28-08-2012, 02:54 PM
Don Jeffries Wrote:Peter,
You know I agree with you politically on almost everything. I did try to fight for you behind the scenes at the EF. I understand your feelings on this. Certainly, the inner members here have adopted something of an "outcast" collective mentality. However, that doesn't explain why there is this compulsion to bash someone like a Mark Prior- who has no connection to EF and hasn't harmed anyone here to my knowledge.
I just wanted to note this situation, and I don't think we can transform it into a larger context. You have a seemingly sincere poster who appears to want nothing more than to fit in on this forum, and he just keeps getting roundly rejected by everyone. Like I said, I don't know him and have no dog in this fight. I just was disturbed by what I saw from reading all these posts.
Don,
At the end of this post I'm including Saint Mark's PM to me that I've previously shared on DPF. In it, your "sincere guy who has been met with inexplicable vitriol from most of you" and who "very politely took you to task for being so cliquish and arrogant" presents as an arrogant naïf willing to make the most churlish personal attacks on me, an individual about whom he admittedly knows nothing ("I am not familiar with your writings or your history") and eager to blame the failure of his ideas to gain traction on the manners in which they were initially received -- all presented in what he mistakenly and in a cowardly manner assumed would be the safety of a "private" message."
To wit: "Your post also included these words of encouragement: "And nothing changes. What's old is old again." Yes...that motivates, doesn't it? I do apologize for the sarcasm. Seriously, if you do not want to get involved, you will not be called upon. But for the sake of the cause, please do not promote the growth of mold while the fruit is still on the tree."
And
"You then posted your entire article to make sure every[one] saw that, yes indeed, you had written such an article. Look at the rest of the thread...there is no discussion about the Manifesto or its content."
I have never felt a "compulsion" to injure Mark Prior in any way. However, I do feel an obligation to point out the myriad weaknesses of his "Manifesto" and to provide insights into its author's mind, manners, and motives.
Prior's "Manifesto" went over like the Edsel. It failed on its own lack of merits, not because of my critique of it. It and the rest of his "ideas" are being roundly rejected by those of us who have devoted so many years of our lives to the struggle for truth and justice in the case of JFK's murder.
This is war, and Mark Prior suggests that we march into a clearing, look a well-armed and merciless enemy in the eye, and give it the finger.
Sign me up.
Charles
_______________________________________
Prior's PM to me:
[B][B]I was not a member of this forum until I discovered the Mr. DiEugenio posted my article on this site. It is not my intention to seek notoriety for the article or myself, which is why I'm messaging you directly and not airing this as a forum post. I am not familiar with your writings or your history, so I mean you no disrespect in what I am about to write. I feel as if you did a disservice to the Manifesto with your post for several reasons. And I'm sure this seems hard to believe but this is not about pride of authorship. This is about the cause. I sincerely ask that you please take a step back and look objectively at the points below:
1. After only one person replied to the post, Mr Vazakas, you posted something that was not about the article in question and turned the thread into something about you. "...but I basically made the same argument 15 years ago." Okay. What is the point of that statement? Are you the only person who can make arguments about the lackadaisical efforts of assassination proponents to mobilize? You then posted your entire article to make sure every saw that, yes indeed, you had written such an article. Look at the rest of the thread...there is no discussion about the Manifesto or its content. The Manifesto is suppose to be about something bigger than you or I. I would hope that it inspires someone to do something, if not any of the specific actions which were mentioned in it.
2. Your post also included these words of encouragement: "And nothing changes. What's old is old again." Yes...that motivates, doesn't it? I do apologize for the sarcasm. Seriously, if you do not want to get involved, you will not be called upon. But for the sake of the cause, please do not promote the growth of mold while the fruit is still on the tree.
I did read your article "In The Blossoms of Our Sins," and while I agree that our articles are similar in their themes of addressing apathy, "A Manifesto For The 50th" provides suggestions to change the attitude within our culture and offers specific suggestions to those who may be motivated to in fact do something. And I simply did not see any parallels between our articles in that regard. I think it's a shame that [sic]
As I mentioned before, I am not posting this, nor am a sending a copy to anyone else. I only ask that you be a little bit more considerate of the TOPIC of thread before you post. Please remember, that this is not about you or I; it is about justice for a man who died nearly 50 years.[/B][/B]