For example, I read a recent book on President Kennedy's assassination and I think it's disinformation/propaganda, and therefore suspect the authors are CIA. Is that fair game to discuss here? I obviously don't want to do it if there's a chance the author is part of the forum, but there's no way to be sure. For example Jim Marrs is affiliated I believe, though he's someone I trust.
Is it ok to discuss authors? Is it just a judgement call? I plan to ask one co-author some questions on the education forum, where he posts. (So you may be able to guess who I'm talking about.) But I'll of course be much more discrete and tactful in the education forum.
Thanks. And thanks for your research into JFK's murder Wim, and for caring about the assassination of this good, potentially great..., man on Nov 22, 1963 at 12:30 *Texas* time...
Myra
How blunt can we be here?
dankbaar wrote:Myra, Just give it a try, we'll know then. Wim
Ok, thanks Wim. Well, I'm not a very tactful person, but I'll try. Um...I read "Ultimate Sacrifice" (along with many other books on the subject of President Kennedy's murder) specifically because I thought Thom Hartman was a progressive figure. And I was stunned when it turned out that he and his co-author were pushing "the mob dunnit" scenario, which I consider to be disinformation up there with the "Oswald dunnit" lie.
And since disinformation = propaganda in my view, and propaganda = CIA...uh...I'm sorta suspicious of Thom Hartman. I realize I'm slinging a pretty serious accusation here, but I quite resent reading such a lame premise by an author I trusted. Plus I'm American, and I take the JFK murder and coup rather personally. (Therefore I greatly appreciate all your research on the subject Wim. I've read *everything* on your website...I think.)
Also, if someone is gonna publish propaganda can't they at least be succinct? That book is, like, 1000 pages and stupifyingly repetative and took friggen forever to plod thru. But I'm just being catty.
So now that I've posted...am I too blunt?
(Oh, and then there's the fact that Hartman actually says on his homepage that 's not with the CIA. Who does that...!?)
Myra
Ok, thanks Wim. Well, I'm not a very tactful person, but I'll try. Um...I read "Ultimate Sacrifice" (along with many other books on the subject of President Kennedy's murder) specifically because I thought Thom Hartman was a progressive figure. And I was stunned when it turned out that he and his co-author were pushing "the mob dunnit" scenario, which I consider to be disinformation up there with the "Oswald dunnit" lie.
And since disinformation = propaganda in my view, and propaganda = CIA...uh...I'm sorta suspicious of Thom Hartman. I realize I'm slinging a pretty serious accusation here, but I quite resent reading such a lame premise by an author I trusted. Plus I'm American, and I take the JFK murder and coup rather personally. (Therefore I greatly appreciate all your research on the subject Wim. I've read *everything* on your website...I think.)
Also, if someone is gonna publish propaganda can't they at least be succinct? That book is, like, 1000 pages and stupifyingly repetative and took friggen forever to plod thru. But I'm just being catty.
So now that I've posted...am I too blunt?
(Oh, and then there's the fact that Hartman actually says on his homepage that 's not with the CIA. Who does that...!?)
Myra
dankbaar wrote:Join the club , Myra.
YES!!!
Thank you so much. I've tried to ask people's opinions in other forums and they go ballistic attacking me every time.
I can't tell if they're loyal fans of Hartman or...colleagues.
I posted a question for Lamar Waldron in the education forum. I'm curious to see if he'll answer it:
"If the Kennedys were close to overthrowing Castro, why wouldn't the mafia wait until Castro was out of power to kill JFK? Wouldn't they want to get their casinos and property back after capitalism is, presumably, restored -- *before* assassinating their enemy?"
Seems like a fundamental logic flaw in the book, but maybe I'm missing something.
Myra
YES!!!
Thank you so much. I've tried to ask people's opinions in other forums and they go ballistic attacking me every time.
I can't tell if they're loyal fans of Hartman or...colleagues.
I posted a question for Lamar Waldron in the education forum. I'm curious to see if he'll answer it:
"If the Kennedys were close to overthrowing Castro, why wouldn't the mafia wait until Castro was out of power to kill JFK? Wouldn't they want to get their casinos and property back after capitalism is, presumably, restored -- *before* assassinating their enemy?"
Seems like a fundamental logic flaw in the book, but maybe I'm missing something.
Myra
First off, welcome myra. You bring some excellent takes to the forum. I agree with both you and Wim, and I have been a big supporter of Hartmann in the past. For instance, he was one of the first to write of the election fraud in the 2004 Presedential election. The article came within a week of Bu$h's second stolen election. But this book shows his true colors. It's one of two things. He's either with the CIA, ala Operation Mockingbird or someone on the inside got to him. It's happened before. Ask Gary Mack.
Yeah, have you seen this?
Uh, the judge who sentenced me, who sawthe, who saw and read the CIA file. And as you remember, you, when you talkedto Sue, you remember she told you what happened with that, they came downthere with two big, thick files, I mean they were thick and let one guy read onesentence out of there, all it said was that Chauncy Holt, Kearney Siegler, John R. Moon , William Dean Rutz, right down the line, are not now and never have been employees of the Central Intelligence Agency. That is all they said. And, of course, that, so they left them read that in, and they wouldn't let the, wouldn't let my attorney cross examine him, or do anything.
Uh, the judge who sentenced me, who sawthe, who saw and read the CIA file. And as you remember, you, when you talkedto Sue, you remember she told you what happened with that, they came downthere with two big, thick files, I mean they were thick and let one guy read onesentence out of there, all it said was that Chauncy Holt, Kearney Siegler, John R. Moon , William Dean Rutz, right down the line, are not now and never have been employees of the Central Intelligence Agency. That is all they said. And, of course, that, so they left them read that in, and they wouldn't let the, wouldn't let my attorney cross examine him, or do anything.
See below, 2 years ago when I found that interview. Hartmann needed to know who posted it. I gave him some data. The next day it was gone.
Then I emailed him why he seemed so concerned with the interview on the Internet? No answer ever again.
Peculiar, not?
Wim
----- Original Message -----
From: Thom Hartmann
To: Wim Dankbaar
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 3:03 PM
Subject: RE: Hello Thom, did you do this interview with Chauncey Holt?
Wim,
How do I get in touch with the person who posted this?
Thom
-----Original Message-----
From: Wim Dankbaar [mailto:dank@xs4all.nl]
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 5:40 AM
To: Thom@mythical.net
Subject: Hello Thom, did you do this interview with Chauncey Holt?
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Marsh/Jfk-conspiracy/HOLT.TXT
If so, can you provide me with the first part?
Then I emailed him why he seemed so concerned with the interview on the Internet? No answer ever again.
Peculiar, not?
Wim
----- Original Message -----
From: Thom Hartmann
To: Wim Dankbaar
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 3:03 PM
Subject: RE: Hello Thom, did you do this interview with Chauncey Holt?
Wim,
How do I get in touch with the person who posted this?
Thom
-----Original Message-----
From: Wim Dankbaar [mailto:dank@xs4all.nl]
Sent: Friday, November 05, 2004 5:40 AM
To: Thom@mythical.net
Subject: Hello Thom, did you do this interview with Chauncey Holt?
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Marsh/Jfk-conspiracy/HOLT.TXT
If so, can you provide me with the first part?