Steve Cearfoss Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Scott: "People like Jim, still hasn't rebut the original origin of the debate we had at Deep Politics as pointed out [in this thread], altas, just ignored, as my memory severs me well, and people like Jim's doesn't." This is a perfect example of why so many members are scratching their heads while trying to figure out what you are saying. Clear writing -- especially expository writing -- should not be a haphazard, slapdash endeavor. Clear writing requires clear thinking. Do you re-read your posts? George Orwell said 'The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. . .' I don't think you are insincere, and I'm sure most members would agree, but you risk the possibility of being considered superficial and possibly insincere by continuing to let your emotions override your intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Scott: "People like Jim, still hasn't rebut the original origin of the debate we had at Deep Politics as pointed out [in this thread], altas, just ignored, as my memory severs me well, and people like Jim's doesn't." This is a perfect example of why so many members are scratching their heads while trying to figure out what you are saying. Clear writing -- especially expository writing -- should not be a haphazard, slapdash endeavor. Clear writing requires clear thinking. Do you re-read your posts? George Orwell said 'The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. . .' I don't think you are insincere, and I'm sure most members would agree, but you risk the possibility of being considered superficial and possibly insincere by continuing to let your emotions override your intellect. I don't think you are insincere, and I'm sure most members would agree, but you risk the possibility of being considered superficial and possibly insincere by continuing to let your emotions override your intellect. Clearly, everyone here is so much more smarter then I, does that make your intellect trump my truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Burnham Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Clearly, everyone here is so much more smarter then I, does that make your intellect trump my truth? No, but when one's ideas are so poorly communicated that they are confusing, disjointed, or too emotionally packed, they might tend to appear to be false, contrived, or ego-driven--even when they aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Clearly, everyone here is so much more smarter then I, does that make your intellect trump my truth? No, but when one's ideas are so poorly communicated that they are confusing, disjointed, or too emotionally packed, they might tend to appear to be false, contrived, or ego-driven--even when they aren't. 1. If they are "confusing", that is, because you don't understand. 2. If they are "disjointed", that's because you have not been following me. 3. If they are too "emotionally packed", that's because I would have more of a [personal] interest in this then anyone here. 4. If they appear to be "false", that's because you have elected not to follow up on anything I've said. 5. If they appear "contrived", that's because you don't know the story. 6. If it appears "ego-driven", my name is not Greg Burnham who has to attach his website everywhere, censor what information is allowed on your site, then stare at myself in the mirror for hours Questions?. Edited February 18, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Any of these "compartmentalised groups" candidates for running dope while ostensibly battling Castro, before or after the assassination of JFK? My God man! You can't possibly suggest that Castro was a two edged sword, promising or, making suggestions at how wealthy some of these anti-Castro Cubans could actually be if they'd allow him to run a country while he provided backdoor channels into the underground drug world. Yes, such I do suggest. Follow the smack money, follow the smack. Laos was the key '61-'63. Castro probably ran a boutique operation, enough biz to keep Zapata Offshore happy but not a major player. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Scott Kaiser, on 17 Feb 2016 - 6:21 PM, said:Clearly, everyone here is so much more smarter then I, does that make your intellect trump my truth? Greg Burnham, on 17 Feb 2016 - 6:50 PM, said: No Some free advise Greg, sometimes, we should just STOP while we think we're ahead. In other words, you should have stopped at the word NO! Edited February 18, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Scott - please take a deep breath, and then consider the possibility that your ability to communicate what you earnestly feel is limited. If truth telling is what you are genuinely interested in you need to find a different path. I suggested an editor. I also suggested a clear timeline of your father's life without your editorializing, allowing it to stand on its own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Scott - please take a deep breath, and then consider the possibility that your ability to communicate what you earnestly feel is limited. If truth telling is what you are genuinely interested in you need to find a different path. I suggested an editor. I also suggested a clear timeline of your father's life without your editorializing, allowing it to stand on its own. How can I ever compete with intellectuals, certainly, y'all are in a class of your own. 1. If you don't understand my communication skills, how is it you write and read English? Tell you what, we'll get back to that one later. 2. Ah, but the only path to truth lies within, did you get that Paul? Tell you what, we'll get back to that one later. 3. Paul, what makes you think that what you've suggested hasn't already been done? Have you not read anything I've written? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/20673422/11752547_977229018995361_514019961571291035_n.jpg Edited February 18, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Scott - I don't understand anything you write, and don't think this has anything to do with being an intellectual. It has to do with organizing your thoughts, and it has to do with assuming the best of your readers. When you take the position that you are the truth teller and the rest of us ignorant intellectuals aren't listening you turn everybody off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Like what was the point of that Dropbox link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Scott - I don't understand anything you write, and don't think this has anything to do with being an intellectual. It has to do with organizing your thoughts, and it has to do with assuming the best of your readers. When you take the position that you are the truth teller and the rest of us ignorant intellectuals aren't listening you turn everybody off. Okay, see that was cool, and a bit more understanding from you, I didn't understand what you were writing moments ago. Really, I didn't, now that we have that out of the way, why don't you explain to me what it is you don't understand so that I may better explain myself rather then telling me you don't understand anything? When you take the lesser chosen path to "I don't understand [anything] you write" tells me you choose not too, or you're simply acting off an oxymoron of intellect, which is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 If in-case you don't know what an oxymoron means, allow me to "explain" myself, in this case, it would be dumb-intellect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Sec. of State could have convinced Kennedy to cancel it at any time prior to D-Day-1. Oh....My....God, do you mean to tell me, stupid me, who knows nothing, that Kennedy could have cancelled the Bay of Pigs, or at the very least postponed it until they had a sure thing, or felt like there was a real bet? Lord, where did I ever hear that before! Slaps my forehead! But if Kennedy had cancelled the BOP he still would have been stuck with Allen Dulles as DCIA. What would have been worse for Kennedy's agenda -- suffering the global embarrassment of the failed BOP OR having to keep the "untouchable" Allen Dulles as head of CIA? Edited February 18, 2016 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Kaiser Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 (edited) Sec. of State could have convinced Kennedy to cancel it at any time prior to D-Day-1. Oh....My....God, do you mean to tell me, stupid me, who knows nothing, that Kennedy could have cancelled the Bay of Pigs, or at the very least postponed it until they had a sure thing, or felt like there was a real bet? Lord, where did I ever hear that before! Slaps my forehead! But if Kennedy had cancelled the BOP he still would have been stuck with Allen Dulles as DCIA. What would have been worse for Kennedy's agenda -- suffering the global embarrassment of the failed BOP OR having to keep the "untouchable" Allen Dulles as head of CIA? President Kennedy called Dulles at his office and bluntly told him that he was moving quickly to announce his “reappointment” as soon as possible. President Kennedy had planned an overhaul of the Central Intelligence Agency after its Director, Allen W. Dulles would retired at the end of Kennedy's presidential year or early next year, it was learned." What followed was unmistakable to all in the Agency, "The timetable for the review of the CIA was moved up as a result of the ill-fated invasion of Cuba by rebel forces. Dulles would now have to think about how to protect the Agency that he had labored for so long to build up and his own future. The strain on the once cordial understanding that existed between Kennedy and Dulles had broken down and it is reported that Kennedy bluntly told Dulles that he had to go. Dulles was not one to trifle with and supported Kennedy's active measures to assassinate Castro and setup the machinery to launch Operation MONGOOSE. It didn't matter, it failed even though Kennedy gave approval to the CIA to use mafia assassins to do it. President Kennedy said; speaking of Allen Dulles before the complement of his "retirement ceremony" "I know of no man who brings a greater sense of personal commitment to his work, who has less pride in office than he has. Your successes are unheralded your failures trumpeted. I sometimes have that feeling myself. But I am sure you realize how important your work is, how essential it is, and how in the long sweep of history, how significant your efforts will be judged." On 29 November, 1961, Allen Dulles formally relinquished his office and retired from the intelligence business. As with all retired professionals, Dulles made speeches and wrote books. Among them were The Craft of Intelligence, which became a best seller. Dulles also lectured at universities and attended private meetings to discuss the abandonment of National Intelligence Estimates by President Kennedy known as the Gun Club. After President Kennedy was gunned down in Dallas, Texas, on 22 November, 1963, the newly sworn in Vice President, Lyndon Johnson, asked Allen Dulles to be a member of a the Warren Commission tasked by President Johnson to investigate JFK's murder and report back to him with their findings. Allen Dulles did not ask LBJ if he could be apart of the Commission. Conspiracy theorists have since then believed Allen Dulles has mastered minded the assassination of President Kennedy. Hogwash! Edited February 18, 2016 by Scott Kaiser Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now