Full Version: Great new clip on Youtube.
Good stuff. Thanks, Wim.
There are also clips of Mark Lane interviewing Lee Bowers and Richard C. Dodd.
I love Dodd's comment when he was asked about what he saw behind the fence;"There was something going on there that somebody should have found out something."
James
There are also clips of Mark Lane interviewing Lee Bowers and Richard C. Dodd.
I love Dodd's comment when he was asked about what he saw behind the fence;"There was something going on there that somebody should have found out something."
James
QUOTE (Wim Dankbaar @ Mar 8 2007, 11:36 PM) 
Yes, great evidence , Wim. I hear so often, "site your evidence". What more do they want? There is a mountain of evidence, like this , that has been ignored. This guy, and many others, witnessed things that were not included in the "official report". The Orwellian nature of this matter is beyond comprehension.
QUOTE (Peter McGuire @ Mar 9 2007, 06:01 AM)
QUOTE (Wim Dankbaar @ Mar 8 2007, 11:36 PM)
Yes, great evidence , Wim. I hear so often, "site your evidence". What more do they want? There is a mountain of evidence, like this , that has been ignored. This guy, and many others, witnessed things that were not included in the "official report". The Orwellian nature of this matter is beyond comprehension.
Thanks Wim for the info. Great video, and Im going to watch them all. What is so nice is finally being able to actually see these peole, and the interviews Mark did with all of the people, and all of the "early" recorded videos of their eyewitness evidence. Im glad to call Mark my "neighbor". He did so much work on the case, and deserves alot of credit that alot of people dont want to give him. All of his books, and the Liberty Lobby winning verdict, disproving Hunts testimony, and proving him a skunk. A round of applause for Mark Lane! Just my opinion FWIW.
thanks-smitty
Those clips are from Mark Lane's film "Rush To Judgment." Though dated, it is still a fascinating piece of important research.
This short video gives me better insight into the geography of the assassination site than anything I've seen before.
Well done!
Well done!
The film has no "supporting value" for James Files claims Wim, and Files is the only reason you posted it, isn't it ?
It only shows, that everything Files claims in regard of that position (which he changed over the years btw.) on
the knoll, the mud there, etc. was long out and in the open years before he came forward.
Btw. is this now the official and final location Files shot from on the 22th of November 1963 ?
Have jfkmurdersolved and James Files finaly made up their mind ?
Not only are you selling a construct, that has no factual proof to support it,but sell it as proven,
you also got yourself into the boat with no good people, who smell money like sharks smell blood.
But hey, as long as they call you friend... .
Here's a good one, James Files and Pamela Ray talking about the book that never was, and few ever had a chance to read.
JF=James Files
JF: (coughs) We’re not gonna get anything out of him anyway...
F: Just like everybody tells me, Wim is my strongest supporter. Like I tell ‘em, “He ain’t got no choice! He has to be my strongest supporter – he’s got a website on me! He sure as hell can’t talk about me, talk bad, you know what I mean?
JF: I mean he’s backed in a corner. He’s painted himself into a corner. He can’t afford to say nothin’ bad about me ‘cause he cuts his own throat.
Sounds like a real friend talking, doesn't it ?
But since I don't use methods others use, here's the full conversation as posted by Pamela Ray, James Files girlfriend .
http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...d=508&page=
Wim you didn't like me posting that link, in the thread that deals with the book you prevented from being published, on your own forum you weren't amused about it at all.
Too much reality for you and your readers ?
You tried to silence opposing views by booting the writer of the post, and not only that, you used your smear tactics again.
Now, how strange is that for a man of truth you claim to be.
It only shows, that everything Files claims in regard of that position (which he changed over the years btw.) on
the knoll, the mud there, etc. was long out and in the open years before he came forward.
Btw. is this now the official and final location Files shot from on the 22th of November 1963 ?
Have jfkmurdersolved and James Files finaly made up their mind ?
Not only are you selling a construct, that has no factual proof to support it,but sell it as proven,
you also got yourself into the boat with no good people, who smell money like sharks smell blood.
But hey, as long as they call you friend... .
Here's a good one, James Files and Pamela Ray talking about the book that never was, and few ever had a chance to read.
JF=James Files
JF: (coughs) We’re not gonna get anything out of him anyway...
F: Just like everybody tells me, Wim is my strongest supporter. Like I tell ‘em, “He ain’t got no choice! He has to be my strongest supporter – he’s got a website on me! He sure as hell can’t talk about me, talk bad, you know what I mean?
JF: I mean he’s backed in a corner. He’s painted himself into a corner. He can’t afford to say nothin’ bad about me ‘cause he cuts his own throat.
Sounds like a real friend talking, doesn't it ?
But since I don't use methods others use, here's the full conversation as posted by Pamela Ray, James Files girlfriend .
http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...d=508&page=
Wim you didn't like me posting that link, in the thread that deals with the book you prevented from being published, on your own forum you weren't amused about it at all.
Too much reality for you and your readers ?
You tried to silence opposing views by booting the writer of the post, and not only that, you used your smear tactics again.
Now, how strange is that for a man of truth you claim to be.
Uwe, in my view, the more you rant, the more pathetic you make yourself. This is an unknown and interesting clip for everyone, independent of whether you support Files or not. It's no secret I do, and no secret you don't.
You can rave all you want on Lancer and here or whereever. I may even address your claims here.
You just don't do it in my home.
Heck, in the past John Simkin has kicked me out for less.
You did not want this book to be published, is that statement wrong ?
Yes and no, I financed it to conditions that weren't met. She still owes me 55 grand plus interest because of it. If the conditions were met, she could have published it. I am tired of wasting my time on a weasel like you. You can vent your suggestive disinformation somewhere else. You're a visitor in my house, who keeps telling the host he is appauled with the interior. That's just one of the reasons I'm kicking you out.
Bye now.
Wim
You can rave all you want on Lancer and here or whereever. I may even address your claims here.
You just don't do it in my home.
Heck, in the past John Simkin has kicked me out for less.
You did not want this book to be published, is that statement wrong ?
Yes and no, I financed it to conditions that weren't met. She still owes me 55 grand plus interest because of it. If the conditions were met, she could have published it. I am tired of wasting my time on a weasel like you. You can vent your suggestive disinformation somewhere else. You're a visitor in my house, who keeps telling the host he is appauled with the interior. That's just one of the reasons I'm kicking you out.
Bye now.
Wim
QUOTE (Wim Dankbaar @ Mar 9 2007, 11:59 AM)
Uwe, in my view, the more you rant, the more pathetic you make yourself. This is an unknown and interesting clip for everyone, independent of whether you support Files or not. It's no secret I do, and no secret you don't.
You can rave all you want on Lancer and here or whereever. I may even address your claims here.
You just don't do it in my home.
Heck, in the past John Simkin has kicked me out for less.
You did not want this book to be published, is that statement wrong ?
Yes and no, I financed it to conditions that weren't met. She still owes me 55 grand plus interest because of it. If the conditions were met, she could have published it. I am tired of wasting my time on a weasel like you. You can vent your suggestive disinformation somewhere else. You're a visitor in my house, who keeps telling the host he is appauled with the interior. That's just one of the reasons I'm kicking you out.
Bye now.
Wim
You can rave all you want on Lancer and here or whereever. I may even address your claims here.
You just don't do it in my home.
Heck, in the past John Simkin has kicked me out for less.
You did not want this book to be published, is that statement wrong ?
Yes and no, I financed it to conditions that weren't met. She still owes me 55 grand plus interest because of it. If the conditions were met, she could have published it. I am tired of wasting my time on a weasel like you. You can vent your suggestive disinformation somewhere else. You're a visitor in my house, who keeps telling the host he is appauled with the interior. That's just one of the reasons I'm kicking you out.
Bye now.
Wim
Wim, I agree, it is an interresting video, that was not my point.
I question your motive or better said the context for posting it, since when one follows the link
you posted this comment under the video link:
Comment by Wim Dankbaar:
What a great video! Never seen it!
If you wanna see who fired that shot, search youtube for "James Files".
Wim
JF -- I had smoked that day. Careless! I probably stepped on several cigarette butts and left them there. Most of them Pall Mall.
J -- Was it muddy back there?
JF -- It was very muddy. Let me put it this way: A couple of times I even took my shoes, put them above up the little country ledger and scraped the mud off the bottom of them. I hated getting mud on them.
End of comment
And there you have it, you use Hollands statements in order to support Files, which brings you nothing at all, more so since
it makes pretty clear now, that Jimmy and also jfkmurdersolved (you) has changed Files position on the knoll more towards the underpass, away from the position of the man seen in Moormans picture, which you and Vernon for years claimed to have been
Files.
Now, how about that ?
Is that now officialy the position Files was standing and fireing from that day ?
Have you finaly made your mind up on it ?
I don't think John has a problem with my view or presentation of facts, but if he has, i am sure he will let me know and I
usualy have no problem of staying within the rules here, just as I stayed within the rules on your forum, but got booted
nonetheless.
Anyway, a nice try to get me booted here Wim, shows just how underhanded you act, when someone touches on your Jimmy Files phantasy in a way you don't like it.
You simply don't want anyone to hear any negatives about your toy.
Bad style !
Now, here are Files different positions on the knoll at the time of the headshot:
Files position as of 27th of August 1992
http://www.jfkchat.com/files/27aug92c%20filesmap.jpg
Files position at least since West died until you took over (if not later) was claimed to have been to the right or right of the large tree near the steps as seen in Moormans picture.
That now has obviously been changed to a position to the left of that same tree more towards the underpass.Click to view attachment
Files said he was about 8-10 feet from the corner of the picket fence.
Nothing has ever changed about that. The fact that you try to suggest it , makes my point exactly.
Wim
Nothing has ever changed about that. The fact that you try to suggest it , makes my point exactly.
Wim
QUOTE (Wim Dankbaar @ Mar 9 2007, 01:51 PM)
Files said he was about 8-10 feet from the corner of the picket fence.
Nothing has ever changed about that. The fact that you try to suggest it , makes my point exactly.
Wim
Nothing has ever changed about that. The fact that you try to suggest it , makes my point exactly.
Wim
For years you and Bob declared the man with the hat to the right of the tree as being Files, and fought
mighty wars over it.
Files never said anything to the contrary, and he knew very well where jfkmurdersolved had located him, as he knows
that picture of Moorman.
Just like with Grady,he never disputed until problems were pointed out, but that is another thing that is going to haunt you, I haven't even started yet.
Also if I remember right, you once posted a trailer that had Jim Marrs in it, and there also was that Moorman
picture with the location to the right of the tree pointed out.
I am always talking of the position as seen in Moorman, therefore, to the right of the tree.
Moorman would have had to be standing on the other side of Elm Street in order to make your perspective work and put
Files to the left of that tree.
Now, why should anyone believe that you are correct now ?
Use your head, you can't place Files in Dealey Plaza on the 22th of November 1963, shooting a Remington .222 fired from an XP-100 right
into the head of JFK.
Again, I know that you believe in that scenario, but you simply can not prove it.
And that drives you nuts,by the looks of it, and results in you hitting out on the wrong persons.
The one that's driven nuts, is not me, Uwe.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/moorman.jpg
I too believe that the figure (or "hatman" as he is called) is James Files. Files has not contradicted that because he is in jail and can't read everything on the Net, and secondly because there was no reason to contradict it. Files has only clarified that he wasn't wearing his hat during the shooting. That's what Vernon wanted believe and put out. I corrected that. Now why would Files "the liar" contradict Vernon?
It's typical that you and Eaglesham try to use Vernon time and again as your ally in your crucade against Files, while both of you know what he was made of.
Especially you!
Wim
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/moorman.jpg
I too believe that the figure (or "hatman" as he is called) is James Files. Files has not contradicted that because he is in jail and can't read everything on the Net, and secondly because there was no reason to contradict it. Files has only clarified that he wasn't wearing his hat during the shooting. That's what Vernon wanted believe and put out. I corrected that. Now why would Files "the liar" contradict Vernon?
It's typical that you and Eaglesham try to use Vernon time and again as your ally in your crucade against Files, while both of you know what he was made of.
Especially you!
Wim
QUOTE (Dave Weaver @ Mar 9 2007, 11:06 AM)
The film has no "supporting value" for James Files claims Wim, and Files is the only reason you posted it, isn't it ?
It only shows, that everything Files claims in regard of that position (which he changed over the years btw.) on
the knoll, the mud there, etc. was long out and in the open years before he came forward.
Btw. is this now the official and final location Files shot from on the 22th of November 1963 ?
Have jfkmurdersolved and James Files finaly made up their mind ?
Not only are you selling a construct, that has no factual proof to support it,but sell it as proven,
you also got yourself into the boat with no good people, who smell money like sharks smell blood.
But hey, as long as they call you friend... .
Here's a good one, James Files and Pamela Ray talking about the book that never was, and few ever had a chance to read.
JF=James Files
JF: (coughs) We’re not gonna get anything out of him anyway...
F: Just like everybody tells me, Wim is my strongest supporter. Like I tell ‘em, “He ain’t got no choice! He has to be my strongest supporter – he’s got a website on me! He sure as hell can’t talk about me, talk bad, you know what I mean?
JF: I mean he’s backed in a corner. He’s painted himself into a corner. He can’t afford to say nothin’ bad about me ‘cause he cuts his own throat.
Sounds like a real friend talking, doesn't it ?
But since I don't use methods others use, here's the full conversation as posted by Pamela Ray, James Files girlfriend .
http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...d=508&page=
Wim you didn't like me posting that link, in the thread that deals with the book you prevented from being published, on your own forum you weren't amused about it at all.
Too much reality for you and your readers ?
You tried to silence opposing views by booting the writer of the post, and not only that, you used your smear tactics again.
Now, how strange is that for a man of truth you claim to be.
It only shows, that everything Files claims in regard of that position (which he changed over the years btw.) on
the knoll, the mud there, etc. was long out and in the open years before he came forward.
Btw. is this now the official and final location Files shot from on the 22th of November 1963 ?
Have jfkmurdersolved and James Files finaly made up their mind ?
Not only are you selling a construct, that has no factual proof to support it,but sell it as proven,
you also got yourself into the boat with no good people, who smell money like sharks smell blood.
But hey, as long as they call you friend... .
Here's a good one, James Files and Pamela Ray talking about the book that never was, and few ever had a chance to read.
JF=James Files
JF: (coughs) We’re not gonna get anything out of him anyway...
F: Just like everybody tells me, Wim is my strongest supporter. Like I tell ‘em, “He ain’t got no choice! He has to be my strongest supporter – he’s got a website on me! He sure as hell can’t talk about me, talk bad, you know what I mean?
JF: I mean he’s backed in a corner. He’s painted himself into a corner. He can’t afford to say nothin’ bad about me ‘cause he cuts his own throat.
Sounds like a real friend talking, doesn't it ?
But since I don't use methods others use, here's the full conversation as posted by Pamela Ray, James Files girlfriend .
http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...d=508&page=
Wim you didn't like me posting that link, in the thread that deals with the book you prevented from being published, on your own forum you weren't amused about it at all.
Too much reality for you and your readers ?
You tried to silence opposing views by booting the writer of the post, and not only that, you used your smear tactics again.
Now, how strange is that for a man of truth you claim to be.
Dave
Why do YOU bring up FIles? Wim posts a great little video (thanx Wim) and says zero about James Files, but you jump all over him. Send him a PM or email.
Dawn
QUOTE (Wim Dankbaar @ Mar 9 2007, 02:25 PM)
The one that's driven nuts, is not me, Uwe.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/moorman.jpg
I too believe that the figure (or "hatman" as he is called) is James Files. Files has not contradicted that because he is in jail and can't read everything on the Net, and secondly because there was no reason to contradict it. Files has only clarified that he wasn't wearing his hat during the shooting. That's what Vernon wanted believe and put out. I corrected that. Now why would Files "the liar" contradict Vernon?
It's typical that you and Eaglesham try to use Vernon time and again as your ally in your crucade against Files, while both of you know what he was made of.
Especially you!
Here's a reminder:
http://jfkmurdersolved.com/BV.htm
Wim
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/moorman.jpg
I too believe that the figure (or "hatman" as he is called) is James Files. Files has not contradicted that because he is in jail and can't read everything on the Net, and secondly because there was no reason to contradict it. Files has only clarified that he wasn't wearing his hat during the shooting. That's what Vernon wanted believe and put out. I corrected that. Now why would Files "the liar" contradict Vernon?
It's typical that you and Eaglesham try to use Vernon time and again as your ally in your crucade against Files, while both of you know what he was made of.
Especially you!
Here's a reminder:
http://jfkmurdersolved.com/BV.htm
Wim
Wim, the "hatman" position does not correspondent with the Holland position as seen in the video, we agree on that.
I was not aware that you have changed Files location to that to the left of the tree (Hollands) from Moormans picture until
today.
Files is and was aware of that moorman picture and the location he was placed in for years, but did not correct you (that is jfkmurdersolved past and present).
I find that strange, to put it mild. He did the same in the Grady matter about his army serial number, don't tell me he didn't know about Gradys
"findings".
Allan Eaglesham does his thing, I do mine, no need to put us in one can.
I correspondent with him from time to time about a lot of matters, from computers to personal things, Files and JFK, and find him a very honest and straight forward person, when we disagree on something it is done in a civil manner.
And I have not the impression, that he is interrested in anything different than to find out the truth in regard of JFK matters.
Some see that different, but have yet to show the proof for it.
I usualy can remember audio/video and text I have run across pretty good on the longterm, so yes, I know about and have already on my harddrive that videomessage of Bob Vernon.
As he was jfkmurdersoved before and also during your involvement, I have to mention him from time to time, and I told you about what I thought
about him and your involvement in 2004 or late 2003.
I think you can agree, that I was somehow right, wasn't I ?
QUOTE (Dawn Meredith @ Mar 9 2007, 02:47 PM)
QUOTE (Dave Weaver @ Mar 9 2007, 11:06 AM)
The film has no "supporting value" for James Files claims Wim, and Files is the only reason you posted it, isn't it ?
It only shows, that everything Files claims in regard of that position (which he changed over the years btw.) on
the knoll, the mud there, etc. was long out and in the open years before he came forward.
Btw. is this now the official and final location Files shot from on the 22th of November 1963 ?
Have jfkmurdersolved and James Files finaly made up their mind ?
Not only are you selling a construct, that has no factual proof to support it,but sell it as proven,
you also got yourself into the boat with no good people, who smell money like sharks smell blood.
But hey, as long as they call you friend... .
Here's a good one, James Files and Pamela Ray talking about the book that never was, and few ever had a chance to read.
JF=James Files
JF: (coughs) We’re not gonna get anything out of him anyway...
F: Just like everybody tells me, Wim is my strongest supporter. Like I tell ‘em, “He ain’t got no choice! He has to be my strongest supporter – he’s got a website on me! He sure as hell can’t talk about me, talk bad, you know what I mean?
JF: I mean he’s backed in a corner. He’s painted himself into a corner. He can’t afford to say nothin’ bad about me ‘cause he cuts his own throat.
Sounds like a real friend talking, doesn't it ?
But since I don't use methods others use, here's the full conversation as posted by Pamela Ray, James Files girlfriend .
http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...d=508&page=
Wim you didn't like me posting that link, in the thread that deals with the book you prevented from being published, on your own forum you weren't amused about it at all.
Too much reality for you and your readers ?
You tried to silence opposing views by booting the writer of the post, and not only that, you used your smear tactics again.
Now, how strange is that for a man of truth you claim to be.
It only shows, that everything Files claims in regard of that position (which he changed over the years btw.) on
the knoll, the mud there, etc. was long out and in the open years before he came forward.
Btw. is this now the official and final location Files shot from on the 22th of November 1963 ?
Have jfkmurdersolved and James Files finaly made up their mind ?
Not only are you selling a construct, that has no factual proof to support it,but sell it as proven,
you also got yourself into the boat with no good people, who smell money like sharks smell blood.
But hey, as long as they call you friend... .
Here's a good one, James Files and Pamela Ray talking about the book that never was, and few ever had a chance to read.
JF=James Files
JF: (coughs) We’re not gonna get anything out of him anyway...
F: Just like everybody tells me, Wim is my strongest supporter. Like I tell ‘em, “He ain’t got no choice! He has to be my strongest supporter – he’s got a website on me! He sure as hell can’t talk about me, talk bad, you know what I mean?
JF: I mean he’s backed in a corner. He’s painted himself into a corner. He can’t afford to say nothin’ bad about me ‘cause he cuts his own throat.
Sounds like a real friend talking, doesn't it ?
But since I don't use methods others use, here's the full conversation as posted by Pamela Ray, James Files girlfriend .
http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...d=508&page=
Wim you didn't like me posting that link, in the thread that deals with the book you prevented from being published, on your own forum you weren't amused about it at all.
Too much reality for you and your readers ?
You tried to silence opposing views by booting the writer of the post, and not only that, you used your smear tactics again.
Now, how strange is that for a man of truth you claim to be.
Dave
Why do YOU bring up FIles? Wim posts a great little video (thanx Wim) and says zero about James Files, but you jump all over him. Send him a PM or email.
Dawn
Dawn, that video has nothing to do with Files, we agree, the posting of the link by Wim has.
I think you are a lawyer and know the mentality of persons and how they
often try to achieve specific things by doing something that seems unrelated.
If not, follow the link,read Wim's comment,and the posts made, add one and one and do not arrive at 3.
Thanks for your comment, It is always nice to hear from you, and I realy mean that,
but my reason for engaging Wim in this thread was valid.
Wim, the "hatman" position does not correspondent with the Holland position as seen in the video, we agree on that.
I was not aware that you have changed Files location to that to the left of the tree (Hollands) from Moormans picture until
today.
Files is and was aware of that moorman picture and the location he was placed in for years, but did not correct you (that is jfkmurdersolved past and present).
******************
The Holland position corresponds exactly with the Files position. You point it out incorrectly on Moorman, it's closer to the tree than your arrow. The view from the Moorman picture is very different from the clip image that you posted. Therefore the tree appears to be much more to the right than it was on the Moorman picture. Whether Files was right or left or the three , he isn't 100 % sure. As he says, it had to be to HIS right, as he didn't want the tree to be in the way. That corresponds with the blob over the fence on the Moorman picture. It's about 8-10 feet from the corner, exactly where Holland and Lane stood in that clip.
Someone shot from there, but in your mind it may not be Files. It has to remain some mysterious figure that never came forward.
If you watch "Files on JFK" again, the 2003 interview, he is asked about it by me, and you can see exactly what he said about it.
W - You’ve got the Moorman picture there? Or do you want to get that later?
J – No. Let’s look at this right here (putting Moorman picture before James Files). Is that the tree you were talking about?
JF - Yep, you can see the branches from back over here coming right down over the wall.
W – And that’s the vicinity where you were standing?
JF – Right there!
W – In this picture there is a uuh .. an object visible if you blow it up. Right here next to that tree. And if you blow it up it looks … it may look like a hat, or a fedora.
J – Do you remember which side of the tree you were on? Was it to your left or your right?
JF – (Thinking) ........ I could be mistaken, I believe ..... no, the tree was to my right. It had to be to my right. The tree was to my right because I didn’t want to have the tree in the way to my left. ….. And you can’t see the sign here, but the sign is right on down here.
W – Yes, the sign is here … This is the blowup. This is sky and this is sky and this is the shape. Yeah …. Do you see a hat in there?
JF – Do I see what?
W – A hat.
JF – Not to me! You’re asking the wrong man. I’ve got a hard time seeing with these glasses, believe me.
W – Okay, but this spot is right next to the tree
I was not aware that you have changed Files location to that to the left of the tree (Hollands) from Moormans picture until
today.
Files is and was aware of that moorman picture and the location he was placed in for years, but did not correct you (that is jfkmurdersolved past and present).
******************
The Holland position corresponds exactly with the Files position. You point it out incorrectly on Moorman, it's closer to the tree than your arrow. The view from the Moorman picture is very different from the clip image that you posted. Therefore the tree appears to be much more to the right than it was on the Moorman picture. Whether Files was right or left or the three , he isn't 100 % sure. As he says, it had to be to HIS right, as he didn't want the tree to be in the way. That corresponds with the blob over the fence on the Moorman picture. It's about 8-10 feet from the corner, exactly where Holland and Lane stood in that clip.
Someone shot from there, but in your mind it may not be Files. It has to remain some mysterious figure that never came forward.
If you watch "Files on JFK" again, the 2003 interview, he is asked about it by me, and you can see exactly what he said about it.
W - You’ve got the Moorman picture there? Or do you want to get that later?
J – No. Let’s look at this right here (putting Moorman picture before James Files). Is that the tree you were talking about?
JF - Yep, you can see the branches from back over here coming right down over the wall.
W – And that’s the vicinity where you were standing?
JF – Right there!
W – In this picture there is a uuh .. an object visible if you blow it up. Right here next to that tree. And if you blow it up it looks … it may look like a hat, or a fedora.
J – Do you remember which side of the tree you were on? Was it to your left or your right?
JF – (Thinking) ........ I could be mistaken, I believe ..... no, the tree was to my right. It had to be to my right. The tree was to my right because I didn’t want to have the tree in the way to my left. ….. And you can’t see the sign here, but the sign is right on down here.
W – Yes, the sign is here … This is the blowup. This is sky and this is sky and this is the shape. Yeah …. Do you see a hat in there?
JF – Do I see what?
W – A hat.
JF – Not to me! You’re asking the wrong man. I’ve got a hard time seeing with these glasses, believe me.
W – Okay, but this spot is right next to the tree
In observing the Mark Lane's tape of Sam Holland, I noticed that Sam states..
That he heard the shot from approximately "20 to 30 feet from the far corner of the little picket fence."
When stating this information he also points to the far end of the fence, near the steps...closest to where
Zapruder was situated...
..not the corner closest to them..on the overpass.
......not 8 to 10 feet from the corner,
by the steps...
He also only mentions mud being seen to have been wiped off on car bumpers...
Also he says that he and his four friends, went around within a very short time frame...and that by the time
he reached the area, he mentions eventually there were approximately 50 people mulling around...
As also Zapruder mentioned, there were police running behind him immediately, before he stepped
down from the pedestal.........there would it seems to have been many behind the fence, almost immediately
after the shooting...
Sam also recalls the footprints, but most important here perhaps is the fact that Mr.Holland also mentions
how they examined the area looking around for empty shells, but found none...
B......
That he heard the shot from approximately "20 to 30 feet from the far corner of the little picket fence."
When stating this information he also points to the far end of the fence, near the steps...closest to where
Zapruder was situated...
..not the corner closest to them..on the overpass.
......not 8 to 10 feet from the corner,
by the steps...
He also only mentions mud being seen to have been wiped off on car bumpers...
Also he says that he and his four friends, went around within a very short time frame...and that by the time
he reached the area, he mentions eventually there were approximately 50 people mulling around...
As also Zapruder mentioned, there were police running behind him immediately, before he stepped
down from the pedestal.........there would it seems to have been many behind the fence, almost immediately
after the shooting...
Sam also recalls the footprints, but most important here perhaps is the fact that Mr.Holland also mentions
how they examined the area looking around for empty shells, but found none...
B......
You will find a list of all the YouTube videos on the JFK assassination here:
http://youtube.com/results?search=related&...p;v=iYj3FAUHwro
http://youtube.com/results?search=related&...p;v=iYj3FAUHwro
Just to show that Uwe pointed the arrow to the incorrect spot, here's the correct spot pointed out:
Ok Wim, big Deal, maybe I was off by a one or two feet with my arrow, since I have not
used, because I don't have it, the hatman picture you used, so what ?
Your story is off miles from being proven that is the bigger problem.
What proven and previously unknown information did Files tell the world when
he "confessed" ?
The mud, the butts,the dented casing,or that JFK was killed ?
In other words, what proven facts of James Files "confession" were not
previously known and could not have been gathered by him through
books,films,newspapers or his criminal surrounding (mob,prison stays,other associates he had or has).
So, if you say that I can't accept Files as being the shooter on the
knoll, you are both right and wrong.
Based on the presented evidence, I can not accept him, if proven beyond a reasonable doubt
I would have no problem with him being the knoll shooter.
Do I doubt you can prove Files story, yep,since you (that is jfkmurdersolved) claim it proven already for the last 13 or so years,
can I be wrong nonetheless, sure, but the burden is on you Wim.
It is as easy as that, everything else, comes only from your imagination and results in personal attacks towards me and my
character.
But, you are forgiven.
used, because I don't have it, the hatman picture you used, so what ?
Your story is off miles from being proven that is the bigger problem.
What proven and previously unknown information did Files tell the world when
he "confessed" ?
The mud, the butts,the dented casing,or that JFK was killed ?
In other words, what proven facts of James Files "confession" were not
previously known and could not have been gathered by him through
books,films,newspapers or his criminal surrounding (mob,prison stays,other associates he had or has).
So, if you say that I can't accept Files as being the shooter on the
knoll, you are both right and wrong.
Based on the presented evidence, I can not accept him, if proven beyond a reasonable doubt
I would have no problem with him being the knoll shooter.
Do I doubt you can prove Files story, yep,since you (that is jfkmurdersolved) claim it proven already for the last 13 or so years,
can I be wrong nonetheless, sure, but the burden is on you Wim.
It is as easy as that, everything else, comes only from your imagination and results in personal attacks towards me and my
character.
But, you are forgiven.
You always make the thinking error that I have to prove Files story. Not my task. I provide information and try to corroborate the information where it can be.
The mere circumstance that information was previously known doesn't mean that Files must have invented his confession.
However, there's also information that was not previously known and corrorated later. For example the teethmark and Nicolleti's being in Dallas.
Wim
The mere circumstance that information was previously known doesn't mean that Files must have invented his confession.
However, there's also information that was not previously known and corrorated later. For example the teethmark and Nicolleti's being in Dallas.
Wim
[quote name='Wim Dankbaar' post='96768' date='Mar 10 2007, 03:09 PM']You always make the thinking error that I have to prove Files story. Not my task. I provide information and try to corroborate the information where it can be.
The mere circumstance that information was previously known doesn't mean that Files must have invented his confession.
However, there's also information that was not previously known and corrorated later. For example the teethmark and Nicolleti's being in Dallas.
Come on Wim,
of course you have to prove it, or you change your website name to jfkmurdersolvedtheory,change the premise of the whole website and change your adverticement to point out, that you market a theory.
Jfkmurdersolved claims for 13+ years that it has solved the assassination of JFK, for almost as long, jfkmurdersolved has ignored proof that at least parts of James Files confession and part of the results of the jfkmurdersolved investigation results are wrong.
Now, obviously you have no problem ignoring that.
I was right with Grady, wasn't I ? Yet you bitterly attacked me, when I posted that on forums, and to this day are not willing to admit in public, that Grady never found Files/Suttons military ID or any information about him serving in the army from 1959 to 1960, and to this day, as far as I am aware, continue to give wrong information to your readers about that in the beginners section of your website.
Your approach in regard of proof was choosen by Vernon as a net he tried to prevent himself from landing flat on the nose with that story,you are not like him, aren't you ?
The dent may or may not have been made by human teeth, the guy who made the expertise isn't at all sure anymore, plus the casings were seen by many before Files ever spoke about the dented one.
I don't say Files must have invented things, I say, based on the lack of proof, it can not be ruled out.
In essence, although I am neither a researcher nor an investigator nor a policeman nor a (state) attorney, and I mean those who realy do their job proper, my approach to the case in general and the different claims is, check the claims, if they are not proven, it is a theory at best.
I think that is the only way to go, if you want to achieve anything that has substance and is able to change how the case is regarded all over the world.
By doing what you do, you only create confusion and the impression that we are a bunch of wackos.
Jfkmurdersolved's approach is that of the tabloid press and others, create artifical reality by using selected information in a manner that it looks like they are connected and therefore can be used by you as evidence to support your claim.
Now, how bad is that ?
The mere circumstance that information was previously known doesn't mean that Files must have invented his confession.
However, there's also information that was not previously known and corrorated later. For example the teethmark and Nicolleti's being in Dallas.
Come on Wim,
of course you have to prove it, or you change your website name to jfkmurdersolvedtheory,change the premise of the whole website and change your adverticement to point out, that you market a theory.
Jfkmurdersolved claims for 13+ years that it has solved the assassination of JFK, for almost as long, jfkmurdersolved has ignored proof that at least parts of James Files confession and part of the results of the jfkmurdersolved investigation results are wrong.
Now, obviously you have no problem ignoring that.
I was right with Grady, wasn't I ? Yet you bitterly attacked me, when I posted that on forums, and to this day are not willing to admit in public, that Grady never found Files/Suttons military ID or any information about him serving in the army from 1959 to 1960, and to this day, as far as I am aware, continue to give wrong information to your readers about that in the beginners section of your website.
Your approach in regard of proof was choosen by Vernon as a net he tried to prevent himself from landing flat on the nose with that story,you are not like him, aren't you ?
The dent may or may not have been made by human teeth, the guy who made the expertise isn't at all sure anymore, plus the casings were seen by many before Files ever spoke about the dented one.
I don't say Files must have invented things, I say, based on the lack of proof, it can not be ruled out.
In essence, although I am neither a researcher nor an investigator nor a policeman nor a (state) attorney, and I mean those who realy do their job proper, my approach to the case in general and the different claims is, check the claims, if they are not proven, it is a theory at best.
I think that is the only way to go, if you want to achieve anything that has substance and is able to change how the case is regarded all over the world.
By doing what you do, you only create confusion and the impression that we are a bunch of wackos.
Jfkmurdersolved's approach is that of the tabloid press and others, create artifical reality by using selected information in a manner that it looks like they are connected and therefore can be used by you as evidence to support your claim.
Now, how bad is that ?
Gentlemen:
Please stay on topic. There are Files threads available for your discussion.
Here is the Rush To Judgement video in its entirety. Enjoy!!!!
http://www.veoh.com/videos/e125022YS5aT4WW
Please stay on topic. There are Files threads available for your discussion.
Here is the Rush To Judgement video in its entirety. Enjoy!!!!
http://www.veoh.com/videos/e125022YS5aT4WW
QUOTE (Kathy Beckett @ Mar 12 2007, 04:27 AM)
Gentlemen:
Please stay on topic. There are Files threads available for your discussion.
Here is the Rush To Judgement video in its entirety. Enjoy!!!!
http://www.veoh.com/videos/e125022YS5aT4WW
Please stay on topic. There are Files threads available for your discussion.
Here is the Rush To Judgement video in its entirety. Enjoy!!!!
http://www.veoh.com/videos/e125022YS5aT4WW
This is wonderful footage. Thank you!
Can anyone identify ALL the speakers? Who for instance is the guy asked to sum up Oswald based on his knoweldge of criminal types? Who was the reporter who posed the question?
Also, I can't work out one of the comments directed at Oswald by a reporter.
What does he say - prompting Oswald to shrug? The sentence starts "You have been..."
Sid,
I believe you are referring to an unknown (at least to me) reporter who shouted out "You have been charged with that," in response to Oswald's claim that "I have not been charged with that" (the assassination of JFK). Oswald's shrug and nonresponse to this is one of the most frustrating video clips from this case, imho. You can tell that he is visibly disturbed by the fact that he has been publicly identified as someone charged with the assassination, and his expression appears to be something like "wtf- this is the first I've heard about this." Still, he kind of lets the matter drop and is quickly escorted away (why- were they afaid of what he would say next?) I would love to know what was really discussed in all those unrecorded interrogation sessions.
I believe you are referring to an unknown (at least to me) reporter who shouted out "You have been charged with that," in response to Oswald's claim that "I have not been charged with that" (the assassination of JFK). Oswald's shrug and nonresponse to this is one of the most frustrating video clips from this case, imho. You can tell that he is visibly disturbed by the fact that he has been publicly identified as someone charged with the assassination, and his expression appears to be something like "wtf- this is the first I've heard about this." Still, he kind of lets the matter drop and is quickly escorted away (why- were they afaid of what he would say next?) I would love to know what was really discussed in all those unrecorded interrogation sessions.
QUOTE (Don Jeffries @ Mar 12 2007, 06:05 AM)
Sid,
I believe you are referring to an unknown (at least to me) reporter who shouted out "You have been charged with that," in response to Oswald's claim that "I have not been charged with that" (the assassination of JFK). Oswald's shrug and nonresponse to this is one of the most frustrating video clips from this case, imho. You can tell that he is visibly disturbed by the fact that he has been publicly identified as someone charged with the assassination, and his expression appears to be something like "wtf- this is the first I've heard about this." Still, he kind of lets the matter drop and is quickly escorted away (why- were they afaid of what he would say next?) I would love to know what was really discussed in all those unrecorded interrogation sessions.
I believe you are referring to an unknown (at least to me) reporter who shouted out "You have been charged with that," in response to Oswald's claim that "I have not been charged with that" (the assassination of JFK). Oswald's shrug and nonresponse to this is one of the most frustrating video clips from this case, imho. You can tell that he is visibly disturbed by the fact that he has been publicly identified as someone charged with the assassination, and his expression appears to be something like "wtf- this is the first I've heard about this." Still, he kind of lets the matter drop and is quickly escorted away (why- were they afaid of what he would say next?) I would love to know what was really discussed in all those unrecorded interrogation sessions.
Thanks Don.
I agree with what you say.
However, in Oswald's first interview on the vid, it seems to me not the reaction of a guy who is a stranger to shenannigans. In the first interview, Oswald seems to be trying to size up what's happening and guage his options. A cool dude, given the circumstances. Not an everage guy off the street, who'd be cracking up with shock and disbelief.
I'd still like to know the identity of all the other participants in the video... especaially the guy who was so certain of Oswald's guilt and his interviewers.
Very interesting footage. Never seen most of it.
At 1:24 you see what I think is Jack Ruby on the back. He's on the left of the screen. He appears to bring up something with his right arm (a gun under a cloth?) and aims it as Oswald? Was he practicing? Or did he not fire because someone got in the way?
Does anyone see what I see? Am I mistaken?
Wim
At 1:24 you see what I think is Jack Ruby on the back. He's on the left of the screen. He appears to bring up something with his right arm (a gun under a cloth?) and aims it as Oswald? Was he practicing? Or did he not fire because someone got in the way?
Does anyone see what I see? Am I mistaken?
Wim
QUOTE
Sid Walker Posted Mar 12 2007, 06:06 AM
QUOTE(Don Jeffries @ Mar 12 2007, 06:05 AM)
Sid,
I believe you are referring to an unknown (at least to me) reporter who shouted out "You have been charged with that," in response to Oswald's claim that "I have not been charged with that" (the assassination of JFK). Oswald's shrug and nonresponse to this is one of the most frustrating video clips from this case, imho. You can tell that he is visibly disturbed by the fact that he has been publicly identified as someone charged with the assassination, and his expression appears to be something like "wtf- this is the first I've heard about this." Still, he kind of lets the matter drop and is quickly escorted away (why- were they afaid of what he would say next?) I would love to know what was really discussed in all those unrecorded interrogation sessions.
Thanks Don.
I agree with what you say.
However, in Oswald's first interview on the vid, it seems to me not the reaction of a guy who is a stranger to shenannigans. In the first interview, Oswald seems to be trying to size up what's happening and guage his options. A cool dude, given the circumstances. Not an everage guy off the street, who'd be cracking up with shock and disbelief.
I'd still like to know the identity of all the other participants in the video... especaially the guy who was so certain of Oswald's guilt and his interviewers.
QUOTE(Don Jeffries @ Mar 12 2007, 06:05 AM)
Sid,
I believe you are referring to an unknown (at least to me) reporter who shouted out "You have been charged with that," in response to Oswald's claim that "I have not been charged with that" (the assassination of JFK). Oswald's shrug and nonresponse to this is one of the most frustrating video clips from this case, imho. You can tell that he is visibly disturbed by the fact that he has been publicly identified as someone charged with the assassination, and his expression appears to be something like "wtf- this is the first I've heard about this." Still, he kind of lets the matter drop and is quickly escorted away (why- were they afaid of what he would say next?) I would love to know what was really discussed in all those unrecorded interrogation sessions.
Thanks Don.
I agree with what you say.
However, in Oswald's first interview on the vid, it seems to me not the reaction of a guy who is a stranger to shenannigans. In the first interview, Oswald seems to be trying to size up what's happening and guage his options. A cool dude, given the circumstances. Not an everage guy off the street, who'd be cracking up with shock and disbelief.
I'd still like to know the identity of all the other participants in the video... especaially the guy who was so certain of Oswald's guilt and his interviewers.
Sid, if you mean the white haired fellow, he's probably Dallas DA Henry Wade, he is also in the beginning of the same 3 minute video. At one point there is Chief Curry, who says something like he's been very arrogant about Oswald.
Thanks Gil, I didn't immediately make the GJJ dude connection to you. Great resource for those like me who aren't too diligent about reading books.
QUOTE (Wim Dankbaar @ Mar 10 2007, 04:09 PM)
You always make the thinking error that I have to prove Files story. Not my task. I provide information and try to corroborate the information where it can be.
The mere circumstance that information was previously known doesn't mean that Files must have invented his confession.
However, there's also information that was not previously known and corrorated later. For example the teethmark and Nicolleti's being in Dallas.
Wim
The mere circumstance that information was previously known doesn't mean that Files must have invented his confession.
However, there's also information that was not previously known and corrorated later. For example the teethmark and Nicolleti's being in Dallas.
Wim
Speaking of corroboration, Wim ... I believe that Bowers said that man was heavy set and that Hoffman pretty much agreed with that description. Files was a scrawny 20/21 year old punk at the time of the assassination as I recall. I might also add that Hoffman said the shooter turned away from the fence and walked towards the steam pipe and tossed the gun to someone else. Files story does not corroborate what the witnesses have said. It seems that if you believe in Files so much, then maybe you should have to address the descrepencies here.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.