Let Us Treat Jim Fetzer with Kindness

[Charles Drago]

Full Disclosure Department: I am neither a psychologist nor a psychiatrist.

At times, I'm a carrier.

After close readings of his most recent Altgens 6 alteration posts available at the fetid Swamp, I've reached the conclusion that Jim Fetzer is a profoundly disturbed man.

Where are his family members? Is there no one who cares about this man and is in a position to help?

In all seriousness, I would like everyone here to consider treating Jim gently now. Of course we must distance ourselves from his recent output, and we must defend against enemy propagandists and well-meaning but ignorant journalists and academics who will attempt to argue that Jim's confused and perhaps even psychotic ramblings are in fact the gold standard for all legitimate assassination inquiries.

But as far as our treatment of Jim is concerned, I submit that we are morally obliged to comfort him.

Seriously.

[Albert Doyle]

There's only two possible explanations for his current activities on EF. Madness or psy-ops.

[Lauren Johnson]

Full Disclosure Department: I am neither a psychologist nor a psychiatrist.

At times, I'm a carrier.

After close readings of his most recent Altgens 6 alteration posts available at the fetid Swamp, I've reached the conclusion that Jim Fetzer is a profoundly disturbed man.

Where are his family members? Is there no one who cares about this man and is in a position to help?

In all seriousness, I would like everyone here to consider treating Jim gently now. Of course we must distance ourselves from his recent output, and we must defend against enemy propagandists and well-meaning but ignorant journalists and academics who will attempt to argue that Jim's confused and perhaps even psychotic ramblings are in fact the gold standard for all legitimate assassination inquiries.

But as far as our treatment of Jim is concerned, I submit that we are morally obliged to comfort him.

Seriously.

I too am not a psychiatrist or a clinical psychologist, I suggest that you think twice about this -- or at least consider carefully what kindness is. In an earlier post, I suggested that he has a personality disorder. (Lot's of stuff available on the web.) One of the common themes is their resistance to treatment, should treatment even be agreed to. That agreement is unlikely because one common thread is that the person with a personality disorder does not experience it as a personal problem. His or order problems stem from everybody else. in Fetzer's case, he is surrounded with people who do not have the courage to accept the truth. There are only a few courageous people that only he is able to identify.

From my point of view, when you are around people with personality disorders, you leave them alone. If you are a leader of some group that is being beseiged by these people, you find ways to isolate them. They only end up causing havoc.

[Albert Doyle]

Well, he could just be a stubborn, ignorant jackass...

[Lauren Johnson]

Well, he could just be a stubborn, ignorant jackass...

Yah, I know. Sometimes a stupid jackass is just a stupid jackass. It does happen.

[Charles Drago]

You make good points, Lauren.

My stance is predicated upon a long-standing friendship with Jim -- one that, while not as deep as that between Greg Burnham and Jim, leads me to my call for sensitivity.

I'll be the first to admit that, over the past two years or so, I have been extremely cutting in my public criticisms of all things Fetzer. But in the wake of the Cinque debacle, I can see quite clearly that the mind I once so greatly admired is no longer in existence.

Jim needs help. I'm obliged to do what I can for him. And under the circumstances, the only help I can offer is the suggestion powering this thread.

[Kevin Hall]

I don't know Mr. Fetzer and don't have any history with him, I did buy his Dealey Plaza book a few years ago.

I would not buy another book from him or anything else that he is selling, I've turned him off and tuned him out.

[Jan Klimkowski]

Charles - your loyalty and compassion towards an old friend are of course fine traits.

I will simply repeat what I wrote in that thread.

Here are some of the key factors a Sunsteinian psyop would likely exhibit:

- the disruption of serious research
- the banalization of serious research
- the relentless promulgation of hypotheses after they have been thoroughly debunked
- the publicizing of those hypotheses in arenas likely to get MSM attention
- the knowledge that these hypotheses, their key evidence and their chief protagonists will not survive basic due diligence from MSM researchers

All serving the End Purpose of a Sunsteinian psyop: To delegitimize research which challenges officially sanctioned history, and to enable MSM to say "Look - this is why you can't trust conspiracy theorists".

This does not mean that I necessarily believe Fetzer to be a Mockingbird.

However, the impact of his public utterances - in many research spheres - is all but indistinguishable from that which a Sunsteinian pysop would have.

Ultimately, my loyalty lies with the legitimate and essential investigation of deep political crimes. Not with any one man.

However damaged that individual may be.

[Greg Burnham]

Charles,

Thank you for expressing compassion for a once great man who did contribute greatly to our quest.

I have been oscillating between anger and sadness, but always with an underlying incredulity at the complete departure he has taken from reason, if not from reality itself.

Unfortunately, I have concluded that he is departed from "this world" in all but the literal sense. As one who has departed he becomes unreachable by anyone as far as I can tell.

I first noticed problems quite some time ago, but they were not nearly as pronounced as they are today. Back then I was able to rationalize them away as more of a personality
quirk than as a more serious issue. Recently, I noticed a big problem when he was arguing that TUM was Roy Hargraves and DCM was Felipe Vidal Santiago. We had many heated
telephone conversations & email exchanges where I attempted to persuade him to cease overextending what can be known from photographs, among other highly specious constructs.
The BIG "slip" came when he found out that Louis Witt (the self-proclaimed TUM) testified that he witnessed the limousine stop. Based on this corroboration of the limousine stop by
Witt, Jim concluded that Witt NECESSARILY must have therefore been TUM.

That is not reasoning. That is something else. That is not Jim Fetzer. I don't know where he went, but it is a sad day.

He is gone.

[Charles Drago]

However, the impact of [Fetzer's] public utterances - in many research spheres - is all but indistinguishable from that which a Sunsteinian pysop would have.

Ultimately, my loyalty lies with the legitimate and essential investigation of deep political crimes. Not with any one man.

However damaged that individual may be.

Thanks, Jan.

Of course you're correct in point one: If a man is going to shoot me in the forehead because he's convinced it's the only cure for my migraine, I still end up at room temperature.

As for loyalty: I stand in comradeship with you, and others, who remain loyal to our larger, shared causes. I will never defend Jim Fetzer's twisted conclusions and methods, and I will always fight to separate our good work from his later, tainted failures.

But simultaneously, I'll extend to Jim the courtesy that should be extended to a failing warrior.

One more thought: If we ever are led to conclude that it was not physical and/or psychological illness that led to Jim's public meltdown, but rather an intel op in which he was a witting participant, then all bets would be off.

But as of now, I'm pretty much convinced that Jim Fetzer is a very ill man.