James DiEugenio Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 This is by Jeff Carter. Jeff is the guy who worked with Len Osanic on the 50 Reasons for 50 Years series for BOR. I especially like Part 2, and there are two more parts to come. http://www.ctka.net/2015/JeffCarterBYP1-3.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted July 31, 2015 Author Share Posted July 31, 2015 David Josephs will also be commenting on the BYP for CTKA in his upcoming review of the so called Rifle and Handgun purchase. Buckle your seat belts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 The BYP were in some ways the most important items used to incriminate Oswald. They were used to confirm the rifle and pistol purchases. They were used to confirm Oswald had commie leanings. Early on, in the 1960s, Warren critics debunked the BYP using shadow analysis. At this point in 2015, the BYP have been debunked for all but [a] the true believers, and some who subscribe to conspiracy-lite. One can go round-and-round. The George DeM. high-quality version. The DPD cut-out version. The un-changing angle of the shot. Marina's testimony re the Imperial reflex. For me, the clincher is that the DPD did not find the BYP on the afternoon of 11-22-63. Despite a thorough search of the Paine residence. Fact is, if one, just one, item used to incriminate Oswald was false, just one, all such items fall into disregard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 David Josephs will also be commenting on the BYP for CTKA in his upcoming review of the so called Rifle and Handgun purchase. Buckle your seat belts. I'm looking forward to DJosephs comments regarding the BYP(s)... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 With the great work Jeff has done in his presentation... all I can do is stay true to my premise about the Evidence being the Conspiracy. While Jeff does a wonderful job with McCabe and the Imperial Reflex stories... I found evidence in the form of a Hosty report on Feb 3, 1964 which presents a different set of circumstances. In THIS report, Hosty writes that McCabe says the "box with camera and other photographic equipment" was in the living room, that it was obvious to McCabe it belinged to Ruth and Michael, and he just left it. As Jeff correctly wrote: According to the FBI, McCabe is “certain that he saw a light gray box camera in a box in Mrs PAINE’s garage. MCCABE stated that this camera was in a box which contained books and photographs belonging to LEE HARVEY OSWALD. MCCABE stated that he searched this box and did not take the camera since he did not consider it to be of evidentiary value.” (CE2557) CE2557 is taken from WCD724 which also does not mention the Hosty interview from 1/28, dictated 1/30 and has a 2/3 date at the top. The first date in CE2557 is 2/16 with Robert. Jeff's discussing the conflict between where these photos and negatives were found and this Hosty report being excluded from CE2557 is the beginning of my article. DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 With the great work Jeff has done in his presentation... all I can do is stay true to my premise about the Evidence being the Conspiracy. While Jeff does a wonderful job with McCabe and the Imperial Reflex stories... I found evidence in the form of a Hosty report on Feb 3, 1964 which presents a different set of circumstances. In THIS report, Hosty writes that McCabe says the "box with camera and other photographic equipment" was in the living room, that it was obvious to McCabe it belinged to Ruth and Michael, and he just left it. As Jeff correctly wrote: According to the FBI, McCabe is “certain that he saw a light gray box camera in a box in Mrs PAINE’s garage. MCCABE stated that this camera was in a box which contained books and photographs belonging to LEE HARVEY OSWALD. MCCABE stated that he searched this box and did not take the camera since he did not consider it to be of evidentiary value.” (CE2557) CE2557 is taken from WCD724 which also does not mention the Hosty interview from 1/28, dictated 1/30 and has a 2/3 date at the top. The first date in CE2557 is 2/16 with Robert. Jeff's discussing the conflict between where these photos and negatives were found and this Hosty report being excluded from CE2557 is the beginning of my article. DJ You mean the box found in the living room that I referred to back in April on this forum? McCabe's reports make for interesting reading... A Camera found in the Paine Magic Cave and left in place... another camera found in the living room in a box with assorted camera equipment -- also left in place... and then later, the story morphs into one of these switching to be found in Marina's bedroom. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=20354&p=300429 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 31, 2015 Share Posted July 31, 2015 Even a broken clock is right twice a day Greg... You want a gold star? And why not mention it was in the "Oswald leaving the TSBD" thread... which of course has nothing to so with your post until you wrongly assume that PM is holding a camera... based on nothing but your imagination... Amazing how much you can pull from your arsenal and throw up against the wall... I didn't notice a reference in your post to this Hosty report... as I said - twice a day... but as long as you take credit and feel good about yourself mate... you keep on searching thru your old posts, I'm sure at one time or another you've said just about everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 (edited) Even a broken clock is right twice a day Greg... You want a gold star? And why not mention it was in the "Oswald leaving the TSBD" thread... which of course has nothing to so with your post until you wrongly assume that PM is holding a camera... based on nothing but your imagination... Amazing how much you can pull from your arsenal and throw up against the wall... I didn't notice a reference in your post to this Hosty report... as I said - twice a day... but as long as you take credit and feel good about yourself mate... you keep on searching thru your old posts, I'm sure at one time or another you've said just about everything. Exactly what I expected! More misrepresentation. Not assumption - I called it what it was - "rabid speculation". You are master of assumptions. You assume what "re-ad" means on an old school report. You assume that because the grades are similar they must refer to the same year, and on and on it goes. Speculation - properly labelled, harms no one and may actually lead somewhere good. Not so sure that applies to unfounded assumptions, cobber. Not about taking credit, btw. With you, it's all about taking the mickey... Edited August 1, 2015 by Greg Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted August 1, 2015 Author Share Posted August 1, 2015 Can we get back to the point? Is McCabe to be taken seriously? Why is it, from what I can see, that he is the odd man out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Can we get back to the point? Is McCabe to be taken seriously? Why is it, from what I can see, that he is the odd man out? No - he is not to be taken seriously (and it was a good piece on this). I think the clue might be that he is attached to Irving - home of the Paines and the Randalls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 Can we get back to the point? Is McCabe to be taken seriously? Why is it, from what I can see, that he is the odd man out? How can that be known Jim when the Evidence itself is contradictory? When the FBI excludes reports in their presentation of exhibits from WCDs it's a sure sign they were not happy with the way it was pointing. The offering that McCabe finds photos as well as Rose/Stovall may be to deflect the planting aspect of these images and negatives... They were NOT there the day before, now they are there when this team of 5 looks more carefully.. They've literally taken just about everything not nailed down that may be linked to Oswald, just not the camera? And if they only took the two photos and two negatives.... when does 133-C show up prior to Nov 29th when they put Det Brown in that exact position? It may also simply be courtesy to the Irving PD since the DPD is going into their area... I have to say, assuming his presence and the Hosty report are just business as usual never seems to pan out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted August 1, 2015 Share Posted August 1, 2015 you guys give out gold stars...? what do i have to do to get one? i want a gold star... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 DJ: And if they only took the two photos and two negatives.... when does 133-C show up prior to Nov 29th when they put Det Brown in that exact position? This is intriguing I think. I also like the end of Part 2 of Jeff's series. With the likliehood that Ruth Paine took the New Orleans photos. And the WC ran from that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Jeffries Posted August 2, 2015 Share Posted August 2, 2015 Thanks for sharing this important article, Jim. I recent years, there has been a willingness on the part of many supposedly pro-conspiracy researchers to accept these obviously forged photos as legitimate. This epitomizes what I refer to as "neo-con" belief. Oswald's posture alone, the problems with the shadows, and the impossible overkill of posing with both alleged murder weapons and commie literature to boot, should have discredited these fakes a long time ago in the eyes of any credible researcher. To quote from my book: In 1970, researcher Jim Marrs interviewed Robert and Patricia Hester, who worked at the National Photo Lab in Dallas. They told Marrs that they’d been very busy developing photographs for both the Secret Service and the FBI on the night of the assassination. They particularly recalled seeing color transparencies of the backyard photos, including one in which there was no figure in the picture. A “ghost image” backyard photo was discovered in the 1980s, featuring a surreal white outline of Oswald’s body. This photo, along with ten others that were taken in the backyard without a figure, was found in the files of the Dallas Police Department.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted August 2, 2015 Author Share Posted August 2, 2015 (edited) DJ: This epitomizes what I refer to as "neo-con" belief. LOL I always thought the Hester testimony was inexplicably discounted. From Reclaiming Parkland, p. 197 "The pose struck by Brown did not recall the two photos originally removed from the Paine home. It was a different pose. HIs pose resembled a photo pilfered from the Dallas Police, which did not show up until the widow of Roscoe White returned it in 1975. Further, as Johnson notes, there were actually two of the ghost photos in the archives. The silhouette was the same but the backgrounds were slightly different. One has the two vertical lines visible, in the other they are removed. As Johnson notes, someone went to some trouble with an airbrush to do so." Edited August 2, 2015 by James DiEugenio 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