MAINSTREAM vs MAGA COOLER - For those who want to challenge the other side.

[Sandy Larsen]

Welcome to the Mainstream vs MAGA Water Cooler!

 

[Mark Knight]

I like the "water cooler" concept.

Now, may "cooler heads" prevail here.

[Michael Griffith]

15 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

As the 60th anniversary approaches, and on the heels of the recent revelation that Harlan Crow, the son of Trammell Crow —  developer of the Dallas Trade Mart which was President Kennedy's final destination on the fateful day — has been the benefactor of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and wife Ginni who participated in the attempt to overthrow our government in 2020,

This is unfortunate, baseless rhetoric. There was no "attempt to overthrow our government in 2020." There was an attempt to get certain courts and certain state legislatures to deal with clear evidence of election fraud and undeniable violations of election law. In the three years since the 2020 election, significant new evidence of election fraud has been documented. 

I've compiled much of this evidence on my website on the 2020 election. A link to it can be found on my Real Issues Home Page:

Real Issues Home Page (google.com)

It is noteworthy that some Democrats still claim that the 2000 election was "stolen" because the U.S. Supreme Court shut down Gore's final attempt at a cherry-picking recount in Florida that he believed would favor him. It wasn't Bush's fault that so many Gore voters in Florida could not figure out how to mark their ballots correctly.

Many Democrats still claim that the Russians rigged the 2016 election to enable Trump to win, even though this myth has been abjectly debunked, and even though we now know that this tale was hatched by Hillary's campaign and certain DNC personnel. 

 

[W. Niederhut]

3 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

We are worlds apart, and that is fine, in our perception of the R-word-gate Hoax. Forums are for varying viewpoints. You should be more respectful of people who have different conclusions than you. 

I did respond on Kilimnik-Manafort, but that thread had been banished. 

There was interference in the 2016 elections, but you may have the wrong capital city in mind. 

But more important: Keep eyes peeled for R-word-gating of RFK Jr., the lone candidate who will open up the JFK Records.

 

       It's not merely a matter of our having differing opinions about Russia-gate, Ben.

       It's about our having differing knowledge of the facts in the case.  Your opinion that Russia-gate is a hoax isn't based on the facts.

      As Daniel Patrick Moynihan famously said, "You're entitled to your own opinions but not your own facts." 

      I described this more general problem in American society and discourse earlier today.

      People in the MAGA-verse are living in a world of "alternate facts."

    

 

Edited May 19, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[David Andrews]

The 56 Years thread became our Decameron, that collection of tales told among people of a renaissance, sheltering from plague.  Tales of love they were, from the erotic to the tragic.

Like Boccaccio's Decameron, it should be taught in the higher academies:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decameron#/media/File:Waterhouse_decameron.jpg

 

 

Edited May 19, 2023 by David Andrews

[Kirk Gallaway]

Ok this is my opinion.

 

We know moderating this forum was never an easy job. But the actions of one immature person were allowed to get completely out of hand, and one rotten apple spoiled the whole bunch for everyone. Things were always going to be controversial, but they were fine 9 months ago. In the end, everyone let a destabilizing force get way out of hand.  But in fairness, These excesses were reported months in advance and little  guidance was taken, but it was pretty apparent, that the little guidance given  was just being dismissed with a casual  apology, yet none of the actions were curtailed. You can't teach sincerity. This should have been noted and cause for greater  concern., but as it turns out little by little freedom of expression was abridged  by a group who were just snickering among each other at their newfound power to cancel others speech, which just exacerbated the hostility, to the point that the entire thread has been dismantled and that was a terrible mistake in that the mods  didn't accurately pinpoint the causes, and let the excesses continue and by so doing  allowed a small potentially innocuous whimper undermine the civil discourse. IMO

 

Though I don't necessarily agree with Cotter in that I don't see there's that much value in having the specific 56 year thread back. I will agree with Cotter, some of us for years had put effort in on that thread. Then in the last 6 months of the thread, the mod game became that  the thread became  so toxic at the end , it was easier to just dismiss it as a "toxic thread". But it's become similar to the Republicans knowing the contents of the Hunter Biden laptop and refusing to release it, to conjure up fear of what might be in it, but no one here should have any fear now of just having the thread open as a repository of the efforts many here have made.

 

Why are you banning books or in this case threads? (Particularly, when there are so many threads here that haven't been contributed to in years?) As if the evil contained on those records will wreak it's insidious effects on the forum again? Such an attitude might be understood if the mods were completely  out of touch with the more productive educative elements that were there, but they  themselves contributed to the thread, which was a good thing! I just don't understand your thinking in closing that thread for what is it now, 4 months?

 

After all, as I've said, it's a pretty unique 2020-2023 time capsule among political chat forums in that all the people contributing to it also believed there was a conspiracy to kill JFK.

 

 

 

That's false, Lance hardly posted on the 56 year thread at all,

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited May 19, 2023 by Kirk Gallaway

[Michael Griffith]

15 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:

Sandy,

 

Yesterday you threatened to move one of Ben's posts to the political forum because you thought it was just a pretext for Ben to offer his "political musings".  I disagreed,  a couple of other folks did too, and that thread is still there.

 

Then today you moved the thread on Russiagate and the Durham report, without notice or discussion, to the political forum.  You haven't responded to any of the points I made yesterday, which also apply to your actions today.

 

A discussion of this is clearly necessary.

 

A separate "political" forum is clearly intended to include discussions of politics unrelated to the JFKA.  Problem is, the JFKA murder was a quintessential political murder, described as such by some writers on the topic.  It changed the result of the 1960 election and the whole trajectory of politics since, as I said yesterday.   

 

Bobby Jr is taking up where his father left off in '68. Not only about the JFKA itself, but the whole perpetual war mongering institution that has taken hold since the murder.  To see the magnitude of the change you need only reread JFK's '63 speech at AU laying out his clear vision for peace, and compare it to the political culture today.

 

By stoking fear and loathing of Russia, Russiagate has been a productive tool for the war mongers that populate both political parties and  that Kennedy wanted so much to blunt.  The Durham Report helps expose the connivance of political and security state leaders in furthering this atmosphere.  It will surely be of use to Jr as he battles those forces in his campaign.

 

Discussion of the JFKA cannot be confined to the murder itself, but must explore the aftermath, if it is to have any importance to life today.  The JFKA is not just a puzzle to be solved.  What is to be done with what we find out?  Nor can it be separated from politics, however you want to define that term.

 

Please reconsider what you have been doing.  This forum needs to be place that allows a full discussion of the JFKA and its ramifications.  

I agree that the Durham report is important, devastating, and damning. However, in case you don't already know, this forum is dominated by liberals, many of whom are extremely liberal. The liberal MSM is already in full denial mode about the report's devastating disclosures regarding government misconduct toward Trump and the fabrication of the Russia-collusion myth. 

All this being said, I must confess that I don't see how the Durham report relates to the JFKA in any way. 

Yes, it's true that the moderators allow people to repeatedly peddle the 9/11 Truther garbage, to engage in shameful bashing of Israel, to champion the anti-Semitic fraud Fletcher Prouty, and to float such bizarre theories as the idea that the Secret Team murdered John Lennon, but, hey, it's their forum and they are free to do what they want. 

Edited May 19, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[W. Niederhut]

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

I agree that the Durham report is important, devastating, and damning. However, in case you don't already know, this forum is dominated by liberals, many of whom are extremely liberal. The liberal MSM is already in full denial mode about the report's devastating disclosures regarding government misconduct toward Trump and the fabrication of the Russia-collusion myth. 

All this being said, I must confess that I don't see how the Durham report relates to the JFKA in any way. 

Yes, it's true that the moderators allow people to repeatedly peddle the 9/11 Truther garbage, to engage in shameful bashing of Israel, to champion the anti-Semitic fraud Fletcher Prouty, and to float such bizarre theories as the idea that the Secret Team murdered John Lennon, but, hey, it's their forum and they are free to do what they want. 

The Durham Report was damning?!  😂 🤣

LOL.  Thanks, Michael.   I needed a good laugh this morning.

You really know how to sling the bovine excrement around here-- about Prouty, JFK and Vietnam, 9/11, etc.

But your excrement never manages to stick to the wall here on the Education Forum.

You need to find a less scholarly forum for your redundant disinformation.

 

[Roger Odisio]

5 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Ok this is my opinion.

 

We know moderating this forum was never an easy job. But the actions of one immature person were allowed to get completely out of hand, and one rotten apple spoiled the whole bunch for everyone. Things were always going to be controversial, but they were fine 9 months ago. In the end, everyone let a destabilizing force get way out of hand.  But in fairness, These excesses were reported months in advance and little  guidance was taken, but it was pretty apparent, that the little guidance given  was just being dismissed with a casual  apology, yet none of the actions were curtailed. You can't teach sincerity. This should have been noted and cause for greater  concern., but as it turns out little by little freedom of expression was abridged  by a group who were just snickering among each other at their newfound power to cancel others speech, which just exacerbated the hostility, to the point that the entire thread has been dismantled and that was a terrible mistake in that the mods  didn't accurately pinpoint the causes, and let the excesses continue and by so doing  allowed a small potentially innocuous whimper undermine the civil discourse. IMO

 

Though I don't necessarily agree with Cotter in that I don't see there's that much value in having the specific 56 year thread back. I will agree with Cotter, some of us for years had put effort in on that thread. Then in the last 6 months of the thread, the mod game became that  the thread became  so toxic at the end , it was easier to just dismiss it as a "toxic thread". But it's become similar to the Republicans knowing the contents of the Hunter Biden laptop and refusing to release it, to conjure up fear of what might be in it, but no one here should have any fear now of just having the thread open as a repository of the efforts many here have made.

 

Why are you banning books or in this case threads? (Particularly, when there are so many threads here that haven't been contributed to in years?) As if the evil contained on those records will wreak it's insidious effects on the forum again? Such an attitude might be understood if the mods were completely  out of touch with the more productive educative elements that were there, but they  themselves contributed to the thread, which was a good thing! I just don't understand your thinking in closing that thread for what is it now, 4 months?

 

After all, as I've said, it's a pretty unique 2020-2023 time capsule among political chat forums in that all the people contributing to it also believed there was a conspiracy to kill JFK.

 

 

 

That's false, Lance hardly posted on the 56 year thread at all,

 

 

 

 

 

 

SL:  "Discussing today's politics will not help in solving the JFK assassination. They are off-topic for the JFK assassination forum." 

 

RO:  This is false.  As I said, to which you offered no response, the JFKA was a profoundly political act designed to replace Kennedy with Johnson, to overturn the results of the 1960 election.  Johnson later said to McNamara that he never agreed with Kennedy's plan to pull out of Vietnam but kept his mouth shut.  The murderers knew this.  Any solving of the JFKA must be done in the context of its effect on US politics.

 

The JFKA cannot be fully understood as an isolated event.  It began the process of successfully eliminating opposition to the war machine security state by more political murders (RFK, MLK, etc.) as well as by other means.  Who are the antiwar politicians today?

 

Isn't it obvious that understanding where we are today helps us understand how we got here?   By tracing backwards we can see more clearly the events of the 60s.

 

If you "solved" the JFKA today what would you do with that information, other than for redress to try to heal the wounds the murder has caused?  The JFKA is not just some puzzle it is interesting to tinker with.  

 

RFK Jr has taken up where his father left off.  The forces he faces are similar to those his father faced, only more powerful today.  Stirring up fear and loathing of Russia and China is a similar playbook used by McCarthy in the 50s, that his father and uncle took on when they came into power.  Again, watch JFK's commencement speech in '63 at AU where he explained the relationship he was trying to establish with the Soviet Union.  What politician is saying anything remotely similar today?

 

Many here are hoping Jr breaks thru in such a way that helps the release of the JFKA records and can open a real investigation into the political murders of the 60s. It is necessary to talk about those forces he faces in the context of his political campaign.

 

SL: "Forum members were calling each other names, John. Moderation couldn't keep pace. Segregating the political discussions dramatically reduced the name calling.

 

How would you have solved the problem?"

 

RO:  Name calling was the problem and you solved it by segregating political discussions?  Where is the link between these two things?  Did the name calling exist only, or even primarily, in discussions you labeled "political"? 

 

Perhaps you should consider establishing clear standards for the name calling you find intolerable.  With input from the members to see if there is a consensus.  I should tell you name calling doesn't much bother me; it is easily ignored.  Then enforce the standard if you can find a clear one.  IOW, deal with the problem directly, not as you have done, 

[John Cotter]

16 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Forum members were calling each other names, John. Moderation couldn't keep pace. Segregating the political discussions dramatically reduced the name calling.

How would you have solved the problem?

 

Sandy,

I would have kept the 56 year thread and closely moderated it. If the name calling were dealt with firmly it might have been stamped out or at least reduced.

[Benjamin Cole]

10 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:

SL:  "Discussing today's politics will not help in solving the JFK assassination. They are off-topic for the JFK assassination forum." 

 

RO:  This is false.  As I said, to which you offered no response, the JFKA was a profoundly political act designed to replace Kennedy with Johnson, to overturn the results of the 1960 election.  Johnson later said to McNamara that he never agreed with Kennedy's plan to pull out of Vietnam but kept his mouth shut.  The murderers knew this.  Any solving of the JFKA must be done in the context of its effect on US politics.

 

The JFKA cannot be fully understood as an isolated event.  It began the process of successfully eliminating opposition to the war machine security state by more political murders (RFK, MLK, etc.) as well as by other means.  Who are the antiwar politicians today?

 

Isn't it obvious that understanding where we are today helps us understand how we got here?   By tracing backwards we can see more clearly the events of the 60s.

 

If you "solved" the JFKA today what would you do with that information, other than for redress to try to heal the wounds the murder has caused?  The JFKA is not just some puzzle it is interesting to tinker with.  

 

RFK Jr has taken up where his father left off.  The forces he faces are similar to those his father faced, only more powerful today.  Stirring up fear and loathing of Russia and China is a similar playbook used by McCarthy in the 50s, that his father and uncle took on when they came into power.  Again, watch JFK's commencement speech in '63 at AU where he explained the relationship he was trying to establish with the Soviet Union.  What politician is saying anything remotely similar today?

 

Many here are hoping Jr breaks thru in such a way that helps the release of the JFKA records and can open a real investigation into the political murders of the 60s. It is necessary to talk about those forces he faces in the context of his political campaign.

 

SL: "Forum members were calling each other names, John. Moderation couldn't keep pace. Segregating the political discussions dramatically reduced the name calling.

 

How would you have solved the problem?"

 

RO:  Name calling was the problem and you solved it by segregating political discussions?  Where is the link between these two things?  Did the name calling exist only, or even primarily, in discussions you labeled "political"? 

 

Perhaps you should consider establishing clear standards for the name calling you find intolerable.  With input from the members to see if there is a consensus.  I should tell you name calling doesn't much bother me; it is easily ignored.  Then enforce the standard if you can find a clear one.  IOW, deal with the problem directly, not as you have done, 

Roger Odisio--

You may have a point, in that the there are links of a sort between the JFKA and the R-word-gating of Trump, and many events in-between. 

What happens to any political figure or candidate deeply out-of-favor with the DC establishment-intel-state-media? 

In the EF-JFKA, there have been worthy extended discussions of how Vietnam emerged out of the JFKA. Those conversations are not banned. Indeed, how the whole globalist empire has been maintained, ever since JFK was violently deposed. Those are worthy conversations and have taken place in this forum. 

Trump was and is a divisive figure, oddly disagreeable for a pol (who usually affect anodyne exteriors...see former veep Pence or Pete Buttigieg for examples).

But Trump was given to non-interventionism, stronger border controls, and even economic decoupling from China---all strong non-globalist positions. Trump openly dismissed the CIA (a CIA which tried to manipulate the 2016 and 2020 elections). Who was the last US president to dismiss the CIA? 

Trump had the temerity to ignore the intel-state and tried to get a peace deal with North Korea. Unwise? Maybe...but since when are peace missions a bad idea? Trump discussed withdrawal of US forces from South Korea. Given that SK is vastly superior to NK in all regards, and the Korean war ended 60 years ago...was that such a bad idea? 

Trump went to Saudi Arabia and the media chortled how garish it all was. Biden went to Saudi Arabia and fist-bumped with MbS--after MbS had recently had US journalist Khashoggi murdered. Crickets (to this day, btw). 

Does NATO pull its weight, then and now? Was Trump right? 

Does anyone doubt the CIA had it in for Trump? And acted on that animus? 

The Durham Report reveals the true picture of Trump and the Deep State, and that hardly makes Trump into a saint. I regard Trump's personality and character as deficient for any management position. 

But Trump's awful personality is not why Trump was gutted.

And RFK Jr.'s personality may be 100 times more pleasant than Trump's---and RFK Jr. will get gutted too. 

Given that RFK Jr. is the only hope we have of ever seeing the JFK Records...I think the Durham Report is instructive: An outline of what will happen to RFK Jr. 

PS--Nothing in this comment should be taken as support for the GOP, or the D-Party for the matter. 

 

Edited May 20, 2023 by Benjamin Cole

[Mark Knight]

It's time someone mentioned an "inconvenient" truth, at least for some EF members.

The Political Discussions forum isn't a recent addition to the EF. It was a part of the EF that John Simkin and Andy [I can never remember his last name] set up when the EF was established.

And moderators moving threads to their appropriate topics isn't a new concept, either. Neither is merging or splitting discussion threads. It's just that, when the ownership of the EF changed, the new administrators and mods weren't immediately familiar with using the mechanisms that are at their disposal. As time has gone on, the admins and mods have begun using these tools, as the admins and mods who came before had done. But there was a period of several years in which the new admins and mods mostly tried not to "rock the boat."

Currently, there is a point system in play before a member loses their posting privileges. And points also expire. Admins and mods are trying to take an imperfect system and improve it.

BUT...it helps if EF members would recognize that the EF is a huge site. While the JFK Assassination Discussion Forum gets the most activity, it is FAR from the ONLY area of the EF. Check out the breadth and width of The Education Forum here: Forums - The Education Forum (ipbhost.com)

 

[Benjamin Cole]

3 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

It's time someone mentioned an "inconvenient" truth, at least for some EF members.

The Political Discussions forum isn't a recent addition to the EF. It was a part of the EF that John Simkin and Andy [I can never remember his last name] set up when the EF was established.

And moderators moving threads to their appropriate topics isn't a new concept, either. Neither is merging or splitting discussion threads. It's just that, when the ownership of the EF changed, the new administrators and mods weren't immediately familiar with using the mechanisms that are at their disposal. As time has gone on, the admins and mods have begun using these tools, as the admins and mods who came before had done. But there was a period of several years in which the new admins and mods mostly tried not to "rock the boat."

Currently, there is a point system in play before a member loses their posting privileges. And points also expire. Admins and mods are trying to take an imperfect system and improve it.

BUT...it helps if EF members would recognize that the EF is a huge site. While the JFK Assassination Discussion Forum gets the most activity, it is FAR from the ONLY area of the EF. Check out the breadth and width of The Education Forum here: Forums - The Education Forum (ipbhost.com)

 

BTW, I think the Hudson autos were really, really cool. Jay Leno has a segment on one. 

[Mark Knight]

1 minute ago, Benjamin Cole said:

BTW, I think the Hudson autos were really, really cool. Jay Leno has a segment on one. 

Relevance to the topic?

[Benjamin Cole]

9 minutes ago, Mark Knight said:

Relevance to the topic?

Your bio...says you like old Hudson autos. 

Just expressing how simpatico we are.