Retraction and Apology

[Robin Unger]

Andy.

I read your comment just as i was taking a mouthfull of coffee.

Now i am wearing it. LOL

[Terry Mauro]

In the past I made some references to Tim Gratz.

I disavow all of them and apologize to Mr. Gratz.

He is a scholar and a gentleman and I meant him no harm.

This will be my final posting in the forum.

Shanet Clark.

But Robert, that thread was from July 2005? Where did he post that he's leaving, in February 2006? Am I missing something here?

It is of course this incident that began my conflict with Tim Gratz.

*******************************************************

"It is of course this incident that began my conflict with Tim Gratz."

But, I still don't understand why this thread was resurrected? I was under the impression that Shanet was still posting on the forum, as of February 2006.

[Pat Speer]

Shanet eventually resurfaced but never had the same energy. I think it's been awhile since he's posted anything. Young Nic Martin is another who cut back her visits after crossing swords with Mr. Gratz. The irony for me is that I rarely have a problem with Tim. He's wrong more often than most. But I appreciate many of his statements in a devil's advocate kind of way.

The main thing that bothered me about the Shanet incident was Tim's threats of taking legal action. To me threatening legal action is WAY DOWN the list when it comes to the right ways to handle a conflict. Lawyers have NO interest in truth or justice, from my perspective. Their interest is in the exercise of power, in getting their way. It's what they are paid to do and the reason why so many of them end up in politics. It's ironic, then, that so many lawyers end up as Judges, as their professions are at cross-purposes. I mean, breast augmentation specialists don't become trauma center operators, do they?

When you read the memoirs of Earl Warren, the last few statements become clear. Warren, as a former prosecutor, and as a friend of the Kennedy family, could not step outside himself and serve as Oswald's defense attorney, which was HIS obligation. If he'd had specialized training, beyond his attending law school and learning to tell a strong case from a weak case, he would have better served the country. IMO.

[Robert Howard]

I didn't mean to stir up anything, I just didn't remember seeing any posts by Shanet in quite a while, and I always liked him. Geez

[Tim Carroll]

Shanet Clark has made 75 posts since acknowledging that it was "wrong" to state that Tim Gratz was a part of the manipulation of Arthur Bremer. Shanet is not a weak sister who needs his cause championed; he's an honorable gentleman who took responsibility for himself and moved on. Resurrecting his apology/departure in order to advance a vendetta against Tim Gratz demeans Shanet as well as Tim.

T.C.

[Terry Mauro]

Shanet Clark has made 75 posts since acknowledging that it was "wrong" to state that Tim Gratz was a part of the manipulation of Arthur Bremer. Shanet is not a weak sister who needs his cause championed; he's an honorable gentleman who took responsibility for himself and moved on. Resurrecting his apology/departure in order to advance a vendetta against Tim Gratz demeans Shanet as well as Tim.

T.C.

**************************************************************

"Resurrecting his apology/departure in order to advance a vendetta against Tim Gratz demeans Shanet as well as Tim.

T.C."

Exactly. Because weren't we all just on the Cheney post yesterday? You, me, T.G., Dawn, and Stephen? So, unless I'm back-peddling dangerously close to the Twilight Zone, I could've sworn we were all yukking it up about Cheney over on that recent thread.

I didn't mean to stir up anything, I just didn't remember seeing any posts by Shanet in quite a while, and I always liked him. Geez

**************************************************

"I just didn't remember seeing any posts by Shanet in quite a while, and I always liked him. Geez"

And, he posted right up behind you and T.C., Mr. Howard.

Shanet Clark Yesterday, 03:03 AM Post #15

Super Member

Group: Members

Posts: 1220

Joined: 13-October 04

From: Atlanta, Dekalb Co., Georgia, USA

Member No.: 1708

Cheney admits to "one beer"......... Tim Carroll is right,

this looks like a classic juvenile cover up.......

--------------------

Biography: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1900

[Robert Howard]

Shanet Clark has made 75 posts since acknowledging that it was "wrong" to state that Tim Gratz was a part of the manipulation of Arthur Bremer. Shanet is not a weak sister who needs his cause championed; he's an honorable gentleman who took responsibility for himself and moved on. Resurrecting his apology/departure in order to advance a vendetta against Tim Gratz demeans Shanet as well as Tim.

T.C.

**************************************************************

"Resurrecting his apology/departure in order to advance a vendetta against Tim Gratz demeans Shanet as well as Tim.

T.C."

Exactly. Because weren't we all just on the Cheney post yesterday? You, me, T.G., Dawn, and Stephen? So, unless I'm back-peddling dangerously close to the Twilight Zone, I could've sworn we were all yukking it up about Cheney over on that recent thread.

I didn't mean to stir up anything, I just didn't remember seeing any posts by Shanet in quite a while, and I always liked him. Geez

**************************************************

"I just didn't remember seeing any posts by Shanet in quite a while, and I always liked him. Geez"

And, he posted right up behind you and T.C., Mr. Howard.

Shanet Clark Yesterday, 03:03 AM Post #15

Super Member

Group: Members

Posts: 1220

Joined: 13-October 04

From: Atlanta, Dekalb Co., Georgia, USA

Member No.: 1708

Cheney admits to "one beer"......... Tim Carroll is right,

this looks like a classic juvenile cover up.......

--------------------

Biography: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=1900

Terry, I would have thought someone your age would have something better to do than to give me grief that I didn't know Shanet had posted to the Forum lately. I would apologize, but frankly I think youve made this into a real event, which I think is pathetic. But I do apologize if anyone has suffered through the trauma of the resurrected post.

Edited February 18, 2006 by Robert Howard

[Tim Carroll]

Terry, I would have thought someone your age would have something better to do than to give me grief that I didn't know Shanet had posted to the Forum lately. I would apologize, but frankly I think youve made this into a real event, which I think is pathetic. But I do apologize if anyone has suffered through the trauma of the resurrected post.

Talk about pathetic, here's Robert bringing back a thread from last summer to continue to prosecute the Shanet Clark brouhaha, caring ever so much about Mr. Clark while at the same time demonstrating overtly that he hasn't just missed that "Shanet had posted to the Forum lately," but has missed Shanet's numerous posts generally. It's a shame that Robert further needed to turn this so-called "real event" of his own making into an opportunity to add even more insult to injury, this time targeted at Terry Mauro.

T.C.

[Robert Howard]

Terry, I would have thought someone your age would have something better to do than to give me grief that I didn't know Shanet had posted to the Forum lately. I would apologize, but frankly I think youve made this into a real event, which I think is pathetic. But I do apologize if anyone has suffered through the trauma of the resurrected post.

Talk about pathetic, here's Robert bringing back a thread from last summer to continue to prosecute the Shanet Clark brouhaha, caring ever so much about Mr. Clark while at the same time demonstrating overtly that he hasn't just missed that "Shanet had posted to the Forum lately," but has missed Shanet's numerous posts generally. It's a shame that Robert further needed to turn this so-called "real event" of his own making into an opportunity to add even more insult to injury, this time targeted at Terry Mauro.

T.C.

Yeah, well if that dribble you just wrote is your reality then you are a sick SOB, clown.

First, you are putting words in my mouth and presuming to divine my intentions in the process. If you powers of comprehension were better, you might notice that I already stated why I added to this post, and it was not to 'prosecute the Shanet Clark brouhaha' that I was not even aware of in the first place.

Second, Terry makes an insulting remark about my not noticing that Shanet had posted over the last few months, I defend myself, and you start in on me. Have you ever made a mistake? Would you like it if somebody started attacking you over it? Hopefully you would not like it, and neither do I.

I would add that this xxxx really galls me, I mean if you have personal problems, don't take it out on me, go kick your dog. If everybody is in a f****** uproar over adding to this thread. The solution is simple. Stop posting!

[Terry Mauro]

Terry, I would have thought someone your age would have something better to do than to give me grief that I didn't know Shanet had posted to the Forum lately. I would apologize, but frankly I think youve made this into a real event, which I think is pathetic. But I do apologize if anyone has suffered through the trauma of the resurrected post.

Talk about pathetic, here's Robert bringing back a thread from last summer to continue to prosecute the Shanet Clark brouhaha, caring ever so much about Mr. Clark while at the same time demonstrating overtly that he hasn't just missed that "Shanet had posted to the Forum lately," but has missed Shanet's numerous posts generally. It's a shame that Robert further needed to turn this so-called "real event" of his own making into an opportunity to add even more insult to injury, this time targeted at Terry Mauro.

T.C.

Yeah, well if that dribble you just wrote is your reality then you are a sick SOB, clown.

First, you are putting words in my mouth and presuming to divine my intentions in the process. If you powers of comprehension were better, you might notice that I already stated why I added to this post, and it was not to 'prosecute the Shanet Clark brouhaha' that I was not even aware of in the first place.

Second, Terry makes an insulting remark about my not noticing that Shanet had posted over the last few months, I defend myself, and you start in on me. Have you ever made a mistake? Would you like it if somebody started attacking you over it? Hopefully you would not like it, and neither do I.

I would add that this xxxx really galls me, I mean if you have personal problems, don't take it out on me, go kick your dog. If everybody is in a f****** uproar over adding to this thread. The solution is simple. Stop posting!

*****************************************************

"But I do apologize if anyone has suffered through the trauma of the resurrected post."

Then, maybe I should apologize for not understanding your intentions in the first place, R.H.

But then again, it's been brought to my attention by a few of my friends, that my support of Tim Gratz is inappropriate, to say the least. It's a shame since apparently my current outside studies have not afforded me the time I normally used to have, to peruse the forum in the depth I had been accustomed to in the past. And, I suppose this led me to assume that we were all on par with one another on the LBJ/Cheney thread, which I picked up on, a couple of days back. Therefore, shame on me to ever become so naive as to expect any of us to ever be able to get along, see eye-to-eye, nor be able to work together in any form or assemblance of cohesiveness. In the future, I'll remember to keep my opinions to myself, and lose any pollyanna hopes of learning via comparative/diversive analysis.

Thank you.

Edited February 18, 2006 by Terry Mauro

[Dawn Meredith]

Shanet Clark has made 75 posts since acknowledging that it was "wrong" to state that Tim Gratz was a part of the manipulation of Arthur Bremer. Shanet is not a weak sister who needs his cause championed; he's an honorable gentleman who took responsibility for himself and moved on. Resurrecting his apology/departure in order to advance a vendetta against Tim Gratz demeans Shanet as well as Tim.

T.C.

Interesting that TC would go to the trouble of COUNTING the number of posts

Shanet has made since being threatened of legal action by TG. He may have

posted a few times since last July when this occurred, but he has largely disappeared.

His "this will be my last post" was clearly a response to the threat that was made against

him.

Gratz can be a real bully if you don't happen to agree with his opinions.

I actually get along fine with him because I ignore his Castro nonsence and

believe his love Bush/love the CIA views do get in his way of seeing the truth of

who killed JFK. But at least he does care about the subject and that is more than

cand be said of many Americans.

I am certain the conspirators love all the CT's infighting.

Enuf allready, ok.

Dawn

[Frank Agbat]

I am certain the conspirators love all the CT's infighting.

Enuf allready, ok.

Dawn

Dawn,

Well said! I'm so bloody sick and tired of the mud and bile being thrown around here, I'm seriously considering taking my leave from this forum.

We're fighting with each other over politics, z-film alteration, photo analysis, researcher's motives, etc, etc.

THIS IS ONLY HELPING THE CASE REMAIN UNSOLVED.

Sure -- we do not all have to agree all the time, and professional disagreement (when properly handled) can lead to advancements. But the vitriolic, ad-hominem, paranoic exchanges that seem inevitable on virtually every thread lead us nowhere.

Just my 2 cents.

[Bernice Moore]

Shanet is a very, very thorough and articulate person concerning his posts to the Forum in the past. Apparently he 'left the Forum' before or around the time that I joined.

Shanet you need to come back because if you don't you are going to miss out on what promises to be the most interesting period, of the Forum's history.

Come back Shane(t)!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*********************

Excuse me but all Robert did, was give Shanet some kind and complimentary words..

So what the heck is and was the problem.....??

It was a post by Robert to Shanet.....wasn't it.....?? So....??

B