Oliver Stone: "Putin is a great leader for his country."

[W. Niederhut]

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

William,

What do the initials NPR refer to?

Do they refer to National Public Radio? Isn't National Public Radio funded by the US government?

John,

     NPR is funded by a variety of sources, including citizen donations.  Would you prefer links to right wing corporate propaganda sources like Breitbart, Daily Mail, or Rupert Murdoch's media empire?

    NPR is merely one of many media sources that have reported on Aleksander Dugin's influence on Putin's policies.

     Many of you Putin apologists seem to imagine that Putin has had no pro-active foreign policy agenda of his own during the past quarter century-- as if the things he has done were merely reactions to NATO.

Edited May 10, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[John Cotter]

Meanwhile, over at the red herring forum I see that Squire Jeremy Bojczuk has resumed service as Sir Alex Wilson’s groom of the stool.

Sir Alex’s specialty is the endless excretion of ad hominem puerile namecalling – illogical re-buttal so to speak. I don’t think he has ever logically rebutted the arguments of any of the many targets of his vitriol (which include many members of this forum), or contributed anything substantive to the JFKA debate.

It’s ironic that he imputed the Dunning-Kruger syndrome to one Ed Forum member, given his unawareness of his own psychological and intellectual impairment as evidenced by his vituperative incontinence.

Sir Alex’s obsession with Hitler and the Nasties seems typical of a dwindling minority of Brits who cling to “their” victory in WWII as if it were a relic of their presumed gloriously edifying past. Hence, Sir Alex’s projection onto me an association with Hitler, which has absolutely zero basis other than Sir Alex’s own aforementioned obsession.

I can’t deny that I find Sir Alex’s antics quite comical, not least his Blackadderesque rolling over into apologetic submissive mode when confronted by one of his targets in his excretorium.

As Billy Connolly said, what is life if you can’t laugh at people less fortunate than yourself?

Edited May 10, 2023 by John Cotter

[Guest]

16 minutes ago, John Cotter said:

Meanwhile, over at the red herring forum I see that Squire Jeremy Bojczuk has resumed service as Sir Alex Wilson’s groom of the stool.

Sir Alex’s specialty is the endless excretion of ad hominem puerile namecalling – illogical re-buttal so to speak. I don’t think he has ever logically rebutted the arguments of any of the many targets of his vitriol (which include many members of this forum), or contributed anything substantive to the JFKA debate.

It’s ironic that he imputed the Dunning-Kruger syndrome to one Ed Forum member, given his unawareness of his own psychological and intellectual impairment as evidenced by his vituperative incontinence.

Sir Alex’s obsession with Hitler and the Nasties seems typical of a dwindling minority of Brits who cling to “their” victory in WWII as if it were a relic of their presumed gloriously edifying past. Hence, Sir Alex’s projection onto me an association with Hitler, which has absolutely zero basis other than Sir Alex’s own aforementioned obsession.

I can’t deny that I find Sir Alex’s antics quite comical, not least his Blackadderesque rolling over into apologetic submissive mode when confronted by one of his targets in his excretorium.

As Billy Connolly said, what is life if you can’t laugh at people less fortunate than yourself?

I agree with you, John. He is pretty comical at times, sometimes inadvertently. The odd post I have seen makes me smile. He is sort of the poor mans Hunter S. Thompson. He tries very hard stylistically with his abstract mutterings, but there is little talent. He clearly isn't emotionally intelligent. He has weak perception skills. People here give so much away about themselves through linguistics and their behaviour, and Alex misses most of that completely. Of course, in his 'Beautiful Mind', he thinks his contributions are on par with Edgar Alan Poe, William Shakespeare, and Ernest Hemingway. And that the tiny space where he submits his content is a place where the world's most refined scholars meet to discuss intellectual things that others can't comprehend. He is baffled that he has been overlooked by the people who awarded the Nobel & Pulitzer prizes for significant contributions to literature. 

Beyond the humour, on the darker side of things, we should seriously question what motivates a man to go on these passive-aggressive rants about complete strangers regularly. For a guy to put so much effort into his writing to post it on the smallest, most fringe forum in the known universe, hoping one of the seven or eight people who frequent it might see it and comment back, offering some words of encouragement, is very sad.  Likewise, the negative culture of Alex living his life through others, watching multiple JFKA boards like a bored housewife watches soap operas or the way failed old men peak out through their net curtains at the younger neighbours enjoying their lives. whilst they snarl utterances of bitterness and resentment under their breath. It just seems so very unhealthy indeed. 

For me, it makes me see him as an ageing Buffalo Bill type character, twisted by life experiences, living in his very elderly mother's basement, perhaps surrounded by half-eaten stale pizzas, with the stench of bed sheets that haven't been washed in almost 6 weeks. At some stage he wasn't loved enough, and the result is now a guy staring at a computer screen with empty eyes, filled with malevolent thoughts, looking for an avenue for his rage and disappointment at life. It wouldn't surprise me if his room was filled with notebooks, Sirhan Sirhan style etchings on them, with "EDUCATION FORUM MUST DIE" written so hard into the yellow-tinged paper that it's almost punctured. I hope the guy doesn't have a firearms license. To me, this has some bad markers. 

 

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

2 hours ago, John Cotter said:

Meanwhile, over at the red herring forum I see that Squire Jeremy Bojczuk has resumed service as Sir Alex Wilson’s groom of the stool.

Sir Alex’s specialty is the endless excretion of ad hominem puerile namecalling – illogical re-buttal so to speak. I don’t think he has ever logically rebutted the arguments of any of the many targets of his vitriol (which include many members of this forum), or contributed anything substantive to the JFKA debate.

It’s ironic that he imputed the Dunning-Kruger syndrome to one Ed Forum member...

John,

     Alex Wilson has, certainly, misinterpreted several of my posts here on the Education Forum, including my recent reference to Ron Unz's American Pravda article on the subject of Holocaust Denial.

     Among other inaccuracies, Wilson mistakenly imagines that I am some sort of Holocaust Denier, because I referenced Ron Unz's analysis of the historiography of the Holocaust.  In fact, the historiography (as opposed to the history) of the Holocaust is a convoluted subject.  The ghastly history of the Holocaust hasn't come down to us in straightforward, unaltered form during the past 80 years.   Many historical details only gradually came to light.  Unz documents that historiographic process in great detail.

     My first exposure to Holocaust history was by word of mouth, over 60 years ago.  When I was a boy, my father mentioned a N-a-z-i concentration camp he had seen firsthand as a GI in Germany in 1945, and he told me that the starving camp survivors "had to be fed very carefully" because they were dying.  That left quite an impression on my mind.  In my adult life, I have also known Holocaust survivors, and children of Holocaust survivors.  The father of one of my medical school housemates was a survivor of Auschwitz.

     I am not a Holocaust Denier.  Far from it.

     So, my impression, after reading Alex Wilson's latest commentaries about the Education Forum this evening, is that he has a habit of making false claims about subjects that he hasn't understood in any depth.

     As examples, Wilson really doesn't seem to be familiar with Fletcher Prouty's career history and writings about the CIA and Vietnam.  Instead, he mistakenly thinks of Prouty as a loony Liberty Lobby Holocaust Denier. 

     Does Wilson believe the same about Mark Lane, based on Lane's association with Spotlight and the Liberty Lobby?

     I also have the impression that Alex Wilson has never studied or understood the scholarly scientific and forensic research about 9/11-- e.g., the analyses of David Ray Griffin and the Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth.

     Yet, ironically, Wilson claims that I, myself, am an example of the Dunning-Kruger syndrome.

     He's simply wrong.  Unlike Wilson, I'm fully aware of my ignorance about subjects that I haven't studied or understood in any detail-- including many aspects of the JFKA research.

     Dunning-Kruger is a phenomenon where people are unaware of their own ignorance.

Edited May 11, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Guest]

RFK Jr says he wishes that every American could read this book:

”How the West brought war to Ukraine.” 
By Benjamin Abelow 

 

Full Podcast Here:

(Just listening now). 

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Chris Barnard writes:

Quote

For a guy to put so much effort into his writing ...

But Sir Alex doesn't put that much effort into his writing. He doesn't spend hours each day in front of his computer, unlike some of the more prolific contributors to this forum.

There's another difference, too: he has a sense of humour. And a third difference: he treats the JFK assassination as a serious historical event, not as an excuse to promote nutty ideas of one type or another.

No doubt he will be pleased to learn that he has acquired an audience over here, although he probably knew that already.

For those casual readers who aren't aware of what the fuss is all about, here is the thread in question:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2700p25-the-only-thing-to-fear-about-inevitability-is-the-inevitable-itself-or-a-portrait-of-the-hollow-men-in-motion#42003

[John Cotter]

1 hour ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Chris Barnard writes:

But Sir Alex doesn't put that much effort into his writing. He doesn't spend hours each day in front of his computer, unlike some of the more prolific contributors to this forum.

There's another difference, too: he has a sense of humour. And a third difference: he treats the JFK assassination as a serious historical event, not as an excuse to promote nutty ideas of one type or another.

No doubt he will be pleased to learn that he has acquired an audience over here, although he probably knew that already.

For those casual readers who aren't aware of what the fuss is all about, here is the thread in question:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2700p25-the-only-thing-to-fear-about-inevitability-is-the-inevitable-itself-or-a-portrait-of-the-hollow-men-in-motion#42003

Thank you, Squire Bojczuk.

We note your being privy to Sir Alex’s privy, even to the extent of being privy to the inner motions whereby his excretions are gestated and the duration thereof.

Thou art a good and faithful servant, a most attentive groom of the stool.

Pray tell how many groats and ha’pence per annum do you receive from Sir Alex in return for your most obsequious ministrations, and how do you stand the smell?

Edited May 11, 2023 by John Cotter

[John Cotter]

PS. I've just seen that the ROKC overlord Greg Parker has seen fit to come to the defence of poor Sir Alex.

That says it all.

Edited May 11, 2023 by John Cotter

[Benjamin Cole]

It may Putin was tricked into a US intel-state bear trap in Ukraine, and he has two legs in.

How can this be good for Russia? Likely, the Russians will soon have spent a year just in Bakhmut, inflicting and receiving horrific losses. 

This is necessary? A good thing? Justified? 

Then, sending missiles into Kyiv, or turning Mariupol into rubble. This is going to benefit Russia? The Ukrainians are never going to forget what Russia did.

Ukraine is Russia's next Afghanistan, but way worse? Did Russia have exalted reasons for occupying Afghanistan? 

Wars of occupation are fantastically expensive, but usually counterproductive.  As a US taxpayer, I am an expert on the topic. 

 

[Matthew Koch]

2 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

It may Putin was tricked into a US intel-state bear trap in Ukraine, and he has two legs in.

How can this be good for Russia? Likely, the Russians will soon have spent a year just in Bakhmut, inflicting and receiving horrific losses. 

This is necessary? A good thing? Justified? 

Then, sending missiles into Kyiv, or turning Mariupol into rubble. This is going to benefit Russia? The Ukrainians are never going to forget what Russia did.

Ukraine is Russia's next Afghanistan, but way worse? Did Russia have exalted reasons for occupying Afghanistan? 

Wars of occupation are fantastically expensive, but usually counterproductive.  As a US taxpayer, I am an expert on the topic. 

 

I know you're not a fan of Cheeto Benito, but we need him back! 

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

5 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Chris Barnard writes:

But Sir Alex doesn't put that much effort into his writing. He doesn't spend hours each day in front of his computer, unlike some of the more prolific contributors to this forum.

There's another difference, too: he has a sense of humour. And a third difference: he treats the JFK assassination as a serious historical event, not as an excuse to promote nutty ideas of one type or another.

Amen, Jeremy. But maybe everyone at ROKC will finally take us here at the Education Forum more seriously now that we have unearthed the earth-shattering fact that Bob Dylan was involved in all the political assassinations of the 1960s? Or that every film and photo from Dealey Plaza has been altered?

[Guest]

8 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

But Sir Alex doesn't put that much effort into his writing. He doesn't spend hours each day in front of his computer, unlike some of the more prolific contributors to this forum.

We’ll take yours and Greg Parker’s word for it. You’re obviously known for your puritanical honesty. He certainly has the time to read this forum and others. I have no idea who Brian Doyle is; but how do you define stalking or obsession? It isn’t a healthy occupation, Jeremy. 
 

8 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

There's another difference, too: he has a sense of humour. And a third difference: he treats the JFK assassination as a serious historical event, not as an excuse to promote nutty ideas of one type or another.

Thats the part I like about him. I like to laugh and he has his moments. There are too many humourless types on forums.

Well, you say he treats the JFK assassination as a serious historical event. Yet, he is happy to besmirch it by dedicating a whole debunked section of a forum to puerile, semi-cryptic ad hominem attacks on people he doesn’t know. Any neutral reading it will assume that these are the writings of someone highly malevolent and clinically insane (not all posts, some). Doesn’t strike me as a great recruitment tool for new researchers or interested neutrals. The weird nature of it may fulfil the stereotypes that the general public have of ‘conspiracy theorists’. Some of us do let ourselves down at times, myself and yourself included when bickering. I am not claiming I have a halo over my head and taking as seriously as you say Alex is. The chastising of the Ed Forum and Sandy/James Gordon, as well as some other posters with diatribes, really detracts from ROKC. Its a bad advert for the cause you claim he cares deeply about. He may well care deeply, he may just have no perception, or self-awareness. 

8 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

No doubt he will be pleased to learn that he has acquired an audience over here, although he probably knew that already.

It’s abundantly clear that it’s attention seeking. We have you to thank for bringing it to our attention, Jeremy. I wouldn’t even know that microscopic fringe fragment of cyberspace existed if it wasn’t for you. Thank you. 
 

Your analysis doesn’t pair up with reality. 
 

 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Chris Barnard
Typo

[W. Niederhut]

5 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:

Chris Barnard writes:

But Sir Alex doesn't put that much effort into his writing. He doesn't spend hours each day in front of his computer, unlike some of the more prolific contributors to this forum.

There's another difference, too: he has a sense of humour. And a third difference: he treats the JFK assassination as a serious historical event, not as an excuse to promote nutty ideas of one type or another.

No doubt he will be pleased to learn that he has acquired an audience over here, although he probably knew that already.

For those casual readers who aren't aware of what the fuss is all about, here is the thread in question:

https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2700p25-the-only-thing-to-fear-about-inevitability-is-the-inevitable-itself-or-a-portrait-of-the-hollow-men-in-motion#42003

Jeremy,

       Reality check.

      Alex Wilson, certainly, has a sense of humor, and he is serious about history, but he also posts some things that are simply false.  He's entertaining, but he's no oracle.

      I pointed out some specific examples (above) relating to my posts here.

      His comments about James DiEugenio are also, frankly, absurd.

[Guest]

6 hours ago, John Cotter said:

PS. I've just seen that the ROKC overlord Greg Parker has seen fit to come to the defence of poor Sir Alex.

That says it all.

I am not sure if this correct but, isn’t Greg Parkers forum? I suspect he was more offended by the insignificance of ROKC being pointed out. As he is under the illusion that his septic space is the Hiram Key of the whole JFK assassination. The fact is that he is responsible for the culture. If he wants it to be a space taken seriously, then he probably needs to bin the “Debunked” section (or offending threads) and encourage more sensible posting. Of course, if he wants it to be a heap of rambling verses of ad hominem with limited traffic, then he should carry on as he is. Imagine a congressman/woman who is thinking about supporting the release of remaining documents, and he/she happens to come across that toxic space. It’s going to confirm most stereotypes about CT’s. Its not a recruitment tool, its repellant. Each to their own. 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Chris Barnard
Typo

[John Cotter]

8 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

We’ll take yours and Greg Parker’s word for it. You’re obviously known for your puritanical honesty. He certainly has the time to read this forum and others. I have no idea who Brian Doyle is; but how do you define stalking or obsession? It isn’t a healthy occupation, Jeremy. 
 

Thats the part I like about him. I like to laugh and he has his moments. There are too many humourless types on forums.

Well, you say he treats the JFK assassination as a serious historical event. Yet, he is happy to besmirch it by dedicating a whole debunked section of a forum to puerile, semi-cryptic ad hominem attacks on people he doesn’t know. Any neutral reading it will assume that these are the writings of someone highly malevolent and clinically insane (not all posts, some). Doesn’t strike me as a great recruitment tool for new researchers or interested neutrals. The weird nature of it may fulfil the stereotypes that the general public have of ‘conspiracy theorists’. Some of us do let ourselves down at times, myself and yourself included when bickering. I am not claiming I have a halo over my head and taking as seriously as you say Alex is. The chastising of the Ed Forum and Sandy/James Gordon, as well as some other posters with diatribes, really detracts from ROKC. Its a bad advert for the cause you claim he cares deeply about. He may well care deeply, he may just have no perception, or self-awareness. 

It’s abundantly clear that it’s attention seeking. We have you to thank for bringing it to our attention, Jeremy. I wouldn’t even know that microscopic fringe fragment of cyberspace existed if it wasn’t for you. Thank you. 
 

Your analysis doesn’t pair up with reality. 
 

 

Well said.

I see that Sir Alex has posted another screed, to which I’ll respond as follows.

As always in such cases, Sir Alex hoists himself on his own petard with his mealy-mouthed pseudo apology. On the one hand he’s admitted he’s at fault, and on the other he’s not man enough to apologise properly – not that I or anyone else was looking for an apology. We were merely exposing his nonsense.

He seems to think it matters to me that he says he dislikes me. Actually, I’m heartened by anyone displaying such schoolgirl silliness disliking me.

Speaking of which, Greg Parker’s scoffing at our observing the rules of this forum is ironic, given the sycophancy of Sir Alex and others towards him. There’s an element of the gang mentality about ROKC as evidenced by the need to have external enemies to constantly pillory for the sake of maintaining gang cohesion.

The core issue is that Sir Alex’s constant puerile ad hominems reflect negatively on him and on ROKC more than on his targets.  That’s unfortunate, since undoubtedly, no less than at this forum, as I have repeatedly acknowledged, there’s a lot of constructive discussion and analysis at ROKC.

As for Sir Alex’s professed superior knowledge of all things historical, he should bear in mind Socrates’ words: the wisest man is he who knows that he knows nothing. No truer words were probably never spoken, and their apparent self-negation serves paradoxically to validate them.

I would add that his (predictably) opportunistic response to my Billy Connolly reference exposes Sir Alex’s ignorance of how comedy works, as explained by exemplars such as Charlie Chaplin and John Cleese – not to mention its being unwittingly revealed in Sir Alex’s own efforts.

ROCK bashers of this forum bang on a lot about the supposed irrelevance of the political dimension of the JFKA and its consequences, while extolling their own purported forensic rectitude.

The irony of this self-righteousness is lost on them. If the JFKA was not political and is of no political consequence, why all the fuss about it? Why have a ROKC forum at all, if the JFKA was just another murder? 

Moreover, the failure of ROKC in its professed mission – to have the JFKA case reopened – is quite obviously a matter of politics. The reason the US government has refused to bring the JFKA conspirators to justice is that it is an accessory to the JFKA.

This underlines the utter stupidity of these bashers in their politically-driven rejection of Tucker Carlson’s and RFK Jr’s JFKA stance.

In the highly unlikely event of the JFKA question ever being resolved, it can only happen in the public arena, and it’s only figures of the stature of Carlson and RFK Jr in the realms of the media and politics respectively who can make it happen.

It won’t be resolved by interminable analysis and debating of minutiae in obscure internet forums.