Site Search:
 
Speak Korean Now!
Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FBI admits lie linking Oswald to JFK assassination
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 10:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics.


In other words, you are saying you have no evidence and get your sick jollies by accusing innocent people of heinous crimes simply to satisfy your sick ego.

To quote Bill Clinton in a comparable situation, "Shame on you! Shame on you!"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
regicide



Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics.

It is not necessary to completely resolve the matter fully in order to examine the Secret Service's involvement.

You evade the issues with your own form of nonsense while others, perhaps more intelligent than you pretend to be, have no trouble with the material.

Why do you refuse to address the issues by use of such disinformation tactics?


Conspiracy, but no theory, February 17, 2007
By Alex (Geneva) - See all my reviews

To use the phrase 'Conspiracy Theory' after viewing these DVDs, would constitute a breathtaking stupidity beyond all reason and sense.

The only 'bias' is towards law and order, detection of crimes and democracy, so 'bias' is not the right word - 'healthy' or 'honest' would be more apt.

It was:

1) Criminal Conspiracy to murder;

2) Criminal Conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, and

3) Treason.

Here in these DVDs is enough evidence, which if all put into police statements or affidavit form, would be well enough to justify (at standards of court-level evidence), a number of 'arrests on suspicion' - which would be the logical conclusion, in order to facilitate further investigation, upon which charges and arraignments would be based.


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2163051261748287922
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see you are trying to learn a new word. Good for you. I encourage my students to expand their vocabulary by using new words in sentences. But don't you think 4 times in two posts is a bit much?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
regicide



Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States

PostPosted: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
I see you are trying to learn a new word. Good for you. I encourage my students to expand their vocabulary by using new words in sentences. But don't you think 4 times in two posts is a bit much?



The Men Who Killed Kennedy is a video documentary series by Nigel Turner that originally aired in 1988 in England with two one-hour segments about the John F. Kennedy assassination. The United States corporation, Arts & Entertainment Company, purchased the rights to the original two segments. Three one-hour segments were added in 1991. A sixth segment was added in 1995. Finally, three additional hourly segments were added by the History Channel in November 2003.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mzZGK9tNyM
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 2:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The Men Who Killed Kennedy


That's just a little bit confusing. First you say it was the CIA and that LBJ just went along with it. The link was about how LBJ was in all the way up to his jug ears.

You can't have it both ways.


I did enjoy the phoney patriotism schtick at the end. The guy claims he's a patriot doing all this research because he wants to help the country get back on track, all the while spewing conspiracy claptrap to undercut the country...It's a whole lot like the Inquisition torturers crushing your bones and pulling out your fingernails for the good of your soul.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 2:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The other day on some music thread you mentioned something about '20 years ago'. That startled me. All along I thought you were about 24 and therefor not fully responsible for being so gullible. But you must be in your 30s, at least.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
regicide



Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States

PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 3:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
The other day on some music thread you mentioned something about '20 years ago'. That startled me. All along I thought you were about 24 and therefor not fully responsible for being so gullible. But you must be in your 30s, at least.


The Men Who Killed Kennedy provides a lot of information for you to review. The information contained in these episodes clearly gives us a better idea of what happened in Dealy Plaza than we previously were told. Did you view the first three episodes? Who didn't you believe specifically?

They provide a lot of information and the theory in that episode was that the Johnson and Dallas machine were behind it.

Do you think they can order the Secret Service to stand down that day?

I don't think so and just because I posted links to the series doesn�t mean I believe everything contained in it.

I have read Final Judgment and find a lot of useful information there; most notably Ruby's connection to the Meyer Lansky crime syndicate--but I don't believe that Israeli was behind it.

Your comment about my age is as was previously used here--quaint!

How is that for expanding my vocabulary?

Which Dealy Plaza witness or expert witnesses do you doubt?

Be specific.

There are hundreds. Are they all wrong?

.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
igotthisguitar



Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)

PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 10:56 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
Quote:
You are avoiding the issue with disinformation tactics.


In other words, you are saying you have no evidence and get your sick jollies by accusing innocent people of heinous crimes simply to satisfy your sick ego.

To quote Bill Clinton in a comparable situation, "Shame on you! Shame on you!"
Rolling Eyes
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
The Men Who Killed Kennedy provides a lot of information for you


First you say the CIA, then LBJ did it. Then there was something about it being a mafia hit.

The possibilities are endless.

Rolling Eyes

It doesn't really matter to you who did it. It's the distrust and suspicion that are important to you. They are the central factors here.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
regicide



Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States

PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 4:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ya-ta Boy wrote:
Quote:
The Men Who Killed Kennedy provides a lot of information for you


First you say the CIA, then LBJ did it. Then there was something about it being a mafia hit.

The possibilities are endless.

Rolling Eyes

It doesn't really matter to you who did it. It's the distrust and suspicion that are important to you. They are the central factors here.


I am flat out sick of your recent comments. You twist and reshape every rational thing I say. As also been said here before; SHAME ON YOU.

The links I post are for people to refer to and make their decision--not to convince your sorry ass.

This is not a game , you silly pri ck.


If you think for ONE minute that I am delighted that a US President was taken out in this sinister way , you are mistaken.

What happened in Dealy Plaza--that is the operation to kill JFK--is obvious and self-evident to anyone who examines the evidence. The Secret Service Stand Down is the most easy to see and there are countless witnesses who paint a very different picture than what the cover story and the cover-up (they are two different things) portrayed.

Countless people have had to except the fact that what was presented to us by our government was a big lie- and some of us found out decades after the fact that we were lied to--in a big way.

That doesn't mean that we hate our government; I submit it is the other way around and that is the case of this poster.

You have not responded to any of my questions- - why is that?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Ya-ta Boy



Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994

PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 6:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
every rational thing I say



It is not grammatically possible for you to make a coherent, intelligible sentence using those two particular words.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
The_Conservative



Joined: 15 Mar 2007

PostPosted: Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

regicide wrote:
[
. .

The government shouldn't have done this, and then they wouldn't have to stand accused.




Boy you sure have a massive ego. The government is not (then or now) standing accused. While you spin your C.T's on Dave's the government totally ignores you...as does the majority of people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
regicide



Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States

PostPosted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 2:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The_Conservative wrote:
igotthisguitar wrote:
bull droppings. regicide damn well knows he wrote:
I'm going to have to back up IGTG on this one.

MOS is a douche. And anyone that has tried to side with him on this thread are also douche.


"And by their fruits ye shall know them ..."

Twenty-Five Rules of Disinformation

5. Sidetrack opponents with name calling, ridicule

6



Well then according to rule number 5 that's what your side is doing and therefore is spreading misinformation.

Hoist by your own petard.


Misinformation is used when defending the official story, retard.

They got away with it; in part from spineless people like you who are in denial of what happened.

And you are correct when you say, although your sentence structure is wrong, that they are not worried about what anyone writes outside the mainstream media. No one is coming after them! And unless the JFK Grand Jury project succeeds, no one ever will.

This is the last window of opportunity available to bring the killers to justice as the matter will surely fade away in matter of a few years.


The Secret Service did nothing when the shots rang out in Dealy Plaza on November 22, 1963.

This is why I am so sure of myself. The United States Secret Service DOES NOT JUST SIT OR STAND THERE WHEN SHOTS HAVE BEEN FIRED AND HAVE HIT THE POTUS. WHAT IN THE H9EL DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?

NO one is going to convince me otherwise or push me around with your nonsensical and arrogant postings.

ANSWER MY QUESTION: WHY DIDN�T THE SECRET SERVICE



MOVE WHEN THE SHOTS RANG OUT?


THAT IS THEIR JOB, BOY. WHAT IS YOUR ANSWER?





NO ONE DISPUTES THESE FACTS.


ALTGEN'S 1: SHOTS HAVE BEEN FIRED AND THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN HIT IN THE BACK AND THE NECK. THE AGENTS ARE AWARE OF THE SHOTS AND JOHNSON'S MEN ARE COVERING HIM. THE JOHNSON FOLLOW UP CAR DOOR IS OPEN AND GUNS ARE DRAWN.

THEY HAVE SIX SECONDS TO MOVE AND PROTECT THE PRESIDENT BUT DO NOT!


UNITED STATES SECRET SERVICE AGENT ROY KELLERMAN IN THE FRONT SEAT OF THE PRESIDENTIAL LIMOUSINE SITTING WHERE HE WILL REMAIN WHEN THE SHOTS RANG OUT. HE WILL, HOWEVER LOOK BACK ONCE AT THE INJURED POTUS AND THE DRIVER ROY KELLERMAN WILL LOOK BACK TWICE AT THE PRESIDENT--WHO IS CHOKING ON A BULLET

AGENT CLINT HILL IN THE FOLLOW UP CAR, THE QUEEN MARY, IS ONLY A FEW FEET BEHIND KENNEDY, AND ALTHOUGH ASSIGNED TO MRS. KENNEDY, DID NOT MOVE FORWARD UNTIL THE FATAL SHOT WAS FIRED. HE HAD OVER SIX SECOND FROM THE TIME OF THE FIRST SHOT AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE ALTGEN'S PHOTO


Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Manner of Speaking



Joined: 09 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

From Wikipedia:

James William "Ike" Altgens (April 28, 1919 � December 12, 1995) was an American photographer and field reporter for the Associated Press. Based in Dallas, Texas, in 1963, Altgens took arguably the most famous photograph of the in-progress assassination of President John F. Kennedy�a snapshot that led to a years-long debate among researchers over whether accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald is visible in Dealey Plaza as the shots were fired.

Altgens spent more than 40 years with the AP, then did advertising work until he retired altogether. Both Altgens and his wife were in their seventies when they died in 1995, at about the same time, in their Dallas home.

Altgens retired from the AP in 1979 rather than accept a transfer to a different bureau. He spent his later years working on display advertising for the Ford Motor Company, and was often contacted for interviews by assassination researchers who found him "polite and affable". Through all the telephone calls and letters, no one ever convinced him that the Warren Commission's conclusion�that Oswald, acting alone, killed Kennedy�could be wrong. "Until those people come up with solid evidence to support their claims," he told Trask, "I see no value in wasting my time with them." Still, he conceded, "there will always be some controversy about details surrounding the site and shooting of the President."

(Trask, Richard B. (1998). That Day in Dallas: Three Photographers Capture on Film the Day President Kennedy Died. Yeoman Press. ISBN 0-9638595-3-6.)


Now if the man who took the photograph himself doesn't believe all these conspiracy theories - and he was/in the best position to know - then it's crazy for anybody else to believe them as well.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Manner of Speaking



Joined: 09 Jan 2003

PostPosted: Wed Jan 02, 2008 3:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

bacasper wrote:
Manner of Speaking wrote:
bacasper wrote:
When I said on another thread,
Quote:
It is a fact that no steel skyscraper has ever been brought down by fire before or after 9/11.


MOS responded by saying,
Quote:
That is an opinion, not a fact.

This can easily be proven or disproven by showing the existence of such a building (which, btw, hasn't been done) or lack of it, but in no way is it an opinion. The failure to grasp such a basic logical concept indicates an inability to engage in rational discourse.

Look who's talking. You took my statement out of context, and only took part of what I said, not my entire statement. My sentence that you quoted above can only be meaningfully understood by providing what I said in its entirety (sp?), but you've deliberately only taken part of my statement in order to mislead the reader as to what I actually said.

OK, here is what you, and I, actually said:
bacasper wrote:
It is a fact that no fire has brought down a steel building before or since the WTC attacks, convoluted pseudoexplanations to the contrary notwithstanding. (my italics - MOS)

Manner of Speaking wrote:
This thread is about conspiracy theories and their effect on democracy. If this sentence has got nothing to do with conspiracy theories, why did you bring it up?

Incidentally, your sentence is an opinion, not a fact. An opinion that the engineering analyses that have been done to explain the collapse of the two towers are "convoluted pseudoexplanations".

You have concluded that the objective engineering analyses that have been done that contradict your statement are "convoluted pseudoexplanations". That is your opinion. It is not a fact.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International