15-07-2015, 08:37 PM
(This post was last modified: 15-07-2015, 09:14 PM by Tom Scully.)
David, thank you for your very reasonable and detailed reply. I read it all and then reread it more slowly and particularly noted the points you emphasized in bolded text. I hope this ten page article I've linked to,written by Dick Russell possibly more than 30 years ago, is new to you. Russell's position on the reliability of key points of Nagell's claims seem closer to yours than to mine, but the information Russell shares does help explain why Nagell's claims have never become a "game changer".
As to the questions you began with, we can fully agree there were certain items found and taken by arresting officers from the trunk of Nagell's car and from other places "on him." The photocopy of the ID card was entered
into Nagell's lawyer's file at some unknown date, presumed to have been mailed to the lawyers office. The detail in the photocopy of the ID card includes what you describe, but your question about the ink marks/stamps does not
strike me as proof or disproof of anything, considering the poor quality of the photocopy. I hope you agree that the
ink marks on the Oswald ID don't eliminate the possibility that an DPD evidence photo of the Oswald card was the foundation of a fabrication of what is represented in the photocopy.
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%...m%2020.pdf
The points you made in your reply help me to understand your research approach and your mindset, and I hope you better understand mine, after our exchange here. Possibly I am too cautious, or you are not cautious enough. Dick Russell was a young man when he first encountered Nagell. I wonder if he would have devoted as much time on Nagell and his claims if he began today, at Russell's current age, than the attention he has devoted to Nagell related research and writing?
If I knew today that I would be limited to reaching the age Gary Mack reached, vs. the age Harold Weisberg reached, how would that knowledge influence my research interests and priorities? I am open to criticism of the sort Mr. Doyle and Mr. Hargrove have posted in recent days. I want to be remembered for asking questions that
the likes of Bush and sons and Priscilla McMillan will pretend were never asked, but I want to influence them to wonder if the details in those questions will be a component of their epitaphs/legacies.
As to the questions you began with, we can fully agree there were certain items found and taken by arresting officers from the trunk of Nagell's car and from other places "on him." The photocopy of the ID card was entered
into Nagell's lawyer's file at some unknown date, presumed to have been mailed to the lawyers office. The detail in the photocopy of the ID card includes what you describe, but your question about the ink marks/stamps does not
strike me as proof or disproof of anything, considering the poor quality of the photocopy. I hope you agree that the
ink marks on the Oswald ID don't eliminate the possibility that an DPD evidence photo of the Oswald card was the foundation of a fabrication of what is represented in the photocopy.
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%...m%2020.pdf
The points you made in your reply help me to understand your research approach and your mindset, and I hope you better understand mine, after our exchange here. Possibly I am too cautious, or you are not cautious enough. Dick Russell was a young man when he first encountered Nagell. I wonder if he would have devoted as much time on Nagell and his claims if he began today, at Russell's current age, than the attention he has devoted to Nagell related research and writing?
If I knew today that I would be limited to reaching the age Gary Mack reached, vs. the age Harold Weisberg reached, how would that knowledge influence my research interests and priorities? I am open to criticism of the sort Mr. Doyle and Mr. Hargrove have posted in recent days. I want to be remembered for asking questions that
the likes of Bush and sons and Priscilla McMillan will pretend were never asked, but I want to influence them to wonder if the details in those questions will be a component of their epitaphs/legacies.
Peter Janney's uncle was Frank Pace, chairman of General Dynamics who enlisted law partners Roswell Gilpatric and Luce's brother-in-law, Maurice "Tex" Moore, in a trade of 16 percent of Gen. Dyn. stock in exchange for Henry Crown and his Material Service Corp. of Chicago, headed by Byfield's Sherman Hotel group's Pat Hoy. The Crown family and partner Conrad Hilton next benefitted from TFX, at the time, the most costly military contract award in the history of the world. Obama was sponsored by the Crowns and Pritzkers. So was Albert Jenner Peter Janney has preferred to write of an imaginary CIA assassination of his surrogate mother, Mary Meyer, but not a word about his Uncle Frank.