Chuck Robbins

Not to be a smart-a__, but, this syndrome seems to be exhibited by some forum members as well. Of course, forum members are not subject to prosecution for revealing to the public that following direct orders from superiors caused "mistakes" to be made in the course of the autopsy. I expect some will argue this point with me? Maybe it is just a part of being human to deny things we do not wish to consider or believe?

Jack, I have posted countless times explaining that Sitzman's dress looks black in Bronson's photo because of the distance he is from the subject in relation to the sun as Zapruder is casting a shadow over her. The same thing happens in the Bell film when you look at all those people on the south pasture. Part's of them that are in direct sunlight shows the color of their clothing while the rest of them being shaded looks black in color. ask yourself why it is that the street in sunlight looks gray, but the parts of it in shadow looks black! So the fact is that I have addressed this over and over and you continue to make the same stupid mistakes over and over so to make something look altered when it isn't. This is exactly why Groden said what he did in the email I shared with this forum. Groden said that you are always wrong and that you have caused a great deal of damage to the researech community over this alteration nonsense. As far as Moorman's photo fitting exactly with the Bell film - this simply is not true, but rather you playing the "close enough" game. Bell was much higher elevated than Moorman was and Bell was off to the side of Mary's line of sight. We should know this when we align any two points of the same from both film sources and note that the background isn't seen the same way between photographer locations. You dopes keep using inferior images to where you start outlining artifacts to the point you start imagining images. It is this type of behavior that Groden commented on concerning the damage you have caused the research community by making CT's look like a bunch of incompetent boobs. If the things you jokers were saying was remotely so, then you'd be on CNN shouting these claims to the world, but you don't - why? The reason why you don't follow through with these alleged ground breaking discoveries is because you know them to be ridiculous and only worth polluting a forum such as this one with them. You guys should be ashamed of yourselves for your disregard for sound basic research practices. It has become a childs game for you boobs and so much so that one of you would say, "They're coming out of the woodworks." Bill. Dopes.....Incompetent Boobs.....Boobs......Jokers.....Alteration Nonsense? Is this really necessary? Bill...please, you're killing me! I am no expert on graphics, but, it seems to me that film from two different elevations, "much higher elevated" is how you described that difference, would not register in a manner which appears to be, as far as I can determine, virtually identical. The concept that film shot from different elevations and from different locations could possibly be aligned in this manner seems to be flawed reasoning. Could you describe for me how this synchronous imaging was accomplished from two very separate locations?

Whatever helps the forum is what is important. I support any action you feel is necessary. Including my own banishment if you feel that is the best course of action.

Good call Gary! All the negative input is distracting, at the least, and as for myself, a huge turnoff. Input should be able to be given by all without fear of the denegration dished out so often by those who hold other views. Stating one's point of view, minus any vitriol, would be a wonderful sight to behold. Personally, I don't need anyone to point out inconsistent or outrageous claims made on the forum. We all, occasionally, are in error.....this does not mean disinformation is the intention of those in error. I have yet to see anyone, on any forum, anywhere, who has never been wrong to some extent. As for myself? Many times I have been so wrong that it has taken quite a bit of guts for me to show my face again. But I have shown my face, and will continue to do so, because I believe that every now and then I have brought something important to light. If even one bit of new information, or a new viewpoint, is all anyone ever contributes....is that a bad thing? I think not.

Not speaking for Wim of course, but he's already addressed that in this thread: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=9242 ""Harvey and Lee" may have some good points, Lee was certainly impersonated by others to nail him as the patsy, but the core thesis that the Lee Harvey Oswald "defecting" to Russia, was another person than the one shot by Jack Ruby, is preposterous. In fact it can be easily disproven, with a voice tape of Lee in Russia that surfaced in recent years. It's the same voice that exclaimed "I'm just a patsy!"" The whole point of the research of Armstrong is to show that the LHO in Russia was the russian-speaking person who was sent in place of the true Oswald. Hoover himself contacted the State Dept., in an effort to obtain information regarding Oswald, because he had information concerning an imposter who was using Oswald's birth certificate. Since he contacted the State Dept. for information regarding this imposter it stands to reason he believed the Oswald in Russia was the imposter.

H. L. Jones, a Transient. H. L. Hunt, a Transient on a train. Curious information indeed.

Wim, At the moment I am forced to use my backup computer as my #1 suddenly developed a bad habit of burning up my powersupplies. 1 powersupply a week got to be a bit more than I was willing to deal with, so, I now have no sound card. Therefore, it would do me no good to view this video...as much as I would like to. I will be viewing that video as soon as I am able to. In the meantime, could you, perhaps, give a quick review of what information she discloses that sheds new light? I appreciate your input on this forum. Thank you.

yes this is exactlty what is happening and i am wondering whats up, also. not to mention what happened a couple of days ago when somehow the bandwidth was exceeded and i had to give up on trying to read posts muchless log in. i was following the wikipedia/cia discussion at the time, then abruptly could not get a connection to the server for some time before i gave up and went to bed. i thought this to be an unnerving occurance. These events are connected. We have witnessed a massive increase in "guest" traffic over the last 10 days knocking us offline on 3 separate occassions in the last week. I am forcing members to log in before the board is accessible for a little while so I can better monitor what has been going on. I assume you get the IP addresses for these guests? Hopefully this is a good sign which indicates newfound interest in this subject. If the bandwidth problem continues, and if it would help, could you require guests to login also?

ISN'T THIS ALL BECOMING JUST A LITTLE BIT RIDICULOUS? Seriously, nothing anyone says, which is designed to lessen someone elses stature on this forum, will change my thoughts or views regarding my beliefs about who was responsible...etc. etc. for the assassination of JFK. Anyone who seems intent upon minimizing anothers point of view regarding this event is doing all a disservice. We all have the faculties to determine, for ourselves, which statements, when made, or, which evidence, when presented, is within the realm of possibility. No matter what, ultimately, we all must decide for ourselves what evidence, whether "solid" or "anecdotal" is acceptable. I, for one, believe that much of what is accepted as evidence today is nothing more than fiction. The fox was guarding the henhouse. The fox, once the chicken was dead, was charged with investigating that death. Much of what shapes my opinions and beliefs is the evidence which was dismissed out of hand by the fox. Chest thumping while relying upon the so-called accepted evidence might not be the wisest course one could pursue. After all, can any one of us state, with absolute certainty, which evidence is credible and which is not?

I'd be very interested in anything else that can be turned up about it. I find it so consistent with everything I know about these weasels that the story they flogged about the back wound bullet coming out on a stretcher in Dallas due to manipulations of the body was actually their brand of "truth"—just moved from D.C. to Dallas and from an autopsy table to a stretcher. In other words, they absolutely love to take a truth and twist it and pervert it so it becomes a trap like flypaper for anybody who touches it. It's the truth in it that is the attraction, and it's the lies in it that are gooier than any tar. It's a sick, diseased sort of brilliance. Ashton OK, I found the files on my computer. Unfortunately, I still cannot upload anything with explorer or firefox...weird. So, I went to the site and searched it manually until i finally found the files which mention the "other bullet". Interesting stuff. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...p;relPageId=311 There are 4 pages. Hope you can find more regarding what happened to the bullet in question.

The date of origin shown for 2 of these documents is 11/26/63. There was no time for mail to be delivered, intercepted, translated and made available to the FBI by that date. Oswald was killed on a Sunday, I believe. Monday, the 25th, would have been the earliest any mail could have been placed into the U. S. mail system. I doubt very seriously that any mail, sent from any location except Dallas, could have been delivered by the 26th. Take a little time to examine the data these references contain. Do you still feel they are simply Ruby's "fan mail"? Notice the use of the name John in the subject title, while using Jack in the actual document. Perhaps this was done to help bury the document? The point I tried to make was simply that it appears that Oswald and Ruby were both able to read (and speak?) Hungarian. That, in my opinion, is very curious information indeed.

And this topic is now about what? LOL I guess these posts could qualify as projectiles of a sort? Are we done?

Listed in the national archives are FBI intercepts of letters to Jack Ruby which are in Hungarian. One document, which was translated, was from J. Jesus Angleton himself. Here are some of the listings. ORIGINATOR : CIA FROM : CIA TO : FBI TITLE : COVER SHEET FOR TWO PIECES OF MAIL (IN <b>HUNGARIAN</b>) INTERCEPTED FROM JOHN RUBY OF CHICAGO, ILLINOIS, PASSED ON TO THE FBI. DATE : 11/26/1963 PAGES : 1 DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER - TEXTUAL DOCUMENT SUBJECTS : MAIL INTERCEPT; RUBY, JACK CLASSIFICATION : SECRET RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL CURRENT STATUS : OPEN DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 08/13/1993 COMMENTS : JFK34 : F4 : 1993.08.13.14:30:30:840007 : PREVIOUSLY SANITIZED DOCUMENT. AGENCY : CIA RECORD NUMBER : 104-10127-10211 RECORDS SERIES : JFK AGENCY FILE NUMBER : 80T01357A <p> </p><center><h3>DOCUMENT INFORMATION</h3></center> ORIGINATOR : CIA FROM : ANGLETON, JAMES, CIA TO : DIR/FBI TITLE : HUNTER REPORT #10816 [iTEMS ADDRESSED TO JOHN RUBY WRITTEN IN <b>HUNGARIAN</b> TRANSLATED FOR FBI]. DATE : 11/26/1963 PAGES : 1 DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER - TEXTUAL DOCUMENT SUBJECTS : <b>HUNGARIAN</b>; RUBY, JACK CLASSIFICATION : SECRET RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL CURRENT STATUS : OPEN AGENCY : DOJ RECORD NUMBER : 179-20002-10008 RECORDS SERIES : CLASSIFIED SUBJECT FILE 129-11, OFFICIAL MAIL SECT. 14 <p> </p><center><h3>DOCUMENT INFORMATION</h3></center> ORIGINATOR : DOS FROM : AMLEGATION BUDAPEST TO : DEPARTMENT OF STATE TITLE : [No Title] DATE : 07/25/1966 PAGES : 3 DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL DOCUMENT SUBJECTS : ARTICLES ON ASSASSINATION IN <b>HUNGARIAN</b> NEWPAPER CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED RESTRICTIONS : REFERRED CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 00/00/0000 COMMENTS : BOX 56 AGENCY : HSCA RECORD NUMBER : 180-10039-10181 RECORDS SERIES : FBI CASE FILE AGENCY FILE NUMBER : 105-82555-3841 <p> </p><center><h3>DOCUMENT INFORMATION</h3></center> ORIGINATOR : FBI FROM : HOOVER, J. EDGAR TO : RANKIN, J. LEE TITLE : [No Title] DATE : 05/21/1964 PAGES : 1 DOCUMENT TYPE : LETTER SUBJECTS : OSWALD, LEE; " MAGYER ELET " (<b>HUNGARIAN</b> RIFLE) CLASSIFICATION : UNCLASSIFIED RESTRICTIONS : OPEN IN FULL CURRENT STATUS : OPEN DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 05/27/1993 COMMENTS : Box 24. Folder Title: Section 160. There are more. Magyar Elet is "Hungarian Life", not hungarian rifle. Whether this is the Hungarian version of LIFE magazine...I don't know for sure. If it is, Oswald read Hungarian as well? Ruby able to read Hungarian.....hmmmmm. What next?

Many is the time I have been verbally battered and browbeaten for having repeated that the FBI agents signed a receipt for A MISSILE. Once I present the opinion that an FBI Agent, a highly trained specialist, signs a document which contains specific language, such as the singular MISSILE present in that receipt, you can bet there was only ONE MISSILE when the object had been signed for, I am told that it was the fault of the (unnamed) navy corpsman who typed up the receipt. It's as if I am expected to just nod my head and say...yes, the FBI agents had no other option but to sign a form which they knew to be inaccurate simply because the form was one provided to them. Would it would have been so difficult for them to have created their own receipt? I think the answer is plain as day and to argue the point is to waste ones time. This receipt, after all, was part of their investigation into THE MURDER OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. To believe that they would then, under the watchful eye of J. E. Hoover, submit anything less than their very best work is ridiculous. One question I hope you might answer for me? If that document were presented into a court of law, as evidence, how would it's language be interpreted? I am very glad that someone who has the intelligence as well as the common sense that you exhibit has taken an interest in this case.

Was he murdered? He had agreed to give interviews to the media in order to promote his book that was due out in March. I can imagine that the CIA was pleased to hear of his death. John, The very first thought I had was that he was done in to keep his trap shut. It would be interesting to find out if his book undergoes any last minute editing. When he intrepidly voiced his opinion that LBJ "Was the man who had JFK killed", his time was short..very short. Maybe that was his way of bending his arm, with a fist at the elbow, and saying; so kill me, I'm still telling!

You know, there was an article in a newspaper years ago, which stated that the newspaper got a bullet from a Dr. who had taken it from JFK's autopsy. This paper made a huge squak about this piece of evidence, promised all sorts of testing would be done, etc., and in the end..the story just kind of went away. Maybe the Fink had a conscience after all? Too bad the newspaper learned the truth about "The Truth" in America... Paraphrasing Mr. Hunt...You don't have a right to know the truth..... I bet they were forced to drop everything.

I was playing poker online today when I saw players speaking in a foreign language. I saw these two words in a sentence...and I stopped thinking about poker altogether...hidd el. First I asked these men what the two words meant. I was told these words mean "Believe In". Then, I thought to ask them what language this was....I had a gut feeling I would be told Hungarian... It was Hungarian. Wasn't one photo of the "Mystery men" at the Embassy in Mexico supposedly identified as a Hungarian man? Personally, I think the name Hidell was given to remind him to believe in himself and what he was doing. Then again...what do I know?

Charlie, Of course it's possible. Sooner or later we will have the means to prove it. When that day comes, don't be surprised how many people will play ostrich. They will figuratively just bury their heads in the sand to ignore something which they would find very disturbing. Maybe the Ostrich, instead of the Eagle, should have been chosen as the symbol of America.

No apology necessary, Chuck. I must admit to occasional confusion when looking at US state/city abreviations. When I read your previous post about the car reportedly being stolen in "LA", I immediately assumed Los Angeles. This report was the one you seem to have been referring to in that prior post? If so, it's not entirely clear to me what your concern is. The car ended up back in Louisiana and was stolen on or about the 29th. Is there more to it than that? There is no report which indicates a time of theft. The date on that paper is the date the message was sent to Dallas. I don't understand why, 1week after the assassination, the LA authorities would feel compelled to report to the DPD that Jada's car had been stolen in LA. Did they expect the DPD to come find the car for them? Did they think someone had followed her from Dallas, stolen the car, and were, at that moment, en route to Dallas? It just makes no sense to me since she was not suspected of having been involved in JFK's assassination.. Maybe it was an attempt by Jada, to indicate that Jada was not in Dallas, since her car had been stolen from her in NO....? I have problems with scenarios which, in my opinion, don't make sense. Thanks for responding.....

These two documents indicate that Oswald had actually been in contact with Legat in Mexico City. The FBI lab RETURNED Oswald's "original" Tourist card to Legat after it had been examined. The next document is a list of questions which a Mr. Gale (Asst. Director) wanted answers to. Notice that he wanted to know why LHO, after he was known to have been in contact with Legat in Mexico, was not contacted. So, what kind of working arrangement would require LHO to give his original tourist card to Legat in Mexico City? Then, why would FBI agents have been expected to contact LHO upon his return from that meeting? Doesn't this sound like some type of spook work was being performed by Oswald and that his work involved interaction with CIA and FBI agents? I am certain some will say I am dead wrong.. They will say.that there must be an innocent explanation for these docs., but...where there is smoke..there is usually fire. I believe 1 of each of these were found in the Hsca and the WC docs. If that is wrong...inform me, please. Individually they might be explained away...together, they show "Oswald" was most likely working for either the FBI, CIA, or both, when he went to those Embassies...imho, of course. Let me state here and now that when I type "Oswald", in quotes, it indicates my belief that this was an imposter. Some think this person was working to set-up Oswald. I think it goes a bit deeper that that. This person was also working, perhaps unknowingly, to bring embarrassment upon the CIA station. What a blackeye that must have been for the CIA to have taken the bait which caused them to misidentify an allegedly unknown person as Lee (Henry) Harvey Oswald. The manner in which this deception was accomplished is telling. The results indicate the scheme was developed by someone with intimate knowledge of what types of surveillance were being used. The result? Tapes of "Oswald's" voice, and photos of "Oswald" were quickly gathered and processed, and, I believe that someone determined, from the data available to them regarding the real Oswald, that "Oswald's" actions were of no cause for alarm to the Agency. I cannot, of course, prove this to be a fact, so, I submit it as opinion only.

In that letter the prisoner said he could prove there was a "Harvey" - Ruby link. Curious that he called him Harvey before there ever was a thought of there being a "Lee" as well as a "Harvey" Oswald. Has anyone else read this letter? Is the prisoner's identity available? In his letter he says that when he gets out he will get Mrs. Oswald and "Harvey's" brother to join him in telling the stories of how Ruby was a frequent visitor to the Oswald home. He says Ruby hired LHO to kill JFK. The prisoner says he was supposed to have gone to the theatre with LHO that day, but, he decided not to go,and that LHO was trying to find him on the streets near the theatre. The letter was sent anonymously...but...can a letter sent from a prison ever truly be anonymous? Also- A statement was given by a lawyer, who, along with his client, who was a stripper, had gone to speak with Ruby about getting the girl hired on at the Carousel. In this statement he said a person he believed to be LHO had been asking Ruby for money up front for a "job" he was going to do. He said he had just got in from louisiana and needed money badly. This statement clearly states that LHO and Ruby spoke about a rifle, LHO shooting at someone with it, and LHO escaping out the back of Ruby's bar. Was the motorcade ever planned to take a possible route near the Carousel? There is much more in the statement that is worth reading, imho. So...did these people, whose identities had to have been known to the authorities, ever speak to the WC? Were their names ever made public? I will try to put the document numbers, or the documents themselves, here as soon as I find them again. Any comments or information regarding these two persons would be appreciated. The statement is very interesting and goes into very specific detail regarding the exchange he witnessed between Ruby and LHO.

Portion of Greg Parker post follows- The doc re the car being stolen in Californmia is in DPD archives folder 1 box 8 item 38. Repoduced below: THIS IS LSP BR GA PLS 9248 TWX 214-899-8553 1712 11-29-63 LSG BR DATA AND STLEN LA LIC 914-985 PLS CALL COLLECT OUR TWX PD DALLAS HENRY ACK PLS GA LSP BR REC GUARISCO I can decipher some of this, but not all... GA = Georgia LA-Los Angeles PLS=please TWX=Texas West Exchange? ACK=Acknowlwdge GUARISCO= A surname -End of Partial Greg Parker post. I believe the LA is Louisiana, where Jada was from. LSP is Louisiana State Police? The DPD had contacted authorities in Louisiana and I believe this report was part of their correspondence? I apologise for the hatchet job on his post, i forgot to leave the quote brackets in.

Stephen, McCarthy was recruited to be the anti-war candidate after RFK and others had turned down the role. When I was a 16 year old high school student, and didn't know any better, I enlisted in the McCarthy campaign, coordinating volunteers in South Jersey and Philadelphia. I assisted McCarthy's advance man in Atlantic City during an NAACP convention, and became part of McCarthy's national staff in Chicago the week before the convention. Working on the Special Projects Committee, which was assigned duties like establishing communications with McCarthy delegates on the floor of the convention (no phones) and other similar tasks. I was later tear gased by the national guard, beat by cops with clubs and arrested by what was later characterized by a Presidentential Commission on Civil Disorders as a "police riot." Since I was loyal to my candidate and competed against RFK, I was not a true RFK Believer, and despised George McGovern even more for trying to take over RFK's campaign and persona. The experience radicalized me politically, off the charts - as a non-partisan libertarian. The small regiment of a few thousand kids like me who came out for McCarthy - the poet-prince, in short order became hundreds of thousands who mobilized the anti-war demonstrations of the late 60s and early 70s and practically drove Nixon from office. By the time he was escourted from the White House he was in a constant state of fear that stemmed directly from his missappreciation of the power of a few people, like the first group of kids who came out for McCarthy - whose minor successes inspired RFK to run, ran off LBJ and eventually snuffed out the power of Nixon. So much for Nixon's fear factor. Bill Kelly bkjfk3@yahoo.com If only we could do something today which would obtain similar results with the current criminal in office.

None were found anywhere. And, the scratches along CE399 which the un-informed have claimed to represent a 6-groove bullet are in fact merely the scratches implied to the bullet by corrosion & crud (powder residue, bullet scraping; etc) inside the rifle barrel which usually end up down in the bottom two grooves of the barrel and thereafter cause parallel scratches along the round as it forces it's way over and across this corrosion & residue. IE: Poorly cleaned barrel and representative scratches on CE399 as a result of same. Lastly, the WCC 6.5mm Carcano ammo was issued by the box (20 rounds to the box) with no clips provided. Since LHO obtained his WCC ammo at some unknown location, it must be assumed that he also acquired his apparantly one and only Carcano clip there as well. We have no ammo box; we have no cleaning equipment; and we have no extra rounds. (other than #4 not fired & found) And, PPS. Inside each and ever box of ammo was found the following slip of paper which makes the production of this ammo about as clandestine as a pink elephant in the Wal-Mart Parking Lot. Perhaps more than you asked for? There was one report filed by a DPD officer which stated that LHO had a POCKET FULL OF BULLETS FOR THE RIFLE in his possession when arrested. Another stated he had pistol shells in his pocket when arrested. How did these guys get away with reporting this crap as facts? Since I believe this to be pure unadulterated horsedookie....I have to ask; why in the world is virtually every piece of "evidence" paired with a piece of, for lack of a better term, anti-evidence? Could it have been simply a means of preserving "evidence" which could be used to construct any scenario which might be needed at some later point in time? I, for one, instinctively distrust much of the BS which was passed off as "evidence" in this matter. Back to the rifle....where is there any real proof that LHO owned that MC? Heck, I would like to see anyone prove that he personally accepted it from his P.O. Box. Mr. Holmes in the Post Office gives me reason to doubt their records regarding LHO. I could go on and on, but, it would only serve to disrupt the topic.