Jump to content
The Education Forum

Jim Glover

Members
  • Content Count

    113
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Jim Glover

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

4,899 profile views
  1. It seems if this article is true, at least Kodak knew that film is destroyed by xrays and radiation. https://medium.com/lessons-from-history/kodak-had-weapons-grade-uranium-in-their-basement-6a6c15d5677f?source=email-b388f9c27a62-1558438049575-digest.reader------2-58------------------d9cdd377_8f38_45dd_9efd_05d021f080ff-1&sectionName=top
  2. To me the figure in the original and all the others seems to be looking down and more of the head is seen on the East side of the face probably because the photo was taken a little to the East of the corner as we can see the fire escape. But the Mug shot of Oswald is a straight on photo so they do not match entirely for me but the resemblance is too striking for me to believe with certainty to be only dirty windows when it appears the shadow of the pane frame is seen on the face and down, a much bigger shadow than from any other window frame as it would on something behind the dirty window. Also I wonder why the face in the West window with or without enhancement is so unclear when that window was open at the time. Was this from the so called "un-cropped" version? I suppose that would have been in the negative destroyed by too much radiation during the House Committee on Assassination hearings. Why would anyone expose a negative to radiation or ex-rays?
  3. OK David you think it is "Superimposed" on a blob or Fake? I doubt that without proof of Who Faked it, When, How and Why because you are in a sense describing a crime. So who are the criminals, Tom Dillard? Does he have a record of being a criminal or trying to frame Oswald? And since the dirty windows make the figure hardly noticeable why did it take so many decades for the figure to even be noticed until the public had the computer tools to examine it closely? Seems like a lot of work which I am not convinced it was even possible in 1963 by that night when Tom Dillard printed his Photo or that he even knew that the coup would be using Oswald as the "Lone Nut" by that night after he got back from Parkland. Also seems unlikely just because of the risk if exposed to the Paper and Tom Dillard. So is Tom Dillard a bad guy or his newspaper bad guys for faking the photo and exhibit for what purpose, if It wasn't used to prove it was Oswald at anytime even today? If you think it was Faked? Convince me. For me it is more likely for reasons I have given that it is Oswald or a look-alike, more then the crime of destroying and falsifying evidence. I see no purpose for what you think without evidence of how, who, when and why the risk was taken with no purpose since it was never even noticed. Like I explained, even if it could be proved it is Oswald that does not prove he was the "Lone Nut Shooter in the Sniper Window" during a crossfire ambush with the cover-up being the Coup. If you have proof or evidence with motive of your accusations I would want to hear it. So where was Oswald... who can even prove that? One thing has changed in this discussion. At first the figure was just a shape of the dirt on the dirty window. But now, another crime. So, this relatively new discovery has challenged most researchers who have invested years without Oswald's whereabouts proved so far. I think I understand yours and other's suspicion of another crime of Falsifying Evidence and that's OK by me. I can't prove it is Oswald or his Look-alike but I find it very compelling to be so. You have a good question: "If that's a face in the window in this version, are the eyes canted more toward the figure's right than in the Oswald version, as if the head is cocked downward to that side?" He does appear to be looking down and If Oswald told Capt. Fritz he was out front with Bill Shelly, by looking down he could possibly see Shelly who testified he was out on that island away from the steps. How would he know where Shelly was if he did not see him? There is no proof about much in this case. We have our beliefs about it after 55 years of killing, confusion, fear, decoys and cover-ups. Nothing we do or say will bring back JFK, Lee or the many people killed and hurt about this manufactured mystery. One thing Oswald said to a reporter in the Hallway, "Of course I was in the building... I work there!" He could have cracked the case at trial if allowed to defend himself but Ruby made sure that would not be. Thanks David for noticing the figure appears to be looking down. Happy Spring! .
  4. Thanks Denis, Bad Idea to give anyone an important negative. This seems to be a pattern. I don't use Blevin's enhancements. The Commission Exhibit was printed more than a decade before the negative was ruined by someone at HSCA. And it does not show anyone in the "snipers window".
  5. My possible explanation ~ Why would Oswald be standing in front of a window near the "Snipers nest" moments after the ambush crossfire? If he is a patsy why not show the world if anyone had a camera, '"Why would I be showing myself in plain site unless I was just a patsy?" (How would he have known the Photo would be so hard to make out?). Maybe nobody on that floor was supposed to hit anyone and Lee as a patsy was forced to go along to save his family as Judyth Baker wrote. So in court he could say "that is me (if someone saw him there or took a photo) and there were others up there watching me". (A few witnesses saw other men on the 6th floor). If he was left on his own somewhere in the building or in the entrance could the plotters risk Lee who may have alerted the authorities about the plot in Chicago a few weeks earlier take the risk of Lee doing it again by running out ahead of the motorcade with a warning? The photos that show him or his look-alike out clearly are enhanced or photo shopped, not the original Commission Exhibit. The original negative seems to have disappeared. So, if he was a patsy and being watched and lived to tell his side, the photo does not prove he shot anyone so maybe someone who knew about the plot made sure the negative was missing. So was Lee a Patsy? Why was the Patsy killed by Ruby who asked an FBI informant to come watch the fireworks with him from a few blocks away. If he lived he could have cracked the case and his photo or being seen in the window would make sense with the rest of his story (I didn't shoot anyone!). Those who were up there could have told him there was a bad guy who was impersonating him who they wanted to catch and was going to kill Kennedy maybe for Castro and we have information He will be acting with your ID. So maybe Lee was trapped or wanted to help if he was told by handlers "This is a test or trap to catch the bad guys". Now I was also set-up (now workin' on my book, Born To Spy) And was told the day after by a couple of agents on Saturday near Point Blank Texas after the double Oswald was Shotgunned Friday night at the Pines Motel, Sam Houston National Forest where men were celebrating from the moment I arrived after dark. Later I was told not to go outside because there was a man with a shotgun going to shoot the guy who shot President Kennedy. The place got quiet after the shots (I'll bet he had a Hell of a story too). So one of the agents told me Saturday late afternoon that Hoover told them on Friday it was a Test that went Bad. By the way Hoover got on the extra Chartered Bus at the Air Port in Houston I was forced onto earlier that then picked up Hoover, the Bushes, and other operatives. I reported this to authorities in 91 and again last May. Witnesses saw Hoover in Texas including late Thursday Night. I haven't read one report where Hoover was seen in DC on Friday and Hoover leaves out completely where he was and what he did on Friday in his WC report until he gets the story straight on the Phone that night with LBJ. Yes, Summers reports Hoover called RFK immediately after the shots were fired told RFK he was getting more Information and will call back. Hoover never called back Why? Why did he call in the first place if he thought he had no Jurisdiction in the case. Did he think RFK did not have a TV? And where was Hoover when he called? And why are all his phone logs of the months before and after missing from the FBI Vault? I have a good idea and from first hand knowledge, this is My Possible explanation. And whoever the figure was who can say he wasn't in the same place during the shooting? Phil Ochs was right, Hoover was The Bad Guy.
  6. I agree David Healy, I could be wrong but I read recently that the original negative was lost somehow by a congressional investigation. One of our friends here has asked for the negative from the Paper in Dallas that published it. If someone could ask Tom Dillard, if alive, that would be great. And if someone could ask Wesley Frazier who he thinks Prayer Man is that might help with more puzzles of the case for us. Thanks!
  7. OK Keyvan, I wonder what the Photographer Dillard would say to his Photo being manipulated. He printed it when he got back from the Hospital so where would he get a negative of Oswald and If he had time to do what you think why would he or someone put in a photo of Oswald that is so faint nobody saw it? http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/dillard.htm
  8. David, Nice work. I always thought for years Prayer Man could be Lee. I never realized until you showed the last Photo that his friend and ride to work Tall, Wesley, is right there looking at him. Does that make out his friend a bad guy? Since the photo without enhancement and overlay is too fuzzy to be sure I am not ready to condemn someone on a possibility but you still might be fairly certain. This case has hurt too many innocent people already. But it is possible Prayer man is Lee, if alive in court that would be reasonable doubt. Yet I am not convinced because nobody there said Lee was there. Wesley defended Lee against pressure more than any witness saying the regular grocery bag did not contain a rifle and I found his rented room did need new curtain rods because the old ones were badly bent out of shape. I can send the photoos sometime but have to go now. Thanks for your work.
  9. Hi David, The original is so faint it took about 50 years for someone to see it. And not identical to the police mug shot. Pretty sure The Warren Commission wanted to find Oswald somewhere in there and every researcher was looking for something to see so why wouldn't they make it plainer and clearer for the official version if they could do it? Pretty sure people didn't notice the face until it is pointed out to them and the ability of us to catch the image sharply was not until we had computers decades later yet even so this was not noticed until fairly recently long after researchers could work on photos with computers. It is like it took Decades even with computers for some of us to notice the large wound in the back of JFK's head in Frames 371 to 384 because everyone was stuck on frame 313. Why didn't they doctor those frames? Pretty sure that they were in such a rush to black out the rear head wound in 313 that they missed it or had no time to do a complete doctoring. So who can prove where Lee was during the shots when there are so many conflicting theories among very good researchers. It could be his Look- a- like in the window and because the boxes were moved around a lot after the shooting there probably were others on the 6th floor watching Oswald if it is Oswald. I'm pretty sure that they would not let the Patsy alone and take the risk he would warn the motorcade and the Plot would have failed. So this does not prove that Oswald fired a rifle or if he did, he tried to hit Kennedy because there were a few missed shots. Another mystery, and You might be right but I am not sure that this case will ever be solved. Some think the dirty smudges formed the image... so who Knows?
  10. David and Keyvan, I did not know they had Photo shop for the Commission exhibit and the Dallas Morning News in 1963. Can you show how they did That? You are not showing the original where Oswald or his Look-a -like is looking down so the original ghostly image is not any arrest photo I can believe ..unless we believe in magic? "Moments after the assassination, this photo was taken of the sixth-floor sniper’s perch in the Texas School Book Depository where Lee Harvey Oswald waited for the motorcade to pass before firing the fateful shots. (Tom Dillard/The Dallas Morning News)"
  11. Here I did not change anything, darkness or grainy pixels and found what looks like two faces behind our figure, not on the ceiling. On the left a women and on the right a man with beard. Strange that these 3 faces ever so faint appear in logical places if they were there. It could be coincidence of the dirty windows, but I am not sure.
  12. Good argument Vince. Still, the workers on the fifth floor heard no footsteps which is strange if a shooter was in a hurry. There is still debate about where Oswald was ... eating lunch in a lunchroom, two lunchrooms, out with with someone else forgot the name in Fritz's notes and not out of breath drinking a coke when Officer Baker and Roy Truly confronted him. Now there is some evidence of another face in the far West window in the "uncropped" Dillard photo. Also boxes were moved quickly as sunlight is on a big box in the middle of the sniper window from a long shot photo as the limo turns left. Could Oswald or his look-alike, also arrested at the Theater be standing on a box just moved? What is fascinating is that the face similar to Oswald is like a ghost in the original Commission exhibit and more. On the original it seems a shadow of the window pain dividers is on the neck and body of the Ghost and seems to widen a bit as it goes from the neck down which may be natural if the figure is looking down with head a bit closer to the dirty glass. I still haven't found definite proof of where Oswald was at the time of the shooting. Still a mystery to me. I am not defending the changed or colorized version as I was surprised at examining the original. Just saying... where was Oswald really? it is still debatable.
  13. I don’t know what “Bump" means Bill, but Vallee looks like the guy in Dallas police custody in Houston with others like Hoover and Bush and one of the Corsican Brothers, Sarti who was not in custody.... he was welcome. If we are lookin for Oswald’s Twin, he did not have one and look-alikes are not supposed to be doubles. Since Tumbleweed Tom told me that night he was afraid to get back on the shadow bus because it had a camera, all these folks who got away from testifying in the case and all the others like Phil Ochs being filmed in Dealey Plaza were being set up to make sure they covered up all with Alan Dulles not in the picture but in charge of what the CIA and military could report to the Warren Commission.
  14. Vallee looks very much like the look alike I described in custody of two Dallas cops late that afternoon after an airport stop and pickup.I reported he had a crew cut as in the photo and the side photo shows his weak chin which Oswald also had and the photo of a high forehead which Oswald had. He was not a double but enough of a look alike to be mistaken for Oswald if a fast look at and then gone like running down the grass to get into a car like officer Roger Graig witnessed or the real Oswald which the Warren Commission did not like either option. The fact that he had a car registered in Lee’s name is important and a look alike is not a twin... it does not have to be. http://www.jfklancer..._stamp=20120517 http://educationforu...showtopic=10194
  15. I am sure Bush worked with the CIA but that does not mean he was just an agent who takes orders. Why try to finger Bush as an agent who would have to take orders when his family connections were way above that agency. It is like ignoring that all these agencies deal with private contractors... there is even the Domestic Contacts division I am sure your aware of. If Bush was an agent he would have to deny it if he wanted to get elected because of questions he could no longer put off... the public would not elect him even if he admitted to being an important family asset to the “Company" family or bigger than that an asset to the much larger national security police State. They don’t say they are with any agency they say “national security” which could be anything and any combination of agencies and private contractors working together on some secret need to know activity. It could even be the National Security Agency. George Bush wanted me to spy on my family around 52, My Dad was a Communist so all agencies were able and ready to spy on Americans.. This is what came out during the 70’s after Watergate. I was and now everyone is Fair Game in this War system. Now the JFK Coup needed more patsies than Oswald if Oswald lived and If Ruby hadn't killed him My friend Phil Ochs who was filmed in Dallas and went as a National Security Observer and I would have been killed. I was abducted that day but luckily made it back home to LA on Sunday and if Oswald would have talked or gone to trial I doubt I would have been here to tell the tale. I saw Bush talking to Hoover late afternoon on the shadow chartered Bus. That was the important meeting and since Hoover knew more than he would say and had his files destroyed before he died the call Bush made to Houston FBI was a signal for him and Hoover to try and get a handle on the loose cannon Cuban Invasion operations which Kruschev warned would mean WAR. Bush was not a hit man he was a rich cover up artist... the coup was the cover up and that is worse than the killing of JFK. Jim, I like your review of the new movie about the killing of Osama and you do good work but to understand the role Bush Played I have a better Idea because I was There. I wrote to Obama about this and asked for a meeting with Bush, W. and Bill Clinton. I don’t expect results but I will not stop working for the truth.
×
×
  • Create New...