Seamus Coogan on John Hankey

[SeamusCoogan]

Lol this is cool.I'm actually seeing people who agree with Hankey that George Bush went up to Washington and threatened J Edgar Hoover in his office with a gun. I've never heard or seen 'Michael Dell' before. Hes obviously Hankeys friend, ah well. I'm surprised anybody is going to argue any of my points. In fact no one here really has guys. Being called arrogant or snide lol. Look. In Jim's reviews for instance can you imagine how Mack and others would be squirming.I have been lucky enough to have been lauded for my piece and I am very very flattered by it all. Guys do you honestly think Allen Dulles was Prescott's Stooge, really cmon team, we're better than this? Was John Connally in on the plot? No. Is John Hankey as good a researcher as say Dealey Joe, or Bob Fox! No not on your lives! Hes not even a researcher that I can discern. Did the CIA launch an attack on Cuba while JFK slept? Did they really? As for Bob Franklin, this is rather sad. Ive enjoyed our interchanges and exchanges in the past but I would watch whom anyone calls arrogant - I think its pretty arrogant to insinuate that 'you' (I'm talking about Hankey Bob) found the documents in question, that 'you' have influenced Michael Talbot and that 'you' have been researching for 50 years. I could go on and on and on. My original manuscript was about 51 pages. Its 31. As for Bush. I never ever denied his CIA links. Read the piece theres quite a substantial amount of stuff there on that. Excuse me for not wanting to hold hands or be a snob. But why should I be friends with every tub thumping conspiracy advocate. It drives me insane when people say we should be quiet when someone makes bunk claims for the good of the community, do you think I should sit down and shut up while Hankeys video is all over the show, how many people are starting off on the case with a foundation of straw? As you all know. I'm harder on myself than I ever will be on John Hankey. I take my job seriously, very, very seriously. The idea (as I have said to you guys before) of making even the smallest mistake in anything I do with JFK drives me to distraction. Take where I come from and the standards I try my best to uphold and look at Hankey, please do. Hankey does not meet those standards. Furthermore Bob lad, its not peace and love brother. I ask you should Jim have been quiet about Lamar Waldron's bogus work? Hankeys work is simply not good, not simply full of one or two errors. Is it my fault that he has been stoved? It's his own and I'm sorry guys if it came across as a little ruthless or vindictive. But trust me this can be a very nasty business I am involved in and Bob you'll discover what I mean when your piece (which I am really looking forward to) comes out. Sometimes you see sides to people that, well, you would prefer not to see. With regard to that i apologize if I have been heavy handed in any of my dealings here on this forum. As Jim says this forum is excellent and its a credit to you all. Sadly, I am much to busy to post here as often nowadays. But Bob mate I hope you don't think that after my piece that John Judge, Len and whoever else will not have Hankey back? Every researcher I have ever spoken to (before my piece) has either said he (Hankey) is a joke, or a crock of shit. Remember too Bob, Len by his own admission has had some real stinkers on and Len has a laugh about it. John Judge can make mistakes also, hell it doesn't mean I don't rate John Judge. One of the reasons why Hankey got to COPA was that he and John Judge were interested in the Gary Webb case apparently. Furthermore people if you don't like what I said about Hankey or Jones in that piece, you wont like what I have written about David Icke and Jones in others. If you struggle or are offended with my take on guys such as these, your gonna struggle with a lot of my research. Hey, but well thats your view.But its great theres a discussion, and I think all of your views no matter how they are presented are fantastic to see. Furthermore Bob its Kens job to post Jim's stuff on here and I had said to him that theres a few little pieces we needed to clear up. But its mine and Jims fault for sticking it up. Jim was getting a lot of requests for it to arrive I had taken so long and I guess thats why it's up there.But yeah guys keep talking and debating the piece its all healthy and its all good.Cheers to Joe and Ken for the heads up.

[Bob]

Seamus, I'm glad you responded. As I WELL know, there will always be people that will disagree with takes on any given story. That will NEVER change. You know I respect your work, but I also respect the opinions of others in this forum. I have pretty much hit on the major disagreements I have with you on your story. It's stuff we have debated since we first met. Bottom line, you spent a lot of time and effort on this story. You have brought out some of the shortcomings of John Hankey's work to be sure. But as I have also said, I believe the overall premise of Hankey's work was accurate. But he did make some assumptions that were most likely incorrect. Still, the man deserves a chance to respond to your story, whether it be on Black Op Radio, CTKA or wherever. Finally, as I also said earlier, it's too bad that no one in the lone nut community does the type of work that Seamus did on one of their own. Whatever Dave Perry says, Larry "The Fable Guy" Dunkel (Gary Mack ) does. Vince Bugliosi could say that Charles Manson and Lee Harvey Oswald were brothers and David Von Pein would nod and say yes. The problem with the CT side is that we infight too much. Yes...we ALL agree it was a conspiracy, but there are arguments about the conspirators, the shooters, the wounds, the autopsy, the Zapruder film etc. Even with all of that, I think we have never been closer to the truth than we are today, thanks to the fantastic books by Jim Douglass and Doug Horne. Meanwhile, let the debate continue, but let's be respectful of each other's opinions please.

[kenmurray]

Seamus, I see that you spend a great deal of time for your work. Several things on Hankey I don't agree with and some I do for now. Bottom line before I even joined this forum, I didn't know Operations Northwoods existed. But Bob and others brought this up many times in the forum and sure did change my opinion on the Bushes. The Bush-Clinton connection in Mena also opened my eyes. Like Bob said let's continue on with the debate.

[SeamusCoogan]

Bob wrote:Seamus, I'm glad you responded. As I WELL know, there will always be people that will disagree with takes on any given story. That will NEVER change. You know I respect your work, but I also respect the opinions of others in this forum. I have pretty much hit on the major disagreements I have with you on your story. It's stuff we have debated since we first met. Bottom line, you spent a lot of time and effort on this story. You have brought out some of the shortcomings of John Hankey's work to be sure. But as I have also said, I believe the overall premise of Hankey's work was accurate. But he did make some assumptions that were most likely incorrect. Still, the man deserves a chance to respond to your story, whether it be on Black Op Radio, CTKA or wherever. Finally, as I also said earlier, it's too bad that no one in the lone nut community does the type of work that Seamus did on one of their own. Whatever Dave Perry says, Larry "The Fable Guy" Dunkel (Gary Mack ) does. Vince Bugliosi could say that Charles Manson and Lee Harvey Oswald were brothers and David Von Pein would nod and say yes. The problem with the CT side is that we infight too much. Yes...we ALL agree it was a conspiracy, but there are arguments about the conspirators, the shooters, the wounds, the autopsy, the Zapruder film etc. Even with all of that, I think we have never been closer to the truth than we are today, thanks to the fantastic books by Jim Douglass and Doug Horne. Meanwhile, let the debate continue, but let's be respectful of each other's opinions please. Nice points there. Bob lad. Get off your ass and get us that piece you and Joe have worked on. I want a rough you SOB lol. I like what you wrote here. Finally, as I also said earlier, it's too bad that no one in the lone nut community does the type of work that Seamus did on one of their own. Whatever Dave Perry says, Larry "The Fable Guy" Dunkel (Gary Mack ) does. Vince Bugliosi could say that Charles Manson and Lee Harvey Oswald were brothers and David Von Pein would nod and say yes. The problem with the CT side is that we infight too much. Yes...we ALL agree it was a conspiracy, but there are arguments about the conspirators, the shooters, the wounds, the autopsy, the Zapruder film etc. Even with all of that, I think we have never been closer to the truth than we are today, thanks to the fantastic books by Jim Douglass and Doug Horne.This is very important and it should be noted. They are not a community they are cutouts. Funded cutouts. Its a very good observation. Oh Bob I have something for you Ill get Ken to put it up on a new post.

[SeamusCoogan]

kenmurray wrote:Seamus, I see that you spend a great deal of time for your work. Several things on Hankey I don't agree with and some I do for now. Bottom line before I even joined this forum, I didn't know Operations Northwoods existed. But Bob and others brought this up many times in the forum and sure did change my opinion on the Bushes. The Bush-Clinton connection in Mena also opened my eyes. Like Bob said let's continue on with the debate. Operation Northwoods is interesting for sure Ken. I could go on and on and on lol. We'll have to have a discussion sometime.The big abyss that I came across team while looking at Hankey was Dulles....my god guys phew. I'm gonna need some comments on that!

[Michael Dell]

SeamusCoogan wrote: I've never heard or seen Michael Dell before. Then we're even. I'm not asking you to hold hands with anyone, nor do you have to agree with Mr. Hankey's work. If Mr. Hankey made mistakes, tell me what they are without all the sarcasm and assorted nonsense. I want to learn. And I learned nothing from that article other than the nature of its author. That review was a hit piece. Period. And I maintain it's a perfect example of why the Kennedy assassination community remains fractured. I only hope people treat you with more respect when evaluating your work.

[SeamusCoogan]

turtleman wrote:For the most part I think very highly of Seamus' work but I have a hard time following an argument trying to exonerate the Bush's from anything. I don't understand his motivation but I guess he is trying to be fair. You don't have to get far into Russ Baker's Family of Secrets to see Poppy's bizarre behavior trying to cover his tracks on 11/22/63. Just because 41's fingerprints aren't all over something doesn't mean he wasn't up to his neck in it Iran/Contra. My head starts to hurt when I think of all he might be involved in. But I do think Seamus is a quite brilliant researcher despite my rather slanted opinion of Poppy.Thats a hardcase. Yeah, the disagreement with Bob and myself chief isn't so bad. Its basically how involved Bush was. As my mate Greg and I have said before its naive to think that Bush was not involved in some clerical way. But nowhere near the levels as outlined by Hankey. Bob goes a little further as is his right. Bakers stuff about Bush acting strange, yeah it was strange but hell man a lot of people were doing strange things lol. I mean why did Allen Dulles go to Dallas three weeks before the assassination? Why was he at the farm (the cia's) training camp on the weekend of the assassination. Those are some tricky questions. Turtle I reckon mate you should look into Helms, Dulles, Angleton and Phillips and look under those rocks thats where you'll find Bush lol. But Hankeys premise that Allan Dulles was Prescott's lackey was what got me started on this whole thing mate! Now that is a cock up of monstrous proportions Bush just wasnt in the same league.

[SeamusCoogan]

Michael Dell wrote:SeamusCoogan wrote: I've never heard or seen Michael Dell before. Then we're even. You obviously havent been listening to BOR, seen the CTKA website,listened to my interview with HB McLain nor a host of other things.Now its not really a blow to my ego, what it indicates however is that you are out of the loop in terms of the Kennedy assassination. Hell if your not even visiting Jim's site like the rest of the lads on here do regularly, then you might be in a spot of bother in a debate on here hence I shall go easy with you. I'm not asking you to hold hands with anyone, nor do you have to agree with Mr. Hankey's work. If Mr. Hankey made mistakes, tell me what they are without all the sarcasm and assorted nonsense. I want to learn. And I learned nothing from that article other than the nature of its author. That review was a hit piece. Period. And I maintain it's a perfect example of why the Kennedy assassination community remains fractured. I only hope people treat you with more respect when evaluating your work.I have already listed the multitude of his mistakes in my work. It was depressing enough the first time. [/b] Did I say his? Wow because no wonder I have never heard of you on here. Because it appears you joined the other day on the 20th. Lol, and your most active forum has been this one. Now, forgive me for being suspicious here but wouldn't it be funny if this is John Hankey under an assumed name lol. I've busted people doing this kinda thing before on this very forum. So if it is John well this is what happens mate when you make mistakes in this game. Its brutal and the aftermath is not nice.Were my piece on Hankey/yourself just one liners and sarcasm then your arguments would hold water. Unfortunately its not, and unfortunately for you I see no need to continue debating with you John/Mark whomever. I have bigger fish to fry[/b]STOP THE PRESS: My apologies to Mike Dell he is authentic and bar his judgment on John Hankey is a bloody good Ice Hockey writer. His articles can be seen here.http://www.lcshockey.com/I'm an Oilers man myself what say you Bob, Ken, Mike? anyone?

[Michael Dell]

SeamusCoogan wrote:Michael Dell wrote:SeamusCoogan wrote:Unfortunately its not, and unfortunately for you I see no need to continue debating with you. I have far bigger fish to fry.Of course you do. You're very important. But it's not a debate. I was making a request. I'm asking you to please treat your future subjects with more respect. Namaste.

[Bob]

SeamusCoogan wrote:Bob wrote:Seamus, I'm glad you responded. As I WELL know, there will always be people that will disagree with takes on any given story. That will NEVER change. You know I respect your work, but I also respect the opinions of others in this forum. I have pretty much hit on the major disagreements I have with you on your story. It's stuff we have debated since we first met. Bottom line, you spent a lot of time and effort on this story. You have brought out some of the shortcomings of John Hankey's work to be sure. But as I have also said, I believe the overall premise of Hankey's work was accurate. But he did make some assumptions that were most likely incorrect. Still, the man deserves a chance to respond to your story, whether it be on Black Op Radio, CTKA or wherever. Finally, as I also said earlier, it's too bad that no one in the lone nut community does the type of work that Seamus did on one of their own. Whatever Dave Perry says, Larry "The Fable Guy" Dunkel (Gary Mack ) does. Vince Bugliosi could say that Charles Manson and Lee Harvey Oswald were brothers and David Von Pein would nod and say yes. The problem with the CT side is that we infight too much. Yes...we ALL agree it was a conspiracy, but there are arguments about the conspirators, the shooters, the wounds, the autopsy, the Zapruder film etc. Even with all of that, I think we have never been closer to the truth than we are today, thanks to the fantastic books by Jim Douglass and Doug Horne. Meanwhile, let the debate continue, but let's be respectful of each other's opinions please. Nice points there. Bob lad. Get off your ass and get us that piece you and Joe have worked on. I want a rough you SOB lol. I like what you wrote here. Finally, as I also said earlier, it's too bad that no one in the lone nut community does the type of work that Seamus did on one of their own. Whatever Dave Perry says, Larry "The Fable Guy" Dunkel (Gary Mack ) does. Vince Bugliosi could say that Charles Manson and Lee Harvey Oswald were brothers and David Von Pein would nod and say yes. The problem with the CT side is that we infight too much. Yes...we ALL agree it was a conspiracy, but there are arguments about the conspirators, the shooters, the wounds, the autopsy, the Zapruder film etc. Even with all of that, I think we have never been closer to the truth than we are today, thanks to the fantastic books by Jim Douglass and Doug Horne.This is very important and it should be noted. They are not a community they are cutouts. Funded cutouts. Its a very good observation. Oh Bob I have something for you Ill get Ken to put it up on a new post.In terms of the story I'm doing for CTKA, I'm working on it right now. I've gotten a bit sidetracked with some things, plus it's been a bit of a rough go of things with my family, as my dad's brother passed away yesterday. GREAT guy too. Played college football at Notre Dame when he was younger, but that stinking Parkinsons disease really took it's toll on him later in life. Bottom line, he raised a great family and was a great uncle. I'll miss him. My dad is the last of the Mohicans in his family now. Anyway, these past few weeks in my life has REALLY sucked. It's moments like those when family and friends count most...and this forum has helped me get through some difficult times in my life.