This was the first group I ever posted to. That was back in the year 2000. It is run by arch WC apologist, John McAdams. It is a moderated forum where every post is subject to vetting before being put on the board.
At times, there have been a mix of good posters in there, at other times, it is completely dominated by WC apologists intent on not debating the evidence, but on simply pouring sarcasm and scorn over anyone foolhardy enough to have an opposing view. I rarely go there anymore except to find old posts from past members.
Here is a random sampling of current posts:
How are you supposed to know that? Did you just identify the shooter on the grassy knoll? I thought you said it was Bigfoot or am I getting the kooks mixed up again? You guys should wear badges.
He (Oswald) didn't bring a lunch nor did he order pizza from Domino's.
I believe in conspiracies, and I believe a benignant conspiracy took place in this case controlled by the Kennedy family.
If you like to go round and round in circles, then this the place for you.
Originally meant as an antidote to McAdams' group, this is an unmoderated free-for-all inhabited by anarchists, trolls and spammers with a sprinkling of sometime on-topic posters. Like it's sibling across the Google Pond, it has actually thrown up the occasional exceptional debate, but it seems like a very long time since that has occurred.
Not for the thin-skinned.
This forum is run by a Scot named Duncan MacRae. MacRae has stated in the past that he runs numerous websites across a variety interests and subjects and that these sites are his sole source of income.
MacRae's JFK site is very large and very confusingly organized - yet has by far the largest membership of all such sites.
The site was recently hacked and taken down, yet despite having to start again from virtual scratch, the site was quickly back and looking like nothing had happened.
MacRae claims to be open to the possibility of a conspiracy, however the site has a slight but definite Lone Nut bias brought about by sheer numbers on that site who support the official version vigorously, venomously and often, vilely. Despite numerous negatives, the site does produce the occasional nugget, but like digging for gold, you have to have a lot of patience and be prepared to leave empty-handed most of the time.
Deep Politics Forum
A lot can be learned about a forum from it's objectives. Here are the objectives of the Deep Politics Forum:
An online community dedicated to shining light into the shadowy reaches of historical and contemporary deep political systems. We aim to expose deep political objectives, strategies, tactics, and operatives, and to understand their social, economic, and cultural impacts.
Our mission transcends academic inquiry, which we accept as an invaluable tactic in a broader strategy to wield knowledge and truth as weapons in a coordinated assault on the manipulators who operate within deep political shadows.
Curious language to say the least. How for example, does one "transcend academic inquiry"? And what is it that is being "accepted as an invaluable tactic", academic inquiry itself, or the transcending of it?
But it is the last declaration of war that takes the cake. "Weaponizing the truth" is a catchphrase used by one of the founders of this forum, Charles Drago. Mr. Drago was summarily evicted at some stage for questioning the bona fides and identity of a member using the name of Albert Doyle. The irony is that others eventually exposed Doyle's real identity, leading him into more and more bizarre rants and behaviors and one by one Mr. Doyle was banned at forum after forum, including the one in which he had established some sort of standing - the Deep Politics forum.
We are still waiting for the weaponizing of the truth and its utilization in "a coordinated assault". It should be a sight to behold. The height of their "truth", is that the CIA ran an "Oswald Project" involving a double for Oswald and a double for his mother - Hungarian refugees from the early 1950s. The aim of the project was in merging the identities of the doubles with the real Oswalds and sending the fake Lee Oswald to the Soviet Union as a fake defector. The theory has been cobbled together in the manner of a parlor game where you are given half a dozen disparate pieces of information, none of them necessarily true, and you have to weave them together into a story.
The inhabitants of this forum tend to see themselves as intellectuals, Zen Masters and revolutionary warriors. The reality is that some can barely construct a coherent sentence and have zero insight into how ridiculous their war declarations make them sound.
This site was started by California real estate salesman, Greg Burnham. Mr. Burnham is an eloquent writer, even when he has no idea what he is writing about. Prominent among those who helped get the forum up and running was the now excommunicated Deep Politics forum co-founder, Charles Drago. Mr. Drago is a Deep Thinker and even more eloquent in his musings than Mr. Burnham. The bromance was sparkling -- but fell apart over differing political views with the election of Donald Trump, and once again Drago was banished to the wilderness, his last refuge being Facebook. With Drago's departure, the door was opened for his former Deep Politics forum nemesis Brian ("Albert") Doyle. The irony is delicious. Everyone is now aware that Doyle has real issues, but Burnham's forum (known by some as "Der Morgue" because that is how deadly quiet it is) can ill-afford to turn any member away. Such is the need for content, Mr. Burnham even allows Doyle to rant about a topic otherwise banned for discussion in Der Morgue (despite all the bowing and scraping to the merits of free speech in his "welcome to the forum" message). That topic is Prayer Man. On the other hand, it does give Mr. Burnham and his one or two other posters the chance to conflate the Prayerman image with that of Lovelady in the Altgens6 pic. Let's call it "weaponizing the strawman".
The assassinationofjfk forum takes silliness to a whole new level. According to this lot, the facilitators and sponsors of the assassination are not only unknown, they are unknowable. But apparently that is not an insurmountable setback - not when you have weaponized a truth you are unable to annunciate except with the broadest of brushes.
Most other forums currently operating can be considered splits from this forum. It started in 2004 and is currently operated by another Scot, James Gordon.
It seems every few years, the "ed forum" (as it is widely called) goes through an existential crisis. It is going through one at the moment, and it follows a familiar pattern - complaints by and about members and moderators over real or perceived slights - then comes the hand-wringing and a threat to pull the plug as the headaches don't warrant ongoing financial commitment to stay afloat.
Unlike the assassinationofjfk forum and the deep politics forum, which at least pretend to have some higher purpose, the theme that keeps coming back here as the most important purpose is civility. Good manners. That means not calling a liar a liar. That means putting up with all sorts of bullshit and baiting - all acceptable so long as it is done politely.
Though there have been times when the forum has shone, it has become another protected haven for crackpot theories, predominately the Two Oswald nonsense so beloved at the Deep Politics forum. For many years, it has been impossible to conduct a discussion on Lee Harvey Oswald at this forum without it being taken over by this garbage.
In 2015 while still a member there, I made the following observation to another poster :
'The goal of education is the advancement of knowledge and the dissemination of truth JFK once said. You make a mockery of it, and your enablers here are just as guilty for caring more about "foul" language than about the foul tactics you and others employ in your battle to thwart any chance of "education" through this site. '
Therein is the real issue. The site has no sense of purpose beyond some vague notion of being an educational resource for students. The JFK section is certainly educational. Unfortunately just not in the way that was envisaged.
My advice fwiw, let it go, or change the culture and find a purpose beyond self-perpetuation. Style (here defined as "good manners") should never trump quality content in the pyramid of need.
This is one of the smaller JFK assassination forums and yet the busiest in terms of new research. Although other sites occasionally present new data or insights, it is rare for them to do so. But that very thing is the whole reason for the existence of this forum. Creating new leads to spark a new investigation. It is also free of the issues that plague other forums, and that is largely down to a membership which takes the case seriously, but not themselves. It is more than a discussion group. It is actively looking for ways to progress the case toward closure.
You may say this assessment is biased since I founded the site. And that's fair enough. Check it out for yourself. Check them all out. If you're thinking of joining a JFK discussion group, there is certainly something out there that will suit your own biases and ideas.