|
Post by DanJohno on Dec 1, 2023 19:43:41 GMT -5
I'm disappointed I wasted so much energy on this whole scene. It's not as bad as TTT makes it out to be. There is some evidence that some of what Roberts said about his life was true. Problem is most simply refuse to do research, or stop after a few dead-ends. Guys like TTT, in my opinion, made their own conclusions ages ago and haven't budged one inch since. I've been coming here off and on for years and he keeps repeating censuses, no matter how many times it's pointed out to him there's a 20+ month window where Brushy could've stepped into another person's life, etc. I don't think it's true but at least I'm giving the possibility of it being true the chance to be considered. Then again here's the problem with "Alias Billy The Kid", not everything that was on the tapes or in the notebooks or in photographs was in the book. What Morrison did not include is just as mysterious as anything else in the whole saga of Brushy Bill Roberts. For example, in Morrison's personal letters apparently mentions that Brushy Bill Roberts had a daughter. But who she is, etc nobody seems to know. For me personally I think there's truths and partial truths along with flat out lies out of Roberts mouth, and that's why now and then we find little mentions in newspapers (for example) that seem to validate certain things he claimed. For instance, it is a historical fact that horses/cattle from Argentina were brought to Texas and vice versa, and that many men did go from Argentina to the Shetland Islands to get Shetland ponies. Brushy claimed he went to both places for those reasons. While not concrete proof of anything, it's a string of truth that demonstrates that he wasn't just pulling things out of thin air either. And as I have said before concerning his known genealogy, there is all of these ties to people like Sam Houston and Monroe Harper and criminals like George Birdwell, etc. It's all about research my friend. And a lot of times you have to think outside the box in order to find interesting things. If you just look at everything straight on like TTT does, then you'll never find anything substantial. But I think one thing we can all agree on whether we think Brushy was The Kid or not, there are enough inconsistencies and issues and problems with what happened that night in Fort Sumner that we can agree that Garrett and Coe's version of events is NOT what really happened. That's not to mean that Billy The Kid survived. It may very well mean that a lot of underhanded things occurred in order to kill him. But we can agree that the whole thing is not kosher. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all I don't really have the skills to do my own research which is why I rely on the expertise of you all. But all the best researchers fight and disagree anyway so what hope does an honest newcomer have? I don't think it's anyone's fault for fighting over this because they are researching a world of lies and corruption and utter dishonesty anyway. Young Guns 2 was a good movie with a good soundtrack but that’s where the good story starts and ends. What an absolute disappointment this whole scene is.
|
|
|
Post by billybarlowofficial on Dec 1, 2023 19:59:25 GMT -5
It's not as bad as TTT makes it out to be. There is some evidence that some of what Roberts said about his life was true. Problem is most simply refuse to do research, or stop after a few dead-ends. Guys like TTT, in my opinion, made their own conclusions ages ago and haven't budged one inch since. I've been coming here off and on for years and he keeps repeating censuses, no matter how many times it's pointed out to him there's a 20+ month window where Brushy could've stepped into another person's life, etc. I don't think it's true but at least I'm giving the possibility of it being true the chance to be considered. Then again here's the problem with "Alias Billy The Kid", not everything that was on the tapes or in the notebooks or in photographs was in the book. What Morrison did not include is just as mysterious as anything else in the whole saga of Brushy Bill Roberts. For example, in Morrison's personal letters apparently mentions that Brushy Bill Roberts had a daughter. But who she is, etc nobody seems to know. For me personally I think there's truths and partial truths along with flat out lies out of Roberts mouth, and that's why now and then we find little mentions in newspapers (for example) that seem to validate certain things he claimed. For instance, it is a historical fact that horses/cattle from Argentina were brought to Texas and vice versa, and that many men did go from Argentina to the Shetland Islands to get Shetland ponies. Brushy claimed he went to both places for those reasons. While not concrete proof of anything, it's a string of truth that demonstrates that he wasn't just pulling things out of thin air either. And as I have said before concerning his known genealogy, there is all of these ties to people like Sam Houston and Monroe Harper and criminals like George Birdwell, etc. It's all about research my friend. And a lot of times you have to think outside the box in order to find interesting things. If you just look at everything straight on like TTT does, then you'll never find anything substantial. But I think one thing we can all agree on whether we think Brushy was The Kid or not, there are enough inconsistencies and issues and problems with what happened that night in Fort Sumner that we can agree that Garrett and Coe's version of events is NOT what really happened. That's not to mean that Billy The Kid survived. It may very well mean that a lot of underhanded things occurred in order to kill him. But we can agree that the whole thing is not kosher. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all I don't really have the skills to do my own research which is why I rely on the expertise of you all. But all the best researchers fight and disagree anyway so what hope does an honest newcomer have? I don't think it's anyone's fault for fighting over this because they are researching a world of lies and corruption and utter dishonesty anyway. Young Guns 2 was a good movie with a good soundtrack but that’s where the good story starts and ends. What an absolute disappointment this whole scene is. Much as I like Young Guns 2 even it was not at all accurate to how Morrison met Brushy, or to Brushy's story, etc. For example, because Keifer Sutherland had to shoot another movie they killed off Doc when the real Doc lived to be an old man. Same with the character Chavez being killed off when he lived on for decades. Brushy never claimed such things, etc so Young Guns 2 can be seen as a parody of Brushy. Anyways, one thing that might make you feel better about the whole situation is that so little is known about the real Billy The Kid that everything is questionable. For example, there is no proof of any kind that he was ever born in New York. We don't know the name of his father either. Some say Michael, others say Patrick, and others say some other name. We don't know his birthdate, and because of censuses he could've been anywhere from 16-25 years of age by the time Fort Sumner occurred. His place of origin is also in question because on censuses he said places like Missouri as his birth state. The real Kid told so many lies, etc that we don't know what is the truth. So it's all open to reinvestigation as far as I'm concerned. We know LESS today about The Kid than they knew back then. He may as well have not existed because everything is built on 2nd hand or 3rd hand information, and flat out lies. And nobody seemed interested in ever asking Joseph Antrim about his family history. Quite the travesty of history. Furthermore... From my view, there always was some doubt about The Kid being killed by Pat Garrett regardless of what historians or anti-Brushy or anti-Miller people say. People forget but there was 20 some odd pretenders or claimants who said they were Billy The Kid, and I think the first one was a teenage boy within months of Fort Sumner and guess what? The law investigated, found him, and the boy admitted he made it all up. But this continued for a couple of years. Anytime there was somebody claiming to be The Kid, the law started snooping. Even into the 1930s, when people across Texas were claiming they saw The Kid playing the fiddle at parties, etc it attracted a man-hunt search by Pawnee Bill. That individual was Henry "Walkabout" Smith alias "Fiddling" Henry Smith, who Martile Able said wasn't The Kid. The point is even though Garrett got his reward money and "officially" he was declared to have killed The Kid, there was enough interest in local police departments from New Mexico to as far as the Rocky Mountains that boots would be put on the ground looking for The Kid. The Fort Sumner crowd maintain that nobody ever said that The Kid survived that night, but apparently that cannot be true because for years (especially early on) there was enough whispering voices to cause many people to keep an open mind and search down imposters in case they were The Kid. Jesus Christ Almighty God bless you all
|
|