Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

That is such a misdirection. There is no photo, or else they would have released it. I am not analyzing an existing photo purporting to be of LHO in MC. I’m pointing out there isn’t one. So how I, or anyone else, would treat such a photo is completely besides the point. 

OK.
Then, let me ask you :
Do you think that the backyard photos are genuine or faked ?
Do you think that the autopsy photos are genuine or faked ?
Please reply with honesty.
I say that they are all genuine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, François Carlier said:


I read a lot about conspiracy theories. I always find the same kind of flawed reasoning with other subjects.
- you find all kinds of "problems" with the Kennedy assassination investigation
- likewise, other authors find all kinds of "problems" with the 9/11 investigation
 

You say 'problems', I say just asking questions.  There may be innocent answers, but I'm seeing a lot of carelessness in the govt investigations.

Why didn't the 911 Commission test for explosive residue in the aftermath, when there's evidence that explosives were used?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, François Carlier said:

OK.
Then, let me ask you :
Do you think that the backyard photos are genuine or faked ?
I say that they are all genuine.

I asked before about the backyard photos.   The 'chin' on LHO looks an awful lot like the chin on Dallas police officer, Roscoe White.  Roscoe White served in the same Marine outfit as LHO, was a photography expert, and original copy of the backyard photos were found in his possession.  He disappeared to California right after the assassination, and then was catapulted into financial riches at that time.

Yes, as you say, people do look different in pictures, but only subtly, you're not going to change major bone structure in a persons face with pictures taken at different times.

LHO had a much more downwards pointing chin than White.

You know something, yes, I see a problem with LHO's chin in the backyard photos.

Roscoe anim .jpg

lee-harvey-oswald-9430309-1-402.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

 Can anyone tell me what the heck FC is talking about when he says I am using David Mantik or David Josephs  as a source for that list above of ten points?

Because none of them come from either source.

These are all in declassified documents by the ARRB.  Which, of course, with FC and DVP,  is the far side of the moon.  They have no idea what that is since they do not read documents.

For example, the first four are in the  Lopez Report. (For instance, the chart about the mismatched languages and voices is on p. 117.  The impossibility of the pulse camera missing Oswald is on p. 303)   Do I have to explain what the Lopez Report is?  But we also now have the actual CIA photo check documents in the Russian and Cuban embassy which say literally: no pic of Oswald.

The fact there was no Saturday call is also in the Lopez Report, p. 190.

The information about Duran's first description of Oswald being short and blonde is also in the Lopez Report.  But further, that particular info was deleted from CIA reports to the WC. (ibid)

The point about the two Cuban Embassy CIA plants not recognizing a picture of Oswald, that was in the documents declassified last October.  I have copies of those and so does David.  We have discussed them on this forum. These are CIA docs. So if FC wants to blame the Agency, go ahead.

The docs about the CIA monthly summaries about the calls to the Cuban embassy not matching LHO, those are also CIA docs which David has placed on this forum  Again, maybe FC wants to argue with the CIA.  In that case he should call them. 

As per the phony trail of Oswald not being on the bus on the way down, please read these two articles by David, which are profusely referenced with actual documents inserted in the text which shows that Ochoa and Echeverria made this all up.  There are very few articles we ever printed that were as heavily documented with primary sources as these two were.  I recommend everyone read them:

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/mexico-city-part-1

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/mexico-city-part-3-the-trip-down-part-2

As per the Visa card, that is in an FBI report. Which is in the WC, see CE 2449, pp 1-3. Again, if you have a problem with this, call the FBI.  Or go to Mexico City.

So, in other words, this info is not from Mantik or Josephs. It is all from primary sources.  Your effort to characterize it as something else is typical of your bombastic, ignorant and pretentious techniques, which you inevitably revert to whenever you cannot answer questions about the record.  Which happens a lot.

I think that DVP is a member of Duncan McRae's forum.  I suggest you join that one also FC.  Over there, that is pretty much a free for all, almost like mud wrestling.  You would fit in there pretty well.  Over here, we actually try and offer real and documented information.  We are trying to solve certain problems in the evidence which the WC left.

Mexico City is one of them since, for all intents and purposes, the WC really did not investigate that area at all.  Which is a complete and utter disgrace, which you and DVP have no problem with.  So please take my advice.  You will be welcome with open arms at Duncan's.

 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, François Carlier said:

OK.
Then, let me ask you :
Do you think that the backyard photos are genuine or faked ?
Do you think that the autopsy photos are genuine or faked ?
Please reply with honesty.
I say that they are all genuine.

I have no firm opinion on either. The subject of this thread is Oswald in MC. There are no photos of him there as far as we know. Is it your point that there are photos of LHO in MC which have been kept secret because no one would believe they were authentic? 

You are trying to change the subject of this thread to my level of gullibility. 

David Josephs did the most in depth look at Oswald’s supposed bus trip to MC possible. It was very convincing, and fits well with my statement, which I stand by, that if photos (or tape recordings) of Oswald in MC existed we would have seen or heard them. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My interest in whether Oswald went to MC was sparked by Reading that David Phillips was willing to believe he didn't go. That is an astonishing admission.

I believe the work by David Josephs is based on documentary evidence. If anyone with criticisms of his work can put down their bluster-guns and do a review then I will read it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Now, let us begin to get at the outright lies in the record.

How about Anne Goodpasture and the so called Mystery Man.  As WC apologists like Gerry Posner try to say, this was just the result of a mix up.

Posner could say that since the Lopez Report had not been released when he wrote his crapola book. In the report Goodpasture claims that the reason she sent it up was that it was the only one of a non-Latin taken on or even around October 1st. Which is when LHO allegedly called the Cuban embassy from the Soviet embassy.

Well, this fell apart under scrutiny. First, there was a non Latin photo taken about 3-4 days before.  But Goodpasture tried to change this guy's name to  a Latin one to disguise her skullduggery. But even worse, that MM pic was not taken on October 1st. It was taken a day later.  This is key.  Why?  Because if it was the first, it may have been LHO, but on the second, it likely could not have been since LHO left early that morning.  A fact that could easily have been checked by going through hotel records at Hotel del Comercio. . She then tried to say it was just an error in reading columns on a chart.  Danny and Eddie found that the days on the chart are marked off in red percentage marks.  Therefore they called this excuse implausible.

The truth is that Goodpasture did what she did because there was no phone transcript on the second.  So she pushed this date back to the first  as an act of desperation.  

Why? Because it was the only one she had.  Now, that photo was sent up to Texas on the night of 11/22/63.  Does anyone really think that she did not know it was not LHO by that time, or in the days to come?  If you do then you may believe the Titanic was struck by a torpedo.  

 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2019 at 7:58 PM, François Carlier said:

Wasn't he in New Orleans, sleeping with Judith Vary Baker ? 😁
(Sorry for that)

No.  Judyth says LHO was in MC, perhaps cavorting with Sylvia Duran...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

I have no firm opinion on either. The subject of this thread is Oswald in MC. There are no photos of him there as far as we know. Is it your point that there are photos of LHO in MC which have been kept secret because no one would believe they were authentic? 

You are trying to change the subject of this thread to my level of gullibility. 

David Josephs did the most in depth look at Oswald’s supposed bus trip to MC possible. It was very convincing, and fits well with my statement, which I stand by, that if photos (or tape recordings) of Oswald in MC existed we would have seen or heard them. 

 

Maybe or maybe not.  It seems MC was such a quagmire it may not be appropriate to expect things to work in any sort of a 'typical' manner...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

No.  Judyth says LHO was in MC, perhaps cavorting with Sylvia Duran...

Thank you, Ma'am.
Actually, I was just joking. I believe that Lee Oswald did go to Mexico City so in no way woud I think that he stayed in New Orleans with Judith Baker (whose story I don't endorse).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2019 at 3:50 PM, François Carlier said:

By the way, as always, you are losing sight of what is important. The only man who shot JFK in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963 was Lee Harvey Oswald. Period. So whatever you might find about Mexico City is not really important as far as looking for the answer to the question : "who killed Kennedy ?"
I'll tell you something. I am all ears. I am open-minded. I'll read all the "evidence" that you'll show here. If you prove to me that Oswald did not go to Mexico City, I will have absolutely no hesitation in admitting it. I don't really care one way or the other. That won't change the fact that on November 22, 1963, in Dallas, it was Lee Oswald who assassinated President Kennedy.
So, go ahead.
(Now, I am confident that you'll never be able to prove something that is wrong. Therefore, you won't be able to prove that Oswald was not where he actually was. But I'll be interested in reading)

Why do people waste time even talking to fc?  Stop sign people, stop sign.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/4/2019 at 10:04 PM, David Von Pein said:
On 1/4/2019 at 9:41 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Meanwhile can you reply to the other nine points:

Why is there no photo?  At either embassy? Why is there no voice match? Why did both informants say he was not there? Twice. Why was there an alleged call on Saturday?  Why is there no indication of the calls on the newly decalcified CIA summary per month?  Why is it the wrong buses and wrong passport?

I can't answer all those questions, Jim. And neither can you (or any other CTer).

 

David,

You can't explain the mysteries of the Mexico City trip because you choose not to explain them. Instead you sweep them under the rug. In contrast, we CTer choose to explore possible explanations for  the trip. We hypothesize and then test our hypotheses.

Many CTers already have a good idea as to what the purpose of this alleged trip was. Unlike you (and even some CTers) I believe that we WILL figure out most of the important points of the "trip."

The Mexico City trip is not unlike many scientific mysteries that have been solved over the decades and centuries, even when limited evidence was available. For example, electricity. The only available hard evidence for electricity was the observance of electrostatic sparks and lightening. But by discovering and piecing together bits and pieces of circumstantial evidence, through the testing of scientific hypotheses the mystery of electricity was eventually solved. And now look at what we have.

I for one choose not to adopt your defeatist attitude.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 1/5/2019 at 1:41 AM, David Von Pein said:
On 1/4/2019 at 11:57 PM, James DiEugenio said:

And this is the difference.  You cannot answer why there are no photos.  Or why it's the wrong voice.  Or why the calls are not on the CIA monthly summary.  Etc etc.

Whereas I can answer yours very easily.

Sure, it's easy to just pretend all the various documents are fake and phony. And it's easy to label someone a l-i-a-r.

 

Yes, it is easy to label something as being phony. And nobody should be afraid of doing so when warranted.

When X completely contradicts Y, and one of those is backed by a great deal of evidence, then its only logical to declare the other one wrong. Even if it is an FBI document, a photograph, or a witness.

Doing this makes all the sense in the world. Sweeping it under the rug makes no sense at all.

 

 

Edited by Sandy Larsen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...