Jump to content
The Education Forum

Lindsay Anderson

Members
  • Posts

    65
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lindsay Anderson

  • Birthday 02/29/1968

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    UK

Recent Profile Visitors

1,622 profile views

Lindsay Anderson's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

  1. Still following the thread, though I got somewhat distracted by the JFK & the KKK thread. This isn't an easy topic to drop in and out of, at times it seems you are talking in code! I am being somewhat misquoted in the repetitions of my earlier post though, as although I questioned the evidence for there being a splice I quickly edited that post and added a subsequent one to say, yes - I do see what David was saying about there being a splice and that it seems so obvious a conclusion that is difficult to imagine how anyone, especially Zavada, could argue against this. David kindly responded with this 'Zavada claims there is a small % of lightness difference... Problem being the stop/starts on the family side of the film all have this telltale LIGHTENING of the first few frames'.,
  2. Paul I think this is a massive jump and almost belongs on another thread - I have not studied the material related to Secret Service Complicity in any detail but - from the things I have seen, (mostly from James Fetzer), there is the stuff that happened after the first shots were fired (such a a limo stop) and the stuff before, such as the dog leg turn, stand-down, bubble dome removal etc. The stuff after the bullet can be argued to be down to (being kind) insufficient resources, equipment and training resulting in them getting it so wrong when under fire. The stuff before the bullet though - what evidence is there that the failings were unusual. Maybe standards slipped so low that those mistakes were being made regularly - did security take a marked dive when Kennedy became president or had it gotten lax well before then. When did security start to fail. Someone must have looked at this challenge as it seem a fairly obvious one and I would suspect there would be records; Manhole covers - check, windows - check, that kind of thing. Security was no doubt improved after the assassination, but that proves nothing.
  3. Hi John I think you may be making an interesting point but I don't fully understand your post (there are a lot of nuttys!) or which post you are replying to. Can you give an example of the type of statement you are referring to (that could be included with the title of the thread).
  4. Hi Terri You must know how unlikely the FBI are to confirm anything. Whether they have the evidence or not they are not going to confirm one way or the other. Were I a journalist or a film maker or had some other official credential they might just agree to share what they do or do not know but otherwise no - or do you think.otherwise? Likewise with comments such as why the RCMP don't sue you. Why do you think they would want to, even if your account was blatant lies? You are no threat to them, this time because you are not a journalist or film-maker. Also, because of your other claims, they too can just dismiss you as a nutter - whether you are one or not. That's the problem with the type of verification you are suggesting we employ here - things like look into the truck, yes maybe that can be done but the other things you suggest as tests are really not tests at all. And those lawyers would not run away if they thought you were any kind of threat - Can you see that? That's why I said earlier that if a catalogue of events like this happened to me..... well lets be silly now, I witness a political murder and the following month i am abducted and returned by aliens - I can 'prove' both. I hope i could resist the need to go public on the alien abduction until such time as my proof re the murder had been investigated, verified and accepted. Sorry to anyone who feels we should not be debating at this level. I do not share that opinion and do not believe we should discard what could be verifiable evidence in this account (especially if it is easily verifiable) purely on the basis that the 'witness' does not seem credible. Well, since I have no proof, only what I HAVE witnessed, I guess I have had my say and I can see where that has landed me. It is too bad that none of what I have told you can be verified. I was hoping there was someone who could at least tell me where to look for the evidence, like about the green truck. I am not a college graduate, so maybe my credentials are not good enough to have anything to say. Sorry there has been so much confusion generated over my eye-witness account. Terri I only have high school too but I dont think that necessarily prevents anyone from contributing something of value here - I am sympathetic to what you are saying but I hoped to point out your appeals for us to look at the evidence to verify your accounts are mostly non starters. I still think your posts are of value - some of your challenges to us, to verify your accounts, are not.
  5. Sorry John but that question also seems like an accusation which also gets us no-where - it may not be your intention but to me it can read that you are questioning the motivation of those posting the objections, which I think is banned here, and suggesting that some of those may be agents trying to cover the truth. I think there is a lot less of that going on now, 50 years on, than there may have been. In fact I would more inclined to believe that does not go on at all now, other than to prevent the release of key documents. I keep asking myself why documents are still being withheld - the topic of this thread provides a plausible explanation.
  6. Hi Terri You must know how unlikely the FBI are to confirm anything. Whether they have the evidence or not they are not going to confirm one way or the other. Were I a journalist or a film maker or had some other official credential they might just agree to share what they do or do not know but otherwise no - or do you think.otherwise? Likewise with comments such as why the RCMP don't sue you. Why do you think they would want to, even if your account was blatant lies? You are no threat to them, this time because you are not a journalist or film-maker. Also, because of your other claims, they too can just dismiss you as a nutter - whether you are one or not. That's the problem with the type of verification you are suggesting we employ here - things like look into the truck, yes maybe that can be done but the other things you suggest as tests are really not tests at all. And those lawyers would not run away if they thought you were any kind of threat - Can you see that? That's why I said earlier that if a catalogue of events like this happened to me..... well lets be silly now, I witness a political murder and the following month i am abducted and returned by aliens - I can 'prove' both. I hope i could resist the need to go public on the alien abduction until such time as my proof re the murder had been investigated, verified and accepted. Sorry to anyone who feels we should not be debating at this level. I do not share that opinion and do not believe we should discard what could be verifiable evidence in this account (especially if it is easily verifiable) purely on the basis that the 'witness' does not seem credible.
  7. I feel a bit bad not having posted since pages ago - my opinion since then hasn't advanced much though. Do Terri's accounts when considered collectively seem far fetched - of course and I don't think I've picked up anything from Terri that suggests she can't see why anyone would naturally come to that conclusion Are they even possible - unlikely yes, strange yes, impossible No Is there anything of interest in her post re JFK and the KKK - I think so - even if I do not buy all of the account Finding more about the truck shouldn't be that difficult and if the Banister link can be proven it would be an important development. I don't gamble but seems like a worthwhile potential return on a very insignificant stake, If it comes to nothing very little has been lost. Would I gamble a grand, never. Would I throw in a pound - oh yes.
  8. Don I think the coverup proves that there were a lot more powerful forces behind the cover up of the assassination of JFK. The question for me is whether or not the KKK were the a driving force behind / significant contributor to, the JFK assassination. Even if they were the driving force, that does not absolve the CIA, MIC, LJ or other usual suspects of involvement in the act or the coverup, That's why I think we need better reasons than Terri's credibility (which of course is important) before significant KKK involvement can be ruled out. There are several reasons I find this thread interesting, one being that it brings another possibility to the table that I had not even considered before, another being that there are elements of Terri's 'testimony' that may be testable (even if doing so would be far beyond my own resources or ability).
  9. Thanks Michael - Seems plausible is far from saying I believe every word of the story and I hope I made that clear. No lecture here (apologies if that is how it appeared) and my post was not directed at anyone in particular, I've seen something of interest in most of the posts on this thread, with the exception of Paul's response to Lee, questioning Lee's value as a researcher. I wanted to disagree with that statement, while saying that I find the premise of Terri's 'testimony' interesting. I do find it (strange/annoying/disappointing - not really sure of the right word), when researchers / contributors attach themselves strongly to other conspiracies, events (as Terri does here) or extreme views. If all that stuff had happened to me, I hope I would keep most of it to myself and limit myself to the one area in which I had the most to offer. Thankfully my life is not that interesting.
  10. I've followed this thread with interest from the start and I really hope this does not degenerate into a mud sling - I too think Lee is an outstanding researcher but it does not stop me seeing value in this thread - and Lee's 'comedy' is not the stuff of clowns, it is sharp, cutting and very well observed. Yes there is much about Terri's accounts that raises doubts (especially when looked at collectively) but non the less, the testimony offered re the KKK seems plausible (if looked at in isolation) and worthy of investigation. I would love to see a good investigative journalist get hold of this. There is a story here that could be significant even if it takes a very different turn from that presented by Terri. So - Lee has made comment (which did need to be said) and Paul has responded. So lets just get on with research now before this becomes another moon landings, twin-towers conspiracy level debate, which to some would be less believable then Terri's claims here.
  11. No need to butt out - I just didnt get the inference but the above explains it well. It could well be significant that an Oswald lookalike was there on the day - I mean there are numerous reports of Oswald impersonators both leading up to and after the assassination but very little about their involvement on the day (AFAIK)
  12. I really don't think the guy filmed to the right of the TSBD door, and at DPD HQ around 2 PM, is the same "Billy Lovelady" photographed at FBI in February 1964. Unlike Ralph Cinque, I don't think he was inserted into any photos. I wonder whether Lovelady and the plaid shirt guy who resembles Lovelady were planted as Oswald near-lookalikes. Greg Burnham: We know next to nothing about Billy Lovelady - less than we do about Wesley Frazier, apparently. What if the Altgens 6 Lovelady is in the photo to send some kind of political message? ?
  13. Hi David, I do appreciate this answer which, for me at least, is thought provoking. I've gone through this several times though and I'm stuck at the same question still, which is "Why?"
  14. Thanks Greg, I think you appreciate that in no way was my post a criticism of those who have tried but have simply had enough of this now - I hope I am a little way off that but as it stands I can see there will be a point where it becomes boring, and there is lots else to do!
  15. Count me out. If I was into S&M I'd be frequenting a different type of forum. I can appreciate that and no doubt I would feel the same had I been participating in this as long as some of you have!
×
×
  • Create New...