Calvin Ye Posted June 15, 2021 Share Posted June 15, 2021 A website is accusing and alleging Peter Dale Scott is a limited hangout operation https://www.lawfulpath.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5039&sid=82580ca57ca3f468a2f55781424ba27c#p5039 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pamela Brown Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 On 6/14/2021 at 11:13 PM, Calvin Ye said: A website is accusing and alleging Peter Dale Scott is a limited hangout operation https://www.lawfulpath.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=5039&sid=82580ca57ca3f468a2f55781424ba27c#p5039 I have wondered where PDS was coming from. Usually, when I read his material, I find myself going around in circles... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 Like a lot of researchers who write too many books, (Rodney Stich, e.g.). Scott's work grows repetitious and his ideas attenuated. The cranky forum guy is correct, however, in that not everything can be blamed on the CIA. There are 17 government-military intelligence agencies, plus an expanding plethora of private and corporate intelligence entities. So, instruments of many masters, even when they're not overtly making policy, as CIA has many times. We need more research on these agencies, and research that isn't cut off at the Afghan war of the 1980s. I'd prefer not to have the next generation be the sole beneficiaries of information on covert ops of the 1990s through present. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Thorne Posted June 16, 2021 Share Posted June 16, 2021 ‘Too many books’? Scott wrote less than ten political books over a 50 year period. Was that too many? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 I have met Peter, and I seriously doubt he has spearheaded a limited hangout for the CIA or anyone else. He has broken important ground over the years. I’d like to see his UCB colleague Joseph McBride put this to rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Thorne Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 Joseph’s comments are always welcome. That noted, Calvin has linked to a pseudonymous post on a little known forum written by someone called ‘Firestarter’ who offers barely any detail to support the claim, and who seems largely unfamiliar with Scott’s career. So I think the assertion is already on shaky ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu Wexler Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 What would help would be if the person making the criticism was widely read in PDS's work and familiar with his interviews and presentations. Because the premise is wrong. He does not limit his analysis to the CIA by any means. Not by a long shot. And he is one of the most forward thinking researchers we have ever had for some of those very reasons. He was talking about Air Force Intelligence, for instance, long before anyone was interested in them. I have grown more convinced by his overarching analysis of deep politics over time-- not less. Regards, Stu Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Boylan Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 I'm with Stu on this. I learn something new every time I read something by Peter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Thorne Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 Yeah I pretty much agree. I have most of Scott's books, and when I dig into them I usually find a bunch of stuff that I'd missed earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 PDS is deep. I've only read two of his books. He makes me Think. Go back and re read and think some more. Wish I had time for more of his excellent work. An honest man, dedicated to pursuit of the Truth. imho. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 (edited) 8 hours ago, Anthony Thorne said: ‘Too many books’? It is, when the water recirculates instead of flowing. Peter Lance, for instance, wrote four 9/11-related books, when one only needs 1.5 of them. Edited June 17, 2021 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Thorne Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 Yeah, but that’s Lance, not Scott. Scott’s three big recent deep political books (RT9, AWM, ADS) all cover different, complimentary stuff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Schwartz Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 In the mid 1970's, I read an essay by Peter Dale Scott linking the JFKA to the Watergate break in. I found that essay ground - breaking (very good essay). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 3 hours ago, Anthony Thorne said: Yeah, but that’s Lance, not Scott. Scott’s three big recent deep political books (RT9, AWM, ADS) all cover different, complimentary stuff. I'll look at those again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonathan Cohen Posted June 17, 2021 Share Posted June 17, 2021 11 hours ago, Anthony Thorne said: Calvin has linked to a pseudonymous post on a little known forum written by someone called ‘Firestarter’ who offers barely any detail to support the claim, and who seems largely unfamiliar with Scott’s career. So I think the assertion is already on shaky ground. Precisely. Most, if not all, of Calvin's posts cite similarly dubious sources. One might even call it trolling... 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