Marty Hay's Blog!

[Albert Doyle]

Nice side step, Albert.

As soon as you find that proof, drop me a line.

I hope people notice there is no difference between this approach and that of the worst crass deniers. Though these persons think "Purity Of Evidence" is a noble position invoking the most scrutinizing, critical investigative technique it is actually quite cheap and supported by the most juvenile-type thinking like that displayed here. What is most obvious is the amount of qualifying circumstantial evidence it is being used to avoid while assuming a superior position the facts do not bear. So, once again, the accuser is actually the worst offender of what he accuses.

I think we know what Mr David's response would be.

By the way, notorious Amazon internet troll Patrick Collins says Martin is an acquaintance with whom he regularly discusses assassination matters.

Mr Hay is just plain wrong.

[Albert Doyle]

Dawn,

I don't blame you for not wanting to get into a "pissing contest" with Wecht and MacDonnell. Losing is never fun.

I'm not trying to rile anyone here (please remember that Albert was the one who bought this Pitzer garbage up), but too many conspiracy theorists are too happy to believe any little story that confirms their beliefs regardless of what the evidence actually shows. And, I'm sorry, but the Pitzer suicide is a prime example. There is a hundred times more evidence that Oswald shot JFK than there is that Pitzer filmed the autopsy and was murdered because of it. And yet we all rightly question the validity of the evidence against Oswald. Why the hell so many people can't apply those same standards to conspiracy stories and witnesses is beyond me.

This is exactly why Harold Weisberg, being the intelligent man that he was, was so critical of the "conspiracy community".

If you know of any evidence that invalidates the opinions of Cyril Wecht and Herbert MacDonnell then please do let me know. Until then, I will not buy into the "Pitzer was murdered" fable.

Not to belabor this but the majority content of this is just recklessly-applied gratuitous doubt that conspicuously avoids the serious evidence that supports Dan Marvin and Dennis David's versions. I would like to point out that Martin calls Pitzer's death "The Pitzer suicide" and therefore flagrantly violates his own trumpeted objective, since he has even less evidence for that than we have of CIA murder. Much less. I consider this effort seriously misguided egotistical folly at the expense of one of the assassination's worst victims and also one of the assassination's best examples of CIA treachery. Frankly, I can't see how anyone who dared call himself an assassination critic would use such a cheap, uncurious, visibly opportunistic approach to deny a brave military insider's attempt to bring out the truth. Commander Pitzer's murder falls perfectly into place with other known CIA murders of witnesses without the slightest bump.

[Seamus Coogan]

Well, I am sort of stuck with Marty and Don on the issue. Pitzer may not have been killed at all. On the other hand, he may have been. This is the sort of thing I can agree with Marty on, but not get to anxious about people believing in a murder scenario! Pitzer aside I think they are both very good articles. I might do a thread with all of the reviews similar to the Nova show. There has been a glut of so called re-enactments on the tube since the turn of the century! Go back to around 2003. To the best of my knowledge Deb Conway did one of the first. Nova's style of show is pretty long in the tooth now!

[Peter Lemkin]

Asking us to "prove" that Pitzer filmed the autopsy is akin to trying to "prove" there was a conspiracy. Those invested in their beliefs will always claim the evidence is suspect. I am shocked that Martin, or anyone else, would not be skeptical of everything that went on at Bethesda during the autopsy, including who was and wasn't "officially" there.

I know this revisionist look at Pitzer's death, which was always included among the mysterious ones Penn Jones and others tabulated so many years ago, was started by Alan Eaglesham. I've exchanged cordial emails with Alan over the years, and have no ax to grind here. But I think this seems to be a personal thing with him, prodded on by his relationship with Dan Marvin.

I think it's still likely that Pitzer was murdered, and Dennis David seems credible to me. Like so many parts of this case, we don't need Pitzer to have been murdered to demonstrate that a lot of witnesses died very conveniently. We also don't need it to prove conspiracy. But there is no reason to reject it out of hand, as too many researchers have done in recent years, with various aspects that once were considered primary indicators of conspiracy. And there certainly isn't "hundreds of times more evidence" that Oswald killed Kennedy.

I think the only responsible way to investigate the JFK Assassination [or other Deep Political events] is to both focus in on a particular person/incident/photo/fact/area of interest AND, at the same time, remember the larger picture which informs us. If there was nothing suspicious that happened at Bethesda, for example, then very rigorous levels of proof would be needed to convince most of foul play; if [as we all know] there were untold levels of hanky-panky at Bethesda, then IMHO the level of the 'bar' to begin to harbor great doubt in the official version of an incident drops dramatically. That said, not everything or everyone was foul play and murdered...but much was and the more we have looked over the years, the more we have found and the consensus on them has grown. Its a balancing act and different people, for a variety of reasons [some good, some not] come at these analyses from different starting points and hoping to find different outcomes. Best is to come at it with an open mind and find only what is to be found, without a prejudice - as much as that is humanly possible. It is not easy - especially in this important and complex case.

[Seamus Coogan]

Pete I wish we simply had a like button we could press without typing. You don't need a reply.
Nonetheless, I find it fascinating that Fetzer and Lifton are suddenly pals once again. Well nothing should surprise me about the nutty professor anymore!
I think a lot of it has to do with how the research community and the public in general basically had the good sense to ignore them both during the 50th.

[Martin Hay]

I would like to point out that Martin calls Pitzer's death "The Pitzer suicide" and therefore flagrantly violates his own trumpeted objective, since he has even less evidence for that than we have of CIA murder.

What an utterly ridiculous remark from Albert Doyle. All of the forensic evidence points towards a simple suicide. There is ZERO evidence of murder.

Did you even read what the forensic experts had to say?

[Martin Hay]

Asking us to "prove" that Pitzer filmed the autopsy is akin to trying to "prove" there was a conspiracy. Those invested in their beliefs will always claim the evidence is suspect. I am shocked that Martin, or anyone else, would not be skeptical of everything that went on at Bethesda during the autopsy, including who was and wasn't "officially" there.

I know this revisionist look at Pitzer's death, which was always included among the mysterious ones Penn Jones and others tabulated so many years ago, was started by Alan Eaglesham. I've exchanged cordial emails with Alan over the years, and have no ax to grind here. But I think this seems to be a personal thing with him, prodded on by his relationship with Dan Marvin.

I think it's still likely that Pitzer was murdered, and Dennis David seems credible to me. Like so many parts of this case, we don't need Pitzer to have been murdered to demonstrate that a lot of witnesses died very conveniently. We also don't need it to prove conspiracy. But there is no reason to reject it out of hand, as too many researchers have done in recent years, with various aspects that once were considered primary indicators of conspiracy. And there certainly isn't "hundreds of times more evidence" that Oswald killed Kennedy.

No offense, Don, but what the hell are you talking about?

A conspiracy in the JFK assassination has been proven through eyewitness, medical, filmed, and acoustical evidence - as well as an abundance of circumstantial proof. The supposed Pitzer film is something for which there is no supporting evidence (beyond David's story). How can you even compare the two?

Let me ask a simple question: Why would it even have been necessary for the CIA (or whoever) to kill Pitzer whilst leaving everybody else present at the autopsy alive?

[Peter Lemkin]

Get an actuary if you can't do the calculations yourself. How often do people commit suicide?...and compare that to how many of those involved in the JFK Assassination [we are told] 'committed suicide'! The numbers are not even close. Was this hardened professional, used to seeing death at autopsy, so effected by the events to have commit suicide...or his personal life to blame...well statistically the answer is NO! Logic dictates he was SILENCED. The odds dictate he was silenced! The burden of proof is on those who say otherwise - whether from the Government [which no longer exists, and is a puppet of the Secret Government, IMO], or from the research community. ::prison::

[Martin Hay]

Get an actuary if you can't do the calculations yourself. How often do people commit suicide?...and compare that to how many of those involved in the JFK Assassination [we are told] 'committed suicide'! The numbers are not even close. Was this hardened professional, used to seeing death at autopsy, so effected by the events to have commit suicide...or his personal life to blame...well statistically the answer is NO! Logic dictates he was SILENCED. The odds dictate he was silenced! The burden of proof is on those who say otherwise - whether from the Government [which no longer exists, and is a puppet of the Secret Government, IMO], or from the research community. ::prison::

Listen to yourself, Peter.

Pitzer's death was ruled a suicide but you want to believe it was murder (regardless of the fact that the forensic evidence does not support such a charge) so I have to prove you wrong?

Based on that sort of "logic" we're all free to say whatever we want about whatever we want and then insist that it's up to others to prove us wrong.

Wow. Imagine if the legal system worked that way...

[Seamus Coogan]

Okay, I posted this to show the odd Fetzer and Lifton coupling. Pitzer, is only a pin prick. You can either think it was via murderous circumstances, or you don't have to. I am on Marty's side because I find Dennis David a little weird truth be told. I also have to say that Pitzer, has been part of some intrigue for sometime. I noted in my MJ-12 article he is listed as being a member of this infamous group. This of course was picked up by the forgers to implicate JFK links in the UFO world.

Pitzers name in a forged document has no baring on whether he was killed or not.

However, it goes to show folk will use minor issues like Pitzer to make a mountain out of a mole hill. The "Oswald Innocence Project" certainly rings a bell. Peter Lemkin made an interesting call about the suspicious deaths, and recently a few friends had a deeply unpleasant experience. One OIP douche by the name of Dick Charnin was befriending people on FB and then deluging their inbox's with all manner of "Witnesses Killed" madness. Now like Peter, and the rest of you I agree totally that there were dodgy deaths. However, when left to nutters in the OIP, it becomes a joke because they'll go for anything. This is where those who believe in Pitzer, should be directing their attention. Not Marty, if Lifton is hanging out with Fetzer supporting Pitzer. How does this assist or create new interest in a potential murder? Any sane person would investigate these guys and bang Pitzer's down for the count. I made this point about Peter Janney. If you really want to kick ass with Pitzer, reject the Fetzerian approach and do your own research on Pitzer's death and reclaim it from the jaws of madness. I think decent blokes like Pete and Don are more than capable of doing this.

Speaking of Don... whats Willy Laws take on Pitzer? P.S How is your work with him going?

Now this may sound pretty hypocritical coming from me. I am pretty intense about the LBJ, and GWB gunk. However, that is big picture stuff. By arguing over the Pitzer incident we stand to make it a life or death scenario. We forget there is still a vast conspiracy with or without Mr Pitzer, Mary Meyer, body alteration on a plane, Oswald outside the TSBD, or as Dave Lifton once said assassins disguised as paper mache trees.