Thomas Graves

Dear Mr. Josephs, The whole point is that the photos in your study are, unfortunately, inconclusive regarding whether or not all of the hands in them are LHO's. Why? Well, due to the fact that different focal planes, lighting conditions, printed resolutions, comparative sizings, focal lengths of the lenses, etc, are incorporated/portrayed in those photographs, not to mention the fact that one of the photographs is a photo of a somewhat squashed hand-print. I personally would like to believe that Oswald's face was pasted (or whatever) onto the body of another man in the backyard photos, but I refuse to seriously entertain what I consider to be amateurish and biased "analysis" or "study" of any part of those same backyard photos. Sincerely, --Tommy PS: By the way, David, I'd like to make a friendly observation and suggestion. When you wrote above, "I've address [sic] that mistake repeatedly," it made me wonder if you ever proof read your posts to address any English language mistakes before you post them for the whole world to see.

David, Please understand that on this thread I'm only concerned with your apparent belief that you have posted definite photographic proof that Oswald's hands were faked in the back yard photographs. My argument is that the resolution is so fuzzy as to make it impossible to say whether or not they were faked. Perhaps we should just agree to disagree, and leave it at that? Sincerely, --Tommy I never said Oswald's hands were faked... you did. I am saying that the person who's hands are holding the rifle/newspaper in the BYPs is not the same person whose face is in those photos. Body = person 1 Hands = person 1 Face = person 2 Dear Mr. Josephs, If the head/face of person B were to be superimposed/pasted/spliced/(or whatever-word-you-want-to-use) onto/over/on the body/torso and hands of person A in a composite final-product photograph, couldn't one say that the body/torso and hands had been "faked" for person B, taking the word "faked" in its broadest meaning? In retrospect I should have said, "On this thread I'm only concerned with your opinion that you have posted definite photographic proof that the hands in the backyard photographs are not Oswald's." I'll try to chose my words a little more carefully for you next time. Sorry. Sincerely, --Tommy P.S. Color coded especially for you. Bumped especially for DJ because he either hasn't read it yet or if he has, well..., he just doesn't seem to "get" the fact that I actually do understand what he's trying to say. --Tommy

Yes, Len! The fingers are thicker in the fuzzy "Backyard" photograph and in the one in which LHO (or his altered double?!) is waving from the train window, high above the camera and therefore at an angle quite different from the other photographs, making his fingers look shorter, too! LOL --Tommy

Don, That's much better Thank you. Even better, IMHO, would be: "David's recent posting of photographs on this forum, all of which show hands which may or may not all be Oswald's -- Impossible to determine due to poor resolution, different angles, etc." (LOL) Thanks, --Tommy

Dear Mr. Jeffries, David's new study of the hands? You've got to be kidding. --Tommy

Jimbo, I thought it was a reasonable question and I asked it in an attempt to encourage discussion about Oswald's actions in Mexico City from an intelligence or counter intelligence operative's point of view. Thank you for your excellent response (this post). Yes, really. So if, as you say, it was not necessary for LHO to think that "somehow all this stuff" (to discredit the FPCC?) "would somehow get into the news cycle," then I wonder if LHO believed he was in Mexico City to discredit the FPCC or if he though he was there for some other known-to-him reason (yes, I realize that my question is based on the questionable premise that he was in Mexico City). Is it plausible to think that, if he was in MC, he didn't know why he was there and was "just following orders"? -or- Could he have been sent there on the pretext of "testing the LI/ENVOY system" for Bill Harvey or James Jesus Angleton? -or- Could he he have thought he was sent there as a counter-intelligence "dangle" directed towards a foreign intelligence agent working in the Soviet or the Cuban Embassy? --or- If he was in MC, and if he was there "because of" the planned upcoming assassination, did he know that? If "yes," then in my mind that opens up two distinct possibilities: 1) he was there as a bad guy who wanted to participate in the planing of the JFK assassination and the implicating of Castro, or 2) he was there as an official (or free-lance?!) "secret agent" whose mission was to penetrate the assassination conspiracy. Either way he was, as we know, manipulated into being the patsy. But his thinking that he was in MC just to go to the Soviet and Cuban embassies in order to somehow eventually discredit the FPCC doesn't make sense to me because it wouldn't have made sense to him. Sincerely, --Tommy edited and bumped

David, Please understand that on this thread I'm only concerned with your apparent belief that you have posted definite photographic proof that Oswald's hands were faked in the back yard photographs. My argument is that the resolution is so fuzzy as to make it impossible to say whether or not they were faked. Perhaps we should just agree to disagree, and leave it at that? Sincerely, --Tommy I never said Oswald's hands were faked... you did. I am saying that the person who's hands are holding the rifle/newspaper in the BYPs is not the same person whose face is in those photos. Body = person 1 Hands = person 1 Face = person 2 Dear Mr. Josephs, If the head/face of person B were to be superimposed/pasted/spliced/(or whatever-word-you-want-to-use) onto/over/on the body/torso and hands of person A in a composite final-product photograph, couldn't one say that the body/torso and hands had been "faked" for person B, taking the word "faked" in its broadest meaning? In retrospect I should have said, "On this thread I'm only concerned with your opinion that you have posted definite photographic proof that the hands in the backyard photographs are not Oswald's." I'll try to chose my words a little more carefully for you next time. Sorry. Sincerely, --Tommy P.S. Color coded especially for you.

Dear David, Really? You would? Why? Sincerely, --Tommy I'd prefer not to have this descend into a slanging match. I simply cannot understand the faith that is placed on the Yates story given the evidence. I have explained that I'm not going to deal with the particular individual directly because he brings out the worst side of my character but I am interested in any evidence that counteracts what is available and written into the record. I am not convinced that clinging to the Yates story and claiming it as factual does anything positive for this community because the evidence suggests the opposite of what is being claimed. If there is more to the story, and I am aware of later snippets of an interview with Dororthy Yates but believe they do not counteract my conclusion, then I genuinly want to hear it. It doesn't matter to me whether it is David Von Pein spreading unsupportable views or a member critical of the official story. If it's unsupportable then it's unsupportable. The difference between this situation and situations that occur here where tentative ideas or proposals are posted and debated, is the fact that the Yates hitch hiker story seems to accepted as gospel and any criticism of it is met by stoney silence. Almost as if I've turned against my own. Let's deal with the issue objectively and constructively... Lee, I agree with you that factual support-ability is what it's all about, whether it's coming from a "lone nutter" or a "conspiracy theorist." Although I'm a CTer myself, I'm probably harder on my fellow CTers that I am on Lone Nutters. It's a thankless, dirty job, but someone's gotta try to help us be as factual and accurate as possible. IMHO, the best researchers are those who can not only incorporate "the facts" into their theory, but are also able to deal with, or at least acknowledge, any and all "inconvenient" accompanying facts, and not just sweep them under the rug or subtly change them. FWIW, I used to believe the Yates story, although I did see potential problems with him and it. Thank you for confirming my doubts about his (possible) fantasies and the questionable timing of the telling his story to the authorities. --Tommy

Dear David, Really? You would? Why? Sincerely, --Tommy

bump

David, Please understand that on this thread I'm only concerned with your apparent belief that you have posted definite photographic proof that Oswald's hands were faked in the back yard photographs. My argument is that the resolution is so fuzzy as to make it impossible to say whether or not they were faked. Perhaps we should just agree to disagree, and leave it at that? Sincerely, --Tommy

I don't think there's an event in contemporary American history that Terri "Forrest Gump" Williams couldn't "enlighten" you on, Paul. The woman has interacted with every U.S. mass murderer, terrorist, assassin and serial-killer since 1960... ****************BEGIN LUNACY************************ SUNDAY, JULY 04, 2004 DC Snipers In an emergency shelter, in Vancouver's DTES (Downtown Eastside), I met the mother and wife of the 'DC Snipers'. She asked me one day if I would meet her husband, that he really wanted to meet me. I had no idea why, except I had just come back from LA where I lived homeless and could relate to the woman's plight. She had two little girls with her and was homeless in a new country. I felt for her, while understanding what life was like where she came from. I had said to her, "Americans are really rough on each other". Apparently she and her husband agreed with me. She introduced her son and husband to me in front of the shelter entrance as John, her husband & John, her son. I joked that I would get confused in the DTES with two John's. So her son introduced himself as John Malvo and his father as John Muhammed. The father wanted me to know what he planned to do and wanted proof of our meeting, so in early July 2002, the only time I ever met the man, John Muhammad told me of his plans in front of the surveillance camera of the shelter. He must have wanted the proof to be there, that we met and that he did tell me what he was about to do. The footage WAS there when I emailed FBI about where they could find PROOF the DC Snipers WERE in Vancouver. They found it and the bad cop was retired, not sent to prison for allowing the murder of Americans to be carried out. If I were the relatives of those victims, I'd sue that cop. John Muhammad seemed to be very angry and frustrated with the way of life for the poor and blacks in 'America'. I had just comeback from LA where I was homeless and could not help but agree with him. The rich deny the poor human respect (let alone life) while catering to the wealthy and corporate (criminals). Although Muhammed's way was not my idea of how to solve things. I do not think that killing anyone is the answer, I do understand how someone could reach the state of wanting to kill; so much injustice is done to the poor and no one who could care, would, or would even be allowed to care. But murder? No, not me. Many people were murdered in my hometown in Mississippi in the 50's, 60's and beyond. No one has ever been convicted of ANY of the deaths as far as I know. The deaths were not even considered deaths by the authorities back then, because the victims were not white and even if they were, that too would be kept hush-hush. No one reported black people who went missing and if anyone tried, no report was ever taken by the white police officers of Mississippi in it's dark heyday of hatred. Those people simply disappeared, no questions asked. (and I do mean No questions) Yet murder is never the answer, even in response to murder. Justice is. There are those (white Klansmen) in my hometown who have gotten away with serial murder, even assassination; they need to be brought to justice. I will do my part, but it is, as always, up to the authorities to DO something about it. Why should it take so long? John Muhammad proceeded to tell me of his plan to have his son tucked into the trunk of a car to shoot and kill Americans, even acting it out by pretending to shoot a rifle as we talked. I became fearful that since he knew I was an American, my life could be in danger too. I looked around as he talked and noticed that the man could get a good shot at me from any rooftop in the neighbourhood, so I went along with him, to lessen the chances he would shoot me first. I mentioned to him that there were plenty of KKK in Mississippi who are guilty of murders they will never be convicted for. The FBI in Seattle were guilty for LAUGHING when I tried to tell them about the 911 attackers (See Fatwah) I had met in Canada in 1999. I mentioned this to him to lessen the chance he would shoot me first. It really wasn't the time to start lecturing the man on the moral conduct. I could tell the boy was afraid of his father too. What can you do when you are 17, know that if police don't listen and it could cost you your life in trying to tell them? What would you do if there was no police you could turn to and nowhere to escape this man, but the streets? A few days later I saw John Malvo sleeping on the church steps at the corner of Gore and Cordova Streets in Vancouver's DTES. I went up to him and asked if he was all right and if he wanted some help. He was curled up in a sleeping bag in front of the locked door of 'God's' empty House. He smiled sweetly and said he was all right. I could tell he wasn't; I saw the fear in his eyes, so I walked across the street to the back of the British Columbia courthouse where there was the big, white, grey-haired Vancouver Police Department (VPD) officer#___, an officer, unknownst to me, with a BAD reputation even amongst his coworkers. I figured a man of his stature and position could do something to help John Malvo and stop John Muhammad before he left Canada and murdered Americans. I explained to the officer what Muhammad had said he planned to do and told him the man had a rifle with him. Then I asked for his assistance for the boy saying, "The boy needs help to get away from his father. Please can you help him? I believe his father intends to carry out the threat he made to me". The big cop, with the character of a pitbull, laughed and walked off at the mention of Americans in danger. He refused to help. There was nothing more I could do, but I had tried. I felt strongly John Malvo had no choice but to go along with his father. The police officer should have helped. It was his job. You just can't be that ignorant and still be a good cop, it is scientifically impossible. Let's all pray VPD have regained their moral code of ethics and now employ a few good cops who can diligently pursue the bad ones that do exist. Let's all pray VPD get over their admitted "indifference" to the plight of the not-so-rich. Let's all pray that independent investigations of police misconduct becomes a reality, everywhere. Let's all be thankful the big, crooked cop is "retired". Who took his place? © Terri Williams MysTerri@gmail.com Links Zodiac Killer Fatwah Petition to Out-law Police Self-investigation POSTED BY TERRI WILLIAMS AT 9:09 AM 5 COMMENTS: mauricebenson2317 said... This comment has been removed by a blog administrator. 1:35 PM EYEZ said... First of all these "MURDERERS" are'nt snipers. The communist media we have in this country "TAGGED" them snipers for ratings. I have killed deer with a rifle at 420 yds. that does'nt make me a sniper. Distance of a kill doesnt mean anyhting. Snipers are highly trained and skilled people who have a duty and job to protect and serve, not maim and murder. Snipers are also highly screened and tested before being accepted into the training schools, military or police. So not just any " nutt job" can make it in. It is a total insult to the craft and to those who have earned the title of " SNIPER," to have a couple of islamic racist pigs be called after their craft. So get it right, those DC thugs are nothing more than human trash and deserving of the needle. 1:35 PM shawnhunor6167028069 said... This comment has been removed by a blog administrator. 4:39 PM Terri Williams said... I wonder how well they tested Albert Lee Lewis. 12:24 PM Terri Williams said... I bet you don't know who Albert Lee Lewis is. 10:09 PM Post a Comment Home Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom) http://dcsnipersinca...dc-snipers.html ****************END OF LUNACY**************************************** Paul Trejo is welcome to Terri Williams. They make a great research team and I sincerely hope that they continue to "enlighten" each other over the coming weeks. Lee, Gullibility combined with a sense of insecurity makes it easy for someone to be manipulated into spewing out what amounts to disinformation. Kinda like a "bot" computer. --Tommy

Dear David, Do I think? Yeah. And I'm really really good at the recognition of different colors, but only when they're presented to me inside circular geometric objects. I think what you're saying is that, due to your belief that the backyard photos are fake, the hands in the photos must be fake. I think that your belief clouds your photographic "analysis" of the hands. (And I proofread my posts before and after I post them, too.) Sincerely, --Tommy

Dear Jim, Thank you for your considered, but unfortunately somewhat ambiguous, response. Question: You would never do what "such a thing"? Sincerely, --Tommy P.S. Did I paraphrase you incorrectly when I accused you of misquoting "Butch" Burroughs in Probe, you know, regarding the time frame in which Burroughs saw Oswald in the Texas Theater? http://www.ctka.net/reviews/dead_men.html Please correct me if I did. After all, as you have pointed out, I've made more than my fair share of (honest) mistakes, and I willingly admit it.

Jimbo, I thought it was a reasonable question and I asked it in an attempt to encourage discussion about Oswald's actions in Mexico City from an intelligence or counter intelligence operative's point of view. Thank you for your excellent response (this post). Yes, really. So if, as you say, it was not necessary for LHO to think that "somehow all this stuff" (to discredit the FPCC?) "would somehow get into the news cycle," then I wonder if LHO believed he was in Mexico City to discredit the FPCC or if he though he was there for some other known-to-him reason (yes, I realize that my question is based on the questionable premise that he was in Mexico City). Is it plausible to think that, if he was in MC, he didn't know why and was "just following orders"? -or- Could he have been sent there on the pretext of "testing the LI/ENVOY system" for Bill Harvey or James Jesus Angleton? -or- If he was in MC, and if he was there "because of" the planned upcoming assassination, did he know that? If "yes," then in my mind that opens up two distinct possibilities: 1) he was there as a bad guy who wanted to participate in the planing of the JFK assassination and the implicating of Castro, or 2) he was there as an official (or free-lance?!) "secret agent" whose mission was to penetrate the assassination conspiracy. Either way he was, as we know, manipulated into being the patsy. But his thinking that he was in MC just to go to the Soviet and Cuban embassies in order to somehow eventually discredit the FPCC doesn't make sense to me because it wouldn't have made sense to him. Sincerely, --Tommy

Dear Jim, The reason I moved my above post to this thread is because David Josephs complained, in so many words, that all this talk about "the hands" (although he had originally posted "the hands" photos on that thread!) was distracting people from the subject of Edwin Ortiz's fine thread-- How Many Rifles Were Found On The Sixth Floor? The reason I'm pursuing this hands thing with Mr. Josephs is because I think all researchers should be held accountable or at least questioned for making statements which are only marginally supportable, or worse, downright unsupportable. I mean, I read in an article you wrote in Probe where you stated that Texas Theater employee "Butch" Burroughs said that he saw Oswald in the theater "at 1:00." If you'll watch the youtube video interview of Burroughs you'll see that he says that Oswald slipped into the theater sometime between 1:00 and 1:07. Unfortunately you only weaken your credibility with the critically-minded CT research community by making statements that are only half true, wittingly or unwittingly. I do admire your exuberance and all, Jimbo, but I think that sometimes you don't do enough fact checking, or you "spin" the facts a bit too much for your own good and that sometimes you are just a wee bit too gullible. Sincerely, --Tommy P.S. Like Lee Farley, I don't believe in the Yates story either.

Dear Mr. Josephs, Please elaborate. Thank you, --Tommy [...] Please stop trying to make this about his hands... the hands being different is only one small part of MANY MANY reasons the BYPs are not possible. (emphasis added by T. Graves) Thanks (David Josephs) Dear David, Thank you so much for your tutorial on color recognition (in the Edwin Ortiz thread "How Many Rifles Were Found On The Sixth Floor") as it applies to circular geometric objects. Truly profound and not condescending or insulting in the slightest. For your information, I do want to (and tend to) believe that the backyard photographs are fakes. However, when "analyzing" different parts of the photos, I try to do so dispassionately, without letting my wishes and tentative beliefs interfere. Perhaps you should do the same? Perhaps the reason the fingers look thicker in one photo than in another is because the resolution in that blow up is quite bad? Just an idea. And BTW, it was not I who originally posted the photos of the hands on your thread. It was you. Sincerely, --Tommy

Not wanting to derail Edwin Ortiz's thread regarding the number of rifles found on the sixth floor, my response to Mr. Josephs has been moved to Len Colby's new thread-- "David Josephs' LHO 'Hands From The Day Of Arrest And From The BYP... Simply Do Not Match.' " --Tommy

John, Not to mention the perspective problem caused by the photographer being below Oswald in the "Russian train" photo. This put the palm of Oswald's hand closer to the camera than his fingers, thereby making his fingers look shorter than they actually were. --Tommy I'm bumping this in an attempt to encourage David Josephs into finally revealing to us specifically why he thinks the hands in the photographs are so "clearly different." To me all the hands look sufficiently similar to possibly be from the same person, i.e. LHO. --Tommy

Robert, I think you meant to say Richard A. Sprague? --Tommy

John, Not to mention the perspective problem caused by the photographer being below Oswald in the "Russian train" photo. This put the palm of Oswald's hand closer to the camera than his fingers, thereby making his fingers look shorter than they actually were. --Tommy

Dear Mr. Josephs, Please elaborate. Thank you, --Tommy

Anthony, Good observation. Maybe it's William "Tosh" Plumlee? --Tommy

I agree with you, Greg. It's ABSOLUTELY LUDICROUS and BEYOND INSANITY that very few people see it the way we see it. ABSOLUTELY MIND-BOGGLING! Anyone who disagrees with us is OBVIOUSLY an idiot, a conspirator, or a shill !!!!!!!!!!!!!! --Tommy

Paul, Although I consider myself a Conspiracy Theorist, I agree with you on this. Your post above is very well written, too. Unlike the posts of some of the other members of this forum (not you, Steven Kossor), this one is actually intelligible. --Tommy