HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Mc Mike » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »

Mc Mike

Profile Information

Member since: Wed Nov 23, 2011, 05:50 PM
Number of posts: 9,084

Journal Archives

I'm going through the whole op and subthreads for the third time, now.

You seem to be pretty polite in the discussion, c_u. Polite disagreement seems to me like the best way to get any kind of progress out of an 'opposing viewpoints' discussion.

I think the links in Octa's post 230, and MinM's 128 and 203 are a better read for me, better than me obtaining and going through a 1600+ page work by an author whose previous work I have read and not found edifying. I don't disregard your feeling that his book satisfies the questions you have or the issues that you think are important in the Kennedy assassination, it's just not for me. I would be more than happy to read the key thorough debunking facts from his book on this issue if you posted them, though.

But insurance companies are in the business to make money. They make money. They rely on actuarial science to assess their risks in insuring people with life insurance policies. There is a high mortality rate among JFK assassination witnesses. Not just people getting heart attacks and strokes, falling from windows, having plane trouble, single car crashes, and the like, but people who were shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, etc. The actuary, who is an expert in the field, unlike Bugliosi, was just saying in effect, "An insurer who writes the policies for all of these people, taking their ages, lifestyles, and occupations into account, will chance to make money from insuring them a hundred thousand million billion times, as opposed to having one chance to lose money." That shows a much higher mortality rate among the sub group of witnesses/connected individuals versus the population as a whole with the same ages-health-occupations, and indicates a very large statistical anomaly. Luckily, no single company insured all of those people, because the one in 'one hundred thousand million billion to one' chance came through.

Regarding one of your earlier posts below, 'Oswald as Commie Proselytizer in the Marines' is one of the more outrageous ideas that the 'official story' offers to the American public. Not being impolite to you here, just the idea itself is absurd to the extreme, but is 'officially true.'

You may be thinking of 'Computers and Automation'

instead of Computer World. Here's a link to an article title list:


You could also use this site's search box, type "computers and automation" into it. Some of the hits are relevant.

I was impressed by an end-note to a '93 documentary on the assassination. It said that the London Sunday Times had commissioned a study by an actuary, on the untimely deaths (within 4 years) of so many people connected to the JFK assassination. The actuary calculated the odds that all those witnesses would be dead, within that time period, to be one hundred million billion to one. 100,000,000,000,000,000 - 1.

3 other points:
Membes of the Prez's Secret Service detail partied the night before in a nightclub owned by an associate of Jack Ruby. Seems to be serious dereliction of duty, considering the virulently anti-Democratic Party and anti-Kennedy atmosphere in Dallas at the time.

The parade route, that the Sol Bloom Agency had mapped out, was changed at the last minute to go right on Houston, then make the slow hard left turn on to Elm, instead of straight ahead on Main.

The S.S. limo driver stopped the vehicle when shots rang out, instead of speeding up, the obvious protocol. If he had sped up, Jackie would have been catapulted off the back of the limo, instead of being shoved back into the limo by the running agent who caught up to the slowly moving car.

+1, thanks.

About the 'anti-semitic link' issue, I notice that anytime there is a criminal conspiracy from the far-right, a host of far right freakshow personalities pop up and contribute 'information' about the issue. Liberty Lobby, Scientologists, Larouchites, Alex Jones, all jump in and report some factual aspects of the scandal, with their whacked out spin and falsehoods added.

Their job is to discredit the non-'nazi wackos' who are reporting the true facts of the issue, to make it easier for willfully ignorant/blind people and actual bad guys to deny the facts. The blind or bad nay-sayers can then ignore or castigate the legit non-nazis by lumping them in with odious groups of people.

And 'conspiracy to commit' charges are a dime-a-dozen in our country's legal system. Two guys talking beforehand about robbing a 7-11 is conspiracy to commit. Frequent and pedestrian. But when big criminal acts occur, the easiest way to derail discussion of the powerful people who planned and executed the criminal act is to 'pooh-pooh' reporting about the facts by typing 'conspiracy theory'. The double think is that the legal system sees 'conspiracies by the low' everywhere in the country, and these blind or bad yutzes simultaneously get to see 'conspiracies by the high' no where, and claim the 'intellectual realist' high ground, all by typing two words. This allows our legal system, which is controlled by people on high, to get away with not prosecuting the high level criminal conspirators, like Judge Fuller, Rove, l'il bush, etc.

Kochs help fund Third Way, maybe? nt

If not Ms. Kennedy, how about Ed Markey? nt

+1. Thanks, Oct, MMM, and s 1 (and some others.)

I miss D & P.

The post-er who keeps insisting that people stop posting, and go obtain and read the 8 zillion volume Warren Report, is a hoot. Typical tactic from people who want to push the boulder down-hill, discussion wise. Demand that people you oppose go perform some 'Hercules cleans out the Augean stables' task. 'Jump through these hoops for me, then come back and post.' Demand that people justify themselves to you, by doing what you tell them, because you're the authority they have to satisfy. Natter away endlessly, don't just post one rebuttal and leave, because you're sure you're 'right'. It's a crusade for 'truth' for you.

The composition of the Warren Commission was a joke. Warren had been threatened with impeachment by the right wing before the Commission, and was in tears when he was forced to helm the commission. The disgraced and forced-out Dulles, smiling for all the photo-ops of the Warren Commission. McCloy helping get the Malmedy Massacre S.S. war criminals' charges dismissed, after his stellar war-time efforts pushing back against Churchill's advice to bomb Auschwitz-Birkenau. The far-right Ford image-spun into a bumbling, affable guy. Hale Boggs' airplane accident. A study of Oswald's pubic hair, and his boy hood dental records.

I'll be back in a month to post, 'stop'bush, as soon as I get on that little task you ordered us to complete.

Exhibits a tenuous grasp of reality for somebody who prizes their clear headed, realistic judgement and thinking.

I have no argument with you about the actual cost, cal.

I've willfully passed up ten opportunities to view the posted clip of the 'movie', (which makes me a noted non-expert in terms of cost.) And I think the clip is all that exists. But there is a lie that a movie exists. There is another lie that the movie cost $5 million dollars to make, or that amount was raised for it.

I don't think Yard's trying to feed us a red herring by pointing out the red herring exists. Your o.p. on McCain's Benghazi-Watergate hearings had an important piece of the picture, repugs using the attacks for partisan politics. Yard's o.p. has an important piece, too -- my take is repugs Generating the attacks for partisan politics. Yard is questioning to get info about the people behind the generation of the 'movie' that was the (red-herring) pretext for the attacks. Demonstrations occurred on 9-11-12, and were used as a cover or smokescreen for attacks on 9-11-12. The demonstrations were supposed to be prompted by attention being drawn to this obscure pin-head's magnum opus, even if that supposition is yet another red herring.

Even if the youtube clip cost a buck ninety eight in reality, it could be helpful to find out about the whole crew of cockroaches that spread it, and the actual mechanism they used to do so. Just like the u-stash-i pastor Jones, a little mutant creep with about 2 dozen followers who has to be begged by Pentagon reps not to use his ginormous 'influence' to put our foreign policy national security personnel at risk with his out-sized bull horn, the perps who produced this pic wield a disproportionately out-sized bull horn on the international scene. GOP skul dug er ee.

Thanks for the sum up and links.

There was a lot of progressive site 'chatter' about the origins of the 'movie'. CA Film Commission has no permit record, there's no IMDb page for the film, a con-man felon's behind making it, maybe the whole movie was screened once, but there's no record. Buzzflash, TPM, Max B., Al Jazeera, Lucas Kavner at Huff Post, all putting info out about the slap-dash nature of the film that 'caused' the attacks. AP says that they traced it to Nakoula Basseley Nakoula, who covered up the 'Basseley' part of his CA driver's license with his thumb, when he showed it to AP to prove his identity. (Sam 'Bacile'.) The fact that it's easy to get lost in the sea of red herrings, on the 'cause' part of the attacks, shows that it's a typical half-baked repug foreign policy op.

Mutant from l'il bush's CPA in Iraq reminded me of

Dem Now! 4/23/07:

"Family of Cho Seung Hui "We Feel Hopeless, Helpless and Lost"
Meanwhile the family of the gunman Cho Seung Hui has issued its first public statement. Cho's sister Sun Kyung said " We feel hopeless, helpless and lost. This is someone that I grew up with and loved. Now I feel like I didn't know this person… He has made the world weep. We are living a nightmare." Cho's sister Sun Kyung works as a contractor for the State Department's Iraq Reconstruction Management Office. "

Their family emigrated to the U.S. from South Korea, and she had top security clearances.

You may be right, but at the very least

the terror attacks were designed for an electoral coup, and they're being used to keep the president on the defensive via corporate media-covered bad publicity and partisan witch-hunt repug 'investigative oversight' efforts.

Remember the old days of terror attacks, when the terrorist org launched the attack because they couldn't take on the power they were against in a stand up fight. So they attacked where they could, then used the media coverage to get attention and support for their cause. A group would step forward and issue a "'credible' claim of responsibility". These days an attack occurs and the perps are far too 'humble' and diffident. Don't want to brag, now. But what's the point of getting media attention via a spectacular attack, then denying responsibility?

The people who attacked us in Egypt and Libya were paramilitary pros, well-trained and well-armed, not fundy fanatic amateurs. If we follow the trail from the characters who made -- and disseminated in Arab language -- the movie trailer (there's no movie) to the source that spread it on the ground in Libya and Egypt and called for demonstrations, we'll get closer to seeing who used those demonstrations as smoke screens for synchronized attacks. Rove repug foreign policy traitors hired some mercs through some Arab language version of Soldier of Fortune. A middle east version of Ronin, by right-wing rove repugs. Just a bald assertion on my part.

I can't discount your 'coup attempt', the repugs are always talking about assassination and secession, and constantly threaten civil war. But you don't have to convince me about a coup attempt, when we could get to the bottom of who attacked our 2 embassies and come up with repug traitors. And the squeeze out of military and intel people on this Petraeus scandal matches the elimination of Dulles, Bissell, Lemnitzer, Cabell and the gang after the Bay of Pigs. They were demoted or forced out for mis-serving the Prez with bad intel and trying to mislead us into a war, though the assassination after that did match the description of a coup.

What I'm trying to say is it's blatantly obvious that the repugs were running on 'Dems weak on foreign policy and national security'. A lot of info points to them being behind a false flag operation that 'proved' their false allegation. They're now definitely using the attack, false flag or not, for legislative branch witchhunts to attempt to cripple the administration. I don't disagree with you that they wanted to roll tanks down US streets, I just think it would be easier to discover that some rogue repug operators orchestrated the attacks than it would be to expose a coup attempt. If an attempt did occur, I'd love to see it exposed and proven, though.

Our government probably won't prove my bald assertion or your thesis, but we have a better shot at getting some repug 'rogue operators' hung out to dry by discovering their part in the attacks. If our Administration doesn't act overtly on either of our ideas, the action for Dems is to squash those bastards in their bull-shit 'investigative oversight' efforts, by lobbying Dems to attack their hyper partisan balderdash with censure in the Senate and House. And to demand that the repug controlled corporate media stop using our public air-waves to support those treasonous nazis in their efforts.
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »