03-05-2014, 05:26 PM
(This post was last modified: 03-05-2014, 05:49 PM by Albert Doyle.)
Norwood is dishonest. In his Veteran's Today article complaining about censorship and persecution on the Deep Politics Forum he never mentioned DiEugenio's post showing what was wrong with Dallek. Norwood presented himself as the victim of crude and primitively biased posters who disallowed him his intellectual treatise on Dallek when the real context was his attempt to work his way in with a superficial formal peer review academic approach, in order to unload Dallek filler, wasn't working. It was more than clear that the trouble was Deep Politics doesn't want to waste time with Kennedy authors who back the Lone Nut position no matter how much other Kennedy information their works contain. It wasn't the DPF members who didn't get it and Norwood's dishonest depiction of what the problem was wasn't honest or accurate to the real situation.
Norwood repeated the same dishonesty when he accused me of boorishly dismissing his references to the Zapruder Film alteration. He quoted me on Veteran's Today as crudely blowing off his reference with the quote "What are you trying to do, instruct me?" That's not honest because that wasn't at all the context. I'm quite familiar with the material Norwood was condescendingly offering. Part of the problem with Norwood was his attitude of superior instruction to the uneducated. That was ignorance in itself since most of the people on Deep Politics are already read on the subject and have already seen the video Norwood was referencing. This shows what kind of character Norwood is. While portraying us as an unintelligent mob crudely denying him his attempt to educate us it wasn't us who was refusing the lesson.
Norwood and Fetzer have two major problems their dishonestly spun version of events won't counter. Dallek was chosen to be on the disinformation programming on the 50th because he serves the Lone Nutters. No matter how much arguing you do Dallek will never survive that. There's a pretty accurate rule of thumb that credible JFK authors like DiEugenio are deep-sixed and Lone Nut shills like Dallek and Caro are given conspicuous screen time. While I agree Dallek, and maybe even Nelson, discuss material that is worth knowing on its own it is hard to ignore the fact they both misled on a Deep Political basis and therefore damaged the cause. That's the problem here that Norwood, while crying victimization, never quite got around to acknowledging in his dishonestly-rendered complaint. The second problem is Ralph Cinque who is obviously one of the most embarrassing buffoons to ever enter JFK Assassination visibility. Endorsement of Cinque is grounds for dismissal from credibility alone and needs no further explanation. Norwood endorses Cinque while pretending to have a sophisticated approach and equally sophisticated issues with the Deep Politics Forum. May I suggest that is like trying to lawyer a court case in a clown's costume. The problem with Fetzer is he now prefers wind over method and sensation over caution. He self-references himself as the more credible source but I don't think he's proven that in practice. Norwood isn't honest and his self-serving version of events over there on Veteran's Today isn't close to what actually happened. Too bad Phil isn't still here because he could do a cartoon of Norwood gobbling from the dubious protection of Fetzer's turkey nest.
.
Norwood repeated the same dishonesty when he accused me of boorishly dismissing his references to the Zapruder Film alteration. He quoted me on Veteran's Today as crudely blowing off his reference with the quote "What are you trying to do, instruct me?" That's not honest because that wasn't at all the context. I'm quite familiar with the material Norwood was condescendingly offering. Part of the problem with Norwood was his attitude of superior instruction to the uneducated. That was ignorance in itself since most of the people on Deep Politics are already read on the subject and have already seen the video Norwood was referencing. This shows what kind of character Norwood is. While portraying us as an unintelligent mob crudely denying him his attempt to educate us it wasn't us who was refusing the lesson.
Norwood and Fetzer have two major problems their dishonestly spun version of events won't counter. Dallek was chosen to be on the disinformation programming on the 50th because he serves the Lone Nutters. No matter how much arguing you do Dallek will never survive that. There's a pretty accurate rule of thumb that credible JFK authors like DiEugenio are deep-sixed and Lone Nut shills like Dallek and Caro are given conspicuous screen time. While I agree Dallek, and maybe even Nelson, discuss material that is worth knowing on its own it is hard to ignore the fact they both misled on a Deep Political basis and therefore damaged the cause. That's the problem here that Norwood, while crying victimization, never quite got around to acknowledging in his dishonestly-rendered complaint. The second problem is Ralph Cinque who is obviously one of the most embarrassing buffoons to ever enter JFK Assassination visibility. Endorsement of Cinque is grounds for dismissal from credibility alone and needs no further explanation. Norwood endorses Cinque while pretending to have a sophisticated approach and equally sophisticated issues with the Deep Politics Forum. May I suggest that is like trying to lawyer a court case in a clown's costume. The problem with Fetzer is he now prefers wind over method and sensation over caution. He self-references himself as the more credible source but I don't think he's proven that in practice. Norwood isn't honest and his self-serving version of events over there on Veteran's Today isn't close to what actually happened. Too bad Phil isn't still here because he could do a cartoon of Norwood gobbling from the dubious protection of Fetzer's turkey nest.
.