17-09-2012, 03:32 PM
No offense but I think you are switching the point from the current need to interrogate Mitchell to an argument over Janney's poor scholarship and methodology. You've won the contest over Janney's poor research and use of uncredible sources. However, as even Charles pointed out, that doesn't necessarily prove Mary Meyer wasn't covertly assassinated. And even if she was murdered by Crump for totally unrelated reasons, it doesn't preclude all this Janney theory business being used for deep political disinformation purposes. That's the trouble with a room full of mirrors is that it is hard to create just one straight image guided by straight logic. Too many words vs a simple solution Mr D. Simply knock on this Mr Mitchell's door and ask him. Otherwise Tom Scully is just an overly informational bringer of wrong information.
I think you don't understand that we can throw out all that crap Janney offers about Mitchell's possible role and still have a legitimate covert assassination remaining. Just not the way Janney described it. In the end it is still highly suspicious for Mitchell to remain quiet with all that has been said about him in public. I agree with Horne on this because it's obvious and has nothing to do with Janney's scholarship.
I think you don't understand that we can throw out all that crap Janney offers about Mitchell's possible role and still have a legitimate covert assassination remaining. Just not the way Janney described it. In the end it is still highly suspicious for Mitchell to remain quiet with all that has been said about him in public. I agree with Horne on this because it's obvious and has nothing to do with Janney's scholarship.