By Stephen Young
By Stephen Young
By Stephen Young
By Jim Schutze
By Rachel Watts
By Lauren Drewes Daniels
I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised when I read Robert Wilonsky's article on Jim Marrs ("The truth is way out there," July 6). I have been a Marrs fan and Kennedy assassination buff for a few years now. I was surprised because I thought Wilonsky would rip him to shreds. I had just cause. Once, Robert told me he believed that Oswald acted alone. His article on Jesse Curry solidified my belief that Wilonsky thought all "truth-seekers" were a joke.
Never mind; I think he called me a joke once for disagreeing with him. I just wanted to thank Wilonsky for being a decent guy. He proved me wrong this time. While he did get his jabs at Marrs in, he did a good job with this article. Any article that isn't a complete slam against "conspiracy theories" only goes to help the cause.
At one point in the mid-'60s, almost everyone in America believed Lee Harvey Oswald was a deranged Communist and an amazing shot. These days, the majority of Americans believe there was a conspiracy in Dallas involving our government. Anyway, I'm getting off topic. Thanks, Wilonsky.
I would like to correct some inaccuracies in the otherwise detailed article on my husband, Jim Marrs. First, I am not his biggest critic, but his greatest admirer. I told Mr. Wilonsky that I am a very private person and did not want to be interviewed. But as we all had lunch together I participated in the conversation. I am not "vaguely intrigued by UFOs." I am fascinated, and a correct quote would have been "I loved Alien Agenda. It is one of my favorite books!"
Also, Jim is not an agnostic. This quote was taken out of context. Jim was asked whether he truly believed in aliens, and he responded that since there is no clear proof of their existence, he is agnostic on the subject. He is not agnostic in spiritual matters. He is a Christian and has a strong belief in God.
Lastly, Dave Perry is no friend. He did not "razz" Jim in his UTA class but was an obstruction to the whole class and harassed both Jim and the guest speakers. Why didn't Mr. Wilonsky talk to Jim's true friends? And why does the media never seem to have space to present the evidence and documentation of these subjects to the public but has space enough to detail the life of "The Nut"? The underlying truth of this article is that Jim is an honest and sincere seeker of information that most journalists ignore.
In regard to the cover story "Killing machine" (June 29), I would like to make a few points. We must remember that in Texas, capital murder is treated differently from all other crimes. Appeals, both federal and state, decide if the trial was fair. Gov. George W. Bush has little power other than what the Board of Pardons and Paroles recommends. Your article was good to point out the governor's position. Thank you. One last thing: The article said Bush refused to act on Gary Graham's case "despite" protests and international attention. I thank our governor for acting on the basis of law rather than public opinion.
Thanks to Jim Schutze for the public service of reporting on the corruption of DISD ("If they only had a brain," July 6).
It's amazing to me that as public schools all over the city have a harder time making ends meet and keeping kids educated and safe, DISD looks more like a den of deception, money launderers, and petty thieves.
I hope that the FBI investigation brings some justice to this organization and that some people are made examples.
Jim Schutze outdid himself. This article is utterly hilarious and right on target.
I am so happy I ran across this article ("We gut the beat," July 6). You see, my German heritage means I don't get to laugh much, so I rewarded myself with a chuckle for this.
I could be nitpicky and point out the glaring errors. (Autechre? German? They're from Sheffield, U.K., and on an English label. Did anyone actually research this article?) Instead I've decided to focus on the pointlessness of this article.
Your writer was obviously a jaded house fan. Apparently, he thinks the only music worth dancing to is music that goes THUMP-THUMP-THUMP-THUMP. Furthermore, he also seems to think that if you're using keyboards, your music must go THUMP-THUMP-THUMP-THUMP. I hate to break the news to him, but the four-on-the-floor beat is not the only thing people dance to. Perhaps he's forgotten about swing, or perhaps he never even knew about African cultures' traditional use of polyrhythms and polymetry. He also must not be aware of current happenings in the classical world, where composers are using non-acoustic instrumentation more and more. Oh, wait, that's thinking music. In that case...leave the smart music to us. Enjoy your Fatboy Slim.