reply to post by SPM.45
Hey, no problem, we all make mistakes.
Well since I first came across this yesterday I naturally googled looking for some further information and of course I discovered that there is a long
history of this story being debated on various forums and saw lots of 'old arguments'. I'm not saying it is all one-sided and I've seen some of
the name-calling you mention.
It would be nice if both sides could bury the hatchet, let bygones be bygones and agree to disagree (3 cliches in the one sentence!) although I don't
hold much hope of that ever happening.
I can see a bit of me in both of you when I look from the outside. When I'm in an argument and I feel I am 100% in the right yet nobody else seems to
think so I get incredibly frustrated and eventually I get to boiling point and explode - so I imagine that perhaps Ken gets like that too when nobody
seems to believe his story and it results in some of the outbursts.
I think you are a bit like me too SPM - I never want to lose an argument, especially when I know I'm right and I'll always try to get the last word
just to prove that I am in fact right. I have the tendency to go on and on and on....my OH would confirm this if she was reading this.
So when you get two people with these traits it is no wonder we end up with 17 pages of argument on this forum and god knows how many else all over
There will never be a winner here so it would be great if you could both call a truce.
That's interesting about the new info. You have obviously been involved with this much longer than me so I accept what you say if you are saying this
is new. Obviously then it would be useful to analyse these things in depth to see what they tell us.
In some ways though I can foresee a problem with any evidence other than someone coming forward to confirm a sighting of Bader in Liverpool in 1942 or
documentary evidence of it.
If everyone can put aside their own opinions on this for a second and look at the problem objectively then we have the possible scenario of Bader
being in Liverpool in 1942 at a time when he was supposed to be being held somewhere else as a POW. IF he was in Liverpool at this time we would all
accept that this had to be for some unknown, secret reason. So if the nature of him being there was SECRET or undisclosed then of course any records
would still have to show him as being in whichever camp he was SUPPOSED to be in otherwise the cat would be out the bag. For that reason we would
EXPECT the IRC report to show him in the location he was supposed to be in, and not in Liverpool. I'm not suggesting that the IRC would have been a
party to any cover up but is it possible that they were deceived? If you look at the case of Monty's double that I mentioned earlier then it is
possible for one person to appear to be in two places at once in order to deceive someone else. I clearly have no idea if there was ever a double used
in this Bader case, only suggesting that it is one possibility which could explain the scenario of Bader being in Liverpool at the same time as also
featuring in an IRC report elsewhere.
You could probably come up with lots of other different scenarios, that was just a quick one to show that in all probability anyone who believes he
was in Liverpool could just easily shrug off any evidence suggesting otherwise by saying 'well it would show that'.
On the other hand I can see that from your point of view you can also say that the IRC is impartial and so would not be complicit in any known
deception therefore the document proves that if they say he was in a camp, he must have been in a camp.
If you look at the anatomy of a debate, the burden of proof is on the person asserting a claim so in this case Ken has no proof other than the fact
that he was there. That's why you keep seeing him state this and the argument returning to this point. From your point of view I would imagine that
you would point to all the circumstantial evidence that makes it likely that Bader was where he was supposed to be in 1942. Is it beyond all
reasonable doubt that he was in a camp? You say yes, I say no and the debate continues.
I really can see where you're coming from - you have built a body of circumstantial evidence that suggests Bader couldn't possibly have been in
Liverpool in 1942. I still think there is a doubt although there is no further evidence other than Ken's word. I don't think we'll ever get another
independent witness or photographic or documentary evidence that he was in Liverpool so where do we go from here? Sorry for such a long post.