10-01-2012, 09:32 AM
I haven't posted here in a while, but wanted to comment on a few of the threads I perused tonight, including this one.
Jim Fetzer knows what I think of him. He is sometimes unbearably bombastic and lashes out way too quickly at those who disagree with him. However, I find myself usually agreeing with him. His data is sound, and anyone who has studied the significant political issues of our time must ultimately agree with him that most all of them have been explained inadequately. He's produced a lot of great work and I think he's become overly thin-skinned primarily because he's been under attack for a long time, by so many fellow researchers. Kind of like the quarterback who has been getting battered behind a horrible offensive line- he flinches and goes into defensive mode even when he's not under pressure.
I also want to say, in defense of John Hankey, that he was one of the few voices on the internet (certainly there were none at all in the mainstream media) who investigated the holes in the official story of JFK, Jr.'s death. There is little question in my mind that JFK, Jr. was assassinated, just like his father and uncle. I found his video on JFK, Jr. and Bush to be quite entertaining. Whether it's Fetzer, Hankey, or any other researcher, I don't feel comfortable in dismissing them as individuals, or declaring they have no credibility, simply because others feel that some of their views are too "extreme." Alex Jones is another guy who gets lambasted in this fashion, when in reality he is a huge force for good. Unless you're willing to label people indiscriminately as "disinfo" agents, then I think you have to acknowledge that people like Jim Fetzer and John Hankey are trying to expose wrong as they see it. I certainly won't question their motivations in doing so.
I don't think there is any rational reason to be so emphatic in stating that body alteration is or isn't a fact, that film alteration did or didn't occur, or that LBJ could or couldn't have been one of the masterminds behind the assassination. Personally, I tend to be agnostic on body alteration, lean towards at least some of the films having been altered, and think LBJ definitely had foreknowledge of the assassination but was not one of the primary forces behind it. But I could easily be wrong. That't the point so many in the research community refuse to admit- any of us could be wrong about our pet theories and hunches as well.
The only absolutes in JFK assassination research, imho, are that there WAS a conspiracy, there WAS a massive coverup and significant policy changes occurred because of the assassination. I don't have all the answers, and neither do any of you. We have common enemies in government officials and virtually every mainstream media reporter, however, who lie and distort the truth about the JFK assassination, 911 and countless other crucial events. If only we could turn all this passion and vitriol towards that common enemy, who not only don't acknowledge the absolutes in this case, but continue to perpetuate an impossible, deadly myth.
Jim Fetzer is one of the good guys- stop treating him like he's Bugliosi.
Jim Fetzer knows what I think of him. He is sometimes unbearably bombastic and lashes out way too quickly at those who disagree with him. However, I find myself usually agreeing with him. His data is sound, and anyone who has studied the significant political issues of our time must ultimately agree with him that most all of them have been explained inadequately. He's produced a lot of great work and I think he's become overly thin-skinned primarily because he's been under attack for a long time, by so many fellow researchers. Kind of like the quarterback who has been getting battered behind a horrible offensive line- he flinches and goes into defensive mode even when he's not under pressure.
I also want to say, in defense of John Hankey, that he was one of the few voices on the internet (certainly there were none at all in the mainstream media) who investigated the holes in the official story of JFK, Jr.'s death. There is little question in my mind that JFK, Jr. was assassinated, just like his father and uncle. I found his video on JFK, Jr. and Bush to be quite entertaining. Whether it's Fetzer, Hankey, or any other researcher, I don't feel comfortable in dismissing them as individuals, or declaring they have no credibility, simply because others feel that some of their views are too "extreme." Alex Jones is another guy who gets lambasted in this fashion, when in reality he is a huge force for good. Unless you're willing to label people indiscriminately as "disinfo" agents, then I think you have to acknowledge that people like Jim Fetzer and John Hankey are trying to expose wrong as they see it. I certainly won't question their motivations in doing so.
I don't think there is any rational reason to be so emphatic in stating that body alteration is or isn't a fact, that film alteration did or didn't occur, or that LBJ could or couldn't have been one of the masterminds behind the assassination. Personally, I tend to be agnostic on body alteration, lean towards at least some of the films having been altered, and think LBJ definitely had foreknowledge of the assassination but was not one of the primary forces behind it. But I could easily be wrong. That't the point so many in the research community refuse to admit- any of us could be wrong about our pet theories and hunches as well.
The only absolutes in JFK assassination research, imho, are that there WAS a conspiracy, there WAS a massive coverup and significant policy changes occurred because of the assassination. I don't have all the answers, and neither do any of you. We have common enemies in government officials and virtually every mainstream media reporter, however, who lie and distort the truth about the JFK assassination, 911 and countless other crucial events. If only we could turn all this passion and vitriol towards that common enemy, who not only don't acknowledge the absolutes in this case, but continue to perpetuate an impossible, deadly myth.
Jim Fetzer is one of the good guys- stop treating him like he's Bugliosi.