>
> >They regurgistated the effusive stories without having done the most basic
> >of homework.
>
> That is PRECISELY what you and the rest of the ragtag Judyth team have
> done from the beginning! HILARIOUS .... though pathetic ... that you
> make that comment about anyone else at this late date!
That is your opinion. You are mistaken.
>
> > Were they just lazy, or did someone from Judyth's camp get to
> >them first?
>
> You do know and understand that this whole publicity tour to Toronto
> was arranged by Judyth's camp ... right?
I don't have any direct information as to how it was arranged. I can surmise, as can you. How do you know Fetzer was not involved?
>Who do you think asked for
> inquiries from press, set up interviews with press, etc? This was a
> book tour .... nicey-nicey interviews are not unexpected.
Pleez. What planet are Canadians on if they can't grab a clue that someone is trying to present themselves as the Holy Grail of the JFK assassination? Why didn't they google at least? If you send out a press packet to a TV station or newspaper, don't you expect it to be vetted first?
It is my understanding that Judyth's book was not published as non-fiction, but under some other category. If the publisher was aware of this, how can they be let off the hook for trying to troll Judyth as a fait accompli?
>And what is
> presented is not necessarily what the reporters PERSONALLY believe, it
> is not expected to be a really an investigative situation!
If not, they sure missed the bigger story, didn't they?
>And one
> interview I heard DID have the reporter commenting on how there are
> those who do not believe Judyth, who say her claims are not
> corrborated ... at which point Judyth did her schtick and slid things
> away from that topic ... even making an appeal for new glasses.
And that is when they could have honed in and asked the tough questions, isn't it?
>
> What is this farce you have created like it McAdams' fault, or
> anyones, that they didn't stop this?
What 'farce' that I created? By keeping an open mind? If you demonize Judyth, she plays victim and gains new converts. Even you realize that, I am sure.
McAdams has a presence on the net with his website, his book is out, he has been campaigning against Judyth obsessively on aaj for over a decade. It would seem logical that if the press were to want to get an opposing viewpoint to Judyth, he would be among the first they would look to. But only one did.
>Or that the press was inept for
> not investigating and turning it all into a circus in a short column
> or short minute or two of an on air interview. Geesh, lady, don't be
> so naive.
You managed to get an article into Judyth's hometown paper. That was so unbalanced in the other direction that I complained. I am surprised that this was not the reception Judyth had to deal with in Canada. I would like to understand why. And perhaps everyone can learn from this situation? Even someone as sophisticated as you? :-0
> >They regurgistated the effusive stories without having done the most basic
> >of homework.
>
> That is PRECISELY what you and the rest of the ragtag Judyth team have
> done from the beginning! HILARIOUS .... though pathetic ... that you
> make that comment about anyone else at this late date!
That is your opinion. You are mistaken.
>
> > Were they just lazy, or did someone from Judyth's camp get to
> >them first?
>
> You do know and understand that this whole publicity tour to Toronto
> was arranged by Judyth's camp ... right?
I don't have any direct information as to how it was arranged. I can surmise, as can you. How do you know Fetzer was not involved?
>Who do you think asked for
> inquiries from press, set up interviews with press, etc? This was a
> book tour .... nicey-nicey interviews are not unexpected.
Pleez. What planet are Canadians on if they can't grab a clue that someone is trying to present themselves as the Holy Grail of the JFK assassination? Why didn't they google at least? If you send out a press packet to a TV station or newspaper, don't you expect it to be vetted first?
It is my understanding that Judyth's book was not published as non-fiction, but under some other category. If the publisher was aware of this, how can they be let off the hook for trying to troll Judyth as a fait accompli?
>And what is
> presented is not necessarily what the reporters PERSONALLY believe, it
> is not expected to be a really an investigative situation!
If not, they sure missed the bigger story, didn't they?
>And one
> interview I heard DID have the reporter commenting on how there are
> those who do not believe Judyth, who say her claims are not
> corrborated ... at which point Judyth did her schtick and slid things
> away from that topic ... even making an appeal for new glasses.
And that is when they could have honed in and asked the tough questions, isn't it?
>
> What is this farce you have created like it McAdams' fault, or
> anyones, that they didn't stop this?
What 'farce' that I created? By keeping an open mind? If you demonize Judyth, she plays victim and gains new converts. Even you realize that, I am sure.
McAdams has a presence on the net with his website, his book is out, he has been campaigning against Judyth obsessively on aaj for over a decade. It would seem logical that if the press were to want to get an opposing viewpoint to Judyth, he would be among the first they would look to. But only one did.
>Or that the press was inept for
> not investigating and turning it all into a circus in a short column
> or short minute or two of an on air interview. Geesh, lady, don't be
> so naive.
You managed to get an article into Judyth's hometown paper. That was so unbalanced in the other direction that I complained. I am surprised that this was not the reception Judyth had to deal with in Canada. I would like to understand why. And perhaps everyone can learn from this situation? Even someone as sophisticated as you? :-0
No comments:
Post a Comment