Most helpful critical review
65 of 90 people found the following review helpful
Hopeless nonsense - Save your money!
on May 11, 2014
If you're hoping this book will prove Hitler, Eva Braun and Martin Bormann escaped from Berlin in 1945 at the end of WW2 forget it. They never fled abroad and lived in Argentina, or anywhere else. This book, which claims to reveal `The documented truth of Hitler's escape from Berlin', is just another variation on the usual conspiracy theory nonsense.
The book is edited by Harry Cooper, a WW2 submarine buff. One third of the book purports to be the memoirs of a former Spanish bullfighter turned Nazi spy, Don Angel Alcazar de Velasco, who worked for the Nazis before, during, and after WW2. According the files in Britain's National Archives he was a dubious character:- `The files contain transcripts of Velasco's telephone conversations and also those of his associates, who talk about him in mostly unfavourable terms ... In 1942 he was involved in selling fabricated intelligence from a mythical group of 'agents' in the UK to the Germans and Japanese.' He also tried unsuccessfully to kidnap the Duke of Windsor.
Velasco was a dedicated Nazi, anti-Semite and conspiracy theorist. `Dropping his voice,' wrote the author Michael Bloch who met him in 1983, Velasco `informed us that the world was being taken over by an international conspiracy of Jews and Freemasons.'
According to the book I'm reviewing here - Harry Cooper's "Hitler in Argentina" - Velasco worked in Berlin at the end of the war. `I was called to the Führer's side,' he tells us. `I spent the last three months of the war in the Führerbunker, Hitler's headquarters beneath the Reich Chancellery.' He claims he was `the only non-German to actually work within the Führer's personal headquarters in the bunker.' There he says he met Hitler. But is he telling the truth when he describes this meeting with the Nazi leader? On pages 44-45 Velasco writes:- `When I crossed the threshold of his map room, Adolf Hitler was sitting at his desk. He looked shrunken and indescribably aged. His light brown uniform jacket - the Nazi party dress he almost always wore - hung from his shoulders like a shroud.'
Hold on a moment ... Hitler wore a brown uniform until WW2 started in September 1939. He then changed to a grey uniform. On Friday, 1st September, 1939, a few hours after the invasion of Poland began, Hitler broadcast a speech from the Kroll Opera House, home of the Nazi Reichstag. As he entered the hall members could see Hitler was not wearing his usual brown-coloured Führer tunic. Instead, he wore a new field-grey tunic matching the colour of a German Army uniform.
During his speech Hitler declared:- `I am from now on just the first soldier of the German Reich. I have once more put on that [Army style] coat that was most sacred and dear to me [in the First World War]. I will not take it off again until victory is secured, or I will not survive the outcome.'
For once Hitler told the truth. He was wearing his field-grey jacket when he committed suicide in the Berlin bunker in 1945. Yet here is Velasco falsely claiming Hitler was wearing a light brown Nazi uniform jacket in the bunker - `the Nazi party dress he almost always wore.'
Velasco is an unreliable narrator. We know his story is untrue when he claims he accompanied Martin Bormann on a submarine to South America in 1946, a year after Germany surrendered. How many times must I repeat when reviewing Hitler escape books that Bormann died in Berlin at the end of the war in 1945. He was a rotting corpse and in no condition to travel anywhere.
The proof? ... Bormann's dead body was seen by the Hitler Youth Leader Artur Axmann near the Lehrter station in Berlin in 1945. This was shortly after Bormann fled from the bunker following Hitler's suicide. In 1972 workmen discovered human remains near the site. The skull was examined and Bormann identified by the teeth. Also the bones. Bormann had damaged his shoulder during a riding accident and the bones showed evidence of this.
More proof came in the 1998 when the remains were DNA tested. They belonged to Martin Bormann.
Two years later Bormann's remains underwent further tests - a mitochondrial DNA comparison. The results were published in the February 14, 2001 issue of International Journal of Legal Medicine. The results supported overwhelmingly the hypothesis that the remains were those of Martin Bormann. For more information see the update at the end of this article.
Yet Velasco insists that a year later - in 1946 - he shared a cabin with Bormann while travelling to Argentina on a German U-Boat. Indeed, he claims to have had long conversations with Bormann. We're supposed to believe that Hitler's right-hand man told him he refused to allow his boss to commit suicide in the last days of the war. Disobeying orders Bormann had Hitler drugged. The Fuhrer was then spirited away from the bunker by officers on Bormann's staff, driven across Germany and smuggled by ship to Norway.
What happened to Eva Braun? She `never arrived in Norway,' claimed Bormann. `Unfortunately she was given an overdose of drugs from which she later died.'
But what about the story accepted by all major historians that Hitler and Eva committed suicide in the Berlin bunker? Velasco quotes Bormann as saying:- `As for the suicide. I was the author of the story that Hitler and Eva Braun committed suicide and their bodies burned with petrol. Those witnesses who afterwards testified to this end had been carefully briefed on my instructions.'
At one point the editor Harry Cooper intervenes in the text and tells us:- `There is very strong proof that Eva Braun did not die and was indeed in Argentina.' How she and Hitler got to South America Velasco never reveals. Indeed, if Bormann had arranged for Hitler to be drugged and spirited away to South America why did he fail to go with him? Bormann seldom left Hitler's side when he was in power. It's inconceivable he would have left this important task to others. Why did he travel with a Spanish spy, Velasco, instead?
Readers hoping for a spate of photos proving Hitler lived in Argentina are in for a disappointment. Only one picture purports to show him in South America. This appears on page 115 and is repeated on the back cover. Even the editor doubts its authenticity. A caption on the back cover says it ‘appears to show Hitler frail and near the end of his life’ … ‘appears to show’? What sort of proof is that? The right ear is the wrong shape - similar to Mr Spock in “Star Treck” - and too large compared with Hitler’s. A handkerchief obscures half the face so the picture is ambiguous and wide open for speculation - like so much evidence conspiracy theorists would have us believe. There's no provenance. When and where was this photo taken? Who was the photographer? Cooper has no idea. I will tell him…
You can buy a copy from Getty Images. This is the caption: 'Caption:29th May 1943: An elderly resident of the Bishopswood Home in Highgate, north London, having a rest in an armchair, with his handkerchief shielding his face. Original Publication: Picture Post - 1446 - Aged People And The War - pub. 1943 (Photo by Kurt Hutton/Picture Post/Getty Images).'
In addition, I have an album of Kurt Hutton's photos published by the Focal Press in 1947. It's called "Speaking Likeness". And guess what? You can find the same picture on page 38. Hutton calls it 'Forty Winks' and published details about how it was taken.
What the hell is Cooper playing at when he claims this picture could be Hitler? Why does he feature it in his book and display it in a prominent position on the back cover? Why does he claim its copyright belongs to his Sharkhunters organisation when he stole it from Getty? His action is even more offensive when you remember the photographer was half Jewish and fled from the Nazis. Cooper is using his work and - by implication - suggesting that someone who was half Jewish, and worked for a magazine that opposed the Nazis, photographed Hitler after the war and told no-one he was still alive!
Cooper compounded the offense when he appeared on the Jeff Rense conspiracy radio program on 21 Feb 2014. At the end of a boring interview lasting 95 minutes the two of them gloart over this picture of an innocent London pensioner who they falsely accuse of being Hitler. It's revolting.
The book's cover is also misleading - not only the words `HITLER IN ARGENTINA - The documented truth of Hitler's escape from Berlin' - but the pictures. The casual browser might think the photo of Hitler and Eva Braun - which is superimposed on top of pictures of a house in Argentina where Hitler was alleged to have lived and a map - was taken in South America. No way! This photo of the smiling couple was taken between September 1938 and October 1940 in the Eagle's Nest at Obersaltzberg. You can find dozens of copies all over the Internet. Three more photos of Eva included in the book were all taken in 1930s Germany. No image exists of her in South America.
On page 61 there's a picture of Hitler in Berlin. He's shown in the Reich Chancellery garden on 20th March 1945 congratulating members of the Hitler Youth who have won medals for bravery. Velasco says a double was substituted for Hitler at the end of WW2. The editor thinks this photo supports his argument. `It is generally accepted,' writes Harry Cooper, `that this is not the real Hitler in this photo shot in the last days of the war. The nose, ears and cheekbones are quite different than the real Hitler.'
The editor has misinterpreted the photograph. His claim that it's `generally accepted that this is not the real Hitler,' is false. On the contrary the majority of mainstream historians regard this photo - or an authentic version of it - as genuine. It shows the real Hitler.
How do we know?
Because this ceremony was photographed by a movie camera that produced hundreds of images of Hitler from different angles. In addition a stills photographer took many images before and after this shot. All the pictures show the genuine Hitler. This disputed shot, which Cooper reproduces in his book, is a tiny, badly printed image that has been doctored. A boy's head has been changed. A bareheaded guy, with glasses and a large shaggy moustache, has been crudely stuck over the original Hitler Youth who wore a cap. The guy resembles Saddam Hussein. But if you look at a properly printed unretouched enlargement containing plenty of detail - "Life" magazine has a copy - you'll see this shot fits into the sequence of images taken at the time. The facial details match the other images which all show the authentic Hitler. There's no double and no mystery. You can find these images all over the Internet.
The only mystery is how this fake image made its way into the book and why the editor uses it to bolster a false argument.
You want proof that what I say about these photos is true? Then visit the website WW2TALK. Go to their discussion forum and type in the words `Hitler escaped'. On page 10 you'll find pictures that prove Cooper has published misleading photos.
The way Cooper handles a picture of President Eisenhower on page 141 also causes disquiet. Did Ike call on Hitler in 1960 when he stayed at the Llao-Llao hotel in the tourist resort of San Carlos de Bariloche, Argentina? This was while the US president was on a highly publicised tour of South America. One Amazon reviewer, who awarded this book four stars, thought he did. `The photo of an American president in 1960 visiting Hitler in his remote hideout was extraordinary,' she wrote.
In fact, the photo shows Ike at Llao-Llao with two unidentified men. Hitler is nowhere visible. The man the Amazon customer mistakes for Hitler is President Arturo Frondizi of Argentina. Cooper makes the link with Hitler by placing this picture - which has a caption laden with innuendo - near allegations on other pages that Hitler lived on an estate close to the hotel. `One can only wonder,' writes Cooper, `what was the real reason an American President was at a resort so far from ... from anything shortly after the end of the war.'
This is wrong. It's inconceivable the former Supreme Allied Commander, head of NATO and President of the USA connived at Hitler's escape. Eisenhower hated Germans and was horrified when he inspected a Nazi concentration camp. If he had been involved in an escape plot and cover-up Ike would have shown continuous interest in Hitler's activities. The most hated man on earth would have been closely monitored. Think of the worldwide scandal if news leaked that the allies were protecting Hitler! One would expect a massive paper trail and records of meetings with the FBI, CIA, etc. Ike would have spoken to many people - Churchill, General Marshall etc. There is no way this information could have remained secret. There is no convincing evidence that it exists because Hitler was long dead.
Ike visited Llao-Llao with Argentina's president to sign the Declaration of San Carlos de Bariloche in the hotel's main hall. The declaration talked about peace, freedom and cultural and material opportunities for the peoples of the Americas. The two men also played four holes of golf. There's nothing sinister about Ike's visit to a famous hotel in a popular tourist resort.
Again, if you want proof visit the website WW2TALK and look at the evidence published on page 10 of their `Hitler escaped' forum.
But back to Velasco ... After the war the Nazi spy lived in Mexico. In July 1952 he claimed he received a message ordering him to report to an isolated region on the southern tip of South America. There he would be taken to see `a most important person'. After several changes of aircraft Velasco said he realised they `were flying towards the South Pole!' Eventually he landed in a snow-covered `Arctic Waste'.
At this point the editor intervenes again and corrects his geography. Surely Velasco means Antarctic instead of Arctic if he's in the southern hemisphere? But the editor thinks Velasco may never have gone that far south. He believes Velasco is `deliberately giving mis-information' - something spies often do. Instead he might have visited the south-western part of Patagonia where Hitler might have lived after the war, though there's no proof.
Velasco would have us believe he arrived at a remote hidden estate and was taken to meet `the Fuhrer'. He was shown into a room and found an elderly man seated at a desk in front of a huge Nazi banner hung on the wall behind. The man was so old and decrepit Velasco admits `if this was Hitler he was barely recognizable as the man whom I had seen leaving the Berlin bunker in April, 1945.' He had no moustache and was completely bald. Velasco emphasises his uncertainty about the man`s identity. `Hitler, if Hitler it was, received me sitting down...'
The spy had been ordered to bring 50 or 60 photos of two teenage children - a boy called Adolpho and girl called Stern - to show the mystery man. The Fuhrer poured over the pictures though never hinted they were his children. None of these pictures appears in the book, though Velasco claims he took many of them himself. Why? Surely he would have had negatives from which copies could have been made. The children could have been tracked down and nowadays DNA tested.
There's a desultory conversation that reveals nothing of interest and Velasco is shown out and returns to Mexico. On the flight home he's `filled with excitement', but also assailed by doubts. `Could this shrunken old man have been the one-time ranting, dominating dictator? ' he wonders. `Was this poor creature, now presiding over a million square miles of nothing, the same as he who had conquered a continent? Was this Hitler?'
If Velasco is suspicious about the man's identity - and he expresses doubts seven times! - why should we believe he was Hitler? Where's the hard evidence?
In 2009 Harry Cooper and a team of enthusiasts visited the house where the man who might - or might not - have been Hitler was supposed to have lived. They reached it by boat. As the editor walked across the lawn a bizarre incident occurred that might have come straight out of the TV comedy series "Fawlty Towers".
`Our Argentine boat captain began goose-stepping with his right arm in the air ..."I know who lived here," he cried. "I lived here in my childhood. My father was the caretaker - I know who lived here!"
Harry says the captain smiled `and set off again with his right arm in the air, goose-stepping across the grass.'
But did Harry and his team discover anything on the site - photos, documents, clothes, objects, etc - associated with Hitler? No! There was nothing there. So again where is the hard evidence that Hitler ever set foot in the place, let alone lived there for years?
The "Fawlty Towers" analogy may be closer to the truth than Harry Cooper realises. The goose-stepping boat captain may have been making fun of the Sharkhunters group. Only instead of realizing they were being played as fools they saw it as hard evidence. The Argentines had form when it came to taking Nazi-hunting foreigners for suckers. Perhaps Harry Cooper and his pals got the same treatment from an Argentine with a sense of humour.
Look at pages 172-173 and you'll find the headline:- `The Maid Knew!'
Here we have a classic conspiracy theory interview - the reluctant witness who agrees to talk, then backs out because `They' don't want her to. When she does agree to talk the evidence mysteriously vanishes and she has nothing of interest to say. The maid, Catalina Gamaro, worked for the Eichhorn family, who had known Hitler in Germany, and now ran the Hotel Eden in Argentina.
Catalina was convinced Hitler had `stayed just a few days' at the hotel. Did she see Hitler?
`No, no, no,' she said. `We don't see him. He stayed in a private place. Nobody can see him.'
So it's just hearsay - gossip and rumour. Was there any evidence to back up this claim - a photograph of Hitler at the hotel?
`Yes,' said Catalina, `The Eichhorns had one, but they burned it.'
So the evidence vanished in a puff of smoke, assuming it ever existed. Catalina claimed Hitler stayed at the hotel in 1949 `and he died in San Juan, Mendoza.'
Really? How did she know Hitler died at San Juan, Mendoza? When did Hitler die? What killed him? Was he buried, or cremated, or spirited away? Any death certificate, grave, or DNA? ... No information. And nothing about Eva Braun, or Martin Bormann. This interview is useless.
Some of Velasco's most explosive remarks occur in the second part of the book where you'll find a letter Velasco wrote to his `Dear Friend Cooper' in 1987. This is printed on pages 238-240. His comments will outrage many. In this letter Velasco makes remarks not only about Martin Bormann, but also about one of the major organisers of the Holocaust, Adolf Eichmann, and the infamous doctor at Auschwitz, Joseph Mengele, known as Dr Death. Velasco claims Bormann was `a circumcised Jew although a Nazi ... Eichmann was also a Jew.' And about Mengele he says - `again a Jew.'
The following year Velasco commented again on this subject in another letter to his `Dear Friend ...my friend Cooper'. You can find it on pages 241-244 where Velasco says:- `You know that Mengele was Jewish by race (like Bormann). He was circumcised and this made him take maximum precautions.'
The second half of the book also contains reproductions of intelligence documents from the FBI and elsewhere, plus newspaper cuttings reporting rumours and sightings of Hitler, Eva, and Bormann. But when it comes to face-to-face meetings, information of real substance, there's nothing there. Again no photos, documents, artefacts, or masses of hard evidence that could prove Hitler lived in South America.
Intelligence officers will tell you their secret archives contain thousands of human intelligence reports of unknown reliability from untested sources. Some of these `sightings' are genuine mistakes. Others are made by impostors, or are a figment of a conspiracy theorist's imagination. These `sightings' surface years later when they're declassified and can fool the unwary. People are easily hoaxed. As one critic put it:- `The conspiracy theorist ... is to the professional historian what the treasure hunter is the archaeologist, only in the case of the conspiracy theorists, there is no means of convincing them that their quick dig among the documents has revealed only false gold.'
And that's what readers will find in this book - false gold. The book is riddled with errors and inconsistencies. The text is chaotically disorganised. Information is chucked in here, there and everywhere. There's no index and the typography and printing are appalling. Everything about this book is tenth-rate and amateurish. While it's true many Nazis fled to South America it's untrue to argue - as this book does - that Adolf Hitler, Eva Braun and Martin Bormann were amongst them and `lived out their lives in safety and comfort...'
In March 2012 Sergio Widder, the Latin America director of Nazi hunters the Simon Wiesenthal Center, said: "Argentina was the main haven for Nazi war criminals. Men like Mengele and Eichmann were protected by the Argentine state. But there is no serious evidence Hitler survived the war, let alone came to Argentina. These stories should be for novels, not history."'
The Simon Wiesenthal Center is the world's leading Nazi hunting organisation. Why are they wrong about Hitler and Harry Cooper right?
The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington has no doubts Bormann died in 1945 as you can see if you visit their website. There they state:- 'Bormann died in an effort to flee Berlin in the last days of World War II, but was long thought to be at large. He was tried in absentia at Nuremberg, where he was sentenced to death. West German authorities officially declared him dead in 1973 after his remains were discovered and positively identified.'
Why is the memorial museum wrong and Harry Cooper right? Why does he know so much more than the experts who have studied this issue for decades?
Yad Vashem, the world centre for Holocaust research in Jerusalem, also denies Hitler survived the war. So does the Wiener Library, another leading authority on the Holocaust and Nazi era. So does Bundesarchiv (German Federal Archive). So does "Encyclopaedia Britannica" which has exacting standards of accuracy.
These organisations are stuffed with experts who have contacts with thousands of knowledgeable people all over the globe. Why are they wrong and Harry Cooper right?
Even that maverick David Irving says Hitler, Eva and Bormann died in Berlin in 1945.
In their Amazon blurb the publishers claim, `This book will change the history you were taught in 5th grade.' It better not. Save your money and buy something better. How can you trust an author who is incapable of getting the simplest facts right? On page 159 he tells us Adolf Eichmann was 'Commandant of Auschwitz concentration camp.' Wrong!
In the meantime, I've reviewed four more bogus Nazi history books here on Amazon where I develop my sceptical arguments further:-
My review of "HUNTING HITLER - New scientific evidence that Hitler escaped Nazi Germany" by Dr Jerome Corsi is entitled "Trash - an insult to the brain".
And my review of "GREY WOLF - the escape of Adolf Hitler" by Simon Dunstan and Gerrard Williams is called "Buyer Beware - Fantasy History! - Updated September 2013, 16 Oct 2011".
"AFTERMATH" by Ladislas Farago. A preposterous book about Martin Bormann. My review is called "Absolute drivel - Avoid!"
My review of Paul Manning's book "MARTIN BORMANN - NAZI IN EXILE" is called "Martin Bormann and the Loch Ness Monster."
As I've pointed out in all these reviews no reputable historian, or major historical institution, backs up Hitler or Martin Bormann survival claims. That applies to Harry Cooper's book "Hitler in Argentina". These writers of pseudo history would have us believe that thousands of experts who have examined these matters for decades since 1945 are wrong. They want us to believe that people with authentic knowledge are involved in a vast conspiracy to deceive the public. Meanwhile, we're supposed to take on trust amateur investigations by those whose muddled and careless interpretation of the evidence makes no sense. Reader beware!
UPDATE:- Here's more evidence that proves Bormann died in Berlin in 1945. This means Velasco's stories about Bormann and Hitler are false - cheap fiction and nothing else.
If you visit the website of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum you will see it gives Martin Bormann's dates as 1900-1945. In other words Bormann died at the end of the war and never escaped. The museum adds this about Bormann:- `West German authorities officially declared him dead in 1973 after his remains were discovered and positively identified.'
This article in "The Los Angeles Times" neatly sums up Bormann's story:-
`NAZI'S FAMILY SAYS CASE CLOSED
May 06, 1998| Reuters
BONN -- Martin Bormann's family welcomed news that DNA tests had shown remains found more than 20 years ago were those of the Nazi, saying they hoped the findings would lay to rest speculation over his whereabouts.
Scientists confirmed Monday that DNA testing showed a skull and other remains found at a Berlin building site in 1972 were those of Bormann, Adolf Hitler's right-hand man.
The bones discovered in Berlin were widely thought to be those of Bormann after dental records and injuries found on the remains matched those of Hitler's henchman, but rumors of his escape and survival continued.
The DNA test "rules out any further speculation over the death or survival of Martin Bormann after 1945 for any serious reporter," the family said in a statement.
The family has consistently maintained that Bormann died in May 1945.'
And here is a report in US National Library of Medicine - National Institute of Health
`Identification of the skeletal remains of Martin Bormann by mtDNA analysis.
Anslinger K1, Weichhold G, Keil W, Bayer B, Eisenmenger W.
Author information: (1)Institute of Legal Medicine, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Germany.
Contrary to statements of an eye-witness who reported that Martin Bormann, the
second most powerful man in the Third Reich, died on 2 May 1945 in Berlin,
rumours persisted over the years that he had escaped from Germany after World War
II. In 1972, skeletal remains were found during construction work, and by
investigating the teeth and the bones experts concluded that they were from
Bormann. Nevertheless, new rumours arose and in order to end this speculation we
were commissioned to identify the skeletal remains by mitochondrial DNA analysis.
The comparison of the sequence of HV1 and HV2 from the skeletal remains and a
living maternal relative of Martin Bormann revealed no differences and this
sequence was not found in 1,500 Caucasoid reference sequences. Based on this
investigation, we support the hypothesis that the skeletal remains are those of
Some people think Velasco's arguments are bolstered by Paul Manning's book "MARTIN BORMANN - Nazi in exile" ... But what do I find when studying it? Manning demolishes Velasco's credibility in a few sentences.
On page 172 Manning confirms Hitler and Eva Braun committed suicide in the Berlin bunker in 1945. Velasco claims Hitler escaped to Argentina and Eva died elsewhere.
Velasco also claims he and Bormann together escaped to Argentina onboard a submarine in the summer of 1946. Manning destroys that argument at a stroke. He claims Bormann boarded a ship the next year - that's 1947 - `a rather sizeable freighter' - sailed to South America and `steamed into the harbor of Buenos Aires in the winter of 1947'. Velasco is never mentioned in Manning's book. He never had conversations with Bormann onboard a submarine, or anywhere else.
I've also been told I should read "AFTERMATH - Martin Bormann and the Fourth Reich" by Ladislas Farago ... I have! ... And what do I find? He too says `Hitler committed suicide' in Berlin in 1945. He describes how Adolf's and Eva's `gasoline-soaked bodies' ... were `consumed by the flames'... So again Velasco was wrong when he claimed Hitler survived and escaped. And when did Bormann enter Argentina? According to Farago he arrived by boat in 1948.
So which year did Bormann arrive in South America - 1946, 1947, or 1948? The answer? ... None of them as Bormann died in Berlin in 1945. Both Manning and Farago dismiss the discovery of Bormann's remains in Berlin 1972 which proved this basic fact. And their books were published too early for the devastating DNA confirmation years later that proved beyond doubt that Bormann never left Hitler's capital at the end of WW2.
Another point ... One person says Ladsilas Farago `wrote that he personally met Martin Bormann in South America.' Some meeting! Even Farago derides it. On page 491 he wrote:- `It was at this stage (1973) that I saw Martin Bormann - saw him is the right word, because it would be too much to say that we met.'
You're telling me! After being given the run-around by various con-men who were trying to get him to pay $500,000 for Bormann's bogus memoirs (which he admits contained nothing of interest about Hitler) Farago was taken to a remote hospital in Bolivia. There, he tells us, he was granted `a five-minute visit (with no questions asked and, certainly, no answers given.)' On entering the room he found a senile, old man propped up in bed who uttered two sentences:- `Dammit, don't you see I'm an old man? So why don't you let me die in peace?'
Farago left. And that's it! No interview, no photographs, no finger-prints. Hardly conclusive proof!