The Book Depository as a Potemkin Village

[Joe Elliott]

He didn't say it was off-limits, he said it was off-topic.  It's called poisoning the well -- a logical fallacy, and Elliott does it all the time.  Whatever Gilbride's views on an unrelated subject are, they have no bearing on the argument presented here.  Just like Michael Griffith's former writings on the civil war have no bearing on his arguments about the acoustical evidence.

CTers want a double standard. Certainly, when Gerald Posner got into trouble with over plagiarism, no CTer argued that none of these articles he was accused of plagiarizing had anything to do with the JFK assassination, therefore, this talk about plagiarism should be “off topic”. Nor did any LNer argue this.

Question:

Can any one point out a post on this forum or any forum where someone made the claim that bringing up Posner’s plagiarism is “off-topic”?

Question:

If a LNer ever stated somewhere else “I know that whatever the government tells me, I know this is true” that referring to this statement is “off-limits” or “off-topic”? Couldn’t a CTer point out that their views about the Warren Report are questionable because of this statement?

Question:

Why should the views of LNers, not directly connected to the JFK assassination, be considered “off-limits” but the views of CTers are?


And I should also point out, that Mr. Gilbride’s views about the U. S. Government’s involvement with, and covering up of, transactions with space aliens, is not a view of his that is unrelated to the JFK assassination. Because he believes that this was the reason, or a principle reason, for the government assassinating the President. So, it cannot be considered “off-topic”.

[John Iacoletti]

CTers want a double standard. Certainly, when Gerald Posner got into trouble with over plagiarism, no CTer argued that none of these articles he was accused of plagiarizing had anything to do with the JFK assassination, therefore, this talk about plagiarism should be “off topic”. Nor did any LNer argue this.

I would.  His arguments about the JFK assassination are either correct and supportable or they are not.  The fact that he may have plagiarized some unrelated content has no bearing on these arguments.

Why should the views of LNers, not directly connected to the JFK assassination, be considered “off-limits” but the views of CTers are?

Nobody said "off limits".  He clearly suggested that you create a new thread to discuss your unrelated topic.

Just because this board is about the JFK assassination doesn't mean that every thread becomes a free for all.  If you're discussing the acoustical evidence of the dictabelt recordings, and I respond by discussing the provenance of CE-399, you would be justified in asking me to take it elsewhere.  This happens on this forum to CTs and LNs alike, all the time.  Why should LNs be exempt from staying on topic?  Particularly when you're going off topic to do an ad hominem poisoning of the well.

[Denis Pointing]

I would.  His arguments about the JFK assassination are either correct and supportable or they are not.  The fact that he may have plagiarized some unrelated content has no bearing on these arguments.

Nobody said "off limits".  He clearly suggested that you create a new thread to discuss your unrelated topic.

Just because this board is about the JFK assassination doesn't mean that every thread becomes a free for all.  If you're discussing the acoustical evidence of the dictabelt recordings, and I respond by discussing the provenance of CE-399, you would be justified in asking me to take it elsewhere.  This happens on this forum to CTs and LNs alike, all the time.  Why should LNs be exempt from staying on topic?  Particularly when you're going off topic to do an ad hominem poisoning of the well.

Please show me the forum rule that prevents members from going off topic. You wouldn't be making up these rules as you go along, would you John?
Last time I checked it was Duncan's job, as admin, to decide which posts were on or off topic. Has that changed, have you been 'promoted' to admin?
John, perhaps you would be better suited starting your very own forum, then you can police members posts and dictate the rules to your heart's content. A short while ago Duncan was asking if any member was interested in buying this forum, did you miss that?
Until that happens I think I'll carry on posting as I see fit (within forum rules) but thanks for the advice.

PS Please feel free to make a complaint to Duncan, concerning my posts going off topic, if you so wish.

[John Iacoletti]

I didn't say it was a rule, nor am I policing.  Just pointing out that it's a logical fallacy to respond to an argument about the TSBD being a false front with a counter argument about aliens.  And the person who started the thread is well within his rights to ask you to stay on topic or start your own thread.  And if you don't like that, then it's your problem.

But thanks for the advice.

[Dan O'meara]

To my horror I find myself agreeing with John. The topic is the TSBD as a front and in my firm opinion there is something deeply suspicious going on there with multiple employees involved. What's going under the radar here is how profoundly weak Richard's argument is - that the power outage is somehow 'proof' that the TSBD is a front.
I would like to ask Richard what you think the purpose of the power outage is?

[Denis Pointing]

I didn't say it was a rule, nor am I policing.  Just pointing out that it's a logical fallacy to respond to an argument about the TSBD being a false front with a counter argument about aliens.  And the person who started the thread is well within his rights to ask you to stay on topic or start your own thread.  And if you don't like that, then it's your problem.

But thanks for the advice.

Problem? Me? I really don't have one...I'm just finding it hilarious watching you get all angry and frustrated over someone else's post. LOL
John, I don't need you to point out anything to me. Mind your business, keep your opinions about my post's to yourself and move on. You're dismissed. As the good book says; GO FOURTH AND MULTIPLY! 

[Richard Gilbride]

My apologies for no direct responses; my internet server is out again, 2nd time in 2 weeks, and I only get 1/2 hour at the local library. But I thought I'd share a background story about the 2020 thesis.

I committed to putting a JFK book together in 2003 and the next year took a camping vacation at my alma mater UMaine, hoping to think like I did 30 years previously as a young idealistic philosophy major searching for eternal truths. They had a copy of the Warren Volumes and I read Jack Dougherty's testimony for the 1st time. Those 5 pages took over an hour, as I tried to read as though it were a stageplay, imagining everyone's faces and reactions. I had a EUREKA moment and realized that he'd taken down the strangers from the 6th floor. And my years of TSBD work since have been cobbling around that fundamental insight.

It's really since 2009 with my Elevator Escape essay that I've put together a formalized thesis about TSBD worker complicity. Imperfectly. But I've honed that thesis into court-presentable evidence now in 2020. That's how truth in criminology finally emerges- a flash of insight, a trickle of possibilities, then a burst of irrefutable conclusions.

And anyone who wants to counter my 2020 thesis has to examine it and provide arguments to the contrary. It's a cop-out to pretend this thesis is about something that's not presented in the thesis, like JFK & UFOs. Kind of like ridiculing me because I believe Brian Jones was murdered, or because I'm ignored by Deep Politics and C.A.P.A. and hated by the Education Forum and ROKC.

One hope is that the reader of The Book Depository as a Potemkin Village looks at the TSBD Company having moved into Dealey Plaza for the express reason of killing President Kennedy. And I had a purpose for introducing the idea that the TSBD had served as a covert supplier for CIA activities, since that hypothesis had been introduced in the 90s.

Hopefully my internet will return soon but here in the hills of Southern New Hampshire there can be difficulties.