The Progressive Murder Spree of 1963

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Chris, clearly you intend to also side with personal attacks rather than respond to issues. As for Mark Lane, I have explained many times how I got here, meaning to this Forum, and how Larry Hancock and Gary Murr have been of great help. But as for this petty, silly, childish, anti-Trump and pro-Kennedy nonsense that seems to have control of many on this Forum, I want nothing to do with it. It is all very stupid and it certainly is not educational or informative. It seems to me that going around and around in silly circles repeating the same old crap over and over and over again is all that many on this Forum can contribute. Count me out of that and if you don't like my enquiries, then just ignore anything to do with me.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander isn't it, Mervyn? There you go calling peoples research that has potentially spanned decades, including reputable authors work as 'same old crap'. You can say you don't agree with it, and you can say why. Your opinion isn't the only one that matters, in fact far from it. We can agree there is a Dem bias here, after all we are researching or commenting on the assassination of the most famous Dem ever (perhaps), so that is to be expected to some degree. There are many who can separate loyalty, and adoration for common sense and think objectively. 

I'm calling you out here, if you don't answer comprehensively, it'll show a real weakness of character on your part. Who (in your opinion) killed JFK & why? 

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

If you are self-applying that tag, that is your responsibility. I am referring to the people who think that they are smart in responding with videos, etc.

I can’t stand idiots who make personal attacks.

...See?

[Mervyn Hagger]

30 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

What is good for the goose is good for the gander isn't it, Mervyn? There you go calling peoples research that has potentially spanned decades, including reputable authors work as 'same old crap'. You can say you don't agree with it, and you can say why. Your opinion isn't the only one that matters, in fact far from it. We can agree there is a Dem bias here, after all we are researching or commenting on the assassination of the most famous Dem ever (perhaps), so that is to be expected to some degree. There are many who can separate loyalty, and adoration for common sense and think objectively. 

I'm calling you out here, if you don't answer comprehensively, it'll show a real weakness of character on your part. Who (in your opinion) killed JFK & why? 

Chris, I am not interested into petty disputes - take them somewhere else - but I am interested in reading the words of people like Larry Hancock (whose work I have purchased), and from Gary Murr who also contributes here and who I am in contact with by email. It is the same old partisan rubbish that bores me. Gary has assisted Larry and Gary is a true research specialist and not a blogger per se. His specialized interest happened to overlap my interest and his research into firearms and bullets seems to me to be quite exceptional and thorough. But that is not the subject that brought me here. That subject is ships, and you do not seem to have any interest in that topic.

[Mervyn Hagger]

4 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I can’t stand idiots who make personal attacks.

...See?

I can see that you are drowning in your own words. Goodbye Cliff. I will now ignore you.

[Cliff Varnell]

38 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

I can see that you are drowning in your own words. Goodbye Cliff. I will now ignore you.

Did we somehow trade Robert Wheeler for this guy?

[James R Gordon]

Mervyn,

Holding personal opinions about JFK or indeed Donald Trump are allowed on this forum. Deriding and insulting fellow members opinions and beliefs  is not. Suggesting that JFK and RFK were two-faced and liars is really not acceptable on this forum.You are an established member of this forum and should know better.

Having fellow members complain about you is not something you want. When that happens my attention is always drawn to the person being complained about.

James.

 

 

[Guest]

3 hours ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

Chris, I am not interested into petty disputes - take them somewhere else - but I am interested in reading the words of people like Larry Hancock (whose work I have purchased), and from Gary Murr who also contributes here and who I am in contact with by email. It is the same old partisan rubbish that bores me. Gary has assisted Larry and Gary is a true research specialist and not a blogger per se. His specialized interest happened to overlap my interest and his research into firearms and bullets seems to me to be quite exceptional and thorough. But that is not the subject that brought me here. That subject is ships, and you do not seem to have any interest in that topic.

So, once again you've been asked point blank for your opinion and you have offered none. Yet, you are happy to dismiss the opinions of others as 'crap' or part of some 'cultism'. It isn't me you are insulting, it's those who have worked very hard researching this topic and dedicated so much time to it. To me it seems you are terrified of the scrutiny your opinions may well receive and, you've backed yourself in to an uncomfortable corner here. Every other member is happy to offer an opinion on who killed JFK & why, plenty of us don't agree, that's the nature of the forum, sharing research and opinions. You've made a rod for your own back. 

[Paul Brancato]

3 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

So, once again you've been asked point blank for your opinion and you have offered none. Yet, you are happy to dismiss the opinions of others as 'crap' or part of some 'cultism'. It isn't me you are insulting, it's those who have worked very hard researching this topic and dedicated so much time to it. To me it seems you are terrified of the scrutiny your opinions may well receive and, you've backed yourself in to an uncomfortable corner here. Every other member is happy to offer an opinion on who killed JFK & why, plenty of us don't agree, that's the nature of the forum, sharing research and opinions. You've made a rod for your own back. 

I gave him the opportunity just as you have. He started this thread but has not offered anything other than his opinion on the Kennedy brothers. 

[Mervyn Hagger]

10 hours ago, James R Gordon said:

Mervyn,

Holding personal opinions about JFK or indeed Donald Trump are allowed on this forum. Deriding and insulting fellow members opinions and beliefs  is not. Suggesting that JFK and RFK were two-faced and XXXXX is really not acceptable on this forum.You are an established member of this forum and should know better.

Having fellow members complain about you is not something you want. When that happens my attention is always drawn to the person being complained about.

James.

 

 

James, when videos appear in place of text that have one message alone, and that is to proclaim "xxxx" - I ignore them until others join in and totally ignore what I have written and begin to chant like parrots. Then I draw the line. I have seen that kind of behavior elsewhere. It is not informative nor helpful. Two people on this Forum have been extremely helpful, one is Larry Hancock and the other one is Gary Murr (who Larry also cited as his source of information.) As a result, the nonsense spewed by the noisy I have ignored, until now, but because it is obvious that Larry and Gary seem to be someone unique, I am pulling back from further contributions at this time.

[Kirk Gallaway]

This is nothing new with Mervyn, he's done this before, and he's doing the same with with all his existing threads.

 

If he wanted to make a thread, knowing the Kennedys are held in high esteem here, and  say anything foul about the Kennedys for example, or progressives, and  defend it , I'd have no problem. But he's so coy about it. He asks broad questions. People in good faith try  to answer him, and he ends up dismissing and criticizing their answers and generally ridiculing them, then turns around and ask for research favors. He's really just impossible, but scarcely aware of it, which makes it 10 times worse and he ends up just sucking everybody's energy.

 

It sounds like he'd like to PM with Larry, but I'm sure he'd drive him crazy.

Edited December 20, 2020 by Kirk Gallaway

[Guest]

4 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

This is nothing new with Mervyn, he's done this before, and he's doing the same with with all his existing threads.

 

If he wanted to make a thread, knowing the Kennedys are held in high esteem here, and  say anything foul about the Kennedys for example, or progressives, and  defend it , I'd have no problem. But he's so coy about it. He asks broad questions. People in good faith try  to answer him, and he ends up dismissing and criticizing their answers and generally ridiculing them, then turns around and ask for research favors. He's really just impossible, but scarcely aware of it, which makes it 10 times worse and he ends up just sucking everybody's energy.

 

It sounds like he'd like to PM with Larry, but I'm sure he'd drive him crazy.

Pretty much exactly that, Kirk. I'll add to that, I get the impression he likes to sit in his ivory tower, attempting to take some high ground or score small points, criticising others with disparaging remarks makes him feel superior. Offering no opinions on the very questions he is asking means he never needs to and defend his own thinking. He's spent the past couple of days trying to filibuster or deflect. Strange behaviour indeed on a forum. 

[Guest]

18 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

I gave him the opportunity just as you have. He started this thread but has not offered anything other than his opinion on the Kennedy brothers. 

Yep, It was a very shallow opinion too. Akin to a youtube comment.