Frank Agbat

Hello Kettle, this is Pot... You're Black!

Strikes me that the man you want to ID is too tall to be Hosty. Unless he was standing on a step or something, he's got at least 6 inches of height on Hosty. Frank

I took the opportunity to download the pdf's of this presentation after seeing this post. I've only made it a small way through, but it is quite impressive to say the least! Wanna be? Hardly. Bone Fide? Yes, unquestionably. As my younger co-workers would say, "out-freaking-standing!"

I want to know who put Lynne in charge of Yin and Yang, anyway... Somehow, I always considered it a bit more 'cosmic' (rather than comic).

You must be another Garrison stooge. You've completely ignored (just like Hoover) one more important clue: Eep Opp Ork Ah Ah! Eep Opp Ork Ah ah! Get in the capsule, baby We are blasting off. Eep opp ork ah ah! (whooooo) Eep opp ork ah ah! (whooooo) Eep opp ork ah ah! And that means I love you. Well now, I took my baby for a ride in space (Eep opp ork ah ah!) And met a funny little man with a funny face (Eep opp ork ah ah!) He taught us both to wail this way (Eep opp ork ah ah!) And nobody digs a word we say (Eep opp ork ah ah!). Eep epp ork ah ah! (whooooo) Eep epp ork ah ah! (whooooo) Eep opp ork ah ah! And that means I love you. Yeah I read my baby loud and clear (Eep opp ork ah ah!) She just said I love you dear. (Eep opp ork ah ah!) Now when I reply the way I do (Eep opp ork ah ah!) I just said I love you too Come fly with me! Up high with me! Come on fly with me And now Eep opp ork means I dig you. You heard the word that crazy word That word you heard Eep opp ork ah ah! means I love you. Hop on baby, I'll put you in orbit. ----------- I think the implications are obvious to anyone who is not in league with Garrison. Why isn't anyone discussing this important piece of information?

Lamar Waldron was recently on "Coast to Coast" (George Noory) discussing this book. I believe the archive MP3 of the program is available to their subscribers. I was able to hear the interview and it was very interesting. Waldron's book is next on my list once I'm done reading "The man who knew too much".

Stephen, Yes it is. In fact, the study of the subject started, I believe, as an offshoot of looking into backwards masking. I would have to say that with me, the jury is certainly out on this concept, but it is intriguing. I can understand the rationale behind something like "VSA" (Voice Stress Analysis) arguably more than reverse speech -- especially since some of the phonemes of english are not truly reversible due to the design of the mouth, throat, etc. Nevertheless, as the author in the linked article points out, the odds of consistent reverses being formed are very low. Yet it would seem that they are far more common than expected. I'm tempted to try a few myself and see if anything interesting turns up. "Number Nine... Number Nine.... Number Nine" *does* become, "turn me on, dead man" (although the accent helps make the reverse more understandable).

Tim C., To me, the "classic gunman" position has always seemed a bit exposed, and one from which unseen escape might be difficult. From your research, is this a valid notion? Frank

First a Strawman, and now an Ad Hominem? You're not producing a strong showing in this debate, Lynne. (I still suspect, however, that your true intent is not to participate but to disrupt.) Please go back and read that Abraham Lincoln quote I shared a few days ago. You *really* should heed its advice at this point...

John, I'm not an expert in bricks, but I happen to be in posession of quite a few of them having done some construction/renovation recently. The bricks I have are "pavers" which are commonly used for patios, driveways, etc. The "paver" bricks I have are: Long Side: 8 1/8 inches Width: 3 7/8 inches Height 2 1/4 inches. I also have some brickwork on my house, and I confirmed my suspicions that the bricks are of slighly different sizes... The bricks used on my house are 1/4 inch shorter in each dimension making them: Long side: 7 7/8" Width: 3 5/8" Height: 2" My suspicion is that these figures will give you ballpark numbers to work with. However, there seems to be some variation and the only way to for sure would be for someone in Dallas to measure... Regards, Frank

Like I said in another thread... A fiver says these linked web sites will be selling something soon... Book, Video, Etc. Something for sale... It is the most plausible explanation for seemingly irrational spamming.

What's the point? Richard Nixon was propelled to power by destroying Alger Hiss. do you have any doubt that he was in fact involved in the Kennedy assassination? Is there anything that Richard Nixon did that did not involve targeting the "enemy"? Why is Nixon's involvement being ignored here? That's the bet that is puzzling, unless it's all political. Why don't you stop spamming and experience the joys of the SEARCH feature on this forum? We've discussed RMN and his merry men many times... And politics? Of WHAT politics, exactly, are you speaking? Considering the WIDE variety of political views on this forum, that must be one BROAD brush you are painting with.

A fiver says that these linked sites will be selling a book or a video of some sort soon...

No. Your meaningless and mindless spam is clogging the boards. I don't know your purpose here, but it certainly isn't to learn about the assassination or to truly research it. If that was truly the case, you would be reading more, using more sources, and posting less. In the words of Abraham Lincoln: "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt. "

Sheesh... Terry M. was merely stating fact, not insulting Gregory Peck. Gregory Peck would have been around 74-75 years old when JFK filmed. As great as Gregory Peck was, it would be a stretch to see him playing a late 40-ish Jim Garrison...

With all due respect, Thomas, I have a great deal of trouble following your threads when you insist on continually replying to yourself. JBC *is* slumping in 308/312. Please compare: and 308, etc, are almost directly perpendicular to Zapruder's sight line. This, and the type of lens used on the camera, produces a distance-compression effect. However, between 262 and 297, JBC most clearly slumps backwards toward his wife. However, it is after Z312 that he rolls over where he is face-down, as opposed to what you see in 312. I have noticed something recently, though, in some of the later Z-frames that might indicate that JBC pops his head up again well after the head shot. I'll post it if it turns out to be anything worth looking at.

Pat, Here is what I have:

A reasonably current roof view of TSBD: Compare that with: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JAMESdealey6.htm and http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JAMESdealey5.htm Doesn't look to me like there are any whirlygigs or anything else flashed through the roof in the area above the supposed sniper's lair. Some of the other pictures on Spartacus give slightly different angles, but none of them show anything through the roof. Unfortunately, there don't seem to be many TSBD pictures shot from the east, so I'll have to do a little digging to see if there is anything that pops out the side of the building. --- I was hoping Tom Alyea's film would have a frame where the pipes were visible. This does not seem to be the case, unfortunately. You're right, though, distortions aside, a brick is a brick. Likewise, the floorboards could provide some useful reference points.

John, An interesting and intriguing post -- thank you. I would imagine that the blueprints of the TSBD are available in Dallas. Most areas have zoning laws, etc, that require prints to be on file. Also, substantive changes usually require permits, and associated revisions to the prints. I don't know what would be involved in obtaining a complete print, or what the cost would be, but it might be something for one of our Dallas-based researchers to look into. A complete set of prints would also reveal the purpose of the pipes. The idea that Gerry put forth about the pipe being related to heating and that it might have been hot is one that never crossed my mind. [quick edit/addition] Google Earth shows the TSBD roof fairly clearly. The pipe does not appear to extend up through to any sort of device on the roof. Whatever its purpose, it stays within the building, unless it turns on a higher floor. Contorting against a pipe is bad enough, let alone one that is at an uncomfortable temperature... In spite of that, squeeze off a world-class shot at a moving target with a weapon as bas as the MC... All with a dime-store misaligned scope... ?? Frank

I'm sure Garrison was no saint... Few of us are, and like most people, I'm sure he had his good and bad points. However, apart from this, several facts make his contribution to the JFK case unquestionable. 1) Unless I'm mistaken, he is still the only person who ever mustered enough cojones to actually bring a trial *of any sort* relating to the JFK assassination. 2) In the course of this trial, he was at least somewhat indirectly responsible for the public seeing the Z-film. Groden's bootleg copy originated, I believe, via the Shaw trial. How long would that have been hidden had this copy not found its way to the public? 3) Movie accuracy/quality issues aside, he re-kindled the public's interest in the case. 4) This re-kindled interest lead to the release of additional documents, etc. 5) the resulting movie reduced the Bacon number for countless actors (see the "oracle of Bacon") http://oracleofbacon.org/

While I'm at it... 3990 East Broad Street in Columbus, Ohio is frequently listed as the address associated with DISC. FWIW, this address is very real and *is* widely known to be an area owned and used by the DoD. There are two major military functions at this location. DSSC is the Defense Supply Center Columbus, and the other is the DLA (Defense Logistic Agency). It is no coincidence that these areas are located near Airport and Train facilities. Both organizations apparently make extensive use of civilian contractors, so it seems consistent that there would be some clearance-related functions run out of these areas. http://www.dscc.dla.mil/ I'll see if I can track down any information on Gordon Novel and any Columbus connections that might be of interest.

http://www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online...s/MM/fmu10.html The link listed above claims: "He was a cattleman throughout his life and acquired extensive ranches in Mexico and East Texas. " If the above source is correct, it would seem to indicate that Clint Murchison did, in fact, have a huge ranch in Mexico. It does not say who might have stayed there, but there might be additional information to be found with some digging.

I generally try to steer clear of these debates, too. I have intentionally left my politics aside, and will attempt to write this post from as neutral a base as I can. I joined the forum to read and post (when I can, which unfortunately is not as often as I would like) along with general discussion of the JFK assassination. I'm aware that the owners of the forum have the ultimate right to post what they want, where and when they want. I respect this, as I respect the right to free speech -- something I think we all hold dearly. I do, however, find it ironic that there are dozens of threads in the JFK forum that have a clear and unhidden left/liberal/socialist bias. Some are downright vitriolic and broad-brushed in their treatment of anyone deemed 'right of center' (whatever that is, really). Many of these threads have nothing to do with the actual assassination, or can only be tied there in a very tangential fashion (usually assuming facts not necessarily in evidence). These threads exist for week after week, and are never moved to this forum. Likewise, it seems to be perfectly acceptable behaviour to bash, but to attempt to post a defence is tiresome? This thread and its partner, however, were quickly whisked off onto this forum. (I would have never found it had the link not remained in the JFK section.) While this is well within the rights of the moderators, it smacks more of "agenda" than "education."

...and like Posner, merely saying it -- even 10,000 times -- does not make it so. One thing we MUST remember when considering various events and motives: We are looking with the benefit of hindsight. In 1962/63, Vietnam was *not* on the radar screen as it was later in the 1960's when it boiled into a full-fledged controversy (in every sense of the term). Kennedy, and equally for those who ended up making profit from the war, could not have *known* that it would turn out the way it did. We know what happened because we have the ability to look back on it. They were living it, and did not have that luxury. Sure, they probably had intelligence, predictions, models, etc., but they had no way to know that it would cycle up into what it became. Now, that said, I agree that LBJ's marked reversal of policy is interesting. However, it could have been anything from LBJ simply having a different opinion on things (perfectly permissible) all the way up to what you claim, or anything in between. Without additional proof, what you have is a classic circumstantial case.

So what, exactly, does this have to do with the assassination of JFK?