Re: MORE EXAMPLES OF THE STRANGE MINDSET OF CONSPIRACY KOOKS
David Von Pein
A conspiracy theorist named Charles Drago (a veteran participant at
various JFK Internet forums) said something really, really funny on
The Education Forum on December 15, 2008, concerning the so-called
"feud" between two assassination researchers, Gus Russo and Max
Holland, both of whom reside in the "Oswald Fired The Only Shots At
JFK" camp.
Drago's remarks were prompted by this article authored by Russo:
www.jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/12/holland-aise-sauce-more-grousing-from.html
Here's what Drago said (which illustrates, yet again, how CTers see
conspiracies virtually everywhere they look):
"A Holland/Russo "feud" is designed to prompt observers to
choose between liars and thus implicitly endorse one of their
assassination-related lies. This is an example of perception control:
Limit possibilities, and the truth is eliminated from consideration.
This charade also serves to bolster Russo and his fabrications by
allowing him to castigate a WC defender. Sophisticated stuff." --
Charles Drago; 12/15/08
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13813&view=findpost&p=159990
=============
So, according to Mr. Drago, we have Gus Russo and Max Holland engaging
in a fake "feud" of some kind (i.e., a "charade", as Drago puts it),
as part of some "sophisticated", planned-in-advance scheme/plot that
is "designed" to place the observers of this feud in a position where
they are forced to choose which of the two "liars" to put their faith
in.
Tell us Mr. Drago --- Is there anything in the world that you CT-Kooks
won't label with the word "conspiracy"? Anything at all?
(When looking at the next item on the "conspiracy tote board" below, I
fear the answer to my last inquiry is "No".)
Just to show that not ALL of the severely-retarded conspiracy-happy
loons reside here at the acj and aaj forums (or at John Simkin's CTer-
infested website), I offer up the following stupid comment posted by a
super-kook named "Wendi" at the IMDb.com "JFK (1991)" forum, regarding
the recent incident in Iraq where a journalist hurled two shoes at
President Bush, barely missing the President with each toss:
"Of course he [Bush] handled it well, because it was staged for
public consumption. Meant to be a diversion from something big
happening." -- "wendi14501"; 12/15/08
=============
Do these kooks consume paranoia pills every day for breakfast (and
dinner)?
BTW, in my opinion, George Bush handled the shoe-throwing incident
very well. And he showed some pretty darn fast reflexes too, in
avoiding that first piece of footwear that was flung his way.
The Iraqi shoe-thrower threw that shoe quite hard too. It looked to me
as if the first shoe would have hit Bush squarely between the eyes if
he hadn't quickly ducked out of its path. And I don't imagine that
would have felt too good if it had hit him directly in the face either
(considering the speed at which the "Size 10" shoe was travelling).
SHOE-TOSSING VIDEO:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=1rwxIjQZF98&fmt=18
YOU LEARN SOMETHING NEW EVERY DAY (RE: "SHOE TOSSING"):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoe_tossing
Bud
David Von Pein wrote:
> A conspiracy theorist named Charles Drago (a veteran participant at
> various JFK Internet forums) said something really, really funny on
> The Education Forum on December 15, 2008, concerning the so-called
> "feud" between two assassination researchers, Gus Russo and Max
> Holland, both of whom reside in the "Oswald Fired The Only Shots At
> JFK" camp.
>
> Drago's remarks were prompted by this article authored by Russo:
>
>
> www.jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/12/holland-aise-sauce-more-grousing-from.html
>
>
> Here's what Drago said (which illustrates, yet again, how CTers see
> conspiracies virtually everywhere they look):
>
>
>
> "A Holland/Russo "feud" is designed to prompt observers to
> choose between liars and thus implicitly endorse one of their
> assassination-related lies. This is an example of perception control:
> Limit possibilities, and the truth is eliminated from consideration.
> This charade also serves to bolster Russo and his fabrications by
> allowing him to castigate a WC defender. Sophisticated stuff." --
> Charles Drago; 12/15/08
>
> http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=13813&view=findpost&p=159990
How does he get to call them liars on a moderated forum, don`t
Holland and Russo post there?
> =============
>
> So, according to Mr. Drago, we have Gus Russo and Max Holland engaging
> in a fake "feud" of some kind (i.e., a "charade", as Drago puts it),
> as part of some "sophisticated", planned-in-advance scheme/plot that
> is "designed" to place the observers of this feud in a position where
> they are forced to choose which of the two "liars" to put their faith
> in.
>
>
> Tell us Mr. Drago --- Is there anything in the world that you CT-Kooks
> won't label with the word "conspiracy"? Anything at all?
It`s part of the appeal of their position. They can invent any
colorful scheme to explain something, and we are stuck will the
dull ,drab truth.
> (When looking at the next item on the "conspiracy tote board" below, I
> fear the answer to my last inquiry is "No".)
>
>
>
> Just to show that not ALL of the severely-retarded conspiracy-happy
> loons reside here at the acj and aaj forums (or at John Simkin's CTer-
> infested website), I offer up the following stupid comment posted by a
> super-kook named "Wendi" at the IMDb.com "JFK (1991)" forum, regarding
> the recent incident in Iraq where a journalist hurled two shoes at
> President Bush, barely missing the President with each toss:
>
> "Of course he [Bush] handled it well, because it was staged for
> public consumption. Meant to be a diversion from something big
> happening." -- "wendi14501"; 12/15/08
>
> =============
>
> Do these kooks consume paranoia pills every day for breakfast (and
> dinner)?
>
>
>
> BTW, in my opinion, George Bush handled the shoe-throwing incident
> very well. And he showed some pretty darn fast reflexes too, in
> avoiding that first piece of footwear that was flung his way.
>
> The Iraqi shoe-thrower threw that shoe quite hard too. It looked to me
> as if the first shoe would have hit Bush squarely between the eyes if
> he hadn't quickly ducked out of its path. And I don't imagine that
> would have felt too good if it had hit him directly in the face either
> (considering the speed at which the "Size 10" shoe was travelling).
He probably though his number was on that shoe. Remember they guy
who tried to blow up the plane with his explosive shoes?
Gil Jesus
that Kennedy was killed as a result of a conspiracy, seems to reveal
that you have unresolved psychiatric issues that need attention.
In other words, your behavior is not normal and it shows in your
postings.
I hope you get the help you need.
YoHarvey
Apparently our resident pathological lying homophobic racist believes
the following is NORMAL:
1. Calling revered and respected public servants murders with no
evidence.
2. Inferring John or Nellie Connally shot JFK with no evidence.
3. Suggesting JFK was coughing up a bullet with no evidence.
4. Believeing the entire DPD was "in on it" with no evidence.
......and the beat goes on.
Chuck Schuyler
Gil, you're misunderstanding his central point.
I understand that conspiracies sometimes occur. I'm sure that Bud,
DVP, YoHarvey, Tim Brennan and other JFK LNers would agree that people
sometimes conspire to rob banks, blow up buildings or whatever.
But life isn't a great big conspiracy. Why can't the guy who threw his
footwear at Bush be some typical nutty Muslim who is p*ssed at the
Great Satan for all the usual reasons and on some spur of the moment
whim decided to hurl his shoes at Bush? Why does everything that
happens need to be connected to something larger?
The guy threw his shoe at Bush. That's the whole story.
Concerning Kennedy, there were real concerns after he was shot that a
larger conspiracy was involved. But this thing has been investigated
to the point where there isn't even any meat left on the bones for the
vultures to pick at, and yet kooks like you still believe utterly
amazing, goofy sh*t. You've promoted/implied John Connally as one of
the shooters. This is breathtakingly stupid, Gil. You've promoted the
idea someone in a sewer on the other side of Elm St. (Jackie's side of
the limo) fired at the President. I believe you also endorse the
utterly ridiculous idea that a shot was fired from the front and went
through the limo windshield.
Gil, are you that far removed from reality that you cannot see how
dumb your positions are? I honestly think there is something mentally
wrong with a middle aged man who would even imply that the Governor in
the limo, who himself was nearly killed, could be involved in this
terrible crime in any way, shape or form. Do you think that the
Governor, sitting next to his beloved wife and riding proudly through
his state's biggest city, is going to whip a pistol out of his boot
and murder the President as he is also being shot, and as his wife is
screaming and being sprayed with blood?
In the years I have posted here, you have never offered up any proof
of your positions. Cobbling together witness testimony pilfered from
other programs, and taken out of context or offered up by people long
after the event, and posting it to YouTube, doesn't constitute proof.
People like yourself and robcap, Rossley, Walt, Healy and the rest of
the misfits at acj. are not mocked by LNers because they believe a
conspiracy killed JFK. They're mocked because they blieve utterly
idiotic things that are divorced from reality. Healy believes a fake
Zapruder filmed the motorcade and turned the film over to the
authorities to be altered. Meanwhile, the real Zapruder gave
interviews on the news that day and described what happened almost
perfectly. Walt once built a cardboard model of Dealey Plaza to try
and get to the bottom of things. Rob Caprio isn't sure the moon
landings were real. I'm sorry, there is something deeper going on here
than a belief that JFK was killed by a conspriacy. Perhaps a few
sessions with a psychiatrist would help.
aeffects
uh-uh-huh..... troll, get your sorry ass back on topic!
aeffects
> A conspiracy theorist named Charles Drago (a veteran participant at
> various JFK Internet forums) said something really, really funny on
> The Education Forum on December 15, 2008, concerning the so-called
> "feud" between two assassination researchers, Gus Russo and Max
> Holland, both of whom reside in the "Oswald Fired The Only Shots At
> JFK" camp.
whose posting today, troll? VP or Reitzes-pieces?
<snip the Lone Nut nonsense>
their whining is getting louder, Gil.... LMFAO!
YoHarvey
Healy, the official CT spokesmen of the lunatics on this board speaks
again. Healy? An education is nothing to skoff at. Stay off the
bong.....and kill the rodents in that apartment. It's Christmas
season.
YoHarvey
Oswald wasn't "climbing the walls' in
jail, because he fully expected to be rescued by his handler
His handler? roflmao. And WHO exactly was his handler???? Be
specific.
YoHarvey
>
> - Show quoted text -
Chuck, the most interesting part of this to me is that essentially
these kooks also support one another. No matter how absurd, how
ridiculous and how abstract these kook theories are, they pat one
another on the back. Reasonable people do NOT behave in this manor.
Jesus and Healy could be brothers. They each lack the ability to
"reason". Their lives are so imbedded in conspiracy that logical,
rational thought simply doesn't inhabit their lives. Look at the
similarities. Both uneducated. Both live in squalor. Both
supposedly fighting the "system" that they blame for their positions
in life. This is not hard to understand.
Losers have traditionally "fought" the establishment. They simply
don't have the ambition or inane intelligence to change their status
quo. They'll die as they lived. Blaming everybody but themselves.
muc...@gmail.com
What could *possibly* be more topical than the asinine antics of Gil/
robcap, Rossley, Walt, Healy and the rest of the misfits at acj?
David Von Pein
>>> "How does he [C. Drago] get to call them liars on a moderated forum, don`t Holland and Russo post there?" <<<
I don't ever recall seeing Russo or Holland posting at The Edu. Forum
before. Although it's possible they have and I haven't seen the posts.
But they certainly haven't posted there recently, AFAIK.
Plus, possibly Mr. Simkin's rule for calling fellow posters "liars"
isn't as rigid as Mr. McAdams' similar rule at aaj. Maybe Simkin
doesn't care if other Edu. members are called liars. ~shrug~
Anyway, I just got a big kick out of Drago's "charade" comment.
Hilarious.
I hope both Russo & Holland see it too. I'm sure they'll be laughing
as well (probably laughing about as hard as I do every time I see [or
hear] somebody call me Dave Reitzes; nothing tickles my funny bone
more than hearing that). :)
Gil Jesus
> their whining is getting louder, Gil.... LMFAO!
I agree. They seem to display an abnormal level of distaste for anyone
who believes in ANY kind of conspiracy, regardless of the topic, hence
the use of the word "kook" to describe such believers.
It's not about the Kennedy assassination to these bird-brains.
It's about "kooks" and insulting them as much as possible.
Walt
> A conspiracy theorist named Charles Drago (a veteran participant at
> various JFK Internet forums) said something really, really funny on
> The Education Forum on December 15, 2008, concerning the so-called
> "feud" between two assassination researchers, Gus Russo and Max
> Holland, both of whom reside in the "Oswald Fired The Only Shots At
> JFK" camp.
>
> Drago's remarks were prompted by this article authored by Russo:
>
>
> Here's what Drago said (which illustrates, yet again, how CTers see
> conspiracies virtually everywhere they look):
>
> "A Holland/Russo "feud" is designed to prompt observers to
> choose between liars and thus implicitly endorse one of their
> assassination-related lies. This is an example of perception control:
> Limit possibilities, and the truth is eliminated from consideration.
> This charade also serves to bolster Russo and his fabrications by
> allowing him to castigate a WC defender. Sophisticated stuff." --
> Charles Drago; 12/15/08
>
I disagree.... Bush should have jumped over that dias and punched the
asshole right on his nose, and knocked him on his ass. If he had
done that, Bush's image would have risen dramatically in the arab
world.
Gil Jesus
>
> BTW, in my opinion, George Bush handled the shoe-throwing incident
> very well.
>
> I disagree.... Bush should have jumped over that dias and punched the
> asshole right on his nose, and knocked him on his ass. � If he had
> done that, Bush's image would have risen dramatically in the arab
> world.
I agree with Walt, but I think Bush should have either caught the shoe
and thrown it back at him, or thrown his OWN shoes at the guy.