Don’t throw LHO out with bathwater

[Cory Santos]

If a subject, such as a senator stating the assassination was not a conspiracy, turns into a political argument, might I suggest there are other proper remedial measures rather than removing the relevant subject post.   This seems to serve no purpose but to punish relevant posts due to a few comments.   Moderate but don’t obliterate.  This was extremely important to show the changing perception of what used to be a subject only discussed in the enquirer.   

Edited December 20, 2023 by Cory Santos

[Cliff Varnell]

3 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

If a subject, such as a senator stating the assassination was not a conspiracy, turns into a political argument, might I suggest there are other proper remedial measures rather than removing the relevant subject post.   This seems to serve no purpose but to punish relevant posts due to a few comments.   Moderate but don’t obliterate.  This was extremely important to show the changing perception of what used to be a subject only discussed in the enquirer.   

I don’t have a problem with the removal of my posts from the Ron Johnson thread.

If y’all can’t see the ulterior motive of a traitor suddenly embracing Talbot and Douglass, so be it.

 

 

[Benjamin Cole]

CS-

When a US Senator says he has read important books on the JFKA, and that he gives those books credence, that is a legitimate topic for the EF-JFKA. 

There was a time when anyone in the JFKA research community was labeled a communist sympathizer, or leftie, with ulterior motives. 

Mental dwarfism is not new....

 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

CS-

When a US Senator says he has read important books on the JFKA, and that he gives those books credence, that is a legitimate topic for the EF-JFKA. 

Absolutely.  Cory should start a new thread and I’ll ridicule the fish taking the bait on the moved thread.  I won’t post at all on the new thread.

Win-win!

[Sandy Larsen]

Cory,

Would you please restart that thread? I tried putting it back where it was. But with five pages of political debate to remove, I had technical difficulties restoring it. Specifically, I couldn't restore your OP, and so I hand copied that into the second post, the one written by Ben.

If you do restart it, I will remove the mangled one I restored. BTW, it's okay to give it the same title as the first one.

P.S. We moderators don't have the time to keep all threads "clean."

 

[Cory Santos]

Ok I will tomorrow.   I’m up late taking a break and back to work now.  Thanks.   

[W. Niederhut]

16 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I don’t have a problem with the removal of my posts from the Ron Johnson thread.

If y’all can’t see the ulterior motive of a traitor suddenly embracing Talbot and Douglass, so be it.

 

 

Cliff,

     You're spot on about RoJo-the-J6-False-Elector-Clown. 

     But it's pointless to argue with a guy who has repeatedly insisted that Trump's J6 mob attack on the U.S. Congress was a harmless "scrum."

[Cory Santos]

Can we please keep this about JFK?

[W. Niederhut]

2 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Can we please keep this about JFK?

Cory,

      What do you make of the fact that the few American politicians and talking heads (e.g., RFK, Jr., RoJo, and Tucker Carlson) who have spoken up about the CIA and the JFK assassination have also either directly participated in Trump's Stop-the-Steal scam, or remained completely silent about it (in RFK, Jr.'s case?)

       Serious question.

       My impression is that RFK, Jr. has a genuine, longstanding interest in making the public aware of the truth about the JFKA, while Republican partisans like Tucker and RoJo are mainly using the JFKA as a pretext for undermining public support for the Democratic Party.

       Speaking of which, whatever happened to Larry Schnapps efforts to get Congressional Republicans involved in releasing the JFK records?

[Sandy Larsen]

I think that both sides make good arguments. We have a current senator who is acknowledging the JFK conspiracy... unfortunately he may be using it for political reasons.

What I've decided to do is to allow both sides to post their thoughts on the main forum, but they must do so on opposing threads.

Senator Ron Johnson says there is no way it wasn’t a conspiracy.

Senator Ron Johnson uses JFK conspiracy for political purposes.

I request that the opposing thread be created and named by William Niederhut. The above name is just an example.

I request that Cory Santos recreate his thread. Further, I suggest that he consider renaming it because the double negative causes ambiguity if read with a slight pause in the wrong place. Specifically this: Senator says no way, it wasn’t a conspiracy. (See how that reversed the meaning?)

I will allow members to link to a post in the opposing thread in order to respond to it. But whatever is posted, it must be regarding the senator's acknowledgement of the conspiracy, and reasons for discounting  or being suspicious of it.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

Once the two threads are created, I will lock Cory's old thread. Members are free to copy material from the old thread to use in the new, replacement thread.

 

[W. Niederhut]

26 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Once the two threads are created, I will lock Cory's old thread. Members are free to copy material from the old thread to use in the new, replacement thread.

 

Sandy,

      When it comes to cognitive styles, some people are "lumpers," and some are "splitters."

      Your pacific intentions are admirable-- preventing conflicts by splitting dissenters into separate threads-- but I have always been more of a synthesizer-- a "lumper"

      The most productive discussions I have ever had-- going back to college days in the 70s-- are those in which worlds collide, and some sort of Hegelian synthesis emerges from conflicting viewpoints, a thesis and an antithesis.  Conflict doesn't bother me.

      Nietzsche once said that he had learned far more from his intellectual adversaries than from his friends.

      Of course, synthesis can only happen in situations where people in a discussion are intellectually honest, and open to learning about facts and theories that challenge their paradigms-- rather than doggedly repeating their fixed beliefs.

      As for the cases of RoJo and Tucker Carlson, we're looking at a large can of MAGA worms that holds little interest for me.  I, frankly, despise both men.

     But, as I said here when Tucker first went public with his claims about the CIA and the JFKA, "Never look a gift horse in the mouth."  Any public figure accusing the CIA of killing JFK is a gift.

    So, the good news is that a U.S. Senator has just accused the CIA of killing JFK.  The bad news is that it's RoJo.

    I have merely asked the question, "Why RoJo?"  I have a hypothesis, but little data other than what I know about RoJo's sordid political career.

      

Edited December 22, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Cory Santos]

I fail to see how publicly blaming a U.S. intelligence agency for the assassination helps one’s political motives.   On the contrary, I think it hurts a persons reputation.   I have not taken a poll but most Republicans I know won’t accept that the assassination or 911 or UFOs  or fill in the blanks are the result of a conspiracy.  When many of them realize I represented the Lear family, commonly their eyes widen.   Obviously the Lears are not Democrats so there are exceptions.   I think it would be a strange move to gain tv time or votes by going conspiracy happy.   Is this the Senator’s plan?   I have no clue as I do not know him.  So you take them at their word until you can prove otherwise.   

[Sandy Larsen]

I've decided not to do anything with these threads as there appears to be no good solution and I've already spent too much time on this.

If the posts remain mostly about Ron Johnson's acknowledgement of the JFKA conspiracy -- even with some posts claiming political motivation -- I will leave the thread on the main board. But if it wanders off into a protracted political debate, I will move it to Political Discussions.

To those who want the thread to remain here, I suggest that you not reply to any purely political posts from those who don't care.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

3 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

I fail to see how publicly blaming a U.S. intelligence agency for the assassination helps one’s political motives.  

It will be helpful when Dictator Don fires every career CIA official and replaces them with Trump sycophants.

The insurrection is ongoing.  Ron Johnson is on board with treason.