25-01-2010, 08:27 PM
(This post was last modified: 25-01-2010, 08:53 PM by Peter Presland.)
Having been absent for a while, my curiosity was piqued by Myra's post and I ended up reading the entire "What Happened to JFK--and Why it Matters Today" thread. Time well spent as it turns out too. I am very impressed.
Have to say that, as a relative JFK Assassination layman and dealing strictly with what I have come to regard as necessary 'protocols' (for want of a better word) of civilised productive debate, Alan has a point. The tone of some of Jim Fetzer's posts were verging on the gratuitously nasty.
Having said that, I have also had a major chunter around JF's blog and am double impressed. His interview with Rory Ridley-Duff is a must-read for anyone seeking to dig deep into the London Bombings for example and, on the strength of it - together with his 911 position naturally - it's yet another addition to my RSS feed reader.
I'm just frustrated how often these sorts of ill-natured spats seem to occur between people who, so far as I can judge, are genuine in their pursuit of the realities behind the perpetually shifting facades of power. And yes, I think I'm as attuned as the next guy to the possibilities of trojans, false-trail layers, gatekeepers and the rest.
From where I stand it seems to me that everyone - bar none - has their blind spots (for want of a better word again) - I know I have. To the point I often have to scrap everything I've written by way of a reply to this or that because, deep down I know it will be counter-productive to my only real goal - which is to UNDERSTAND what happened rather than to defend this or that position I have tentatively (or not so tentatively) arrived at. Or, as an Old Royal Navy poem has it "They prosper who burn in the morning the letters thay wrote overnight"
The two recently past Paul Rigby spats spring to mind here.
I've also had a chunter around Alan's site and similarly, he clearly knows a thing or two about his subject.
IOW - Alan Eaglesham and Jim Fetzer are BOTH potential major assets to this site and I sincerely hope they BOTH continue to provide us with their insights.
Have to say that, as a relative JFK Assassination layman and dealing strictly with what I have come to regard as necessary 'protocols' (for want of a better word) of civilised productive debate, Alan has a point. The tone of some of Jim Fetzer's posts were verging on the gratuitously nasty.
Having said that, I have also had a major chunter around JF's blog and am double impressed. His interview with Rory Ridley-Duff is a must-read for anyone seeking to dig deep into the London Bombings for example and, on the strength of it - together with his 911 position naturally - it's yet another addition to my RSS feed reader.
I'm just frustrated how often these sorts of ill-natured spats seem to occur between people who, so far as I can judge, are genuine in their pursuit of the realities behind the perpetually shifting facades of power. And yes, I think I'm as attuned as the next guy to the possibilities of trojans, false-trail layers, gatekeepers and the rest.
From where I stand it seems to me that everyone - bar none - has their blind spots (for want of a better word again) - I know I have. To the point I often have to scrap everything I've written by way of a reply to this or that because, deep down I know it will be counter-productive to my only real goal - which is to UNDERSTAND what happened rather than to defend this or that position I have tentatively (or not so tentatively) arrived at. Or, as an Old Royal Navy poem has it "They prosper who burn in the morning the letters thay wrote overnight"
The two recently past Paul Rigby spats spring to mind here.
I've also had a chunter around Alan's site and similarly, he clearly knows a thing or two about his subject.
IOW - Alan Eaglesham and Jim Fetzer are BOTH potential major assets to this site and I sincerely hope they BOTH continue to provide us with their insights.
Peter Presland
".....there is something far worse than Nazism, and that is the hubris of the Anglo-American fraternities, whose routine is to incite indigenous monsters to war, and steer the pandemonium to further their imperial aims"
Guido Preparata. Preface to 'Conjuring Hitler'[size=12][size=12]
"Never believe anything until it has been officially denied"
Claud Cockburn
[/SIZE][/SIZE]
".....there is something far worse than Nazism, and that is the hubris of the Anglo-American fraternities, whose routine is to incite indigenous monsters to war, and steer the pandemonium to further their imperial aims"
Guido Preparata. Preface to 'Conjuring Hitler'[size=12][size=12]
"Never believe anything until it has been officially denied"
Claud Cockburn
[/SIZE][/SIZE]