Jump to content
The Education Forum

Eddy Bainbridge

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Eddy Bainbridge

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Eddy Bainbridge

    Jim Garrison vs Fred Litwin

    Hi Mr DiEugenio, Your research is part of the reason I believe Jim Garrison was on to something. The 'something' is not clear to me. Was Shaw a low level player or did he marshall funding for the assassination? I find the evidence of a New Orleans group plotting the assassination incongruous with other notions of high level CIA plotting, any help matching the NO story with the CIA story greatly appreciated.
  2. Eddy Bainbridge

    Jean Souetre

    Sorry Steve, I can't right now but if you type the references I gave into google (I got them from Mary Ferrell by typing David Christensen) then it took me to the lists in the NSA archive.
  3. Eddy Bainbridge

    Jean Souetre

    Just read NSA 144 10001 10178 and 10180 re David Christensen. His letter reads like a genuine recall of an event prior to the Nov 1963, which possibly supports Eugene Dinkin's foreknowledge. The docs suggest rather similar treatment to Dinkin's.
  4. Eddy Bainbridge

    Z313 FLASH

    Z313 shows a 'flash' of some sort. To my understanding there are two potential genuine explanations: It could be blood/matter or it could be a flash caused by some sort of exploding bullet. Taking the first option : Is the colour right? Are there any comparisons on film that support the proposition? Is there a plausible explanation why the 'flash' effect is so shortlived? Taking the second option : If Oswald fired the earlier neck/back shot, why didn't that cause a flash? I understood that bullets were propelled by an initial explosion in the barrel. Can you get bullets that also cause a 'flash' on impact?
  5. Eddy Bainbridge

    I understand why people hate conspiracies

    The JFK assassination is a very very odd subject for the application of Conspiracy theories because of the uncertainty over what the 'Official' version of events is. Is there any other disputed piece of history where officialdom has attempted to improve the original findings of fact (HSCA) and have Less supporters than the original (Warren)?
  6. Eddy Bainbridge

    2018 Lancer Conference in Dallas

    I live in the UK so can't come but I would like to know if you are re-inviting David Josephs. I want to see his views on Mexico City viewed more widely and I also want him to present live on the mysteriously modified survey plat with Chris Davidson.
  7. Eddy Bainbridge


    This rule makes little sense to me. You have banned a person for their conduct. How can a third party be banned for expressing ANY views, as long as their conduct is acceptable. The experts on here call out misinformation and we all make value judgments on posts. Are you really worried about a master manipulator?
  8. Eddy Bainbridge

    The CMC-Permindex Papers

    I found the part in the 1967 memo stating no determination could be made about the CIA's use of Permindex interesting. It leaves open the possibility that an element of the CIA did use Permindex, but not in an internally transparent way.
  9. Eddy Bainbridge

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    Thankyou very much for your reply Mr Von Pein. As I said, you're comments are based on evidence which is very helpful. Your response does not appear to answer my question. You have responded by stating that, in effect experts have confirmed it happened. Put another way; people with medical expertise say a bullet passed on the trajectory (there is absolutely no doubt as to the required trajectory, a line can be drawn from the 'snipers nest' to the front of Kennedy's throat) required through the bones in JFK's neck/back. I urge anyone to seek out an anatomically correct neck/back model and see the problem, no gap. I have asked this question on the JFK facts website and received the reply 'JFK had an obnormality ' (from another poster, no support for this provided). That's a shame because it is incredibly implausible, but at least possible. If Oswald had aimed badly and his bullet had struck something (a branch?) then again implausible , but possible. You have chosen one line of argument, your argument lends weight to the premise, about the weight of a grain of sand. Do you have anything else to add to your reply to me?, I would again be grateful. To me, the inability to explain this simple fault with the suggestion Oswald caused the throat wound makes me look at the other options. The possibility he was shot from the front and the bullet ricocheted into to his chest cavity matches the evidence best.
  10. Eddy Bainbridge

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    Mr Von Pein, I always read your posts with interest as you back up your comments with evidence. I have studied an anatomically correct model of the neck. There is no gap for a bullet to pass through, it is built rather like a suit of armour. It can of course flex, but flexion does not result in a gap appearing at any angle (I tried this with the model). With this in mind, please could you point me to evidence that either shows the damage to the neck bones caused by a bullet fired from the TBSD, or provide an alternative explanation for the bullet path if it didn't pass through the neck bones. Thankyou in advance.
  11. Eddy Bainbridge

    Isn't this obvious

    Please can someone disabuse me of something that looks obvious to a beginner in the field. This is basic stuff but not everyone on here is deeply involved. Around Z309 (Brake lights confirm) the limo braked. JFK, as the only un-braced person in the car (Jackie was turned sideways to the direction of motion, as are John and Nellie) fell forward at around Z312 (Forward movement visible). 1. JFK's head slumps (Removed from film) 2. JFK is shot in the temple with his head facing down.(Removed from film) 3. Debris flies out up and back(Brigioni testimony) hitting Hargis(?) (See testimony) with force and sprays up and over the front passengers (Removed from film, confirmed by Connelly's) 4. A possible second shot to Kennedy's head (See autopsy discussion). (Removed from film, verified by acoustic evidence?) 5. The limo accelerates violently (Kellerman testimony) forcing Kennedy (Again unbraced) 'back and to the front' (Seen in film but perceived to be 'the headshot') Bear in mind, since the car is stopped almost directly in front of Zapruder, then the crop is not easily discernable as little is changing in the field of view. In the sequence discussed the car has ; decelerated ,stopped and accelerated.With a crop the car appears to be at constant speed after Z313 (confirmed by Alvarez analysis). If Chris Davidson or David Josephs would comment I would be most grateful, as I believe their analysis is pretty persuasive on frame removal, and that a shot/shots were fired after Z313. I believe the 'maths rules' thread is relevant because the cropping has forced the cover up to move the shot back to Z313 so it aligns with the braking of the car. It seems an amazing coincidence if the headshot exactly matches the point where Kennedy was moving due to the braking. A side issue to this, that I have only just considered is ; how far would Kennedy's Jacket and Shirt have ridden up in this scenario? Would the bullet holes in Jacket/Shirt/back align?
  12. Eddy Bainbridge

    Mili Cranor Demolishes more Disinfo

    We hit a nasty impasse when the single bullet theory is challenged. The argument goes : Look at the evidence! It shows the SBT is false. I believe this to be true, but to complete the argument and conclude 'and this is what actually happened!' always relies on impugning the evidence. The list of theories are some variant on 1. The body was altered 2. The film was altered. 3. The autopsy photos/xrays were altered, or combinations of the three. This makes for an area of research ripe for disinformation. It is impossible to argue with any credibility that no evidence alteration has occurred. So if some alteration is proven then other alteration is plausible. Forget the 'No alterationists'. That position is not tenable. In my short time studying the case I have read nothing persuasive that stops me believing that JFK left the motorcade with a large hole in the back of his head. Until I am persuaded otherwise I want to know why I can't see that on the Z-film (altered/spliced ?) and why the evidence indicates brain matter went forcefully back, and showered forwards. These views are very relevant to the current thread,. Milicent Cranor does not challenge the 'back and to the left' motion as accurately reflecting history. I do challenge it, for the reasons above.( I have a theory, but don't we all)
  13. Eddy Bainbridge

    Foul Play for Cuba Committee?

    Mr Dean, I am very grateful for your contribution and apologise for quoting you without giving you the credit (You had responded to a Jon Simkin thread). Would you be willing to give your personal opinion as to the FPCC?
  14. Eddy Bainbridge

    Foul Play for Cuba Committee?

    Thanks for that, I couldn't resist selectively pinching a titbit from the thread : "Phil Hopley wrote: Gibson was in the US military in the early 1950s then, after leaving the Army, headed to Paris, France, in 1955 and joined the US ex-pat community who mostly spent their time at the Cafe Tournon and the "left bank" crowd. ... .. it was generally believed in the Paris ex-pat community that Gibson was secretly working for the CIA or FBI."
  15. Eddy Bainbridge

    Foul Play for Cuba Committee?

    The Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC) lasted from April 1960 to December 1963. It was formed by Robert Taber and Richard Gibson. Bill Simpich provides more information ( https://www.counterpunch.org/2009/07/24/fair-play-for-cuba-and-the-cuban-revolution/ ) It would appear the source of funding for the FPCC was unclear, with its fundraiser (Santos Buch) first claiming eight individuals provided the money and later that the Cuban Government provided it. The latest document releases confirm Richard Gibson spied for the CIA. (http://www.newsweek.com/richard-gibson-cia-spies-james-baldwin-amiri-baraka-richard-wright-cuba-926428 ) In the Newsweek article Morley describes how Gibson became a spy around 1965, but he had made documented attempts to contact the CIA at least as early as 1962 when he was allegedly deemed to be too unreliable for use. Taber later also offered to assist the CIA (See Simpich article) Vincent T. Lee was the final leader of the FPCC and is another opaque character (http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/T%20Disk/Tampa%20Florida%20Times/Item%2004.pdf ) . John Simkin has attempted to find out about his background without success, the following appears on a past Ed Forum thread "Harry J.Dean said: The only info. I know re; V.T. Lee is that he had lived in Florida, he made several trips to Cuba., and was a firebrand for Castro. He arrived at FPCC in New York long after my time in the Chicago Chapter 60/61. Prior to V.T. Lee's position at FPCC, Richard Taber and Richard Gibson 'were FPCC', with whom Chicago FPCC leaders held a meeting and as FPCC secretary I was present, 1960." So was the FPCC a genuine pro Castro organisation? If it wasn't, then perhaps its use by Oswald points more strongly to his association with Phillips. The FPCC appears to be a candidate for a Phillips organisation. Its leaders were certainly malleable and the timing of its collapse suspicious. Any thoughts?