27-08-2013, 11:45 PM
Everyone here rejects the LN bunk.
I guess this won't serve as the point to be rallied around, but I think it should be.
Divide and Conquer is the AGE-OLD tactic of the enemy and a damn successful tactic at that.
I would rather agree on the FACT of conspiracy in the murder of the President.
All this ire and such is referenced in the CIA document of how to counter the WC critics.
I could go look it up, but many know of the document and I'd rather encourage all here to not cooperate with the Enemy.
Toleration of the Enemy is NOT what I am thinking about.
Charles is correct, ignoring the fools cannot help, toleration of the Enemy only serves the Enemy by accepting endless dispute the Enemy desires.
However I don't require agreement with my opinion to listen to sincere folks that hold differing views to consider a view.
I understand the anger at some issues being judged as impossible when I don't agree with the view.
Only an example:
As if someone says more people than LHO did the shooting but LHO also fired upon the President and used the WC weapons.
It irks me now that we know from Mr. Armstrong's great work on the weapons that LHO never ever possessed the weapons.
Nothing wrong with trying to inform the unknowing about the paper trails of the weapons. By the response of the unknowing we would know what was up.
A charade to promote division or someone actually not knowing about the paper trail evidence being manufactured by USPS and FBI.
If a charade player we out them in short order, if not game playing and not knowing then we explain the state of evidence to date.
As it should be.
Not all here have been curious about the case since in my case about '67 or '68, some longer than I.
Fletcher Prouty and Ms. Mae and the others that broke the ground never had to tell me I was ignorant, I knew it listening to them without being told.
I guess this won't serve as the point to be rallied around, but I think it should be.
Divide and Conquer is the AGE-OLD tactic of the enemy and a damn successful tactic at that.
I would rather agree on the FACT of conspiracy in the murder of the President.
All this ire and such is referenced in the CIA document of how to counter the WC critics.
I could go look it up, but many know of the document and I'd rather encourage all here to not cooperate with the Enemy.
Toleration of the Enemy is NOT what I am thinking about.
Charles is correct, ignoring the fools cannot help, toleration of the Enemy only serves the Enemy by accepting endless dispute the Enemy desires.
However I don't require agreement with my opinion to listen to sincere folks that hold differing views to consider a view.
I understand the anger at some issues being judged as impossible when I don't agree with the view.
Only an example:
As if someone says more people than LHO did the shooting but LHO also fired upon the President and used the WC weapons.
It irks me now that we know from Mr. Armstrong's great work on the weapons that LHO never ever possessed the weapons.
Nothing wrong with trying to inform the unknowing about the paper trails of the weapons. By the response of the unknowing we would know what was up.
A charade to promote division or someone actually not knowing about the paper trail evidence being manufactured by USPS and FBI.
If a charade player we out them in short order, if not game playing and not knowing then we explain the state of evidence to date.
As it should be.
Not all here have been curious about the case since in my case about '67 or '68, some longer than I.
Fletcher Prouty and Ms. Mae and the others that broke the ground never had to tell me I was ignorant, I knew it listening to them without being told.
Read not to contradict and confute;
nor to believe and take for granted;
nor to find talk and discourse;
but to weigh and consider.
FRANCIS BACON
nor to believe and take for granted;
nor to find talk and discourse;
but to weigh and consider.
FRANCIS BACON