David Von Pein Posted May 4, 2018 Share Posted May 4, 2018 (edited) James DiEugenio said: If you have not read it, this is Joe [McBride's] reply to [Dale] Myers, who thinks he owns the Tippit case.... https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/myers-dale-with-malice-lee-harvey-oswald-and-the-murder-of-officer-j-d-tippit I'll provide Dale Myers with a bit of "equal time" here: http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2014/02/mcbrides-folly-how-conspirati-avoid.html http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2010/12/tippit-murder-why-conspiracy-theorists-can't-tell-the-truth.html http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/12/dale-myers-and-don-thomas.html http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2010/08/oswalds-mail-order-revolver-purchase.html http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2017/11/acquilla-clemons-and-murder-of-jd-tippit.html Edited May 4, 2018 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 4, 2018 Share Posted May 4, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said: on our side Why do you see assassination research in terms of sides, teams, and competition? Are you mainly trying to win against the opposing team? I'm glad to have different approaches to history explored here but aren't you advocating tribalism with this talk of your side and "the other" side??? Jason Edited May 4, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted May 4, 2018 Share Posted May 4, 2018 1 hour ago, Jason Ward said: Why do you see assassination research in terms of sides, teams, and competition? Are you mainly trying to win against the opposing team? I'm glad to have different approaches to history explored here but aren't you advocating tribalism with this talk of your side and "the other" side??? Jason Jason - I can’t find the two words you quoted. Even so, anyone who thinks the WC got it right is on one side of a 54+ year debate with those who don’t agree. It feels like you’re overdoing it a bit with your characterization. Do you have something to share here on Tippit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted May 4, 2018 Author Share Posted May 4, 2018 (edited) Paul, this is the sentence. "Since we really did not have a book length study of that case on our side." Its in my description of Joe McBride's attributes in writing his book. I was of course glad to have Joe's book as a counterweight to Myers'. Jason apparently thinks that someone who can get on national TV, as Myers did, and draw an imaginary path through JFK and JBC using a computer, and then announce to the world that he has just created the Single Bullet Fact, somehow that person's "different approach" is helpful to having "history explored.". He is not aware that you cannot explain history by bamboozling the public into thinking something that never happened actually did. https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-impossible-one-day-journey-of-ce-399 Edited May 4, 2018 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 4, 2018 Share Posted May 4, 2018 2 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: Paul, this is the sentence. "Since we really did not have a book length study of that case on our side." Its in my description of Joe McBride's attributes in writing his book. I was of course glad to have Joe's book as a counterweight to Myers'. Jason apparently thinks that someone who can get on national TV, as Myers did, and draw an imaginary path through JFK and JBC using a computer, and then announce to the world that he has just created the Single Bullet Fact, somehow that person's "different approach" is helpful to having "history explored.". He is not aware that you cannot explain history by bamboozling the public into thinking something that never happened actually did. Many thanks for the usual non-substantive reply that doesn't address my question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted May 5, 2018 Author Share Posted May 5, 2018 Let me post my reasons for not finding Dale Myers credible, one more time: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-impossible-one-day-journey-of-ce-399 And let me say again, as I have before, if you do not want to read the reference, that is your problem, not mine. And after reading it, you still find Myers credible, then its you who are engaging in "tribalism." Not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 Just now, James DiEugenio said: Let me post my reasons for not finding Dale Myers credible, one more time: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-impossible-one-day-journey-of-ce-399 And let me say again, as I have before, if you do not want to read the reference, that is your problem, not mine. And after reading it, you still find Myers credible, then its you who are engaging in "tribalism." Not me. And let me say it again, if you don't want to post your evidence, that is your problem, not mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted May 5, 2018 Author Share Posted May 5, 2018 LOL, from the guy who won't click through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 Just now, James DiEugenio said: LOL, from the guy who won't click through. LOL, from the guy who can't afford an image hosting service.😄 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Jason Ward said: LOL, from the guy who can't afford an image hosting service.😄 I always click through, even from the likes of you. As usual your "evidence" is no evidence whatsoever - it's merely your conclusion and click bait for a cheesy website. YOU ARE NOT A SOURCE. YOUR OPINION IS NOT EVIDENCE. Let the evidence speak for itself and save us your pre-determined CIA-is-in-control-of-the-world "reference" that cites as "evidence" other conspiracy theorists. Please. Edited May 5, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 (edited) http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/09/vince-bugliosi-dale-myers-and-sbt.html http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/dale-myers-and-sbt.html Edited May 5, 2018 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 (edited) 28 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: Let me post my reasons for not finding Dale Myers credible, one more time: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-impossible-one-day-journey-of-ce-399 And let me say again, as I have before, if you do not want to read the reference, that is your problem, not mine. And after reading it, you still find Myers credible, then its you who are engaging in "tribalism." Not me. Your "reference" is nothing but a daisy chain of conspiracy theorists citing other conspiracy theorists in an absurd echo chamber where primary sources are nowhere in sight. You cite yourself, Gary Aguilar, Tink Thompson, et al., as if the conclusions of conspiracy theorists in a feedback loop are evidence. Naming those who who think Dale Myers lacks credibility is of no bearing on the credibility of Dale Myers. Can I politely ask you to pause your enmity for me personally and consider a point in abstract? Because I am not one of your disciples and because I choose to engage Paul Trejo, I know your imperative is always to attack me....but...would you accept the opinion of Gerald Ford or Richard Helms or Gerald Posner as credible if there evidence was nothing but the opinions of Gerald Ford or Richard Helms or Gerald Posner? Opinions and conclusions are not evidence. Jason Edited May 5, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Brancato Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Jason Ward said: Why do you see assassination research in terms of sides, teams, and competition? Are you mainly trying to win against the opposing team? I'm glad to have different approaches to history explored here but aren't you advocating tribalism with this talk of your side and "the other" side??? Jason Jason - Jim is a writer and a critic if you will. Read what he has written if you want to engage him substantively. This is all nonsense. Now that I’ve read your last criticism let me point out something you do often, which is to dismiss all those that did research for 54 years. You’re not the first and only to dig up documents. If you have specific problems with that research it’s up to you to dispel myth if that is what you think it is. There is a research community from which Jim draws to do his writing. Pill give you an example of something that Steve Thomas has been looking into - the 488th military intelligence detachment that Jack Crichton created in 1956. None of us have yet found the source documents. But we do have Crichton’s words, and we do have Colonel Frank M Brandstetter’s autobiography in which he states that ACSI, for whom he worked for 18 years, assigned him to that unit in 1959. Are we to assume that because military records cannot confirm the existence of this Unit that it doesn’t exist? I read most of what you post and find nuggets all the time. That’s despite the fact that I cannot fathom how you, or Trejo, could opine that no one in high places, such as JCS or Hoover or Angleton, would dare consider setting in motion an assassination of a president. If there is no smoking gun what does that mean? Might mean documents have been destroyed. We simply don’t know the extent to which that is the case, and we know for sure that when it comes to released records the Pentagon has been the most stingy. You often post news articles. That’s evidence? Worth considering of course but not evidence. Edited May 5, 2018 by Paul Brancato Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted May 5, 2018 Author Share Posted May 5, 2018 (edited) To the more objective people on this site. Like Paul. In the article I linked to in order to show what a hack Myers is, there are 22 footnotes to make my case of 15 major evidentiary points. I wrote not one page of any of the source material anywhere in the essay. Yet Ward says I am the source for the material. And he calls my link "click bait" to a "cheesy web site". And he then says that none of it is evidence. BTW, this includes references to primary sources in the WC and to the documents contained in John Hunt's two milestone essays on the subject. But then he adds, he always clicks through even for the "likes of me". I invite anyone to read the short essay and check the sources. And then reconcile it with Dale Myers' claim to his computer creating the Single Bullet Fact. And then decide who is relying on facts and evidence and who is an outright propagandist. And if Ward cannot tell the difference then that is his problem. Not mine. Edited May 5, 2018 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted May 5, 2018 Share Posted May 5, 2018 (edited) 12 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: John Hunt's two milestone essays on the subject. Essays are not evidence. No matter how highly you personally regard John Hunt and his "milestone" essay - opinions are not evidence. 12 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: this includes references to primary sources in the WC I don't see even a SINGLE reference to any primary source or the Warren Commission - your cites are ENTIRELY the opinions of conspiracy theorists. Jason CORRECTION: I see precisely one place where you cite the WC. I see 22 references to the opinions of other conspiracy theorists. Edited May 5, 2018 by Jason Ward Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now