GDG- Killing Lincoln

[ATMackeyJr at aol.com]

In a message dated 1/15/2012 10:21:52 P.M. Eastern Standard Time,  
CWMHTours at aol.com writes:

Esteemed  GDG Member Contributes:
Your post is excellent and I really have no problem  with any  of your 
points.  They are all very  salient.

Except if you are an aware human being you are a witness  to  history.
----------------
Nobody living today witnessed the events of 147 years ago, so you have no  
point to make in this.
 
 
People who write a book and want to present themselves as   authoritative 
historians have an obligation, to themselves if not anyone  else,  to 
winnow 
out falsehoods and fiction from what is specified  as  history.
----------------
I suggest you read Mr. Joad's excellent post again.
 
 
 
Either something happened or it didn't  even if we didn't   see it.  

Authors, if they want to call their work history need to  cull  fiction and 
blatant errors from their  works if they want to  maintain their  integrity.
------------------
What do you make of the first edition of Martin's book on July 1,  1863?
 
 
 
 
It has been suggested that I am a liar with no rebuke  from the  moderators 
to the person making the assertion.
-------------------
Actually, you've been treated as someone with the intellectual integrity to 
 be held to the same standard as you want to impose on others.  If you 
don't  want to be held to the same standard you want to impose on others, then 
just  tell us you don't have that intellectual integrity and we'll adjust  
accordingly.
 
 
 

I have learned that some people in the GDG like having fiction   and 
blatant 
errors, deliberate or otherwise, mixed in with their  history.   And that's 
OK.  It's their lives.
--------------------
Ah, another inaccurate claim.  Once again, to use your own  standard, I 
suppose that would mean you are a "lying author" who  deliberately distorts the 
truth.  Of course, in my opinion, it's just a  mistaken interpretation on 
your part.  But if we're going to be consistent,  we need to hold you to the 
same standard you want for others.  Since what  you wrote is not a fact, 
then you're also breaking your "just the facts" motto  as well.
 


I am just personally of the camp that if I read a book   categorized as 
history to be only the facts and no fiction   
---------------------
Or only what you consider to be the facts.
 
 
"Just  the facts, ma'am." 

-----------------------
Except you don't really believe that, since you are free and loose with  
making inaccurate claims about others.
 
 
Best Regards,
Al Mackey