28-03-2013, 06:07 PM
I don't see how any assassination researcher can dismiss the evidence for Ralph Yates' story so easily or take the side of the FBI against him and use FBI's defamation methods against Yates as well?
Those researchers are forgetting Ralph Yates passed a lie detector test showing what he was saying was true and that one of the FBI agents who gave Yates the test privately told his wife Dorothy that the reason he was being committed was because the test showed he was telling the truth.
They also misconstrue Dempsey Jones' statement. It's important to get this right. Yates rushed in to work to tell Jones of his picking-up a hitch-hiker who discussed shooting Kennedy from an office building with a high powered rifle (sound familiar?) during his motorcade. Yates rushed in to tell Jones this because it was a curious coincidence with their previous conversation about it being possible to shoot Kennedy on his visit. I don't think those researchers are quoting accurately either because I believe Yates mentioned to Jones that the man was carrying a package. Or do they think Yates rushed-in to work to tell Jones he picked-up an ordinary hitch-hiker?
Those researchers are foolish because they forget that Jones' admission that Yates told him this two days prior to the assassination is proof enough of the hitch-hiker. It's not like this story doesn't match other stories of Oswald doubles trying to frame Oswald prior to the assassination in Dallas. Stories Yates would have no idea of when he came forward.
Another reason those researchers are foolish is because they quote witnesses after FBI and Dallas Police had gotten in touch with them. To take the FBI and those witnesses at their word and quote them is a real research foul yet they do it without shrugging. You might as well quote the owners of Ryder's Gun shop or Marina Oswald at their word and not estimate the potential intimidation they received.
No, people don't stick with a hoax under mental institution persecution up to death. Using FBI defamations of Yates' mental problems to further your case is incredibly dubious. Yates was most-likely driven crazy by FBI because they refused to believe a story he knew was true. To go after the tortured and murdered by mental institution victim Yates is one of the worst travesties you could possibly commit. It just don't work that way.
What these people are saying is Yates went to Jones upon arriving back at work to tell him about a mundane hitch-hiker. What they forget however is Jones and Yates had a curious conversation days previous where they pondered JFK getting shot from an office building with a high-powered rifle and it was because of that conversation that Yates went in to tell Jones of the freakish coincidence. These researchers give no heed to the intimidation factor of FBI giving clear signals to Jones that they didn't like this story or how that might have affected his memory of the event. As far as I know Jones told FBI that Yates said the man had a package. Yates also mentioned his telling the hitch-hiker to put the package in the pick-up bed. Yates said the hitchhiker said he would rather hold on to it. I think what saves Yates is the fact he rushed back to tell Jones because the experience was freakishly similar to what they were discussing. I can't understand people who takes sides against a man who endured sanitarium persecution in order to stick to his story as well as passing a lie detector test. Yates contacting FBI in order to push a silly hoax that would only get him in serious trouble if exposed doesn't make sense. Funny how Yates had no signs at all of those alleged serious mental problems during his employment until he came forward with his story and refused to back-down.
Those researchers are forgetting Ralph Yates passed a lie detector test showing what he was saying was true and that one of the FBI agents who gave Yates the test privately told his wife Dorothy that the reason he was being committed was because the test showed he was telling the truth.
They also misconstrue Dempsey Jones' statement. It's important to get this right. Yates rushed in to work to tell Jones of his picking-up a hitch-hiker who discussed shooting Kennedy from an office building with a high powered rifle (sound familiar?) during his motorcade. Yates rushed in to tell Jones this because it was a curious coincidence with their previous conversation about it being possible to shoot Kennedy on his visit. I don't think those researchers are quoting accurately either because I believe Yates mentioned to Jones that the man was carrying a package. Or do they think Yates rushed-in to work to tell Jones he picked-up an ordinary hitch-hiker?
Those researchers are foolish because they forget that Jones' admission that Yates told him this two days prior to the assassination is proof enough of the hitch-hiker. It's not like this story doesn't match other stories of Oswald doubles trying to frame Oswald prior to the assassination in Dallas. Stories Yates would have no idea of when he came forward.
Another reason those researchers are foolish is because they quote witnesses after FBI and Dallas Police had gotten in touch with them. To take the FBI and those witnesses at their word and quote them is a real research foul yet they do it without shrugging. You might as well quote the owners of Ryder's Gun shop or Marina Oswald at their word and not estimate the potential intimidation they received.
No, people don't stick with a hoax under mental institution persecution up to death. Using FBI defamations of Yates' mental problems to further your case is incredibly dubious. Yates was most-likely driven crazy by FBI because they refused to believe a story he knew was true. To go after the tortured and murdered by mental institution victim Yates is one of the worst travesties you could possibly commit. It just don't work that way.
What these people are saying is Yates went to Jones upon arriving back at work to tell him about a mundane hitch-hiker. What they forget however is Jones and Yates had a curious conversation days previous where they pondered JFK getting shot from an office building with a high-powered rifle and it was because of that conversation that Yates went in to tell Jones of the freakish coincidence. These researchers give no heed to the intimidation factor of FBI giving clear signals to Jones that they didn't like this story or how that might have affected his memory of the event. As far as I know Jones told FBI that Yates said the man had a package. Yates also mentioned his telling the hitch-hiker to put the package in the pick-up bed. Yates said the hitchhiker said he would rather hold on to it. I think what saves Yates is the fact he rushed back to tell Jones because the experience was freakishly similar to what they were discussing. I can't understand people who takes sides against a man who endured sanitarium persecution in order to stick to his story as well as passing a lie detector test. Yates contacting FBI in order to push a silly hoax that would only get him in serious trouble if exposed doesn't make sense. Funny how Yates had no signs at all of those alleged serious mental problems during his employment until he came forward with his story and refused to back-down.