|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Manner of Speaking
Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 1:44 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Dear ernie, bacasper, some waygoogk-in, loose ends, cbclark4, Spinoza, ED209, IGTG, Jinju, Mosley, Ya-ta Boy, Summer Wine, Gopher, OTOH, Kuros, Joo, Pluto, Keane, JMO, and anybody else I might have missed...
Thanks for your participation in this discussion thread. I appreciated your comments, even if I may not have agreed with what everybody said. It was an interesting discussion.
Are we ok to wind up this thread? I think we've covered every aspect of this topic, and for certain aspects that people disagree on I don't see any point in going around in circles. I don't particularly like threads that go on forever for no reason, and for my part I've said all that I wanted to say.
Cheers and best wishes, 
MOS |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ya-ta Boy wrote: |
| Quote: |
| it seems his premise for this ridiculous thread might have it's orgins from: Reclaiming History: |
Or it could be that more than just one person believes conspiracy theorists are contributing to the corrosive cynicism and negativity in the political world. |
Obviously retard. We have got you and MOS. That makes two already.
It is not news that a lot of people promote the big lie.
It's closed minded people like you , JMO, MOS and others who are a danger to this world.
Nothing could be more obvious than a conspiracy in the murder of President Kennedy.
Anyone who does see so is either not familiar with the evidence , or cognitively impaired.
To speak up about it is what the United States is all about.
Last edited by regicide on Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:40 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
Are we ok to wind up this thread?MOS |
No it isn't. I am just getting started. Just like your false information about the shot details, I want to expose you for the fake that you are. You think you can regurgitate some information back to us and take credit for an original thought, don't you?
The latest issue of "The Federal Lawyer," an American publication that is directed toward, and largely read by, federal attorneys, has published Dr. Gary Aguilar's review of Vincent Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History."
In that review Aguilar, who is an MD writes:
It is not just that critics have convinced 75 percent of Americans
(Bugliosi's figure [3]) to reject the official truth, which he says happens to be the real truth. These critics, Bugliosi contends, are also responsible for a widespread loss of faith in once-respected institutions. Such widespread skepticism, "gestating for decades in the nation's marrow," he writes, "obviously has to have had a deleterious effect on the way Americans view those who lead them and determine their destiny. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
Dear ernie, bacasper, some waygoogk-in, loose ends, cbclark4, Spinoza, ED209, IGTG, Jinju, Mosley, Ya-ta Boy, Summer Wine, Gopher, OTOH, Kuros, Joo, Pluto, Keane, JMO, and anybody else I might have missed...
Thanks for your participation in this discussion thread. I appreciated your comments, even if I may not have agreed with what everybody said. It was an interesting discussion.
Are we ok to wind up this thread? I think we've covered every aspect of this topic, and for certain aspects that people disagree on I don't see any point in going around in circles. I don't particularly like threads that go on forever for no reason, and for my part I've said all that I wanted to say.
Cheers and best wishes,
MOS |
you've dropped your signature?
you want to end this thread?
what happened?
have you reconsidered your initial statements? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| We got you and MOS. That makes two already |
Who is 'we'? And what does it mean when you say "We 'got' you"?
Did you get your feelings hurt when one of the premier prosecuting attorneys in the country agrees with such fine up-standing members of the community as MoS and myself and says your position bears a large part of the responsibility for negative public feeling?
Everyone makes mistakes in life. It isn't all that uncommon. I think you'd feel a whole lot better if you just admitted you have been scammed by some pretty good con artists and resolve to be more critical in your thinking in the future. Don't you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mosley
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Man, I believe in one conspiracy theory now: there's obviously been a plot afoot to prevent regicide from getting laid.
Dude, you are obsessed and nasty.
I've disagreed w/MOS in the past but he's always come off as a pretty reasonable sort and undeserving of your abuse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
As usual ,you missed the point of the article. The point is that it is not an original thought by MOS. Furthermore, the review is by an MD and he represents 80% of the American public in this matter. You are a minority and have to be the dumbest man on the planet Yata for your continued belief in the most obvious lie in history.
I would not be proud of that.
Last edited by regicide on Wed Dec 05, 2007 12:44 am; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mosley wrote: |
Man, I believe in one conspiracy theory now: there's obviously been a plot afoot to prevent regicide from getting laid.
Dude, you are obsessed and nasty.
I've disagreed w/MOS in the past but he's always come off as a pretty reasonable sort and undeserving of your abuse. |
I have forgotten more sexual encounters than you have ever had man.
Don't call me man, mister.
You make me sick with your defense of this slimeball. If you followed all his threads and attacks on me , you would have the real picture of the encounter.
And the dude is wrong. Dead wrong. None of his nonsense bears out under scrutiny. Knowledge that has been around for 40 years.
Where have some of you people been for God's sake? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mosley
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
regicide: I'd be careful of calling another poster the "dummest(sic) man on the planet" 
But, whatever, man, mister, mate, mac...you're a nutter by any name. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 11:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mosley wrote: |
Man, I believe in one conspiracy theory now: there's obviously been a plot afoot to prevent regicide from getting laid.
Dude, you are obsessed and nasty.
I've disagreed w/MOS in the past but he's always come off as a pretty reasonable sort and undeserving of your abuse. |
This is the reasonable man you defend?
| Manner of Speaking wrote: |
| regicide wrote: |
| No offense to anyone in particular here, but many of you are referring to this thing as the "IMF" and as has been discussed it is not the right characterization... |
Well we were here during that time, you weren't, and in any case the thread was about the economic collapse IN KOREA of 97. Koreans commonly refer to it as the IMF crisis. It's just a name. Koreans decide what to call it, you don't. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mosley
Joined: 15 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Keerist, you make it sound like he said something outrageously...outrageous.
Koreans DO call it the IMF crisis. Personally, I think that's a misnomer(it should be called the Korean corruption crisis or something to that effect) but they do call it that, like it or not.
Certainly, in your quotation there's nothing to indicate that MOS deserved the abuse you heaped upon him.
PS nice edit of "dummest"  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Mosley wrote: |
Keerist, you make it sound like he said something outrageously...outrageous.
Koreans DO call it the IMF crisis. Personally, I think that's a misnomer(it should be called the Korean corruption crisis or something to that effect) but they do call it that, like it or not.
Certainly, in your quotation there's nothing to indicate that MOS deserved the abuse you heaped upon him. |
Nice to hear from you , oh defender of the corrector of wrongs , and in your opinion a just man who didn't do anything to anyone.
The post given to you is just the beginning of that particular thrashing, and is not the total picture. I could continue to make my case, but for what purpose?
What is your particular motivation? What is MOS and Yata and other defenders of the most exposed lie ever: The Warren Commission and it's Magic Bullet Theory motivation? They already won!
You see. You people always get on your high horse and assume you are right.
In the case of the core of our conflict , MOS and others think they are right because they are backing the government.
Following behind them, and only because of my angry words, you also are your high horse simply because of that; and a few spelling errors.
Just the FACTS Ma'am, just the facts.
When the dialogue gets to that, the thread typically ends. EX- McAdams and his unbelievable spin on the the subject, give me your proof.
Where is my proof? It is mostly contained in the Warren Report itself and it's contradictions and obvious lies.
And let's end with MOS best; that I did not have the right to post undisputed photos of the assassination.
Witnesses to the president's wound - rear of the head
Last edited by regicide on Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:32 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
igotthisguitar
Joined: 08 Apr 2003
Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Regicide, can you explain the meaning of this picture please?
Thanks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
loose_ends
Joined: 23 Jul 2007
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 05, 2007 4:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'm going to have to back up Regicide on this one.
MOS is a douche. And anyone that has tried to side with him on this thread are also douches.
for the sake of this thread, a douche is someone who disregards logic in an attempt to explain a weak theory. it is also used to represent people that jump on the bandwagon. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
regicide
Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Location: United States
|
| Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| igotthisguitar wrote: |
Regicide, can you explain the meaning of this picture please?
Thanks. |
These are witnesses to the president's wound - rear of the head.
David Lifton neatly summarized the claims of Parkland witnesses who interpreted the rear wound they saw as an exit wound, "Indeed, six Dallas doctors testified that wound in the rear of the head was an exit wound; and a seventh, Dr. Kemp Clark, said it could be an exit wound, but it was also possible the wound was 'tangential'; Dr. Jones testified it 'appeared to be an exit wound in the posterior portion of the skull'; Dr. Perry referred to it as 'avulsive'; Dr. Jenkins, referring to the region as 'exploded,' said, 'I wound interpret it being a wound of exit'; and Dr. Akin said: 'I assume that the right occipitoparietal region was the exit.'" (Lifton, BE, p.317) Apparently Dr. Clark is holding fast in 1994 to the opinion he first gave in 1963 of a rear exit wound (see above), unlike some of his colleagues.
Thus, twenty of twenty-two Parkland witnesses (all but Giesecke's and Salyer's) first, unrehearsed, and specific recollection of the head wound, either in writing, verbally, or both, placed a major skull defect unambiguously posteriorly on the right.
Not one description, other than Giesecke's ambiguous and obviously erroneous account, described any anterior wound, or even an anterior-lateral wound--as the HSCA forensic panel and the Clark Panel claimed existed on the basis of the "best evidence", the photographs and X-rays. Salyer's account of a right temporal wound is the only account given which fails to describe a rear defect.
By his own admission, Salyer was positioned on JFK's left side, a poor vantage point for seeing JFK's right skull wound, and he admitted that he had not had a good look. Salyer did say, however, that the defect extended behind the right ear and he expressed the opinion the photographs appeared to him to have been tampered with in this area.
The conclusion that there was a major skull and scalp defect in the rear of JFK's skull based on the descriptions of very qualified and experienced Parkland witnesses cannot be easily dismissed.
The absence of a rear skull defect in JFK's autopsy photographs must be viewed with consideration of compelling evidence that the photographic inventory is incomplete. If images have been deleted from the original inventory, might there not also have been tampering with the images that remain? Might the 'adjusted' photographic record be responsible for the conclusions of later reviewers whose conclusion of an anterolateral skull defect is quite at odds with the descriptions of witnesses? If not alteration, what hypothesis can better explain the contradictory conclusions of later well-credentialed, non-witness reviewers who arrived at such vastly different conclusions based upon photographs and X- rays?
Gary L. Aguilar, MD
San Francisco, California, August, 1994 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
