As an aside: there seem to be a fair number of people who are convinced that Massad Ayoob is some sort of total sham, with various reasons being given for this opinion. Given what I know of his background, what I've seen of his standing in the legal, law-enforcement, and military training arenas, and what I know of him personally through his classes and my own interactions with him in social, competitive, and professional settings, I find opinions of this ilk to be baseless and a total pantload. His qualifications on paper can be found
here ,
and his writings and the writings about him and his expertise are known and well-respected by experts worldwide. Whether one likes it or not, he enjoys the reputation as one of the preeminent voices of truth in the areas of forensic investigation and legal ramifications of force-on-force encounters. Having said that, I believe what he, his colleagues, and other training professionals always say: each instructor/pundit/writer's opinions are just that -- opinions -- and should be weighed against other learned opinions and one's own world view. As an example, many people are fervent believers in Ken Hackathorn's wisdom, but many think that his drills are unnecessarily and unjustifiably reckless. Does that nullify his opinions, or his experience, or his ability to teach?
Maybe those who feel they know better, or feel they have to trash someone personally and repeatedly (something I was told was not allowed on this forum, by the way) in this public venue, might like to publish their own curriculum vitae and body of work so that we might objectively judge the veracity of their opinions in a like manner?