Jump to content
The Education Forum

The original purpose of this forum: John Simkin responds


Recommended Posts

Several members have recently made the self-serving claim that this forum was set up as a place for conspiracy theorists on the JFK assassination to share info, and not as a place where CTs and LNs could argue about the basic facts.
 
John Simkin--the creator of this forum--has weighed in on this matter. 
 
 
Hi Pat,
 
I am still alive and well and still investigating political corruption. However, I am not involved with JFK research as I have enough on my hands with what is going on in the UK. I do not post on the forum and play no role in the way it is run. However, you have permission to quote this email on the forum.
 
I initially set up the forum to discuss different interpretations of the past. Over time the JFK assassination began to dominate the forum. From the very beginning I allowed people to join the forum with a wide variety of different views on the assassination. That includes those who believed in the lone-gunman theory. One example of this was J. Timothy Gratz who was one of our most regular posters. I also arranged for people like Don Bohning and Nina Burleigh to join the forum to discuss their books on the forum although they did not believe there was a conspiracy to kill JFK (see link below). Even when Bohning went on to write an article in a journal for retired CIA officers where he attempted to smear me with the claim that I was a "communist" I did not remove his membership. I am someone who believes in free speech for everyone, not just for people who agree with me.    
 
 
John   
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

 

Several members have recently made the self-serving claim that this forum was set up as a place for conspiracy theorists on the JFK assassination to share info, and not as a place where CTs and LNs could argue about the basic facts.
 
John Simkin--the creator of this forum--has weighed in on this matter. 
 
 
Hi Pat,
 
I am still alive and well and still investigating political corruption. However, I am not involved with JFK research as I have enough on my hands with what is going on in the UK. I do not post on the forum and play no role in the way it is run. However, you have permission to quote this email on the forum.
 
I initially set up the forum to discuss different interpretations of the past. Over time the JFK assassination began to dominate the forum. From the very beginning I allowed people to join the forum with a wide variety of different views on the assassination. That includes those who believed in the lone-gunman theory. One example of this was J. Timothy Gratz who was one of our most regular posters. I also arranged for people like Don Bohning and Nina Burleigh to join the forum to discuss their books on the forum although they did not believe there was a conspiracy to kill JFK (see link below). Even when Bohning went on to write an article in a journal for retired CIA officers where he attempted to smear me with the claim that I was a "communist" I did not remove his membership. I am someone who believes in free speech for everyone, not just for people who agree with me.    
 
 
John   

A thanks to John Simkin for taking the time and effort to re-state his original forum creation tenets and allowing them to be quoted and posted here.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Bear in mind ladies and gentleman that every time you violate or propose to violate the free speech of someone else, you, in potencia, you are making a rod for your own back….Who is going to decide, to whom to you award the right to decide which speech is harmful, or who is the harmful speaker, or to determine in advance what the harmful consequences are going to be that we know enough in advance to prevent? To whom would you give this job; to whom are you going to award the task of being the censor?" -Christopher Hitchens

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Simkin had it right, and so does Pat Speer. 

I understand there are truths; for example the JFKA did not happen on Nov. 23. 

Here is a truth, properly expressed; It appears to many (including me) the WC was biased, and pursued a prosecution of LHO as the sole perp of the JFKA, as opposed to an investigation, let alone presenting a robust defense counsel's arguments, cross-examinations, evidence and narratives.  

It is a truth the CIA ran Operation Mockingbird.

Do those two truths axiomatically exonerate LHO? Not really. It is possible to frame a guilty man, to enhance the evidence to get a conviction from a jury, or win public opinion. 

BTW, it is my contention Op Mock is bigger than ever, and indeed the blending of the two major parties with media and the intel-state almost makes Op Mock an unnecessary anachronism (from the perspective of the Deep State). 

It is also true there are social-media influencers financed by Tehran and Moscow.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I think Simkin had it right, and so does Pat Speer. 

 

Ben,

     This sentence is a reductio ad absurdum.

     Pat Speer explicitly disagreed (on 10/6/24) with John Simkin's 2005 claim that John McAdams was a CIA propagandist.

     See my earlier thread on the subject-- which I initiated in response to Pat's claims this weekend that Education Forum members (and moderators) should not raise the issue of CIA-sponsored internet propaganda in relation to WCR/LN disinformation.

     Pat has also insisted, inaccurately, that the WCR/LN theory has not been debunked by multiple contrary facts.

     It's unclear why Pat started this duplicate thread on the subject, which we have been discussing on my original John Simkin thread.

Edited by W. Niederhut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...