16-08-2017, 05:06 AM
Quote:You have inadvertently proven one of my points ("With loyalty comes a loss of intellectual independence") by jumping in to Jim DiEugenio's defense
Not a great start there Richard. Couldn't Dawn have independently decided that Jim was worth defending? Perhaps even by using her intellect to come to that decision? And why is she supposed to be 'loyal' to Jim, anyway? Does she owe him money and he's decided to defer payments? You're a smart guy (I've enjoyed what I've seen of your writing) and you can do better than that.
Some of us are probably fond of Jim's writing because he spends more time than most - not necessarily you, but 'most' - digging into the subject, and generally seems on target and well intentioned in an area where a lot of people don't manage to be either. This is a page about the JFK assassination on a forum devoted to deep politics. Please forgive us if some of us enjoy a writer treats both the assassination and deep conspiratorial politics in general with some degree of seriousness.
I know a couple of the ROKC guys personally. That noted, I regret the hostility that some of the members there have brought into some discussions. Who needs it? I don't, you don't, none of us do as far as I can tell. If anyone has been 'targeted' by ROKC then ROKC should give it a rest. It's off putting and does no-one any favours.
I hope that 450 page book sees print. I'm certainly curious to read it.