card]

9 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

Ah, yes, the Knights of Malta!  There are only about 40 of us in my little town, but we have a lot of fun.  We have a Thursday night bowling league and pretty regular Sunday potlucks, if anyone is interested (gotta wear your funny hat, but you can easily find a used one on eBay for about $20).

 

9 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

Because I have put forth this level of effort, which I have, this makes me "quite a legend in my own mind"?  This is the sort of thing Conspiracy Game enthusiasts say when they have no substantive response.  It sounds better than "Duh."

 

Lance, this is an example of not dealing with the evidence, and avoiding discussion of the evidence.   It also has your signature with the prime rule of disinfo.......ridicule, and ad hom.   Then to top it all off, in your very next comment, you accuse the poster of doing exactly what you're guilty of, which is, 'This is the sort of thing Conspiracy Game enthusiasts say when they have no substantive response.'

 

[Cliff Varnell]

6 hours ago, Lance Payette said:

Cliff's Irrefutable Solution

Attributing the historical record to me personally is the lowest form of intellectual dishonesty.