My Debate On JFK On The Mythbusters Forum - OMFG!!!!!

[Bob]

Pasquale, I have to give you lots of credit for trying to portray facts in a forum where there is so much tunnel vision and so much policing done to control the masses. It sounds a lot like the Dumbya Bu$h administration with their tactics. That is why Bu$h never did what Obama is doing, giving speeches and answering questions in a town hall forum type setting (even in Republican districts). Bu$h was always in a controlled bubble, and he ONLY spoke to crowds their were well screened or at places like military bases. Plus, his ideology was so narrow, and so stubborn, that he never listened to other possibilities. It sounds like you are going through the same thing. But again, Discovery controls the forum. They don't want to hear the truth. They just tell ONE side of the story in their JFK asassination specials. You always see Gary Mack. But where is Jim Marrs, Robert Groden or Wim Dankbaar? It's like going on the Bill O'Reilly show. No matter what you say...and how true the facts are...O'Reilly will shout you down and control the message. That is what you are experiencing at that forum. If I were you, I wouldn't waste anymore of your valuable time there.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Bob wrote:Pasquale, I have to give you lots of credit for trying to portray facts in a forum where there is so much tunnel vision and so much policing done to control the masses. It sounds a lot like the Dumbya Bu$h administration with their tactics. That is why Bu$h never did what Obama is doing, giving speeches and answering questions in a town hall forum type setting (even in Republican districts). Bu$h was always in a controlled bubble, and he ONLY spoke to crowds their were well screened or at places like military bases. Plus, his ideology was so narrow, and so stubborn, that he never listened to other possibilities. It sounds like you are going through the same thing. But again, Discovery controls the forum. They don't want to hear the truth. They just tell ONE side of the story in their JFK asassination specials. You always see Gary Mack. But where is Jim Marrs, Robert Groden or Wim Dankbaar? It's like going on the Bill O'Reilly show. No matter what you say...and how true the facts are...O'Reilly will shout you down and control the message. That is what you are experiencing at that forum. If I were you, I wouldn't waste anymore of your valuable time there.That is so true. In fact, I haven't even logged on there for a couple of days now. I MIGHT do what Turtleman might do and that is the occasional log-in over once in a while to do a quick reply to a BS posting or two.To support what you're saying about that forum, one of the forum rules is NO DISCUSSION about 9/11 at all. Seriously. In fact, one of the forum members over there apparently found out that I'm on this forum here at jfkmurdersolved and then asked me something like "I bet you think 9/11 was a conspiracy too." Almost immediately his cronies over there began replying to him that 9/11 discussion can get you booted off of that forum.So, what kind of true discussion board has a BAN on 9/11 discussion??? WTF??? I thought we lived in the United States. What happened to free and open discussion.It's no wonder that Turtleman's other post was censored. They tried to take a lot of the "meat" out of what he was saying.

[Pennyworth]

Zapruder JFK Film Impeached by Moorman JFK Polaroidhttp://www.opednews.com/articles/Zapruder-JFK- ... 24-48.html

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Pennyworth wrote:Zapruder JFK Film Impeached by Moorman JFK Polaroidhttp://www.opednews.com/articles/Zapruder-JFK- ... 48.htmlHow very interesting indeed. So...they're just going to start calling the Zapruder film a fake? LOLNow THAT's funny!!!!!! LMAOI like how the author of that assassinationscience page just says things without actually backing them up.Is it just me? So, he uses the line "...don't just believe what the U.S. government tells you!" and then he puts disinformation out! Wow...kind of like a disinformation double-bluff. He's trying to look like he's on OUR side, and then he prints his garbage. Is it just me, or am I off the mark?

[saracarter766]

no pasquale your not off the mark the author of the assassinations science page is full of horse manure.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

saracarter766 wrote:no pasquale your not off the mark the author of the assassinations science page is full of horse manure. I thought so, but I never like to assume too much. The article with the assassinations-science link was difficult to read too. A lot of references without any beef! Where's the beef? Like that little old lady in those commercials, you know? (I think I watch too many commercials. I can never remember the brand names sometimes, but the commercials crack me up.)Okay, so it's not just me then! Good! LOLSo, the verdict is horse poop for them, eh?

[ChristophMessner]

Disinfo is always kind of primitive and needs spectacular show effects or rhethorics. Real info always needs more time to explain how it really was and is, it needs more effort, it's more toilsome. Convincing like overpowering with the better rhethoric, the better explanations, the truer and more facts often does not work, because it demands a difficult process from the opponent, namely to admit to have been wrong about some parts and that is very difficult for almost everybody, to give in to having lost one's face somehow. Especially in the JFK-thing it is very difficult to make to admit to some truths, because it deals with a shame-feeling in the identification process with the whole state. It scratches the pride of belonging to and identifying with one's state in the first run. And additionally it is so difficult for many to evaluate the criminological aspect of the open-air JFK-murder: was it just a plain crime of JFK-haters or was it, because JFK went soft on the other superpowers and therefore it was necessary to remove him from office? I mean, the JFK-case somehow touches all levels of human life and human powers aspects. So I see the solution for the difficulty to convince opinion opponents in drawing the discussion to the more general level, in which you speak about the possible motivs of participants in a more philosophical way, leaving open to some degree, what kind of politics should be at the peak of the pyramid of executive power. Mutual philosophizing about what is real disgrace, what is real strength, what is real useful in politics and so on. In my eyes the plotters of the JFK-murder are not all bad, because they might have thought, that soft politics on the Asian dictatorships might be long-term suicidal to the freedoms of America and therefore Kennedy's populistic politics might be dangerous, but nevertheless murder is murder and cover-up is cover-up and fraud is fraud, so they deserved to be brought before court and judged under the same laws they implied on others.

[turtleman]

Well I just spent a few hours looking over Fetzer's piece and the comparison between Moorman and Zapruder and I walk away thinking Zapruder's film was altered. Something is wrong and it looks to me like they really needed to push the story of the headshot from the rear causing a gaping front right hole. We know that isn't where the skull was blown out. Another thread on this forum talks about different versions of Zapruder. I could almost swear I have seen a version with brain and skull matter scattered across the trunk of the Lincoln. How do they get to people and make them change stories or alter things? I find it amazing how it is all spun for public consumption. Bob?

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

ChristophMessner wrote:In my eyes the plotters of the JFK-murder are not all bad, because they might have thought, that soft politics on the Asian dictatorships might be long-term suicidal to the freedoms of America and therefore Kennedy's populistic politics might be dangerous, but nevertheless murder is murder and cover-up is cover-up and fraud is fraud, so they deserved to be brought before court and judged under the same laws they implied on others.I've often thought that myself about certain people who were involved in the cover-up. I'm SURE there were people who looked at JFK as too soft on the Communist boogyman. Well, SHAME on them for actually being naive enough to trust a bunch of politicians and power elite and not opening their eyes. There had to have been moments of confusion for those lower-level people helping with the cover-up...kind of like, "Hey, that doesn't make sense," or "Hey, why are these witnesses suddenly dying?" SHAME on them for blindly following orders. Maybe I shouldn't be so hard on them... Okay, I felt bad for them for about a minute, and now I say SHAME on them again! LOL

[ChristophMessner]

Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:Okay, I felt bad for them for about a minute, and now I say SHAME on them again! LOL My guess is, that the higher you get up in the hidden pyramid of executive or money power, the more your mind is soaped with a way of thinking, which takes ambiguities as normal and playing around with numerous human lifes and deaths just natural. Those guys who have been dramatically successful in their lifes and have just had a very steep career boost passed, are so thrilled by the rapid movement of events for them, that they just do not register a normal way of being anymore. Soaping others with their half-true-half-lie-stories-and-agendas has become just daily routine for them. They have the feeling, that what worked for them in the past so well, will work for them in the future as well, but they start to register that they might err with that and in the shark pond they are living in, they are also training to stay even more flexible with truth in the future. So there is no way to beat them by direct confrontation anymore, but only ignoring them, doing one's own thing independantly from them, not-enviing them, leaving them alone in their error-life, commiserating them, expose their miserable life style in public, forgiving them their inferiority complex which needs profit for self-esteem, deigning to heal their soul wounds, which came from the error, that men would need ruling, only this helpes with these commiserable ill-guided ones who need cover-up of coup d'etats and bribery.