Talk:Jim Keith

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An anonymous editor 131.252.232.198 removed the following text:

Keith's writing has been criticized as factually inaccurate and his controversial views often fail to resonate with his audience. Among other things, Keith has been criticized for labelling former American President Bill Clinton a "Soviet agent".

I agree that the comment about "fail[ure] to resonate" should be removed, but the other comments seem relevant, if true. Do critics claim Keith's writing is "factually inaccurate"? If so, could we have a simple reference?

Also, I think that the charge Clinton was a Soviet agent is a nice way to suggest that Keith is a touch extreme in his views. Again, a reference would be in order. Where did he claim this? Phiwum 08:54, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

An Amazon user comment on Keith's book Black Helicopters over America: Strikeforce for the New World Order says he refers to Clinton as a "possible Soviet agent," but I have not seen the book myself.

[edit] CoS affiliation

This link has some stuff about Keith's interest in and affiliation with the Church of Scientology. __meco 12:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I knew Jim from 1966 to his death. He got me into Scientology and I almost got him out (he jumped from Scientology to a splinter group called Avatar). I don't have any handy citations, but I was there with him. I co-edited the mag in which we published an article by Jack Harness about Dianetics. Jack was an old time Dianeticist and a mutual friend of ours and a fellow member of the Los Angeles Science Fantasy Society (of which L. Ron Hubbard was also a member). Jim Keith came to live with me in Klamath Falls, OR after leaving staff at Riverside Mission in 1974. I came to visit him while he was working at the Reno Mission in 1984. We saw each other daily from 1966 to 1970, and from 1978 to 1980 and from 1988 till his death in 1999. So I am an eye witness to his spiritual persuits. --Jerry E. Smith

We would need reliable sources published elsewhere to include this in the article, I believe. If you have been interviewed somewhere about this such an article could be used as a source. __meco 21:35, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

I hadn't noticed when I wrote the above that you already had made an addition to the article text regarding these matters. If others don't find this controversial I won't remove it though. __meco 21:44, 4 November 2006 (UTC)