This Hatfield  McCoy battle has apparently raged for something like two years between the LA Times reporter defending his  article and the many editors who believe that if any attention is paid to said article equal space or more should be given to the evidence countering the reporters tendentious take on this subject  Given the substantial evidence put forward by Thomass defenders who seem motivated by a fierce desire to defend him from posthumous attacks and the contrasting motives  whatever they may be  of a reporter who has devoted such impressive energies to criticizing the man before and after his death the best way to resolve the problem is not to draw undue attention to it  If the reporter wants to insure his views will be seen the link remains to his commentary piece on his personal web site  And for those who want to insure Thomass defense is readily available the link remains to the web site set up in response to the LA Times article   The alternative to this is an endless wrangle