Jump to content
The Education Forum

Eddy Bainbridge

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Eddy Bainbridge

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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?
  4. 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)
  5. 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?
  6. 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?
  7. 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."
  8. Eddy Bainbridge

    Russell's question

    Hi David, many thanks for your excellent reply . You have reinforced my understanding of the troubling adjustment of the survey plat and the plausible but complex explanation of the reasons for it. I am convinced by the acoustic data, but not by D B Thomas's matching of the shots to the Zapruder film ( http://www.whokilledjfk.net/d_b_thomas_report.htm ) He uses the Film speed as 18.3 fps and you are challenging this. Are you able to use the acoustic evidence to assist in yours and Chris's analysis? I think the first thing you would have to address is your assertion that there was multiple shots fired at exactly the same time, since the acoustic evidence and analysis does not support that.
  9. Eddy Bainbridge

    Russell's question

    Hi Michael, The Ignore function on The Education forum is extremely valuable. I have you on Ignore. I have edited your reply to my post to demonstrate why you are on ignore. You have used two phrases that set my alarm bells off. "We all know that that's what really happened" is a phrase that will never be used by someone honestly interested in JKF's assassination. The phrase "Now try to keep an open mind here" has been used by you to convey the impossibility of keeping an open mind 'here'. I find reading anything I don't have an open mind about intolerable. Its a pity you don't. On the subject of the ignore function. I had hoped to monitor the people I ignore, in case they said something worthwhile, by seeing how their posts were reflected by others. That bit of the plan hasn't worked yet, but I'll keep trying.
  10. Eddy Bainbridge

    Russell's question

    Hi David , I don't understand your post. I am interested in understanding it, but rather than explain I would greatly appreciate your help in another area. Would you be willing to provide a guide to the work of Chris (math rules) Davidson. I have asked him to explain his thread and I suspect you are one of the few people who understand what he has done. You have shown great skill with explanatory diagrams and unravelling complex issues (Oswald's Mexico travel for example) and I suspect he is on to something very significant. He doesn't however seem to have a desire to appeal to the masses.
  11. Eddy Bainbridge

    Russell's question

    I fear one can make an argument for National Security which gives little succour to anyone seeking the truth. If the Intelligence Agencies have any culpability in the assassination or any culpability in its cover up, then it demonstrates there is a severe weakness in American Democracy. A severe weakness in Governance is a threat to National Security. Perhaps its better not to reveal such a weakness?
  12. William K Harvey's testimony to the Church Committee is fascinating. It illuminates a highly intelligent, and morally motivated man. Several times he returns to topics he has testified upon, to ensure he is not being misunderstood, or has not given a clear and honest answer. He is meticulous with his wording and respectful to the committee, this is a man who appears to have a highly considered moral code. He demonstrates this when asked by Bissell to investigate the CIA's capabilities for executive action: "Well I'm not trying to be humorous, but the first thing I did quite honestly, was to go back and think about it, and try to think out my own thoughts...' In his own words assassination of high ranking officialdom is justified. (my highlights added) "I can conceive of it being perfectly within the province of an intelligence service, one, on proper orders, from the proper highest authority in case of utter necessity to eliminate a threat to security of this country by any means whatever, whether its a nuclear strike or a rifle bullet, if I may be that blunt." "The second category of case is the one where not the Constitutionally defined treason, but treason in the ethical sense is involved, and where a given individual is guilty of such treason, either has to be eliminated or one of more other lives of a great deal more worthiness and a great deal more value obviously have to be sacrificed. I would not personally exclude assassination or any other technique as a proper weapon under such circumstances." I think 'proper highest authority' is a carefully chosen phrase. He is talking to Senators. The audience-specific phrase is a choice of 'The President' , 'The White House' or 'The Democratically Elected Government'. The phrase used suggests William K Harvey himself determines 'the proper highest authority' i.e An authority he deems worthy of that name. The phrase "treason in the ethical sense" I would suggest can only convey one meaning: That is , 'treason in my ethical sense'. So, from Harvey's own analysis: If Kennedy's Bay of Pigs decisions are an act of "treason in the ethical sense" then executive action is justifiable when the order comes from 'the proper highest authority'. His wife referred late in life to the Kennedys as 'scum'. Presumably the type of people who can be removed so those of "a great deal more worthiness" can live.
  13. Eddy Bainbridge

    Harvey justifies the assassination of JFK

    In the clip linked below note how vehemently the friend(Ruben Carbajal) of David Morales ( who worked with Harvey on assassinations) makes the moral case for the hatred of Kennedy. The witnesses in the clip are persuasive that Morales was a man of action and who was willing to indicate the CIA 'got' JFK, an action he fully backed. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzOs-jTOo-Q I would suggest the evidence shows Morales would affirm Harvey's justification of the assassination.
  14. Eddy Bainbridge

    Harvey justifies the assassination of JFK

    Yes, go to Mary Ferrell foundation for transcript. Eddy
  15. Eddy Bainbridge

    The JFK Assassination (2018) by James DiEugenio

    Mr DiEugenio , First there was 'On the trail of the assassins' then there was 'Reclaiming Parkland', surely your comments point to a new film!!
  16. Eddy Bainbridge

    Dealey Plaza UK Canterbury Seminar 2018

    Hi Mr Kamp, There was a question I guess would have been hard for you to ask in public: But I would like to know what Malcolm Blunt thinks of your research on Prayerman? Can you enlighten me?
  17. Eddy Bainbridge

    FOIA Request tutorial thread

    I live in the UK and there is a piece of Freedom of Information requests I would like to clarify. In the UK we have had cases where the debate has been over whether the body requested to provide information is in fact a 'public' body to which the law applies. If this avenue of challenge is open in the USA are there any supposedly non-public bodies that FOIA requests about the assassination could be made? For example : Is a body that holds public records a public body?
  18. Eddy Bainbridge

    Dealey Plaza UK Canterbury Seminar 2018

    Mr Hancock, the best compliment I think I can give you is that I hope you live a very long time! We need you. Thank you very much for your clarifying words on 'Deep History'. I entirely agree with your sentiment that the term 'Deep State' has been hijacked, by lazy hijackers. Without wishing to make assumptions about any hypothesis you have on the assassination, I wonder if there may be a tantalising means of evidencing a 'Rogue element': If there was a surface element of the CIA who were unaware of a plot to assassinate JFK, then when it happened it must have created an element of shock. I have read that there certainly is evidence of this shock. I read that Jefferson Morley thinks Angleton may have been unaware of the assassination for example. "All I can say is there is a lot we don’t know. Was Angleton running Oswald? Or was someone else? There’s some evidence that makes me think Angleton was surprised by Kennedy’s assassination. Bill Simpich thinks Angleton was not part of a plot to kill JFK for reasons that make sense. So rather than commit to a speculative position without direct evidence, I’ll just say I don’t know. Because I don’t." - J Morley So, like the people running up the grassy knoll, because their senses indicated the direction of fire, is there evidence of shocked actors metaphorically focussing on the guilty?
  19. Eddy Bainbridge

    Dealey Plaza UK Canterbury Seminar 2018

    Mr Hancock, I have just listened to your fascinating presentation and wondered if you might answer a couple of questions on it: 1. You mentioned Harvey being brought into Staff D and an assassination attempt being made on Lamumba. Does your research indicate that Harvey initiated assassination attempts? The short History you gave of Harvey suggested an intelligence gatherer, not necessarily a character who was going to embark on regime change actions. 2. A subject of general fascination in this field is speculation on the motives of RFK post-assassination. I think you are suggesting RFK was pursuing the elimination of Castro while JFK was pursuing détente. Do you think this explains RFK's failure to pursue or facilitate investigations? 3. You are expounding an interesting alternative to the 'Deep State'. You are suggesting the 'Socially Connected State'. Am I getting that right? Many thanks in advance.
  20. Eddy Bainbridge

    Trump Caved: Three More years

    Dreaming of an end to this misery I wondered if Oliver Stone would be able to get finance for another film ; 'JFK 2018' (or 2020 if it takes a while). Since the 90's the original films premise has been enhanced. I think the people who advised on the film (still living) could colour in some more of the story and the reputation of the original would get the crowds flocking in. Whilst the first film looked at events in New Orleans the new one could look at Mexico City and really hammer home the cover-up of medical evidence.
  21. Eddy Bainbridge

    Ted Kennedy

    I think a far more interesting question is ; Why did the Kennedy clan react to JFK's assassination in the way they did? I think a potential good answer to this is the involvement Bobby had with Castro Assassination attempts. It may have seemed a real risk that Bobby was tarred with killing his own brother. Winning the Presidential election and enhancing his brother's legacy may have appeared to be a better option.
  22. Eddy Bainbridge

    Sign please

  23. Eddy Bainbridge

    Moderators - please teach how to ignore

    Hi Lance, I don't agree. If an ignored miscreant actualy makes a valid contribution then their views may filter into the debate as described. That's why the personal decision to ignore is not the sledgehammer solution that banning is.
  24. Eddy Bainbridge

    Moderators - please teach how to ignore

    Just implemented the ignore feature, its brilliant!!. Threads can be unsplurged at the click of the ignore. Highly recommended.
  25. Eddy Bainbridge

    Swan-Song -- Math Rules

    Hi David, The quote is fascinating but are you aware of other people corroborating the quote? I am struggling to keep up with the maths given the little time I am taking to comprehend it. Am I right in this summary of the hypothesis : - The Extant film has been modified. The camera filmed, at least for some of the time at 48 fps. Frames have been removed , and to hide this a narrative has been created whereby the limo travelled at constant speed, and the camera continuously ran at 18.3 fps. This narrative is partly fouled up by the significant slowing required to make the tight and ungainly turn onto Elm Street. A solution to this issue was to remove the ungainly turn from the in-camera original and falsify the surveyor's record of the locations of the limo, as related to the Z film.