10-02-2012, 07:41 PM
Albert,
Please try to focus and pay attention.
I reiterate: This thread is NOT "about" Altgens 6 or Fetzer or "Cinque."
It is intended to spur discussions of deep political science and the lessons gleaned from deep political inquiry.
The JFK assassination is a deep political phenomenon. The creation and manipulation of disinformation, misinformation, and cognitive dissonance are well-established, frequently observed tactics in the JFK assassination.
Do you grasp, for instance, the function and forms of the doppelganger phenomena in this case?
Further, I am not aware of any "deep political principle of prolonging the debate."
When you write, "No offense intended, but those who didn't participate in the actual abstract material arguments of why the claim is false tend to be the same people who show up later with sophist approaches that make the terrible mistake of permitting the possibility the doorway claim is valid," you are spouting nonsense. Where is this "sophistry" you claim to have detected? Where is your understanding and discussion of deep political strategies and tactics?
What the hell is an "abstract material" argument?
"Abstract material"???
Who is trying to "save" "doorway proponents?"
Why can't you see the distinction between "permitting the possibility the doorway claims is valid" and my hypothesis as expressed in the syllogism?
Why can't you understand that, when you write, "I'd say a dirty sock and gag is more appropriate for ["Cinque"]," you give no indication that in fact there are valuable lessons from allowing "them" to expose their methods.
Albert, I'm sincerely grateful to you for your kind words here and on Amazon.com, but your post above is, to be polite, off-point, rife with self-contradiction and straw men, and in all other respects rather shoddy work.
And as far as your rhetoric is concerned, at your level of development, less is more.
Please try to focus and pay attention.
I reiterate: This thread is NOT "about" Altgens 6 or Fetzer or "Cinque."
It is intended to spur discussions of deep political science and the lessons gleaned from deep political inquiry.
The JFK assassination is a deep political phenomenon. The creation and manipulation of disinformation, misinformation, and cognitive dissonance are well-established, frequently observed tactics in the JFK assassination.
Do you grasp, for instance, the function and forms of the doppelganger phenomena in this case?
Further, I am not aware of any "deep political principle of prolonging the debate."
When you write, "No offense intended, but those who didn't participate in the actual abstract material arguments of why the claim is false tend to be the same people who show up later with sophist approaches that make the terrible mistake of permitting the possibility the doorway claim is valid," you are spouting nonsense. Where is this "sophistry" you claim to have detected? Where is your understanding and discussion of deep political strategies and tactics?
What the hell is an "abstract material" argument?
"Abstract material"???
Who is trying to "save" "doorway proponents?"
Why can't you see the distinction between "permitting the possibility the doorway claims is valid" and my hypothesis as expressed in the syllogism?
Why can't you understand that, when you write, "I'd say a dirty sock and gag is more appropriate for ["Cinque"]," you give no indication that in fact there are valuable lessons from allowing "them" to expose their methods.
Albert, I'm sincerely grateful to you for your kind words here and on Amazon.com, but your post above is, to be polite, off-point, rife with self-contradiction and straw men, and in all other respects rather shoddy work.
And as far as your rhetoric is concerned, at your level of development, less is more.