| PART 8A: Over the edge . . . |
| James H. Fetzer |
|
tack at this point by initiating a sequence of posts called "THE DISINFORMATION SERIES", in which he reiterated various arguments he had advanced in other fora as aspects of his ongoing attack upon me. He also ridiculed the idea that my training "as a professor" had made me a "sensitive disinformation de- tector", when I had claimed instead that it was my training "as a philosopher" that made me sensitive to abuses of logic and language.] RE:: THE DISINFORMATION SERIES: INTRODUCTION
AND PART I. -- Josiah Thompson I don't know what's going on here. When I described myself as a "sensitive disinformation detector", it was not due to my training as a professor per se but as a philosopher! (I find it odd that Josiah can't even get that straight!) As I have explained in several previous posts, I really never thought of philosophy (analytic philosophy, including logic, critical thinking, and the philosophy of science) as "disinformation detection", but, to the extent to which disinformation depends upon the abuse of logic and language, it is not a bad description -- although, of course, it should not be exaggerated as though it were "all purpose", since there are many forms of disinformation -- such as the creation, al\teration, or fabrication of medical, physical, and photographic evidence--that a mere philosopher could not detect. When I call for "excising"
disinformation and those who disseminate it, just as I call for
"excising" those who were responsible for the death
of the 35th President, I am endorsing the idea that they must
be identified and exposed! Surely that is the least of our objectives
as students of the assassination. I am not suggesting that they
should be taken out and shot! And if this is not what we are
about on this forum, then I am completely and totally mystified.
I have always assumed that was our objective, even to the extent
of seeing them incarcerated and even executed, if they were found
guilty of crimes deserving of such penalties under the law. There
is nothing "fascistic" or neo-Nazi-like in wanting
disinformation to be identified and From his recent posts, this guy seems
to me to be "verging toward madness" (to quote a phrase
he has directed against me). I do not understand why my unwillingness
to take him at face value as an open, honest, and diligent seeker
after truth should have precipitated all this IF I AM NOT RIGHT!
I therefore remain as bewildered as ever about who this guy
really is. He is manifestly not the person he pretends to be,
but I certainly cannot claim -- and never have claimed -- that
he works for some "shadowy government agency", as he
has alleged. Indeed, the very phrase, "shadowy government
agency", was introduced by HIM in another obvious attempt
to smear me by exaggering where I stand. This is why he has
repeatedly refused to discuss the chapter-and-verse words I have
used in talking about him or assassination research. This technique,
by the way, of taking a reasonable position and stretching it
until it becomes hopelessly untenable, is called the straw man.
This guy is a past master, and there is every reason to believe
we are now in for an exhibition. |