Nelson's LBJ Mastermind book

[James H. Fetzer]

David,

I'm not going to archive the arguments presented on this forum, but were i to
make a guess, I would suggest that you would find that those from Phil Nelson,
Robert Morrow, and me were 90% logic and evidence, while the reverse would
be the approximate standard for those who have been so critical of our position.

That such a to-do would be made over the use of the term "mastermind" and
that it would be rebutted by exaggerating the scope and detail of control that
someone would have to have to qualify while concurrently minimizing Lyndon's
astounding capacity for manipulating others for his own benefit dumbfounds me.

The DiEguenio list of activities by Oswald he would have had to have controlled
to qualify as the "mastermind" is quite simply absurd. He had the CIA and Joint
Chiefs on his side. They did their part and he did his. And to suggest anything I
argue "must be true because i say it is true" is grossly untrue and quite insulting.

My life has been dedicated to logic, critical thinking and scientific reasoning. When
I observe one fallacious argument compounded with another--one straw man with
another ad hominem and special pleading ad nauseam--I am forced to conclude an
agenda other than truth is dominating the discussion. It most assuredly has been.

I am sorry. I really did not expect this. I thought this forum would be a good place
to discuss Phil's book, which I greatly admire. I believe it is one of the best books
on the assassination and the perfect complement to JFK AND THE UNSPEAKABLE.
I am not going to continue to argue the case, but I am quite disillusioned with DPF.

Thanks for even bothering to care. Concern of that caliber seems rather rare here.

Jim

Jim, with great respect I disagree about your conclusions and judgement in this particular matter.

I speak for no one apart from myself in this regard, but I do not find Robert to be either professional or enlightening, nor particularly knowledgeable.

Not least, a complaint has been received about him and has been considered and a judgement made. It is the lot of those who run forums to everlastingly try to balance the diversity of opinion. It's not always easy, or comfortable a role. And inevitably there are those who will be upset and those who will not be upset, with any judgement reached. A fine line has to be trod. We take that role and our custodianship of this forum seriously. That is one reason we will never allow advertising here. That is why we dig into our own pockets each year to ensure the forum remains uncontaminated by any form of commercialism.

Do we get it right every time? No. But I think we get it right more often than not.

I'm genuinely sorry for any poor experiences you've had here Jim. The passion of dearly held beliefs often colour our judgements, I think. This is simply a fact of human nature.

It will not, therefore, surprise you at all to hear that I fundamentally and utterly disagree about your view about veneer. Judgements made in the bloody heat of battle are often the poorest judgements a man ever makes.

I admire you, Jim, especially for all the good work you did on 911.

David