Dave Perry and his disinformation.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

ChristophMessner wrote:After addressing some critical points to Dave Perry and Gary Mack, they just stopped communicating with me.LMAO! Of course they stopped! They didn't have the answers! LOL

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

Dealey Joe wrote:Chris, That would be a good question for Robert Groden and Jim Marrs.Why they did not do that years ago.someone did try it a couple years ago but they got thrown out of their building.What we need to do is to take over the School Book Depository.It takes young people with vision and a passion (Politician type}to accomplish a thing like that.and a lot of money and dedication.A big problem on a project like that researchers mainly want to talk about it, so it takes a differeny type to do it.I think we should get the government to open up a conspiracy floor in the museum and pay one of us 180,000 bucks a year to man it.Who ownes that building and who pays the bills for the museum.that is an example of being a nutter if takes all the arguement out of it. they don't have to set around on their computersdissagreeing on what REALLY happened.Hell i have not had one response to my asking for help at Dealey 11-23-10no one even can find a time to have a JFKMS Forum convention.Lancer seams to find the time and the funds to do itI wonder who is paying Lancer's bills. Personally, I get the most out of spreading information out there.

[ChristophMessner]

Joe, Pasquale, while it seems unachievable to us to make a living from political enlightenment/education/truthspreading, we comunicate at least, that's more than nothing, and I would say, a reckognition of a wisdom just theoretically or on paper can be worth more than all materialized achievements, don't they? Chris

[andries]

I really agree with that ...... sometimes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBvdHXChNqY

[Dealey Joe]

I am thinking of changing the slogan at the bottom of my posts toOH! Bullshitwhat do you think

[Bob]

andries wrote:I really agree with that ...... sometimes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IBvdHXChNqYClassic tune!

[Phil Dragoo]

I found that the Remington Fireball was available in the .222, but if Dave Perry says it was not, I have to ask myself whether to believe him or my lying eyes.I had a back and forth of emails with Larry Dunkel regarding his contention that Robert Oswald spoke truthfully that brother Lee was "watching reruns of I Led Three Lives when I went off to the Marines."I pointed out that Robert went off to the Marines in 1952; I Led Three Lives premiered in 1953. Hence, to watch reruns of it the year before it premiered required special powers featured on Art Bell & George Noory's Coast to Coast Program.To believe Lee was the lone nut, you have to believe a collection of nuts prepared to lie outright, as well as proffer forged, fabricated, or otherwise distorted information, testimony, evidence.These purveyors rely heavily on the memory hole of Orwell's 1984, as well as newspeak and doublethink.I am reading Jim Douglass' JFK and the Unspeakable and just found reference to Allen Dulles' later comment regarding his victim, "That little Kennedy; he thought he was some kind of god."Such are the servants of the so-called security state, the sometimes named military-industrial complex, or the screaming queens of spookdom.

[kenmurray]

Larry the fable guy, if your around look at this and get your facts straight for once in your life. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MMyN3v8 ... elatedPhil was right. The show didn't debut until Oct, 1st, 1953.

[ChristophMessner]

ChristophMessner wrote:Bob, let's hope you don't admire me too much then! Bob, I'm sorry, this might have been a little misunderstandable. Of course I was delighted when you praised me, it's just the German way to joke about being praised while truely thinking having got too much honor. It's like testing the mutual self-criticism-capacity by questioning everything at once in surprise to make stunned. Here I am at my limits expressing myself in a forum without having the possibility that you see may eyes and kind of smile. In fact I do admire your steadfastness as messenger and ask myself all the time, whether I have the steadfastness it really takes for giving and being the right answer to politics how it really is actually and presently. The accussation "disinformation", as we implement on Dave Perry, leads into a territory on which it makes a big difference inhowfar the accused spreads "disinfo" intentionally or unintentionally, out of good motives or out of bad motives, based on a complete moral philosophy or based on an incomplete moral philosophy. Maybe from his standpoint Dave Perry thinks it would be moral to do anti-propaganda to the James-Files story cause he thinks the US public still can't really digest this kind of truth properly. So is it with all propaganda for the truth: yes, from my point of view, it is very moral to confront the fellow citizens with the enlightening propaganda you, Bob, do for the sake of the wakeup of political consciousness and non-indifference to dirty truths inside the political, but I would say, many people in the US still think, that some truths still should be swallowed and hidden, cause there rise into public consciousness would be negative to the self-esteem of the people and it would make the people unable to fight the dangers from abroad and I think there really are very very corrupt systems abroad as well. So it boils down to the point, that when we do propaganda for the "real truth" do we do it with understanding for the other side or do we do it with contempt for those who oppose our vision. I would say, contempt is legitimate if the opposition only comes from indifference or materialistic bribedness, contempt is not legitimate if the opposition thinks: the time has not yet come for the people to get to know the truth, cause they can't draw the right conclusions yet. So the question is: is the majority already mature enough to get to know the full truth about all the corruption in politics and how it really was with JFK and James Files etc.? Wouldn't the full truth end all kind of loyality to the political elite in the US instantly, making the US disintegrate into a very vulnerable Non-United States, easily attackable by other superpowers? Which level of self-critizism is appropriate? Should we still leave some kind of maximum tolerance to people like Dave Perry as he is obviously not agreeing with a high level of self-critizism and doing truth-suppression for the sake of "the-US-soul-should-stay-strong-without-self-doubts"? So I am still very much on scales with all of this and that's why I don't feel admirable at all still with all my pretty helpless tries to do political enlightening. I am just thankful that there are people like you who give so much concentrated extra-information which helps me keeping my positions with more steadfastness. Sincerely, Chris