I am not defensive at all.

When you say that Carpenter missed none of this, my question is "None of what?"

I mean, I can understand Carpenter doing something like this "Six Degrees of Separation" to cast doubt on Garrison-- I mean he had an agenda to fulfill. But you?

And why completely ignore my main point?

Do you or Carpenter really think that Garrison did not have the right people in New Orleans? I think that is ridiculous. Especially in light of all that we have learned since the seventies. And which I listed some of above. I mean, to take one more example besides Banister: why would Ferrie try and eliminate the evidence of his relationship to Oswald in the CAP within 48 hours of the assassination? To the point of calling people in the CAP to find the picture depicting him and Oswald? Why would Shaw then tell so many lies on the stand?

Tom, I have been dueling with these anti Garrison types for a very long time--actually decades. If you read my review of Jeff Caufield's piece of junk, you will see my latest round. In each and every case, they use the same tactics--they try and distract, they smear, they leave out crucial information. And that's Carpenter also.

Its really odd that you trusted him over me.