More Dirt on McCain
Wow:
Had he not been the son and grandson of admirals, there is scant chance he would have been admitted to the U.S. Naval Academy. Given his behavior patterns and academics, had he not been the son and grandson of admirals, there is little doubt he would have been thrown out. Instead, in 1958 he managed to graduate 894 out of 899. Had he not been the son and grandson of admirals, he is no chance he would have been accepted into the prestigious naval flight training program over far better qualified officers. On his way to becoming a North Vietnamese ace, the aviator lost 3 expensive aircraft on routine, non-combat flights. Little was made of all that, because he was, you know, the son and grandson of admirals.The article goes on quite a bit more in this vein, eventually concluding that McCain is the most flawed presidential candidate in history.
McCain’s most horrendous loss occurred in 1967 on the USS Forrestal. Well, not horrendous for him. The starter motor switch on the A4E Skyhawk allowed fuel to pool in the engine. When the aircraft was “wet-started,” an impressive flame would shoot from the tail. It was one of the ways young hot-shots got their jollies. Investigators and survivors took the position that McCain deliberately wet-started to harass the F4 pilot directly behind him. The cook off launched an M34 Zuni rocket that tore through the Skyhawk’s fuel tank, released a thousand pound bomb, and ignited a fire that killed the pilot plus 167 men. Before the tally of dead and dying was complete, the son and grandson of admirals had been transferred to the USS Oriskany.
posted by spooked at 11:22 PM
12 Comments:
Is McCain any worse than someone who
is given space on a prominent progressive (sic) blog site to promote opinions which are not considered to be credible by knowledgeable people nor experts in the subject matter, and who, when asked questions about said opinions, refuses to answer them and instead, engages in the most common tactics of
right-wing disinformation agents whenever THEY are confronted with
questions which they can't or won't answer?
Basic questions about things like
9/11 are still be raised and debated after more than six years.
Skeptics raise questions, disinfo
agents respond with ridicule and
tortured evasions.
Disinfo agents support long-discredited theories about various aspects of 9/11, skeptics
repeat the same questions they've been asking for six years that raise doubts about the validity of the theories supported by disinfo agenst, and the cycle continues.
How is McCain any more flawed than
such characters as "Bolo", "Lared", "Greyl", "Sweet Pea", "Hack89", "Laurier", "Vincent Vega", "Suderstat" or the person who falsely characterizes itself as a Physicist and who is the subject of this comment?
All of the above well-known disinfo agents are protected by the owners
and moderators of DU. Their posts are safe. In almost seven years, it is difficult to name even one disinfo agent who has been permanently banned from that site.
Their posts are never deleted (except on exceeding rare occasions). The only posts that are regularly deleted at DU are those written by skeptics.
Even Spooked has written of his fear of publishing what he'd really like to say, out of (knowledgeable)
fear that it would be deleted and he might be subject to being banned.
And the cycle continues at DU.
Here, whenever the one who (falsely, in my opinion) claims to be a Physicist repeatedly posts rambling commentaries about all kinds of magical subjects but also throws
in things like political assassinations - it should be fair game for skeptics to ask that person questions...and expect to receive substantive answers regarding their posted opinions (which the "Physicist" usually
characterizes not as opinion, rather as Ultimate Truth).
Here, as at DU, skeptics must tread lightly lest their comments are deleted. Even so, it isn't unusual
for comments of skeptics to be disappeared.
Meanwhile, the username A.P. person
is protected and thus has no need
to tread lightly as s/he evades the
responsibility of proving her claims and responding to questions about them.
That commenter, like the disinfo agents at DU is free to be the first to engage in ad hominem arguments as a tactic to avoid
answering questions.
Senator McCain may be a flawed man,
but is his character any more flawed than that of the commenter in question here at this blog site?
hey it's Charlie Brown's parents again!
blah blah blah!
wow a super Charlie Brown's parents' comment!
blah blah blah blah blah!
Another baloney sandwich from the
anonymous poster who pretends to be a
physicist.
You seem intent on proving that you lack the courage of your convictions, anonymous fake physicist.
Have you worked up the nerve yet to
take a peak at what REAL physicists
have to say about your bizarre JFK
assassination theories?
Still waiting for you to answer some of the questions you've been ducking for weeks now concerning
how your theory can't possibly be
true or even plausible.
10:35am and 8:40pm-- enough! I've stated my position. If you continue this nonsense I will simply delete your comments. And all this time, you still haven't told us who YOU think killed JFK.
What's with the double standard, Spooked?
It hasn't been that long ago when
it would be unthinkable that you wouldn't welcome dissent, especially
to claims that 99% of knowledgeable
people who KNOW there was a conspiracy to assassinate JFK also
know that it isn't plausible or even possible that the limo driver could have shot anyone.
You must not have bothered yourself
to learn why there is simply no
credible evidence to sustain that
particular theory.
One of the experts I've cited is Dr. David Mantik who is both a Ph.D in physics AND a renowned physician who is commonly acknowledged to be the first person to prove conclusively that the medical evidence (X rays etc.) proves that
the Warren Commission Report's findings give a false account of
what happened on 11/22/63.
If you won't consider the scholarly
research of people like Dr. Mantik, then you are either willingly
ignorant or else your own motivations are different than you would have readers believe.
"blah blah blah!"
10:31pm -- Yes, the official JFK ass'n theory is bull! Now tell us what YOU think happened!!! Who shot JFK???
Who shot JFK?
At least two different people, perhaps more than two.
There may have been a shooter in the TSBD building, perhaps one in the Dal-Tex building, maybe one in the
County Records building. The shot which hit JFK in the back most likely came from one of those locations.
The fatal headshot (Z313) almost certainly had to have come from either the South Knoll or the North Knoll.
The shot which entered JFK's neck
(just above his tie knot) probably
came from the North Knoll.
The names of the actual shooters are not known and may not ever be known.
Who was behind it? Take your pick.
So many powerful interests came to hate JFK that all we can do at this point is make educated guesses.
I think that the main player was the CIA.
I believe there were two Oswalds, both CIA-managed. In 1961, the British arrested Gordon Lonsdale and charged him with espionage. He
was born in the Soviet Union, grew up in the West, and was posing as a Canadian businessman (while spying for the Soviets in Britain) at the time of his arrest.
Lee HARVEY Oswald was born in Hungary (most likely, though it could have been somewhere else in the same vicinity). His first language was Russian. He came to the U.S. as a small child and became a CIA-managed puppet who was
sent to the Soviet Union as a false
defector. It was HARVEY Oswald who was falsely blamed as framed as the "Lone Nut" who shot JFK and DPD officer J.D. Tippit.
LEE Harvey Oswald was born in New Orleans and impersonated HARVEY and
played the key role in setting him up for what happened in Dallas.
LEE Harvey Oswald may, repeat may, have fired a shot on 11/22, but that hasn't been proven.
Vince Palamara, the JFK assassination's leading expert on the Secret Service has never fingered or conjectured that SSA William Greer
fired a shot on 11/22.
Dale Myers is another leading researcher whose work on the murder of DPD officer Tippit is especially
important, though most researchers dismiss his conclusions about JFK as well as his conclusion that Oswald killed Tippit - does not give any credence whatsoever to the notion that Greer fired any shots on 11/22.
Summary: I don't know who killed JFK. I believe there was a conspiracy to kill him and that he was caught and shot in a classic
crossfire. I believe that the CIA played the most important role in the conspiracy. I believe that the more we learn about the medical evidence, the history and tensions (which grew into hatred) between JFK, CIA, anti-Castro Cubans, FBI, and the military industrial complex, the closer we will come to a more satisfying understanding of what happened in Dallas.
I believe that some day the names of the actual shooters and other participants in the assassination (such as those who assisted by giving signals...Umbrella Man and his companion Dark Complected Man, who many believe was carrying some kind of walkie talkie device beneath his clothes) may become known, but that is more of a hope than an optimistic belief.
I believe that the more we learn about 9/11 and other similar events, the greater will become our understanding of what happened in Dallas. And Los Angeles. Memphis.
And NYC (Malcolm X).
Thanks, appreciate that.
yay col. charlie brown's parents finally comes thru with his own JFK assassination probably hypothesis!
ok now that that is over with maybe we can focus on what AP has posited re: wtc destruction - his math is correct and his observations entirely fit with the facts at hand - most likely he is correct: it was a nuclear bomb demolition and subsequent 'china syndrome' resulting at ground zero.
Yes, I think we can all now agree that
a.p.'s claims about who killed JFK
are wholly without merit and deserve to be consigned to the waste basket.
Post a Comment
<< Home