Two days ago was the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the /Lusitania/.
Patrick Beesly was an officer of British naval intelligence and
published a 1982 book, partly on it. He loved the British Royal Navy.
He studied extensively what happened regarding the sinking. Beesly
concluded:
"I would prefer to attribute this failure [on the part of the British
navy] to negligence, even gross negligence, rather [than] to a
conspiracy deliberately to endanger the ship. ... [O]n the basis of the
considerable volume of information which is now available, I am
reluctantly compelled to state that on balance, the most likely
explanation is that there was indeed a plot, however imperfect, to
endanger the /Lusitania/ in order to involve the United States in the
war. ... If that's unacceptable, will someone tell me another
explanation to these very very curious circumstance?" Erik Larson,
/Dead Wake, /2015, p. 324.
Is Patrick Beesly to be charged with being a "conspiracy theorist"? If
so, what's the problem? What about Larson for reporting Beesly? Are
both nut cases, or honest researchers?
Paul Zarembka
==== */Research in Political Economy/
<http://www.emeraldinsight.com/books.htm?issn=0161-7230>* (since 1977) |
Editor's *webpage <http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/%7Ezarembka>*
/*Sraffa and Althusser Reconsidered; Neoliberalism Advancing*/ (2014)
/*Contradictions: Finance, Greed, and Labor Unequally Paid*/ (2013)
/*Revitalizing Marxist Theory for Today's Capitalism*/ (2011), with R.Desai
/*The Hidden History of 9-11
<http://catalog.sevenstories.com/products/hidden-history-of-911>*/ (2nd
ed., Seven Stories Press)
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
