Response to the Fez's latest

We're here trying to out the Military Industrial Congressional Complex... you honestly think I'm worried about members playing cointelpro games?

I've discussed the case with GP over many years Mitchell.. From my experience that which he uses as evidence to bedunk is never very strong or even appropriate to the discussion. In most every case the subject matter of his arguments are laced with speculation and his own theiories about other people and what COULD be possible...

As we've come to learn, anyone can argue the "against" side of the discussion... Evidence could be created/altered, memories fade, tonsils grow back, scars fade... 

Do a quick search on James Earl Ray or Sirhan Sirhan and see how much time and effort the FBI put to creating their life's narrative... I did and only found fleeting mentions of James dropping out of high school... not the year by year, grade by grade minutia we find in the JFK investigation. 

What people like GP fail to grasp is the YEARS of work interviewing those who the FBI hide away to get at the heart and truth of the matter.

One can always claim Dennis David or Paul O'Connor are lying... if they stood alone on an island... but once you expand the view and see how corroborated their accounts are... and then look at the scores of people who knew LEE and claim the HARVEY, the man Ruby shot, was NOT him... and then you check the records and find copies of copies which do not work together, or finally find original Unit Diaries which contradict the "agreed upon" timelines while corroborating stories like Felde's or Donavan's or Powers'... one ought to take a minute from talking tonsils and do the research.

GP did not, does not do that... go over to his forum Mitchell... just read the ..ing that passes for posts and the vile attacks on this forum and its members who disagree with GP and his approach... or Hasan's blog... angry little men with nothing to do but to lash out in their little corner of the internet... and offer nothing to forward our knowledge of anything.

Talking about inches, or unsigned undocumented FBI reports reeks of cointelpro tactics for derailing productive conversation. I expected more from GP than voodoo tonsils and obscure theories based on a single sentence he picked out of a review somewhere - would it be fair to talk theological inconsistencies with a priest if you have never bothered to read the bible? ... just cause you kinda know what the story is...?

IDK what GP's point or direction was... if purely to debunk H&L he comes woefully unprepared... if only to attack Armstrong and the H&L evidence, I find his attacks hollow and inadequate for the task.... He wants to know where I get my copies of documents... he remained so unaware of 99% of the evdience yet can take to his soapbox and berate others for having done their homework and challenge his POV... 

Mitchell - I appreciate those who admit they are not prepared to have these conversations... Or just as prepared to take what we post and question it realistically...

I am not a cult member here (as GP has accused me of) I took the time to determine what the evidence - not Armstrong - says... and it points to two different people from both a forward moving timeline as well as a backward looking one where the FBI created/altered/destroyed the documents needed to support/uncover the charade.

John and I are discussing the 5 most important and most unassailable facts to try and help me create a post that makes the evidence mroe "real"...


1. The Stripling/Kudlaty situation and 2220 Thomas Place is hard to argue against...
2. The different platoons and timing of the Marine records vs those that spent time with Lee or Harvey is also supported by a massive number of docs
3. The movements in and out of Russia and the "coincidences" of Marina's clouded history and Webster's involvement couplded with Goodpasture's actions

"I've discussed the case with GP over many years Mitchell.. From my experience that which he uses as evidence to bedunk is never very strong or even appropriate to the discussion. In most every case the subject matter of his arguments are laced with speculation and his own theiories about other people and what COULD be possible..."

Greg Parker wrote:
But none of these facts matter to the Fez because he urges readers to look at the totality of the evidence. This is code for "do not scrutinize ANY of the evidence -- but place it all side by side on the table and marvel at the sheer volume of it. There is soooo much, it can't be wrong." Which is the EXACT same MO that the likes of DVP make regularly when any individual piece of evidence is scrutinized and found wanting. The Fez knows this because DVP has pulled this same MO in response to the Fez's posts on the purchases of the weapons.

This is how the LNs work and why Bugliosi goes on about his "53 pieces" of "evidence". These are Big Picture people and can't be bothered with the details. As long as there is a large construct that holds together so well, the details do not matter. The sheer bulk of the edifice "proves" it to be correct. Anything else would fall apart.Well, guess what? It falls apart quite easily.



What Mitch will find is an imperfect little group whose members don't take themselves too seriously, nor run from debate.


A warm welcome from the imperfect.

John Mooney wrote:Nobody... but nobody can possibly taker Fetzer's work seriously.

His Billy Lovelady shirt nonsense at EF was a complete farce.

I am of the opinion it's now his job to be the media "go to" to make all JFK researchers look like cranks.

He must have had his tongue firmly planted in his cheek for this:

"I've discussed the case with GP over many years Mitchell.. From my experience that which he uses as evidence to bedunk is never very strong or even appropriate to the discussion. In most every case the subject matter of his arguments are laced with speculation and his own theiories about other people and what COULD be possible..."

Incredible.

Physican heal thyself (James T Kirk).

dwdunn(akaDan) wrote:  You can find the origin of the idea on probably page 2 of the "claims, claims and more claims" thread in In-House Issues, just before I started cussing.

Take care

greg parker wrote:Trying to out the MICC? With your arsenal of emoticons and fonts, I'm sure they're trembling in their bootstraps.

Stan Dane wrote:

dwdunn(akaDan) wrote:  You can find the origin of the idea on probably page 2 of the "claims, claims and more claims" thread in In-House Issues, just before I started cussing.

Take care

You got it Dan. That was about the point where my language went into the gutter as well. The Navy taught me many things, including how to express myself. It's nice to get a chance to use it occasionally.

It's funny, the idea for the Fez came out of our discussing the virtues of Paralyzed. "Looking backwards," it makes, sense, huh?