22-12-2015, 03:21 AM
Quote:Let us see if one of the attorney reading here will vouch for your method of challenging the official record
a. Since whatever you guys are arguing about now didn't occur in a legal proceeding, it is unlikely that I or any attorney can offer you an opinion any more useful than anyone else, one way or another.
b. I don't truly understand what the dispute is here. Are you guys arguing about whether the money order was cashed/processed? (since there's no bank stamps, best evidence is "no," and I'd suggest the burden of proving that they were processed falls on the camp that says so, and I'm not convinced). Are you arguing about whether these witnesses actually existed? ( I'd defer to Tom's obvious genealogical expertise here.)
The bottom line (for me) is that the FBI and the Warren Commission basically wrote words into the witnesses' mouths anyways. Bob is right. To paraphrase from a film of that alleged moon-landing forger Stanley Kubrick, "It's full of lies!"
"All that is necessary for tyranny to succeed is for good men to do nothing." (unknown)
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."
James Tracy: "There is sometimes an undue amount of paranoia among some conspiracy researchers that can contribute to flawed observations and analysis."
Gary Cornwell (Dept. Chief Counsel HSCA): "A fact merely marks the point at which we have agreed to let investigation cease."
Alan Ford: "Just because you believe it, that doesn't make it so."