03-03-2014, 08:58 AM
I agree with Jim D on the importance of John's work. His focus on the postal evidence and Harry Holmes as a suspect is also very important.
On whether Oswald ever went to Mexico City, I remain an agnostic.
I think my book State Secret makes a good argument that the important thing to look at is
how others responded to the LHO character.
On whether Oswald ever went to Mexico City, I remain an agnostic.
I think my book State Secret makes a good argument that the important thing to look at is
how others responded to the LHO character.
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:I don't agree with everything in the book. And I wish John had let me look at it first.
But, there is no doubt that it is a valuable and unique contribution to the field. And anyone who dismisses it out of hand shows their ignorance because there is stuff in that book that you will not find anywhere else.
To give one example: John's analysis of Mexico CIty is one of the best there is. And his chronicles of the bus rides down and back is unparalleled. In fact, I don't see how anyone can read that and still think there is no question Oswald was on the bus. Which is where I have a disagreement with people like Hancock and Simpich. It is not a done deal that Oswald was in Mexico City and did the things the WC said he did.
Secondly, John's discussion of the MC rifle is a quantum leap forward. No one ever did that before. Third, his review of the alleged REA delivery of the handgun is also unique.
I could go on and on, but its a book much worth reading.