Mark Knight

From what I can see, it looks great.

Mr. Trejo: So you now know for a FACT that General Walker had plans for Oswald? Or is this simply part of your THEORY? Simply stating something is fact does NOT make it become fact. Unless you have PROOF, then let's back up on the claim that it's a FACT. At this point, you have a THEORY. Unless you're holding back some "smoking-gun" info that would MAKE that statement a fact.

Thank you, Paul, for finally admitting the truth about agent Oswald. It's been a long time coming. Jim, You're quite mistaken that LHO was a CIA agent. Just because the teenage LHO was on an assignment from the ONI inside the USSR, this hardly qualifies LHO as a CIA agent. LHO was still a high-school dropout. LHO still didn't know how to drive a car. LHO still could hardly spell. LHO was also a hothead, arrogant teenager -- independent and willful. Not a team player. LHO proved that by leaving his ONI mission early -- by marrying Marina and letting her push him into coming to the wealthy USA. That's not the mark of a CIA agent. That's the mark of a CIA wannabe. Regards, --Paul Trejo Lee Harvey Oswald was born on October 18, 1939. He arrived in Moscow on October 16, 1959. So he was a teenager for all of TWO DAYS while in the USSR. Just the facts, sir.

So...was Oswald, the so-called Marxist, a member of the union? If so, where's his membership card? If not...why would a man who allegedly thought of himself as a downtrodden worker, NOT join the union? Where's the evidence, either way?

Were the Jaggers-Chiles Stovall workers represented by Dallas Typographical Union Local 173? If so, did the union go on strike in October 1962?

I would certainly hope not. Is this the Anne Lorene Goodpasture born in 1918 (who would've been age 45 in 1963) who died in Oklahoma City in 2011? Findagrave.com has no information on a final resting place for her.

I'm no "expert witness," but the HIDELL part of the signatures look enough alike to have been done by the same hand...IMHO.

Should we hold our collective breath?

And wasn't the Secret Service UNDER SUBPOENA from the AARB when they destroyed JFK-related records? What makes you think the FBI, CIA, ONI, or any other agency hasn't "purged" any records that might suggest ANY smoking gun but Oswald's?

Mr. Trejo contends that his theory will be "proven" on October 26, 2017...so we only have to wait a year and 13 days (and counting) for him to be proven a genius.

I think you're right that, if the report means what it says--it's not a signed deposition, but a secondhand account of an interview--then Oswald was the subject of discussions BEFORE KLEINLERER EVER MET HIM. That would be QUITE odd, IMHO. It would make me wonder WHY such discussions took place.

Mr. Roy and I didn't always see eye-to-eye, but I respected his research. Sorry to hear this news.

I had a friend who served in a construction battalion during WWII in the Pacific. He told me that one day he was welding on the blade of a bulldozer, and because of the noise of the engine-driven welder, he couldn't hear much else. But he thought that he was working near a nest of bees...until one of his buddies had him get behind the dozer blade because those weren't bees, those were bullets from a sniper. [The sniper was eliminated and my friend wasn't wounded.] So the sound of a high-speed bullet at close range, when you can't hear the muzzle blast, apparently is much like the sound of a high-speed bee or wasp at close range.

I'm with James on this.While requiring registration will not PREVENT another hacking, it would serve as a bit of a deterrent. So for that reason I'm in favor of requiring registration.

You are correct, sir. A deposit ticket ONLY proves that someone wrote a deposit ticket...same as the fact that an entry in a check register only shows that someone wrote in a check register [often mistakenly assumed by the uninformed as "proof" that a payment was made].

Would someone care to refresh my memory on why a SEPTEMBER 23 affidavit would be considered evidence? That would have been 10 months AFTER the assassination...certainly not a FRESH recollection, by ANY stretch of the definition. And September 23 would have been ONE DAY before the WCR was given to the President, and FOUR days before the release of the report to the public. [i'm assuming September 23, 1964 because September 23, 1963 would have been two months PRIOR TO the assassination.]

Mr. Nall, I think that's a valid point. Many of the political positions of the right in 1963 are considered to be on the left in 2015. So I agree that we should do our best to view the events of 1963 which are political in the frame that was prevalent in '63.

If I recall correctly, wasn't Purvis an LN? That would necessarily limit from the get-go what he could theorize about the back wound. A tree branch would certainly be convenient, but I think you've shown that with a tumbling bullet he was going out on a limb. Mr. Ecker, Tom Purvis was indeed a LNer. But I was able to finally get him to concede that there is nothing proving that Oswald fired any shots from the 6th floor of the TSBD. Still, he claimed it was a 3-shot, 3-hit scenario...and contrary to what the WC claimed, there was no "shot that missed" in Mr. Purvis' scenario.

The late Tom Purvis offered the theory that the bullet passed through a branch of the live oak tree outside the TSBD, which flattened it somewhat, slowed it down, caused some of the lead core to extrude from the base, and sent the bullet on a tumbling track. He believed that the reason the bullet wound in JFK's back was the shape it was [not round] was because the bullet was still tumbling...and that the tearing of the cloth of the jacket and the shirt in the fashion it did was due to the bullet striking the jacket base first, and acting more like a "wadcutter" bullet than the round-nosed projectile that started its flight. Purvis then claimed that this bullet was CE399, which did NOT strike Connally. Many have disagreed with Purvis' theory, but Purvis also noted that at the time of the WC re-enactments in Dealy plaza, some branches from that live oak tree were trimmed...begging the question, for what purpose? Mr. Purvis is no longer around to answer any questions about this, but there are several of us here to whom he sent copies of his work on the topic. Perhaps one of the other recipients of the Purvis materials could explain this in greater detail.

Whenever I heard of Bobby Kennedy asking LBJ to place Dulles on the Warren Commission, it was in reference to LBJ's own words...and not Bobby Kennedy's words.

Mr. Trejo: So where was the rifle between the time LHO left New Orleans and October 4th? I'm guessing it did NOT go to Mexico with him.

Dr. Finck was Chief of Wound Ballistic Pathology at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, located in the Army Medical Museum and Library at Independence Avenue and 6th Street SW in Washington DC from 1877-1969. It closed its doors September 15, 2011. [Prior to 1877, it was located at the site of Ford's Theater...oddly enough.] i think that Dr. Finck's participation in the JFK autopsy, which was already in progress when he arrived, was an afterthought. I think that someone decided that Finck's mere presence would give the autopsy some legitimacy. After all, if his area of expertise was wound ballistics...then why were the autopsy doctors NOT dissecting bullet wounds to determine exact bullet paths BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT? Well, maybe THAT was because, as Finck testified in New Orleans, the autopsy doctors had orders NOT to do what a legitimate autopsy would've done. My point? That Dr. Finck was brought in NOT to actually participate in a legitimate autopsy, but to add a name that carried an impressive title to the sham of an autopsy that the most important man in America was given. We can argue from now until two weeks past doomsday about who gave the order NOT to dissect those wounds; since the order is not written, to our knowledge, we can only speculate...because that order is a baby whose father won't claim it.

Mr. Prudhomme, go to YouTube and pull up the Z-film. Concentrate on the film AFTER Z-313. Watch the various positions of JFK's head. Now assume, for the sake of this little exercise, that the head wound Pat Speer is talking about, actually occurred as he says it did. At what point could a shot from the 6th floor of the TSBD enter JFK's skull at the lower hairline and exit through the top of the head? I suggest such a wound could NOT have been from a bullet fired from the 6th floor. So help me try to figure where such a shot could have originated. Sure, it would've been from behind the limo...but since JFK didn't fall either straight forward, or slightly to the right, then the shot would also have to had been fired from somewhere to the right of the limo. Suspend your disbelief for a brief moment. Given the nature of the wound as described by Mr. Speer... do we agree that this is the ONLY way such a scenario is possible?

Hmmmm..."I LED THREE LIVES--he [Lee Oswald] became really engrossed in that particular TV show, and he was still watching it when I left to go into the Marine Corps in 1952." EXCEPT... "I Led Three Lives (also known as I Led 3 Lives) is an American drama series which was syndicated by Ziv Television Programs from October 1, 1953 to January 1, 1956." So it had never been on TV in 1952...And Lee Oswald never watched a single episode in 1952.

I think an EOP entrance would confirm a shot after Z313...and it would've had to have come from somewhere lower than the 6th floor of ANY building. I just watched a slow-motion version of the Z-film. After Z-313, JFK's body falls to the left in the limo. For a shot to enter on the right side of the hairline near the EOP, the shooter WOULD have to be behind JFK...but the shot couldn't have elevated much over the level of the Grassy Knoll...and for Jackie not to have been hit, I don't see that shot occurring before Z369 or so. That's just MY interpretation...and that's assuming the shooter responsible for the EOP entrance wound was NOT hiding in the storm drain.