George Bollschweiler Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 Having e-witnessed the argument between Tim and Shanet shows the difficulties of solving such a dispute on an anonymous platform like an internet-forum. When considering the reasons of the two contenders I can understand both. Tim, because nobody wants to be accused of something he has not done and specially if such a thing is spread by the net. Shanet, maybe taken by surprise of Tim’s reaction and threat to sue him, sheltered himself by withdrawing from the forum. So it won’t be easy to return without loosing the face. At the moment we have no winners but losers. The forum lost a worthwhile member, whose analyses are appreciated and his knowledge is a brick in the forum’s foundation. On the other hand we have Tim, who beside all criticism is one of the motors of this forum because he is everywhere and almost has a response to everything and fights for his theories, like everybody else. Now he will be blamed by many for dispelling Shanet and the situation might get worse. In a face to face situation, the conflict might have not accrued in such a way and finally the dispute could have been ended by shaking hands. So what we need is a virtual “shake hands” ! Common’ boys, get out of your corner and let's get back to what we are here for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 George, this is by far the most perceptive post I have seen in trying to understand both sides and reach an agreeable settlement. Have you considered a career in diplomacy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Bollschweiler Posted July 19, 2005 Author Share Posted July 19, 2005 George, this is by far the most perceptive post I have seen in trying to understand both sides and reach an agreeable settlement.Have you considered a career in diplomacy? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Unfortunatly not, but considering our history in Switzerland we meanwhile maybe have all developed a diplomacy- gene. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted July 19, 2005 Share Posted July 19, 2005 (edited) George Bollschweiler wrote: [...] Common’ boys, get out of your corner and let's get back to what we are here for. ________________ "...what we are here for." A comment I suspect, turned question in a few minds hereabouts! Business as usual? To get your 'diplomatic' career off to a start George, consider those on one side of the equation, the "rightist" side of the equation. They impeached a sitting US president over "lying" about blowjob in the oval office, yes? The lies (by whom) suggested recently regarding the war in IRAQ, are? Maintain neutral status, George! This fist fight has been going on for some years... Edited July 19, 2005 by David G. Healy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Bollschweiler Posted July 20, 2005 Author Share Posted July 20, 2005 A comment I suspect, turned question in a few minds hereabouts! Business as usual? David,what else are we doing every day? What about all the facts we discovered in the past years concerning our environment? With all our knowledge about how things in nature are connected with our future, we are still the most stupid individuals on earth. The only one’s who are sawing the branch we are sitting on! (E.g. what is the flower power generation, who fought in the sixties for a better world doing today? Pushing the shareholder-values and the globalization!) That’s what I call business as usual and therefore you are right, that really turns questions in my mind. As back to the issue, I think my post was as neutral as it could be. George Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Knight Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 I believe that Shanet made a statement which could not be confirmed by the known facts, and the statement could be construed as damaging to Tim's reputation. While I personally feel that Tim's threatened lawsuit was a bit extreme, it was nonetheless effective and precipitated the retraction and apology Tim sought. I believe that, for the most part, Tim's contributions are of some value. I also believe that Shanet's contributions to the forum have some merit. I would consider it a shame to lose either of them, but I don't feel that the forum would suffer irrepairable harm, as no individual is 100% indispensible. I agree that Tim and Shanet should figuratively shake hands and move on...and perhaps we should ALL edit what we post so that this recent moment in history doesn't repeat itself...and so we can go back to considering the assassination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim Gratz Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 (edited) Mark, we agree! I think we should all assume, until proven otherwise, that all members genuinely believe the positions they assert (in other words, that no one is deliberately posting information they know to be false--which is of course unlikely to be the case since most material comes from published sources); that all members are genuinely interested in solving the assassination; and that most members would admit that their theories of the assassination COULD be wrong. What has concerned me in the past before the recent brouhaha about me has been the unfortunate tendency to try to read people's minds and impugn their motives. E.g. when the very well respected leftist journal "The Nation" is accused of participating in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice. We should not assign nefarious motives to people merely because we disagree with their opinions, even if we wonder how people of such evident intelligence can hold such opinions. (I think they think the same of us.) I have been reading your posts on the other thread and I apologize to you and others for publicy stating demeaning things that were better left unsaid. I should not take offense when someone (not you) calls me names. I should assume that most members of this forum are intelligent enough to recognize the childishness of name-calling without my having to point it out. As I said on another thread, it takes respect to get respect. If I am not as respected as I think I should be, it may very well be that I have not accorded the same respect to those with whose opinions I disagree. So, in accordance with your post and George's (and Dixie's) let's start afresh and respect each other as people who are willing to invest their time and often their money to try to solve the assassination. Edited July 20, 2005 by Tim Gratz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Stephen Turner Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 [E.g. what is the flower power generation, who fought in the sixties for a better world doing today? Pushing the shareholder-values and the globalization!) George <{POST_SNAPBACK}> George, a most cogent remark, hear hear Sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nic Martin Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Agreed, there's no need for all the histrionics. 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