posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 09:25 AM
Hi Waynos, good to have your input. I think you have it here - we have seen that Ken did get his timelines that he originally used to place his story
in mid 42 muddled and having had those pointed out to him, took them out of his story. Like you say, this is nothing unusual and doesn't of itself
make someone a liar, but it does call that persons credibility into question as a reliable witness. Personally, I wouldn't go so far as to say Ken
is a liar, though he is clearly something of a lineshooter. I think he was a naive young lad that got taken in and having now made such a fuss about
it, he can't swallow his pride and back down.
On the issue of respect, I quite agree, all should be treated with respect, veteran or not, old or young, but that is two way and as we have seen here
Ken does not treat anyone that seeks to question his account with respect - to me that means he abrogates his right to respect, at least in relation
to his account. Simply being a veteran does not make him above question. Frankly, his abusive attitude further detracts from any credibility.
Clearly there will never be any proof of this as even if POW records turned up (and most were destroyed) showing Bader in various camps contiguously,
Ken will most likely allege that the records were doctored to cover up the mystery. However we do have the account from Dolly that contradicts many
of the assertions made by Ken - again, not proof but very much more compelling than Ken's "version".
I still come back to the gaping holes in this story - there is clearly a yawning gap between the description of the man that Ken met and Bader and the
simple facts that could place such a man in such a place at such a time. Ken takes it on trust that the information given to him about this person
being Bader was gospel as opposed to irony, a joke or an assumed name (you can almost hear the manager's pained tones - "Oh go and help old
'Douglas Bader' in room 7") and I can't given any real credence to the alleged confirmation by Bader in the 70s - as I know from colleagues that
knew Bader, the man did not suffer fools or people he considered his inferior gladly - witness the call he made to Alec Ross after the latter left
Bader's legs at Colditz, thus a phone call from a stranger claiming to have helped Bader many years before would likely have been got rid of, and how
better to do that quickly and easily with no fuss than say "Oh yes, old boy, I remember you well - nice to hear from you. Goodbye".
Too many assumptions, too many holes, too many mistakes. I think it's likely that there was a person in the Stork that either called himself, or
was known as Douglas Bader, but it wasn't the real one. Eliminate the impossible and what is left is the truth - I think we have done just that.
[edit on 9-2-2008 by SPM.45]