REOPENKENNEDYCASE
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
ROKC IS NOW CLOSED AND IS READ ONLY. WE THANK THOSE WHO HAVE SUPPORTED US OVER THE LAST 14 YEARS.


Search
Display results as :
Advanced Search
Similar topics
Latest topics
Brian says...Sat 30 Dec 2023, 4:33 pmEd.Ledoux
last drinks before the bar closesSat 30 Dec 2023, 2:46 pmTony Krome
The Mystery of Dirk Thomas KunertSat 30 Dec 2023, 1:23 pmTony Krome
Vickie AdamsSat 30 Dec 2023, 1:14 pmgreg_parker
Busted again: Tex ItaliaSat 30 Dec 2023, 9:22 amEd.Ledoux
The Raleigh CallSat 30 Dec 2023, 4:33 ambarto
Was Oswald ever confronted with the physical rifle?Sat 30 Dec 2023, 12:03 amCastroSimp
Who Dat? Fri 29 Dec 2023, 10:24 pmTony Krome
Log in
Social bookmarking
Social bookmarking reddit      

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website

Bookmark and share the address of REOPENKENNEDYCASE on your social bookmarking website
Keywords

Darnell  Theory  paine  tippit  doyle  Lankford  3a  beckley  fritz  Lifton  zapruder  prayer  +Lankford  2  Floor  4  frazier  tsbd  9  Mason  11  3  hosty  David  Weigman  Humor  

Like/Tweet/+1

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

+21
Mick_Purdy
Goban_Saor
bernie laverick
Vinny
Faroe Islander
Redfern
Mark A. O'Blazney
ianlloyd
Ray Mitcham
Albert Rossi
Colin_Crow
Frankie Vegas
Hasan Yusuf
John Mooney
TerryWMartin
dwdunn(akaDan)
Admin_2
gerrrycam
beowulf
StanDane
greg_parker
25 posters
Go down
avatar
Guest
Guest

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Wed 02 Apr 2014, 7:42 pm
First topic message reminder :

I want to begin by focusing on the notorious vestibule door, with the plate-glass window, that Baker first glimpsed Oswald looking through. It's WC Exhibit 498, at XVII p. 213, and even in the Warren volumes you can easily discern the fresh grain pattern in the wood. First Day Evidence, on p. 286, is even clearer.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0120a.htm

Very probably this was a new door, installed during the late 1962 overhaul, when the Sexton Grocery warehouse was remodeled to accommodate the TSBD company and several other publishers. By the way, Sexton had its offices on the 1st & 2nd floors and very likely used the same lunchroom that we all know so well. The vestibule door had an automatic closing device, and Truly had to come in and make a special affidavit about that on August 3rd (WCH VII p. 591). It took several seconds to close. This device was probably pneumatic.

This vestibule door had some weight to it. It was sturdy. It could be described as heavy-duty. Installing it was a 2-man job. In comparison, the doors to the up & down flights of stairs were downright flimsy. (Same link as above, but page 217). These stairwell doors were normally open during the course of the day, as was the lunchroom door (WCD 496, p. 32). The vestibule door closed by itself and was always in the closed position, if not in use.

The vestibule door helped muffle the sounds from the landing and stairwell, so that people in the lunchroom could eat in relative peace & quiet. The stairs were old and quite noisy and the landing floors were wood. Warehouse workers habitually came up to use the lunchroom Coke machine. And office workers also came down from the 3rd  & 4th floors, human nature being what it is, rather than wait impatiently at lunchtime for the passenger elevator. For example, Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles' run down the stairs on November 22nd wasn't their first experience on them. They instinctively knew they could head for the corner stairwell when they discovered the passenger elevator wasn't operating.

Considering the potential for irritable human traffic, the vestibule door kept disturbing sounds to a reasonable minimum. It was installed with that purpose in mind.

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

Adams & Styles watched the motorcade from their 4th-floor office window overlooking Elm Street. Adams estimated the time it took them to reach the 1st floor, after the shots, was "no longer than a minute at the most." She confirmed to author Barry Ernest that she left the window just before the limousine reached the Triple Underpass (The Girl on the Stairs p. 329).

The first point that needs to be appreciated is that Adams & Styles could not have beaten Truly & Baker to the freight elevators. Even if these women made it to the 1st floor in 60 seconds, Truly & Baker had 60 seconds to make it only as far as the will-call counter, or just a bit further into the warehouse, to see the women across the floor. And Adams & Styles continued running in front of the freight elevators for the rear door. Even the most sluggard time estimate for Truly & Baker brings them onto the warehouse floor well before Adams & Styles. And in one re-enactment they made it to the 2nd-floor lunchroom in 75 seconds.

The second point is that Adams' & Styles' supervisor, Dorothy Garner, stated for the record that after they went downstairs, she saw Truly & Baker come up. The purpose of Garner's statement was to refute the WC argument that Adams must have gone downstairs several minutes after the shots, because otherwise she should have encountered Lee Harvey Oswald fleeing down the steps. Garner's statement was given in the U.S. Attorney's office in Dallas, and they sent it to WC Chief Counsel J. Lee Rankin. But he never brought it to light, since it helped refute the Commission's contention that Oswald was the 6th-floor assassin. And the statement lay buried in the National Archives in the papers of the Dallas U.S. Attorney until Barry Ernest discovered it.

We can boil the stairs down to a mathematical problem, where A & S are descending from the 4th while T & B are ascending to the 4th (and then the 5th). Yet they never interact with each other. Why is this the case? Because T & B removed themselves from the stairs for a time, and went into the lunchroom. And it is a mathematical certainty that A & S passed T & B while they were in the lunchroom.

Why didn't T & B hear them? Truly said that he, Baker & Oswald were only 2 or 3 feet inside the lunchroom. The answer is that the vestibule door muffled a lot of sound, coming from Adams' & Styles' high heels clomping down the wooden stair treads and across the wooden landing. And T & B were in an intense, gun-in-the-belly situation with Oswald. Even if a little bit of noise from those high heels filtered into their eardrums, it was only high heels and they quickly brushed it off and forgot about it.

Baker estimated the lunchroom encounter took 30 seconds. The stairs were roughly L-shaped, split-level. I think it's fair to say that for someone in the lunchroom, floor "2 1/2" to floor "1 1/2" constitutes their hearing range. Half a flight of steps gets descended in about 5 seconds, with another 5 seconds for crossing the 10-foot landing. That's 15 seconds total for A & S to be in hearing range. They probably were on the 3rd-floor landing just as B & T entered the lunchroom.

Skeptics of the lunchroom incident not only have to construe Baker & Truly as liars. Since 2010, when Garner's information came out, they have to construe her as misbegotten as well- yet her statement was made with Oswald's escape in mind, not the lunchroom incident.

What the simple mathematics of this problem means is that the totality of evidence cited by the skeptics, as supporting the lunchroom episode as a non-event, is nothing more than a red herring. The disparate news stories are just that- disparate news stories, and they tell us little more than that reporters will write anything.

And etc. Bring your best arguments to the table, in favor of the non-event. Prepare for a whuppin'.  cat

greg_parker
greg_parker
Admin
Posts : 8326
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 65
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia
http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 7:43 am
Hasan Yusuf wrote:I strongly recommend that Greg remove it from my Admin account so it is fair.

Done.

_________________
Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
              Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me


"So what’s an independent-minded populist like me to do? I’ve had to grovel in promoting myself on social media, even begging for Amazon reviews and Goodreads ratings, to no avail." 
Don Jeffries

"I've been aware of Greg Parker's work for years, and strongly recommend it." Peter Dale Scott

https://gregrparker.com
greg_parker
greg_parker
Admin
Posts : 8326
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 65
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia
http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 7:56 am
Richard Gilbride wrote:Let me remind you that I majored in philosophy before earning a chemistry degree. I have US Patent D396,060 for the "Periodic Circle of the Elements", fundamentally improving Mendeleyev's design for the elements. Before I started my JFK research I spent 6 years intensively tearing apart theoretical physics, looking for answers, in just about all of Nikola Tesla's work and in the Einstein-Cartan spin-tensor equations for a rotating gravitational field, among many others. When I retire from JFK work I plan on picking up where I left off, and there are 3 patents I intend to apply for for deriving energy from the natural environment. Lots of energy.

No brag, just fact. I will not be slighted, nor underestimated.
You are indeed, an intelligent person, Richard. I never held any doubts about that.


I have defended you here and at the ed forum (from which I was not axed, btw). Without checking, I am reasonably certain you are the longest standing regular poster after me. I have never gone after you, or anyone else, over H & L whose approach to it has been sane, careful and restrained. I respected you enough to make you an admin here. Yet, despite all that, you have now shit in this forum in revenge for something you disagree with at another forum? 

Let's just bypass the lunchroom brawl. If it is me you are so pissed at, just get it all out here and now. Say whatever you want about me. It's a free hit. I will not retaliate. I will not delete. Just get it all off your chest, and then maybe we can move on.

_________________
Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
              Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me


"So what’s an independent-minded populist like me to do? I’ve had to grovel in promoting myself on social media, even begging for Amazon reviews and Goodreads ratings, to no avail." 
Don Jeffries

"I've been aware of Greg Parker's work for years, and strongly recommend it." Peter Dale Scott

https://gregrparker.com
TerryWMartin
TerryWMartin
Posts : 1000
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 72
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA
http://martianpublishing.com

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 10:01 am
I find this discussion of the second floor lunchroom fascinating. I enjoyed reading what everyone had to say on the subject over at the Ed Forum with Sean Murphy and the objections Bill Kelly brought up.

But I cannot see how degrees in chemistry, philosophy, law, medicine, or history makes you more qualified than the average joe on this subject. If it was a question pertaining to chemistry, I think it would be pertinent. Otherwise it sounds a bit like Dawn going on about her law degree.

On the patent front, my brother has six and he never finished high school. Level of education has little to do with intelligence.

Like I said, admirable accomplishments, but stay on the thread and don't try insulting people in a roundabout way. So far as I have seen there's nobody I would call an expert on all aspects of this case.

But if you are just out for some petty vendetta here, I guess none of what I say makes any difference.

_________________
If God had intended Man to do anything except copulate, He would have given us brains. 
                          - - - Ignatz Verbotham
avatar
Guest
Guest

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 2:05 pm
:face: Edited


Last edited by Goodbye on Sun 06 Apr 2014, 2:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
avatar
Guest
Guest

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 2:20 pm
Richard Gilbride wrote:gerrrycam, why do you even bring this up? Baker was riding abreast of the last camera car and was well away from the motorcycles trailing the limousine. How does this even remotely apply to the discussion of Baker's running into the TSBD and its lunchroom? Let's see you attend an American football game and sit in one end zone and accurately describe what went on the the other end zone. Oh, you made a mistake? I get it, you must be lying.

T + 60 seconds. A & S on 1st floor.

"If this is accurate, it is possible that the ladies were just exiting the back when the men were exiting the front."

No, Greg, it's not accurate, and you know it. I explained 2 posts ago that the film timing shows that T & B were at the will-call counter long before A & S got anywhere near the freight elevators.

Check out the Prayer Man thread at this forum for your treatment of the lunchroom non-event hypothesis as fact, and your mudslinging of Bill Kelly. This is part of your bully pulpit attitude that people won't put up with at Deep Politics, and what got you axed from the Ed Forum. It's OK to be passionate about no H & L, but you haven't demonstrated that you're able to do it calmly and with objectivity. You disregard evidence simply on your say-so, with a hatred bordering on pathological.

I will not relent on this lunchroom issue. For far too long it has been treated as sacrosanct by the tribe of true believers and I am showing unequivocably that it is incorrect. Hasan is an impudent punk who needs several years of maturity. I don't see him on this thread. Let him put up the muscle to back up his mouth. He made a mistake adding insult to injury over what David Josephs posted. "Racist piece of doo-doo." I don't favor Josephs over anyone else, but admire how he's stood up to your H & L attacks, but personally criticize his knee-jerk criticism of MC Piper. That innuendo evidently went over dwdunn's head, who gave me flack for bringing up Piper. True, forum members have vented their anger against me for attempting to stop a venom-filled argument. (I succeeded, by the way). And I have every motivation to get my revenge via this thread. Is not revenge a dish best served cold?

I did lay it out in the first post. You don't have the formal education to see that. Let me remind you that I majored in philosophy before earning a chemistry degree. I have US Patent D396,060 for the "Periodic Circle of the Elements", fundamentally improving Mendeleyev's design for the elements. Before I started my JFK research I spent 6 years intensively tearing apart theoretical physics, looking for answers, in just about all of Nikola Tesla's work and in the Einstein-Cartan spin-tensor equations for a rotating gravitational field, among many others. When I retire from JFK work I plan on picking up where I left off, and there are 3 patents I intend to apply for for deriving energy from the natural environment. Lots of energy.

No brag, just fact. I will not be slighted, nor underestimated.

"In your scenario, LHO goes to trial. Baker gets put on the stand and has to explain not only no mention of 2nd floor and no lunchroom, but his not IDing him when he had the perfect opportunity to do so? His credibility shredded..."

How on earth do you come up with all that? Looking too long through lunchroom non-event glasses, in my opinion. My scenario posits Baker not joining in the rough-necking of LHO by the DPD, but trusting they'll find out if LHO was somehow involved. Period. Someday you'll just have to accept a benign explanation for why Baker didn't ID Oswald and just leave it at that. It's what went on that afternoon in Baker's mind, which evidently didn't reproduce accurate architectural drawings of the TSBD. That's all there is to it.

"...that Vicki's recollection was the more accurate one..." meaning that Styles conceded that they may well have gone down the stairs immediately after the shots.

"She seemed genuinely taken aback, if not nonplussed, by Garner's reported claim." Because for years Styles had been living in the mis-memory of having gone down those stairs a long time after the shots.

Face it, Greg. Your lunchroom non-event theory is in its death throes. Can you handle that fact? Where is your disproof of my statement that:

Dorothy Garner's statement establishes a boundary condition, which allows the problem to be resolved mathematically. That trumps conflicts between earlier/later stories, every time. In order to salvage the lunchroom non-event, you have to refute those mathematics. That can't be done, so you have to refute the veracity of her account. That's why you have to sign on to the Fritz-coaxer theory."

Because that takes my critique head-on. Your last post is filled with end-around arguments.

And with this amazing education you recieved, what do you do now?  You paint fucking walls don't you, you fucking horrible jumped up cunt.

And you write sub par movie scripts that a real film maker I passed it to on your behalf said was a crock of undiluted shite.  Yeah, that's what people in a 'club' do isn't it, Mr. Gobshite Gilbride?  We help each other out even when one party within the club thinks the other is a complete arsehole - and vice versa.

I have watched your character fully bloom in a manner befitting a slimy toad over the last few weeks.  Making excuses for a racist.  Apologising on behalf of the entire forum who have been insulted by the said racist, and telling them all they should accept you apologising on their behalf even though the racist is in the wrong.

When you get a painting job, what exactly do you paint?  Murals of Jim Crow and KKK lynchings?

I left this forum a while back.  Most members think it was because of Bob Prudhomme.  I can assure them that it wasn't.  It was because of you you horrible little cunt.  I spoke to Greg privately and told him why I was leaving.  Bob Prudhomme's name wasn't mentioned.  Yours was.  If you'd have been sat in front of me when you wrote your reply to my ultimatum I'd have broken your fucking nose.  Yeah, right across your face.  Not a brag.

Quite a few years ago when I first met you you initially came across as an affable and level headed bloke.  As time went by I began to detect a strange tone to some your posts when I broached topics that you obviously held deep rooted and almost faith driven beliefs in.  The tone I detected smacked of someone who claimed to be open minded but was actually a man who views this case, and probably many other aspects of his life, through absolutist thinking.  

I began to suspect you were nothing more than a jumped up condescending prick.

I have been proven right.  Every member here is now on the same page as me.  Your aggressive tone smacks of someone who is slowly losing the plot.  You think it may be because someone with such a great education now paints shit, and has failed in his bid at writing a movie script that not a single human being wanted to waste one single piece of film on?  Just a thought.

Pat Speer and Don Jeffries could only dream of being as much of an abject cunt that you have portrayed yourself to be over the last few months.  

I have battled with some utter gobshites on these forums over the last five or six years.  David Lifton, David Von Pein, the disgustingly awful Paul May, Francois Carlier, Mike Rago, one of your newest members here Raymond J. Carroll, and Paul Trejo to name just a handful.  Each time I took one of them on I always won the debate.  Always.  Without fail.  The reason it was so easy to do with these professional wankers was because they are all fucking liars.  Each of them had to lie to gain any sort of foothold and their lies were always discovered and exposed for all to see.

You are now the ReopenKennedyCase moderator who apologises to other jumped up condescending pricks most probably because you sense a deep sense of camaraderie with you yourself also being a jumped up condescending prick.  

You now join their ranks and I will destroy you right here on this forum over the coming weeks and we will see you go the same way as Bob Prudhomme and Bill Brown.  I promise.  Moderator or no moderator. You are going down.

Wait and see...

...you horrible cunt.


Last edited by Hello Goodbye on Sat 17 May 2014, 6:42 pm; edited 3 times in total
dwdunn(akaDan)
dwdunn(akaDan)
Posts : 304
Join date : 2013-06-22
Age : 60
Location : among the hills of southern Indiana, USA
http://xefdisposable.blogspot.com/

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 2:33 pm
I only said I thought I could bring a lot to the position. I never said I could be an adequate replacement for the original. Who could?

PS: Good to hear from you again, Lee. Please don't hurt me


Last edited by dwdunn(akaDan) on Sun 06 Apr 2014, 3:04 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : couldn't send pm)
StanDane
StanDane
Posts : 3644
Join date : 2013-09-03
Age : 70
https://prayermanleeharveyoswald.blogspot.com/

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 3:06 pm
Welcome back Lee!
avatar
beowulf
Posts : 373
Join date : 2013-04-21

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 4:13 pm
Hasan is an impudent punk who needs several years of maturity. I don't see him on this thread. Let him put up the muscle...

Who talks (or thinks) like this? Hasan is a good guy who's polite to everyone who posts here even those he disagrees with, no need to take your anger out on him.
avatar
gerrrycam
Posts : 227
Join date : 2014-03-25

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 5:29 pm
Richard Gilbride I like your football analogy. in football you have instant replay that shows Baker lied. More important you have Allen Dulles and WC setting up Baker to lie


Last edited by gerrrycam on Mon 07 Apr 2014, 12:19 am; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : spelling)
avatar
John Mooney
Posts : 84
Join date : 2013-09-20

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 5:41 pm
Truly lied to the Warren Commision.


The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 498 for identification.)
Mr. BELIN. I ask you to state, if you know what this is.
Mr. TRULY. Yes. This is the vestibule, when you first come up the stairs on the second floor--this is what you will find right there.
Mr. BELIN. Now, as you take a look at the picture Exhibit 498, is this a post immediately to the left side of the picture, to the extreme left of the picture?
Mr. TRULY. No.
Mr. BELIN. What is this to the extreme left? Is that the wall for the staircase?
Mr. TRULY. Yes;
there is an opening on this side, and the staircase is back over here. This picture is just part of this vestibule out here.



Take a look at CE 498.

There was some slight of hand going on here and Belin and Truly were in on it. It was the pillar not the wall.

This was to make it look like the view Baker would have had when rounding the stairs.

It wasn't!

CE 498 was carefully cropped to give a false impression.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/pdf/WH17_CE_498.pdf

http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/truly1.htm
greg_parker
greg_parker
Admin
Posts : 8326
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 65
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia
http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 10:05 pm
I spoke to Greg privately and told him why I was leaving.  Bob Prudhomme's name wasn't mentioned.  Yours was.
I guess the cat's out now. What no one including Richard has been aware of is that I did what I thought was right, knowing it would mean Lee walking. I could have mentioned it any number of times, but I did not want Richard feeling he owed me any favors. I also could have thrown being a painter at him after having his laundry list of academic achievements rubbed in my face. Again, I chose not to. 

What I have been trying to do is understand the gripe you Richard, have with me and which seems to have precipitated you pissing off any number of posters here. If your gripe is just with me, then I ask you again just to spell it out. If you can't do that, then I reluctantly have to agree it may be time for a parting. I certainly cannot keep protecting one person from himself, and the forum cannot be sustained in the face of ongoing or recurring issues of revenge or whatever the issue/s may be from your POV.    

And one last thing: Here is what Bill Kelly wrote on my FB page 15 hours ago "U the Best Greg!" I guess he must really hate me for all the "mudslinging" I've aimed at him.

_________________
Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
              Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me


"So what’s an independent-minded populist like me to do? I’ve had to grovel in promoting myself on social media, even begging for Amazon reviews and Goodreads ratings, to no avail." 
Don Jeffries

"I've been aware of Greg Parker's work for years, and strongly recommend it." Peter Dale Scott

https://gregrparker.com
TerryWMartin
TerryWMartin
Posts : 1000
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 72
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA
http://martianpublishing.com

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 10:21 pm
Okay, like WOW!

This explains a lot!

Kudos to Greg for attempting to keep the peace and paying the price.

Welcome Back, Lee!

_________________
If God had intended Man to do anything except copulate, He would have given us brains. 
                          - - - Ignatz Verbotham
avatar
Guest
Guest

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 10:52 pm
Good!! Apologies extended to anyone I offended or pissed off. I see that Lee Farley has been inspired to come out of the woodwork and re-enter the debate. Am enthused to have him aboard for this particular discussion. Like Muhammed Ali before the George Foreman fight, I can only say that "I feel good! I feel clean! I know I can win!"

C'mon, Lee. You know the score. Float like a bumblebee, sting like a bee. Put up your dukes, you temper-mental old twat. I haven't seen such a cry-baby since Fredo in Godfather II. And you bring your bumbling expertise to the discussion?! You're not going to bring in the Ralph Yates mularkey to this topic, are you? Spare me, mister.

Seeing as I now have to justify my occupational choice in order to continue to have posting privileges here, I enjoy the independence of self-employment. And I am highly-skilled at it, and use my brain constantly, much more than I had done while employed as a chemist. The work often allows me to think through problems in other areas of my life. And it keeps me in shape. I can see that you are all in love with status quo definitions of what a working class hero should do with his career. Is that 'cause your momma fed you pancakes every morning?

I had a cottage industry selling posters of my scientific design from approx. 1995-2002, sold only about 700, lost several thousand bucks, and had to pack it in. I don't regret it, because they are there for the next generation.

Yes, JFK work takes all you got, plenty of errors get made, it hardly matters what one's academic background is. But in this particular thread, I bring a lot to the gladiator's arena. We'll see who's left standing after the battle.

OK, girls. Or should I say morons? Your position on the lunchroom non-event is poison, just as surely as the casket-switch theory, or single-bullet theory are schools of thought that don't cut the mustard. I am on a mission to eradicate this faulty postulate. I will not relent.
Hasan Yusuf
Hasan Yusuf
Posts : 1899
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 35
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Sun 06 Apr 2014, 10:52 pm
beowulf wrote:Hasan is an impudent punk who needs several years of maturity. I don't see him on this thread. Let him put up the muscle...

Who talks (or thinks) like this? Hasan is a good guy who's polite to everyone who posts here even those he disagrees with, no need to take your anger out on him.


Thanks, Beowulf. I try to remain as polite as I can, but with people like Josephs and Gilbride, I make an exception. Gilbride is a smug and condescending piece of shit, who is an absolute disgrace to this entire forum. But since taking away Admin rights from his account, I know that he won't be able to cause the forum any real harm.
Hasan Yusuf
Hasan Yusuf
Posts : 1899
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 35
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 12:08 am
Racist lover wrote:OK, girls. Or should I say morons?

No you dumb motherfucking racist lover. They are RESEARCHERS. Which is a lot more than what I can say about a moron like you who believes Eddie Piper was the sixth floor shooter. Tell me dipshit, how many people do you think buy your bullshit theory? Now go suck David Josephs cock.
dwdunn(akaDan)
dwdunn(akaDan)
Posts : 304
Join date : 2013-06-22
Age : 60
Location : among the hills of southern Indiana, USA
http://xefdisposable.blogspot.com/

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 12:50 am
greg parker wrote:
I spoke to Greg privately and told him why I was leaving.  Bob Prudhomme's name wasn't mentioned.  Yours was.
I guess the cat's out now. What no one including Richard has been aware of is that I did what I thought was right, knowing it would mean Lee walking. I could have mentioned it any number of times, but I did not want Richard feeling he owed me any favors. I also could have thrown being a painter at him after having his laundry list of academic achievements rubbed in my face. Again, I chose not to. 

What I have been trying to do is understand the gripe you Richard, have with me and which seems to have precipitated you pissing off any number of posters here. If your gripe is just with me, then I ask you again just to spell it out. If you can't do that, then I reluctantly have to agree it may be time for a parting. I certainly cannot keep protecting one person from himself, and the forum cannot be sustained in the face of ongoing or recurring issues of revenge or whatever the issue/s may be from your POV.    

And one last thing: Here is what Bill Kelly wrote on my FB page 15 hours ago "U the Best Greg!" I guess he must really hate me for all the "mudslinging" I've aimed at him.
Well, at least that finally explains the formal and circumspect tone from management at the end of Prudhomme's "Chaney" thread, when I slightly objected to censoring the arguments on grounds of potential misunderstandings that might result from lack of transparency. Problem was, when Lee thereafter pulled out of co-authorship on the book, the conspiracy-minded among us could hardly be blamed for coming to a conclusion that Lee's departures might be due to a serious conflict with you. (as in, "discovering" or coming to a conclusion that you were just another "front man" for "the Man") I guess you're alright after all, Greg. And it's nice to know your lack of formal education hasn't kept you from developing into a decent human being.

On the other matter, this thread didn't make much sense as "revenge" against me; for all Richard knows, I might agree with him on the issue, or be relatively indifferent to it since I have areas other than JFK that I work on. It didn't make much sense as "revenge" against Hasan, since he was extremely unlikely to go anywhere near Richard anytime soon. It might have made sense as "revenge" against Stan, but I don't see how; I actually can't think of anything that might disturb Stan (I mean, I suppose you could tell him his cartoons and music selections suck, but the weight of evidence would be overwhelmingly against you).

So this "revenge" is really against you, Greg, and I suppose it mostly has to do with Richard's perception that he should have been backed up by you on the Apology issue? And his "Let's move on" evidently meant, "I'm right, you were wrong, there should be no more discussion, I win"? Little does he know that after he'd made his post in which he mentioned Piper, I had intended to shut up solely out of deference to you and your longstanding relationship here with him; but once he posted again, with talk of "it doesn't matter" and "manning up," I couldn't help but say exactly what I'd been thinking. Funny how these things work out.
StanDane
StanDane
Posts : 3644
Join date : 2013-09-03
Age : 70
https://prayermanleeharveyoswald.blogspot.com/

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 2:00 am
Richard, you're a dog that bites the hand that feeds you. Rather than show a modicum of humility (a quality that enriches "the temple of the spirit," btw), you brazenly plow ahead like a misguided child, convinced of your untenable position. I would think Greg is owed a simple "thank you" here. (Since you haven't thanked Greg for supporting you, I will: "Thanks, Greg!" There. See how easy that was?)
 
A few days ago I suggested you ask yourself: "Is this really a good place for me anymore?" If you need help answering that question, there are many of us here who can help you decide. Just ask. Maybe we can even do a poll?
 
PS: People who have actually accomplished things in life don't need to talk about what degrees they have, how smart they are, or their big plans for the future. Any idiot can do that. The world is full of educated derelicts. 
 
PPS: It's float like a butterfly, sting like a bee.

 
greg_parker
greg_parker
Admin
Posts : 8326
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 65
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia
http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 7:48 am
Richard Gilbride wrote:Good!! Apologies extended to anyone I offended or pissed off. I see that Lee Farley has been inspired to come out of the woodwork and re-enter the debate. Am enthused to have him aboard for this particular discussion. Like Muhammed Ali before the George Foreman fight, I can only say that "I feel good! I feel clean! I know I can win!"

C'mon, Lee. You know the score. Float like a bumblebee, sting like a bee. Put up your dukes, you temper-mental old twat. I haven't seen such a cry-baby since Fredo in Godfather II. And you bring your bumbling expertise to the discussion?! You're not going to bring in the Ralph Yates mularkey to this topic, are you? Spare me, mister.

Seeing as I now have to justify my occupational choice in order to continue to have posting privileges here, I enjoy the independence of self-employment. And I am highly-skilled at it, and use my brain constantly, much more than I had done while employed as a chemist. The work often allows me to think through problems in other areas of my life. And it keeps me in shape. I can see that you are all in love with status quo definitions of what a working class hero should do with his career. Is that 'cause your momma fed you pancakes every morning?

I had a cottage industry selling posters of my scientific design from approx. 1995-2002, sold only about 700, lost several thousand bucks, and had to pack it in. I don't regret it, because they are there for the next generation.

Yes, JFK work takes all you got, plenty of errors get made, it hardly matters what one's academic background is. But in this particular thread, I bring a lot to the gladiator's arena. We'll see who's left standing after the battle.

OK, girls. Or should I say morons? Your position on the lunchroom non-event is poison, just as surely as the casket-switch theory, or single-bullet theory are schools of thought that don't cut the mustard. I am on a mission to eradicate this faulty postulate. I will not relent.
Richard, you do not have to justify your occupational choice. That is ludicrous and was never said or implied. 

What I put to you was that you should just spit out what your problem is with me. I further suggested that if the air couldn't be cleared because you can't or won't discuss it, and instead, insist upon continuing your current "mission" then it may be time for you to leave. You can continue it elsewhere. 

It's your choice. I'll give you 24 hours.

_________________
Australians don't mind criminals: It's successful bullshit artists we despise. 
              Lachie Hulme            
-----------------------------
The Cold War ran on bullshit.
              Me


"So what’s an independent-minded populist like me to do? I’ve had to grovel in promoting myself on social media, even begging for Amazon reviews and Goodreads ratings, to no avail." 
Don Jeffries

"I've been aware of Greg Parker's work for years, and strongly recommend it." Peter Dale Scott

https://gregrparker.com
avatar
Guest
Guest

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 8:43 am
Last night i deleted my account here due to Richard's attitude and absolute distain towards all members, mainly Hasan and Greg. It was wrong for me to do this. As a 24 carat moron, i joined this forum to learn all i can from a diverse group of people who hail from all points of the compass.
My education will continue and hopefully Richard will get a contract for the Forth Bridge.
TerryWMartin
TerryWMartin
Posts : 1000
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 72
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA
http://martianpublishing.com

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 9:26 am
Alan Dixon wrote:Last night i deleted my account here due to Richard's attitude and absolute distain towards all members, mainly Hasan and Greg. It was wrong for me to do this. As a 24 carat moron, i joined this forum to learn all i can from a diverse group of people who hail from all points of the compass.
My education will continue and hopefully Richard will get a contract for the Forth Bridge.

Alan,

Glad to hear you're sticking around. I find there is much to learn about this subject even after fifty years of study.

One Q: what is "a contract for the Forth Bridge"?
avatar
Guest
Guest

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 9:44 am
AN old saying for a job with no end is painting the Forth Bridge.
Hasan Yusuf
Hasan Yusuf
Posts : 1899
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 35
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 10:54 am
Alan Dixon wrote:Last night i deleted my account here due to Richard's attitude and absolute distain towards all members, mainly Hasan and Greg. It was wrong for me to do this. As a 24 carat moron, i joined this forum to learn all i can from a diverse group of people who hail from all points of the compass.
My education will continue and hopefully Richard will get a contract for the Forth Bridge.


Welcome back, Alan. As far as Gilbride is concerned, I think it's time for him to leave the forum for good.
avatar
Guest
Guest

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 11:34 am
I was given a responsibility as administrator to be in a boss position. I cared deeply about this forum, its image and such, including how members here , were treated (or mistreated) on other forums. But to have it de-evolve into a profanity-tossing fest after the David Josephs incident set me off big-time. I explained that I see where using profanity is offensive, uncalled for.

And I stepped into the fight to attempt to break it up, seeing myself as making a magnanimous gesture by apologizing to David. I was viciously attacked with insults for doing this. My "revenge" is directed against these particular insults. If there had been animosity against my general posting personality, it really came out then.

True, I don't need this forum. Life is extremely full for me. My schedule often gives me inadequate time for it. But I think we can carry on with respect and calmness from here, I really do. I got very upset to watch this place bottom out into a mudslinging pit, when it does a lot of high-class and high-caliber research.

It seems that I owe everyone an apology. So be it. I'm sorry. But please understand that my anger was stoked by your anger, and it was yours initially. It inflamed into a Lord of the Flies situation. This has been a common scene on JFK forums the past several years, and small wonder that the divisive invectives cause more harm than good.

We can get down to brass tacks or continue venting, the choice is ours and will be ongoing. I am quite passionate about this particular issue and have every confidence of the correctness of my stated position. It might be a good tonic for the research community, to have this debate on record and to show that we can settle down after explosive in-fighting.

I will make an effort to tone down the rhetoric. It would be a shame to lose the discussion because of heated emotions. However, I will not tone down my confidence in my correctness.

Tomorrow I have a few hours off and can spend some time re-posting the "brass tacks", as this discussion may need a fresh starting point.
Frankie Vegas
Frankie Vegas
Posts : 367
Join date : 2009-11-09
Age : 41
Location : New Zealand

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 12:06 pm
Wow, this is really disappointing. And can I point out that calling someone a 'girl' in a derogatory way is sexist and super offensive.
Sort it out - like men.
Colin_Crow
Colin_Crow
Posts : 322
Join date : 2013-08-03

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Mon 07 Apr 2014, 3:25 pm
With appropriate irony given the release date of Dr Strangelove.

“Gentlemen, You Can’t Fight In Here! This is The War Room!”
Sponsored content

The Lunchroom Incident Revisited - Page 2 Empty Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Back to top
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum