Alger Hiss was Acquitted

[Tim Gratz]

If I recall correctly, what might have initiated the entire imbriglio with John B was when I challenged his post that at one point Alger Hiss was acquitted by a jury of his peers.

Several times I have (politely, I think) asked John B to either document the acquittal or admit he erred.

I want to have this "thread" so he can do one or the other here.

We all make factual mistakes from time to time. I just find it curious that John B just cannot seem to admit that he erred in claiming Hiss was ever acquitted.

[Dawn Meredith]

If I recall correctly, what might have initiated the entire imbriglio with John B was when I challenged his post that at one point Alger Hiss was acquitted by a jury of his peers.

Several times I have (politely, I think) asked John B to either document the acquittal or admit he erred.

I want to have this "thread" so he can do one or the other here.

We all make factual mistakes from time to time. I just find it curious that John B just cannot seem to admit that he erred in claiming Hiss was ever acquitted.

And your point is? Tim, this is beating a dead horse. But you seem to enjoy such.

Dawn

[Evan Burton]

Tim, Dawn,

I am prepared to let this thread continue as long as all parties are civil. If people start to throw insults at one another, I'll delete this thread without warning.

I DO NOT CARE IF ANYONE ON ANY SIDE HAS BEEN PROVOKED - REMAIN CIVIL OR THE THREAD WILL BE DELETED.

Any transgressions will be recorded for John and Andy to see what happened, then the thread will be deleted.

[John Simkin]

If I recall correctly, what might have initiated the entire imbriglio with John B was when I challenged his post that at one point Alger Hiss was acquitted by a jury of his peers.

Several times I have (politely, I think) asked John B to either document the acquittal or admit he erred.

I want to have this "thread" so he can do one or the other here.

We all make factual mistakes from time to time. I just find it curious that John B just cannot seem to admit that he erred in claiming Hiss was ever acquitted.

And your point is? Tim, this is beating a dead horse. But you seem to enjoy such.

Dawn

Tim's point is that he has got something right for a change. Yet he is unwilling to argue about the Hiss case that I started for him. This situation all began when Tim began this McCarthyite smear against Hiss.

Tim, why did you leave the debate about JFK and the Vietnam War. I am very keen to know how Goldwater could have won the Vietnam War in two years if he became president in 1964.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=11263

[Dawn Meredith]

Tim, Dawn,

I am prepared to let this thread continue as long as all parties are civil. If people start to throw insults at one another, I'll delete this thread without warning.

I DO NOT CARE IF ANYONE ON ANY SIDE HAS BEEN PROVOKED - REMAIN CIVIL OR THE THREAD WILL BE DELETED.

Any transgressions will be recorded for John and Andy to see what happened, then the thread will be deleted.

Evan:

I was not trying to "start" anything. But given the bad blood of late around John B's posts re Gratz, I culd not see why he was wanting to start this up again. But I am out of this thread.

Dawn

[Greg Parker]

Tim, in another thread, which seems to have vanished, you said,

I think the matter could be cleansed by an apology by John B to both Terry and me and by his refraining from such personal attacks on any member in the future. I can assure you that I would quickly forgive him since I am taught that in order for my trespasses to be forgiven I must forgive those who trespass against me.

C'mon Tim, an apology? He has done for you what Pat Speer has valiantly failed to do... garnering you support and sympathy .

If I recall correctly, John once had a sense of humour, and used it at least as often as he did vitriol to cut down others. I hope he finds it again. I doubt you'll get your apology. I'm sure you doubt it, too - which makes your pledge to forgive him post-apology a very good tactical move to consolidate this new-found wave of Tim-mania. Hope you can forgive the cynicism!

John should have admitted his mistake on Hiss.

John should apologize to Terry for the name-calling.

Terry should not have posted his 2003 employment and other personal details, since they disclosed nothing that could be interpreted as being "in the public interest" - unlike your own back-ground details which I believe do fall into such a category.

If John is unwilling or unable to reign in his vitriol, the processes John S has put in place should commence to deal with it.

I agree with you and others that you don't fight McCarthyism by employing it, and I confess to not understanding John's rationale on that. Believe it or not, in my past dealings with John, I found him to be quite likable (Why he is hell-bent on becoming the object of what may be approaching loathing by so many is again, beyond me).

But then, I have a grudging admiration for beach bums, too...regardless of whether that is their calling, or their penance....

[John Bevilaqua]

Tim, in another thread, which seems to have vanished, you said,

I think the matter could be cleansed by an apology by John B to both Terry and me and by his refraining from such personal attacks on any member in the future. I can assure you that I would quickly forgive him since I am taught that in order for my trespasses to be forgiven I must forgive those who trespass against me.

C'mon Tim, an apology? He has done for you what Pat Speer has valiantly failed to do... garnering you support and sympathy .

If I recall correctly, John once had a sense of humour, and used it at least as often as he did vitriol to cut down others. I hope he finds it again. I doubt you'll get your apology. I'm sure you doubt it, too - which makes your pledge to forgive him post-apology a very good tactical move to consolidate this new-found wave of Tim-mania. Hope you can forgive the cynicism!

John should have admitted his mistake on Hiss.

John should apologize to Terry for the name-calling.

Terry should not have posted his 2003 employment and other personal details, since they disclosed nothing that could be interpreted as being "in the public interest" - unlike your own back-ground details which I believe do fall into such a category.

If John is unwilling or unable to reign in his vitriol, the processes John S has put in place should commence to deal with it.

I agree with you and others that you don't fight McCarthyism by employing it, and I confess to not understanding John's rationale on that. Believe it or not, in my past dealings with John, I found him to be quite likable (Why he is hell-bent on becoming the object of what may be approaching loathing by so many is again, beyond me).

But then, I have a grudging admiration for beach bums, too...regardless of whether that is their calling, or their penance....

Thanks, mate, for your well intentioned commentaries. I have always appreciated your analytical abilities and your research results.

Evan, there can be no useful purpose served either by continuing this thread or pandering to Gratz's penchant for beating a dead horse

as Dawn said. That is quite frankly, his only contribution to this Forum, and his only intention in life. Why you can't see through this is

beyond me.

THIS THREAD IS OFFICIALLY DEAD.

Edited October 29, 2007 by Kathy Beckett

[Tim Gratz]

Greg, thank you for your post. I think I agree with almost all of it.

But let me amend my previous wrting (now deleted) to say that I forgive John B for his often puerile attacks on me. I believe forgiveness is morally mandated even when it is not sought.

I loved this line you wrote:

But then, I have a grudging admiration for beach bums, too...regardless of whether that is their calling, or their penance....

As I said, I paid (rightfully so) a heavy cost for my wrongful acts as an attorney, but had I not gotten in over my head financially, I might still be engaged in the legal, and often stressful, "rat race" in Wisconsin. In several respects, my life as a laid back "beach bum" in Key West beats the very stressful life of a litigator. My life also gives me much more time to spend with my daughter than if I was still practicing law.

[Tim Gratz]

John B wrote:

THIS THREAD IS OFFICIALLY DEAD.

So dead without your admitting that you erred in claiming that Hiss was acquitted? Why is it so difficult for you to admit a simple factual error? I never once claimed you intentionally lied about it nor do I now claim that you are a bad person merely because you made what I still assume was an honest mistake.

What I really don't understand is why you simply cannot admit you were wrong about Hiss being acquitted.

[Tim Gratz]

One will note another day has gone by without John B having the intestinal fortitude to admit he was wrong about a Hiss acquittal. He just cannot bring himself to admit his error.