Tradecraft and Killer Punches
Nick Pelling and I have occupied opposite corners of the Somerton Man boxing ring for many years. It’s been open slather like a good fight should be, but there are rules. The major one being you have to know who you are fighting. For this we examine Pelling’s moves in the ring. Look for an opening amongst his flurry of words.
“Similarly, even though political historians tend to work from a more high-end (yet slim) frame of reference (from Chifley to Churchill), it hasn’t stopped researchers from trying to read the mysterious unreadable note attributed to the Somerton Man as implying some kind of espionage-centric back-story for him: a Russian spy scouting out South Australia’s uranium secrets, or defecting from some international conference. Yet the supposed ‘tradecraft’ evidence holding this aloft is something that I’ve never found any genuine substance to.”*
“Yet the supposed ‘tradecraft’ evidence holding this (espionage-centric back-story) aloft is something that I’ve never found any genuine substance to.”
I’ve never found any genuine substance to.”
There are many publications available that provide Genuine Substance to the existence of espionage tradecraft and Pelling doesn’t appear to have read any of them. Given that apparent lack of knowledge, isolating his argument to the Somerton Body Case is a precocious approach – and this is coming from the man who admitted never using the word steganography in any post on the subject.
He got clipped there as well.