31-03-2017, 04:17 AM
(This post was last modified: 31-03-2017, 04:49 PM by Albert Doyle.)
Norwood is correct about Armstrong but made the mistake of thinking you could praise Mockingbird authors like Dallek on DPF. All you have to do is read DiEugenio on Dallek (like I did thoroughly) to know why he isn't credible on Kennedy. Norwood was trying to pose me as unread.
Shortly before my father died we watched a show on probably PBS with I think it was Caro explaining Johnson and Kennedy. It was one of those sunny eves where the sun comes into the den with a perfect light that creates a temporary tranquil stillness. This was shortly after reading on Caro and his failings. I took great pleasure in explaining the falsehoods and omissions Caro was trying to get away with. My father listened.
Norwood:
When you don't tell the truth on the Assassination it doesn't really matter what else you did...And no matter how you qualify it, false coverage of the Assassination does vitiate an author and his Deep Political credibility...
.
Shortly before my father died we watched a show on probably PBS with I think it was Caro explaining Johnson and Kennedy. It was one of those sunny eves where the sun comes into the den with a perfect light that creates a temporary tranquil stillness. This was shortly after reading on Caro and his failings. I took great pleasure in explaining the falsehoods and omissions Caro was trying to get away with. My father listened.
Norwood:
Quote:Marlene,
Thank you for your intervention and for your important reminder about free speech.
I honestly believe that Robert Dallek is a good presidential historian. He has made important inroads into our understanding of JFK's Vietnam policy. He is a cut above such popular historians as Robert Caro and Doris Kearns Goodwin, who are guilty of omitting from the historical record the criminal activities of Lyndon Johnson. By contrast, Dallek's book An Unfinished Life is a substantial work of scholarship that adds to our knowledge of JFK's presidency. It is deplorable that Dallek does not address the assassination with integrity. But that lapse does not invalidate his other research contributions. I expressed my views on Dallek on another thread, and Albert Doyle ridiculed me on that thread and now uses my opinions on Dallek to discredit my views on the Zapruder film. All the while, he offers no evidence of having read a single line written by Dallek. This is wrong.
When you don't tell the truth on the Assassination it doesn't really matter what else you did...And no matter how you qualify it, false coverage of the Assassination does vitiate an author and his Deep Political credibility...
.