06-07-2018, 09:28 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-07-2018, 05:59 PM by Matt Grantham.)
Hi Anthony yes I understand the point that one can draw a general conclusion of of the two Oswald without delving into the minutiae Also one can just dismiss the theory on what many might call a common sense belief of what lies beyond the realm of plausible possibility Maybe that sounds critical, but i have no real objection to those who dismiss some theories as just simply "too outrageous,
alternatively it might be logical to dismiss said conclusions by certain critiques leading proponents of the theory who may have questionable qualities of one sort or another. sloppy fact checking, poor citations, wrong on specific points etc I am very much open to the idea that i do not know all the facts, though i had a fairly long dialogue with W Tracy Parnell that I did not finding particularly enlightening. Also i hoped you noticed my post was very much oriented towards questioning what is perhaps a hole in the Armstrong narrative, and that I am not therefore just parroting the official Armstrong narrative I get it that many are not interested in pursuing this, and in many ways i have more questions for the supporters of the Armstrong narrative than those who question it I do appreciate it Anthony that you took the time to explain your position
alternatively it might be logical to dismiss said conclusions by certain critiques leading proponents of the theory who may have questionable qualities of one sort or another. sloppy fact checking, poor citations, wrong on specific points etc I am very much open to the idea that i do not know all the facts, though i had a fairly long dialogue with W Tracy Parnell that I did not finding particularly enlightening. Also i hoped you noticed my post was very much oriented towards questioning what is perhaps a hole in the Armstrong narrative, and that I am not therefore just parroting the official Armstrong narrative I get it that many are not interested in pursuing this, and in many ways i have more questions for the supporters of the Armstrong narrative than those who question it I do appreciate it Anthony that you took the time to explain your position
Anthony Thorne Wrote:I've avoided looking at the two Oswalds stuff too deeply, although a number of critics I respect do not dismiss it, and a couple of others who I also respect dismiss it vehemently. John Newman says he'll be running back through the Harvey and Lee evidence and assessing it when he hits volume 5 of his ongoing JFK series (1,2 are out already, 3 is out this Christmas, 4 and a revised version of 2 are scheduled for 2020 and the wrap-up volume 5 is scheduled for 2022, although if he decided to make the final volume twice as long and kick it across to the 60th anniversary in 2023 I wouldn't have a problem).