I am reblogging Ross Elder's facebook post. Get your free ebook!
This weekend only. I've got my copy and will submit my review when it's done.
Okay then. Here's the deal. I need my latest book, Just Stop, to reach more people. So, I'm going to make the Kindle edition FREE for the weekend. If you don't have it, get it this weekend. Read it. (It's short) Then write a review on Amazon. Show the love!
There is a Kindle app for every device known to man, including the Space Station, but those pesky Russians refuse to get a copy. They're still bitter about all those satellite images of us flipping them the bird during the 80s.
It's going to be free so there are no excuses. Well, unless you can't read, in which case you aren't reading this message anyway so it doesn't matter. Have someone read it to you. It is a great love story, for all you lonely ladies out there. Yes, I read your posts. You need a cat. Until then, READ MY BOOK. Did I mention it will be free?
Friday, Saturday, Sunday til around noon.
Doesn't look promising. Just glanced through the sample:
"Another habit of the JFK crowd is to simultaneously attempt to convince you that the Warren Commission report is a total white-wash while quoting from sections that support their theory in the same breath. It is either correct, or it isn't. It's that simple. You can't have it both ways in the real world but, in the conspiracy world, you can have it seventeen, or eighty five ways and still walk proudly through the crowd at next year's convention."
This isn't a "rational" argument in the least. It's actually absurd, although I've heard it before from self-styled "debunkers." The large amount of evidence within the Warren Report that conflicts with its conclusions is part of the reason why it is clearly a whitewash. If Mr. Elder was a defense attorney in a murder trial and believed his client was innocent, would he think it unreasonable to point out exculpatory evidence buried within the police report on the basis that he disagrees with the report's conclusions?
Also, no one should "have to convince" Mr. Elder that the Warren Report was a whitewash. Virtually every serious researcher has come to view that as a simple fact of the case, and that includes even those who cling to much of the official narrative. Ignoring everything else. For those new to the case, Jim DiEugenio has compiled a nifty list of 63 reasons why:
Supporting the Warren Report is a completely outdated position. There shouldn't even be any debate on that point anymore.
Mr. Elder might roll his eyes at the CTKA article that I linked to, as it mainly references books by the authors of the articles - which, despite being filled with references to official documents and first-hand interviews, are "conspiracy theory books." Another short passage from the sample:
"In support of those beliefs, believers often reference information generated by other believers in order to support their own belief. If you read any book worth mentioning on a conspiracy theory, the theorist will quote from and reference the work of other conspiracy theorists in order to add some sort of imagined credibility to their own work. Richard Belzer, who arguably writes some of the most entertaining conspiracy theory books available, will quote from Jim Marrs and Jesse Ventura, among others, as though those two men possess some level of genius not found in the common man."
In every field, researchers reference the work of one another to give credit where it is due and to avoid repeatedly reinventing the wheel. It is not that these men "possess some level of genius not found in the common man," but simply that the common man - in many cases the reader - is not a researcher of the case, and thus will likely be able to learn from the data amassed by others who are. Mr. Elder seemingly can't wrap his mind around this, or perhaps applies such criticism only to conspiracy researchers.
Admittedly, books by Jim Marrs and Jesse Ventura are largely simply collections of research done by many others and do contain errors. However, criticizing conspiracy researchers for referencing one another's work is absurd. The ARRB has released thousands of new documents relating to the assassination, and people like Jim DiEugenio, Bill Davy, Barry Ernest, Joan Mellen, and Lisa Pease have not only spent an unbelievable amount of time sifting through them and found a wealth of important material, but they've also tracked down many important witnesses. Mr. Elder, who would appear to be of the opinion that their data bestows nothing more than "imaginary credibility" on those who choose to use it, has very likely not done either of these things.
Post a Comment