+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 3
Results 41 to 51 of 51

Thread: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

  1. Link to Post #41
    Ireland Avalon Member gnostic9's Avatar
    Join Date
    3rd January 2014
    Age
    55
    Posts
    185
    Thanks
    1,234
    Thanked 645 times in 156 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    Ships of the United States Navy in Cork Ireland during World War One
    (For fleet list click here)

    USS JACOB JONES DD61
    (Tucker Class, 1915)







    USS Jacob Jones arrived in Queenstown (now Cobh) in the south of Ireland, on the 17th of May, 1917. She was in company of Rowan, Tucker, Ericsson, Cassin and Winslow. Queenstown was the centre for anti-submarine forces, on the Western Approaches, under the command of Admiral Lewis Bayley, Commander in Chief , Coast of Ireland. Jacob Jones commenced operations immediately.
    Initially there was uncertainty as to the most effective use of destroyers. At first they were given patrol areas which they would scout, singly or in pairs. Any stray incoming merchantmen seen, were to be escorted to near their destinations. This was a most ineffective use of the force, as the chances of coming across, and destroying a lone submarine in the vastness of the Western Approaches was virtually nil.
    By Summer 1917, under the urging of commanders such as Admiral Sims, Commander of US Naval Forces in Europe, the convoy system was initiated. Groups of merchantmen were escorted through the war zone by flanking destroyer screens. This had the dual effect of reducing the amount of targets for German u-boats, and allowing destroyers and sloops to attack the harassing submarines. The priorities of the destroyers were to:
    Destroy Submarines.
    Protect and escort Merchantmen.
    Save the crews and passengers of torpedoed ships.
    Anti-submarine patrols did continue also for the duration of the war, especially in the Irish Sea and close to the coast of France, where u-boats would try to sink merchantmen as the convoys dispersed. In 1918, any destroyer in the Irish Sea, which was not actively convoying, came under the orders of The Irish Sea Hunting Flotilla, under the command of Captain Gordon Campbell VC based in Holyhead, Wales. US destroyers were also used to patrol the west coast of Ireland to hunt suspected gun-running ships, for Irish Republicans.
    The destroyers , initially, were ill-equipped to fight submerged submarines. When they arrived in Europe they were armed with guns and torpedoes. The only undersea weapons supplied were single hand-launched 50lb depth charges which were particularly ineffective. It was the later fitting of dual depth charge racks on the sterns of the ships, Thornycroft depth charge throwers, and Y shaped charge throwers that turned them into a dangerous force. These were capable of dropping and firing a continuous patterned barrage of 200lb, charges around a submarine's suspected position. Most of the retro-fitting of these armaments was done at Cammel Laird in Birkenhead, England.
    On the 6th of June, 1917, SS Manchester Miller was torpedoed and abandoned in position 52.30N, 15.00W. USS McDougal rescued the survivors. USS Jacob Jones, USS Cassin and HMS Camellia arrived to offer assistance. Camellia took the Manchester Miller in tow, escorted by McDougal. Jacob Jones and Cassin returned on patrol. The Manchester Miller sank after 12 miles, in position 52.46N, 13.43W.
    On the 6th of June, 1917, in pos 52.05N, 12.19W, USS Jacob Jones sighted a submarine which submerged.
    On the 7th of June, 1917, in position 52.35N, 12.11W, Jacob Jones spotted large oil slick. One hand launched depth charge was dropped on the spot, but no result seen.
    On the 28th of June , 1917, in pos 7 miles off Old Head lighthouse Jacob Jones dropped depth charge on oil and bubbles. No result seen.
    On the 8th of July, 1917, in pos 51.49N, 12.00W, the SS Valetta was torpedoed and sunk. USS Jacob Jones picked up the whole of the crew, 44 in number and landed the at Queenstown.
    On July 15th, 1917, Jacob Jones went to the assistance of SS Abinsi, which was being chased by submarine. Jacob Jones caught up with steamer and went alongside her. The two vessels touched, ns some damage was done to the Jacob Jones, with one whaleboat destroyed.
    On the 20th of July, 1917, in pos 51.01N, 11.21W, USS Jacob Jones sighted submarine which submerged. Jacob Jones dropped 2 depth charges. No result seen.
    On the 21st of July, 1917, in pos 50.50N, 11.36W, USS Jacob Jones picked up 25 survivors of SS Dafila torpedoed by enemy submarine and landed them at Bantry. Whilst searching vicinity, Jacob Jones was attacked and missed by torpedo.
    On July 28th 1917, USS Trippe,USS Wadsworth, USS McDougal, USS Porter, USS Wainwright, USS Jacob Jones, USS Shaw, and USS Ericsson, formed an escort for an incoming convoy of 19 ships. On July 29th 1917,at 10.55pm, USS Wadsworth dropped a depth charge on a suspected submarine wake. 5 minutes later the nearby USS Trippe collided with an underwater object, no serious damage was done and nothing further was seen.


    On the 19th of August, 1917, USS Trippe, USS Rowan, USS Jacob Jones, USS Ericsson, USS Shaw, and
    USS Wainwright, were escorting a US Army convoy to St Nazaire, France. At 1.15pm Jacob Jones reported “periscope sighted”. At 1.34pm Ericsson dropped a depth charge, there was nothing further seen. On the 20th of August. Land was sighted near Belle Ile. At 8.17am one of the transports, the USS Finland opened fire with her stern gun. The Rowan and Trippe rushed to the spot and both dropped depth charges. The transports began firing in multiple directions as two French areoplanes flew over the convoy. USS Shaw was narrowly missed by firing and shrapnel landed within 200 yards of her. On later examination it was felt that the ships had been firing at schools of porpoises. The incident became known as the ‘Battle of Belle Ile’ and was an example of how easily crews were fooled into thinking submarines were attacking a
    Convoy.
    On the 6th of September, 1917, in pos 51.40N, 06.35W, USS Jacob Jones in company with USS Paulding sighted submarine which submerged immediately. Jacob Jones dropped depth charge, but no result seen.

    On the 19th of October, 1917, HMS Orama was torpedoed and sunk, in pos 48.00N, 09.20W. USS Conyngham picked up 50 survivors and USS Jacob Jones picked up 305. Conyngham chased after submarine and dropped depth charge on her. Admiral Bayley, Commander in Chief, Coast of Ireland reported - The picking up of those survivors alongside a sinking ship at night was a fine feat of seamanship.
    On the night of November 3rd 1917, USS Parker was part of the escort for convoy HS14. At 10.30 pm sighted suspicious object and headed for it at 22 knots, all guns manned. Parker maded challenge by blinker light, but received no reply. Parker fired one shot. Immediately other vessel turned on masthead recognition lights. This vessel turned out to be the Jacob Jones. The two vessels continued in company.
    On the 6th of December, 1917, USS Jacob Jones was returning to Queenstown from convoy duties in Brest. The ship was off the Scilly Isles, in position 49.23N, 06.13W, when a single torpedo was seen speeding towards the starboard side of the ship. Lieutenant F.S.Kalk, officer of the watch turned the helm hard to port and increased speed, but to no avail and the torpedo struck the starboard oil tank and exploded. No SOS could be sent as the mainmast was collapsed by the explosion. Efforts were made to launch any available rafts and boats, and the splinter mats were cut off the bridge to aid men in the water. Two shots were fired by the number four gun to try to attract attention from any passing ships. Lieut Commander Bagley ordered abandon ship


    The Jacob Jones sank by the stern in 8 minutes, and as it sank, the armed depth charges exploded, injuring and killing some of those in the water. Immediate efforts were made to get the men in the water onto rafts and to keep rafts and boats together.


    15 minutes after the ship sank. The submarine surfaced, and was seen to rescue one man struggling in the water. It then submerged and was not seen again. Lieut Commander Bagley was picked up up from the water into the motor dory. This boat made for the Scilly Isles, to try to get help for the men on the rafts, who were now getting separated. When Lieut Commander Bagley reached the Scilly Isles, he was informed that most of the survivors had been picked up by HMS Camellia, and one small raft was rescued by the merchant vessel SS Catalina. HMS Insolent picked up the last of the survivors.


    That so many men survived the frigid December waters, was down to the fact that the Commander of the the German submarine U-53, Hans Rose, had radioed the position of the sinking to Queenstown – a rare humane gesture in time of war.


    Notes:
    Commanding Officer, Lieut Commander D.W.Bagley , 1917,


    http://www.corkshipwrecks.net/ussjacobjonesdd61.html



    I hope this helps.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to gnostic9 For This Post:

    Ewan (24th March 2017)

  3. Link to Post #42
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    26th December 2014
    Age
    50
    Posts
    262
    Thanks
    1,048
    Thanked 1,672 times in 245 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    Here is Weisbecker's Part II of his musings on the artist formerly known as Miles W. Mathis... It's a bit of a meandering rant, and thus harder to follow than Part I, but I still think Weisbecker is on to something with respect to Mathis.

    http://blog.banditobooks.com/an-open...this-part-two/


    As a writer/researcher myself, I know how long it takes to research any subject with any depth, and Weisbecker's word count for Mathis is pretty astounding....

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to awakeningmom For This Post:

    Foxie Loxie (23rd March 2017)

  5. Link to Post #43
    United States Administrator Paul's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    69
    Posts
    23,245
    Thanks
    19,048
    Thanked 93,803 times in 16,276 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    Quote Posted by awakeningmom (here)
    Here is Weisbecker's Part II of his musings on the artist formerly known as Miles W. Mathis... It's a bit of a meandering rant, and thus harder to follow than Part I, but I still think Weisbecker is on to something with respect to Mathis.

    http://blog.banditobooks.com/an-open...this-part-two/


    As a writer/researcher myself, I know how long it takes to research any subject with any depth, and Weisbecker's word count for Mathis is pretty astounding....
    Weisbecker states that Miles Mathis' updates to his earlier papers don't actually contain any change.

    This is false. I routinely scan his updated papers, to read just the added material, and there is always something added, just as Miles claims.

    I also have downloaded dozens of papers of Miles on my computer that Miles has updated, sometimes several times, and that have gotten longer with each update. That's not just my memory saying this - it's evidence collected over the years.

    ... Did Weisbecker think we weren't going to actually verify his claims? Oh the irony!

    Perhaps where Weisbecker got confused is that he followed the various links to a particular paper, both from the original posting, to the update postings, and noticed that all links to the same paper yielded the same paper. This is because Miles is updating in place. He has for example a single link to his Sharon Tate paper, at mileswmathis.com/tate.pdf. Only the latest tate.pdf can be found there. But I happened to have downloaded one of the earlier versions as well, and its a few hundred words shorter than the current version.
    Last edited by Paul; 23rd March 2017 at 20:38.
    *** Avalon Forum Guidelines - Membership Guidelines.
    *** ProjectAvalonStatus.net - Check here for forum status.
    Formerly known as "ThePythonicCow", aka "Cow", "Mooster", ...

  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    Foxie Loxie (23rd March 2017), Helene West (23rd March 2017)

  7. Link to Post #44
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    18th September 2016
    Posts
    258
    Thanks
    418
    Thanked 1,113 times in 243 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    I don't know why some people read MM I only know why I do.

    As he makes a disclaimer at the beginning of each essay letting you know these are his opinions, not some post grad dissertation and he lets you know upfront he gets his info from easily accessible public sources not from some 'deep throat' scenario hoping to break open a controversial story, i don't sweat over every detail and idea.

    --I get, as Gordon Gekko would say, ".. perks, lots and lots of perks".
    --I got a less lazy way of looking at photos, people in the public eye and events taught in school or the media.
    --I get chuckles with his sardonic sense of humor and exasperation over much of the same things I feel exasperated about.
    --And lastly, and I've mentioned this before but it may be for me my biggest takeaway, he has made me wonder if the entire western world, primarily gentile, is really ruled ultimately by jews.

    People now get upset with me for this as I've been throwing out this idea recently. They will say things like: "...I couldn't care less who is ruling, what do you care? Will it change your life? Get a life! Are they bothering you? (lol, my fave!) What difference does it make? and of course the all-time favorite - you're anti-semitic.... "

    I've always been intrigued with con artists, my tastes in stories, films, etc. show characters who get over on others. So coming from a very christian area and being taught and seeing most famous and/or powerful people seeming to be non-jewish, MM's indirect supposition that the puppeteers of the world are jews intrigues me. if that is the case it's one of the biggest hoaxes played on people of the western world especially considering numerically they are so small.

    They were money changers at the time of the Romans at least. Plenty of time to come up through the centuries amassing wealth through lending and usury and it's known they were lending to royals of europe in the medieval days. Lending to kings, princes and dukes, i.e. owning or influencing them.

    When I see europe today, with european men being murdered and european children and women raped by refugees and their men disabled to do anything and the leaders not only apathetic but hostile to the euro victims I wonder how they can be so heartless? They have no identification with the populace. The populace is gentile. Perhaps they don't identify with the gentile europeans because they are Not gentiles. Just a consideration.
    Then take in on our forum just today in the politics category the threat of Mr. Schwartz (AKA Soros) to bring very planned out and coordinated mayhem to the streets of the U.S. as he does in europe. Perhaps it's all just a coincidence that he is jewish. I love his cover story by the way - that he hates israel, hah, hah...We're supposed to believe he is a self-hating jew to throw us off as to the cultural genocide of gentile whites I guess.

    Anyhow, as it is a recurring theme of Miles, i.e. 'Is everyone jewish'?? in his essays, he (or his supposed group), may be, just may be, trying to warn passive, scared, sleepy, naive Goy America!

    I particularly find the essay on Hitler intriguing. When he throws out his little tidbits like some photos of Hitler's top generals, Himmler, Goebbels, etc. and asks is it me or do they look jewish? And hmmm, don't the names actually sound jewish? and at the end of his maze of genealogies and other tidbits leaves you wondering - Oh, No, Don't tell me the Nazis were jewish! Don't tell me it was all an incredible plan to get the world to WANT to give the Jews a home in the middle of muslim land probably to take the oil of the region.
    I grew up assuming the Rockefellers (Standard Oil) were gentile. But in a 10 lb book written only for the jewish community (only 550 printed and consecutively numbered) called - “Americans of Jewish Decent” by Malcolm H. Stern the Rockefellers are listed as "Marranos" (those Jews who “PRETEND” to be Christians in their community but secretly hold to their Jewish faith and race when among their own kind.)

    'Weisbecker' - hmmm. Could jolly well be a tribesman. A tribesman that is pissed that someone or some group is getting too hip to the hoax? Won't come out and say that as to not put ideas in heads that are not quite getting it so he sticks to picking at minutiae.

    So though it's annoying the thought that adorable looking, sharp as a tack Miles Mathis may be some group with an agenda I'm still choosing to go with Miles. And, even if it is some group of sharp shooter deconstructionists, I think they are doing a service..., not that the goyim will do anything anyhow, they've been sufficiently crushed by the white guilt psy-ops thing, but a service nonetheless....

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Helene West For This Post:

    Bruno (24th March 2017), Ewan (24th March 2017)

  9. Link to Post #45
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    26th December 2014
    Age
    50
    Posts
    262
    Thanks
    1,048
    Thanked 1,672 times in 245 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    Quote Posted by Paul (here)
    Quote Posted by awakeningmom (here)
    Here is Weisbecker's Part II of his musings on the artist formerly known as Miles W. Mathis... It's a bit of a meandering rant, and thus harder to follow than Part I, but I still think Weisbecker is on to something with respect to Mathis.

    http://blog.banditobooks.com/an-open...this-part-two/


    As a writer/researcher myself, I know how long it takes to research any subject with any depth, and Weisbecker's word count for Mathis is pretty astounding....
    Weisbecker states that Miles Mathis' updates to his earlier papers don't actually contain any change.

    This is false. I routinely scan his updated papers, to read just the added material, and there is always something added, just as Miles claims.

    I also have downloaded dozens of papers of Miles on my computer that Miles has updated, sometimes several times, and that have gotten longer with each update. That's not just my memory saying this - it's evidence collected over the years.

    ... Did Weisbecker think we weren't going to actually verify his claims? Oh the irony!

    Perhaps where Weisbecker got confused is that he followed the various links to a particular paper, both from the original posting, to the update postings, and noticed that all links to the same paper yielded the same paper. This is because Miles is updating in place. He has for example a single link to his Sharon Tate paper, at mileswmathis.com/tate.pdf. Only the latest tate.pdf can be found there. But I happened to have downloaded one of the earlier versions as well, and its a few hundred words shorter than the current version.
    Good catch, Paul! Very interesting.

    And Helene, while I don't agree with you on the 'everyone-bad-is-really-a-crypto-jew' theme, I do agree with your assessment of Miles' "adorableness." However, I would guess that the cute grundge-REI traveler picture of him in his bio is quite old. Judging from the bio, Miles' likely graduated high school in the early 80's, putting him in the mid-50's range today, and I don't know many mid-50's men who still look like that with a full head of hair. Plus, he doesn't hold a candle in adorableness to Sean Stone in my opinion.

    Finally, can someone please tell me how to cut and quote only snippets of a previous poster's post? I have tried just hitting "reply with quotes" and then manually deleting the unnecessary text, but then it doesn't show up as blue quoted material in my own post. I am sure there's some thread that explains this, but I haven't found it!

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to awakeningmom For This Post:

    Bruno (24th March 2017), Shannon (24th March 2017)

  11. Link to Post #46
    United States Administrator Paul's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    69
    Posts
    23,245
    Thanks
    19,048
    Thanked 93,803 times in 16,276 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    Quote Posted by awakeningmom (here)
    Finally, can someone please tell me how to cut and quote only snippets of a previous poster's post? I have tried just hitting "reply with quotes" and then manually deleting the unnecessary text, but then it doesn't show up as blue quoted material in my own post. I am sure there's some thread that explains this, but I haven't found it!
    Try this explanation - see if it makes sense: How to quote part of a post -- Post #4.
    *** Avalon Forum Guidelines - Membership Guidelines.
    *** ProjectAvalonStatus.net - Check here for forum status.
    Formerly known as "ThePythonicCow", aka "Cow", "Mooster", ...

  12. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Paul For This Post:

    awakeningmom (24th March 2017), Billy (24th March 2017), Shannon (24th March 2017)

  13. Link to Post #47
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    18th September 2016
    Posts
    258
    Thanks
    418
    Thanked 1,113 times in 243 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    AwakeMom

    It’s not 'everyone-bad-is-really-a-crypto-jew' theme – it’s ‘many famous and/or powerful persons past and present you thought were gentile are really jews who purposely altered their names and why is that? Theme’

    Slight difference

  14. Link to Post #48
    United States Avalon Member
    Join Date
    26th December 2014
    Age
    50
    Posts
    262
    Thanks
    1,048
    Thanked 1,672 times in 245 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    Quote Posted by Helene West (here)
    AwakeMom

    It’s not 'everyone-bad-is-really-a-crypto-jew' theme – it’s ‘many famous and/or powerful persons past and present you thought were gentile are really jews who purposely altered their names and why is that? Theme’

    Slight difference
    I'm not sure I really see the difference, tbh. Isn't the theory that 'they' are changing their names so that when they do something nefarious to advance their nefarious agenda it won't be connected back to their jewishness or to the fact that 'they' are really in control of the entire world?

  15. Link to Post #49
    United States Administrator Paul's Avatar
    Join Date
    4th January 2011
    Location
    North Texas
    Age
    69
    Posts
    23,245
    Thanks
    19,048
    Thanked 93,803 times in 16,276 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    Quote Posted by awakeningmom (here)
    I'm not sure I really see the difference, tbh. Isn't the theory that 'they' are changing their names so that when they do something nefarious to advance their nefarious agenda it won't be connected back to their jewishness or to the fact that 'they' are really in control of the entire world?
    The difference is in whether (1) most Jews are nefarious (I trust not), or (2) an unusually high proportion of nefarious people have maternal Jewish ancestry (apparently yes).
    *** Avalon Forum Guidelines - Membership Guidelines.
    *** ProjectAvalonStatus.net - Check here for forum status.
    Formerly known as "ThePythonicCow", aka "Cow", "Mooster", ...

  16. Link to Post #50
    France Avalon Member araucaria's Avatar
    Join Date
    24th January 2011
    Posts
    4,875
    Thanks
    11,737
    Thanked 27,476 times in 4,492 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    Although I too came independently to the idea that Mathis was putting out a lot of material for a single individual (an idea that Paul refutes based on his own performance... ), I want to highlight a difference between Weisbecker and myself in this same regard. Weisbecker comes out all guns blazing, and is hard to follow because he is jumping around all the time.

    My own approach tends rather towards depth than breadth. Mathis has a tendency to make connections between individuals on the basis that their names appear on the same Wikipedia page. This is worse than treating people as cardboard cutouts: they are reduced to mere labels. My method has simply been to flesh out portraits of the characters involved, notably by extensively quoting things they actually wrote, said or did.

    Consider that there are only six degrees of separation between any two individuals on the planet, and that a single degree of separation can cover the mixed bunch of Avalon members. Most of them you would consider your friends, or agreeable acquaintances; others are way out of range, and one or two are maybe on a diametrically opposite course. You don’t want to be linked indiscriminately to all of these people. And this applies to families. Here in France we have a presidential hopeful (Fillon) whose younger brother is a decent jazz pianist. There is not much interesting to be said about either on the basis of that relationship: statesmanship and musicianship have little in common. Similarly, even being married to someone is not enough to validate comments about one or the other being made to include the spouse – which is why we have a high divorce rate: people are different.

    If six degrees of separation are sufficient to bring two persons together, however hastily, then I suggest there has to be a law of x degrees of connection to prise any two people apart. Take this quote by Mathis about Ben Bradlee, editor of the Washington Post, stating that his second marriage was to the sister-in-law (very soon to be ex-sister-in-law) of a CIA man:
    Quote In 1957, Bradlee married his second wife, Antoinette Pinchot. Do you recognize that name from my Kennedy paper? She was the sister of Mary Pinchot, wife of Cord Meyer. Meyer just happened to be a top CIA agent involved in Project Mockingbird. And what was that about? According to Wikipedia, it was a “program to influence the media”. But Bradlee was never influenced, right? He was just a straight editor later at the Post, right?
    By the degrees of separation law, this is very close: close enough to draw conclusions. This is the gray area where, depending on one’s standpoint, conspiracy theory becomes conspiracy fact, or conspiracy fact can be plausibly denied as conspiracy theory. Overall, I would say this is where we get stuck.

    By my ‘degrees of connection’ law, on the other hand, this relationship is fairly distant: distant enough to make room for a whole new picture to be drawn by developing these name labels into cardboard cutouts, and the cardboard cutouts into rounded individuals. First, sisters can be very different, including in their tastes regarding men. Antoinette did not necessarily marry a CIA man on the basis that Mary had. Secondly, by 1957 Mary was actually in the process of leaving her CIA man, the divorce proceedings being drawn out owing to the death of their son Michael. Thirdly, Mary was leaving her CIA man precisely because the man she had married was a very different person altogether, a leading campaigner for world peace in fact. And Mary herself was later murdered for knowing too much about the JFK assassination, very likely murdered by CIA husbands and even with Meyer’s consent.

    This is not to say that Bradlee was not CIA, applying Project Mockingbird to the Washington Post. On the contrary, I would accept that he was. But what has Mathis done when he stops there? He has placed another label on someone. Big deal. You couldn’t believe everything you read in his newspaper. Now what? Big question. Big question that doesn’t get asked. But one that deserves an answer on the lines of honest consistency within a given individual. For example: Mary Pinchot married a peace activist and divorced a CIA agent, the peace activist husband having done a complete U-turn, while she remained consistent. This consistent woman later fell in love with JFK, who must then have been himself a peace-lover, or more likely a Cold Warrior/CIA sympathizer doing a complete U-turn with her help.

    The bottom line is that some people change in relatively superficial ways by being consistent in changing circumstances, while other are profoundly changed one way or the other (revert to type?) by changing circumstances. This is a dynamic picture we don’t get from Miles Mathis. It is symptomatic that he doesn’t allow people to die, although death is an integral part of this dynamic process. In 1963, there were plenty of people wishing Kennedy dead, more than enough to see him off. That sentiment has been gradually reversed over the decades, with more and more people wishing he were still alive, or someone like him. What would be the motive then for claiming that JFK’s death was faked? It would be to immortalize the moment when a maximum of people (albeit a tiny minority) were glad he was dead.

    This sums up my difference with Miles Mathis. My goal is to immortalize the moment when a maximum number of people are glad that JFK, Mary Meyer, so many others, up to and including you and I, were/are alive. When a maximum number of people are glad that a maximum number of people are alive.


  17. The Following User Says Thank You to araucaria For This Post:

    Post-Structuralist Comet (24th March 2017)

  18. Link to Post #51
    Avalon Member Satori's Avatar
    Join Date
    26th May 2010
    Location
    Albuquerque, NM, USA
    Age
    66
    Posts
    265
    Thanks
    572
    Thanked 1,127 times in 245 posts

    Default Re: Miles W. Mathis Theories about Engineered Events in History

    Quote Posted by araucaria (here)
    Although I too came independently to the idea that Mathis was putting out a lot of material for a single individual (an idea that Paul refutes based on his own performance... ), I want to highlight a difference between Weisbecker and myself in this same regard. Weisbecker comes out all guns blazing, and is hard to follow because he is jumping around all the time.

    My own approach tends rather towards depth than breadth. Mathis has a tendency to make connections between individuals on the basis that their names appear on the same Wikipedia page. This is worse than treating people as cardboard cutouts: they are reduced to mere labels. My method has simply been to flesh out portraits of the characters involved, notably by extensively quoting things they actually wrote, said or did.

    Consider that there are only six degrees of separation between any two individuals on the planet, and that a single degree of separation can cover the mixed bunch of Avalon members. Most of them you would consider your friends, or agreeable acquaintances; others are way out of range, and one or two are maybe on a diametrically opposite course. You don’t want to be linked indiscriminately to all of these people. And this applies to families. Here in France we have a presidential hopeful (Fillon) whose younger brother is a decent jazz pianist. There is not much interesting to be said about either on the basis of that relationship: statesmanship and musicianship have little in common. Similarly, even being married to someone is not enough to validate comments about one or the other being made to include the spouse – which is why we have a high divorce rate: people are different.

    If six degrees of separation are sufficient to bring two persons together, however hastily, then I suggest there has to be a law of x degrees of connection to prise any two people apart. Take this quote by Mathis about Ben Bradlee, editor of the Washington Post, stating that his second marriage was to the sister-in-law (very soon to be ex-sister-in-law) of a CIA man:
    Quote In 1957, Bradlee married his second wife, Antoinette Pinchot. Do you recognize that name from my Kennedy paper? She was the sister of Mary Pinchot, wife of Cord Meyer. Meyer just happened to be a top CIA agent involved in Project Mockingbird. And what was that about? According to Wikipedia, it was a “program to influence the media”. But Bradlee was never influenced, right? He was just a straight editor later at the Post, right?
    By the degrees of separation law, this is very close: close enough to draw conclusions. This is the gray area where, depending on one’s standpoint, conspiracy theory becomes conspiracy fact, or conspiracy fact can be plausibly denied as conspiracy theory. Overall, I would say this is where we get stuck.

    By my ‘degrees of connection’ law, on the other hand, this relationship is fairly distant: distant enough to make room for a whole new picture to be drawn by developing these name labels into cardboard cutouts, and the cardboard cutouts into rounded individuals. First, sisters can be very different, including in their tastes regarding men. Antoinette did not necessarily marry a CIA man on the basis that Mary had. Secondly, by 1957 Mary was actually in the process of leaving her CIA man, the divorce proceedings being drawn out owing to the death of their son Michael. Thirdly, Mary was leaving her CIA man precisely because the man she had married was a very different person altogether, a leading campaigner for world peace in fact. And Mary herself was later murdered for knowing too much about the JFK assassination, very likely murdered by CIA husbands and even with Meyer’s consent.

    This is not to say that Bradlee was not CIA, applying Project Mockingbird to the Washington Post. On the contrary, I would accept that he was. But what has Mathis done when he stops there? He has placed another label on someone. Big deal. You couldn’t believe everything you read in his newspaper. Now what? Big question. Big question that doesn’t get asked. But one that deserves an answer on the lines of honest consistency within a given individual. For example: Mary Pinchot married a peace activist and divorced a CIA agent, the peace activist husband having done a complete U-turn, while she remained consistent. This consistent woman later fell in love with JFK, who must then have been himself a peace-lover, or more likely a Cold Warrior/CIA sympathizer doing a complete U-turn with her help.

    The bottom line is that some people change in relatively superficial ways by being consistent in changing circumstances, while other are profoundly changed one way or the other (revert to type?) by changing circumstances. This is a dynamic picture we don’t get from Miles Mathis. It is symptomatic that he doesn’t allow people to die, although death is an integral part of this dynamic process. In 1963, there were plenty of people wishing Kennedy dead, more than enough to see him off. That sentiment has been gradually reversed over the decades, with more and more people wishing he were still alive, or someone like him. What would be the motive then for claiming that JFK’s death was faked? It would be to immortalize the moment when a maximum of people (albeit a tiny minority) were glad he was dead.

    This sums up my difference with Miles Mathis. My goal is to immortalize the moment when a maximum number of people are glad that JFK, Mary Meyer, so many others, up to and including you and I, were/are alive. When a maximum number of people are glad that a maximum number of people are alive.

    Araucaria. If I understand your point, as to the assassination of JFK, you are saying that MM pushes the claim that JFK faked his death in order to allow those who are/were glad he was murdered more time to revel in and enjoy the fact that he was indeed murdered on 11/22/1963. If I am correct, then does it follow that MM gains some form of pleasure that JFK was assassinated? Or perhaps more accurately, does he gain some form of pleasure, or monetary benefit (or both), from ensconcing himself in murder and other intrigues? Mason/Tate, JFK, Laurel Canyon, etc... Do you believe that to be true? If so, what is his motive and who does he work for--in your view?

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 3

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts