Choose Search Type
Search
 
 

Display results as :
 


Rechercher Advanced Search

Latest topics
» What strange affidavits these are!
Today at 7:38 pm by Ed. Ledoux

» Kennedys and King website
Today at 6:05 pm by Paul Francisco Paso

» The Facts about Connally's Wounds
Today at 5:53 pm by Paul Francisco Paso

» Kent Courtney
Yesterday at 11:47 pm by Hasan Yusuf

» a ramble in and around Pine St, NO
Yesterday at 11:45 pm by Hasan Yusuf

» Anatomy Of A Second Floor Encounter
Yesterday at 11:01 pm by barto

» ROKC Lampoon
Yesterday at 7:56 pm by steely dan

» Backyard photo´s rifle
Yesterday at 11:04 am by Ed. Ledoux

» No Shots Fired From The TSBD
Yesterday at 4:48 am by Stan Dane

Log in

I forgot my password

Social bookmarking

Social bookmarking Digg  Social bookmarking Delicious  Social bookmarking Reddit  Social bookmarking Stumbleupon  Social bookmarking Slashdot  Social bookmarking Furl  Social bookmarking Yahoo  Social bookmarking Google  Social bookmarking Blinklist  Social bookmarking Blogmarks  Social bookmarking Technorati  

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

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

RSS feeds


Yahoo! 
MSN 
AOL 
Netvibes 
Bloglines 


Affiliates
free forum
 



The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Page 2 of 22 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12 ... 22  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by greg parker on 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.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

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

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3440
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by greg parker on 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.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

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

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3440
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Terry W. Martin on 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.

Terry W. Martin

Posts : 690
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 65
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA

View user profile http://martianpublishing.com

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Guest on 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

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Guest on 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

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by dwdunn(akaDan) on 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)

dwdunn(akaDan)

Posts : 304
Join date : 2013-06-22
Age : 53
Location : among the hills of southern Indiana, USA

View user profile http://xefdisposable.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Stan Dane on Sun 06 Apr 2014, 3:06 pm

Welcome back Lee!

Stan Dane

Posts : 2322
Join date : 2013-09-03
Age : 63

View user profile https://prayermanleeharveyoswald.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by beowulf on 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.

beowulf

Posts : 364
Join date : 2013-04-21

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by gerrrycam on 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)

gerrrycam

Posts : 227
Join date : 2014-03-25

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by John Mooney on 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

John Mooney

Posts : 84
Join date : 2013-09-20

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by greg parker on 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.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

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

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3440
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Terry W. Martin on 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!

Terry W. Martin

Posts : 690
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 65
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA

View user profile http://martianpublishing.com

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Guest on 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.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on 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

Posts : 1778
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on 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.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1778
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by dwdunn(akaDan) on 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.

dwdunn(akaDan)

Posts : 304
Join date : 2013-06-22
Age : 53
Location : among the hills of southern Indiana, USA

View user profile http://xefdisposable.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Stan Dane on 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.

 

Stan Dane

Posts : 2322
Join date : 2013-09-03
Age : 63

View user profile https://prayermanleeharveyoswald.blogspot.com/

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by greg parker on 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.

_________________
Mixing Pop and Politics he asks me what the use is
I offer him embarrassment and my usual excuses
While looking down the corridor
Out to where the van is waiting
I'm looking for the Great Leap Forward

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

greg parker
Admin

Posts : 3440
Join date : 2009-08-21
Age : 58
Location : Orange, NSW, Australia

View user profile http:// http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00IXOA5ZK/ref=s9_simh_

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Guest on 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.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Terry W. Martin on 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"?

Terry W. Martin

Posts : 690
Join date : 2013-11-30
Age : 65
Location : Middleburg, VA, USA

View user profile http://martianpublishing.com

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Guest on Mon 07 Apr 2014, 9:44 am

AN old saying for a job with no end is painting the Forth Bridge.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Hasan Yusuf on 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.

Hasan Yusuf

Posts : 1778
Join date : 2013-03-13
Age : 28
Location : Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

View user profile http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com.au/

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Guest on 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.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Frankie Vegas on 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.

Frankie Vegas

Posts : 367
Join date : 2009-11-09
Age : 33
Location : New Zealand

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Colin Crow on 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!”

Colin Crow

Posts : 214
Join date : 2013-08-03

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: The Lunchroom Incident Revisited

Post by Sponsored content Today at 10:32 pm


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 22 Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 12 ... 22  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

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