Thomas Graves

Why are so many Forum members' photos missing? Just curious,..... --Thomas

Hi James. Yeh it looks to be the same Jim Braden look alike, but like you, i don't think it is him.! ______________________________________ Regarding post #16, yes that's definitely the same guy who was tentatively identified as Eugene Hale Brading in a well-known photo (below). The same "Al Davis"-type face, the same hat, the same X's on the same hatband, the same white shirt with tight collar, the same tightly-knotted dark tie. http://www.jfkresearch.freehomepage.com/MissedShot.htm (scroll down to other photo of him) --Thomas P.S. If you're wondering who Al Davis is, he's the owner of the Oakland Raiders football team.... ______________________________________

_______________________________________ I always had the impression that Gerry P. Hemming could speak German. He had a very interesting sense of humor, as well..... Hmm.

_________________________ bump

_______________________________ Why the apostrophe? _______________________________

____________________________________ I know that this is probably a stupid question, but what the hell... Which firing location would have been 45 degrees above the lower-head (entrance) and throat (exit) wound, and would have been possible from the left-to-right angle as well? Thanks, --Thomas ____________________________________

Pamela, The short answer is that there were no misses inside the limo. These shots were not difficult at all. Mike Mike, I hear this mantra all the time now about the shots not being difficult. If they were so easy, why has no one ever been able to duplicate them? The government tried, CBS tried, and each time they used better shooters, as well as making the conditions easier for them. Still, they could never match the feat of this "rather poor shot," as Oswald was grudgingly described by a Marine Corps spokesman to the Warren Commission. So, apparently they weren't that easy. __________________________________ I guess Oswald got really lucky. LOL --Thomas __________________________________

deleted by T. Graves

I disagree with all sorts of particulars in the essay below. Yet I regard it as one of the most important contributions to an adult understanding of the case. It goes a deal of the way to answering your question. Paul The Design of the Warren Report - to Fall to Pieces by Vincent J. Salandria Introduction – 1999 After re-reading this twenty-two year old piece, I would not change much. My current judgment is that events seem to bear out that the military did in fact join with the Eastern establishment and the U.S. intelligence services in the conspiracy to kill and to obfuscate the reasons for the killing of President John F. Kennedy. The bloated U.S. military budget, in the absence of credible enemies, convincingly speaks to the rich benefits derived by the military and to the military-industrial complex for their role in the assassination of JFK. The killing of President Kennedy and the layers of transparent conspiratorial contradictory explanations for this killing disseminated by our Eastern establishment and its mainstream media enabled the national security state to increase its hold over political power and the economy domestically and globally. This power structure used the killing of President Kennedy and the false debate over it to extend its capacity to frame and to shape the current thinking of our citizens. By achieving an understanding of the true reasons for the killing of President Kennedy we will be able to free ourselves from the Orwellian paralysis of thinking which grips our people. The Design of the Warren Report - to Fall to Pieces Reprinted with permission from People and the PURSUIT of Truth, April 1977. Copyright © 1977 by and published by Berkeley Enterprises Inc., 515 Washington St., Newtonville, Massachusetts 02160. fp.htmlfp.html Return to Main Page __________________________________ Mr. Rigby, Interesting post, but what in the heck does it have to do my original post? Perhaps you should have started your own thread. __________________________________

Something I've always wondered about-- Why would the CIA or the DPD (or whomever) create photos, ostensibly of LHO, in which the subject ends up appearing to be leaning so impossibly far to his right as to make the photos look fake? Did someone want them to look bogus or was it just incompetence? --Thomas

_______________________________________________ A Question For John Simkin, John, would it be possible for you to re-post the two photos, or have they disappeared into a digital blackhole from which they can never be extracted/reconstituted? There are probably a lot of people who are relatively new members of the forum and/or visitors to the forum who have not seen the photo comparison which was so kindly posted for me by James back on 01/18/07. Thank you, --Thomas __________________________________________ bump

_______________________________________________ A Question For John Simkin, John, would it be possible for you to re-post the two photos, or have they disappeared into a digital blackhole from which they can never be extracted/reconstituted? There are probably a lot of people who are relatively new members of the forum and/or visitors to the forum who have not seen the photo comparison which was so kindly posted for me by James back on 01/18/07. Thank you, --Thomas

_________________________________________________ John, Just out of curiousity, was Scott a Republican or a Democrat? --Thomas _________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________ James, Jack, Ron, Peter, et al In the photos that James posted in post #12, it's interesting to note that the collar of Michael Paine is turned up, as is the collar of "Frenchy." Hmmm. Since it was around 73 degrees Fahrenheit in "Big D" when the "Tramps" were paraded through Dealy Plaza around 2 o'clock that afternoon, one can only wonder why "Frenchy" had his collar turned up. Because he was cold? (LOL) Because he wanted to make a "fashion statement?" (LOL) Because, like Michael Paine, he was in the habit of turning his collar up? Hmmm......... Was "Frenchy" Michael Paine? Was "Frenchy" someone who was masquerading as Michael Paine. Or....?? Hmmmm............ FWIW, --Thomas _________________________________________________________

_____________________________________________ James, Great post. As we all know, Ron Ecker thinks the dude walking past the tramps might be Gen. Maxwell Taylor.... (My dad keeps saying that someday he's going to introduce me to his buddy Krulak whom he met during the Korean War. He actually called Krulak a few weeks ago to see if it was OK for us to come by to visit him at his house, but unfortunately "Brute" had another social engagement that particular day. Bummer.) Are you at liberty to divulge the name of the Cuban guy you think might have been the first tramp? Thanks, --Thomas _____________________________________________

_____________________________________________________ Hi James, You know I highly respect your research and beliefs regarding the assassination. Any thoughts on who the first tramp was? Thanks, --Thomas _____________________________________________________

Way too late. Jack ___________________________________________ The subject appears to be wearing a dress and to be a lot more robust in the "posterior" and the upper torso than DCM. For what it's worth, --Thomas ___________________________________________

___________________________________ Works for me, too, Greg. --Thomas ___________________________________

________________________________________ That's "Yugoslavia," not "Youglalvica." LOL ________________________________________

Darn it!! I left out the cattle prod remark! Gee-- tortured, prodded, and left for dead! Faith must be one heck of a nurse!!!! Also no hospital records. Wim, you would've probably got more return on your money if you would've sent Faith to nursing school--she obviously has a gift for restoring health, and Lord knows, we could use more "Faith healers". Kathy PS: I didn't think some of the mmmmms were affirmatives, I thought that they could've been hmmmms. _________________________________ mmmms and hymns---hallejujah! _________________________________

____________________________________________________ Because he'd been a bad boy? --Thomas ____________________________________________________

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=3 (posted on this thread a few months ago by Greg Parker) _____________________ Bump. Check out the fascinating document that Greg posted via the "link." Any theories?. Thanks. --Thomas _____________________

Not unusual - just stupid! And what shooter ... you asked this question and showed this photo in relation to questions about Oswald's escape route .... what relevance is a photo of the RR yard 25 years after the assassination?? I mean, what kind of a screwball purposely tries to go off-topic and will post a dark hazy image with a small crop of someones head inserted into it and then hints that a dark area may be a shooter. I actually asked another researcher just what in the heck did he think you were trying to do and he replied, "Certainly not trying to advance the case in JFK's assassination." Such a waste of time IMO. And what about some joker posting an Allen photo and wrongly calling it a Murry photo. Then you assert that I cannot find Ozzie ... who is 'Ozzie'??? And where have you been all these years ... the claim that Oswald is seen in that photo was debunked a long time ago, so there is no Oswald to find in that photo. So rather than to post about the need to use clearer prints for interpretations over poor grainy images ... you brought this nonsense to the table. You make a sham out of this forum and yet their seem to be no rules against you doing it .... so xxxxx on Miles. Bill Miller _______________________________ Bill, Good post. Thanks, --Thomas _______________________________ With respect Thomas, not a good post at all, just more blowhard stuff from Bill because he failed to understand the point of Miles post, and his blood must be boiling over because I understood it. Bill self proclaims that he is an expert interpreter of the content of individual photographs at the scene of the JFK assassination, sunlight and foliage effects appearing to the favourite self proclaimed topic on which he believes he is an expert. Craig Lamson slaughtered him on the subject recently. Miles did a simple test to evaluate Bill's ovservational skills, and he failed miserably, I passed. He also argued with me that it was not Gary Mack in a photograph. Gary corrected him on the matter, proving I was correct. Bill claims Hatman is in Wilis, but fails to produce the evidence. He relies mainly on backup from researcher Robert Groden who is renowned for his blunders, OJ'S shoes, the Pyracantha assassin etc etc. He accuses me of using fuzzy and blurred images, yet decides to copy what he says is my Moorman ( it's not ) to his computer and tells me and everyone on this forum that he used it as part of his research. He fails to notice that the Gordon Arnold has been altered in the Moorman which he used. He continually says in almost every thread that " A well known researcher told me " but he never names them LOL!! Yes Thomas, a magnificent post fit for the trashcan. Duncan ______________________________________ Duncan, Very good post. Thanks for the summary and the "clarification." --Thomas ______________________________________

Not unusual - just stupid! And what shooter ... you asked this question and showed this photo in relation to questions about Oswald's escape route .... what relevance is a photo of the RR yard 25 years after the assassination?? I mean, what kind of a screwball purposely tries to go off-topic and will post a dark hazy image with a small crop of someones head inserted into it and then hints that a dark area may be a shooter. I actually asked another researcher just what in the heck did he think you were trying to do and he replied, "Certainly not trying to advance the case in JFK's assassination." Such a waste of time IMO. And what about some joker posting an Allen photo and wrongly calling it a Murry photo. Then you assert that I cannot find Ozzie ... who is 'Ozzie'??? And where have you been all these years ... the claim that Oswald is seen in that photo was debunked a long time ago, so there is no Oswald to find in that photo. So rather than to post about the need to use clearer prints for interpretations over poor grainy images ... you brought this nonsense to the table. You make a sham out of this forum and yet their seem to be no rules against you doing it .... so xxxxx on Miles. Bill Miller _______________________________ Bill, Good post. Thanks, --Thomas _______________________________

___________________________________ James, Fascinating photo! The image on the clipboard does look like a photo of a person, perhaps a mugshot? (BTW, it looks like the passenger's window is rolled all the way up, but hard to say for sure. What do you think? And where in the heck did you find this great photo?) Thanks, --Thomas ___________________________________