| Subject: | Re: [socialcredit] Re: COGEXEC: Norm Kurland: Plagiarist | | Date: | Sunday, September 4, 2005 06:59:24 (-0400) | | From: | Keith Wilde <nschwartz @......ca>
|
OK, what we see here is more of the self-puffery and exaggeration that
strays beyond the boundary of truth. With that I am familiar. The wonder
and aggravation of it is really the question of how much influence Kurland
and his associates are able to sell on the basis of what does appear to be a
substantial degree of fantasy and distortion. Your probing into some of the
claims (e.g. accounting credentials) did expose what seems to be a pattern
of behavior that is almost deliberately self-delusional. I nonetheless
remain puzzled by your consistent charge of plagiarism w.r.t. Kelsoists. In
respect of the Alaska Plan in particular, how do you know that it was
inspired by Douglas? I don't recall having heard that before (but I'm not
always listening either).
Keith
----- Original Message -----
From: "William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
To: <cogexec@cog.kent.edu>; <socialcredit@elistas.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 03, 2005 11:56 AM
Subject: [socialcredit] Re: COGEXEC: Norm Kurland: Plagiarist
> Keith, the date is merely the smoking gun. The
> plagiarism is that he claims that Chalabi's proposal
> is his own, and that it represents a "reversal" from
> his "previous" advocacy of the Alaska model, which is
> the lie. Chalabi's proposal was and continues to be
> inspired by the Alaska model, which he and his
> advisers repeatedly cite. They have not once
> mentioned "Binary Economics" or Norm Kurland in any
> public forum, despite Kurland's illusions of grandeur.
> They may not be aware of the term.
>
> You might remember a couple of years back when Rodney
> Shakespeare stupidly claimed that the Alaska Dividend
> was the implementation of "Binary Economics."
>
> I replied that, on the contrary, Kelso, Gravel and
> Kurland vehemently opposed the Dividend plan when it
> was proposed, and tried to promote their alternative
> scheme--something quite different in purpose and
> intent.
>
> That set Kurland off on his usual tirade.
> -
>
>
> --- Keith Wilde <keithwilde@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, Bill, but I don't get your point here. I can
> > clearly see that there
> > is a marked difference between the Chalabi proposal
> > and that of Kurland, and
> > I understand why you much prefer the Chalabi
> > approach. But I do not see how
> > the charge of plagiarism applies. It seems to have
> > something to do with the
> > date Norm claims for having spoken to the Senator
> > and articles that appeared
> > in various news souces, but I fail to see the
> > connections that bear on the
> > issue of plagiarism. I certainly don't see any
> > incorporation of Douglas
> > ideas in what Norm is claiming for Kelso?
> >
> > Keith
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "William B. Ryan" <w_b_ryan@yahoo.com>
> [snipped]
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
> http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Some introductory materials to the discussion topic of this list are at
> http://www.geocities.com/socredus/compendium
> You're subscribed to this list with the email nschwartz@cogeco.ca
> For more information, visit http://www.eListas.com/list/socialcredit
>
|
Re: [socialcredit]
Reply to this message