Prouty on Lansdale

[Greg Burnham]

...as per Lansdale, well that is iffy.

jim

Very impressive opinion, Jim--since you knew Lansdale so well.:banghead:

Isn't it about time Greg (master researcher) that you went round and told everyone the glorious news about gunmen coming out of every orifice in Dealey? In particularly your backing of the defunct Storm Drain angle. Hmmmmmmmm now isn't Jim's caution with the photo's a little more sensible an option than plunging on in?

Well Greg it appears you plunge in on quite a few things doesn't it?

Like just about any new fad that comes along.

Why don't you come back and tell me how credible a guy Chauncey Holt is? Sheesh Greg while your at it let's hear about your wonderful theories about how Zapruder was in on the plot? Tell me how credible JVB is and how a study of Oswald's penis will be useful to the case? How about let's discuss crop circles (I see they are advocated on your site as is a link to John Hankeys appalling video JFK II) You may have missed the bus on that goldmine Greg.

Of course you can always find flaws in Jim Di's arguments by using such good and well researched links to your site. Have you seen Hankey call Jim Di and I intelligence assets?

So before you criticise anybodies opinions on Lansdale or any other researcher. I'd think real, real, real long and hard about the very ones you advocate for and why Greg (more so than yourself by a country mile no make it continents) Jim DiEugenio is one of the most respected researchers currently operating! Furthermore, some people may find that a little on the nose.

But it's why I'll be hard pressed to use anything you have ever done in the field. Hows them apples?

Oh I say this not out of being vindictive. But because I won't lose any sleep if you don't use mine. Should you start too I'd be seriously worried about my massive drop in standards!

I know Greg well. I did not know he has a website where he
discusses crop circles. I need to compare notes with him.

Hmmmmmmm.

Jack

You are quite correct, Jack. I have NO websites at this time, and I have NEVER had a website discussing the matters Coogan suggests.

Moreover, this is bordering heavily on ad hominem, Seamus. You are inventing claims that I have never made and attributing them to me.

I do NOT believe Chauncey Holt was a tramp. Never have. You invented that attribute when you assigned it to me. I am on the record over a DECADE ago with that position. However, I knew him well. He taught me a lot. But, I don't buy that claim at all.

I never said Zapruder was "in on the plot" -- not even once. However, he should rightfully be scrutinized--and I did scrutinize him. Everyone is invited to reach their own conclusions as to what the facts of his circumstances mean, or if their meaning can even be known. It is up to the observer to determine, not you or me.

As for JVB, you are way behind. I have never endorsed her story. I have said that she was very "believable" when I met with her for a day in Los Angeles. However, I have also remained neutral for the most part because I was unable to spend the amount of time it would take to either verify or refute her claims. I simply do not know.

As for Oswald's penis... Have you lost your mind! You are beginning to sound like Robert Morrow! I objected so strongly to it being the topic of discussion on the EF that it was removed! I might have been wrong for objecting, but I did as it seems only remotely--tangentially--relevant if at all.

As for crop circles on my website... ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND? First, I HAVE NO WEBSITE! Second, I have never had anything about crop circles on ANY site in the past. And I have no interest in Hankey.

Why am I even defending myself against you? Is Jim so weak that he cannot stand up for himself here? I don't think so.

I don't know why you have such a hard on against me, Seamus. I don't even know you.

Your relationship with Jim D reminds me of Dave Perry's influence on Gary Mack.

A pity. We shall see where it leads.