CIA Harassment of CT'ers Exposed!! (baby)
Tom Sutpen
in the parlance of this forum to attract a crowd here on the midway.
Okay . . . so I'm having a pleasant, civilized exchange here with one
Ben Holmes, when he asks me why the Central Intelligence Agency has
engaged in a widespread campaign of harassment against Kennedy
Assassination Conspiracy Theorists from time immemorial. It's an
interesting question in several respects, and I have my own theory as
to why that state of events would occur (which I will disclose
presently), but I thought I should open the floor, as it were, and ask
all y'all for your views on it.
Why did/do the CIA spend their time pickin' on Conspiracy Theorists,
anyway?
Tom Sutpen
aeffects
focus, son.... if you insist on impressing the 45 questions await
you..
> Tom Sutpen
Tom Sutpen
> > Why did/do the CIA spend their time pickin' on Conspiracy Theorists,
> > anyway?
>
> focus, son.... if you insist on impressing the 45 questions await
> you..
*****
I'm here to impress no one; added to which, I already did the '45
Questions' thingmajig (Ben said I only needed to answer one, but I
answered three because I'm a generous soul). This was one of the
questions . . . actually, they're not questions, but that's besides
the point . . . that I answered.
Tom Sutpen
timstter
Hi Tom,
Maybe they got concerned when they found out that the KGB was helping
to fund the work of conspiracy theorists like Mark Lane and thought
they'd get even. Besides which, Leftists in the States clearly went
overboard trying to exonerate the obviously guilty Marxist Oswald.
Regards,
Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
aeffects
sitdown ya fat fuck no one is talking to you....
David Von Pein
>>> "Why did/do the CIA spend their time pickin' on Conspiracy Theorists?" <<<
Could it be due to the (obvious) fact that a good-sized percentage of
JFK conspiracy theorists who post on the Internet are retarded idiots/
kooks who can't even figure out that Lee Harvey Oswald shot and killed
two people on November 22, 1963?
Yeah, that could be it!
Now, all the kooks have to do is prove that the CIA hires "LNers" to
prowl the Internet and pick on the retarded CTers. To date, I've
certainly seen no proof that such a thing occurs in the first place.
But I'll tell ya this--if the CIA does have such a program to ridicule
the CT-Kooks, I'm ready to sign up right now!
Where can I get an application?
timstter
Why how very erudite of you, Mr David *aeffects* Healy.
Tell me, is it true that you are a published author on the matter of,
er, Zapruder film alteration?
Is it true that your editor on that occasion was/is Dr Jim Fetzer,
organiser of *Scholars For Truth* re the 9/11 hijackings? (ie Fetzer
thinks that George Bush was behind 9/11?).
Isn't Fetzer's latest JFK witness Judyth Vary Baker, a woman who
claims she was Lee Harvey Oswald's girlfriend back in '63?
Well, keep up the great work Mr David *aeffects* Healy.
You are an ornament to the JFK-CT side of the debate!
Admiring Regards,
Ben Holmes
Tom Sutpen says...
>
>Sorry for the breathless subject line, but I thought it best to engage
>in the parlance of this forum to attract a crowd here on the midway.
>
>Okay . . . so I'm having a pleasant, civilized exchange here with one
>Ben Holmes, when he asks me why the Central Intelligence Agency has
>engaged in a widespread campaign of harassment against Kennedy
>Assassination Conspiracy Theorists from time immemorial.
Actually, I challenged you to see if you could answer any one of the 45
Questions... *YOU* chose this among others.
Perhaps this one fact explains why CT'ers and LNT'ers are at odds... CT'ers
prefer facts, and LNT'ers are slippery with speculation and loose with facts.
>It's an
>interesting question in several respects, and I have my own theory as
>to why that state of events would occur (which I will disclose
>presently),
ROTFLMAO!!!
Shades of Toddy! How many years has it been since Toddy assured everyone that he
*would* answer my question about FBI intimidation of eyewitnesses... just as
soon as he could get to his file cabinet?
>but I thought I should open the floor, as it were, and ask
>all y'all for your views on it.
>
>Why did/do the CIA spend their time pickin' on Conspiracy Theorists,
>anyway?
>
>Tom Sutpen
The point, of course, is that you cannot provide a reasonable and
non-conspiratorial explanation for this fact... nor refute the facts...
I think you'd better try the censored group... maybe they can give you a few
ideas to run past the sharper minds on this forum.
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
Ben Holmes
Tom Sutpen says...
>
>On May 28, 4:39=A0pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> > Why did/do the CIA spend their time pickin' on Conspiracy Theorists,
>> > anyway?
>>
>> focus, son.... if you insist on impressing the 45 questions await
>> you..
>
>*****
>I'm here to impress no one; added to which, I already did the '45
>Questions' thingmajig
Do you seriously think that your half-hearted attempts at 3 Questions out of 45
are going to impress anyone?
>(Ben said I only needed to answer one, but I
>answered three because I'm a generous soul). This was one of the
>questions . . . actually, they're not questions,
Sounds like you need to define the term, or simply quote which of the 45
Questions does not contain what *you* think of as a question...
>but that's besides
>the point . . . that I answered.
Not, however, with a reasonable and non-conspiratorial explanation...
>Tom Sutpen
Ben Holmes
aeffects says...
>
>On May 28, 2:15=A0pm, timstter <timst...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm always amused at nutcases who try to portray this in political terms...
Since polls have put an acceptance of the conspiracy as high as 90% of the
American population - the obvious question becomes, how did Ronald Reagan ever
get elected?
Bud
> In article <8fe72544-14a7-4738-941d-391cf8331...@t14g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
Just a lie.
> the obvious question becomes, how did Ronald Reagan ever
> get elected?
Or, if 90% of the people believe there was a conspiracy, how did
Arlen Spector get elected to the Senate five times?
Bud
> In article <0675a697-6c5a-4478-b77c-bb2eccfb1...@e28g2000vbd.googlegroups.com>,
> Tom Sutpen says...
>
>
>
> >On May 28, 4:39=A0pm, aeffects <aeffect...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >> > Why did/do the CIA spend their time pickin' on Conspiracy Theorists,
> >> > anyway?
>
> >> focus, son.... if you insist on impressing the 45 questions await
> >> you..
>
> >*****
> >I'm here to impress no one; added to which, I already did the '45
> >Questions' thingmajig
>
> Do you seriously think that your half-hearted attempts at 3 Questions out of 45
> are going to impress anyone?
Is that what it`s about for you, impressing people? Well, I gotta
tell you, Healy is very impressed. Very, very impressed. He wants to
have your baby he is so impressed.
> >(Ben said I only needed to answer one, but I
> >answered three because I'm a generous soul). This was one of the
> >questions . . . actually, they're not questions,
>
> Sounds like you need to define the term, or simply quote which of the 45
> Questions does not contain what *you* think of as a question...
They all have problems. Most require speculation. Some assume what
hasn`t been shown. I could break them down for you, but since you are
retarded it probably wouldn`t do you any good.
> >but that's besides
> >the point . . . that I answered.
>
> Not, however, with a reasonable and non-conspiratorial explanation...
Thats like asking for dry water. No conspiracy explanations in this
case are reasonable. If you had reasonable options, you`d produce them
rather than take this silly approach.
Gil Jesus
Well, "Tom Sutpen" of Boston, Mass., perhaps you should ask the CIA:
timstter
> In article <8fe72544-14a7-4738-941d-391cf8331...@t14g2000prm.googlegroups.com>,
Possibly because the question of who shot JFK was not a big one with
voters at the time of the 1980 presidential election, Benny?
Still, it's a documented fact that the KGB was so impressed with Mark
Lane's work that they made sure some funding got through to him.
Isn't that so, Benny?
aeffects
son-of-a-bitch, shithead.... they actually fed you in Fresno... and
thanks for spelling my name correctly... even Wild Bill Miller took
three years to figure that out.... btw, that's a large 'A' in aeffects
-- wake up dipshit! And NO you don't get an autograph -- I understand
you're speechless with envy....
aeffects
Hey KFC frycook... heard you found MacRae's forum.... ya gonna hold
Paul *pukster* May's hand while he winds his way through the minefield
called Lone Nutterism... he needs it dontcha know!
Jeff
>
> Tim Brennan
> Sydney, Australia
> *Newsgroup(s) Commentator*
What's so hard to believe about Judyth Vary Baker being Oswald's
mistress ?
She was a very talented medical researcher who was working on the
cancer virus they wanted to put into Fidel's milkshake.
Baker tells how they had told Oswald that there was a team of people
who were going to try to assassinate the president and Oswald was one
of the good guys. This makes a lot of sense and explains Oswald's
bizarre behavior after the assassination.
Oswald did everything humanly possible to get himself killed by the
police. They may have told him this was part of the plan somehow
like maybe he was supposed to get himself arrested for some reason.
What Oswald didn't realize of course is his handlers really wanted him
to get killed. They themselves were that team of assassins.
I agree people will sometimes lie for many reasons so we some scrutiny
of their statements is required. But on the other hand why would
someone say something like that about such as serious issue ?
People like Judyth Vary Baker remained silent about what they knew for
many years for fear of their lives. And back then these weren't idle
fears.
Johnson's mistress is someone else who made explosive statements about
Johnson hating the Kennedy brothers.
Granted people can lie. But then again Johnson was the president of
the United States. How likely is it that someone like her would lie
about the president and the father of her son ?
Jeff Marzano
drummist1965
You shouldn't talk to yourself like that, Healy.
j leyden
> Okay . . . so I'm having a pleasant, civilized exchange here with one
> Ben Holmes, when he asks me why the Central Intelligence Agency has
> engaged in a widespread campaign of harassment against Kennedy
> Assassination Conspiracy Theorists from time immemorial. It's an
> interesting question in several respects...
You may be on to something. I suspect Ben Holmes and Robcap (a/k/a
Robocop) are engaged in the conspiracy to monopolize the newsgroup and
discourage others from posting. Allegedly, the NG has 420+ members
but these two jokers put up fully one-third of the total posts. Very,
very suspicious.
JGL
Iconoclast
newsgroup discussion isn't really about the Kennedy assassination. It's
more a venue for people who enjoy recreational nastiness; the JFK theme is
incidental. I admit to a certain fascination with the vein-popping
intensity of some of the old-timers. What is it about conspiracies -- MLK,
RFK, truthers, birthers, etc. -- that attracts otherwise presumably
rational people?
I rubbernecked here for a couple months and even posted occasionally. But
it gets boring quickly unless you can get people to react to you, good or
bad. Same old stuff, endlessly repeated.
To address your question: I bet someone will say that CT'ers are
constantly harassed and ridiculed in this very ng, proving
circumstantially without doubt that the CIA is secretly administering and
monitoring this group.
rcw
robcap...@netscape.com
> On May 28, 3:55 pm, Tom Sutpen <tomsut...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Okay . . . so I'm having a pleasant, civilized exchange here with one
> > Ben Holmes, when he asks me why the Central Intelligence Agency has
> > engaged in a widespread campaign of harassment against Kennedy
> > Assassination Conspiracy Theorists from time immemorial. It's an
> > interesting question in several respects...
>
> You may be on to something. I suspect Ben Holmes and Robcap (a/k/a
> Robocop)
Just how dumb are YOU JGL?? For something to be "a.k.a." someone has
to use the OTHER NAME, I never have used or called myself "Robocap".
YOU invented that for me! So we see right off the bat you are a liar.
It would be like me saying JGL (a.k.a. "Just Get Lost") when I made
that up for you!
Just how dishonest are you? Let's see if he will come clean and say
whether he is dumb or dishonest, okay?
> are engaged in the conspiracy to monopolize the newsgroup and
> discourage others from posting.
LOL! How do our posts to each other "discourage" others from posting
here? There may be 420 people listed as members of this board but we
all know the same 10-15 are here day in and day out.
YOU are welcome to post evidence pertaining to JFK's murder any time
JGL, but YOU never seem to. How come?
> Allegedly, the NG has 420+ members
> but these two jokers put up fully one-third of the total posts. Very,
> very suspicious.
The vast majority of the posters here are paid liars like you who work
for John. There sole purpose is to avoid the case and hurl personal
insults. Wow, we are really interrupting that if you list to JGL.
LOL!!!
YOU really can't find a LNer who will discuss the evidence with you as
soon as they find out YOU know the evidence real well!
They become like the roaches in the "Raid" commercial then!
> > Sorry for the breathless subject line, but I thought it best to engage
> > in the parlance of this forum to attract a crowd here on the midway.
>
> > Okay . . . so I'm having a pleasant, civilized exchange here with one
> > Ben Holmes, when he asks me why the Central Intelligence Agency has
> > engaged in a widespread campaign of harassment against Kennedy
> > Assassination Conspiracy Theorists from time immemorial. It's an
> > interesting question in several respects, and I have my own theory as
> > to why that state of events would occur (which I will disclose
> > presently), but I thought I should open the floor, as it were, and ask
> > all y'all for your views on it.
>
> > Why did/do the CIA spend their time pickin' on Conspiracy Theorists,
> > anyway?
>
> > Tom Sutpen- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -