Jump to content
The Education Forum

Chuck Robbins

Members
  • Content Count

    388
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Chuck Robbins

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 10/21/1958

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Southern California
  • Interests
    I guess I am pretty boring. Have only a few interests, such as reading trying to learn something new every day, and, of course, trying to find some answers to what happened to our country on 11/22/1963. .
    .

Recent Profile Visitors

5,425 profile views
  1. Here we are, nearly ten years later, and despite the nice response from the late Mr. Hemming, I am still unsure of his answer. I did, however, stumble across a reference to the second floor Dal-Tex "shooters window" being owned by a Mining company. Whether that is a fact or not? I do not know. Now, mines port, not minesport, sounds like it might be a coded reference to the location of a sniper. A port is an opening, be it a door or a window. Just another wacky coincidence? Probably just my wacky imagination.
  2. I remember Bush was staying at the Sheraton on 11/22/63. I also remember that Ruby had a phone number to the Sheraton found on or near his refrigerator?? Maybe found when the refrigerator was moved? It has been over 15 years since I learned of the number found and recently learned about Bush at the Sheraton. Is it so strange to believe they may have had contact of some sort regarding JFK's death?
  3. So sorry to hear this. I wish I were in a position to help, but, I am unemployed. I remember you telling me all those years ago, John, about what was happening here in America, and how it was exactly the same thing which had been done to England, Great Britain, whatever name you prefer to use. You suggested I start spreading the word around, and I, in my fear of the govt. here, failed to do so. That has been bothering me for years, so, this being maybe the last chance to tell you, I am sorry I failed to do as you had suggested. With the economic crisis, manufactured I am sure, which has been such a problem over here for the last 8 years, it has become increasingly difficult...no, it has become downright impossible for me to find decent work for some time now. I have not been doing what I should to support this forum and it pains me to realize that I may be a part of why this site is closing. Now that I have made my peace with this. I wish you all the best in life. You are a true gentleman. Many would do well to continue the struggle you have maintained all these years. Peace.
  4. I am trying to find out what company this guy was working for. This is taken from a film of LHO's exhumation. When he noticed he was being filmed he backed out of frame so quickly I thought I was watching a keystone cops movie. Does he look familiar to anyone?
  5. Judging by the constant state of war we have managed to be in for the last 50 years, it was obviously more than just one man's desire to be President that got JFK killed, regrdless of what the people throwing LBJ under the bus want people to believe. Who REALLY benefitted longterm? Military. Corporations. Banks (Including The Federal Reserve) Who got temporary benefits? LBJ. (Not including the time saved from doing a prison term.) Who got stuck putting their Father's Brother's Sister's and Mother's lives on the line in these wars? Us. We have paid in BLOOD for every dollar these vultures have made. I am mad, frustrated and sad...all at the same time. What a crazy world this has turned out to be.
  6. 16 years for the govt. to decide the S. S. was deficient in the performance of their duties? Come on fellas, everybody knew that the day JFK was killed. S. S. Lawson was in a position to tell the DPD not to perform usual security functions.? Really? Personally, I believe Life bought the Zapruder film and squirreled it away because if the people had seen that film, at that time, showing how they had done nothing at all to save JFK, there would have been rioting all across the country. Even now, it is hard to watch the agents sit and stand by doing nothing while JFK get's his damn head blown off and not think they purposely allowed him to get whacked. They should have all been given lie detector tests, truth serum, water boarding...you name it, in order to find out why they refused to do the job they were paid to do, which was to place their bodies in the way of bullets, to save the President from harm. It would take very powerful persuasion to stop them, in my opinion, from doing their jobs. Threats? Hell... who knows?
  7. Why were they trying to get Allman to remember Oswald as the person who gave directions to the phone? To prove that Oswald was in the building, no...that is already a given, isn't it? Why, in this one instance, were they trying to prove Oswald correct, as opposed to the rest of his statements, which they were trying to disprove? I have to think on this one a while. Now, if memory serves me right, didn't the guy(s) caught in the Dal-Tex building use the phone excuse as their reason for being in the Dal-Tex building? "rather like a shotgun fired in a concrete chamber that reverberates" Concrete chamber...that reverberates. Perhaps that would be from a shot coming from near the overpass? Or, a shot from a semi-enclosed concrete area, such as near the pergola? All in all, he strikes me as somewhat flaky.
  8. "by August 1963, according to Edward Jay Epstein —a renowned expert on the killing of the president and author of the recently released book "The JFK Assassination Diary"— Richard Helms, though not yet CIA director, was "receiving almost daily phone calls from [Attorney General Robert Kennedy ] demanding to know what actions he was [taking] to remove Castro from power." The agency recruited Rolando Cubela, a revolutionary insider, to do the job. " How does this fly when JFK is known to have been seeking normalization of relations with Cuba? His brother is accused of working behind his brother's back? It is as hard to believe this bit of "history" as it is to believe the rest of the crap written about these two. In my humble opinion, of course. So Epstein is privy to CIA insider information...
  9. If Oswald was a Lone Nut, how would 10 or 10,000,000 wiretaps have helped uncover "the plan"? Chris, I agree. It would make more sense if Nixon was talking about a plan for Oswald, not by Oswald. --Tommy I think he knew of the existence of the Milteer tape. I believe he might have been saying that if Bobby Kennedy had been given the wiretap (tape recording) of Joseph Milteer he might have been made aware of the "Oswald plan".
  10. Jesus, the JCS were insane. Survivable nuclear war with the soviets? If they were so set on that course of action, why then, didn't they push for it after JFK was killed? If they were in control they could have done as they pleased. Am I missing something here?
  11. As I am sure you are all aware, this forum is under constant scrutiny by the govt., and, that said, I would suggest a quick trip to visit Ruth in order to interrupt any form of briefing she may be given on how to handle the interview.
  12. God, Dennis, I didn't realize I was talking to idiots who can't quite handle compound sentences. Thanks for clearing that up for me. Or are you asking me to put it in terms that you can understand? I'd suggest that if you can understand it, most other people can too. I don't see any need to "dumb it down" for "the folks," but I'm sure they appreciate your concern for my overtaxing their intellect. I present facts and tell you what I think of them, or what I think they mean. You don't have to agree, but your disagreement doesn't establish a different fact.Tell you what: start at 1:16 and work your way backward to 12:30 or earlier. Use the WC times, as well as conflicting statements under oath (e.g., Whaley's statement of how long it took him to drive the cab route in his own vehicle, versus how long it took the AAG to drive Whaley's cab over the same route with Whaley as a passenger), as well as reasonable estimates for other things to have occurred, such as the gathering of the crowd before Bowley's arrival. If 1:16 is the late end of the timeline, the early end is when McWatters was let go from the check point at St Paul Street. You do the work this time and I'll tell you where I think it's wrong. Feel free to explain it in detail for "the folks." I think they'll "get it" even if you don't. No that's fine for me Duke, I understand it all perfectly well thank you. You've made it abundantly clear that neither you nor anyone else can claim a definitive time for the Tippit slaying, the witness testimony is just too contradictory, and yet you still keep trying to state as fact that "Oswald couldn't have done it" or "Oswald couldn't have got there in time", like I said Duke, you are blowing hot air. And you damn well know it. P.S. Do try not to keep throwing these little hissy fits and tantrums every time someone 'dares' to disagree with you please. I realize you've had some articles published but frankly your head is so far up your own backside I truly do worry about you suffocating. Have you ever seen the copy of Tippit's death certificate? It has TOD as 1:15. That should help clear up any misunderstandings. There is no possible way that Tippit was shot as late as stated in the WC report. No where close.
  13. The two men acted as if they knew each other when they met. What is there to say they did not know each other? What if Tippit saw somebody walking down the street that he knew for a fact should not have been walking anywhere at that moment? I still have a funny feeling about the officer in #56, (Ptm. W.P. Parker) who reported himself as "56 clear for 5." when dispatch asked "56, your location." he said he was on "East Jefferson." at 12:43 p.m. After a pause of nearly 2 minutes, the next broadcast is "Attention Elm and Houston is reported to be an unknown white male, all squads. Attention all squads. The suspect in the shooting at approximately thirty, slender build, height five feet ten inches, weight one hundred sixty-five pounds, reported to be armed with what is thought to be a 30 caliber rifle. Attention all squads. The suspect from Elm and Houston is reported to be an unknown white male about thirty, slender build, five feet ten inches tall, one hundred sixty-five pounds, armed with what is thought to be a 30-30 rifle. No further description at this time, or information. 12:45." Within a minute, this is the very next broadcast "87, 78, move into central Oak Cliff area." Sometime between 12:55 and 1:03 dispatch asks "78, location?" To which there is no response, and no further inquiry is made. Perhaps because he was out of the car and on the ground at that time? Later, the call came in to report an officer being shot. Immediately after being told the shooting of Tippit had occured "Between Marsalis and Beckley. It's a police officer. Somebody shot him. What -- what's . . . 404 Tenth Street.", the dispatcher, for reasons unknown, broadcast that he was shot "Attention. Signal 19, police officer, 510 E. Jefferson." The officer in #56 had not given a specific address on E;.Jefferson. Did the dispatcher somehow know exactly where #56 was located? If so, what would have been his reason to believe that a shooting would have involved that officer instead of Tippit? Had a police officer at that address radioed in that he was involved in a shooting? There is a description of this suspect given by Patrolman Walker "White male, thirty, height five foot eight, very slender build, black hair, a white jacket, white shirt and dark slacks." I am curious as to whether or not this description (or the one above stating 5'10") would have fit Mr. Parker in 1963. Or if this "That suspect in this shooting is a white male, twenty-seven, five feet eleven, a hundred sixty-five, black wavy hair, fair complected, wearing a light grey Eisenhower-type jacket, dark trousers and a white shirt, and (. . . ?). Last seen running on the north side of the street from Patton, on Jefferson, on East Jefferson. And he was apparently armed with a 32 dark-finish automatic pistol which he had in his right hand." fits his description. Then, as if to reinforce the dispatcher's knowledge of where the officer was, this comes in "One of the men here at the service station that saw him seems to think he's in this block, the 400 block of East Jefferson behind this service station. Would you give me some more squads over here?" Then this from dispatch "19, where did the officer go?" 19 replies "I saw some squads going towards Methodist real fast. Imagine that's where he is." 19 also reported "I've got two witnesses; one that talked with the officer and one that observed the man." No one could have talked to Tippit, he was shot in the head and expired immediately, correct? Whether you can put this all together to come up with the idea, like I did, that they are talking about an Officer who was seen, and talked to, by witnesses at the scene who was not Tippit, that is up to you. There is just something wrong with the whole dialogue. If anyone knows what Officer Parker looked like in 1963 perhaps you could post it here?
×
×
  • Create New...