Bias against Trump

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Bias against Trump

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 117 of 573 < 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 >

Hrolf The Ganger 05 May 18 12.07pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays It would have made far more sense for the mob to kill RFK in 62. If the mob connection had legs there would have been a leak by now that stood up. Ruby said that sympathy for the president's widow was his only motive. Sure he had mob connections but again, there's no real evidence. I think people get excited by categorising half truths as proven truths. For example, the Warren report found that Ruby had connections to the mob but he wasn't in the mob. They were lots of people like that. Oswald was very sympathetic to Cuba and hung around with lots of anti establishment figures that doesn't mean Castro or the mob used him to kill Kennedy. Occam's razor. Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 11.33am) I'm sure that Oswald was involved but didn't fire the fatal bullet. Ruby was not in the mob so was perfect for plausible deniability. He was no doubt made an offer he couldn't refuse. With no solid evidence and any later claims not believed, it is impossible to have a definitive answer. That was the plan. The Zapruder film complicated issues and brought the conspiracy to a wider audience. I believe that it actually helped to complicate matters with all the daft bullet theories but it also helped to prolong interest and let investigators sniff out the flaws in the official story. As with all these thing, we choose what to believe based on our experience of life.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

05 May 18 12.07pm

Send a Private Message to Hrolf The Ganger

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

It would have made far more sense for the mob to kill RFK in 62.

If the mob connection had legs there would have been a leak by now that stood up.

Ruby said that sympathy for the president's widow was his only motive. Sure he had mob connections but again, there's no real evidence.

I think people get excited by categorising half truths as proven truths. For example, the Warren report found that Ruby had connections to the mob but he wasn't in the mob. They were lots of people like that. Oswald was very sympathetic to Cuba and hung around with lots of anti establishment figures that doesn't mean Castro or the mob used him to kill Kennedy.

Occam's razor.

Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 11.33am)

I'm sure that Oswald was involved but didn't fire the fatal bullet. Ruby was not in the mob so was perfect for plausible deniability. He was no doubt made an offer he couldn't refuse.

With no solid evidence and any later claims not believed, it is impossible to have a definitive answer. That was the plan.
The Zapruder film complicated issues and brought the conspiracy to a wider audience. I believe that it actually helped to complicate matters with all the daft bullet theories but it also helped to prolong interest and let investigators sniff out the flaws in the official story.
As with all these thing, we choose what to believe based on our experience of life.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 05 May 18 12.52pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger I'm sure that Oswald was involved but didn't fire the fatal bullet. Ruby was not in the mob so was perfect for plausible deniability. He was no doubt made an offer he couldn't refuse. With no solid evidence and any later claims not believed, it is impossible to have a definitive answer. That was the plan. The Zapruder film complicated issues and brought the conspiracy to a wider audience. I believe that it actually helped to complicate matters with all the daft bullet theories but it also helped to prolong interest and let investigators sniff out the flaws in the official story. As with all these thing, we choose what to believe based on our experience of life. For me, when I watch that Zapruder film in slow mo it looks like the kill bullet comes from high and behind. Before his head goes 'back and to the left'(nervous system reaction) it goes forward (force impact). We know that position high up in the book depository would have been Oswald's. That was my conclusion anyway....I certainly watched it enough times....and it isn't pleasant. [Link] Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 12.54pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

05 May 18 12.52pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I'm sure that Oswald was involved but didn't fire the fatal bullet. Ruby was not in the mob so was perfect for plausible deniability. He was no doubt made an offer he couldn't refuse.

For me, when I watch that Zapruder film in slow mo it looks like the kill bullet comes from high and behind. Before his head goes 'back and to the left'(nervous system reaction) it goes forward (force impact).

We know that position high up in the book depository would have been Oswald's.

That was my conclusion anyway....I certainly watched it enough times....and it isn't pleasant.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 12.54pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 05 May 18 1.38pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays For me, when I watch that Zapruder film in slow mo it looks like the kill bullet comes from high and behind. Before his head goes 'back and to the left'(nervous system reaction) it goes forward (force impact). We know that position high up in the book depository would have been Oswald's. That was my conclusion anyway....I certainly watched it enough times....and it isn't pleasant. [Link] Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 12.54pm) I think the assassination itself is a distraction. What happened afterwards is the where the story lies. Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (10 May 2018 12.17pm)
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

05 May 18 1.38pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

We know that position high up in the book depository would have been Oswald's.

That was my conclusion anyway....I certainly watched it enough times....and it isn't pleasant.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 12.54pm)

I think the assassination itself is a distraction. What happened afterwards is the where the story lies.

Edited by Hrolf The Ganger (10 May 2018 12.17pm)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 05 May 18 2.30pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger I think the assination itself is a distraction. What happened afterward is the where the story lies. Sure, but you wouldn't convict anyone on that. I just don't think that history can be controlled very easily....so many variables. I mean how much control do you have over your own life? Luck and the motivations of others, realised and failed, factor in hugely into anyone's life. If a set of events proceeds along a certain path it is always tempting to look back at a point and say....well, the future here is obvious.....we even have sayings about hindsight and all that. Yet I bet if I said to you predict the major events of the next five years you couldn't.......There are strong possibilities, possibilities and unlikelihoods and all the inbetweens. Just me chewing the fat. Nothing wrong with you seeing it your way. Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 2.32pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

05 May 18 2.30pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

I think the assination itself is a distraction. What happened afterward is the where the story lies.

Sure, but you wouldn't convict anyone on that.

I just don't think that history can be controlled very easily....so many variables. I mean how much control do you have over your own life? Luck and the motivations of others, realised and failed, factor in hugely into anyone's life.

If a set of events proceeds along a certain path it is always tempting to look back at a point and say....well, the future here is obvious.....we even have sayings about hindsight and all that.

Yet I bet if I said to you predict the major events of the next five years you couldn't.......There are strong possibilities, possibilities and unlikelihoods and all the inbetweens.

Just me chewing the fat. Nothing wrong with you seeing it your way.

Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 2.32pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger 05 May 18 4.44pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Sure, but you wouldn't convict anyone on that. I just don't think that history can be controlled very easily....so many variables. I mean how much control do you have over your own life? Luck and the motivations of others, realised and failed, factor in hugely into anyone's life. If a set of events proceeds along a certain path it is always tempting to look back at a point and say....well, the future here is obvious.....we even have sayings about hindsight and all that. Yet I bet if I said to you predict the major events of the next five years you couldn't.......There are strong possibilities, possibilities and unlikelihoods and all the inbetweens. Just me chewing the fat. Nothing wrong with you seeing it your way. Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 2.32pm) I certainly agree that it is easy to add two and two and make five. In the absence of certainty, one has to go with gut instinct using the available information. No doubt people often abuse details to form an opinion that is fanciful. Equally, there are times when one can make an accurate assessment of general circumstances but still get the detail wrong. I believe that people are right when they suspect a conspiracy with Kennedy but offer erroneous evidence to support it. Can I prove it? Nope.
Alert a moderator to this post

Hrolf The Ganger

05 May 18 4.44pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Sure, but you wouldn't convict anyone on that.

If a set of events proceeds along a certain path it is always tempting to look back at a point and say....well, the future here is obvious.....we even have sayings about hindsight and all that.

Yet I bet if I said to you predict the major events of the next five years you couldn't.......There are strong possibilities, possibilities and unlikelihoods and all the inbetweens.

Just me chewing the fat. Nothing wrong with you seeing it your way.

Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 2.32pm)

I certainly agree that it is easy to add two and two and make five.
In the absence of certainty, one has to go with gut instinct using the available information. No doubt people often abuse details to form an opinion that is fanciful. Equally, there are times when one can make an accurate assessment of general circumstances but still get the detail wrong.
I believe that people are right when they suspect a conspiracy with Kennedy but offer erroneous evidence to support it.
Can I prove it? Nope.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 05 May 18 5.07pm
Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger I certainly agree that it is easy to add two and two and make five. In the absence of certainty, one has to go with gut instinct using the available information. No doubt people often abuse details to form an opinion that is fanciful. Equally, there are times when one can make an accurate assessment of general circumstances but still get the detail wrong. I believe that people are right when they suspect a conspiracy with Kennedy but offer erroneous evidence to support it. Can I prove it? Nope. Fair enough. I certainly believe in a social media conspiracy to close down and/or restrict prominent conservative voices (excepting Trump who is too important to Twitter traffic).....whilst lying about it. Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 5.08pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

05 May 18 5.07pm

Originally posted by Hrolf The Ganger

Fair enough.

I certainly believe in a social media conspiracy to close down and/or restrict prominent conservative voices (excepting Trump who is too important to Twitter traffic).....whilst lying about it.

Edited by Stirlingsays (05 May 2018 5.08pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

.TUX. 05 May 18 5.15pm
Originally posted by .TUX. By far the greatest (US) ''conspiracy'' took place 105yrs ago despite it being completely unconstitutional to this day. If those involved in this particular scam can get away with this then JFK/9-11/pointless wars are merely a walk in the park. ‘'It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.'’ No response. Not unexpected tbh as had you accepted this then it would blow everything else that you continually believe in, despite many facts, apart. The head is far safer in the sand............for many. Buy Litecoin.
Alert a moderator to this post

.TUX.

05 May 18 5.15pm

Originally posted by .TUX.

By far the greatest (US) ''conspiracy'' took place 105yrs ago despite it being completely unconstitutional to this day.
If those involved in this particular scam can get away with this then JFK/9-11/pointless wars are merely a walk in the park.

‘'It's easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled.'’

No response.
Not unexpected tbh as had you accepted this then it would blow everything else that you continually believe in, despite many facts, apart.

The head is far safer in the sand............for many.

Buy Litecoin.

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 05 May 18 9.19pm
Originally posted by .TUX. No response. Not unexpected tbh as had you accepted this then it would blow everything else that you continually believe in, despite many facts, apart. The head is far safer in the sand............for many. Go on then....tell us about the conspiracy to top them all. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

05 May 18 9.19pm

Originally posted by .TUX.

No response.
Not unexpected tbh as had you accepted this then it would blow everything else that you continually believe in, despite many facts, apart.

The head is far safer in the sand............for many.

Go on then....tell us about the conspiracy to top them all.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Penge Eagle Beckenham 06 May 18 11.24am
Today's BBC news home page screenshot attached shows the latest anti-Trump propaganda. Lead story shows its partisan towards President Hassan Rouhani(!), because he is Trump's enemy, and fails to properly explain why Trump is rightly looking at ripping it up. It fails to mention former Secretary of State John Kerry visiting Iran and working against his own country to thwart Trump. Story 2 is about a p* star appearing on a comedy show! This is the BBC, not the Sun newspaper. Story 4 sees the BBC side with the North Korean dictator because of course, it's all USA's fault! Story 7 has another nation (France) ripping into Trump. And you wonder why Trump has a problem with the mainstream media?! All of those stories could have been written in a more neutral, or dare I say it, pro-USA way. Edited by Penge Eagle (06 May 2018 11.49am) Attachment**: bbc.JPG (136.64Kb)
Alert a moderator to this post \| Board Moderator

Penge Eagle

Beckenham 06 May 18 11.24am

Today's BBC news home page screenshot attached shows the latest anti-Trump propaganda.

Lead story shows its partisan towards President Hassan Rouhani(!), because he is Trump's enemy, and fails to properly explain why Trump is rightly looking at ripping it up. It fails to mention former Secretary of State John Kerry visiting Iran and working against his own country to thwart Trump.

Story 2 is about a p*** star appearing on a comedy show! This is the BBC, not the Sun newspaper.

Story 4 sees the BBC side with the North Korean dictator because of course, it's all USA's fault!

Story 7 has another nation (France) ripping into Trump.

And you wonder why Trump has a problem with the mainstream media?! All of those stories could have been written in a more neutral, or dare I say it, pro-USA way.

Edited by Penge Eagle (06 May 2018 11.49am)

Attachment: bbc.JPG (136.64Kb)

Alert a moderator to this post | Board Moderator

Stirlingsays 06 May 18 12.03pm
Originally posted by Penge Eagle Today's BBC news home page screenshot attached shows the latest anti-Trump propaganda. Lead story shows its partisan towards President Hassan Rouhani(!), because he is Trump's enemy, and fails to properly explain why Trump is rightly looking at ripping it up. It fails to mention former Secretary of State John Kerry visiting Iran and working against his own country to thwart Trump. Story 2 is about a p*** star appearing on a comedy show! This is the BBC, not the Sun newspaper. Story 4 sees the BBC side with the North Korean dictator because of course, it's all USA's fault! Story 7 has another nation (France) ripping into Trump. And you wonder why Trump has a problem with the mainstream media?! All of those stories could have been written in a more neutral, or dare I say it, pro-USA way. Edited by Penge Eagle (06 May 2018 11.49am) Yep......I remember reading that the BBC have a former Guardian paper editor in charge of its website. The BBC website obviously models itself on the Guardian all over.....like most BBC producers. In 2011, Peter Sissons, a main news presenter at the BBC from 1989—2009, said that "at the core of the BBC, in its very DNA, is a way of thinking that is firmly of the Left". Another BBC presenter, Andrew Marr, commented that "the BBC is not impartial or neutral. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias." Well, Andrew that should not be the case on taxpayer funding......It's also a lie. It isn't 'liberal' in terms of classical liberal, it's progressive left wing that you dress up as 'liberal'. Former BBC director Roger Mosey classified it as "liberal defensive. Edited by Stirlingsays (06 May 2018 12.10pm) 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

06 May 18 12.03pm

Originally posted by Penge Eagle

Today's BBC news home page screenshot attached shows the latest anti-Trump propaganda.

Story 2 is about a p*** star appearing on a comedy show! This is the BBC, not the Sun newspaper.

Story 4 sees the BBC side with the North Korean dictator because of course, it's all USA's fault!

Story 7 has another nation (France) ripping into Trump.

And you wonder why Trump has a problem with the mainstream media?! All of those stories could have been written in a more neutral, or dare I say it, pro-USA way.

Edited by Penge Eagle (06 May 2018 11.49am)

Yep......I remember reading that the BBC have a former Guardian paper editor in charge of its website.

The BBC website obviously models itself on the Guardian all over.....like most BBC producers.

In 2011, Peter Sissons, a main news presenter at the BBC from 1989—2009, said that "at the core of the BBC, in its very DNA, is a way of thinking that is firmly of the Left".

Another BBC presenter, Andrew Marr, commented that "the BBC is not impartial or neutral. It has a liberal bias, not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias."

Well, Andrew that should not be the case on taxpayer funding......It's also a lie. It isn't 'liberal' in terms of classical liberal, it's progressive left wing that you dress up as 'liberal'.

Former BBC director Roger Mosey classified it as "liberal defensive.

Edited by Stirlingsays (06 May 2018 12.10pm)

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays 10 May 18 1.18am
Look at Opec, the climate accord and the Iran deal. Trump is so good at pulling out that even those Russian prostitutes didn't know if he was f***ing them or not. 'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)
Alert a moderator to this post

Stirlingsays

10 May 18 1.18am

Look at Opec, the climate accord and the Iran deal. Trump is so good at pulling out that even those Russian prostitutes didn't know if he was f***ing them or not.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert a moderator to this post

pefwin Where you have to have an English ... 10 May 18 1.50pm
Originally posted by Stirlingsays Look at Opec, the climate accord and the Iran deal. Trump is so good at pulling out that even those Russian prostitutes didn't know if he was f***ing them or not. LOL. You know what they say about small hands. "Everything is air-droppable at least once." "When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support."
Alert a moderator to this post

pefwin

Where you have to have an English ... 10 May 18 1.50pm

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Look at Opec, the climate accord and the Iran deal. Trump is so good at pulling out that even those Russian prostitutes didn't know if he was f***ing them or not.

LOL.

You know what they say about small hands.

"Everything is air-droppable at least once."

"When the going gets tough, the tough call for close air support."

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 117 of 573 < 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Bias against Trump

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors