Quote:
Originally Posted by AstralTraveller
As you may imagine, I find you last generalisation inappropriate. It's true that the loud-mouthed ignoramii tend to make the most noise while the decent people tend to keep quiet but I think that is because 'ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge' (Darwin). You haven't made today the most disappointing of my life but being lumped in with <names withheld> certainly hasn't raised my spirits.  |
On this topic at least, I am pleased to be suitably admonished for being incorrect and unfair.
I apologise.
Quote:
|
Can you point me to a not-too-long explanation of your point?
|
The subject matter has been so profoundly obfuscated and distorted in the public narrative that it requires some historical context in order to even begin to understand it... well, actually a fair bit of historical context... way beyond what could be conveyed in a 5 minute youtube video or sound byte.
fwiw) I couldn't count the number of hours I have spent over the years trying to piece it together (and I won't insult you with the hubris to suggest I have been successful to that end) but the time would be measured in the thousands (of hours), digging through the publicly accessibly accounts, the journals, transcripts, diaries, interviews of historians and people on the stage of life in the pivotal moments in history. Of course, a sizeable chunk of that time was wasted on reading or listening to buffoons, shills, gate keepers and charlatans. Ironically, all of them serving to define the boundaries of the set of information best described; as 'not the truth'. Amongst the tailings however, you find the gems... the skill worth learning is how to make the distinction.
Ask Danny Casolaro why I choose not to elaborate further.
I prefer the remuneration of 'non-participant/observer' status.