three card monte

Slobodan \"Alan Ford" Stinkic wrote:And let's note that Mr. Bojczuk has pointedly declined the opportunity to rule out nefarious photo-alteration in the Kamp Darnell frame. Like his PM-to-the-Death-and-Beyond! true believer pals, he has evidently gone all in on the project of making the already discredited PM/Darnell=LHO claim unfalsifiable. No matter what happens from here on in, the delusion will be kept alive. Even if NBC were to release the original film, and it showed the woman we already know from the Kamp frame, the line will simply be: Well, this shows that a panicked NBC altered the film! We were right!! 

What a POS Slobby Stinkic is (that's his real name because I  imagined it is).

Something is either falsifiable, or it isn't. Neither Mr. Stinkic nor anyone here can wish that away or make it otherwise. If it shows a woman, the hypothesis has been falsified and claiming fakery without proof does not change that. 

What is truly unfalsifiable is Slobby's thesis and all component parts of it. It takes some fucking gall to put forward a theory like that while claiming others with falsifiable evidence, are magically trying to make that evidence unfalsifiable.

But credit where due, he has the "voice" of the carnival con calling one and all to come play three card monte with him - where oh where is the Lovelady card today, folks? 

and the rubes are gathering.... "friends..." indeed.

He is not there to debate in good faith. Looks like his agenda is to derail the PM issue by muddying the waters. A carnival hustler indeed.

I barely scan his posts anymore. Just look for responses. There are less and less of them.

It makes you wonder what his motivation is. Either he's doing it for the attention, or he is deliberately trying to muddy the waters over Prayer Man. Anything that requires Lovelady in Altgens 6 to be Oswald, and the Wiegman film to be a fake, has to be a joke.

Mr Ford's (or "Mr Ford"'s) faux-jocular style serves to disguise the weakness of his claims. When someone churns out plenty of words but fails to state their theory outright, it's usually a sign that there's a charlatan at work, a principle I deduced while reading Lifton's Best Evidence.

There's also his apparent lack of honesty in failing to address reasonable objections. Roger Odisio pointed out the implausiblity of Ford's ludicrous claim that JFK authorised a mock assassination attempt in Dealey Plaza as part of a plan to overthrow Castro, to which Ford's reply was "I rest my case", after which he promptly moved onto another topic. I asked him to explain why there were no witnesses to his supposed flag-waving exercise on the steps of the book depository, and his reply was: "the waving mini-incident was witnessed --------------- by the camera of young Miss Towner".

That's the sort of thing the moderators over there should be looking at, if they're interested in promoting serious debate, rather than putting people on the naughty step for trivial things like "making fun of members" or whatever the reason was for Jonathan's temporary banishment.

I've suggested that Mr Ford should try promoting his theory over here. I wonder if he'll be brave enough to have a go.

Well said, Jeremy. As for the mods there at least one of them has quite a strong supporter of Ford. In any case it looks Sandy and Mark are the only two mods remaining. Kathy has mysteriously disappeared from the forum. Gordon too appears to have left.

Here is my full exchange with Alan.  Sorry for the length.
 

  On 11/7/2023 at 7:51 PM, Alan Ford said:
Yes x2
 

(I had asked Alan if he was saying JFK had approved the false flag incident he describes as a pretext to go after Castro)
 
Let's review. Kennedy had his first chance to go after Castro with the Bay of Pigs, set up for him by Nixon and Allen Dulles.  Dulles thought he had trapped Kennedy into providing air support, and preferably, sending in troops when the invasion failed. He was wrong.  Kennedy refused.
 
Next the Cuban missile crisis. All the military and nat security advisors and some domestic aides wanted either to bomb the missile site or invade Cuba. Kennedy said no and worked out a plan with Krushchev to cool the crisis in part by agreeing not to invade Cuba.  
 
The generals came to Kennedy with a plan to preemptively strike the Soviet Union to take advantage of the US superiority in nukes before the Soviets could catch up.  The loss of life would be manageable, they said.  Kennedy threw them out of his office.
 
They came back with Operation Northwoods, a false flag incident that could be blamed on Castro as a excuse to attack him.  Kennedy said no.
 
After the missile crisis, both Kennedy and Krushchev realized how close they came to ending life on earth, and how each was surrounded by hard line war mongers.  They began back channel discussions of ways to accept their differences and work together to prevent catastrophe.
 
Kennedy also opened secret talks with Castro to try to work out ways they could live with each other.  Castro told Kennedy's envoy (on the very day Kennedy was murdered) that Krushchev told him that he would be able to work with Kennedy.
 
Krushchev said Kennedy's speech at AU extolling the similarities of the Russian and American people and laying out a plan for peace, was the greatest speech by an American since FDR and had it played all over the Soviet Union.
 
But despite all of this and much more we now know (this is just a brief summary), Alan, you  know better. What JFK really wanted was to overthrow Castro, knowing that it would lead to war with the Soviet Union because Krushchev could not stand by and do nothing.  Kennedy must have wanted that too.  So he concocted the scheme you describe.
 
What nonsense.
 
Alan responded to nothing, but instead said (an early indication he had no response):
 
AF:  Yes, my explanation for what really went down 11/22/63 is going to be challenging for anyone still clinging to the kumbaya version of the Kennedy brothers' plans for Cuba.
 
To which I said:
 
That's it, Alan? That's your answer to the facts I laid out for you?   Kennedy realized he had missed several chances to take out Cuba and start a nuclear war with the Soviet Union, and with his first term nearing the end, was determined to not let another chance slip by?  So he devised the false flag operation you describe?
 
What a clever guy that Kennedy was.  Working behind the scenes to fool Krushchev and Castro into letting down their guard down while planning to blow them away.  And the rhetoric of the peace speech--no to a Pax Americana enforced by American weapons of war--that produced something like 80 votes in the Senate to ratify the limited test ban treaty--was that a mistake?  Wouldn't Kennedy's plan to rule the world with the SU out of the way been in a better position without the test ban?  
 
Do you suppose that before going to Dallas he couldn't resist sidling up to Curtis LeMay to tell him his previous statements and decisions (that caused LeMay to call him a coward to his face) were a ruse, or he had changed his mind, or whatever explanation you have come up with to support your claims? Just to let him know they were both on the same side. Kennedy's new plan, after all, was just a tweaking of Northwoods that he had so brusquely rejected before.  The generals had given Kennedy a deadline that was fast approaching for a preemptive strike on the SU, and he was now seeing the wisdom of that.
 
Your story has a certain internal logic to it. If you ignore the mountain evidence that contradicts, nay destroys, it.  Kind of like the Warren Report.
 
Btw, since you already have worked out your full "explanation" for Nov 22, why the delay in offering it, Alan?   Is this a parlor game to you?
 
Alan dodged again:
 
AF:  ~Yawn~
 
Can someone please give Mr. Odisio contact details for Mr. Lamar Waldron?
 
Yawn?  Your ignorance is exceeded only by your arrogance, Alan.  Couldn't *you* have given me contacts to Waldron?
 
Never mind.  I looked him up.  He's written a couple of books about the secret coup JFK was planning against Castro on Dec.1, that you have been slyly alluding to. He thinks the plan was intercepted by Carlos Marcello and his mafioso, who then murdered Kennedy as revenge for their treatment by the Kennedy bros. 
 
Is that where you're headed, Alan?  All the back and forth about what the films show was just a diversion, a way to build your research bonafides before you sprung your "truth" on everyone?  Marcelo did it for the simplest of reasons?
 
If so, that was probably wise.  Had you started with your conclusion, this thread would have been short lived, into the dustbin with other such theories, and you wouldn't have gotten all the attention you so assiduously have sought.
 
An isolated murder with no connection to the rest of the political murders of the 60s, you say?  Nothing whatsoever to do with the Washington takeover of the war machine, which nevertheless did happen and is obviously still in control today.  Whew!  That's a relief.  Personally I can save all that time I would have spent tracing its beginning back to the  the JFKA.
 
What about the Soviet Union, Alan?  Should we credit Marcelo, by offing JFK, for saving us from a nuclear war with the Soviets that Kennedy would have caused by overthrowing Castro?
 
As I have raised questions, your answers have shrunk to the dismissive nothingness of your latest effort. But were/are you planning to explain how Kennedy arrived at the alleged plan for a coup after rejecting all previous suggestions for something similar?
 
Alan was done.  He slunk away with a final pathetic dodge: You had to look him up? I rest my case, lol
 
I was done, too,  I had wasted enough time with this charlatan:   Another nonanswer avoidance.  You keep resting your case without responding to anything, indicating you neither have any answers nor a case to begin with.

Great smack down Roger. He could never deserve it more.