13-10-2013, 12:40 AM
Magda,
Yes, I would really like to see this thread get back on topic with a discussion of Judge John Tunheim and his errors of omission in over a decade of his speeches and interviews about the ARRB.
When I first began writing about this subject, I approached the two major newspapers in the Twin Cities, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune and the St. Paul Pioneer Press. Neither of those organs responded to my queries.
After exhausting all of my options, I was able to find an outlet for my thoughts on Tunheim, which I published in an online article.
After the local ABC affiliate aired a piece on Tunheim, I approached reporter Steve Tellier, who was not interested in reading my article and presenting an alternative view of the ARRB.
After I provided the link to my article on this thread on Deep Politics Forum, I was attacked in multiple postings by one of your members, Keith Millea, because he didn't like the online site for my publication, and he wanted to protect "the reputation of the forum." He never read the article; he simply didn't like the site where I (by necessity) had published the piece.
The members of this forum comprise an extremely limited clique of students of the JFK assassination. It is most unfortunate that you have failed in devising united front in order to raise awareness about the truth of the JFK assassination at the time of the 50th anniversary. As a relative outsider to the members who post frequently on this forum, I would observe the following: right now, you are not making a difference in changing views about the assassination.
To get the Tunheim discussion back on track, I would raise the following question:
Why should the "voice" of John Tunheim count for so much, while the five-volume publication of Douglas Horne on the same topic receive virtually no coverage in the mainstream media? Horne was a bona fide member of Tunheim's committee, yet his detailed synthesis of the medical evidence has been nearly completely ignored in the press and television. Why?
James
Yes, I would really like to see this thread get back on topic with a discussion of Judge John Tunheim and his errors of omission in over a decade of his speeches and interviews about the ARRB.
When I first began writing about this subject, I approached the two major newspapers in the Twin Cities, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune and the St. Paul Pioneer Press. Neither of those organs responded to my queries.
After exhausting all of my options, I was able to find an outlet for my thoughts on Tunheim, which I published in an online article.
After the local ABC affiliate aired a piece on Tunheim, I approached reporter Steve Tellier, who was not interested in reading my article and presenting an alternative view of the ARRB.
After I provided the link to my article on this thread on Deep Politics Forum, I was attacked in multiple postings by one of your members, Keith Millea, because he didn't like the online site for my publication, and he wanted to protect "the reputation of the forum." He never read the article; he simply didn't like the site where I (by necessity) had published the piece.
The members of this forum comprise an extremely limited clique of students of the JFK assassination. It is most unfortunate that you have failed in devising united front in order to raise awareness about the truth of the JFK assassination at the time of the 50th anniversary. As a relative outsider to the members who post frequently on this forum, I would observe the following: right now, you are not making a difference in changing views about the assassination.
To get the Tunheim discussion back on track, I would raise the following question:
Why should the "voice" of John Tunheim count for so much, while the five-volume publication of Douglas Horne on the same topic receive virtually no coverage in the mainstream media? Horne was a bona fide member of Tunheim's committee, yet his detailed synthesis of the medical evidence has been nearly completely ignored in the press and television. Why?
James