Was it really just a MOLE HUNT about "Oswald?"

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Here's the information again....

Just wondering-how many times are you going to post the same thing?

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Tracy Parnell writes:

Quote

You can go to Greg Parker's site and read about White's relationship with Kudlaty and how that may have effected the story that he told. Now, if you want to believe that Kudlaty listened to White and suddenly and independently "remembered" that the FBI confiscated records, a fact that he had never mentioned to anyone before and saw no significance in previously, you are free to do that. I am a little skeptical though.

Jack White? Let me think. Which Jack White was that? It must be Jack "Frank Kudlaty was a friend of mine for fifty years, er, hang on, Frank who, no, never heard of the guy" White. Is he any relation to Jack "the moon landings were faked" White?

For White's changing story about his relationship with Kudlaty, see:

- https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2208-dear-sandy#33635

- https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2208-dear-sandy#33647

Greg also makes a good point about the unreliability of Robert Oswald's memories of what his brother had done years earlier:

- https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2209-dear-jim#33533

Robert wrote in his book that "In the early 1950s, Lee watched that show [I Led Three Lives] every week without fail. When I left home to join the Marines, he was still watching the reruns." Robert's recollection appears to have been faulty. The show was not made until 1953, the year after Robert joined the Marines, and the reruns would not have started until at least 1956, when the original broadcasts ended.

And who was it who demonstrated that Robert's recollection was faulty? Why, it was none other than John "I deliberately concealed from my readers a fact that disproved my theory" Armstrong * (in H&L, p.42).

On the subject of Robert Oswald's unreliability, I'm quoting an excerpt from the cult's manual, How to Cherry-Pick Evidence:

Quote

1 - Take a source that you know to be unreliable.
2 - Discover that the unreliable source made a claim that can be used to support the 'Harvey and Lee' agenda (WC Hearings, vol.1, p.299).
3 - Ignore the source's previous unreliability.
4 - Ignore the fact that the unreliable source had no first-hand knowledge of the useful event he described (namely, the doppelganger's attendance at Stripling, which supposedly happened two years after Robert joined the Marines).
5 - Declare the unreliable source to be a paragon of truth and reliability.

Hey presto! One more piece of irrefutable evidence for our beloved 'Harvey and Lee' theory!

Of course, as soon as someone pokes holes in Robert Oswald's credibility, you should feel free to divert attention from your claim about Robert by dumping him and moving onto the next talking point. Once you have been obliged to perform the old 'Harvey and Lee' shuffle a few more times and you're running out of non-debunked talking points, you may want to bring up Robert Oswald's unreliable claim again.

Look! Did you know that Robert said his brother attended Stripling?

As others have pointed out, 'Harvey and Lee' doctrine claims that the unreliable source in question, Robert Oswald, was in on the plot, and would surely have been instructed not to give the game away by blurting out the incriminating claim that his doppelganger brother had attended a school he wasn't supposed to have attended. Robert would have been just as stupid as the Oswald doppelganger who also gave the game away when arrested in the Texas Theater, by telling the cops his name was Oswald.

* And what was the fact that was concealed from his readers by John "I deliberately concealed from my readers a fact that disproved my theory" Armstrong? Why, it was the existence of a mastoidectomy defect on the body in Oswald's grave, which contradicted Armstrong's carefully worked-out biographies of his two fictional doppelgangers. Armstrong's theory had been disproved two decades before he published his book, and he knew it.

It was the necessity of diverting readers' attention from that unwelcome information that obliged Jim Hargrove to bring up the Stripling stuff as a distraction, as you can see if you go back to page 12. Now that the Stripling stuff is facing similar challenges, what will the 'Harvey and Lee' shuffle bring us next? Bolton Ford? The 13-inch head?

[Jim Hargrove]

How Did Robert Oswald
Know LHO Attended Stripling?

At least one of the four or five H&L critics working so hard here have pointed out, correctly, that Robert Oswald was in the Marine Corps when LHO enrolled in Stripling School in the fall semester of 1954.  So how did Robert know about LHO’s attendance there?

John A. wrote about this very issue some time ago on this page of HarveyandLee.net.

Robert Oswald knew HARVEY Oswald

In 1948 Robert Oswald enrolled in the 9th grade at Stripling Junior High School in Ft. Worth (1948-49 school year). Six years later, in 1954, HARVEY Oswald enrolled in the 9th grade at Stripling JHS. Two years later, during the summer and fall of 1956 Robert Oswald, HARVEY Oswald, and the short, heavy-set Marguerite Oswald impostor were living in an apartment at 4936 Collinwood in Ft. Worth, not far from Stripling JHS. 

Google Maps

While living together in this small apartment, it is the author's opinion that Robert and HARVEY discussed their attendance, teachers, and experiences at nearby Stripling JHS. The would explain how Robert Oswald learned that HARVEY had attended Stripling JHS, and would also explain how Robert was able to tell the Warren Commission that his "brother" had attended Stripling.

NOTE: It is worth noting that during the summer of 1956 Robert's mother, the tall, nice-looking Marguerite Claverie Oswald, was still living in New Orleans and  working at Goldrings Dept. Store. LEE Oswald was also in New Orleans, working under the supervision of Frank DiBenedetto at the Gerard F. Tujague Company. Late that summer Marguerite Claverie Oswald relocated from New Orleans to Ft. Worth and moved into an apartment at 3830 W. 6th, not far from 4936 Collinwood. While in the Marines her son, LEE Oswald (not HARVEY), resided with her when on leave from the Marine Corps.

HARVEY Oswald joined the Marines in October, 1956, left Fort Worth, and arrived at Camp Pendleton in California. One month later, in November, Robert Oswald married Vada Mercer, and the Marguerite Oswald impostor was now alone in her apartment at 4936 Collinwood. During the time that Robert and Vada were dating, the summer and fall of 1956, Robert never introduced his future wife to HARVEY Oswald (supposedly his "brother") nor to the Marguerite Oswald impostor (supposedly his "mother"). This makes perfect sense, because HARVEY Oswald was not Robert's brother and the short, heavy-set Marguerite Oswald impostor was not Robert's mother.

Despite all the work the H&L critics are trying to do to dismiss the evidence that LHO did indeed attend Stripling, it’s a funny thing about evidence.  It just doesn’t go away, despite efforts to explain it away.

Unless Mr. Gordon tells me to stop, and I’m going to keep posting this evidence on every page of this thread so that casual readers who happen to come across the critics’ attacks won’t be deceived into believing there isn’t substantial evidence that LHO did indeed attend Stripling School.

First, of course, is the proof that the two LHOs attended two different schools just one year before the Stripling School attendance.

Because both the FBI and the Warren Commission missed this detail and neglected to cover it up, school records published in the Warren volumes show that both LHOs attended a full fall 1953 school semester in New York City and New Orleans simultaneously.

In the fall semester of 1953, one LHO attended Public School 44 in the Bronx borough of New York City, where he was present for 62 full days and 5 half days, was absent 3 full days and 8 half days, for a total accounting of 78 days.

Also in the fall semester of 1953, the other LHO was present at Beauregard Junior High School in New Orleans for 89 school days.

One year later, one LHO attended Beauregard School in New Orleans while the other was indeed enrolled in Stripling School in Fort Worth.

It was, and remains, common knowledge among local Stripling School district residents and current and former students and teachers that Lee Harvey Oswald attended Stripling School in the 1950s.

The Fort Worth Star-Telegram confirmed this simple fact in an article published in 2017 and updated in 2019.

Once again, 

This 1959 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

This 1962 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicates LHO attended Stripling.

Published two days after the assassination of JFK, this Fort Worth Star-Telegram article reported: “He attended Stripling Junior High School and Arlington Heights High School before joining the Marines.”

In his 1964 Warren Commission testimony, Robert Oswald said that LHO attended Stripling School.

This May 11, 2002 Fort Worth Star-Telegram article indicated that “a boy walked to Stripling from a home nearby.  His mother was living in a home behind the school on Thomas Place by 1963, when the world learned the name Lee Harvey Oswald.”

And then, of course, there is the Fort Worth Star-Telegram article from 2017 mentioned above.

Way back on December 27, 1993, John Armstrong wrote to Ricardo Galindo, the then current principal of Stripling School, asking if there were any records for Lee Harvey Oswald's attendance the school.  Mr. Galindo telephoned John back and said that, although there were no records, it was “common knowledge” that LHO had attended the school. [Harvey and Lee, p. 97]

In this 1997 interview, Stripling Student Fran Schubert watched LHO walk from the school to his house at 2220 Thomas Place just across the street from the school.

And, of course, in a 1997 interview, the assistant principal of Stripling School described how he met two FBI agents at Stripling less than 24 hours after the assassination and gave them the records for LHO.  Mr. Stevens can only say that Frank Kudlaty, who went on to become the Superintendent of Schools for Waco, Texas, was mistaken (about his entire story of meeting FBI agents hours after the assassination???) or lying.

[Jim Hargrove]

H&L critics want readers to believe that the evil cabal of Jack White and Frank Kudlaty conspired to lie to the world about LHO attending Stripling School.  It just didn’t happen, they want readers to believe.

But they fail to explain how the White/Kudlaty team traveled back in time to 1959, and again to 1962, and talked Robert Oswald into telling the Fort Worth Star-Tribune the enormous fib about LHO attending Stripling School.

Robert Oswald wasn’t guessing about Stripling and LHO!  In 1956, more than a year after LHO had attended Stripling, Robert, “Marguerite,” and LHO were all living at 4936 Collinwood in Fort Worth.  Do you seriously think Robert and LHO didn’t compare notes about their experiences at Stripling JHS?

The Stripling School evidence is simply overwhelming, and I’ll never stop posting it as long as anyone here tries to deny it.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

H&L critics want readers to believe that the evil cabal of Jack White and Frank Kudlaty conspired to lie to the world about LHO attending Stripling School.  It just didn’t happen, they want readers to believe.

Misrepresentation. Nobody said there was a conspiracy between White and Kudlaty, White told his H&L story and Kudlaty "remembered" what was likely an explainable trip by some authority to attempt to obtain information and that got turned into a confiscation of records.

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

But they fail to explain how the White/Kudlaty team traveled back in time to 1959, and again to 1962, and talked Robert Oswald into telling the Fort Worth Star-Tribune the enormous fib about LHO attending Stripling School.

Robert honestly believed that his brother attended Stripling. And he would have (or perhaps he would have attended the new Monnig school if you believe Armstrong) but for his relocation to NYC.

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

The Stripling School evidence is simply overwhelming, and I’ll never stop posting it as long as anyone here tries to deny it.

Well, it is certainly true that you never stop posting the same thing over and over. But the evidence is not "overwhelming." Records, other documentary evidence such as real estate records, yearbook photos, etc. would be overwhelming. But you just have a few 30-40 year old memories of people who were falsely led to believe they were a part of history.

[Sandy Larsen]

On 7/1/2020 at 7:19 AM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

On 6/30/2020 at 6:56 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

 

What evidence is there indicating that Jack White coached Kudlaty into saying that the FBI got LHO's Stripling School records from him?

 

You can go to Greg Parker's site and read about White's relationship with Kudlaty and how that may have effected the story that he told.

 

You claimed in an earlier post that Jack White coached Frank Kudlaty into lying, and now you say the evidence for that is that the two were friends.

That's a non sequitur, Tracy.

 

On 7/1/2020 at 7:19 AM, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Now, if you want to believe that Kudlaty listened to White and suddenly and independently "remembered" that the FBI confiscated records, a fact that he had never mentioned to anyone before and saw no significance in previously, you are free to do that. I am a little skeptical though.

I don't believe any of that (except the part that Kudlaty said). And I don't know where you got it.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 6/30/2020 at 8:05 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

On 6/30/2020 at 4:46 PM, Mark Stevens said:

The issue I'm taken "offense" with is the fact that even though "None of the H&L evidence proves that there were two Oswalds," H&L supporters, yourself included continue to make statements such as:

Larsen: "We have multiple corroborating witnesses." ....Francetta and other corroborating witnesses say you're wrong."

 

I'm puzzled. What is wrong with my statements?

 

Quote

Mark Stevens said:

What is "wrong" with your statement is the disingenuous nature in which it is being used. The actual fact is there are two "witnesses" who can corroborate, in even the flimsiest manner, that LHO attended Stripling for time frame you claim he did.....

Instead it has to be "multiple corroborating witnesses.... Do not inflate the issue....

 

I used the word "multiple" because I didn't know at the moment how many corroborating witnesses there are. I've seen the numbers five and six, and you say two at best. I knew only that there are more than one, and so I wrote "multiple." "Multiple" means "more than one."

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 7/1/2020 at 10:07 AM, Mark Stevens said:

Quote

 

I told you I would if I could. I haven't found time/energy-level yet.

 

While I do empathize, and would not have mentioned you, you did continue to participate in the discussion. If you can write 3 paragraphs on one topic, I'm assuming you can write 3 on the topic being discussed.

 

If I can do A then I should be able to do B?

Well sure, but if I did B then I wouldn't be able to do A.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 7/1/2020 at 10:07 AM, Mark Stevens said:

You ignore the fact and I mean literally ignore because you won't reply to the numerous questions I've asked in this regard, the fact that he is claimed to hang with a group of friends.

 

While it is the case that I've seen enough evidence to convince me there were two boy Oswalds (H&L), I'm far from being an expert on any of the other evidence. I do recall a claim made by one of the witnesses who said that he or she saw LHO playing with others across from the school, but that's about it regarding his friends near Stripling.

I don't ignore things deliberately.

 

On 7/1/2020 at 10:07 AM, Mark Stevens said:

Again I ask, why has no one attempted to locate these friends? Why has no one spoken to Delbert McClinton who is named as one of these friends?

 

There are only so many hours in a day. I suspect that Armstrong felt like he had made his case with what evidence he'd found, and moved onto other things.

There remains numerous things Armstrong hopes others will check out. I've done a little bit of checking myself. But no matter what, there will be things left unchecked.

 

On 7/1/2020 at 10:07 AM, Mark Stevens said:

I've said before, if McClinton were to say "oh yeah I remember LHO that year, he lived in this house across the street, we hung out there at lunch," the H&L crowd would have put a huge nail in the coffin and I tell you this, you would convert me with that type of statement. 

 

LOL, no way Mark! You won't even believe Kudlaty, why would you believe some guy named McClinton? (Whoever he is.)

 

[Sandy Larsen]

On 7/1/2020 at 10:07 AM, Mark Stevens said:

Quote

 

So why do you want to start with what is the weakest evidence for the Stripling situation? That is, those multiple witnesses, not counting Kudlaty?

Let me save you some time.... if all I had were their statements, I would reject them. They're not very convincing. Fran's is better than the others, but I'd reject hers too.

 

Sandy, look..I think almost everything the H&L crowd presents as proof or evidence, at least in regards to Stripling, is equally weak. This includes all aspects of the evidence. If you would like, you can create a chart which shows on a scale which are strongest and which are weakest so we all know when we are debating/discussing/whatever we call ourselves doing.

 

Well then, there is nothing further for us to discuss regarding Stripling. Because I think that an eyewitness stating that he gave the school records to the FBI is very good evidence, some that an attorney would love to have in defending a case. I don't know how anyone could think otherwise.

 

[Mark Stevens]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I used the word "multiple" because I didn't know at the moment how many corroborating witnesses there are. I've seen the numbers five and six, and you say two at best. I knew only that there are more than one, and so I wrote "multiple." "Multiple" means "more than one."

The point I've been trying to make is that in the time it took you to make this post you could read the statements and know for yourself. I liken this statement to a Libertarian saying they don't know how many amendments are in the Bill of Rights. As a H&L supporter I believe this is a basic fact you should know and understand.

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

If I can do A then I should be able to do B?

Well sure, but if I did B then I wouldn't be able to do A.

My basic point was that which I made above.

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

While it is the case that I've seen enough evidence to convince me there were two boy Oswalds (H&L), I'm far from being an expert on any of the other evidence. I do recall a claim made by one of the witnesses who said that he or she saw LHO playing with others across from the school, but that's about it regarding his friends near Stripling.

I don't ignore things deliberately.

Much of what we are discussing is core evidence of the H&L story. If you aren't familiar with the details of the evidence then I don't really understand what has convinced you. 

Quote

 

There are only so many hours in a day. I suspect that Armstrong felt like he had made his case with what evidence he'd found, and moved onto other things.

There remains numerous things Armstrong hopes others will check out. I've done a little bit of checking myself. But no matter what, there will be things left unchecked.

 

 

LOL, no way Mark! You won't even believe Kudlaty, why would you believe some guy named McClinton? (Whoever he is.)

 

Sandy, do you mean to tell me that a guy saying it is common knowledge Oswald went to the school is a better witness than 1 or more people who can attest to being part of a group of friends with Oswald? Those witnesses aren't even worth putting any effort to, because we have a guy who never actually saw him, just maybe heard rumors? I feel those witnesses bear a significant importance and I believe almost any lawyer would agree. There are some on this forum, we can ask them. I agree though with the uncheckable nature, especially at this point, of much of the...I don't know...evidence...I guess...

 

Regarding McClinton, I was largely being facetious, it would take more to convince me of the Hungarian Oswald. I do though subscribe to basically, a "2nd Oswald" theory, it though follows more "traditional" impersonation scenario(s). Delbert McClinton is named as a person in the group of Oswald's friends. I believe his name was also in an address book of Ruby's. From what I recall, it was related to his music. He does, or at some point has played, in a band with Willie Nelson.

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Well then, there is nothing further for us to discuss regarding Stripling. Because I think that an eyewitness stating that he gave the school records to the FBI is very good evidence, some that an attorney would love to have in defending a case. I don't know how anyone could think otherwise.

One could think otherwise because there are other, at the least equally valid explanations. I believe you would have to concede the other explanation is at least equally likely. Then, that explanation is weighed against other evidence (for and against it) as is the original(?) explanation and see what you come to.

The facts are this, everything Kudlaty stated mirrors the actual truth of Robert Lee Oswald's attendance at Stripling and is at the least as likely as the H&L story to be true. If you don't believe this to be true, could you please explain how so?

 

[Jeremy Bojczuk]

Jim Hargrove writes:

Quote

Unless Mr. Gordon tells me to stop, and [sic] I’m going to keep posting this evidence on every page of this thread ... I’ll never stop posting it as long as anyone here tries to deny it.

Mark Stevens responds:

Quote

How can this lead to any honest discussion on these topics?

Any casual reader will have worked out by now that Jim isn't interested in honest discussion. He is a propagandist, out to promote a worthless and harmful theory that was debunked two decades before its holy text was published.

Any method will do, apart from honest discussion. Jim has frequently misrepresented other people's arguments. He has repeatedly failed even to acknowledge criticism, let alone deal with it. He changes the subject, answers questions he wasn't asked, and refuses to answer the reasonable questions he was asked.

Whether any of this is against the rules, I don't know. It certainly doesn't help the reputation of what is supposed to be a place for serious discussion of the JFK assassination. I'd be surprised if James Gordon is happy for this forum to be used as a dumping ground for endless amounts of 'Harvey and Lee' spam.

Perhaps, as has been pointed out at https://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/t2215-fao-mark-stevens#33729, Jim is trying to get this thread closed down. That might be his best way out of his current predicament. He wouldn't need to face up to the criticism he has received here, but he would be free to create new threads in which to dump yet more 'Harvey and Lee' spam.

Let's give Jim one more chance to show that he isn't simply a one-dimensional propagandist, and that he can deal rationally with criticism. Look at the eyewitness statements which, according to Jim (and James Norwood, who seems to have gone missing again), show that Oswald attended Stripling. Then look at Mark Stevens' analysis of those statements, on page 19.

Now answer the question Mark raised on page 20:

Quote

We can gladly discuss the school records, and newspaper articles, and whatever you would like, literally in 1 post if you will just please address the witness statements. Please explain how my assessment of those statements is in error.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

Ya gotta love they way the H&L critics pretend that I have ignored their attempted rebuttals to all this evidence, acting as if I had not patiently explained to Mark Stevens—twice-- that the evidence shows it was LHO’s Stripling records, not Robert’s, that Dr. Kudlaty gave the FBI,  that I haven’t explained to Mr. Stevens what “common knowledge” means to normal people,  that I haven’t shown that the believable time for LHOs Stripling attendance was given by Robert in his two pre-assassination newspaper interviews and not his WC testimony, that I haven’t shown the simultaneous school appearances fit a now familiar pattern, and on and on.  They want to pretend I am hiding from their questions, which is simply untrue.

What is stunning about the H&L critics is that they attempt to blithely explain away the enormous amount of evidence that LHO attended Stripling School and show not an ounce of curiosity about whether this evidence could actually prove the case for two LHOs.

The H&L critics claim that the Stripling assistant principal who said he gave LHO’s Stripling records to the FBI hours after the assassination was either lying or profoundly mistaken.

They claim that Robert Oswald was just guessing that LHO attended Stripling when he told the Forth Worth Star Telegram in 1959 and again in 1962 that LHO attended Stripling school a year or so before entering the Marine Corps.  The H&L critics ignore the fact that in 1956 Robert, Marguerite, and LHO lived at 4936 Collinwood in Fort Worth, just ten blocks or so from Stripling School, when Robert and LHO undoubtedly compared notes for their Stripling attendance (Robert in 1948, LHO in 1954).  Robert certainly wasn’t guessing about LHO’s Stripling attendance.

The H&L critics claim that the Star-Telegram article published two days after the assassination was wrong when it stated LHO attended Stripling.  Ditto for the Star Telegram stories of 2002 and 2017, both of which said LHO attended Stripling.

They claim Stripling student Fran Schubert was wrong in her clear memory that she watched LHO walk the short distance home from the school to 2220 Thomas Place, just across the street from Stripling, where Marguerite lived on several occasions, including when JFK was killed.

They claim to not understand what Stripling principal Ricardo Galindo meant when he told John Armstrong that it was “common knowledge” that LHO attended Stripling.

They ignore Marguerite’s statement in the 11/15/59 Star-Telegram that LHO “quit school at 14 …. he quit in the eighth grade ….. but was so set on getting an education, he quit and returned three times,” and apparently want people to think this matches the Official Record without Stripling School.

They ignore the evidence, claiming it is just a “distraction,” that just one year before Stripling the two LHOs attended school simultaneously in New York City and New Orleans.

The H&L critics cannot even CONSIDER ACCEPTING the clear evidence that LHO attended Stripling School because they know, if they do, they have to accept there were two different young men sharing the identity of LHO, just as John Armstrong has shown.  That is why the H&L critics are working so hard in their unsuccessful attempts to debunk the Stripling evidence.  If they accept it—any of it—they lose!

[Mark Stevens]

13 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Ya gotta love they way the H&L critics pretend that I have ignored their attempted rebuttals to all this evidence, acting as if I had not patiently explained to Mark Stevens—twice-- that the evidence shows it was LHO’s Stripling records, not Robert’s, that Dr. Kudlaty gave the FBI,  that I haven’t explained to Mr. Stevens what “common knowledge” means to normal people,  that I haven’t shown that the believable time for LHOs Stripling attendance was given by Robert in his two pre-assassination newspaper interviews and not his WC testimony, that I haven’t shown the simultaneous school appearances fit a now familiar pattern, and on and on.  They want to pretend I am hiding from their questions, which is simply untrue.

Uhm, actually you did the exact opposite. When I pointed out that "normal people" would expect qualification to the statement "common knowledge," you stated: 

Quote

 

Mr. Stevens responded with this: 

“Again, what exactly constitutes 'common knowledge?' If for instance, 300 students and faculty were at Stripling, daily, and Harvey & Lee proponents have offered, at best, 6 documented witnesses which can attest to Oswald's presence at Stripling; would 2% constitute a population which could be considered 'common knowledge?'"

A “debate” like this seems worthless to me.  Stripling School principal Ricardo Galindo told John Armstrong that it was “common knowledge” that LHO attended his school. Demanding a discussion of what “common knowledge” should mean to a linguist or a statistician or a philosopher is absurd. 

 

You did not explain what a "normal person" would understand that to be. You instead hem and hawed and pretended as though I asked a question I didn't, so you could attack the question instead of responding.

You see what I did there? You see how I used your actual words to refute a baseless statement you just made? How I post what you actually said and allow readers to know what you actually said.

I don't make up some exaggerated version of what you said, I just post what you said.

Notice how instead you do this?

Quote

 

"...the H&L critics is that they attempt to blithely explain away the...".

"The H&L critics claim..." 

"They claim that..."

"The H&L critics claim...."

"They claim..."

"They claim.."

"...and apparently want people to think..."

 

All of those accusations are from the same reply. Not once do you use any facts or actual words of the accused to support your statement. You just baselessly slander their name without any remorse (or concern). 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

13 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

You claimed in an earlier post that Jack White coached Frank Kudlaty into lying, and now you say the evidence for that is that the two were friends.

I never said Kudlaty knowingly lied. Only that the story he told was likely influenced by White's tales.