Jump to content
The Education Forum

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Yesterday
  2. Paul, Looking at the statements by Baker and Arnold and Biffle and Holmes (and yes, Holmes should be considered with extreme care), I’m beginning to think “Oswald” was stopped not once, but twice: once on the second floor by the lunch room and again in the first floor lobby. Which doesn’t seem unreasonable, considering the circumstances. Carolyn Arnold saw Oswald in the 2nd floor lunchroom just five minutes before the shots rang out. And the FBI blew thick smoke around that fact. We know Oswald made it to the lobby because McNeil reported it as happening, though McNeil never saw Oswald go out the front door. The evidence that Oswald was also challenged on the first floor is a little more obtuse, but I’m working on it with a friend. More soon, hopefully.
  3. Here are some photos taken in or near Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.... http://kennedy-photos.blogspot.com/Dealey Plaza Photos (Nov. 22, 1963) SUPER-LARGE VERSION OF THE SECOND PICTURE ABOVE
  4. John, Timing is critical about almost everything that day, but when we start splitting minutes we may be taking things too far. These are all human estimates. I wouldn’t bet that Oswald was outside the TSBD when Baker ran into it. My bet is that he didn't go down to the first floor until after the shots were fired. Carolyn Arnold (who got married and was named Carolyn Johnston in the Earl Golz article linked below), saw Oswald in the second floor lunchroom just 6 minutes or so before Baker and Truly encountered him in the vestibule beside it. http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/B Disk/Bronson Charles/Item 27.pdf
  5. Richard Gilbride's work is an abomination, it is filled with ifs, perhapses, and other baseless innuendo alike. Read HERE And read HERE If you want to know what really happened, with ALL (!) available evidence on display with regards the 2FLRE then read HERE Let's not forget that Richard Gilbride was kicked off this forum for his repugnant behaviour not too long ago.
  6. Interesting point on the CIA obtaining Secret Service credentials. However, thinks RFK was hit by a stray bullet from Sirhan's pistol.
  7. Welcome Michael. I just hope she reads it. In retrospect, I might have asked to keep my name out of it. I can just see it now, "Omar is now using conspiracy theorist Jim DiEugenio about the Israeli-Palestinian dispute." Then they bring on someone like Von Pein or McAdams.
  8. There are three citations above showing why CBLA has been discarded. And Baker, in the face of all this, still insists he is right and somehow CBLA is not junk science. Gary Aguilar wrote perhaps the best summary of why it has been discarded. This was in a legal periodical, Federal Lawyer when Bugliosi's book came out. He based this info on a presentation made in SF by Rick Randich and Pat Grant. The two men who got the phony CBLA process thrown out of court with a judge who was about to charge an FBI agent unless the Bureau backed away from using this as evidence. http://www.fedbar.org/Resources_1/Federal-Lawyer-Magazine/2007/The-Federal-Lawyer-NovemberDecember-2007/Departments/Book-Reviews.aspx?FT=.pdf Just go to page 66 of the above article and Gary explains why its junk science based upon the Randich/ Grant presentation. It is not difficult to understand. And BTW, Grant knew Guinn, the guy who manufactured this phony test. With Gary's article, its very easy to see how flawed it was in its very underpinnings. The incredible thing is that it was used for so long. Now, again, if Baker has new information that effectively counters what Gary wrote, or what Randich and Grant presented, then he should go to the FBI and tell them. They then can go to the judge and show them how wrong he was to throw out the test and the FBI will start using the test again. If he does not do this, then what are we to make of his protestations? Baker reminds me a lot of Paul Hoch in this regard. A guy who was supposed to be a scientist, but who stood by Alvarez and his phony melon experiment, and also abided by the CBLA for years after it had been discredited. In both cases their standing by this junk science tells us more about Hoch and Baker than it does the scientific process. BTW, is there any ranting and raving in my above post? I don't detect it. Gary Aguilar's article would not have been published in a legal journal had it contained any of that. Is Baker now going to bring up Brennan next?
  9. "DEATH OF THE LUNCHROOM HOAX This essay establishes beyond any rational doubt that the 2nd-floor lunchroom encounter between Lee Harvey Oswald, Marion Baker and Roy Truly actually happened. The timing of this incident, roughly 60 seconds after the assassination, strongly suggests that Oswald was in the lunchroom during the shooting of President Kennedy." I have a problem with this article. This fellow puts Baker, Truly, and Oswald in the 2nd floor breakroom roughly 60 seconds after the shooting. I don't think that's possible and the timing of this may very well destroy his premise. I haven't read this yet but, I am wondering whether I should go any further. The bold type words through one for a loop. Didn't the WC lawyers and Baker establish through reenactment that the least time Baker could have arrived at the 2nd floor breakroom is 90 seconds? Based on my own calculations 60 seconds is to short of a time. And, 90 seconds is also an incorrect time because Oswald was outside the building when Marion Baker entered the TSBD. Here is reasoning that may be useful. Baker is half way down Houston street from Main Street when the shooting begins. He is between the Court House and the Court Records building. This at the least is about 75 feet from the intersection of Houston and Elm Street. Weigman’s run to the intersection began with him out of his vehicle and on the street as the 3rd shot occurs= about 5 seconds to the intersection Weigman begins filming and for some reason the first 8 seconds is blank. His film begins with the Mayor’s Car and the National Press Pool Car in motion. This is slightly pass where Mrs. Cabell indicated her vehicle was stopped= 8 seconds or, it could be longer depending on how long the Mayor’s Car was stopped A Weigman frame at 38 seconds shows the Camera Cars in motion= 30 seconds. Their start into the turn at Houston and Elm may be a second or two earlier. Couch/Darnell shows Officer Baker begin his run as the film starts and at about 2 seconds the film shows Baker running and he takes an estimated 4 seconds to reach the steps and confront Roy Truly there or inside the building= 6 seconds Roy Truly speaks to Officer Baker inside the TSBD or on the TSBD steps= about 5 seconds Inside the TSBD from the South door/ Main Entrance there is about 100 feet to the rear door / freight elevators. = 8 seconds Roy Truly calls twice up the elevator shaft for someone to lower the elevator= 7 seconds Roy Truly and Office Baker proceed to the second floor breakroom= about 20 seconds. Total: 5 + 8 + 30 + 6 + 8 + 7 + 20 = 1 minute and 24 seconds which is less than the 90 seconds estimated as the least time by the WC. But, still over the one minute or 60 seconds in time. These are estimated times and can be adjusted if there is good reason.
  10. Right, however, was this thread not meant to be about the front lift escape theory by John Armstrong in which two assassins were supposed to get to the sixth floor by climbing through the roof of the passenger lift, then to climb the fifth floor using a ladder, open the wooden floor of the sixth floor from beneath against boxes of books resting on these wooden boards, and then return back via the same route while Shelley and Lovelady made sure that the lift stays on the fourth floor by switching the electricity off but then on again to allow the lift to start moving? However, Mrs. Sarah Stanton was able to enter the passenger lift immediately after the shooting (so, it was on the first floor, not on the fourth floor) and used it to get to the second floor. I understand that she wished to use the lift because she was overweight, weighing more than 300 pounds. So, I wonder how Mrs. Stanton's movements suit John Armstrong's escape theory: From the FBI report (Warren Commission Exhibit, CD7, undated) on Mrs. Sarah Stanton: “… advised that she is employed in the second floor office of the Texas School Book Depository, 411 Elms Street, Dallas, Texas, and at about 12:30 P.M., on November 22, 1963, she was standing on the front steps of the building as the President passed and shortly thereafter she heard three explosions, however, she did not know where they came from and immediately went into the building, caught the elevator and went to the second floor offices and into the office of the Southwestern Publishing Company, located there, to try to look out the window and see what was happening… She knows LEE HARVEY OSWALD by sight, being employed by the same concern, but is not personally acquainted with him and did not see OSWALD on November 22, 1963, and she never seen him with a gun.
  11. Ron, The last thing Allen Dulles wanted to do was to introduce testimony that the suspect encountered by Baker was not "Oswald"! Allen Dulles was one of the chief architects of the cover-up. How close he was to those who ordered the assassination remains speculative, at least for now.
  12. http://www.science.tamu.edu/news/story.php?story_ID=550
  13. I tried to buy the picture from the Dallas Morning News, this is the reply that I got: We're sorry. The photo or page reprint you requested from The Dallas Morning News is not available for sale.Please do not respond to this email. If you wish to contact us please go to this web page: http://dallasnews.mycapture.com/mycapture/photoRequestForm.asp?prID=114473&contactus=1Sincerely,Dallas Morning News Teamhttp://dallasnews.mycapture.com
  14. PAUL DEBOLE - JFK/RFK ASSASSINATIONS https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1iLhP7K_Mk&feature=share
  15. Trump is using Roy Cohn's legal strategies. https://www.axios.com/donald-trump-legal-strategy-subpoenas-investigations-f472ed47-988b-4762-824b-6578dfbedc3f.html [It should be pointed out that Roy Cohn was disbarred from the practice of law towards to the end of his life. But I guess he would say his strategies worked up until then.] https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1986/06/24/roy-cohn-is-disbarred-by-new-york-court/c5ca9112-3245-48f0-ab01-c2c0f3c3fc2e/?utm_term=.c474daa4f784
  16. In a sense Robert Morrow was ahead of his time in being consumed with the sex lives and sexual hypocrisies of politicians. The 2016 election campaign saw Trump on national TV getting off a campaign bus after being recorded about boasting of a recent adultery and other gross sexual matters, such his habit of as grabbing the private parts of women. Then there was his attempt to pay off two women he had sex with, this in the closing days of the campaign so that the voters were kept in the dark. This has resulted in a criminal investigation of the pay-offs. There are many other public scandals involving Trump and his adulterous actions. Morrow's preoccupation with sexual matters pales when contrasted with President Trump's gross sexual exploits.
  17. We all suffer from confirmation bias, which leaves us all cognitively impaired. Don't take it personally. It happens to all of us. In your case your LN True Belief impairs your ability to recognize JFK's T3 back wound. Jim DiEugenio's ambition to be the #1 authority on JFK can't recognize the T3 back wound either, because to do so would deflate the significance of his CE399 analysis. It's not personal, Sonny, it's strictly business.
  18. I've read all of that stuff, and more besides. That it is has been discredited is due to the interpretation of the results it provides, and has nothing to do with its inherent credibility. NAA is real. It is being used. It works. Jim DiEugenio, as usual, discards it as 'junk science', primarily because he doesn't understand it, just like he discards anything that doesn't fit in with his warped world view. Yes, this is why I tend to avoid this forum these days. I'm cognitively impaired, am I? People like you worry me.
  19. Jim, I suspect that there was some kind of encounter between our "Oswald" and a DPD cop (probably Marrion Baker) somewhere on the first floor. Note that the NYT story of Sunday morning, 11/24/63 (when "Oswald' was still very much alive) did not specify precisely which "lunchroom" the encounter allegedly occurred. (We all know that there were two eating rooms in the TSBD, one of which was on the first floor.) I also suspect that at the very first interrogation of "Oswald" (as recorded by James Hosty), it became obvious that "Oswald" had an alibi - he was on the first floor of the TSBD during the shooting. The second-floor story was needed to get "Oswald" off the first floor and away from witnesses he might later call to testify on his behalf. This deserves a much fuller development on a separate thread. But, I will look carefully at Richard Gilbride's essay over the next few days and get back to you. Meanwhile, one incredible fact remains: at the very moment he was completing his first day affidavit by hand, Marrion Baker was literally sitting right next to "Oswald" and nowhere in that affidavit did he state that the man right next to him was the same "lt brown jacket" wearing suspect he'd encountered up on the "3rd or 4th floor"! Further, the suspect description provided by Baker does not really fit our "Oswald" - 30 years old? 165 pounds? "Oswald" was sitting right next to him!
  20. It was an incorrectly spelled pun on Brian Doyle's vision, David. "Paradoyleia"😊
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...