Huffington has someone claiming Hickey did it...

[Tracy Riddle]

I did a talk tonight at a book store with a pretty sophisticated crowd.

In the Q and A, someone asked me about Hickey.

Boy they are really revving up the disinfo machine aren't they?

And its still over 3 1/2 months away.

Doesn't the Bronson film show (from a distance) the follow-up car right before the head shot, and no one in the car is standing?
Fortunately for Menninger & Donahue, Hickey is dead and can no longer sue them.

[Albert Rossi]

I did a talk tonight at a book store with a pretty sophisticated crowd.

In the Q and A, someone asked me about Hickey.

Boy they are really revving up the disinfo machine aren't they?

And its still over 3 1/2 months away.

Doesn't the Bronson film show (from a distance) the follow-up car right before the head shot, and no one in the car is standing?
Fortunately for Menninger & Donahue, Hickey is dead and can no longer sue them.

As far as I can remember, there is no photographic confirmation for this "hypothesis" (if it merits that characterization) other than the photo of the follow-up car with Hickey holding the AK-47, after it has gone under the Triple Underpass and entered the Stemmons Freeway.

[Jim DiEugenio]

If I recall correctly, Groden pointed this out to Menninger back in the nineties.

They went ahead with the book anyway.

That shows you what an agenda some people have.

BTW, I have to say, that was a slickly done book. It was well written, and it had some neat information in it.

THey usually put some good packaging around the disinfo, right. No matter how simple or how extreme it is. The other end would be Waldron and Hartmann.

[Jim DiEugenio]

OMG, Tom Wilson.

Only Nigel Turner could buy into this guy's methodology.


I will never forget what Milicent Cranor once said of him: "Tom Wilson could not find a hunk of metal in a Pittsburgh steel factory."

[Albert Rossi]

OMG, Tom Wilson.

Only Nigel Turner could buy into this guy's methodology.


I will never forget what Milicent Cranor once said of him: "Tom Wilson could not find a hunk of metal in a Pittsburgh steel factory."

LOL

[Charles Drago]

1. Regarding your hypothesis that J. D. Tippit very well may have been the "Badge Man" figure allegedly firing at JFK from behind the picket fence...

I remember that Gary Mack's two favorite pieces of conspiracy evidence were "Badge Man" and the dictabelt recording, neither of which I ever felt much confidence about. Staring at that Rorschach test we call the Moorman Polaroid, you can see almost anything if you look hard enough. Raymond Marcus actually identified some more plausible shapes in the photo, but we're still in Wonderland. If only Mary had had a better quality, color camera.

Let me state, first, that I have Into the Nightmare in my stack of books, and have not yet gotten to it, but am anxious to read it. So I do not know what the arguments about Tippit are that Joseph musters for his hypothesis. But, FWIW, I do know -- outside of Buchanan -- that this identification has been proposed in at least one other place: Phillips, D.T. A Deeper, Darker Truth: Tom Wilson's Journey into the Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Illinois: DTP/Companion Books, 2009. The epilogue suggests that Badge Man is Tippit because of the supposed pock mark on his left cheek uncovered by Wilson's digital analysis. In my opinion the book is, to be kind, extremely dubious (I am inclined to say totally bogus junk; there is not enough detail in the presentation to understand exactly what the mathematics of Wilson's technique supposedly consists of), but I thought I'd just add this into the mix here for completeness sake.

I was in the Dallas ASK conference audiences for Wilson's first and second public presentations of his work and its products. The point I made then is the point I make now: Let us simply conduct a series of impartial tests of his machinery and methods. Use science to test science. It works, or it doesn't work. Or both.

For reasons that perhaps Peter Lemkin can speak to in detail, there are no public records of any such tests having been conducted.

[Magda Hassan]

[quote=Magda Hassan]
Yep. The masses have never been taught to think critcally. /QUOTE]

And it is no accident that the likes of Ken Rahn and John McAdams declare that they are teaching critical thinking skills in defending the LN lie.

Telling case in point: Rahn, a scientist who was allowed to teach a University of Rhode Island class in critical thinking and the JFK assassination, proudly awarded an "A" grade to a student who argued that the observations of Parkland Hospital ER physicians treating JFK -- in particular those who confirmed the presence of a large exit wound on the rear of JFK's head -- must be discounted based on statistics indicating that a significant majority of ER physicians in American hospitals have little or no experience treating gunshot wounds.

Seriously.

Pay no attention to the fact that Parkland's ER physicians treating JFK -- the only statistically relevant population for this study -- could claim considerable experience in dealing with gunshot wounds.

A Rahn-approved critical thinker is equally concerned with the skills of doctors on the night shift at Beverly Hills Central.

Don't forget your dear friend who taught 'logic' in Minnesota Professor James Fetzer.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Shit Ocean has started...http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/news/g.../#comments

[Magda Hassan]

Shit Ocean has started...http://jfkfacts.org/assassination/news/g.../#comments

It's been all over the internet. Daily Mail in the UK, Greece. Mission accomplished.

[Albert Rossi]

1. Regarding your hypothesis that J. D. Tippit very well may have been the "Badge Man" figure allegedly firing at JFK from behind the picket fence...

I remember that Gary Mack's two favorite pieces of conspiracy evidence were "Badge Man" and the dictabelt recording, neither of which I ever felt much confidence about. Staring at that Rorschach test we call the Moorman Polaroid, you can see almost anything if you look hard enough. Raymond Marcus actually identified some more plausible shapes in the photo, but we're still in Wonderland. If only Mary had had a better quality, color camera.

Let me state, first, that I have Into the Nightmare in my stack of books, and have not yet gotten to it, but am anxious to read it. So I do not know what the arguments about Tippit are that Joseph musters for his hypothesis. But, FWIW, I do know -- outside of Buchanan -- that this identification has been proposed in at least one other place: Phillips, D.T. A Deeper, Darker Truth: Tom Wilson's Journey into the Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Illinois: DTP/Companion Books, 2009. The epilogue suggests that Badge Man is Tippit because of the supposed pock mark on his left cheek uncovered by Wilson's digital analysis. In my opinion the book is, to be kind, extremely dubious (I am inclined to say totally bogus junk; there is not enough detail in the presentation to understand exactly what the mathematics of Wilson's technique supposedly consists of), but I thought I'd just add this into the mix here for completeness sake.

I was in the Dallas ASK conference audiences for Wilson's first and second public presentations of his work and its products. The point I made then is the point I make now: Let us simply conduct a series of impartial tests of his machinery and methods. Use science to test science. It works, or it doesn't work. Or both.

For reasons that perhaps Peter Lemkin can speak to in detail, there are no public records of any such tests having been conducted.

Something I also wondered about: on what basis does Phillips make the assertion that this is a technique that has legal validity?

In retirement, Tom supplemented his income by serving as a consulting technical expert in criminal law cases where his image processing work was accepted as hard evidence in American courts of law (p. 240).

Unless this is a subtly misleading sentence (e.g., "his image processing work" does not strictly refer to the kind of image processing the book pretends to show), it would seem that law courts have granted scientific validity to this technique. But Phillips is not forthcoming as to the basis for this claim, nor does he cite specific cases.

Is this simply malarkey?