30-03-2013, 12:35 AM
Miles Scull Wrote:DJ, just want to make it clear that I'm not "attacking" Lee Farely, who does good work, as DiEugenio intemperately states.
I merely think that a careful examination of the total evidence, including all of the FBI docs, validates Yates and that Douglass' interpretation is correct.
Cheers
Never thought that for a second Miles... Lee's points are well taken... yet only in context of their sources - which are very questionable as to their reliability.
That he chooses to fault YATES over the reporting of the FBI during this time is a surprise, that's all.
No doubt many bystanders wished to involve themselves in the case for attention, personnal reasons or pure insanity... J. Baker comes to mind.. and a thorough, skeptical examination SHOULD be done...
With Baker it's about what SHE SAID, not what the FBI REPORTS they say she said without her ever seeing it...
Are we to call Ms Arnold a liar when she says she saw Oswald at 12:15 in the lunchroom... or the FBI's reporting of it... or lack thereof.
Perry? Mercer? The list goes on and on.... ".. the paper does match..." "...the paper does NOT match..."
Until the FBI proves they got ANYTHING correct in the case I am going to lean toward the non-governmental witnesses' earliest statements as the most accurate in understanding what happened.
And try to weed the wackos from there
Good to see you posting again old friend
DJ
Once in a while you get shown the light
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter
in the strangest of places if you look at it right..... R. Hunter