Bill Brown

[John Beckham]

[quote="dankbaar"][quote="ChristophMessner"]Everybody should have the right to speak out publicly in political matters, no matter whether he/she showes his address and telephone number or not. In my opinion the jfkmurdersolvedforum has to show, that it can stand all kind of critical posters and is open to everybody who is not violating the basic rules of decency. Bill Brown shall be able to post.[/quote]I disagree (as more often) with Christoph. The likes of Bill Brown do not truly contribute to a constructive debate about the evidence. Their game is not sincere questioning, but just fabricating roadblocks. They will never deviate from their position anyway, no matter what you say or offer. If you address an issue at the frontdoor, they are already contemplating intruding at the backdoor. I see them as destructive nailthrowers alongside the road to see how and if the cars are able to evade them. Their boxes with nails are inexhaustive. They are not really addressing any perceived loopholes in the evidence. Before I know it, the debate is not about the factmatter, detoriating into hostilities, plus I must address the pleas from other members to kick these guys off. Not to mention dealing with the attacks of others claiming I am not objective, "invested" in the Files story, pursuing a hoax for money, not tolerating critiscism etcetera. We had for example "Dan" in the past. John Beckham is a current example. Analyse his posts and you'll see I am right about the above. Often these characters have NEVER watched a DVD or read the book they attack. As a rule of thumb they are fully behind the Warren Report and they are also duplicitious or sneaky. Beckham for example first registered as "conspiracybuff". I am thinking hard to show him the door too. I wonder what truly drives these people. I think that's the most interesting question. After all, if they are truly convinced that a deranged lunatic killed Kennedy alone, why bother so much? That's still the official version of the "truth". Wim[/quote]wow! i guess that's how you deal with a debate you won't win isn't it? Wim, you have not won a debate anywhere as far as i can tell. make all the excuses you want to not have a real debate. the JFK community know your tactics all too well. you are a joke in the circle of actual researchers. sorry you poured $ into such a venture. but there must come a time when you need to stop trying to sell your dead horse. most serious people read and watch. but, your lack of knowledge tells me you do not. when you can't face the facts, you make it personal.as far as being "conspiracybuff", i am not ashamed. i actually thought there was some danger involved in knowing certain information. believed some real bs, like your stuff. but, after ACTUALLY doing some research, found that to be untrue. and bob who? what is your last name bob? phone #. if you are actually named bob. that's a pretty common name you know. "disinformation agents" or "sheeple" that's what most here are. or they are "noobs" like i once was, who believe the crap you put forward. funny how you call others that when the rest of the world think that of you? must mean you're onto something? :lol:ban me. that's what everyone would expect from here. i'm sorry Bill is so scary to you. he's actually a good person. but, of course you wouldn't know. does you forums lack of members and posts reflect what people think? yes. it's dying.

[Bob]

John Beckham wrote:dankbaar wrote:ChristophMessner wrote:Everybody should have the right to speak out publicly in political matters, no matter whether he/she showes his address and telephone number or not. In my opinion the jfkmurdersolvedforum has to show, that it can stand all kind of critical posters and is open to everybody who is not violating the basic rules of decency. Bill Brown shall be able to post.I disagree (as more often) with Christoph. The likes of Bill Brown do not truly contribute to a constructive debate about the evidence. Their game is not sincere questioning, but just fabricating roadblocks. They will never deviate from their position anyway, no matter what you say or offer. If you address an issue at the frontdoor, they are already contemplating intruding at the backdoor. I see them as destructive nailthrowers alongside the road to see how and if the cars are able to evade them. Their boxes with nails are inexhaustive. They are not really addressing any perceived loopholes in the evidence. Before I know it, the debate is not about the factmatter, detoriating into hostilities, plus I must address the pleas from other members to kick these guys off. Not to mention dealing with the attacks of others claiming I am not objective, "invested" in the Files story, pursuing a hoax for money, not tolerating critiscism etcetera. We had for example "Dan" in the past. John Beckham is a current example. Analyse his posts and you'll see I am right about the above. Often these characters have NEVER watched a DVD or read the book they attack. As a rule of thumb they are fully behind the Warren Report and they are also duplicitious or sneaky. Beckham for example first registered as "conspiracybuff". I am thinking hard to show him the door too. I wonder what truly drives these people. I think that's the most interesting question. After all, if they are truly convinced that a deranged lunatic killed Kennedy alone, why bother so much? That's still the official version of the "truth". Wimwow! i guess that's how you deal with a debate you won't win isn't it? Wim, you have not won a debate anywhere as far as i can tell. make all the excuses you want to not have a real debate. the JFK community know your tactics all too well. you are a joke in the circle of actual researchers. sorry you poured $ into such a venture. but there must come a time when you need to stop trying to sell your dead horse. most serious people read and watch. but, your lack of knowledge tells me you do not. when you can't face the facts, you make it personal.as far as being "conspiracybuff", i am not ashamed. i actually thought there was some danger involved in knowing certain information. believed some real bs, like your stuff. but, after ACTUALLY doing some research, found that to be untrue. and bob who? what is your last name bob? phone #. if you are actually named bob. that's a pretty common name you know. "disinformation agents" or "sheeple" that's what most here are. or they are "noobs" like i once was, who believe the crap you put forward. funny how you call others that when the rest of the world think that of you? must mean you're onto something? ban me. that's what everyone would expect from here. i'm sorry Bill is so scary to you. he's actually a good person. but, of course you wouldn't know. does you forums lack of members and posts reflect what people think? yes. it's dying.STILL waiting for your response to the Jim Marrs' take on Jimmy Files thread. Right now you are just wasting space , wasting our time and spewing bullshit. Oh wait...that's what people in the disinformation machine do!

[dankbaar]

Skype chat august 17 2009:[22:18:20] Bob zegt: I think it's time to show John Beckham the door. He just wasting space and trying to keep people occupied with his lone nut nonsense.[22:50:07] Wim Dankbaar zegt: Yes, I agree, maybe you should do it. You're a moderator, and I am sure it will have everyone's blessing.[22:54:10] Bob zegt: All right then...he's gone. I don't mind when people disagree, but give an opinion why your argument makes sense. Beckham doesn't even try. You and I don't agree on everything, but we at least debate each other. Speaking of that, one day I will convince you that David Atlee Phillips was at LHO's midnight press conference. At least I'll keep trying, unless you convince me otherwise.

[Bob]

I'm sorry that it had to come to this, but as I have said on many occasions, this forum has evolved into a great forum with a lot of bright minds, tireless and persistant researchers and back and forth, well documented debates. We need to just keep doing what we are doing, which has been great research and many are noticing...both the GOOD side and the DARK side. The DARK side just wants to spew disinformation to take us off focus, and then they don't even do what they say they wanted to do in the first place...debate the Jimmy Files story, or at least the take that Jim Marrs gave. I'll take Wim, Marrs, Robert Groden, Wayne Madsen, Jim DiEugenio, Jack White and Russ Baker anyday over the likes of Gary Mack, John McAdams, Dave Perry and David Von Pein. In other words...FACT not FICTION.

[kenmurray]

Bob wrote:I'm sorry that it had to come to this, but as I have said on many occasions, this forum has evolved into a great forum with a lot of bright minds, tireless and persistant researchers and back and forth, well documented debates. We need to just keep doing what we are doing, which has been great research and many are noticing...both the GOOD side and the DARK side. The DARK side just wants to spew disinformation to take us off focus, and then they don't even do what they say they wanted to do in the first place...debate the Jimmy Files story, or at least the take that Jim Marrs gave. I'll take Wim, Marrs, Robert Groden, Wayne Madsen, Jim DiEugenio, Jack White and Russ Baker anyday over the likes of Gary Mack, John McAdams, Dave Perry and David Von Pein. In other words...FACT not FICTION.Well spoken Bob.

[bob franklin]

Bob, sent you a pm.

[bob franklin]

Just gonna throw this out here. Certain members of "that other forum" may be trying to foster ill will between members over here. I was picking around over there with the intention of figuring out what their deal is, when I read a remark I found unlikely. Take anything you read there with a grain of salt would be my advice. Oh, one more thing... Beckham has gone ahead & adopted (stolen) Wims signature.

[Bob]

Thanks for the heads up Bob. When it comes to the lone nut club, there are many holes in their theory. But none is bigger than the "magic bullet" theory. They will point to the bullshit Discovery specials about the JFK assassination to say the single bullet theory was possible, but the environment was COMPLETELY different in the specials, but the bottom line is that the whole theory goes out the window completely, unless Gerald Ford raises JFK's back wound several inches. This is from the contents section of this site under special release...Gerald Ford's motto: Attack is Best Defense.Gerald Ford, former President and last surviving member of the Warren Commission, has demonstrated his strategy again: Disguise your crimes by attacking the attacker. I am increasingly flabbergasted about what is possible in America. Why is the world and the History Channel swallowing his attack on the documentary "The guilty men"? For those who missed this headline news, it is the last episode of "The men who killed Kennedy" series, aired last November and originally scheduled for re-runs over the next nine years, which makes a case for Lyndon Johnson as a main conspirator in JFK's murder. Ford's coordinated protest with former Johnson cronies like Bill Moyers, Jack Valenti and Johnson's widow, has now even resulted in complete cancellation of all three new episodes, including those which were not attacked, like "The Love Affair" with Judyth Vary Baker, who makes a credible case for having been Lee Harvey Oswald's girlfriend, exonerating him from the Government's THEORY that he was the lone assassin. To my knowledge, this is an unprecedented form of censorship in the United States. In all the heated discussions and controversy about the History Channel's documentary, whether LBJ had a role in the JFK assassination or not, it seems that one thing is overlooked : In this case, Lyndon Baines Johnson and his next door neighbor and close buddy J. Edgar Hoover are guilty of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, not because we can prove they ordered it or because we can prove they had any direct connection to the killing, but because we can prove beyond any reasonable doubt that those two men took steps and took actions that covered up the truth of the crime. Washing out and refurbishing the President's limousine is just one of many examples of destroying crucial evidence. This makes them AT LEAST accessories after the fact. And was it not to Bill Moyers that Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach sent the infamous memo: "The public should be satisfied that Oswald was the lone assassin"? But what's more, Ford himself is guilty! Not only was it learned that he was secretly reporting on the Commission to FBI Director Hoover, but also, forced by declassified files, he has admitted that he instructed the Warren Commission to move Kennedy's backwound up by several inches !!! The significance of this cannot be overstated! For with a wound in the original location, there cannot be a single bullet theory and without a single bullet theory there cannot be a lone gunman. Last time I looked, this was called "tampering with evidence", which is a federal crime and in such an important case as the death of a president, it is also TREASON. Raised with my naive and Dutch set of values on freedom and democracy, I believe the man should be in jail, despite his rehearsed repetitions that the Commission "found no evidence of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic". Instead, he is allowed to bury essentially good documentaries. What is happening to America?All three men, Johnson, Hoover AND Ford, took steps that altered, destroyed and hid evidence, ...... and this, by the way, is what changes what otherwise would have been a Texas homicide, to a national coup d'etat! In order to provide a contra-weight to these outrageous proceedings of the on-going cover-up, I have made available for the public the first ever camera-interview with former special FBI agent James W. Sibert. This interview will be part of an upcoming film/documentary "Second Look, FBI agents re-examine the JFK assassination" (wanted: uncontrolled broadcasters). James Sibert, 84 years young, a former World War II hero and B-52 pilot, 21 year career FBI agent and American patriot, was present at Kennedy's autopsy in Bethesda. Like every other retired FBI agent featured in Second Look, he is also PISSED with his government for covering up such a major crime. See and hear what he has to say about Gerald Ford and senator Arlen Specter, architect of the notorious single bullet theory that was (and still is) pushed down our throat.Right here: http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/sibert.htmThis is age of the Internet, the new revolutionary and independent medium that can spread the truth. Recent studies show that the web has surpassed conventional media as a news source. If you share my amazement, SPREAD THIS! Email to friends and/or your favorite news-outlets. This message is also posted there, thus forwarding the link is enough. The videoclip may be downloaded and used for any website. Signed,Wim Dankbaar (Netherlands) "During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act."George Orwell This isn't just Wim putting this out there either...By MIKE FEINSILBERThe Associated Press WASHINGTON (July 2) - Thirty-three years ago, Gerald R. Ford took pen in hand and changed - ever so slightly - the Warren Commission's key sentence on the place where a bullet entered John F. Kennedy's body when he was killed in Dallas. The effect of Ford's change was to strengthen the commission's conclusion that a single bullet passed through Kennedy and severely wounded Texas Gov. John Connally - a crucial element in its finding that Lee Harvey Oswald was the sole gunman. A small change, said Ford on Wednesday when it came to light, one intended to clarify meaning, not alter history. ''My changes had nothing to do with a conspiracy theory,'' he said in a telephone interview from Beaver Creek, Colo. ''My changes were only an attempt to be more precise.'' But still, his editing was seized upon by members of the conspiracy community, which rejects the commission's conclusion that Oswald acted alone. ''This is the most significant lie in the whole Warren Commission report,'' said Robert D. Morningstar, a computer systems specialist in New York City who said he has studied the assassination since it occurred and written an Internet book about it. The effect of Ford's editing, Morningstar said, was to suggest that a bullet struck Kennedy in the neck, ''raising the wound two or three inches. Without that alteration, they could never have hoodwinked the public as to the true number of assassins.'' If the bullet had hit Kennedy in the back, it could not have struck Connolly in the way the commission said it did, he said. The Warren Commission concluded in 1964 that a single bullet - fired by a ''discontented'' Oswald - passed through Kennedy's body and wounded his fellow motorcade passenger, Connally, and that a second, fatal bullet, fired from the same place, tore through Kennedy's head. The assassination of the president occurred Nov. 22, 1963, in Dallas; Oswald was arrested that day but was shot and killed two days later as he was being transferred from the city jail to the county jail. Conspiracy theorists reject the idea that a single bullet could have hit both Kennedy and Connally and done such damage. Thus they argue that a second gunman must have been involved. Ford's changes tend to support the single-bullet theory by making a specific point that the bullet entered Kennedy's body ''at the back of his neck'' rather than in his uppermost back, as the commission staff originally wrote. Ford's handwritten notes were contained in 40,000 pages of records kept by J. Lee Rankin, chief counsel of the Warren Commission. They were made public Wednesday by the Assassination Record Review Board, an agency created by Congress to amass all relevant evidence in the case. The documents will be available to the public in the National Archives. The staff of the commission had written: ''A bullet had entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder and to the right of the spine.'' Ford suggested changing that to read: ''A bullet had entered the back of his neck at a point slightly to the right of the spine.'' The final report said: ''A bullet had entered the base of the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine.'' Ford, then House Republican leader and later elevated to the presidency with the 1974 resignation of Richard Nixon, is the sole surviving member of the seven-member commission chaired by Chief Justice Earl Warren. Also...what about this memo, huh boys and girls?Memo from Nicholas deB. Katzenbach, Deputy Attorney General to LBJ aide Bill Moyers November 25, 1963MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MOYERS It is important that all of the facts surrounding President Kennedy's Assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial. 2. Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists. Unfortunately the facts on Oswald seem about too pat-- too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc.). The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory, and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus silenced.3. The matter has been handled thus far with neither dignity nor conviction. Facts have been mixed with rumour and speculation. We can scarcely let the world see us totally in the image of the Dallas police when our President is murdered.I think this objective may be satisfied by making public as soon as possible a complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination. This may run into the difficulty of pointing to in- consistencies between this report and statements by Dallas police officials. But the reputation of the Bureau is such that it may do the whole job. The only other step would be the appointment of a Presidential Commission of unimpeachable personnel to review and examine the evidence and announce its conclusions. This has both advantages and disadvantages. It think it can await publication of the FBI report and public reaction to it here and abroad.I think, however, that a statement that all the facts will be made public property in an orderly and responsible way should be made now. We need something to head off public speculation or Congressional hearings of the wrong sort. Nicholas deB. KatzenbachDeputy Attorney General The lone nut club likes to drop in periodically and post things from here. Since they won't debate the Files story (at least here), maybe they can debate this post. Wait...I think I hear the crickets chirping.

[kenmurray]

The lone nut response to all that is is that Ford's intention was to clarify meaning and not alter history. And to be more precise. Yeah right.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

kenmurray wrote:The lone nut response to all that is is that Ford's intention was to clarify meaning and not alter history. And to be more precise. Yeah right. I see. So Ford was trying to RECTIFY the situation, eh? Sounds like Ford was a proctologist with poor depth perception to me!