On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 8:01:27 PM UTC-6, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 2/18/2015 1:41 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 10:27:16 AM UTC-6, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >> On 2/17/2015 9:06 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> >>> On Monday, February 9, 2015 at 8:47:28 PM UTC-6, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >>>> On 2/7/2015 5:25 PM, Marcus Hanson wrote:
> >>>>> "I'm against censorship, but persons like Mr Von Pein have crossed a line
> >>>>> where they no longer deserve fair hearing amongst honest people."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Typical lefty comment - not in favour of censorship....UNLESS a contrary
> >>>>> opinion is not well received.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The poster Albert Doyle was - IMO - "brought into line" by an ex-DPF-er
> >>>>> for straying from the CT orthodoxy. It's been a long time since I read his
> >>>>> posts,but after reproval,IIRC,he toed the line like a good boy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here,we don't all have to agree on every point(even on the LN side) or
> >>>>> worry about getting approval from John.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> But there is a big difference. There is no level playing field here.
> >>>> McAdams brings in minions to attack conspiracy believers and then does not
> >>>> let the conspiracy believers defend themselves.
> >>>
> >>> In fact, it might be said that aaj is an experimental training ground for
> >>> how to bully dissenters.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Maybe it is just a CIA training exercise.[...]
> >
> > To what end? Simply to deny a truly open forum for the discussion of the
> > JFK assassination or something more complex, such as trying to train
> > people to think that if they question authority they are a loonie?
> >
>
> I am not allowed to tell you the name of the program, but you can find it
> on the Internet if you know where to look.
Thanks. I may have tracked it down.
>The CIA developed a program to
> send disinformation agents into Usenet newsgroups to "guide" the
> discussions and deny CIA activities.
If that could be *proven*, which of course it cannot, as all-things-CIA are secret, doing such a thing would put them smack in the middle of not only the cover-up, but the assassination.
>
> > And how does research on Judyth fit into this? What if McAdams had
> > allowed her a really level field? Would she then hoist herself
>
> Please tell us exactly what research McAdams has ever done on Judyth.
I did not intend to imply that McAdams has himself done research on Judyth. I meant that if he knew to his own satisfaction that she was indeed a fraud and a liar and wanted to make sure he allowed her to demonstrate that to everyone else, it would behoove him to treat her with the utmost respect, because then she would have nothing to complain about and would effectively hoist herself with her own petard in front of the research community. McAdams would come off smelling like a rose.
> Did
> HE find her letter to President Kennedy? Did HE get her college records
> under cover of her trying to transfer credits to his college?
No, you did that.
>
> > onto/by/with her own petard? If McAdams, with his influence here, had
> > treated her with the utmost respect, and she turned on him with nothing
> > tangible to complain about (no pilfered manuscript, no photo used without
> > her permission, etc...) how persuasive would that have been for everyone?
> > Would that have helped or hurt his cause?
> >
>
> Why should anyone have treated her with ANY respect?
It's called unmasking Marsh.
Besides, if you know Judyth, you realize that she takes advantage of every single misstep she can trick anyone into making. If someone does something in the LEAST unethical, she screams and yells at high volume. The only alternative is to make sure you treat her with the utmost respect, so that when she tries to complain about you, you can remind her of that. That gives less power to her imo. She is just waving in the wind with nobody to blame but herself.
>
> Is that the old proverb about catching more flies with honey than with
> vinegar?
No, it's a matter of waging war, Marsh. Its a strategy for dealing with your worst enemies.
>
> No thanks, I don't want her flies.
>
> > Pamela Brown
> > mcadamsexperiment.blogspot.com
> >
> On 2/18/2015 1:41 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> > On Wednesday, February 18, 2015 at 10:27:16 AM UTC-6, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >> On 2/17/2015 9:06 PM, Pamela Brown wrote:
> >>> On Monday, February 9, 2015 at 8:47:28 PM UTC-6, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >>>> On 2/7/2015 5:25 PM, Marcus Hanson wrote:
> >>>>> "I'm against censorship, but persons like Mr Von Pein have crossed a line
> >>>>> where they no longer deserve fair hearing amongst honest people."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Typical lefty comment - not in favour of censorship....UNLESS a contrary
> >>>>> opinion is not well received.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The poster Albert Doyle was - IMO - "brought into line" by an ex-DPF-er
> >>>>> for straying from the CT orthodoxy. It's been a long time since I read his
> >>>>> posts,but after reproval,IIRC,he toed the line like a good boy.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Here,we don't all have to agree on every point(even on the LN side) or
> >>>>> worry about getting approval from John.
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> But there is a big difference. There is no level playing field here.
> >>>> McAdams brings in minions to attack conspiracy believers and then does not
> >>>> let the conspiracy believers defend themselves.
> >>>
> >>> In fact, it might be said that aaj is an experimental training ground for
> >>> how to bully dissenters.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Maybe it is just a CIA training exercise.[...]
> >
> > To what end? Simply to deny a truly open forum for the discussion of the
> > JFK assassination or something more complex, such as trying to train
> > people to think that if they question authority they are a loonie?
> >
>
> I am not allowed to tell you the name of the program, but you can find it
> on the Internet if you know where to look.
Thanks. I may have tracked it down.
>The CIA developed a program to
> send disinformation agents into Usenet newsgroups to "guide" the
> discussions and deny CIA activities.
If that could be *proven*, which of course it cannot, as all-things-CIA are secret, doing such a thing would put them smack in the middle of not only the cover-up, but the assassination.
>
> > And how does research on Judyth fit into this? What if McAdams had
> > allowed her a really level field? Would she then hoist herself
>
> Please tell us exactly what research McAdams has ever done on Judyth.
I did not intend to imply that McAdams has himself done research on Judyth. I meant that if he knew to his own satisfaction that she was indeed a fraud and a liar and wanted to make sure he allowed her to demonstrate that to everyone else, it would behoove him to treat her with the utmost respect, because then she would have nothing to complain about and would effectively hoist herself with her own petard in front of the research community. McAdams would come off smelling like a rose.
> Did
> HE find her letter to President Kennedy? Did HE get her college records
> under cover of her trying to transfer credits to his college?
No, you did that.
>
> > onto/by/with her own petard? If McAdams, with his influence here, had
> > treated her with the utmost respect, and she turned on him with nothing
> > tangible to complain about (no pilfered manuscript, no photo used without
> > her permission, etc...) how persuasive would that have been for everyone?
> > Would that have helped or hurt his cause?
> >
>
> Why should anyone have treated her with ANY respect?
It's called unmasking Marsh.
Besides, if you know Judyth, you realize that she takes advantage of every single misstep she can trick anyone into making. If someone does something in the LEAST unethical, she screams and yells at high volume. The only alternative is to make sure you treat her with the utmost respect, so that when she tries to complain about you, you can remind her of that. That gives less power to her imo. She is just waving in the wind with nobody to blame but herself.
>
> Is that the old proverb about catching more flies with honey than with
> vinegar?
No, it's a matter of waging war, Marsh. Its a strategy for dealing with your worst enemies.
>
> No thanks, I don't want her flies.
>
> > Pamela Brown
> > mcadamsexperiment.blogspot.com
> >
No comments:
Post a Comment