This whole ’spend four months a year travelling overseas’ thing gets very old, very fast, let me tell you. First time on an A380, though.

Shorter MarkL: I’ll be out of Canberra for 4 weeks staying in a backpackers near Manly and the janitorial staff in the basement of the department of defence supply (where I work) bought me what they thought was the story of Walter Mitty, but it turned out to be a Tonka Toy A380.

If there was any CIA program implicated in JFK’s death, it may have been Operation Mongoose, or maybe some rogue elements irritated by JFK’s pusillanimous attitude to the Bay of Pigs misadventure.

Is that what happended to JFK, Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy then?

The irony is delectable, at least to me. Especially when using good (but dated) sources which are ‘revised’ by more up to date Communist Vietnamese sources. It’s an interesting reversal to see you ardently defending your cherry-picked interpretation of AMERICAN sources and down playing COMMUNIST VIETNAMESE sources.

That must really smart, when so earnestly hunting through the same source for things with which to feed an open anti-American bigotry.

Oh, as for the Emeritus matter? He was faculty head before retirement but he still spends several days a week there (health permitting) supervising advanced students and lecturing on his specialities. His (yes)former staff still playfully refer to him as ‘boss’ and in return are called ‘my loyal staff’.

I thought this would be clear from the nuances of the context. I DO apologise, I forgot how truly un-nuanced you are.

In terms of ‘revisionist history’, of course yours is one interpretation (and it is correct within its definition), as is mine; which is also correct within its limits as I defined it for you. Your missed this nuance, didn’t you? How amusing that I am the one playing ‘revisionist’you, the reactionary, in the context of this recent conflict.

Anyhoo, the taxi is due in 30 minutes as I am off overseas for two weeks or so. This whole ‘spend four months a year travelling overseas’ thing gets very old, very fast, let me tell you. First time on an A380, though.

I truly treasure your sentence:

…what does your above comment mean?

That pretty much sums this discourse with you up, my friend! A plaintive plea of ignorance on your part.

TTFN!

MarkL
canberra

PS: You have not found it, have you, reactionary compadre?

Dolphin 45

So what? You may recall other events of that year.

Is it your argument that the CIA discontinued the Phoenix Program in 1972 because the CIA either needed or desired to redeploy its assets to another major project? If not, what does your above comment mean?

And thank you for the kind compliment. Erm… you DO understand that ALL historical scholarship revises what is known, and that, by definition, all history is ‘revisionist’? At least, according to my friendly Emeritus Professor of History and his staff.

You appear to be unaware of fact that an “emeritus professor” is a retired professor who continues to work on an honorary basis. An “emeritus professor” therefore has no “staff”. Your knowledge of academia is troublingly sketchy.

Your lack of acquaintance with the concept of “historical revisionism” is still more troubling. Here are more than 25,000 uses of the term “revisionist history of”. As you may be able to perceive, a “revisionist” history purports to do much more than make minor amendments to the historical record. On the contrary, a “revisionist history” purports to overthrow well-established orthodoxies, even to perform paradigmatic shifts in historical understanding.

Perhaps you could ask your “emeritus professor” and his “staff” to explain this to you in terms that you would understand.

Comment: Amusing. My 15 year old son took 2 minutes 55 seconds on Google to work out what this meant. You still have not been able to manage it. Guess that whole ‘history’ thing still has you beat all hollow, eh?

In MarkL’s labyrinthine tunnels of yearned-for counterfactuals, he fails to perceive the significance of the fact that the Phoenix Program, which remained a deep secret from the oversight of civil government and public scrutiny until 1975, was discontinued by the CIA in 1972!

So what? You may recall other events of that year. Oh, I forgot, your historical knowledge is too poor to do so.

The CIA, the chief projectors, architects and funders (by means of its secret budget, courtesy of US taxpayers) of the Phoenix Program, decided that the program was not worth continued support, even with someone else’s money and other nations’ lives. Clearly, the CIA came up with its own assessment of the value of the program.

Wrong. Again. If the CIA acted as described, where did all the existing programs (village defence, rural militia, provincial anti-VC networks etc etc) come from? Mars?

Gallingly for revisionists like MarkL, chewing bitterly on the gristle of vicarious defeat, the CIA was the first to arrive at the sound judgment of responsible historians.

Comment: Mere unsupported opinion of someone who has demonstrated a very poor knowledge of history.

And thank you for the kind compliment. Erm… you DO understand that ALL historical scholarship revises what is known, and that, by definition, all history is ‘revisionist’? At least, according to my friendly Emeritus Professor of History and his staff.

(Truly embarrassing silliness deleted)

1/10 is your mark today. Try harder next time, please.

Dolphin 45

MarkL
canberra

I think the following applies best, here:

Dolphin 45

Whereupon MarkL’s head explodes.

In MarkL’s labyrinthine tunnels of yearned-for counterfactuals, he fails to perceive the significance of the fact that the Phoenix Program, which remained a deep secret from the oversight of civil government and public scrutiny until 1975, was discontinued by the CIA in 1972!

The CIA, the chief projectors, architects and funders (by means of its secret budget, courtesy of US taxpayers) of the Phoenix Program, decided that the program was not worth continued support, even with someone else’s money and other nations’ lives. Clearly, the CIA came up with its own assessment of the value of the program.

Gallingly for revisionists like MarkL, chewing bitterly on the gristle of vicarious defeat, the CIA was the first to arrive at the sound judgment of responsible historians.

Keep hunting down those traitors, MarkL!

but wouldn’t the expectation be that the president would still be the one making the “go” decision?

Normally, with a normal president. Not with a reformed drunk high on teachings.

Dolphin 45

MarkL
Canberra

As for the history being ‘worthless’, you are busily utilising the 24 year old source I provided for you.

Is that so, MarkL?

Poetic MarkL:

“I am the Dean of KP College,
What I don’t know isn’t knowledge.”