21-03-2013, 02:54 AM
(This post was last modified: 21-03-2013, 03:31 AM by Charles Drago.)
David Josephs Wrote:So while CD interprets Scott as " "the" Soviets and the Cubans had conspired successfully to kill the president" what Scott actually writes is the attempt "linking Oswald to the USSR, to Cuba, or to both countries together"
A subtle distinction yet a serious one... CD wants us to believe Phase 1 was about blaming the Soviets/Cubans when in reality it was focused on LINKING OSWALD to these countries... and letting imagination and events run wild from there.
Forgive me, but I'm at a loss to find a rationale argument worthy of response in the preceding stream-of-consciousness ... what shall I call it ... diatribe.
And so, out of frustration and not a little bit of indignation, I am left to walk the ad hom tightrope. I'll do everything in my power not to fall off.
This Josephs person continues to misinterpret me and vainly -- in more ways than one -- attempt to speak for me.
Contrary to what Josephs would have you believe, I make no such interpretation as he claims above. Is he seriously suggesting that I've concluded that Scott has concluded that "the Soviets and Cubans conspired to kill" JFK???
Really ... I'm not trying to cause trouble here ... but who the hell does he think he's talking to? Who does he think he's fooling?
Further, I don't want anyone to believe anything.
How much more of this are we supposed to take?
Josephs attempts to characterize my response to Adele as an "insult."
Adele repudiates him.
What does this tell you about Josephs' character that, without permission, he would enlist her in his jihad?
Josephs attempts to convince readers that in this thread I am arguing for a certain position.
Jan straightens him out. Or at least tries to.
But Josephs won't stop trying to misrepresent me.
Why?
It is not my intention to proffer ad hominem-as-response. It's just that I am at a loss to account for his behavior.
Josephs seems unwilling or unable to grasp the nature of this thread:
HYPOTHESIS.
Why won't he stop?
My answer, for what it's worth as an opinion formulated without benefit of a degree in psychology, is expressed in just one word:
OBSESSION.
I guess it's official. I have a stalker.
Has anyone else had just about enough of this guy?
Charles Drago
Co-Founder, Deep Politics Forum
If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence: He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave.
-- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods
You can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity.
-- Graham Greene
Co-Founder, Deep Politics Forum
If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence: He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave.
-- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods
You can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity.
-- Graham Greene