01-01-2011, 05:42 PM
Am I reading this correctly?
BY referring to the assassination as "The Big Event", is Fetzer also endorsing that ridiculous Saint John Hunt story? You know the one he barfed up for "Rolling Stone" and then regurgitated for Alex Jones, and that, as Seamus Coogan point out, Jesse was unfortunate enough to swallow for his special?
Wow, if that is so then Fetzer has completely abandoned any kind of scholarly standards in the JFK field. He has now become a kind of caricature of Ahab and the White whale story.
What do I mean by that? This: In any kind of scholarly approach to a subject, one has to try to find the primary sources. If there is more than one, you then have to search to see if there is anything written at the time, or if there is any kind of majority view, or if one of the sources has credibility problems.
To put it mildly: Howard Hunt has some credibility problems. In fact, a lot of people believe--including me--that he was involved in the JFK murder. On top of that, he absolutely despised the Kennedys. So he would be willing to throw sand around to obfuscate things.
His son, Saint John Hunt, also has some serious credibility problems. He is a twice convicted felon who is not above selling naked pictures of his wife on the web. Further, he was the main source for the Rolling Stone article that gave wide circulation to the whole "Hunt confession" mess.
Now, anyone who knows anything about Watergate, or has read Jim Hougan's brilliant book on the subject, Secret Agenda, will see that Hunt's son is somewhat circumspect as a source. In that article, he has his father returning home after the discovery of the Watergate break-in, and then he and Dad dumping lots of recording equipment in a river.
The problem is that when the cops arrived at the Watergate, Hunt told McCord's assistant, Alfred Baldwin, to take the recording equipment to McCord's house. Which he did. (Hougan, p. 204)
Further, as Hougan later notes, Hunt did not go home after the cops arrived. He first went to his office at the White House compound. (ibid, p. 216) He got some cash to pay for a lawyer who he called, one Douglas Caddy. He then went to the Mullen Company, the CIA front company he worked at prior to joining The Plumbers. From there he called some relations of the Cubans who had ben apprehended.
Hunt had little to do with the actual taping and surveillance. McCord and Baldwin handled the large bulk of it. So Saint John's story is tainted. As is the whole Rolling Stone article.
Hunt's so called confession was a bunch of BS. And Saint John looks like a cheap hustler. For Fetzer to somehow accept this is, to say the least, puzzling. But considering his related endorsement of Nelson, its not surprising.
BY referring to the assassination as "The Big Event", is Fetzer also endorsing that ridiculous Saint John Hunt story? You know the one he barfed up for "Rolling Stone" and then regurgitated for Alex Jones, and that, as Seamus Coogan point out, Jesse was unfortunate enough to swallow for his special?
Wow, if that is so then Fetzer has completely abandoned any kind of scholarly standards in the JFK field. He has now become a kind of caricature of Ahab and the White whale story.
What do I mean by that? This: In any kind of scholarly approach to a subject, one has to try to find the primary sources. If there is more than one, you then have to search to see if there is anything written at the time, or if there is any kind of majority view, or if one of the sources has credibility problems.
To put it mildly: Howard Hunt has some credibility problems. In fact, a lot of people believe--including me--that he was involved in the JFK murder. On top of that, he absolutely despised the Kennedys. So he would be willing to throw sand around to obfuscate things.
His son, Saint John Hunt, also has some serious credibility problems. He is a twice convicted felon who is not above selling naked pictures of his wife on the web. Further, he was the main source for the Rolling Stone article that gave wide circulation to the whole "Hunt confession" mess.
Now, anyone who knows anything about Watergate, or has read Jim Hougan's brilliant book on the subject, Secret Agenda, will see that Hunt's son is somewhat circumspect as a source. In that article, he has his father returning home after the discovery of the Watergate break-in, and then he and Dad dumping lots of recording equipment in a river.
The problem is that when the cops arrived at the Watergate, Hunt told McCord's assistant, Alfred Baldwin, to take the recording equipment to McCord's house. Which he did. (Hougan, p. 204)
Further, as Hougan later notes, Hunt did not go home after the cops arrived. He first went to his office at the White House compound. (ibid, p. 216) He got some cash to pay for a lawyer who he called, one Douglas Caddy. He then went to the Mullen Company, the CIA front company he worked at prior to joining The Plumbers. From there he called some relations of the Cubans who had ben apprehended.
Hunt had little to do with the actual taping and surveillance. McCord and Baldwin handled the large bulk of it. So Saint John's story is tainted. As is the whole Rolling Stone article.
Hunt's so called confession was a bunch of BS. And Saint John looks like a cheap hustler. For Fetzer to somehow accept this is, to say the least, puzzling. But considering his related endorsement of Nelson, its not surprising.