Jon G. Tidd Posted September 13, 2015 Share Posted September 13, 2015 I guess one preference here is for structured discussion, discussion that stays within prescribed boundaries. And I understand this desire. After all, the chase is not after DNA structure. It's more like paleontology. "Damn it, don't spring Homo Naledi upon the public until you've verified the age of the bones found in the South African cavern." I don't get structured discussion. It doesn't make sense to me. I prefer associations to deductions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 [...] I don't get structured discussion. It doesn't make sense to me. I prefer associations to deductions. Jon, I intuited that. --Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted September 14, 2015 Share Posted September 14, 2015 Thanks for carrying on with that Vanessa, regardless of the alternative it seems to be a pretty stunning indictment of the only DPD officer to actually encounter Oswald at the scene. If the investigation does not support Baker then you have to wonder about using him as a source at all...or equally, about the investigation itself. And of course nobody on the WC staff pursued that rather obvious point. Thanks for carrying on with that Vanessa, regardless of the alternative it seems to be a pretty stunning indictment of the only DPD officer to actually encounter Oswald at the scene. If the investigation does not support Baker then you have to wonder about using him as a source at all...or equally, about the investigation itself. And of course nobody on the WC staff pursued that rather obvious point. Exactly Larry - everything is wrong with this piece of Fritz's testimony including the WC's lack of curiosity about it. Perhaps I should be more cautious but for me this is the 'smoking gun' of what happened to Baker and his testimony about Oswald on the steps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted October 23, 2015 Share Posted October 23, 2015 Going back to the topic of the opening post, Bill Simpich's second article on the Oswald wallet(s) may cast question on the veracity of Will Fritz's reconstituted Oswald interrogation notes: http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/33005-the-murder-of-jfk-part-2-counterfeit-id-planted-in-oswalds-wallet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now