“I was troubled by the dismissive assertion that the entire story was false.”
I made no such assertion. I said, “This whole story may be BS.”
May be. As in might. As in could be. Possibly. It suggests possibility. It is not an “assertion that the entire story was false.”
“I did not see you post any evidence of that while the NY Post story had lots of details, including a photo of the survivor. I do know survivors. I’m troubled by previous comments by Pat Buchanan and Mel Gibson, so sometimes I have to ask to avoid making assumptions.”
I think you were making them by asking the question in the first. Also, any assumption you had in that regard would be irrelevant as to the veracity of what I said.
“I saw post 8 but no reference to its assertion. Did I miss something ?”
Again, there was no “assertion” as you are using it. Did you miss something? Yes. Will you find it in this thread? No.
“Why would Mr. Martin Greenfield’s entire story be false ?”
Did I say the WHOLE story is false? No. I said it might be false and that does not mean the whole story is false either. If it is false in any details it is so for the same reasons that some others are false. I posted links to examples of those.
“He is in Wikipedia and other articles were written about him, as far back as 2010.”
Irrelevant. Some stories have taken decades to be exposed as lies. His might be true. It might be a lie. I’m wary of these stories for a reason.
It seems to me you have no evidence whatsoever that Mr. Martin Greenfield’s published story is false but have written of it “This whole story may be BS.” That strikes me as irresponsible and provocative, given the nature of the story and this thread, and wholly unnecessary. It is certainly not what I expect from your obvious abilities to post edifying comments. I suppose I look up to you for a high standard. I hope I’ve not troubled you by my minor criticisms.