John Simkin Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I am just re-reading John Kelin's book and it is just as good as it was first time round. It is a must for any serious JFK assassination researcher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Newell Posted November 16, 2012 Share Posted November 16, 2012 I hate to say this, but I don't know if there are many serious JFK assassination researchers involved here any more... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rago Posted November 17, 2012 Share Posted November 17, 2012 (edited) I hate to say this, but I don't know if there are many serious JFK assassination researchers involved here any more... I do not think that reading the books is that important to understanding what actually happened. In fact it is my opinion that if you read the books you are almost guaranteed NOT to discover what actually happened. As I have stated on various occasions, I have found some very subtle but extremely significant errors in the very few books that I have read on this subject. In fact I will make this declarative statement, in full confidence... you will not discover the truth of the JFK assassination from reading any currently existing book on the subject. The book that comes closest to describing what happened that day is Josiah Thompsons "Six Seconds In Dallas" ( and I have not read that book ) (and I hope and pray that he does not rewrite it in accordance with the wishes of Gary Mack) This is not to say that one will not find some very important "corroborative" information in some of these books. I am not saying you should not read the books. I am saying that reading all the books is not a pre-requisite to discovering what happened that day andit should not be used as a way to classify people into serious and not serious researchers. In my view, a serious researcher would develop their skill in photographic analysis because, in the end, the photographic record, as poor or as good as it is, is the best evidence that we have available to discover what happened that day. To me , a serious researcher, is one who knows this. Why? The photographic record is a primary data source! Every serious researcher should have the basic skill to load an image of interest into some photo analysis program and , at the very minimum, be able to mark it up and present that mark up to the group to ask a question. If you cannot do that you are not a serious researcher! I had to learn it and I took the time and effort to learn it. The CIA (and all intelligence agencies) have people who do this all the time with aerial photography. It is a very important part of intelligence. But it does take both, the written record and the photographic record. I should read more books. You should should analyze more photos. I use the written record quite a bit. By the written record I mean witness testimony and statements. And to be honest, there are a lot of witness statements contained in the books. For me that is the value of the books that have been written on the subject, not the personal opinions of the authors of those books. Edited November 18, 2012 by Mike Rago 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