Unlike others (ask Tad) I am not afraid to present all of the evidence even if it challenges my side. I believe that only by addressing all points can you narrow in on the truth. That, Seumas, is how research is conducted,Your posts make no sense because you so frequently contradict yourself in the same post about who said and did what.
This is getting very boring and you not doing yourself any favours here.
Arun, rejecting holus bolus any evidence that contradicts you is usually a sign that you are losing the debate. I start by accepting any evidence presented and incorporating it into the body of evidence so that it can be weighed and measured in context, and, after careful consideration, deciding if it contributes to the overall true picture of events. Rejecting any interview with any survivor by any newspaper at any time is a self-defeating decision.