Couple of things jump out at you. I have not followed this matter really.
He definitely was a spy.
He was killed, moreover, more or less publicly, in England, in a way which simultaneously uncovered him to have been a spy.
In a sense, then, he was outed, as he was killed.
It seems to me therefore that someone was sending a message by his death to others.
What other conclusions could one reach?
It would have been easy to have killed him privately, but that was not done.
Patton, not a spy, you know, was privately killed, by 'truck', or rather, finished off secretly in hospital, after truck.
No one, on either side, say three sides or more, then or later, wanted his death to be thought anything other than an unfortunate accident, except perhaps, only much later, Douglas Bazata, whose conscience bothered him, if one believes Target Patton. Question: what indicia of reliability should one attach to such an account, Wilcox's, especially re Bazata ? Such indicia are well known. They have been used in biblical scholarship, and elsewhere, for decades. Maybe someone more well versed than myself in these historical corroboration matters can address such questions. Re The Drew Pearson Fallacy in this connection, see Wikipedia Drew Pearson.
Here was Bazata's obituary:
http://www.nytimes.com/1999/08/22/world/douglas-dewitt-bazata-artist-and-oss-officer-dies-at-88.html
No comments:
Post a Comment