Exactly Who Taught Obama to Be an "Ardent Believer of the Free Market?"

“He couldn’t have learned that from his childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis. He’s also an admitted Communist. So it’s not likely he learned the ways of Adam Smith from this self admitted child rapist. (Yes, you read that right.)”

Why are you spreading the myth that Frank Marshall Davis was a “self-admitted rapist”? Is it just because Davis’s porn memoir-novel included sex with an underage teenager, or do you have ANY other evidence? Do you also consider the author of porn memoir-novel “Lolita” to be a “self-admitted rapist,” or just Davis? A novel is fiction!

Calling Davis a pedophile based on his novel makes no more sense than calling David Letterman a pedophile based on his joke. Both myths are widespread in the right-wing blogosphere, and reflect the pinnacle of intellectual dishonesty. Both misrepresent the core values of artists by spreading falsehoods that gullible readers accept as truth, and who then spread further in good faith.

The issue is rather simple: Either you literally attribute fictional characters’ stories to their authors’ real lives, or you accept that fictional characters’ stories are fiction. By definition, even semiautobiographical novels are fictionalized accounts of their authors’ own lives! You will find that ALL fictional narrators of such novels claim the events are true, although their ACTUAL authors make no such claims! For example, here is the opening section of “Fanny Hill”:

[QUOTE]
I sit down to give you an undeniable proof of my considering your desires as indispensable orders. Ungracious then as the task may be, I shall recall to view those scandalous stages of my life, out of which I emerg’d, at length, to the enjoyment of every blessing in the power of love, health, and fortune to bestow; whilst yet in the flower of youth, and not too late to employ the leisure afforded me by great ease and affluence, to cultivate an understanding, naturally not a despicable one, and which had, even amidst the whirl of loose pleasures I had been tost in, exerted more observation on the characters and manners of the world than what is common to those of my unhappy profession, who looking on all thought or reflection as their capital enemy, keep it at as great a distance as they can, or destroy it without mercy.

Hating, as I mortally do, all long unnecessary preface, I shall give you good quarter in this, and use no farther apology, than to prepare you for seeing the loose part of my life, wrote with the same liberty that I led it.

Truth! stark, naked truth, is the word; and I will not so much as take the pains to bestow the strip of a gauze wrapper on it, but paint situations such as they actually rose to me in nature, careless of violating those laws of decency that were never made for such unreserved intimacies as ours; and you have too much sense, too much knowledge of the ORIGINALS themselves, to sniff prudishly and out of character at the PICTURES of them. The greatest men, those of the first and most leading taste, will not scruple adorning their private closets with nudities, though, in compliance with vulgar prejudices, they may not think them decent decorations of the staircase, or salon.
This, and enough, premised, I go souse into my personal history. My maiden name was Frances Hill. I was born at a small village near Liverpool, in Lancashire, of parents extremely poor, and, I piously believe, extremely honest.
[END QUOTE (http://fiction.eserver.org/novels/fanny_hill/01.html)

Do you believe that the author, John Cleland, actually experienced those adventures, because his fictional narrator (Fanny Hill) claimed they were true? The same thing applies to Jonathan Swift’s “Gulliver’s Travels.” Do you believe that the author actually experienced those adventures, because his fictional narrator claimed they were true? Once again: Do you have ANY evidence, other than his novel, that Davis was a “self-admitted rapist?”

“He couldn’t have learned that from his childhood mentor, Frank Marshall Davis. He’s also an admitted Communist. So it’s not likely he learned the ways of Adam Smith from this self admitted child rapist. (Yes, you read that right.)”

Why are you spreading the myth that Frank Marshall Davis was a “self-admitted rapist”? Is it just because Davis’s porn memoir-novel included sex with an underage teenager, or do you have ANY other evidence? Do you also consider the author of porn memoir-novel “Lolita” to be a “self-admitted rapist,” or just Davis? A novel is fiction!

Calling Davis a pedophile based on his novel makes no more sense than calling David Letterman a pedophile based on his joke. Both myths are widespread in the right-wing blogosphere, and reflect the pinnacle of intellectual dishonesty. Both misrepresent the core values of artists by spreading falsehoods that gullible readers accept as truth, and who then spread further in good faith.

The issue is rather simple: Either you literally attribute fictional characters’ stories to their authors’ real lives, or you accept that fictional characters’ stories are fiction. By definition, even semiautobiographical novels are fictionalized accounts of their authors’ own lives! You will find that ALL fictional narrators of such novels claim the events are true, although their ACTUAL authors make no such claims! For example, here is the opening section of “Fanny Hill”:

[QUOTE]
I sit down to give you an undeniable proof of my considering your desires as indispensable orders. Ungracious then as the task may be, I shall recall to view those scandalous stages of my life, out of which I emerg’d, at length, to the enjoyment of every blessing in the power of love, health, and fortune to bestow; whilst yet in the flower of youth, and not too late to employ the leisure afforded me by great ease and affluence, to cultivate an understanding, naturally not a despicable one, and which had, even amidst the whirl of loose pleasures I had been tost in, exerted more observation on the characters and manners of the world than what is common to those of my unhappy profession, who looking on all thought or reflection as their capital enemy, keep it at as great a distance as they can, or destroy it without mercy.

Hating, as I mortally do, all long unnecessary preface, I shall give you good quarter in this, and use no farther apology, than to prepare you for seeing the loose part of my life, wrote with the same liberty that I led it.

Truth! stark, naked truth, is the word; and I will not so much as take the pains to bestow the strip of a gauze wrapper on it, but paint situations such as they actually rose to me in nature, careless of violating those laws of decency that were never made for such unreserved intimacies as ours; and you have too much sense, too much knowledge of the ORIGINALS themselves, to sniff prudishly and out of character at the PICTURES of them. The greatest men, those of the first and most leading taste, will not scruple adorning their private closets with nudities, though, in compliance with vulgar prejudices, they may not think them decent decorations of the staircase, or salon.
This, and enough, premised, I go souse into my personal history. My maiden name was Frances Hill. I was born at a small village near Liverpool, in Lancashire, of parents extremely poor, and, I piously believe, extremely honest.
[END QUOTE (http://fiction.eserver.org/novels/fanny_hill/01.html)

Do you believe that the author, John Cleland, actually experienced those adventures, because his fictional narrator (Fanny Hill) claimed they were true? The same thing applies to Jonathan Swift’s “Gulliver’s Travels.” Do you believe that the author actually experienced those adventures, because his fictional narrator claimed they were true? Once again: Do you have ANY evidence, other than his novel, that Davis was a “self-admitted rapist?”

In the article from the Telegraph, you find this:

In a surviving portion of an autobiographical manuscript, Mr Davis confirms that he was the author of Sex Rebel: Black after a reader had noticed the “similarities in style and phraseology” between the pornographic work and his poetry.

“I could not then truthfully deny that this book, which came out in 1968 as a Greenleaf Classic, was mine.” In the introduction to Sex Rebel, Mr Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences”.

His words. Not mine.

And I didn’t say he was a pedophile. I said he was a child rapist. There’s a difference.

In the article from the Telegraph, you find this:

In a surviving portion of an autobiographical manuscript, Mr Davis confirms that he was the author of Sex Rebel: Black after a reader had noticed the “similarities in style and phraseology” between the pornographic work and his poetry.

“I could not then truthfully deny that this book, which came out in 1968 as a Greenleaf Classic, was mine.” In the introduction to Sex Rebel, Mr Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences”.

His words. Not mine.

And I didn’t say he was a pedophile. I said he was a child rapist. There’s a difference.

Ouch.

One hell of a post.
Scott´s last blog ..Surprisingly, Starbucks is not anti-gun

Ouch.

One hell of a post.
Scott´s last blog ..Surprisingly, Starbucks is not anti-gun

True. The book was his, just as “Lolita” was Nabokov’s book and “Fanny Hill” was Cleland’s book. The issue is not whether or not he wrote the book, but whether or not he confirmed that the INCIDENTS literally occured in his life. Only character Bob Greene, not Davis, said incidents were taken from actual experiences, just as characters Fanny Hill and Gulliver also claimed incidents came from THEIR experiences.

According to Hamden, “Mr. Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences.” Please note that the fictional character Bob Greene, not Davis, alleges that incidents were taken from actual experiences. Even Hamden’s travesty of journalism only stated that Mr. Davis confirmed that he was the author, not that the events actually occurred in Davis’s life.

Casual readers of Hamden’s story may not have noticed his sleight of hand when substituting author Davis for fictional character Bob Greene as the subject of experiences in the book. This deception, however, reveals Hamden’s intent to directly smear Davis and thereby indirectly smear Obama through guilt-by-association.

There are at least four disclaimers that shield Frank Marshall Davis from literal attribution of this novel:

a. All memoir-novels, whether pornographic (e.g., John Cleland’s “Fanny Hill”), satirical (e.g., Jonathan Swift’s “Gulliver’s Travels”), or other genre (e.g., Daniel Defoe’s “Moll Flanders”), are allegedly true but nevertheless fiction. The fictional authors of memoir-novels, such as “Bob Greene,” claim that such incidents actually occurred although they, too, are fictional. In a broader sense, ALL first-person narrative novels, such as Nabokov’s “Lolita” and Mark Twain’s “Huckleberry Finn,” claim authenticity despite obviously being fiction. To claim that some memoir-novels are literally true (if convenient for one’s political agenda), while acknowledging that other memoir-novels are truly fiction, is intellectual dishonesty.

Please note that Jonathan Swift (writing as fictional character Gulliver in memoir-novel “Gulliver’s Travels”) described various encounters with Lilliputians and other characters, and Vladimir Nabokov (writing as fictional character Humbert Humbert in memoir-novel “Lolita”) described various encounters with Lolita and other characters. Upon what rational basis can someone claim that Davis’s story is history, while other first person narrative memoir-novels are fantasy? To literally attribute memoir-novel character Bob Greene’s encounters to Davis, but not attribute the encounters of memoir-novel characters Gulliver and Humbert Humbert to their respective authors, indicates a flagrantly biased double standard to smear Barack Obama through guilt-by-association.

b. Scandalous memoirs such as “Sex Rebel: Black (Memoirs of a Gash Gourmet)” have been a literary genre for centuries. According to Wikipedia, such scandalous memoirs are allegedly factual, but are largely invented. The title, alone, qualifies it as a “scandalous memoir.” It is the epitome of dishonesty to claim, without empirical evidence, that fictional characters’ experiences actually occurred in their author’s real life .

c. The fictional character Bob Greene, not author Frank Marshall Davis, “changed names and identities” of other characters. According to dictionary.com, “identity” means “condition or character as to who a person or what a thing is: a case of mistaken identity.” Changing name AND identities means changing names AND other “condition or character as to who a person or what a thing is,” which may include biographical data such as age. Further, “taken from actual experiences” does not mean they are accurate representations of any experiences.

d. Edgar Tidwell, the expert on the life and writing of Frank Marshall Davis, says the book is “semiautobiographical,” which (according to dictionary.com) means “1. pertaining to or being a fictionalized account of an author’s own life. 2. pertaining to or being a work of fiction strongly influenced by events in an author’s life.” “Sex Rebel: Black” is therefore a fictionalized account of events in Davis’s life.

In an honest evaluation, any of these disclaimers should protect the author from literal interpretation. The combination of all four should provide absolute protection from any culpability. Unfortunately, Davis’s accusers are dishonest. Like Mike Nifong, the disgraced ex-D.A. in the Duke lacrosse case, their campaign to demonize their target ignores exculpatory evidence in their reckless rush to judgment. In order to smear Barack Obama through guilt-by-association with Frank Marshall Davis, they are virtually lynching Davis by grossly misrepresenting his character and influence. Such misrepresentation may be symptomatic of the accuser’s own psychological disorder, indicated by projection of the accuser’s own pedophilic fantasies onto the author.

In “Sex Rebel,” Davis’s Bob Greene (not unlike Nabokov’s Humbert Humbert) hesitates at a pubescent girl’s sexual invitation, but foolishly relents. Like “Lolita,” this faux foreword is written by a Ph.D impersonator who details the psychological significance of the memoir. Like Nabokov, Davis wanted to write under a pseudonym to shield his reputation, but felt compelled to reveal his authorship. As a result, however, Davis has been posthumously accused of pedophilia, while “Lolita” is “considered by many to be one of the finest novels written in the 20th century.” In 1998, it was named the fourth greatest English language novels of the 20th century by the Modern Library,” despite also being initially dismissed as pornography, according to Wikipedia.

Since all three imaginary narrators (Bob Greene, Fanny Hill, and Gulliver) all claim their stories reflect actual experiences, but their respective authors NEVER made such claims, do you also believe Fanny and Gulliver’s adventures happened in their authors’ lives??

True. The book was his, just as “Lolita” was Nabokov’s book and “Fanny Hill” was Cleland’s book. The issue is not whether or not he wrote the book, but whether or not he confirmed that the INCIDENTS literally occured in his life. Only character Bob Greene, not Davis, said incidents were taken from actual experiences, just as characters Fanny Hill and Gulliver also claimed incidents came from THEIR experiences.

According to Hamden, “Mr. Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences.” Please note that the fictional character Bob Greene, not Davis, alleges that incidents were taken from actual experiences. Even Hamden’s travesty of journalism only stated that Mr. Davis confirmed that he was the author, not that the events actually occurred in Davis’s life.

Casual readers of Hamden’s story may not have noticed his sleight of hand when substituting author Davis for fictional character Bob Greene as the subject of experiences in the book. This deception, however, reveals Hamden’s intent to directly smear Davis and thereby indirectly smear Obama through guilt-by-association.

There are at least four disclaimers that shield Frank Marshall Davis from literal attribution of this novel:

a. All memoir-novels, whether pornographic (e.g., John Cleland’s “Fanny Hill”), satirical (e.g., Jonathan Swift’s “Gulliver’s Travels”), or other genre (e.g., Daniel Defoe’s “Moll Flanders”), are allegedly true but nevertheless fiction. The fictional authors of memoir-novels, such as “Bob Greene,” claim that such incidents actually occurred although they, too, are fictional. In a broader sense, ALL first-person narrative novels, such as Nabokov’s “Lolita” and Mark Twain’s “Huckleberry Finn,” claim authenticity despite obviously being fiction. To claim that some memoir-novels are literally true (if convenient for one’s political agenda), while acknowledging that other memoir-novels are truly fiction, is intellectual dishonesty.

Please note that Jonathan Swift (writing as fictional character Gulliver in memoir-novel “Gulliver’s Travels”) described various encounters with Lilliputians and other characters, and Vladimir Nabokov (writing as fictional character Humbert Humbert in memoir-novel “Lolita”) described various encounters with Lolita and other characters. Upon what rational basis can someone claim that Davis’s story is history, while other first person narrative memoir-novels are fantasy? To literally attribute memoir-novel character Bob Greene’s encounters to Davis, but not attribute the encounters of memoir-novel characters Gulliver and Humbert Humbert to their respective authors, indicates a flagrantly biased double standard to smear Barack Obama through guilt-by-association.

b. Scandalous memoirs such as “Sex Rebel: Black (Memoirs of a Gash Gourmet)” have been a literary genre for centuries. According to Wikipedia, such scandalous memoirs are allegedly factual, but are largely invented. The title, alone, qualifies it as a “scandalous memoir.” It is the epitome of dishonesty to claim, without empirical evidence, that fictional characters’ experiences actually occurred in their author’s real life .

c. The fictional character Bob Greene, not author Frank Marshall Davis, “changed names and identities” of other characters. According to dictionary.com, “identity” means “condition or character as to who a person or what a thing is: a case of mistaken identity.” Changing name AND identities means changing names AND other “condition or character as to who a person or what a thing is,” which may include biographical data such as age. Further, “taken from actual experiences” does not mean they are accurate representations of any experiences.

d. Edgar Tidwell, the expert on the life and writing of Frank Marshall Davis, says the book is “semiautobiographical,” which (according to dictionary.com) means “1. pertaining to or being a fictionalized account of an author’s own life. 2. pertaining to or being a work of fiction strongly influenced by events in an author’s life.” “Sex Rebel: Black” is therefore a fictionalized account of events in Davis’s life.

In an honest evaluation, any of these disclaimers should protect the author from literal interpretation. The combination of all four should provide absolute protection from any culpability. Unfortunately, Davis’s accusers are dishonest. Like Mike Nifong, the disgraced ex-D.A. in the Duke lacrosse case, their campaign to demonize their target ignores exculpatory evidence in their reckless rush to judgment. In order to smear Barack Obama through guilt-by-association with Frank Marshall Davis, they are virtually lynching Davis by grossly misrepresenting his character and influence. Such misrepresentation may be symptomatic of the accuser’s own psychological disorder, indicated by projection of the accuser’s own pedophilic fantasies onto the author.

In “Sex Rebel,” Davis’s Bob Greene (not unlike Nabokov’s Humbert Humbert) hesitates at a pubescent girl’s sexual invitation, but foolishly relents. Like “Lolita,” this faux foreword is written by a Ph.D impersonator who details the psychological significance of the memoir. Like Nabokov, Davis wanted to write under a pseudonym to shield his reputation, but felt compelled to reveal his authorship. As a result, however, Davis has been posthumously accused of pedophilia, while “Lolita” is “considered by many to be one of the finest novels written in the 20th century.” In 1998, it was named the fourth greatest English language novels of the 20th century by the Modern Library,” despite also being initially dismissed as pornography, according to Wikipedia.

Since all three imaginary narrators (Bob Greene, Fanny Hill, and Gulliver) all claim their stories reflect actual experiences, but their respective authors NEVER made such claims, do you also believe Fanny and Gulliver’s adventures happened in their authors’ lives??

Before I forget: Where EXACTLY does Frank Marshall Davis (not any fictional character) “admit” to being a child rapist?

Before I forget: Where EXACTLY does Frank Marshall Davis (not any fictional character) “admit” to being a child rapist?

Did you bother re-reading his (Duane’s) reply, or just keep going on your tirade?

On the topic of where did he learn to ‘love’ the free market?
From US Citizens who stood up last summer and demanded something DIFFERENT from the last 20 years.

Did you bother re-reading his (Duane’s) reply, or just keep going on your tirade?

On the topic of where did he learn to ‘love’ the free market?
From US Citizens who stood up last summer and demanded something DIFFERENT from the last 20 years.

Sure I read his reply. Duane’s reply made three points:

1. Davis confirmed the book was his. This is not a point of contention.

2. In the intro to Sex Rebel, Davis wrote that FICTIONAL CHARACTER GREENE said “all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences”. This is not a point of contention. Of course this fictional character claimed the events came from actual experience, just like fictional characters Humbert Humbert, Fanny Hill, and Gulliver claimed their stories came from actual experiences. ALL fictional narrators of such novels claim their experiences were real. This does NOT mean they actually happened in the real authors’ lives. What is the difference between Greene’s claims and those of fictional characters Fanny Hill, Humbert Humbert, and Gulliver?

For example, here is the initial claim that Gulliver’s Travel adventures are true:

[QUOTE]
FROM

Capt. GULLIVER

To His

Cousin SYMPSON

I HOPE YOU will be ready to own publicly, whenever you shall be called to it, that by your great and frequent urgency you prevailed on me to publish a very loose and uncorrect account of my travels; with direction to hire some young gentlemen of either university to put them in order, and correct the style, as my cousin, Dampier did by my advice, in his book called, A Voyage round the World. But I do not remember I gave you power to consent, that any thing should be omitted, and much less that any thing should be inserted: therefore, as to the latter, I do here renounce every thing of that kind; particularly a paragraph about her Majesty the late Queen Anne, of most pious and glorious memory; although I did reverence and esteem her more than any of human species. But you, or your interpolator, ought to have considered, that it was not my inclination, so was it not decent to praise any animal of our composition before my master Houyhnhnm: and, besides, the fact was altogether false; for to my knowledge, being in England during some part of her Majesty’s reign, she did govern by a chief minister; nay even by two successively; the first whereof was the Lord of Godolphin, and the second the Lord of Oxford; so that you have made me say the thing that was not. Likewise, in the account of the academy of projectors, and several passages of my discourse to my Master Houyhnhnm, you have either omitted some material circumstances, or minced or changed them in such a manner, that I do hardly know my own work. When I formerly hinted to you something of this in a letter, you were pleased to answer, that you were afraid of giving offence; that people in power were very watchful over the press; and apt not only to interpret, but to punish every thing which looked like an inuendo (as I think you call it). But pray, how could that which I spoke so many years ago, and at about five thousand leagues distance, in another reign, be applied to any of the Yahoos, who now are said to govern the herd; especially, at a time when I little thought on or feared the unhappiness of living under them. Have not I the most reason to complain, when I see these very Yahoos carried by Houyhnhnms in a vehicle, as if these were brutes, and those the rational creatures? And, indeed, to avoid so monstrous and detestable a sight, was one principal motive of my retirement hither.
[END QUOTE]

3. He claimed that Davis admitted being a child rapist. I asked exactly where does Davis (rather than a fictional character) admit to being a child rapist.

My questions are:

1. Do you also attribute the adventures of Fanny Hill, Humbert Humbert, and Capt. Gulliver to their authors’ real lives. Like fictional character Bob Greene, they ALL claim their adventures actually happened. All of their authors admit writing their books, but none of them claim the adventures happened in their real lives. So what’s the difference, other than an effort to defame Frank Marshall Davis?

2. What empirical evidence do you have that Davis (not a fictional character) is a “child rapist”?

Sure I read his reply. Duane’s reply made three points:

1. Davis confirmed the book was his. This is not a point of contention.

2. In the intro to Sex Rebel, Davis wrote that FICTIONAL CHARACTER GREENE said “all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences”. This is not a point of contention. Of course this fictional character claimed the events came from actual experience, just like fictional characters Humbert Humbert, Fanny Hill, and Gulliver claimed their stories came from actual experiences. ALL fictional narrators of such novels claim their experiences were real. This does NOT mean they actually happened in the real authors’ lives. What is the difference between Greene’s claims and those of fictional characters Fanny Hill, Humbert Humbert, and Gulliver?

For example, here is the initial claim that Gulliver’s Travel adventures are true:

[QUOTE]
FROM

Capt. GULLIVER

To His

Cousin SYMPSON

I HOPE YOU will be ready to own publicly, whenever you shall be called to it, that by your great and frequent urgency you prevailed on me to publish a very loose and uncorrect account of my travels; with direction to hire some young gentlemen of either university to put them in order, and correct the style, as my cousin, Dampier did by my advice, in his book called, A Voyage round the World. But I do not remember I gave you power to consent, that any thing should be omitted, and much less that any thing should be inserted: therefore, as to the latter, I do here renounce every thing of that kind; particularly a paragraph about her Majesty the late Queen Anne, of most pious and glorious memory; although I did reverence and esteem her more than any of human species. But you, or your interpolator, ought to have considered, that it was not my inclination, so was it not decent to praise any animal of our composition before my master Houyhnhnm: and, besides, the fact was altogether false; for to my knowledge, being in England during some part of her Majesty’s reign, she did govern by a chief minister; nay even by two successively; the first whereof was the Lord of Godolphin, and the second the Lord of Oxford; so that you have made me say the thing that was not. Likewise, in the account of the academy of projectors, and several passages of my discourse to my Master Houyhnhnm, you have either omitted some material circumstances, or minced or changed them in such a manner, that I do hardly know my own work. When I formerly hinted to you something of this in a letter, you were pleased to answer, that you were afraid of giving offence; that people in power were very watchful over the press; and apt not only to interpret, but to punish every thing which looked like an inuendo (as I think you call it). But pray, how could that which I spoke so many years ago, and at about five thousand leagues distance, in another reign, be applied to any of the Yahoos, who now are said to govern the herd; especially, at a time when I little thought on or feared the unhappiness of living under them. Have not I the most reason to complain, when I see these very Yahoos carried by Houyhnhnms in a vehicle, as if these were brutes, and those the rational creatures? And, indeed, to avoid so monstrous and detestable a sight, was one principal motive of my retirement hither.
[END QUOTE]

3. He claimed that Davis admitted being a child rapist. I asked exactly where does Davis (rather than a fictional character) admit to being a child rapist.

My questions are:

1. Do you also attribute the adventures of Fanny Hill, Humbert Humbert, and Capt. Gulliver to their authors’ real lives. Like fictional character Bob Greene, they ALL claim their adventures actually happened. All of their authors admit writing their books, but none of them claim the adventures happened in their real lives. So what’s the difference, other than an effort to defame Frank Marshall Davis?

2. What empirical evidence do you have that Davis (not a fictional character) is a “child rapist”?

FYI: Here are notable autobiographical novel that are also FICTION. Please note that in EVERY CASE their fictional narrator, like Bob Greene, claims their adventures actually happened:

Charles Dickens, David Copperfield (1850)
George Borrow, Lavengro (1851)
Leo Tolstoy, Childhood (1852)
Charlotte Brontë, Villette (1853)
Leo Tolstoy, Boyhood (1854)
Leo Tolstoy, Youth (1856)
Thomas Hughes, Tom Brown’s School Days (1857)
Fitz Hugh Ludlow, The Hasheesh Eater (1857)
Charles Dickens, Great Expectations (1860), which has many autobiographical elements but to a lesser extent
Louisa May Alcott, Little Women (1868)
Samuel Butler, The Way of All Flesh (1903)
D. H. Lawrence, Sons and Lovers (1913)
Jack London, John Barleycorn (1913)
Somerset Maugham, Of Human Bondage (1915)
James Joyce, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (1916)
F. Scott Fitzgerald, This Side of Paradise (1920)
Marcel Proust, In Search of Lost Time (1927), aka A Remembrance of Things Past
Ernest Hemingway, A Farewell to Arms (1929)
Thomas Wolfe, Look Homeward, Angel (1929)
Louis Ferdinand Céline, Journey to the End of the Night (1932), as well as “Death on Credit” (also, “Death on an Installment Plan”) and subsequent books as well.
Gertrude Stein, The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas (1933), a mock autobiography of Stein’s secretary and companion purported to be Toklas’s views of Stein.
Henry Miller, Tropic of Cancer (1934)
Ayn Rand, We, the Living (1936)
Henry Miller, Tropic of Capricorn (1939)
James A. Michener, The Fires of Spring (1949), semi-autobiographical
Graham Greene, The End of the Affair (1951)
Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man (1952)
James Baldwin, Go Tell It on the Mountain (1953)
Saul Bellow, The Adventures of Augie March (1953)
William S. Burroughs, Junkie (1953)
James Agee, A Death in the Family (1957)
Jack Kerouac, On the Road (1957)
Jack Kerouac, The Dharma Bums (1958)
Elie Wiesel, Night (1958), sometimes considered an autobiographical novel although classified as a memoir by the author.
Ian Fleming, (1960′s) Some of the James Bond experiences are based in his own World War II spy missions.
Nikos Kazantzakis, Report to Greco (1961)
Sylvia Plath, The Bell Jar (1963)
Kenzaburo Oe, A Personal Matter (1964)
Isaac Bashevis Singer, In My Father’s Court, (1966)
Frederick Exley, A Fan’s Notes (1967)
Maya Angelou, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings (1969)
Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1971)
Rita Mae Brown, Rubyfruit Jungle (1973)
Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (1973)
Pat Conroy, The Great Santini (1976)
Samuel R. Delany, Heavenly Breakfast (1979)
Philip K. Dick, VALIS (1981), perhaps the only book that could be considered both an autobiographical novel and a work of science fiction
Isabel Allende, The House of Spirits (1982), includes many elements from her family history
Charles Bukowski, Ham on Rye (1982)
J. G. Ballard, Empire of the Sun (1984)
Marguerite Duras, The Lover (1984)
Jeanette Winterson, Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit (1985)
Jaan Kross, The Wikman Boys (1988)
Samuel R. Delany, The Motion of Light in Water (1988)
Tim O’Brien, The Things They Carried (1990)
Craig Thompson, Blankets (2003), an autobiographical graphic novel.
Tobias Wolff, Old School (2003), loosely based on Wolff’s life although more novel than biography.
Mohammad Ali wih Hana Yasmeen Ali, The Soul of a Butterfly (2004)
James Frey, My Friend Leonard (2005)
Sherman Alexie, The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian (2007)
Daniel Selby Retracing My Steps (2009)
Mona Simpson, Anywhere But Here

Do you also attribute these adventures to their respective real life authors? They all claim they wrote these novels, but none of their novels can be literally attributed to their real lives!

FYI: Here are notable autobiographical novel that are also FICTION. Please note that in EVERY CASE their fictional narrator, like Bob Greene, claims their adventures actually happened:

Charles Dickens, David Copperfield (1850)
George Borrow, Lavengro (1851)
Leo Tolstoy, Childhood (1852)
Charlotte Brontë, Villette (1853)
Leo Tolstoy, Boyhood (1854)
Leo Tolstoy, Youth (1856)
Thomas Hughes, Tom Brown’s School Days (1857)
Fitz Hugh Ludlow, The Hasheesh Eater (1857)
Charles Dickens, Great Expectations (1860), which has many autobiographical elements but to a lesser extent
Louisa May Alcott, Little Women (1868)
Samuel Butler, The Way of All Flesh (1903)
D. H. Lawrence, Sons and Lovers (1913)
Jack London, John Barleycorn (1913)
Somerset Maugham, Of Human Bondage (1915)
James Joyce, A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man (1916)
F. Scott Fitzgerald, This Side of Paradise (1920)
Marcel Proust, In Search of Lost Time (1927), aka A Remembrance of Things Past
Ernest Hemingway, A Farewell to Arms (1929)
Thomas Wolfe, Look Homeward, Angel (1929)
Louis Ferdinand Céline, Journey to the End of the Night (1932), as well as “Death on Credit” (also, “Death on an Installment Plan”) and subsequent books as well.
Gertrude Stein, The Autobiography of Alice B. Toklas (1933), a mock autobiography of Stein’s secretary and companion purported to be Toklas’s views of Stein.
Henry Miller, Tropic of Cancer (1934)
Ayn Rand, We, the Living (1936)
Henry Miller, Tropic of Capricorn (1939)
James A. Michener, The Fires of Spring (1949), semi-autobiographical
Graham Greene, The End of the Affair (1951)
Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man (1952)
James Baldwin, Go Tell It on the Mountain (1953)
Saul Bellow, The Adventures of Augie March (1953)
William S. Burroughs, Junkie (1953)
James Agee, A Death in the Family (1957)
Jack Kerouac, On the Road (1957)
Jack Kerouac, The Dharma Bums (1958)
Elie Wiesel, Night (1958), sometimes considered an autobiographical novel although classified as a memoir by the author.
Ian Fleming, (1960′s) Some of the James Bond experiences are based in his own World War II spy missions.
Nikos Kazantzakis, Report to Greco (1961)
Sylvia Plath, The Bell Jar (1963)
Kenzaburo Oe, A Personal Matter (1964)
Isaac Bashevis Singer, In My Father’s Court, (1966)
Frederick Exley, A Fan’s Notes (1967)
Maya Angelou, I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings (1969)
Hunter S. Thompson, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1971)
Rita Mae Brown, Rubyfruit Jungle (1973)
Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance (1973)
Pat Conroy, The Great Santini (1976)
Samuel R. Delany, Heavenly Breakfast (1979)
Philip K. Dick, VALIS (1981), perhaps the only book that could be considered both an autobiographical novel and a work of science fiction
Isabel Allende, The House of Spirits (1982), includes many elements from her family history
Charles Bukowski, Ham on Rye (1982)
J. G. Ballard, Empire of the Sun (1984)
Marguerite Duras, The Lover (1984)
Jeanette Winterson, Oranges Are Not the Only Fruit (1985)
Jaan Kross, The Wikman Boys (1988)
Samuel R. Delany, The Motion of Light in Water (1988)
Tim O’Brien, The Things They Carried (1990)
Craig Thompson, Blankets (2003), an autobiographical graphic novel.
Tobias Wolff, Old School (2003), loosely based on Wolff’s life although more novel than biography.
Mohammad Ali wih Hana Yasmeen Ali, The Soul of a Butterfly (2004)
James Frey, My Friend Leonard (2005)
Sherman Alexie, The Absolutely True Diary of a Part-Time Indian (2007)
Daniel Selby Retracing My Steps (2009)
Mona Simpson, Anywhere But Here

Do you also attribute these adventures to their respective real life authors? They all claim they wrote these novels, but none of their novels can be literally attributed to their real lives!

First off, I’d like to welcome the son of Frank Marshall Davis to All American Blogger. It seems you spend a lot of time debating this topic on the Internet, which explains why you have such long, ready to copy and paste comments here.

Secondly, I’ll quote from the Telegraph again:

The book, which closely tracks Mr Davis’s life in Chicago and Hawaii and the fact that his first wife was black and his second white, describes in lurid detail a series of shockingly sordid sexual encounters, often involving group sex.

One chapter concerns the seduction by Mr Davis and his first wife of a 13-year-old girl called Anne. Mr Davis wrote that it was the girl who had suggested he had sex with her. “I’m not one to go in for Lolitas. Usually I’d rather not bed a babe under 20.

The book itself follows your father’s life.

The Telegraph minces no words. They also make the claim that this is not “Greene” but Davis. Perhaps it is poorly written, but there is no doubt they believe he did this.

Thirdly, I’ll quote you:

“Sex Rebel Black” was a SEMI-autobiographical fictional novel, with names and identities changed. “Identity” includes biographical data other than name, including age. Davis does not admit molesting children.

Ok, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. So, tell me, what parts were factual and what parts were fictional? And why didn’t he come out and explain that he didn’t actually have sex with that 13 year old?

I’ll go ahead and remove the “child rapist” comment from the text. You make some good points.

First off, I’d like to welcome the son of Frank Marshall Davis to All American Blogger. It seems you spend a lot of time debating this topic on the Internet, which explains why you have such long, ready to copy and paste comments here.

Secondly, I’ll quote from the Telegraph again:

The book, which closely tracks Mr Davis’s life in Chicago and Hawaii and the fact that his first wife was black and his second white, describes in lurid detail a series of shockingly sordid sexual encounters, often involving group sex.

One chapter concerns the seduction by Mr Davis and his first wife of a 13-year-old girl called Anne. Mr Davis wrote that it was the girl who had suggested he had sex with her. “I’m not one to go in for Lolitas. Usually I’d rather not bed a babe under 20.

The book itself follows your father’s life.

The Telegraph minces no words. They also make the claim that this is not “Greene” but Davis. Perhaps it is poorly written, but there is no doubt they believe he did this.

Thirdly, I’ll quote you:

“Sex Rebel Black” was a SEMI-autobiographical fictional novel, with names and identities changed. “Identity” includes biographical data other than name, including age. Davis does not admit molesting children.

Ok, I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. So, tell me, what parts were factual and what parts were fictional? And why didn’t he come out and explain that he didn’t actually have sex with that 13 year old?

I’ll go ahead and remove the “child rapist” comment from the text. You make some good points.

I tried to answer your questions last night, and again today, but my response apparently was dumped . . .

I tried to answer your questions last night, and again today, but my response apparently was dumped . . .

OK; I’ll try this in two parts, although length did not seem to be a problem earlier:

Thanks!! I was wondering when you would connect the dots. You might be surprised to know that I never even ventured into the blogosphere until a friend surprised me with the news that my father was mentioned in Obama’s book, and the uproar it caused: Redbaiting, race-baiting, and now accusations of child rape, where my father is misrepresented as an avowed communist, racist, and criminal monster, in the creation of a straw man through which Obama is easy to attack through guilt-by-association.

My father was no angel, but he was nothing like the virtual monster created by “Accuracy In Media” (AIM firebrand Cliff Kincaid and others, through their disinformation campaign documented and deconstructed as “specific misrepresentation” in my “Redbaiting Barack Obama” post at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX . I am willing to answer any relevant question to the best of my ability.

YOU WROTE: “So, tell me, what parts were factual and what parts were fictional? And why didn’t he come out and explain that he didn’t actually have sex with that 13 year old?”

RESPONSE: There is no possible way to know how much of the story he actually experienced. As a work of fiction, however, NONE of the events can be literally attributed to his life. I believe he didn’t “come out and explain that he didn’t have sex with that 13 year old” because he was never asked about it, just as Nabokov never had to deny that HE had sex with Lolita, and just as other authors do not have to deny that THEY did not personally experience events in their novels. Fiction writers are rarely accused of personally committing offenses they write about. (Stephen King could be jailed for life if he committed a fraction of the offenses in his books!) It is much more common for nonfiction writers to be accused of fabrication.

OK; I’ll try this in two parts, although length did not seem to be a problem earlier:

Thanks!! I was wondering when you would connect the dots. You might be surprised to know that I never even ventured into the blogosphere until a friend surprised me with the news that my father was mentioned in Obama’s book, and the uproar it caused: Redbaiting, race-baiting, and now accusations of child rape, where my father is misrepresented as an avowed communist, racist, and criminal monster, in the creation of a straw man through which Obama is easy to attack through guilt-by-association.

My father was no angel, but he was nothing like the virtual monster created by “Accuracy In Media” (AIM firebrand Cliff Kincaid and others, through their disinformation campaign documented and deconstructed as “specific misrepresentation” in my “Redbaiting Barack Obama” post at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX . I am willing to answer any relevant question to the best of my ability.

YOU WROTE: “So, tell me, what parts were factual and what parts were fictional? And why didn’t he come out and explain that he didn’t actually have sex with that 13 year old?”

RESPONSE: There is no possible way to know how much of the story he actually experienced. As a work of fiction, however, NONE of the events can be literally attributed to his life. I believe he didn’t “come out and explain that he didn’t have sex with that 13 year old” because he was never asked about it, just as Nabokov never had to deny that HE had sex with Lolita, and just as other authors do not have to deny that THEY did not personally experience events in their novels. Fiction writers are rarely accused of personally committing offenses they write about. (Stephen King could be jailed for life if he committed a fraction of the offenses in his books!) It is much more common for nonfiction writers to be accused of fabrication.

YOU WROTE: “The Telegraph minces no words. They also make the claim that this is not “Greene” but Davis. Perhaps it is poorly written, but there is no doubt they believe he did this.”

RESPONSE: Based on the sequence of events, I believe that Hamden colluded with AIM’s Cliff Kincaid in this misrepresentation. It was actually written quite well from a disinformation perspective, although it may violate the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. To wit:

Frank Marshall Davis wrote a scandalous memoir-novel under the pseudonym Bob Greene, one chapter of which is devoted to fictional character Bob Greene and his wife having sex with a thirteen year old girl. This fact was as accurately reported on August 24, 2008 by Toby Hamden on a British website
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2601914/Frank-Marshall-Davis-alleged-Communist-was-early-influence-on-Barack-Obama.html). From this kernel of truth, however, a deceptive house of cards was constructed:

1. FALSE ATTRIBUTION: According to Hamden, “Mr. Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences.”

a. Please note that the fictional character Bob Greene, not author Davis, alleges that incidents were taken from actual experiences. Even Hamden’s travesty of journalism only stated that Mr. Davis confirmed that he was the author, not that the events actually occurred in Davis’s life.

b. Casual readers of Hamden’s story may not have noticed his sleight of hand (fallacy of equivocation) when substituting author Davis for fictional character Bob Greene as the subject of experiences in the book. In this one statement, Hamden shifted the identity of subject “he” from Greene to Davis, thereby indicating that Greene’s story actually happened to Davis. This deception, however, reveals Hamden’s intent to directly smear Davis and thereby indirectly smear Obama through guilt-by-association.

2. ESCALATION #1: On the same day (August 24) Hamden’s report was published, so-called “Accuracy In Media” (AIM) published a new report citing Hamden’s story. (AIM had already published numerous reports defaming Frank Marshall Davis starting in February 2008.) AIM now reported that Edgar Tidwell, an “expert in the life and writing of Davis,” confirmed that Frank Marshall Davis wrote “Sex Rebel: Black” as a semi-autobiographical novel. Despite Tidwell’s expert opinion that the novel was SEMI-autobiographical, AIM escalated accusations against Davis by claiming he was a sex pervert (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-red-mentor-was-a-pervert/) based on Hamden’s same-day report. Kincaid falsely attributed the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s report.

3. ESCALATION #2: On 14 October, AIM again escalated the charges by falsely claiming Davis was an “admitted child molester” (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/was-a-communist-obamas-sex-teacher/).

4. SUMMARY: Evidence strongly suggests that Hamden and AIM worked together on this story before either post was published on August 24: AIM’s post referenced Hamden’s story although both were published the same day. Further, AIM’s false attribution of the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s story suggests AIM referenced Hamden’s draft rather than a final version.

YOU WROTE: “The Telegraph minces no words. They also make the claim that this is not “Greene” but Davis. Perhaps it is poorly written, but there is no doubt they believe he did this.”

RESPONSE: Based on the sequence of events, I believe that Hamden colluded with AIM’s Cliff Kincaid in this misrepresentation. It was actually written quite well from a disinformation perspective, although it may violate the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. To wit:

Frank Marshall Davis wrote a scandalous memoir-novel under the pseudonym Bob Greene, one chapter of which is devoted to fictional character Bob Greene and his wife having sex with a thirteen year old girl. This fact was as accurately reported on August 24, 2008 by Toby Hamden on a British website
(http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2601914/Frank-Marshall-Davis-alleged-Communist-was-early-influence-on-Barack-Obama.html). From this kernel of truth, however, a deceptive house of cards was constructed:

1. FALSE ATTRIBUTION: According to Hamden, “Mr. Davis (writing as Greene) explains that although he has “changed names and identities…all incidents I have described have been taken from actual experiences.”

a. Please note that the fictional character Bob Greene, not author Davis, alleges that incidents were taken from actual experiences. Even Hamden’s travesty of journalism only stated that Mr. Davis confirmed that he was the author, not that the events actually occurred in Davis’s life.

b. Casual readers of Hamden’s story may not have noticed his sleight of hand (fallacy of equivocation) when substituting author Davis for fictional character Bob Greene as the subject of experiences in the book. In this one statement, Hamden shifted the identity of subject “he” from Greene to Davis, thereby indicating that Greene’s story actually happened to Davis. This deception, however, reveals Hamden’s intent to directly smear Davis and thereby indirectly smear Obama through guilt-by-association.

2. ESCALATION #1: On the same day (August 24) Hamden’s report was published, so-called “Accuracy In Media” (AIM) published a new report citing Hamden’s story. (AIM had already published numerous reports defaming Frank Marshall Davis starting in February 2008.) AIM now reported that Edgar Tidwell, an “expert in the life and writing of Davis,” confirmed that Frank Marshall Davis wrote “Sex Rebel: Black” as a semi-autobiographical novel. Despite Tidwell’s expert opinion that the novel was SEMI-autobiographical, AIM escalated accusations against Davis by claiming he was a sex pervert (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-red-mentor-was-a-pervert/) based on Hamden’s same-day report. Kincaid falsely attributed the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s report.

3. ESCALATION #2: On 14 October, AIM again escalated the charges by falsely claiming Davis was an “admitted child molester” (http://www.aim.org/aim-column/was-a-communist-obamas-sex-teacher/).

4. SUMMARY: Evidence strongly suggests that Hamden and AIM worked together on this story before either post was published on August 24: AIM’s post referenced Hamden’s story although both were published the same day. Further, AIM’s false attribution of the “pervert” claim to Hamden’s story suggests AIM referenced Hamden’s draft rather than a final version.

OTHER COMMENTS: This sex claim was only the tip of the iceberg of the disinformation campaign. Through innuendo, half-truths and outright fabrication, Obama’s opponents deliberately misrepresented a casual family friendship as political indoctrination sessions, or worse. In their rush to malign Obama, their scam transformed the legacy of a relatively obscure leftist poet into a “Stalinist agent” who corrupted Obama’s values. Slander and libel were their tools of their trade, because truth was irrelevant. Their perverted ethics find nothing wrong with such lies. Destroying my father’s reputation was apparently just collateral damage. Cliff Kincaid may rationalize his deceit as a Leo Straussian “noble lie,” but in reality it is a dishonorable attack.

The AIM disinformation campaign consisted of a series of small lies fabricated to support the big lie that “His values, passed on to Obama, were those of a communist agent who pledged allegiance to Stalin” (see http://www.aim.org/aim-column/media-excuse-obamas-false-advertising). A painstakingly documented analysis of Kincaid’s falsehoods is posted as “specific misrepresentation” at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX . I
invite any person of integrity to refute my evidence against his body of lies. If he had authentic evidence of my father’s radical influence, he would not need to fabricate such evidence.

As a fair-minded thinker, you may be interested in this cordial exchange between myself and Max Friedman, Cliff Kincaid’s researcher: http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2009/05/31/judge-sonia-sotomayor-and-singing-sensation-susan-boyle/#comment-13017. (Only the last few comments pertain to this situation.) Please note that Max agreed to follow through with Cliff Kincaid regarding the specific misrepresentation I had identified in June. Not a peep was heard from him since then.

BTW: As a retired Air Force Intelligence Officer with specific training in Deception Analysis by the C.I.A. in 1989, I was VERY lucky to be familiar with disinformation campaigns, including Pope Gregory’s misrepresentation of Mary Magdalene, Russian and German misrepresentation of Judaism, Operation Fortitude protecting the D-Day invasion, Operation Left Hook protecting the coalition drive into Kuwait, and the misrepresentation of the Iraqi threat this century. This disinformation campaign fits the pattern epitomized by “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” where a target is smeared through deliberate misrepresentation. Relying on unsubstantiated claims of mentorship to implicate Obama makes no more sense than relying on Curveball’s unsubstantiated claims of mobile weapons labs to implicate Iraq.

Thanks for your consideration.

“The way to combat noxious ideas is with other ideas. The way to combat
falsehoods is with truth.” – William O. Douglas

BTW: The fact that my post was accepted in three pieces, rather than one long post, suggests your blogger software has an undisclosed length limit. It would be nice if the software actually notified posters of length limitations. Thanks again!
Kaleokualoha´s last blog ..Closing the Circle (18 January 2009)

OTHER COMMENTS: This sex claim was only the tip of the iceberg of the disinformation campaign. Through innuendo, half-truths and outright fabrication, Obama’s opponents deliberately misrepresented a casual family friendship as political indoctrination sessions, or worse. In their rush to malign Obama, their scam transformed the legacy of a relatively obscure leftist poet into a “Stalinist agent” who corrupted Obama’s values. Slander and libel were their tools of their trade, because truth was irrelevant. Their perverted ethics find nothing wrong with such lies. Destroying my father’s reputation was apparently just collateral damage. Cliff Kincaid may rationalize his deceit as a Leo Straussian “noble lie,” but in reality it is a dishonorable attack.

The AIM disinformation campaign consisted of a series of small lies fabricated to support the big lie that “His values, passed on to Obama, were those of a communist agent who pledged allegiance to Stalin” (see http://www.aim.org/aim-column/media-excuse-obamas-false-advertising). A painstakingly documented analysis of Kincaid’s falsehoods is posted as “specific misrepresentation” at http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/Kaleokualoha/gGxdvX . I
invite any person of integrity to refute my evidence against his body of lies. If he had authentic evidence of my father’s radical influence, he would not need to fabricate such evidence.

As a fair-minded thinker, you may be interested in this cordial exchange between myself and Max Friedman, Cliff Kincaid’s researcher: http://pajamasmedia.com/phyllischesler/2009/05/31/judge-sonia-sotomayor-and-singing-sensation-susan-boyle/#comment-13017. (Only the last few comments pertain to this situation.) Please note that Max agreed to follow through with Cliff Kincaid regarding the specific misrepresentation I had identified in June. Not a peep was heard from him since then.

BTW: As a retired Air Force Intelligence Officer with specific training in Deception Analysis by the C.I.A. in 1989, I was VERY lucky to be familiar with disinformation campaigns, including Pope Gregory’s misrepresentation of Mary Magdalene, Russian and German misrepresentation of Judaism, Operation Fortitude protecting the D-Day invasion, Operation Left Hook protecting the coalition drive into Kuwait, and the misrepresentation of the Iraqi threat this century. This disinformation campaign fits the pattern epitomized by “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” where a target is smeared through deliberate misrepresentation. Relying on unsubstantiated claims of mentorship to implicate Obama makes no more sense than relying on Curveball’s unsubstantiated claims of mobile weapons labs to implicate Iraq.

Thanks for your consideration.

“The way to combat noxious ideas is with other ideas. The way to combat
falsehoods is with truth.” – William O. Douglas

BTW: The fact that my post was accepted in three pieces, rather than one long post, suggests your blogger software has an undisclosed length limit. It would be nice if the software actually notified posters of length limitations. Thanks again!
Kaleokualoha´s last blog ..Closing the Circle (18 January 2009)

I await thy reaction, milord . . .
Kaleokualoha´s last blog ..Closing the Circle (18 January 2009)

I await thy reaction, milord . . .
Kaleokualoha´s last blog ..Closing the Circle (18 January 2009)