tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4091060397245050674.post6617888809843303214..comments2023-02-24T00:50:55.288-08:00Comments on JFK: Destiny Betrayed, by Jim DiEugenioHasan Yusufhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10662154848135364660noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4091060397245050674.post-14172514422383261922013-05-29T13:45:35.126-07:002013-05-29T13:45:35.126-07:00I agree with everything you said, Martin; except o...I agree with everything you said, Martin; except of course, the authenticity of the backyard photos. I also get sick and tired of hearing that the Zapruder film, the photos of Dealey plaza etc. have been altered/faked. I tend to keep away from these issues, as there are MUCH more informant issues to focus on.<br /><br />Hasan.Hasan Yusufhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10662154848135364660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4091060397245050674.post-53194019563866218232013-05-28T12:55:20.143-07:002013-05-28T12:55:20.143-07:00Absolutely, Hasan. We all place greater emphasis o...Absolutely, Hasan. We all place greater emphasis on different pieces of evidence. That's one of the reasons why there are 12 people on a jury. So of course we can agree to disagree. I'm not one of those people who automatically despises people with different views. I am even good friends with a guy who's a committed lone nutter! That being said, I get quite annoyed by the alterationists; the people who pretend that every piece of evidence that contradicts their pet theories is faked or altered. That's just silly and lazy-minded. For the record, I don't buy the idea that the Zapruder film, JFK's corpse, or the X-rays have been altered. Nor do I really believe the backyard photos are fake - I just don't believe Marina is the person who took them.<br /><br />And like yourself, my mind is always changing about things based on what I learn. To me, that's the mark of an honest researcher. <br /><br />Cheers, MartinMartin Hayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08751300048094175683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4091060397245050674.post-46715905271351829842013-05-28T12:38:30.194-07:002013-05-28T12:38:30.194-07:00Thanks for the feedback, Martin.
I think you make...Thanks for the feedback, Martin.<br /><br />I think you make a good point about Oswald and the revolver. However, consider that perhaps Oswald didn't want want to accuse the cops of framing him, as he might have thought the press would not believe him, and just ridicule him. Perhaps during the melee inside the Theatre, Oswald didn't even realise that Hill had shouted out that he had the gun. Who knows. Rememeber, Oswald also didn't shout out to the press that he had been framed with the so-called backyard pictures. I hate to think what was going through his mind from the time he was arrested till the time Ruby shot him. In any event, I think the evidence is very convincing that Hill is guilty of framing him.<br /><br />As for the rifle, I think Gil Jesus has proven that Oswald could not have ordered it via Money order. It makes absolutely no sense to me that Oswald would use an alias to order the rifle (obviously to hide the fact that he, Oswald, ordered it), but then have it delivered to his PO box; which was under his own name. I think it was Ruth Paine who obtained the rifle as part of the frame-up, and that Michael Paine brought the so-called backyard photos with him when he arrived to "help" the DPD. But since they were already there, the photos then had to be "found" the following day.<br /><br />I am firmly of the opinion that only TWO shots were fired from the TSBD sniper's nest, and that Pat Speer's analysis of the ear witness statements has demonstrated that the shot(s) to Governor Connally was fired by a rifle equipped with a silencer/suppressor. I discuss my take on the acoustics evidence in Part 3 of my review of the Don Thomas book. I realise that my belief there were two microphones "stuck" open will sound far fetched, but I think it's possible.<br /><br />I have changed my mind on a number of things throughout my research into the JFK assassination, but I doubt that anything will change my mind about Gerald Hill, and that there were two (not three) shots fired from the TSBD.<br /><br />Having said all that, I hope we can agree to disagree on some things, Martin, and continue to communicate with eachother.<br /><br />Hasan.<br /><br />Hasan Yusufhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10662154848135364660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4091060397245050674.post-43373611637192892712013-05-28T01:12:32.111-07:002013-05-28T01:12:32.111-07:00I can see we agree on a good number of points. The...I can see we agree on a good number of points. The SBT is bullshit but based on Don Thomas's acoustics work I believe Connally was hit around Z-225. Thomas's version of the SBT is no more persuasive IMHO. I have long thought that the Mauser story is a red herring. After all, if you're going to set Oswald up, why wouldn't you use a rifle traceable to him? Where we disagree is that I think Oswald DID own it. I also have no doubt that there was a gunman on the 6th floor based not only on the acoustics but also the witnesses who all saw a guy wearing a white or very light colored shirt - not Oswald's burgandy plaid one.<br /><br />OTOH I don't believe Hill planted the revolver on Oswald. IMHO if that were the case Oswald would have shouted about it at least once during the many times he was paraded before the press. I'm sure he would have said something about it during the infamous midnight press conference. I know I would have done. As soon as I got before reporters I'd have been yelling "These bastards are setting me up! They tried to plant a gun on me!" Wouldn't you? <br /><br />Just my two cents.<br /><br />Martin Hayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08751300048094175683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4091060397245050674.post-44568292075180099812013-05-27T13:41:53.308-07:002013-05-27T13:41:53.308-07:00I totally agree with you about separating the whea...I totally agree with you about separating the wheat from the chaff, and the need to stop propagating unfound allegations. For example;<br /><br />Although I think the SBT is totally bogus, I think it's 100% obvious that Connally was hit at Zapruder frame 224.<br /><br />There are some researchers who want to believe that Tippit was shot by an automatic, because of Gerald Hill. But I am 100% convinced that Hill framed Oswald with the revolver, and claimed the Tippit shells were from an automatic as part of CYA.<br /><br />I am satisfied that the MC was used during the assassination (and Oswald did NOT own it), and that the Mauser in fact belonged to Warren Caster, and that he lied about removing it from the TSBD before the assassination to help make the Mauser storey disappear.<br /><br />I am convinced that there was indeed a shooter in the Sniper's nest window of the 6th TSBD window; unlike some other researchers who want to believe this was not the case.<br /><br />etc...<br /><br />As for Ralph Yates, Greg Parker and Lee Farley had a brilliant discussion on Greg's forum that Yates had picked-up Larry Crafard. Look for the "Rushoman to Judgement" thread, if you haven't seen it already.<br /><br />Hasan.Hasan Yusufhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10662154848135364660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4091060397245050674.post-21750806963445788782013-05-27T00:48:26.197-07:002013-05-27T00:48:26.197-07:00No problem, Hasan. I look forward to reading it.
...No problem, Hasan. I look forward to reading it.<br /><br />I actually think I agree with you on the issue of "definitive" books. I gave JFK and the Unspeakable a 5-star review at the time but I'm less enthusiatic about parts of it now. I think Douglass fell for a few too many tall tales. For example William Bruce Pitzer did not make a film of the autopsy and his death was a suicide, pure and simple. And from everything I've read, the FBI didn't ruin Ralph Leon Yates's life, he was genuinely nuts. These types of small points are unimportant to the overall thesis of the book, but at the same time they will mislead people new to the case. As I see it, 50 years on, we need to stop theorizing, stop propagating unfounded allegations, and start seperating the wheat from the chaff. Martin Hayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08751300048094175683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4091060397245050674.post-81547288049449675982013-05-26T12:42:42.596-07:002013-05-26T12:42:42.596-07:00Martin,
I don't think there can ever be a &qu...Martin,<br /><br />I don't think there can ever be a "definitive" book on the assassination. The reason I say that is because even if - and that's a big fat if - all the classified assassination related files were to be declassified within the next 50 years, we will never know how many important files and documents were lost/destroyed.<br /><br />Having said all that, the three best books in my opinion are Jim's book, JFK and the unspeakable, and Someone would have talked (3rd edition). <br /><br />Jim Di's terrific work at CTKA (and others such as yourself) is the number one reason why I am continuing with JFK assassination research.<br /><br />I emailed him an essay I wrote on the dark gray blue jacket (Ce163) which will be posted on CTKA, and would like for you to please provide me some feedback on it if you decide to read it.<br /><br />Hasan.Hasan Yusufhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10662154848135364660noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4091060397245050674.post-2984110105248155672013-05-26T06:49:07.561-07:002013-05-26T06:49:07.561-07:00I agree with you that this is a book everybody sho...I agree with you that this is a book everybody should own. Jim is a true expert and his work on Jim Garrison is exceptional. Just out of curiosity, what would you consider to be a "definitive" JFK assassination book?Martin Hayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08751300048094175683noreply@blogger.com