04-05-2010, 09:46 PM
(This post was last modified: 06-05-2010, 06:29 AM by James H. Fetzer.)
God knows, it's NOT about me. It's about the truth in relation to the death of JFK. If you had spent more time reading Doug's work, you
would be much better informed about the assassination. Give me a break. You entertain a host of views that are utterly unsupportable,
such as that the Groden color-photos are not fake, that the blow-out to JFK's skull was at the top of his head, and more. You are not the
right person to be offering advice to anyone about research on JFK. I have suggested that you spend more time on David Mantik's work
especially his brilliant synthesis of the medical evidence in MURDER. To that I must add, more on Lifton and more on Horne would help.
[quote name='Pat Speer' post='191668' date='May 4 2010, 08:54 AM']
[quote name='James H. Fetzer' post='191649' date='May 4 2010, 03:07 AM']
JIM RESPONDS TO JIM DIEUGENIO COMING FROM OUT OF LEFT FIELD
Well, I embarrassed DiEugenio on another thread and I take it this is his form of retaliation. I suppose he does not mention the dates when this purported "research" was done, because it would reveal the distance in time between the original reports and testimony in relation to the Garrison trial and this (virtually irrelevant) effort expended not long before Reeves Morgan died. There is a natural decay in recollections, which in this case has obviously been exacerbated by deliberate corruption and quite possibly by witness intimidation. Most strikingly, he does not understand that there were two visits and two cars, one of which was a black Cadillac driven by Clay Shaw himself. Judyth, no doubt, will say more. When research is done properly, early testimony when memories are fresher is preferable to later. Just as this guy excoriated Horne for his admiration of David Lifton's work--apparently oblivious that the ARRB had found that there was surgery to the skull and that body alteration had taken place and that there were multiple casket entries, which meant that the key claims of his early work, BEST EVIDENCE, had been vindicated, which Horne was reporting--producing one of the most peculiar reviews I have ever read, where the reviewer apparently wrote the first part of his review completely unaware of the actual findings that would be established during the rest of its pages. This also extends to the issue of Zapruder film alteration, where DiEugnio has declined to take a stand on the ground that the research that would be involved would be too taxing! But that means he has probably not read ASSASSINATION SCiENCE, MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA, or THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX, which don't leave much room for hope by anti-alterationists. Even more peculiar, he apparently doesn't know what is coming in the appendix to INSIDE THE ARRB, Vol. IV, which I summarized in "US Government Official: JKF Cover-Up, Film Fakery". I would say that his positions about the events in Jackson are on a par with his review of Horne, which was grossly incompetent. File trails are frequently distorted and incomplete, as the very post on which he is commenting convincingly demonstrates. As a friend of mine likes to say, "How dumb is that?" I used to think he was a serious scholar, but I am now persuaded that, his review of Bugliosi notwithstanding, his work should not be taken at face value. I will invite Judyth to comment in greater detail, but the thought that he and his "brain trust" are more competent and reliable than Howard Platzman or Judyth herself, in view of these considerations, is not merely a stretch but quite ridiculous. The earlier testimony of Lea McGehee, Reeves Morgan, and Mary Morgan is obviously the more reliable.[/quote]
Jim, the highlighted section above is just not true. The ARRB made NO conclusions. None of the members of its board came out of their experience as supporters of Lifton's theory of body alteration. The only ARRB employee, to my knowledge, who came out of his ARRB experience a committed alterationist was Horne, who went in as a committed alterationist. Jeremy Gunn, Horne's boss, has claimed in year's past that the only thing he learned for sure about the medical evidence was that one can't trust the thirty-year old memories of old people, or something like that. Horne has spent the last decade trying to weave all the conflicting stories into a convincing whole.
But it's more like an unconvincing hole, IMO.
FWIW, IMO, you need to take your lumps and just let the Judyth story drop, if only for a while. While you may have a valid point to make, and where Judyth and her story--as improbable as it sounds--may have something to it, you have let it become personal, and about YOU. You are hurt that men you considered friends fail to trust your judgment re Judyth. You are now claiming DiEugenio has it in for you, when he is simply sharing his own impressions based on actual conversations he has had with actual witnesses.
It's not about you.
Take care.
[/quote]
would be much better informed about the assassination. Give me a break. You entertain a host of views that are utterly unsupportable,
such as that the Groden color-photos are not fake, that the blow-out to JFK's skull was at the top of his head, and more. You are not the
right person to be offering advice to anyone about research on JFK. I have suggested that you spend more time on David Mantik's work
especially his brilliant synthesis of the medical evidence in MURDER. To that I must add, more on Lifton and more on Horne would help.
[quote name='Pat Speer' post='191668' date='May 4 2010, 08:54 AM']
[quote name='James H. Fetzer' post='191649' date='May 4 2010, 03:07 AM']
JIM RESPONDS TO JIM DIEUGENIO COMING FROM OUT OF LEFT FIELD
Well, I embarrassed DiEugenio on another thread and I take it this is his form of retaliation. I suppose he does not mention the dates when this purported "research" was done, because it would reveal the distance in time between the original reports and testimony in relation to the Garrison trial and this (virtually irrelevant) effort expended not long before Reeves Morgan died. There is a natural decay in recollections, which in this case has obviously been exacerbated by deliberate corruption and quite possibly by witness intimidation. Most strikingly, he does not understand that there were two visits and two cars, one of which was a black Cadillac driven by Clay Shaw himself. Judyth, no doubt, will say more. When research is done properly, early testimony when memories are fresher is preferable to later. Just as this guy excoriated Horne for his admiration of David Lifton's work--apparently oblivious that the ARRB had found that there was surgery to the skull and that body alteration had taken place and that there were multiple casket entries, which meant that the key claims of his early work, BEST EVIDENCE, had been vindicated, which Horne was reporting--producing one of the most peculiar reviews I have ever read, where the reviewer apparently wrote the first part of his review completely unaware of the actual findings that would be established during the rest of its pages. This also extends to the issue of Zapruder film alteration, where DiEugnio has declined to take a stand on the ground that the research that would be involved would be too taxing! But that means he has probably not read ASSASSINATION SCiENCE, MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA, or THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX, which don't leave much room for hope by anti-alterationists. Even more peculiar, he apparently doesn't know what is coming in the appendix to INSIDE THE ARRB, Vol. IV, which I summarized in "US Government Official: JKF Cover-Up, Film Fakery". I would say that his positions about the events in Jackson are on a par with his review of Horne, which was grossly incompetent. File trails are frequently distorted and incomplete, as the very post on which he is commenting convincingly demonstrates. As a friend of mine likes to say, "How dumb is that?" I used to think he was a serious scholar, but I am now persuaded that, his review of Bugliosi notwithstanding, his work should not be taken at face value. I will invite Judyth to comment in greater detail, but the thought that he and his "brain trust" are more competent and reliable than Howard Platzman or Judyth herself, in view of these considerations, is not merely a stretch but quite ridiculous. The earlier testimony of Lea McGehee, Reeves Morgan, and Mary Morgan is obviously the more reliable.[/quote]
Jim, the highlighted section above is just not true. The ARRB made NO conclusions. None of the members of its board came out of their experience as supporters of Lifton's theory of body alteration. The only ARRB employee, to my knowledge, who came out of his ARRB experience a committed alterationist was Horne, who went in as a committed alterationist. Jeremy Gunn, Horne's boss, has claimed in year's past that the only thing he learned for sure about the medical evidence was that one can't trust the thirty-year old memories of old people, or something like that. Horne has spent the last decade trying to weave all the conflicting stories into a convincing whole.
But it's more like an unconvincing hole, IMO.
FWIW, IMO, you need to take your lumps and just let the Judyth story drop, if only for a while. While you may have a valid point to make, and where Judyth and her story--as improbable as it sounds--may have something to it, you have let it become personal, and about YOU. You are hurt that men you considered friends fail to trust your judgment re Judyth. You are now claiming DiEugenio has it in for you, when he is simply sharing his own impressions based on actual conversations he has had with actual witnesses.
It's not about you.
Take care.
[/quote]