21-08-2017, 06:53 AM
This is one of the problems i have with this field. For many people, this is not a research endeavor. Its a quasi religious Crusade, comparable to the misguided Children's Crusade of the middle ages.
Doyle PM'd me on this subject a couple of days ago. He also tried to dump a guilt trip on me, that somehow I was in some way responsible for his being placed on moderation.
No sale to him. No sale to you.
Bart's article was a good piece of mostly new research about the lunchroom encounter. An event that had become something of a shibboleth with JFK books and research. I began to question this event when I discovered Baker's first day affidavit. It was mentioned at length by Weisberg in Whitewash 2, and so I found it online at the Dallas Archives. I wrote four pages about it in Reclaiming Parkland. (See pages 216-220) I stand by what I wrote.
But Bart brought in many new sources of information about the event. That article has one of the highest ratings ever recorded at Kennedysandking.com. Something like 19 five stars. Which is the opposite of an appeal to authority. Its approval from the public. There is not anything in that article as edited that refers to PM. And for you to say that somehow if you like the article its like the WC saying "well, if Oswald killed JFK he killed Tippit", because you have to buy PM also ,that is such a loopy stretch that it shows how obsessed you and Doyle have become with Sean Murphy's ideas.
I have not posted on the lunch room encounter thread here in ages. And I don't ever plan on doing so. I have not posted on the PM matter over at EF in ages. And I don't plan on doing so. And I have stated why. Because the arguments have become so polarized and so angry that I don't see any point in taking part. It would be like arguing whether the Zapruder film has been altered with Lifton and Groden. What would be the point? None that I can see.
Doyle PM'd me on this subject a couple of days ago. He also tried to dump a guilt trip on me, that somehow I was in some way responsible for his being placed on moderation.
No sale to him. No sale to you.
Bart's article was a good piece of mostly new research about the lunchroom encounter. An event that had become something of a shibboleth with JFK books and research. I began to question this event when I discovered Baker's first day affidavit. It was mentioned at length by Weisberg in Whitewash 2, and so I found it online at the Dallas Archives. I wrote four pages about it in Reclaiming Parkland. (See pages 216-220) I stand by what I wrote.
But Bart brought in many new sources of information about the event. That article has one of the highest ratings ever recorded at Kennedysandking.com. Something like 19 five stars. Which is the opposite of an appeal to authority. Its approval from the public. There is not anything in that article as edited that refers to PM. And for you to say that somehow if you like the article its like the WC saying "well, if Oswald killed JFK he killed Tippit", because you have to buy PM also ,that is such a loopy stretch that it shows how obsessed you and Doyle have become with Sean Murphy's ideas.
I have not posted on the lunch room encounter thread here in ages. And I don't ever plan on doing so. I have not posted on the PM matter over at EF in ages. And I don't plan on doing so. And I have stated why. Because the arguments have become so polarized and so angry that I don't see any point in taking part. It would be like arguing whether the Zapruder film has been altered with Lifton and Groden. What would be the point? None that I can see.