|
| Given the many *continuing* misrepresentations, distortions, and lies
that Larry Parr has been writing about me in *his own separate* thread,
'Tit for Tat (OT)', which Larry Parr evidently *created in order to get
as far away as possible from the evidence in this original thread*,
I have concluded now that my earlier statements in this thread about
Larry Parr's misrepresentations of me may need to be emphasised again
in some stronger terms of criticism.
nickbourbaki3@yahoo.co.uk (Nick) wrote in
message news:<54d8daf3.0409251508.1e00ae14@posting.google.com>...
quote:
> parrthenon@cs.com (Parrthenon) wrote:
>
> I have to say that Larry Parr has rather distorted the context of my post.
I have concluded that Larry Parr has deliberately distorted my original post
in this thread in order to attack it. And Larry Parr has been *reiterating*
his many (already confuted) misrepresentations and lies in 'Tit for Tat (OT').
quote:
> For context, here's what I wrote (which Larry Parr snipped) *first*:
> "For whatever it's worth, belief in 'conspiracy theories' seems common enough
> in the United States. Evidently, many Americans do *not* believe the official
> conclusion that President F. Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald,
> 'acting alone'."
> --Nick
>
> *Then* I wrote what Larry Parr has quoted (below).
>
>
> *Then* I wrote a *parenthetical declared joke* about Gertrude Bell in a
> *separate paragraph*. (Please read my earlier post to confirm that fact.)
>
> But Larry Parr *snipped both my parentheses and my paragraphical separation*
> and combined my text in an apparent attempt to make it appear *as though*
> my declared joke about Gertrude Bell were somehow intended as a comment on
> the Pearl Harbor 'surprise attack' conspiracy theories. (Please read
> Larry Parr's earlier post to me to confirm that fact.)
>
>
> Larry Parr wrote:
>
> That's a serious misunderstanding or a serious distortion by Larry Parr.
Larry Parr has been reiterating that flagrant misrepresentation of me
again and again in *his own separate thread*, 'Tit for Tat (OT)', despite
the fact that I have fully addressed and confuted it here, not to mention
pointing out how *dishonestly* Larry Parr has *snipped and rearranged* my
original words in order to distort them.
quote:
> I did *not* 'equate (those) possibilities' (as I have explained above),
> though Larry Parr has *rearranged my original text* in an apparent attempt
> to suggest that. I wrote a *parenthetical declared joke* about Gertrude Bell
> in a *separate paragraph*.
>
> I knew quite well that Gertrude Bell (1868-1926) was strongly anti-Zionist.
>
> "An old Arab proverb says a woman should be beaten at least twice a day.
> If you don't know the reason, she does."
> --Larry Parr (12 May 2004, in rec.games.chess.misc)
>
> On 13 May 2004, I asked Larry Parr for a 'specific citation' about
> that supposed 'old Arab proverb', and I am still waiting for it.
>
>
> Gertrude Bell also had *opposed* granting women the right to vote.
>
>
> For the record (and in order to preempt more trolling misrepresentations),
> I do *not* believe that Gertrude Bell was a 'Zionist secret agent'.
>
> I wrote a *declared joke* about Gertrude Bell. To a 'conspiracy theorist',
> the 'historical premise' *could* be that what Gertrude Bell had done in Iraq
> (such as helping to draw up its boundaries) resulted in such a mess that Iraq
> would find it quite difficult, if not impossible, ever to become a completely
> united nation-state. (The Americans who now are militarily occupying Iraq
> seem to be learning that lesson from bitter experience.)
>
>
> 'Toland is a major historian'? Only to the more historically ignorant readers.
>
> John Toland (who died on 4 January 2004) was a popular writer of books on some
> historical subjects, but he was *not* considered a 'major historian', if he
> was even considered a historian, by academic historians on those subjects.
>
>
> Gore Vidal is known as a writer of fiction.
>
>
> For further reading:
> "Pearl Harbor" (2001) by H.P. Willmott, with T. Haruo and W.S. Johnson
>
> (I do *not* necessarily concur with everything written by H.P. Willmott.)
>
>
> H.P. Willmott has written that there was an organised cover-up to protect
> George C. Marshall's reputation. But H.P. Willmott does *not* believe the
> 'conspiracy theory' that Larry Parr seems to believe is probably true.
>
> 'Odds are the conspiracy theory here is true...'
> --Larry Parr
>
>
> Would Larry Parr remember what happened to the USS Liberty in 1967? :-)
>
>
> My post was *not* intended as a specific critique of Larry Parr's examples.
> My post was written as a general comment on the 'common enough' "belief in
> 'conspiracy theories' in the United States".
>
>
> Some historian acquaintances of mine have advised me simply to ignore,
> whenever possible, most of the 'conspiracy theories' circulating among
> the public.
Larry Parr (aka 'Liarry Parr', as he has been characterised by Jerome Bibuld,
Neil Brennen, and some other writers here) may continue writing his many
distortions, misrepresentations, and lies, and those falsehoods may succeed
in deceiving the more nearly illiterate, ignorant, and lazy readers here.
But I have enough confidence that nothing that Larry Parr could ever write
about me would have any credibility with the scholars who have known me
and what I have done and can do.
'Historians are not accountable for the difficulty of learning to read.'
--Jane Austen (Northanger Abbey)
--Nick
|
|