It's all fake

[Joe Bauer]

Leslie Sharp...your deep research chops remind me of Mae Brussell.

She was a virtual machine in that area. A locomotive on full throttle.

I remember actually becoming exhausted listening to her broadcasts on our local radio station here in Carmel, CA.

She would put out so much information in a non-stop, non-break way. Sometimes even a little manic I hate to say.

Yet, she consistently brought out some remarkable finds. Connections between power groups and individuals that at first sounded almost paranoid...yet, in time they turned out to be true and relevant.

I viewed the video via an earlier posted link of Tucker Carlson speaking to I believe the Heritage group? Just two days before his firing?

I really haven't studied Carlson and his work and background.

Starting to do some now.

Just from this talk tape however I can see he is a crafty and intelligent wordsmith. 

Very "sharp" in this way. Great vocabulary. Quick minded.

Rush Limbaugh was too.

Obviously Carlson does well "talking" in front of an audience. 

But man...do I see some deep flaws in his character and moral makeup.

Would need a full day to present my Carlson critique in a coherent manner and even then I'm sure at least half of those who read it would disagree with me.

One thing that made me cringe in that talk was TC's reference to his "I'm just a talk show host!"

When criticism of him gets too heated to the point of serious charges being directed his way he falls back on that disingenuous and even cowardly " don't take me that seriously folks - I am just a talk show host " shpiel that Rush Limbaugh used in the same vein when his gas lighting rhetoric got out of hand.

Limbaugh:

Whoa folks...I know I told you who are registered republicans to crossover and vote in the Democratic primaries to screw up the Democrats and Hillary's vote count momentum ... but I didn't really think hundreds of thousands of you vapid listeners would actually do so. It was a joke! I'm just a radio talk show host. You know, a comedic one?

Carlson said the same thing in this talk. Covering himself when things he says are quoted by crazies who take him so seriously they begin to act them out.

January 6th for instance.

Carlson said he goes into his sauna daily. It's a Swedish thing. To clear his mind he goes "pheasant hunting." Just a regular working stiff American.

He talked about sanitation and personal cleanliness being paramount and "good." And disorder and filth in society being "evil!"

Guess most of unsanitary India and other poverty stricken nations and societies makes them evil?

Reminded me of Trump ( a noted "germaphobe" ) describing these poor unsanitary locations around the globe as "shithole" countries.

The host of his talk presentation openly joked how "elitist" Carlson was just as they sat down after his talk. Carlson laughed loudly ( and screechingly ) while agreeing with that assessment.

TC could keep up with the ultimate erudite wordsmith William F. Buckley. He's that well read and quick minded. He jumps from Greek philosophy to Keynesian economics to Freudian analogies as easily and smoothly as can be.

He is a formidable debate opponent in that way.

George W. Bush Junior was the opposite. And he was our president for 8 years?

If Carlson's JFKA reveal just fades away...at some point will his advocates here admit to at least some degree that maybe they've been had?

 

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Joe Bauer Joe- i dont think we have been "had". I would suggest instead that without Tucker doing two back-to-back segments on the JFK Act non-disclosures and his behind the scenes communications with the House leadership that we would not have had the "Justice for Kennedy Act", it would not have been referred to 4 committees and the bill would not have been advanced to the Intell subcommittee. -IMHO 

[Aaron Sharpe]

I've mostly been lurking at this forum for a while, but scanning through this thread has really crystallized something I've been observing in the community. 

There's something monstrously ironic—downright paradoxical, in fact—about criticizing Carlson and labeling him "far right," clearly aligning one's self with the current globalist Regime and shameless sycophancy of the legacy media, while also purporting to champion ... getting to the truth of the JFK assassination??

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@Aaron Sharpe  i dont think its is "monstriously ironic" that Tucker could be truth-seeker about the assassination. It is all about motivation.  From my conversations with him and his staff, I can say he cares about the JFK Assassination. In contrast, he spread lies on air about Jan 6th because management wanted him to stop the bleeding to the alt-right programs.  People are not all "bad" or all "good". Nor are they XXXXX or frauds all the time. and as the arphorism says, even a paranoid person could have someone following them.  

[Guest]

20 minutes ago, Aaron Sharpe said:

I've mostly been lurking at this forum for a while, but scanning through this thread has really crystallized something I've been observing in the community. 

There's something monstrously ironic—downright paradoxical, in fact—about criticizing Carlson and labeling him "far right," clearly aligning one's self with the current globalist Regime and shameless sycophancy of the legacy media, while also purporting to champion ... getting to the truth of the JFK assassination??

You’re 100% correct. Thank you for posting. What I observe commonly is this tribal mentality which is very cultish. If something corrupt happens on a Republican watch (potus), Democrats will entertain it as a valid conspiracy. If a Democrat government is in office with the exception of LBJ, it must be nonsense or ‘right wing’ propaganda.

I break this down to a divide and rule strategy by the globalists/MSM. And also the phenomenon of ‘profilicity’, a psychological disposition where peoples political positions online are seen as an extension of their person. They will defend something blindly, irrespective of facts, only because its connected to them and who they identify as. 
 

To someone unconnected to party, who is capable of independent critical thinking, this is incredibly frustrating and counter-productive. We see it with consistent repetition. I did write a thread a while back explaining the psychological dispositions which impair a person when trying to see the world objectively. 
 

Some may apply both ways. 

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Aaron Sharpe  i dont think its is "monstriously ironic" that Tucker could be truth-seeker about the assassination. It is all about motivation.  From my conversations with him and his staff, I can say he cares about the JFK Assassination. In contrast, he spread lies on air about Jan 6th because management wanted him to stop the bleeding to the alt-right programs.  People are not all "bad" or all "good". Nor are they XXXXX or frauds all the time. and as the arphorism says, even a paranoid person could have someone following them.  

Larry, its also very plausible that he is going through an ‘awakening’, like many members of the public on many issues. As he said in his video yesterday, he is most ashamed of his support for the Iraq war. I think he has cheerleaded the system and realised he’s been a mug of. To people who don’t have to work, what else is important bar reputation? 

[W. Niederhut]

31 minutes ago, Aaron Sharpe said:

I've mostly been lurking at this forum for a while, but scanning through this thread has really crystallized something I've been observing in the community. 

There's something monstrously ironic—downright paradoxical, in fact—about criticizing Carlson and labeling him "far right," clearly aligning one's self with the current globalist Regime and shameless sycophancy of the legacy media, while also purporting to champion ... getting to the truth of the JFK assassination??

The "paradox" that you describe is actually a mere anomaly.

As Mr. Schnapf described, Tucker Carlson's surprising recent advocacy for JFKA truth is anomalous, given his longstanding history of promoting falsehoods on behalf of the right wing Trumplicon establishment.

You and Chris Barnard are misinterpreting the significance of "liberal" skepticism about Carlson.

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

The "paradox" that you describe is actually a mere anomaly.

As Mr. Schnapf described, Tucker Carlson's surprising recent advocacy for JFKA truth is anomalous, given his longstanding history of promoting falsehoods on behalf of the right wing Trumplicon establishment.

You and Chris Barnard are misinterpreting the significance of "liberal" skepticism about Carlson.

William, I did the test, too. I am liberal and libertarian. The question is, why do I see things differently? You're welcome to call him a villain for his decades of speech that may have been misguided. The only thing you should be analysing now is if what he says has merit or not. 

[Roger Odisio]

1 hour ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

@Joe Bauer Joe- i dont think we have been "had". I would suggest instead that without Tucker doing two back-to-back segments on the JFK Act non-disclosures and his behind the scenes communications with the House leadership that we would not have had the "Justice for Kennedy Act", it would not have been referred to 4 committees and the bill would not have been advanced to the Intell subcommittee. -IMHO 

I started this thread to discuss Carlson's remarkable claims on mainstream TV in December, and elaborated since, that (1) the CIA murdered JFK and (2) the murder was a catastrophic turning point in the US, speeding us in the wrong direction due mainly to the dishonesty and ineptitude of the people who took over.  

I agree with that. You can draw a straight  line from the Dulles brothers in the 50s claiming  there is no such thing as a nonaligned country--you're either with us or the commies--andusing that to suppress indigenous movements. To Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz in the 90s creating "American Exceptualism" claiming that after the demise ofthe Soviet Unuion, the US 

28 minutes ago, Aaron Sharpe said:

I've mostly been lurking at this forum for a while, but scanning through this thread has really crystallized something I've been observing in the community. 

There's something monstrously ironic—downright paradoxical, in fact—about criticizing Carlson and labeling him "far right," clearly aligning one's self with the current globalist Regime and shameless sycophancy of the legacy media, while also purporting to champion ... getting to the truth of the JFK assassination??

Nice #2 message, Aaron.  I started this thread to discuss Carlson's remarkable claims on mainstream TV in December, and elaborated since, that (1) the CIA murdered JFK and (2) the murder was a catastrophic turning point in the US, speeding us in the wrong direction due mainly to the dishonesty and ineptitude of the people who took over.  It turns out JFK was the last prominent person standing in the way of the war machine (compare his peace speech at American University months before his murder with what politicians today say and do.   

I agree with that perspective.  It's certainly worth pursuing.  Yet most of the oxygen here has been taken up by commenters intent on exploring Carlson's character and politics.   Or worse, whether he really had a source at the CIA who told him such things, rather than having figured it out for himself. By trying to discredit him or malign his motives, they seem to think we can ignore what he said.

But his words are out there. They have a life of their own.  By now millions have seen them. Larry thinks he can help pursuing some of the ideas inherent in his statement.  I hope he is right.  

[Roger Odisio]

2 minutes ago, Roger Odisio said:

I started this thread to discuss Carlson's remarkable claims on mainstream TV in December, and elaborated since, that (1) the CIA murdered JFK and (2) the murder was a catastrophic turning point in the US, speeding us in the wrong direction due mainly to the dishonesty and ineptitude of the people who took over.  

I agree with that. You can draw a straight  line from the Dulles brothers in the 50s claiming  there is no such thing as a nonaligned country--you're either with us or the commies--andusing that to suppress indigenous movements. To Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz in the 90s creating "American Exceptualism" claiming that after the demise ofthe Soviet Unuion, the US 

Nice #2 message, Aaron.  I started this thread to discuss Carlson's remarkable claims on mainstream TV in December, and elaborated since, that (1) the CIA murdered JFK and (2) the murder was a catastrophic turning point in the US, speeding us in the wrong direction due mainly to the dishonesty and ineptitude of the people who took over.  It turns out JFK was the last prominent person standing in the way of the war machine (compare his peace speech at American University months before his murder with what politicians today say and do.   

I agree with that perspective.  It's certainly worth pursuing.  Yet most of the oxygen here has been taken up by commenters intent on exploring Carlson's character and politics.   Or worse, whether he really had a source at the CIA who told him such things, rather than having figured it out for himself. By trying to discredit him or malign his motives, they seem to think we can ignore what he said.

But his words are out there. They have a life of their own.  By now millions have seen them. Larry thinks he can help pursuing some of the ideas inherent in his statement.  I hope he is right.  

 

3 minutes ago, Roger Odisio said:

I started this thread to discuss Carlson's remarkable claims on mainstream TV in December, and elaborated since, that (1) the CIA murdered JFK and (2) the murder was a catastrophic turning point in the US, speeding us in the wrong direction due mainly to the dishonesty and ineptitude of the people who took over.  

I agree with that. You can draw a straight  line from the Dulles brothers in the 50s claiming  there is no such thing as a nonaligned country--you're either with us or the commies--andusing that to suppress indigenous movements. To Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz in the 90s creating "American Exceptualism" claiming that after the demise ofthe Soviet Unuion, the US 

Nice #2 message, Aaron.  I started this thread to discuss Carlson's remarkable claims on mainstream TV in December, and elaborated since, that (1) the CIA murdered JFK and (2) the murder was a catastrophic turning point in the US, speeding us in the wrong direction due mainly to the dishonesty and ineptitude of the people who took over.  It turns out JFK was the last prominent person standing in the way of the war machine (compare his peace speech at American University months before his murder with what politicians today say and do.   

I agree with that perspective.  It's certainly worth pursuing.  Yet most of the oxygen here has been taken up by commenters intent on exploring Carlson's character and politics.   Or worse, whether he really had a source at the CIA who told him such things, rather than having figured it out for himself. By trying to discredit him or malign his motives, they seem to think we can ignore what he said.

But his words are out there. They have a life of their own.  By now millions have seen them. Larry thinks he can help pursuing some of the ideas inherent in his statement.  I hope he is right.  

Sorry.  The first part, a response to Joe, was not finished and not meant to be posted.

[W. Niederhut]

51 minutes ago, Chris Barnard said:

William, I did the test, too. I am liberal and libertarian. The question is, why do I see things differently? You're welcome to call him a villain for his decades of speech that may have been misguided. The only thing you should be analysing now is if what he says has merit or not. 

Chris,

    I have said from Day One that I really appreciate Tucker Carlson's shocking advocacy of JFKA Truth.

    At the same time, I recognize that Carlson has been a longstanding promoter of false Trumplicon narratives-- e.g., Stop-the-Steal, and the "Patriot Purge" narrative about Trump's J6 coup.

    So, my point was simply that "liberals" have had legitimate reasons to be skeptical about Carlson.

    I don't think most progressive Democrats in the U.S. are naive about the problems with our corporate plutocracy and military industrial complex.

    I strongly opposed our invasion of Iraq in 2003, and caught some flak for it at the time.  I also disagreed with the Obama era CIA Operation Timber Sycamore in Syria.

   (Incidentally, I also disagree with the current military strategy of Ukraine escalating the war by attempting to re-take Crimea.  I think the U.S. and NATO should pursue a peace deal with Moscow -- an end to the conflict.)

[Lawrence Schnapf]

@W. Niederhut  we can have two minds about Tucker. Grateful for his JFK work but aghast at his other stuff. 

I agree with you on Ukraine. we need to stop this proxy war.   

[Leslie Sharp]

Berlet provides us with an appropriate analogy:

. . . Sinkin’s appearance on the same platform with the LaRouchians served as an implicit endorsement, suggesting by example that joint work with the LaRouchians was acceptable . . .

. . . working with the LaRouchians and other far-right and bigoted forces will only discredit serious work towards . . .

 

Similarly, leading figures in the assassination research community appearing on the same platform as Carlson/Fox may suggest implicit endorsement?  And, working with far-right and bigoted forces can only discredit the serious work at hand? 

The question is whether Tucker Carlson would countenance direct criticism of his overriding political ideology of (male) white supremacy, racist, anti-Semitic, mysogenistic inflammatory lying coming from those whose efforts toward enforcing the JFK Records Act are both genuine and heroic? Have any of the spokespeople in question gone near such criticism of Tucker and Fox when they apparently have the perfect platform? Perhaps begin by saying, Tucker, it's ironic that President Kennedy gave his life fighting against the very ideology you espouse."

Is it sufficient to say, "well at least Carlson will have us on"?

What is the difference between "the government" determining the narrative and Fox News/Tucker Carlson determining the narrative?

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Benjamin Cole]

4 hours ago, Aaron Sharpe said:

I've mostly been lurking at this forum for a while, but scanning through this thread has really crystallized something I've been observing in the community. 

There's something monstrously ironic—downright paradoxical, in fact—about criticizing Carlson and labeling him "far right," clearly aligning one's self with the current globalist Regime and shameless sycophancy of the legacy media, while also purporting to champion ... getting to the truth of the JFK assassination??

Aaron--

In rough, I agree with you. 

Also, though partisans may think the world is black and white, and good vs. evil...the real world is a jumble. 

Why are some Americans poor? Well, some are lazy, others are terrible at planning. Others work hard at minimum wage jobs and can hardly get ahead, especially in high cost cities (where wages are depressed further by immigration). Others are truly disabled or old. 

The picture is mixed. 

Carlson was evolving and improving. I wish he had taken pains to avoid racist-sounding sound bites. He should have prefaced every comment about immigration with something like, "It is not the color of illegal immigrants, it is the volume that destroys American wages." 

It is strange world when Carlson's anti-war anti-globalist rhetoric is derisively dismissed by what used to be the American left. 

Bombs away with Hillary Clinton---who, like Senator McCain and the Cheneys, never met a war she didn't like.

[Leslie Sharp]

@Chris Barnard
Presumably you're not suggesting that those who align with party are incapable of critical thinking.

It could be argued that those who have yet to stand firmly in favor of democracy for all and firmly against anything or anyone that might erode it are in a growth phase.  The worrisome nature of that phase is that it "could go either way,' which prompts many of us to remain vigilant. 

Edited April 28, 2023 by Leslie Sharp