Jump to content
The Education Forum

Jim DiEugenio vs Fred Litwin


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 233
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

5 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Here is a better question. Where is Mr. McBride's (or anyone else's) proof that I am paid for what I do by anyone?

So, you're saying you spread disinformation for free?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TP: Myers and Russo have obviously spent years on the case and their credentials are impeccable. Therefore the attempt is made to diminish them and their conversion by saying they "sold out."

 

Impeccable?  Just watch this:

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Recall, it was this pastiche that got Dale the cartoonist his gig in 2003 on ABC. Where he said that it proved the Magic Bullet was really the Single Bullet Fact.  

He got on that show through his buddy Gus Russo who was the lead correspondent. Although ABC took Russo's name off the broadcast. This may have been done because we sent info to the president of the company that, to put it mildly, Russo had exaggerated his claims about being nominated for a Pulitzer Prize.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

From what I recall, he did not describe that journey in any way at all in that book. I was interested to hear what parts of the evidence initially made him believe there was a conspiracy, and then specifically the process of how his thinking evolved to his current position. But there's none of that in his book.

Wrong. On page 149 he writes about two articles by Paul Hoch. Those pieces led to a review of the HSCA hearings and exhibits. That is the point at which he changed his mind. This is all in the book along with a brief chronological history of the CT movement and his reaction to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

1.) The idea that only the Parkland doctors saw the hole in the rear of Kennedy's skull is hogwash. To name just one other person, there is Clint Hill and he talked about it in various newspaper reports and in the WC.  There is also the FBI agents, SIbert and O'Neill. 

Right. I should have said the only evidence is eyewitness accounts. I have just corrected myself. Which is something you will not see Jim D. do on this forum.

 

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

2.) What was the explanation given in the WR about the rocketing backward motion of JFK in the Z film? I don't recall any.  Mainly because it was not mentioned.

Correct, and Fred, who supposedly is shilling for the WC, notes this omission in his book (p. 105) and calls it "unfortunate."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Right. I should have said the only evidence is eyewitness accounts. I have just corrected myself. Which is something you will not see Jim D. do on this forum.

 

Correct, and Fred, who supposedly is shilling for the WC, notes this omission in his book (p. 105) and calls it "unfortunate."

"Unfortunate," but Fred still, apparently, convinced himself that the fatal head shot was fired from the TSBD, eh?

He must have skipped physics while majoring in marketing and creative writing in college.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

So, what is his motive then? What conspiracy theory are you guys pushing now? It was correctly mentioned that Fred didn't "do it" for money. As for "no one" could become a lone nutter, several were already mentioned-Myers, Russo and Mack although the latter did not consider himself a lone nutter. Myers and Russo have obviously spent years on the case and their credentials are impeccable.

Impeccable!  Here's Myers, emphasis added:

http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl2.htm

The President's clothing confirmed the path of the bullet: a small hole in the back of his suit coat (threads pushed inward) approximately 5.3 inches below the top of the collar and 1.96 inches to the right of the middle seam (7HSCA83), a corresponding hole in the President's shirt located 5.75 inches below the collar and 1.3 inches to the right of the midline (CD205, p.153-54) (photographs taken seconds before the shooting show the suit coat had shifted upward on the President's back, accounting for the discrepancy between the wounds in the body and the holes in the clothing), a slit-like bullet hole in the front of the shirt (threads pushed outward), and a tear on the left side of the tie knot where the exiting bullet grazed the tie knot. (ARRB MD28) </q>

The bullet hole in the shirt is 4" below the bottom of the collar; the defect in the jacket 4 &1/8" below the bottom of the collar. 

The jacket was elevated 1/8".

Elm St photos show JFK with a normal amount of shirt collar visible at the back of his neck, indicating the bottom of the jacket collar was in a normal position just above the base of his neck.

Can Myers or any of the other LN cultists replicate 2+" of shirt and 2+" of jacket elevated entirely above the top of the back without pushing up on the jacket collar right above the base of the neck?

Isn't such a claim utterly, obviously idiotic?

Quote

Therefore the attempt is made to diminish them and their conversion by saying they "sold out."

Nonsense, I say and whatever monies they made were earned because they had a product (their knowledge) that had value. But the attempt to diminish them has to be made because the concept that anyone could look at the evidence and change their mind after serious study is too dangerous to the CT mindset.

Anyone afflicted with that degree of confirmation bias is a danger only to themselves.

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

"Unfortunate," but Fred still, apparently, convinced himself that the fatal head shot was fired from the TSBD, eh?

He must have skipped physics while majoring in marketing and creative writing in college.

Ha.  I skipped physics (or I might not have graduated) and had an undeclared minor in marketing.  That's no excuse.  I don't buy this BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

"Unfortunate," but Fred still, apparently, convinced himself that the fatal head shot was fired from the TSBD, eh?

He must have skipped physics while majoring in marketing and creative writing in college.

This has nothing to do with what I am talking about. As I have already pointed out, there are plenty of theorists who believe that Oswald killed JFK but conspired with others in doing so. That was his belief at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

TP:Wrong. On page 149 he writes about two articles by Paul Hoch. Those pieces led to a review of the HSCA hearings and exhibits. That is the point at which he changed his mind. This is all in the book along with a brief chronological history of the CT movement and his reaction to it.

This is not what is meant by me or Denny.

The idea Fred puts out is that he himself was a WC critic.  That is is the very title of the book.  Anyone can read an article and say they were influenced a certain way.  That kind of thing happens all the time.

What is important and what Fred does not show is any convincing evidence that he himself was a critic.  

But what makes this even more dubious is this:  If you read Matt D's most recent article about Fred you will read Fred's own words as thus:

It’s a story that should be in my Teenage Conspiracy Freak book, but isn’t. It goes like this. As I was slowly changing my opinion, I decided it was time to read Posner's book. I bought it…but I couldn't open it. It sat there for days…until I decided to read the medical evidence chapter. I thought it was a great chapter—in fact, I wish I had written it…and I knew then that there was no conspiracy…and I put the book down…a changed man. (1/15/21 Facebook message)

In other words, Fred has  changed the cause of his St. Paul on the way to Damascus transformation. Now, instead of being blinded by the light of the HSCA, it was really Posner.

Tracy, I think you should email your good pal Fred and tell him he should stick to one story in the future. Then you would not have to tie yourself in knots playing El Cid driving out the Moors.. Pretty soon, you are going to be escorted out the gate, a corpse on a horse. 

Except I don't think you will end up riding down the beach trampling the infidels before you.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
13 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

TP:Wrong. On page 149 he writes about two articles by Paul Hoch. Those pieces led to a review of the HSCA hearings and exhibits. That is the point at which he changed his mind. This is all in the book along with a brief chronological history of the CT movement and his reaction to it.

This is not what is meant by me or Denny.

The idea Fred puts out is that he himself was a WC critic.  That is is the very title of the book.  Anyone can read an article and say they were influenced a certain way.  That kind of thing happens all the time.

What is important and what Fred does not show is any convincing evidence that he himself was a critic.  

But what makes this even more dubious is this:  If you read Matt D's most recent article about Fred you will read Fred's own words as thus:

It’s a story that should be in my Teenage Conspiracy Freak book, but isn’t. It goes like this. As I was slowly changing my opinion, I decided it was time to read Posner's book. I bought it…but I couldn't open it. It sat there for days…until I decided to read the medical evidence chapter. I thought it was a great chapter—in fact, I wish I had written it…and I knew then that there was no conspiracy…and I put the book down…a changed man. (1/15/21 Facebook message)

In other words, Fred has  changed the cause of his St. Paul on the way to Damascus transformation. Now, instead of being blinded by the light of the HSCA, it was really Posner.

Tracy, I think you should email your good pal Fred and tell him he should stick to one story in the future. Then you would not have to tie yourself in knots playing El Cid driving out the Moors.. Pretty soon, you are going to be escorted out the gate, a corpse on a horse. 

 

It's a stretch, but perhaps Tracy does bear a slight resemblance to Charlton Heston. 🤥

Charlton Heston El Cid Posters and Photos 283117 | Movie Store

W. Tracy Parnell

Edited by W. Niederhut
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

It’s a story that should be in my Teenage Conspiracy Freak book, but isn’t. It goes like this. As I was slowly changing my opinion, I decided it was time to read Posner's book.

I think it was a combination of things that happened at roughly the same time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...