Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Some Observations About This Group
81 views
Skip to first unread message
Richard Weed
Oct 26, 2011, 9:49:18 PM10/26/11
to
I have made a limited number of posts on this group. In none of these posts
have I expressed an opinion about who killed JFK or why he was killed. In
spite of this, I have already been labeled a "lone nutter," a condition
apparently ranking just below that of a child molester to the
conspiratorialists. I have also been told I must take, and presumably pass,
some forty-five question "test" about the assassination before I am worthy
of participating on this group. It is probably only a matter of time before
I'm called a CIA or FBI "asset."
My main sins in the eyes of the conspiratorialists seems to be my asking if
an obsession with the JFK case is passé, a perfectly reasonable question out
here in the real world, and having a less that adoring view of Mark Lane
because of his past Marxist affilations and the damage he has done to the
American political Left (post Rush to Judgment) , not because of his
conspiracy theorizing.
And conspiratorialists wonder why they often have a less than shining public
image. Of course it's always possible that the conspiratorialists in
question are working for "the other side" to damage the reputations of
honest JFK assassination researchers. Can we way COINTELPRO? ;-) (Just
kidding on that last one.)
have I expressed an opinion about who killed JFK or why he was killed. In
spite of this, I have already been labeled a "lone nutter," a condition
apparently ranking just below that of a child molester to the
conspiratorialists. I have also been told I must take, and presumably pass,
some forty-five question "test" about the assassination before I am worthy
of participating on this group. It is probably only a matter of time before
I'm called a CIA or FBI "asset."
My main sins in the eyes of the conspiratorialists seems to be my asking if
an obsession with the JFK case is passé, a perfectly reasonable question out
here in the real world, and having a less that adoring view of Mark Lane
because of his past Marxist affilations and the damage he has done to the
American political Left (post Rush to Judgment) , not because of his
conspiracy theorizing.
And conspiratorialists wonder why they often have a less than shining public
image. Of course it's always possible that the conspiratorialists in
question are working for "the other side" to damage the reputations of
honest JFK assassination researchers. Can we way COINTELPRO? ;-) (Just
kidding on that last one.)
Walt
Oct 26, 2011, 9:54:31 PM10/26/11
to
On Oct 26, 8:49 pm, "Richard Weed" <wee...@folk.net> wrote:
> I have made a limited number of posts on this group. In none of these posts
> have I expressed an opinion about who killed JFK
Oh really???....Let's see..... Aren't you the same "weed" who asked
> I have made a limited number of posts on this group. In none of these posts
> have I expressed an opinion about who killed JFK
these questions?.....Question For The Conspiratoids. Why are you
still flogging the JFK case? Aren't JFK CTs kind of passé?
Looks to me that you're just another liar........
Ben Holmes
Oct 26, 2011, 10:07:40 PM10/26/11
to
In article <4ea8...@news.x-privat.org>, Richard Weed says...
The longer you take to admit that you accept the WCR, the more surely you peg
yourself as a dishonest LNT'er.
>In spite of this, I have already been labeled a "lone nutter," a condition
>apparently ranking just below that of a child molester to the
>conspiratorialists.
Yeah... we don't have a very high opinion of dishonest people.
>I have also been told I must take, and presumably pass,
>some forty-five question "test" about the assassination before I am worthy
>of participating on this group.
That's the problem... trolls like you think you're "participating" even as you
run in the other direction when evidence is brought up.
>It is probably only a matter of time before
>I'm called a CIA or FBI "asset."
I've already *made* my predictions...
>My main sins in the eyes of the conspiratorialists seems to be my asking if
>an obsession with the JFK case is passé, a perfectly reasonable question out
>here in the real world, and having a less that adoring view of Mark Lane
>because of his past Marxist affilations and the damage he has done to the
>American political Left (post Rush to Judgment) , not because of his
>conspiracy theorizing.
What "theorizing?"
>And conspiratorialists wonder why they often have a less than shining public
>image.
You see? Dishonest already...
Can you *SUPPORT* such a claim regarding those who accept a conspiracy in the
murder of JFK?
>Of course it's always possible that the conspiratorialists in
>question are working for "the other side" to damage the reputations of
>honest JFK assassination researchers. Can we way COINTELPRO? ;-) (Just
>kidding on that last one.)
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
>
>I have made a limited number of posts on this group. In none of these posts
>have I expressed an opinion about who killed JFK or why he was killed.
Why do you believe it's a mystery?
>I have made a limited number of posts on this group. In none of these posts
>have I expressed an opinion about who killed JFK or why he was killed.
The longer you take to admit that you accept the WCR, the more surely you peg
yourself as a dishonest LNT'er.
>In spite of this, I have already been labeled a "lone nutter," a condition
>apparently ranking just below that of a child molester to the
>conspiratorialists.
>I have also been told I must take, and presumably pass,
>some forty-five question "test" about the assassination before I am worthy
>of participating on this group.
run in the other direction when evidence is brought up.
>It is probably only a matter of time before
>I'm called a CIA or FBI "asset."
>My main sins in the eyes of the conspiratorialists seems to be my asking if
>an obsession with the JFK case is passé, a perfectly reasonable question out
>here in the real world, and having a less that adoring view of Mark Lane
>because of his past Marxist affilations and the damage he has done to the
>American political Left (post Rush to Judgment) , not because of his
>conspiracy theorizing.
>And conspiratorialists wonder why they often have a less than shining public
>image.
Can you *SUPPORT* such a claim regarding those who accept a conspiracy in the
murder of JFK?
>Of course it's always possible that the conspiratorialists in
>question are working for "the other side" to damage the reputations of
>honest JFK assassination researchers. Can we way COINTELPRO? ;-) (Just
>kidding on that last one.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com
Jason Burke/Bud/bigdog
Oct 26, 2011, 10:41:41 PM10/26/11
to
On Oct 26, 8:49 pm, "Richard Weed" <wee...@folk.net> wrote:
genius. I am head troll here and don't you ever post here again. These
guys will stomp a mudhole in your ass. I've tried to slow their roll
but the more I try, the more they bring up concerning my dads
involvement in the assassination. My dear sweet mama, Lady Bird
Johnson, would roll over in her grave if she knew how bad I'm failing
my job of detering these fine men from posting the truth about Daddy.
Especially that Stan, man he's sharp as a tack, and he knows the truth
about Daddy and his girlfriends on Houston St. He has that part nailed
solid and I didn't think anybody knew about that. I'm sorry Mama, I've
let you down. But you Weed, go roll yourself a fatty and get the HELL
OUT IF HERE.
Tom Lowry
mainframetech
Oct 27, 2011, 8:45:40 AM10/27/11
to
On Oct 26, 10:41 pm, "Jason Burke/Bud/bigdog" <stanmoff...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> Tom Lowry- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ahem! Let's not even try to assume the mantle of head troll with
the real one still around to monitor little benny's (and his
pseudonyms) doings.
Absolute Head Troll Chris
wrote:
>
> - Show quoted text -
Ahem! Let's not even try to assume the mantle of head troll with
the real one still around to monitor little benny's (and his
pseudonyms) doings.
Absolute Head Troll Chris
mucher1
Oct 27, 2011, 9:56:03 AM10/27/11
to
> Ahem! Let's not even try to assume the mantle of head troll with
> the real one still around to monitor little benny's (and his
> pseudonyms) doings.
>
> Absolute Head Troll Chris
I'm old enough to remember when the CTs were supposed to be the good
> the real one still around to monitor little benny's (and his
> pseudonyms) doings.
>
> Absolute Head Troll Chris
guys. Nowadays, they're just clueless and vile, floating aimlessly in
kookspace and spewing ad hominems at good and decent people who just
happen to disagree with their conclusions re: the JFK murder...
Richard Weed
Oct 27, 2011, 10:18:42 AM10/27/11
to
Thanks to all who replied for confirming my suspicions about the type of
people who post on the group. Namely self-righteous, closed-minded,
died-in-the-wool conspiracy kooks who can tolerate no opinion but their own.
Like Dale Myers said back in 2007, it never ends. Excuse me now but I have
some CIA business to attend too. ;-)
----------
When the Internet was in its infancy, a friend of mine introduced me to
Internet newsgroups. I was thrilled at the idea of being able to instantly
communicate with other serious researchers like myself from around the
globe. He logged on to alt.conspiracy.jfk and turned the keyboard and mouse
over to me. I eagerly began browsing the topics and reading a few entries.
"Oh my gawd!" I exclaimed, absolutely horrified. "These people are nuttier
than a fruit cake!" My friend laughed his fool head off.
To say that things have only gotten worse would be an understatement. My
early vision of an Internet utopia where serious research and discussion of
the Kennedy assassination would lead to truth and clarity floundered on the
rocks of reality on day one. It never occurred to me that the Internet might
allow lonely, irrational, and psychotic people to clutter up the chat rooms
and discussion boards. And God knows, the Kennedy assassination is one big
magnet.
The worse part about the Internet and the Kennedy assassination is that the
technology has allowed old myths to rise from the ashes and proliferate.
Spin down the subject headings of any newsgroup: The Figure in the Doorway,
Two Rifles on the Sixth Floor, The Sidewalk Scar, Tommy Tilson's Car Chase,
James Files and the Dented Cartridge Case, and on and on. These subjects
were not just debunked decades ago - they were destroyed beyond recognition
and don't belong in any serious discussion, except perhaps as part of a
brief and whimsical look back on what passed for "important" issues. Yet,
there they are - hot, time-wasting topics for a new generation of young,
naive minds. Sadly, this cycle of endless myth-making, destruction, and
resurrection will never go away. It is the heart of the Internet.
Posted by Dale K. Myers
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/06/it-never-ends.html
people who post on the group. Namely self-righteous, closed-minded,
died-in-the-wool conspiracy kooks who can tolerate no opinion but their own.
Like Dale Myers said back in 2007, it never ends. Excuse me now but I have
some CIA business to attend too. ;-)
----------
When the Internet was in its infancy, a friend of mine introduced me to
Internet newsgroups. I was thrilled at the idea of being able to instantly
communicate with other serious researchers like myself from around the
globe. He logged on to alt.conspiracy.jfk and turned the keyboard and mouse
over to me. I eagerly began browsing the topics and reading a few entries.
"Oh my gawd!" I exclaimed, absolutely horrified. "These people are nuttier
than a fruit cake!" My friend laughed his fool head off.
To say that things have only gotten worse would be an understatement. My
early vision of an Internet utopia where serious research and discussion of
the Kennedy assassination would lead to truth and clarity floundered on the
rocks of reality on day one. It never occurred to me that the Internet might
allow lonely, irrational, and psychotic people to clutter up the chat rooms
and discussion boards. And God knows, the Kennedy assassination is one big
magnet.
The worse part about the Internet and the Kennedy assassination is that the
technology has allowed old myths to rise from the ashes and proliferate.
Spin down the subject headings of any newsgroup: The Figure in the Doorway,
Two Rifles on the Sixth Floor, The Sidewalk Scar, Tommy Tilson's Car Chase,
James Files and the Dented Cartridge Case, and on and on. These subjects
were not just debunked decades ago - they were destroyed beyond recognition
and don't belong in any serious discussion, except perhaps as part of a
brief and whimsical look back on what passed for "important" issues. Yet,
there they are - hot, time-wasting topics for a new generation of young,
naive minds. Sadly, this cycle of endless myth-making, destruction, and
resurrection will never go away. It is the heart of the Internet.
Posted by Dale K. Myers
http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2007/06/it-never-ends.html
Ben Holmes
Oct 27, 2011, 10:31:02 AM10/27/11
to
In article <4ea9...@news.x-privat.org>, Richard Weed says...
Just for the record, *I* accept the fact that there was a conspiracy in the
murder of JFK.
It's amusing that you *STILL* can't do anything other than balance on the top of
that fence...
>
>Thanks to all who replied for confirming my suspicions about the type of
>people who post on the group. Namely self-righteous, closed-minded,
>died-in-the-wool conspiracy kooks who can tolerate no opinion but their own.
>
>Like Dale Myers said back in 2007, it never ends. Excuse me now but I have
>some CIA business to attend too. ;-)
Still a coward, I see...
>Thanks to all who replied for confirming my suspicions about the type of
>people who post on the group. Namely self-righteous, closed-minded,
>died-in-the-wool conspiracy kooks who can tolerate no opinion but their own.
>
>Like Dale Myers said back in 2007, it never ends. Excuse me now but I have
>some CIA business to attend too. ;-)
Just for the record, *I* accept the fact that there was a conspiracy in the
murder of JFK.
It's amusing that you *STILL* can't do anything other than balance on the top of
that fence...
Walt
Oct 27, 2011, 10:25:22 AM10/27/11
to
"doormats", who allowed LBJ's Warren Commission apologists to walk on
them. Since we LNer's were united in our belief of the official
fairy tale and the CT's were in disarray we could walk on them and
ridicule any attempt at exposing the truth. But alas those days are
over, the "doormats" are kicking our ass.
Nowadays, they're just clueless and vile, floating aimlessly in
> kookspace and spewing ad hominems at good and decent people who just
Walt
Oct 27, 2011, 10:53:43 AM10/27/11
to
On Oct 27, 9:18 am, "Richard Weed" <wee...@folk.net> wrote:
> Thanks to all who replied for confirming my suspicions about the type of
> people who post on the group. Namely self-righteous, closed-minded,
> died-in-the-wool conspiracy kooks who can tolerate no opinion but their own.
>
> Like Dale Myers said back in 2007, it never ends. Excuse me now but I have
> some CIA business to attend too. ;-)
>
> ----------
>
> When the Internet was in its infancy, a friend of mine introduced me to
> Internet newsgroups. I was thrilled at the idea of being able to instantly
> communicate with other serious researchers like myself from around the
> globe. He logged on to alt.conspiracy.jfk and turned the keyboard and mouse
> over to me. I eagerly began browsing the topics and reading a few entries.
> "Oh my gawd!" I exclaimed, absolutely horrified. "These people are nuttier
> than a fruit cake!" My friend laughed his fool head off.
>
> To say that things have only gotten worse would be an understatement. My
> early vision of an Internet utopia where serious research and discussion of
> the Kennedy assassination would lead to truth and clarity floundered on the
> rocks of reality on day one.
NOW HEAR THIS!...... Here's an open admission from a LNer that we have
> Thanks to all who replied for confirming my suspicions about the type of
> people who post on the group. Namely self-righteous, closed-minded,
> died-in-the-wool conspiracy kooks who can tolerate no opinion but their own.
>
> Like Dale Myers said back in 2007, it never ends. Excuse me now but I have
> some CIA business to attend too. ;-)
>
> ----------
>
> When the Internet was in its infancy, a friend of mine introduced me to
> Internet newsgroups. I was thrilled at the idea of being able to instantly
> communicate with other serious researchers like myself from around the
> globe. He logged on to alt.conspiracy.jfk and turned the keyboard and mouse
> over to me. I eagerly began browsing the topics and reading a few entries.
> "Oh my gawd!" I exclaimed, absolutely horrified. "These people are nuttier
> than a fruit cake!" My friend laughed his fool head off.
>
> To say that things have only gotten worse would be an understatement. My
> early vision of an Internet utopia where serious research and discussion of
> the Kennedy assassination would lead to truth and clarity floundered on the
> rocks of reality on day one.
been handed a lie by LBJ's Warren Commission.
"My early vision of an Internet utopia where serious research and
Dick Weed
It never occurred to me that the Internet might
> allow lonely, irrational, and psychotic people to clutter up the chat rooms
> and discussion boards. And God knows, the Kennedy assassination is one big
> magnet.
>
> The worse part about the Internet and the Kennedy assassination is that the
> technology has allowed old myths to rise from the ashes and proliferate.
> Spin down the subject headings of any newsgroup: The Figure in the Doorway,
> Two Rifles on the Sixth Floor, The Sidewalk Scar, Tommy Tilson's Car Chase,
> James Files and the Dented Cartridge Case,
"myths".... The dented cartrige case.
tom...@cox.net
Nov 4, 2011, 9:15:58 PM11/4/11
to
I notice you avoid telling us exactly what our qualiications are to address
the subject.
Do you have the 26 volumes?
Do you have the GPO edition of th WCR?
--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
the subject.
Do you have the 26 volumes?
Do you have the GPO edition of th WCR?
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB
tom...@cox.net
Nov 4, 2011, 9:17:44 PM11/4/11
to
Quoting a "Cartoon -Maker tells us everything about your values BUNKY>
aeffects
Nov 6, 2011, 9:17:00 PM11/6/11
to
have neither, just stupidity or, more commonly called 'a fucking
moron'.... carry on simpleton...
> Absolute Head Troll Chris
aeffects
Nov 6, 2011, 9:19:39 PM11/6/11
to
you, cyber-warriorism? lmfao
Bud
Nov 7, 2011, 5:37:01 AM11/7/11
to
On Oct 26, 9:07 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <4ea8b...@news.x-privat.org>, Richard Weed says...
this event? I`m sure if you spelled out and elaborated on what you
believe occurred even Sam McClung might give a Woody Woodpecker laugh.
> >In spite of this, I have already been labeled a "lone nutter," a condition
> >apparently ranking just below that of a child molester to the
> >conspiratorialists.
>
> Yeah... we don't have a very high opinion of dishonest people.
>
> >I have also been told I must take, and presumably pass,
> >some forty-five question "test" about the assassination before I am worthy
> >of participating on this group.
>
> That's the problem... trolls like you think you're "participating" even as you
> run in the other direction when evidence is brought up.
Hard to see how you can criticize anyone, considering you hide from
the open exchange of ideas in this newsgroup and run whenever you are
called upon to support your ideas.
> In article <4ea8b...@news.x-privat.org>, Richard Weed says...
>
>
>
> >I have made a limited number of posts on this group. In none of these posts
> >have I expressed an opinion about who killed JFK or why he was killed.
>
> Why do you believe it's a mystery?
>
> The longer you take to admit that you accept the WCR, the more surely you peg
> yourself as a dishonest LNT'er.
When are you going to man-up and put your cards on the table about
>
>
> >I have made a limited number of posts on this group. In none of these posts
> >have I expressed an opinion about who killed JFK or why he was killed.
>
> Why do you believe it's a mystery?
>
> The longer you take to admit that you accept the WCR, the more surely you peg
> yourself as a dishonest LNT'er.
this event? I`m sure if you spelled out and elaborated on what you
believe occurred even Sam McClung might give a Woody Woodpecker laugh.
> >In spite of this, I have already been labeled a "lone nutter," a condition
> >apparently ranking just below that of a child molester to the
> >conspiratorialists.
>
> Yeah... we don't have a very high opinion of dishonest people.
>
> >I have also been told I must take, and presumably pass,
> >some forty-five question "test" about the assassination before I am worthy
> >of participating on this group.
>
> That's the problem... trolls like you think you're "participating" even as you
> run in the other direction when evidence is brought up.
the open exchange of ideas in this newsgroup and run whenever you are
called upon to support your ideas.
0 new messages