• Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
John Butler

Robert Hughes And The Cut Apart Policeman

79 posts in this topic

On 3/14/2017 at 9:47 AM, Brad Milch said:

@Bill Miller

I consider your analysis of the Blevins Dillard photo as adequate to the debate. I do hope Mr. Blevins reads what you wrote & responds here at EF or in his future YouTube visual analysis videos. I'll have to go through all his videos on his channel to determine what else he has analyzed in the JFK ambush films before I draw my own opinion as to how good or bad his take on the JFK visuals is.

Since you tell us that you bought the same negative of the Dillard photo that Mr. Blevins used in his analysis video with the difference being your photo shows nothing in the sniper's nest window vs. Mr. Blevins shows what appears to be LHO's half body in the photo, questions should arise as to what the heck is going on here? Who got punked, Blevins or Miller (lol). Or is Blevins guilty of punking us all? Perhaps you might post a copy of your Dillard photo so that EF readers can compare it to the images Mr. Blevins has presented in his YouTube analysis video?

For me, like the rest of the controversy that continuously swirls around the JFK assassination, it's a case of black & white, it is or it isn't. The image is LHO, or it isn't.

I honestly can't remember when I first saw the Dillard photo. Whether it was on TV, newspapers or books, I don't recall attention being drawn to a face in the window until just recently. If the image has been manipulated somewhere in the timeline of the Dillard photo, that should lead to an investigation of the matter that might settle the issue one way or another. If the Dillard image was the victim of manipulation, EF readers should note that the manipulated image (if it was) was not passed off to the public as showing LHO in the sniper's nest window by any of the early investigators (including the DPD, Dallas County Sheriff's Dept., FBI & WC). The MSM didn't draw attention to the 'LHO face' in the Dillard image either. So why is the LHO face there in Mr. Bleviins' version of the Dillard photo (since the photo wasn't used to either incriminate LHO or used as proof he wasn't a shooter)?

If the image is genuine, I see what appears to be LHO leaning forward behind 2 stacks of boxes, one stack closer to the window than the stack behind it with a camera up to his face. In private correspondence, some friends of mine see a microphone (as from a walkie talkie) up to 'LHO's' mouth, as if he's talking to someone on a radio.

None of us sees things exactly the same. That's one of the reasons I would never attempt to be a visuals analyst. I know from my own experiences in life that some people wouldn't see the ocean (if pointed out to them) if they fell into it face first (lol).

Sincerely,

Brad Milch

I will try and find it when I get back to BC next month. I bought a copy negative directly from the Dallas Morning News.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I agree, Chris.

To enlighten Kathy a bit more (in case she doesn't get around the Internet as much as some of us do), all JFK websites are routinely bombarded by trollers. Their individual or concentrated effort are the reason many of those that posted videos at YouTube & initially welcomed comments were forced to disable comments altogether. Trollers use the comments to hijack the topics & create chaos. A worse case scenario of this would be the comments Jeff Morley or his outside help published at his website that appeared to many readers to be the work of Mr. McAdams & his 'cheerleaders', both spending more time at Jeff's website than they did at alt.jfk. On a good day, most, if not all of Jeff's reader's comments were from the 'McAdams gang'. After sifting through the garbage, probably a lot of Jeff's readers forgot what the original topic was about. There was a lot of complaining & many readers told Jeff they were abandoning his ship as a result of the apparent trolling.

EF readers see this garbage routinely when they travel around from one JFK Forum to another. I'm sure Debra Conway & her former staff could tell you horror stories about when their original Lancer Forum suffered the worst, most extreme form of trolling as a cyber attack victim.

Why would someone attack a respected webmaster such as Robin Unger, a man who has contributed countless good things to the JFK assassination research community, is like asking how could someone aim a weapon at the head of a man sitting next to his wife as a passenger in a car during a parade & squeeze the trigger (JFK). Or do basically the same to another man walking home with his wife (John Lennon). Or steer a couple of passenger airliners full of innocent, terrified people of all genders & ages into two giant New York skyscrapers. Or nail a man of worship, faith & peace to a cross & leave Him on it to die in agony for the crime of disturbing the peace.

Some people do things that defy reason & rationality.

Sincerely,

Brad Milch

Edited by Brad Milch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brad,

 

I 've been around for a long time, and was a member at Lancer since 2006, here since 2007. I have seen a lot of JFK forums, and been a member of quite a few. 

I know several people over the years that have  different ideas of what appears in a photo. I also know that some people are a little more set in their beliefs than others, and will put a quite a strong fight, and it becomes personal. (Have you read the old threads--go back a few years-same thing)

Like I wrote you in the PM I sent you, the Ed forum is an historical record which we try to preserve, because we  have had a lot of researchers who are no longer among us,  and we want to continue to provide their work, and the work of our current community. 

All I  did was provide the link that was referenced, and state that the thread appeared continuous. Someone who would've just read the thread, and not seen the link, may have thought Robin did something.

That you believe that ROKC  may be responsible, I find funny, but you are allowed to believe what you wish.   I don't agree. And that's fine.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

3 hours ago, Kathy Beckett said:

Brad,

 

I 've been around for a long time, and was a member at Lancer since 2006, here since 2007. I have seen a lot of JFK forums, and been a member of quite a few. 

I know several people over the years that have  different ideas of what appears in a photo. I also know that some people are a little more set in their beliefs than others, and will put a quite a strong fight, and it becomes personal. (Have you read the old threads--go back a few years-same thing)

Like I wrote you in the PM I sent you, the Ed forum is an historical record which we try to preserve, because we  have had a lot of researchers who are no longer among us,  and we want to continue to provide their work, and the work of our current community. 

All I  did was provide the link that was referenced, and state that the thread appeared continuous. Someone who would've just read the thread, and not seen the link, may have thought Robin did something.

That you believe that ROKC  may be responsible, I find funny, but you are allowed to believe what you wish.   I don't agree. And that's fine.

 

Kathy:

I read a warning about 'ROKC infiltrators' in a topic posted here at EF just a few weeks past. I only looked at the reply Jim DiEugenio may have posted in that thread because I am an admirer of his & I enjoy reading his comments. I know nothing about ROKC. I don't ever recall visiting that website. Go easy on me Kathy. I had nothing to do with the mess created by someone else.....

I meant no disrespect concerning your past tenure at Lancer. I simply forgot about it. At age 64, it's a miracle I can remember anything at all. You obviously have seen the effects of trolling there at Lancer; lectures on the subject are not needed. Please accept my sincerest apology for forgetting.

I know you weren't there to witness it, Kathy, but back when I worked for our favorite uncle, I often started my day with a 'blanket apology' to each & every female co-worked that worked along side me: I'd apologize for anything I may do wrong during the day, anything I might be suspected of doing (based on their experiences with other males), apologize for being born a male, apologize for being born...the works. It seemed to work, I'd receive the less complaints lodged against me. Occasionally, I might even have gotten lucky with one or two of them.

Brad Milch

 

 

Edited by Brad Milch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now