MODERATORS DISCRIMINATE AGAINST CENTRISTS & CONSERVATIVES

[John Cotter]

On February 6^th 1962 JFK declared his commitment to the “four freedoms” which FDR had said defined the aspirations of the 20^th century.

The first of these freedoms was “freedom of speech and expression”.

https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKWHA/1962/JFKWHA-077-002/JFKWHA-077-002

It’s sadly ironic to see a freedom held so dear by JFK being suppressed in a forum supposedly dedicated to discovering the truth about his assassination.

[Gil Jesus]

I'm disappointed when a member gets banned. Especially when that member has on more than one occasion come to my defense when I was being attacked by another member.

Politics is always a hot subject. The old saying is that you never discuss religion or politics. Today politics is more hate-filled than in any time in my lifetime.

The same hate-filled approach to American politics that exists today was what got John Kennedy killed.

Some day, we, as a nation, are going to wake up and see it for what it was.

Not so much a coup d'etat, but a move to return the power of the Presidency to the power elite.

Kennedy's enemies, Texans who preferred Lyndon Johnson in the White House, lured JFK to Dallas so they could kill him and return the government to the power elite that controlled it prior to 1960.

Both Johnson and Hoover's jobs were at stake and they weren't going to bite the hand that fed them, so they covered it up. They used a "world war III" scenario as the cover story for that coverup.

This wasn't Castro, this wasn't the Russians or the Mafia. No, they couldn't control the autopsy.

This wasn't some Secret Service agent accidently killing the President.

This was a planned, triangulated cross-fire with the President being hit by shots from in front and from the rear.

This was the Secret Service making last minute changes to the motorcade at Love Field, like taking the general who rode in the front seat of the limo out of the car. Relegating the Press to convertibles further back instead of in a flatbed truck in front of the limo. 

This was the Secret Service slowing the limo down when shooting started.

This was the military mislocating the wounds in the President's body to hide the fact that he was killed by multiple shooters.

This was a conspiracy contrived by the CIA, backed by the military and elements of the Secret Service. The money behind it came from one of the CIA's friends in Dallas: a rich "patriotic" Dallas oil man. It was this oil man who got Oswald his job in the TSBD. It was this same oil man ( who, according to his personal assistant ) conspired with the Dallas Police to allow Ruby into the building to kill Oswald.

All of these people were connected by their politics. They saw Kennedy's policies and behavior as a threat to the security of the country and decided to remove him from office.

Perhaps in a moment of contrition, Johnson even admitted, "It was the CIA and the oil men".

And yes, they DID get away with murder, unless we expose them.

When it comes to politics, people are passionate and it can turn to hatred and then, in the most extreme cases, to violence.

Sixty years after Kennedy's assassination, we still haven't learned this lesson.

Edited March 17, 2023 by Gil Jesus

[John Cotter]

2 minutes ago, Gil Jesus said:

I'm disappointed when a member gets banned. Especially when that member has on more than one occasion come to my defense when I was being attacked by another member.

Politics is always a hot subject. The old saying is that you never discuss religion or politics. Today politics is more hate-filled than in any time in my lifetime.

The same hate-filled approach to American politics that exists today was what got John Kennedy killed.

Some day, we, as a nation, are going to wake up and see it for what it was.

Not so much a coup d'etat, but a move to return the power of the Presidency to the power elite.

Kennedy's enemies, who preferred Lyndon Johnson in the White House, lured JFK to Texas so they could kill him and return the government to the power elite that controlled it prior to 1960.

Both Johnson and Hoover's jobs were at stake and they weren't going to bite the hand that fed them, so they covered it up. They used a "world war III" scenario as the cover story for that coverup.

This wasn't Castro, this wasn't the Russians or the Mafia. No, they couldn't control the autopsy.

This wasn't some Secret Service agent accidently killing the President.

This was a planned, triangulated cross-fire with the President being hit by shots from in front and from the rear.

This was the Secret Service making last minute changes to the motorcade at Love Field, like taking the general who rode in the front seat of the limo out of the car. Relegating the Press to convertibles further back instead of in a flatbed truck in front of the limo. 

This was the Secret Service slowing the limo down when shooting started.

This was the military mislocating the wounds in the President's body to hide the fact that he was killed by multiple shooters.

This was a conspiracy contrived by the CIA, backed by the military and elements of the Secret Service. The money behind it came from one of the CIA's friends in Dallas: a rich "patriotic" Dallas oil man. It was this oil man who got Oswald his job in the TSBD. It was this same oil man ( who, according to his personal assistant ) conspired with the Dallas Police to allow Ruby into the building to kill Oswald.

All of these people were connected by their politics. They saw Kennedy's policies and behvior as a threat to the secuirty of the country and decided to remove him from office.

And yes, they DID get away with murder, unless we expose them.

When it comes to politics, people are passionate and it can turn to hatred and then, in the most extreme cases, to violence.

Sixty years after Kennedy's assassination, we still haven't learned this lesson.

Great post, Gil.

[Paul Rigby]

In the wake of Tucker Carlson’s intervention in the JFK assassination debate, individuals and institutions with a pre-existing interest in the case had a number of options. These ranged from obsessing over Carlson’s sincerity, through pulling up the drawbridge in disdain, to embracing the opportunity to broaden the coalition of the informed and interested.

For those genuinely committed to advancing our knowledge of the case, the latter alternative was self-evidently the best option. It offered potential, from committing Trump and DeSantis, the leading GOP contenders for the presidency, to a full release of government records (and thus increasing the pressure on the Dem candidate, whoever supplants Biden), to unlocking familial secrets from MAGA descendants of direct participants in the coup and cover-up. None of these outcomes were guaranteed: Nothing would be lost by attempting any of them.

So what did this forum do? It prioritised domestic US party political partisanship over the advancement of the JFK case. As Joe Bauer put it with such commendable honesty, albeit ironically within a thread entitled “Thankyou, Tucker Carlson,” the real purpose of this forum, as most clearly revealed in the double-standard used to expel Matthew Koch, is to keep the deplorables out:

“Maybe a better analogy is that this forum is like an elite membership private country club with strict vetting rules. Only the most respected and intelligent are allowed in?

It was never intended to be a Jerry Springer/Maury Povich/Pit Bulls And Parolees TV show fan drop in venue.”*

A similar contempt for the riff-raff occurred on the same page of that thread, emanating this time from Lesley Sharp:

Yes, I have a problem when bad actors infiltrate any tent, and I'm pretty defensive of this one (the Royal) as you no doubt recognize.  You'll ask what constitutes infiltration, and I could be glib and say "you'll know them when you see them," but kidding aside, I've concluded based on Hank's investigation and our additional research, the assassination of Kennedy — a president whose platform is polar opposite of the platform Trump ran on — was ideologically driven by etremists from the right on an international scale. And MAGA, led by Trump is simply the latest iteration (think JBS, Buchanan's "America First," the Tea Party) of the big tent that housed those extremists in 1963.

MAGA is anathema to all that Kennedy stood for. So, when Carlson promoted propaganda designed to please MAGA, and along with Trump coopted the term "deep state" and spun it to suggest that Trump and Kennedy had something in common, or when Trump attempted a coup using lies about the 2020 election, those who believed the lies rolled into Kennedy assassination research tents in a multi-pronged attack and promoted the lie that Trump was the reincarnation>

I think we're looking at the hammer that will nail the coffin of democracy constructed in Dallas in 1963.”*

The utter asininity of this position is demonstrated by a single statistic - roughly 13% of Trump voters voted for Obama in 2012**. Were all of these people “simply the latest iteration (think JBS, Buchanan's "America First," the Tea Party) of the big tent that housed those extremists in 1963”? The proposition is deranged.

This forum was founded by an English Socialist. He did not impose political loyalty tests or exclude Americans based upon their domestic party affiliation. It is a tradition that needs to be recovered by a new set of moderators who are above and beyond tribal US party political concerns.

*https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/28836-thankyou-tucker-carlson/page/20/

**https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama%E2%80%93Trump_voters

[W. Niederhut]

5 hours ago, John Cotter said:

On February 6^th 1962 JFK declared his commitment to the “four freedoms” which FDR had said defined the aspirations of the 20^th century.

The first of these freedoms was “freedom of speech and expression”.

https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKWHA/1962/JFKWHA-077-002/JFKWHA-077-002

It’s sadly ironic to see a freedom held so dear by JFK being suppressed in a forum supposedly dedicated to discovering the truth about his assassination.

John,

     I seriously doubt that anyone on this forum is opposed to "freedom of speech and expression," with certain exceptions.

    For example, few among us would support freedom of hate speech-- speech inciting violence and/or hate crimes against individuals or groups.

    There was a time in American history when the Know Nothing Party denounced Irish immigrants-- accusing them of, "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion."

     The Know Nothings wanted to Make America Great Again by denigrating and persecuting Irish Catholics.

     (Incidentally, my Slovenian aunts and uncles told me about American kids throwing rocks at them and calling them, "Cat Lickers" in the 1920s.  Not so long ago.)

    And what about deleterious false advertising-- false claims that endanger the public health?  Should they be freely expressed?

    As for the Education Forum, I posted my opinion recently about a putative EF mission/agenda of discerning and reporting the truth about history, current events, and other subjects.   Knowledge and truth matter here.  It's an attribute that has attracted many people to this forum.  It's not Reddit.

    So, if EF members repeatedly disregard facts and post falsehoods, is that entirely acceptable on this forum?  

    Should there be no reasonable limits here on the "free expression" of disinformation?

    As for freedom of expression, I'm posting two of my 30 year-old Celtic recordings for St. Patrick's Day.

    I take no credit for these fine performances, other than playing the guitar and bodhran accompaniments.

    Dr. Steven Kick, of the University of Colorado, played the flute on Josie McDermott's Reels.

    My old friend, Rock Eggen, an original member of the Irish folk band, Tenpenny, of Salt Lake City, played the flute on The Butterfly Slip Jig.

    Erin go bragh, folks!

https://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=14563196

https://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=14563198

 

    

    

Edited March 17, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Leslie Sharp]

18 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

Trying to give untruths the same weight as facts by referring to them as opinion, is generally considered a cheap propaganda technique.

Example:

Person 1 "My point of view is that the earth is flat."

Person 2 "That's not true. The earth is round."

Person 1 "Well, it's just my point of view, so it's valid."

Person 2. "No, it's really not. Sorry."

 

well stated, Matt.

[John Cotter]

27 minutes ago, Paul Rigby said:

In the wake of Tucker Carlson’s intervention in the JFK assassination debate, individuals and institutions with a pre-existing interest in the case had a number of options. These ranged from obsessing over Carlson’s sincerity, through pulling up the drawbridge in disdain, to embracing the opportunity to broaden the coalition of the informed and interested.

For those genuinely committed to advancing our knowledge of the case, the latter alternative was self-evidently the best option. It offered potential, from committing Trump and DeSantis, the leading GOP contenders for the presidency, to a full release of government records (and thus increasing the pressure on the Dem candidate, whoever supplants Biden), to unlocking familial secrets from MAGA descendants of direct participants in the coup and cover-up. None of these outcomes were guaranteed: Nothing would be lost by attempting any of them.

So what did this forum do? It prioritised domestic US party political partisanship over the advancement of the JFK case. As Joe Bauer put it with such commendable honesty, albeit ironically within a thread entitled “Thankyou, Tucker Carlson,” the real purpose of this forum, as most clearly revealed in the double-standard used to expel Matthew Koch, is to keep the deplorables out:

“Maybe a better analogy is that this forum is like an elite membership private country club with strict vetting rules. Only the most respected and intelligent are allowed in?

It was never intended to be a Jerry Springer/Maury Povich/Pit Bulls And Parolees TV show fan drop in venue.”*

A similar contempt for the riff-raff occurred on the same page of that thread, emanating this time from Lesley Sharp:

Yes, I have a problem when bad actors infiltrate any tent, and I'm pretty defensive of this one (the Royal) as you no doubt recognize.  You'll ask what constitutes infiltration, and I could be glib and say "you'll know them when you see them," but kidding aside, I've concluded based on Hank's investigation and our additional research, the assassination of Kennedy — a president whose platform is polar opposite of the platform Trump ran on — was ideologically driven by etremists from the right on an international scale. And MAGA, led by Trump is simply the latest iteration (think JBS, Buchanan's "America First," the Tea Party) of the big tent that housed those extremists in 1963.

MAGA is anathema to all that Kennedy stood for. So, when Carlson promoted propaganda designed to please MAGA, and along with Trump coopted the term "deep state" and spun it to suggest that Trump and Kennedy had something in common, or when Trump attempted a coup using lies about the 2020 election, those who believed the lies rolled into Kennedy assassination research tents in a multi-pronged attack and promoted the lie that Trump was the reincarnation>

I think we're looking at the hammer that will nail the coffin of democracy constructed in Dallas in 1963.”*

The utter asininity of this position is demonstrated by a single statistic - roughly 13% of Trump voters voted for Obama in 2012**. Were all of these people “simply the latest iteration (think JBS, Buchanan's "America First," the Tea Party) of the big tent that housed those extremists in 1963”? The proposition is deranged.

This forum was founded by an English Socialist. He did not impose political loyalty tests or exclude Americans based upon their domestic party affiliation. It is a tradition that needs to be recovered by a new set of moderators who are above and beyond tribal US party political concerns.

*https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/28836-thankyou-tucker-carlson/page/20/

**https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama%E2%80%93Trump_voters

Hear, hear.

[Leslie Sharp]

4 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

John,

     I seriously doubt that anyone on this forum is opposed to "freedom of speech and expression," with certain exceptions.

    For example, few among us would support freedom of hate speech-- speech inciting violence and/or hate crimes against individuals or groups.

    There was a time in American history when the Know Nothing Party denounced Irish immigrants-- accusing them of, "Rum, Romanism, and Rebellion."

     The Know Nothings wanted to Make America Great Again by denigrating and persecuting Irish Catholics.

     (Incidentally, my Slovenian aunts and uncles told me about American kids throwing rocks at them and calling them, "Cat Lickers" in the 1920s.  Not so long ago.)

    And what about deleterious false advertising-- false claims that endanger the public health?  Should they be freely expressed?

    As for the Education Forum, I posted my opinion recently about a putative EF mission/agenda of discerning and reporting the truth, about history, current events, and other subjects.   Knowledge and truth matter here.  It's an attribute that has attracted many people to this forum.  It's not Reddit.

    So, if EF members repeatedly disregard facts and post falsehoods, is that entirely acceptable on this forum?  

    Should there be no reasonable limits here on the "free expression" of disinformation?

    As for freedom of expression, I'm posting two of my 30 year-old Celtic recordings for St. Patrick's Day.

    I take no credit for these fine performances, other than playing the guitar and bodhran accompaniments.

    Dr. Steven Kick, of the University of Colorado, played the flute on Josie McDermott's Reels.

    My old friend, Rock Eggen, an original member of the Irish folk band, Tenpenny, of Salt Lake City, played the flute on The Butterfly Slip Jig.

    Erin go bragh, folks!

https://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=14563196

https://soundclick.com/share.cfm?id=14563198

 

    

    

Great session, W.! 

sláinte mhaith agus go mbeirimid beo ar an am seo arís

and may all your wars be happy and all your songs be sad.

 

[Mark Ulrik]

1 hour ago, Gil Jesus said:

This was the Secret Service making last minute changes to the motorcade at Love Field, like taking the general who rode in the front seat of the limo out of the car.

You're talking about Godfrey McHugh. What difference would his presence in the limo have made? What's your evidence that the SS removed him? Why do you call it a "last minute" change? He didn't ride in the limo in Fort Worth either.

[Leslie Sharp]

6 hours ago, John Cotter said:

On February 6^th 1962 JFK declared his commitment to the “four freedoms” which FDR had said defined the aspirations of the 20^th century.

The first of these freedoms was “freedom of speech and expression”.

https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKWHA/1962/JFKWHA-077-002/JFKWHA-077-002

It’s sadly ironic to see a freedom held so dear by JFK being suppressed in a forum supposedly dedicated to discovering the truth about his assassination.

The day of John Kennedy's address to the nation on June 11, 1963, I turned 16, and his speech "woke" me up fully to what my mother had been pointing out since my age of reason ... the appalling discrimination we witnessed (and were de facto party to) in our small town  . . . African Americans had to sit in the balcony of the Royal Theatre, African Americans had to drink from separate fountains at our county courthouse, African Americans were forced to return to the other side of the tracks before sunset or face harassment - ergo the name of their 'neighborhood' Sunset.  Kennedy told me this was wrong, and must stop.

Yet . . .  as late as 1999, GOP Texas Gov. George Bush, then campaigning for a second term, signed off on a sting operation in that small Texas town that resulted in the national headline-making arrests of 16% of the town's African American population.  A corrupt undercover agent testified and some of my classmates received excessive sentences including one who was sentenced to 99 years in prison.

So, any effort on this forum or any other to argue that "wokeness" is an affront to their freedom of speech, or their behavior, in an attempt to reverse the Civil Rights Act — while invoking John Kennedy — should and will be challenged.

President John F. Kennedy, June 1963 

... It ought to be possible ... for American students of any color to attend any public insititution they select without having to be backed up by troops.

... It ought to be possible for Americans consumers of any color to receive equal service in places of public accommodation, such as hotels and restaurants and theaters and retail stores, without being forced to resort to demonstrations in the street, and it ought to be possible for American citizens of any color to register to vote in a free election without interference or fear of reprisal.

It ought to be possible, in short, for every American to enjoy the privileges of being American without regard to his race or his color. In short, every American ought to have the right to be treated as he would wish to be treated, as one would wish his children to be treated. But this is not the case….

...This is not a sectional issue…Nor is this a partisan issue…This is not even a legal or legislative issue alone. It is better to settle these matters in the courts than on the streets, and new laws are needed at every level, but law alone cannot make men see right.

We are confronted primarily with a moral issue. It is as old as the scriptures and is as clear as the American Constitution.

The heart of the question is — whether all Americans are to be afforded equal rights and equal opportunities. Whether we are going to treat our fellow Americans as we want to be treated. If an American, because his skin is dark, cannot eat lunch in a restaurant open to the public, if he cannot send his children to the best public school available, if he cannot vote for the public officials who represent him, if, in short, he cannot enjoy the full and free life which all of us want, then who among us would be content to have the color of his skin changed and stand in his place? Who among us would then be content with the counsels of patience and delay?

One hundred years of delay have passed since President Lincoln freed the slaves, yet their heirs, their grandsons, are not fully free….

...It is not enough to pin the blame on others, to say this is a problem of one section of the country or another, or deplore the fact that we face. A great change is at hand, and our task, our obligation, is to make that revolution, that change, peaceful and constructive for all.

Those who do nothing are inviting shame as well as violence. Those who act boldly are recognizing right as well as reality…

 

Edited March 17, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[John Cotter]

1 hour ago, Mark Ulrik said:

You're talking about Godfrey McHugh. What difference would his presence in the limo have made? What's your evidence that the SS removed him? Why do you call it a "last minute" change? He didn't ride in the limo in Fort Worth either.

You’re trying to instigate another diversionary dance “around the mulberry bush” – a debate which has probably already been had many times previously – which is irrelevant to the topic of the thread.

As I said already, this is how internet forums about the JFK assassination have been sabotaged for decades by disruptive posters either by design or through ignorance of how rational discourse should proceed.

[Matt Allison]

9 minutes ago, John Cotter said:

As I said already, this is how internet forums about the JFK assassination have been sabotaged for decades by disruptive posters either by design or through ignorance of how rational discourse should proceed.

Wait, you're complaining that by talking about the JFKA, someone is being "disruptive"? In yet another OT thread that complains about a disruptor/propagandist getting (thankfully) bounced from this JFK forum? That's rich.

My question is this: has this nonsense now reached the point where it can be described as harassment towards the Mods?

[John Cotter]

17 minutes ago, Matt Allison said:

Wait, you're complaining that by talking about the JFKA, someone is being "disruptive"? In yet another OT thread that complains about a disruptor/propagandist getting (thankfully) bounced from this JFK forum? That's rich.

My question is this: has this nonsense now reached the point where it can be described as harassment towards the Mods?

I’ve already exposed your repeated disruptive behaviour on this thread and put the run on you.

Now you’re back trying to disrupt it from a different angle.

Do you understand the meaning of the thread title? Have you got problems with the English language?

Do you understand the concept of relevance? Have you got problems with logic?

Or are you just deliberately sabotaging the thread for obvious reasons?

[Matt Allison]

So anyone that posts something you don't like in this thread about "public discourse" is a disruptor?

Stop harassing me. Stop harassing the mods.

[Mark Ulrik]

56 minutes ago, John Cotter said:

You’re trying to instigate another diversionary dance “around the mulberry bush” – a debate which has probably already been had many times previously – which is irrelevant to the topic of the thread.

As I said already, this is how internet forums about the JFK assassination have been sabotaged for decades by disruptive posters either by design or through ignorance of how rational discourse should proceed.

Just exercising my freedom of speech and expression. In the spirit of the late President Kennedy, you know.