Dean Hagerman

Just curious though why aren’t you willing to go to the thresher for the person Fetzer claimed was "the leading technical expert on the film"

Because in TGZFH I found a certain part of Costellas chapter appendix to be a little much in the paranoia department (Im sure you know what im talking about)

And I have stated before, I dont use his combined edit of the Z-film because I have the MPI for the sprocket area and Grodens Z-film for every frame

Thats all, nothing sinister

Curious, has the "dear leader"Jack White denounced that paranoia or does he embrace it?

Jack didnt write that part of TGZFH, if he agrees with Costella on it then thats fine with me, I dont think Costella should have included page 222-238 at all, thats just my opinion

Jack was attacked in his home and seriously injured, so I think he has reason to be a little more suspicious then most other people

And Craig I dont know how many times I have to tell you I dont agree with everything Jack has done, I dont agree with everything in TGZFH

You think because I agree with any part in a book or any part of someones research that I believe EVERYTHING in that book or what that researcher has done

I have my own theory

I have my own research

Yes lots of my theory has to do with alteration, but that is one part of my theory

In the real world you are allowed to agree with someone on one point, but then disagree with that same person on another point

In Craigsters world if you agree with a researcher on one point then what ever that researcher says for the rest of his life no matter what it is you are linked to him and every theory

I would love to give you my theory Craig, you would be very suprised to see how much I disagree with other alterationists (on certain aspects)

But I feel it would be a waste of time because you dont care about the assassination

Lets see how deano does here.

Len asks:

"Just curious though why aren’t you willing to go to the thresher for the person Fetzer claimed was "the leading technical expert on the film"

deano:

"Because in TGZFH I found a certain part of Costellas chapter appendix to be a little much in the paranoia department (Im sure you know what im talking about)"

deano dumps all of Costella's work because he thinks he is wrong on a SINGLE item he presents.

The deano tells us:

"In the real world you are allowed to agree with someone on one point, but then disagree with that same person on another point."

So which is it deano? Or do you just believe???

deano says:

"In Craigsters world if you agree with a researcher on one point then what ever that researcher says for the rest of his life no matter what it is you are linked to him and every theory"

You see its not about agree or disagree deano, it about correct or incorrect. Intellectual honestry and intellectual dishonesty.

There is nothing with making an error and maning up and admitting it. Thats intellectual honesty. Making a claim, having it proven wrong by unimpeachable, experiment emprical evidence, and then continuing to claim you are still correct, that is intellectual dishonesty.

If you do not admit your error, more so if you claim expert status, everything you will ever produce is tainted. You are an intellectualy dishonest actor.

Also if you you are not the creator of the work that has been proven wrong, but you continue to promote it, knowing it is wrong ( and remember we are not talking about opinions here but articles that can be tested and proven) you too are intellectual dishonest and everything you say is tainted.

Bunnies in the clouds coulds opinion. Stating, based on physics, a tilted pole cannot change angle when you move the camera is not opinion. It can be tested and shown correct or incorrect.

And thats the point deano. You judge the credibility of a person by thier body of work and their intellectual honesty or lack thereof. It does not matter which "side" someone is on, what matters is that that deliver honest information. You won't find many JFK cts who actually work like this. Too many slaves to a warped worldview to ever let the truth ruin their 'belief"

We don't know about you just yet. You say you don't just believe and then you turn around and tell us you THINK Jack is correct "most of the time"

Time is gonna tell on that score, when we see your work, if that ever happens. I'm not holding my breath.

Don't bother with your assassination "theory". They are like assshats, everyone has one and they all stink.

Craig you are the master BSer

Its almost like taking peoples words and mixing them around to your likeness is an art to you

Just curious though why aren’t you willing to go to the thresher for the person Fetzer claimed was "the leading technical expert on the film"

Because in TGZFH I found a certain part of Costellas chapter appendix to be a little much in the paranoia department (Im sure you know what im talking about)

And I have stated before, I dont use his combined edit of the Z-film because I have the MPI for the sprocket area and Grodens Z-film for every frame

Thats all, nothing sinister

Curious, has the "dear leader"Jack White denounced that paranoia or does he embrace it?

Jack didnt write that part of TGZFH, if he agrees with Costella on it then thats fine with me, I dont think Costella should have included page 222-238 at all, thats just my opinion

Jack was attacked in his home and seriously injured, so I think he has reason to be a little more suspicious then most other people

And Craig I dont know how many times I have to tell you I dont agree with everything Jack has done, I dont agree with everything in TGZFH

You think because I agree with any part in a book or any part of someones research that I believe EVERYTHING in that book or what that researcher has done

I have my own theory

I have my own research

Yes lots of my theory has to do with alteration, but that is one part of my theory

In the real world you are allowed to agree with someone on one point, but then disagree with that same person on another point

In Craigsters world if you agree with a researcher on one point then what ever that researcher says for the rest of his life no matter what it is you are linked to him and every theory

I would love to give you my theory Craig, you would be very suprised to see how much I disagree with other alterationists (on certain aspects)

But I feel it would be a waste of time because you dont care about the assassination

Just curious though why aren’t you willing to go to the thresher for the person Fetzer claimed was "the leading technical expert on the film"

Because in TGZFH I found a certain part of Costellas chapter appendix to be a little much in the paranoia department (Im sure you know what im talking about)

And I have stated before, I dont use his combined edit of the Z-film because I have the MPI for the sprocket area and Grodens Z-film for every frame

Thats all, nothing sinister

BTW jimbo, I already took you , Costella, Mantik, Lifton, Healy and White out and down for the count with this one.

LMFAO

The day that you take Fetzer, Lifton, Healy and White to town on anything related to the assassination is the day I will walk straight into a Combine that is plowing a field in your Indiana hometown

Good job Jim and Jim, I enjoyed that read

Poor Dean, that Combine is REALLY gonna hurt.

Read them again, kiss your wife and kids goodbye.

www.craiglamson.com/costella.htm

www.craiglamson.com/costella2.htm

They all tried and failed to salvage Costella from his ignorant signpost blunder.

They actually took themself down by BELIEVING, instead of knowing. Just like deano.

BTW exactly how do you KNOW the Fetzer and Marrs morass was good? You claim no real study of the backyard phtoos, yet here you are doing some sheep like backslappin. lordy lordy, deano BELIEVES!

And hey where are those three best Jack White studies that you say you have researched and validated? Cat got your tongue? Or is the combine closing in on your azz?

I never mentioned Costellas name

And dont worry about my studies, I told you I would post them and I will

Im just letting you sweat a little

Right on Bill!

I love your drive and attitude

BTW jimbo, I already took you , Costella, Mantik, Lifton, Healy and White out and down for the count with this one.

LMFAO

The day that you take Fetzer, Lifton, Healy and White to town on anything related to the assassination is the day I will walk straight into a Combine that is plowing a field in your Indiana hometown

Good job Jim and Jim, I enjoyed that read

It is my opinion that the Mob may have shared a hit man for the Assassination, but they wanted no connection to the Kennedy Assassination.

Am I reading this wrong?

If the mob shared a hit man (shared with who?) for the assassination, then they were connected to the assassination

But then you said they wanted no connection to the assassination

So why in the world would they share one of their hit man for the JFK assassination if they wanted no connection to the assassination?

And you think Jack Ruby was in the CIA?

Could you clear your theory up a little for me please?

Because what I read made no sense at all

OK. It is well known that Jack Ruby was gun-running for the CIA and involved with Cuban activities. Seth Kantor detailed this in his book, The Ruby Cover Up, pgs. 249-252

Somehow they got Ruby to kill Harvey Oswald. "Shared" might be an unfortunate word. There may have been a hit man used both by the Mob in their killings and by the CIA in the Assassination. His "resume" may have gotten around in other words.

I believe Ruby did work for the Mob, but later in his life he worked more with the CIA and/or was a victim of MK/ULTRA. All you had to do was mention "Kennedy" to him and he'd start crying. And he was out to show that Jews were not cowards. So he was really messed up. There will always be speculation about Ruby.

What I'm trying to say is the CIA, military intelligence, oil money and the CIA-trained Cuban exiles were behind the Assassination of President Kennedy. Other people believe it was Lyndon Johnson. He certainly gained the most by Kennedy's death. He supplied the cover-up. He knew if people thought Castro did it, there'd be an all out war. So Harvey Oswald was the patsy. I do believe Johnson and Hoover had foreknowledge. Just a look at Johnson's face when Kennedy spoke to people across the street from his hotel that morning and at the Breakfast. His girlfriend, Madelyn Brown, said he knew it. He had said, "After tomorrow those Kennedy boys won't be able to embarrass me anymore." This was said at the Murchison house late the night before. Texas in the Morning. And of course there was complicity of the Secret Service, as seen on a local newscast at Love Field.

In my opinion the Mob didn't get Kennedy. And they were too busy killing each other, with the deaths of Johnny Roselli, Sam Giancana, Jimmy Hoffa... I think Paul Dorfman was desperate to keep the Chicago Mob out of the Kennedy Assassination. So much so -- in my opinion, though I can't prove it -- that he ordered a hit on Karyn Kupcinet, an innocent victim, who was the daughter of Chicago Columnist, Irv Kupcinet. She was so well-known in Chicago that her death moved Ruby a bit out of the headlines. Then a few weeks later Frank Sinatra Jr was kidnapped. I believe this was orchestrated by the Mob again to get the country focused on something else than the Mafia. And it was Frank Sinatra who did everything he could to get President Kennedy elected. So let him squirm.

I hope that clears things up a bit.

Kathy C

Ok I see what you are saying now

Thanks for clearing that up Kathy, sometimes I need an in depth post to see what other members are thinking about in regards to assassination theories

Dean

It is my opinion that the Mob may have shared a hit man for the Assassination, but they wanted no connection to the Kennedy Assassination.

Am I reading this wrong?

If the mob shared a hit man (shared with who?) for the assassination, then they were connected to the assassination

But then you said they wanted no connection to the assassination

So why in the world would they share one of their hit man for the JFK assassination if they wanted no connection to the assassination?

And you think Jack Ruby was in the CIA?

Could you clear your theory up a little for me please?

Because what I read made no sense at all

Ok the real name of this program is "Two men in Dallas" with Mark Lane (or at least the clip of Roger Craig talking is)

And the short clip of the man running at 1:44 is a heavyset man no question

Oswald was pretty much rail thin

It is not Oswald in that small scene at 1:44

I am 100% positive

Sounds good

I ran into the same thing with regards to posting scanned pages from Harold Weisbergs "Photgraphic Whitewash"

I talked to the lady in charge of the library that all of Harolds work and files had been donated

http://texashistory.unt.edu/explore/collec...s/JFKDP/browse/

You beat me to it, Jack.

See - http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/JFK-Investigati...e-69782592.html

Also - http://texashistory.unt.edu/explore/collec...owse/?start=190

Joe Backes

Agreed, there's some really good stuff here.

How come none of the photos are labeled as evidence with the name of the photographer, date they were taken, where they were processed and when, etc.?

Okay, they were found in a closit and posted because of a grant from these save history people, God bless them, but then there's all the unanswered questions.

Where did the curtain rods come from and whose fingerprints are they, anyway?

And whose fingerprints are those on the fender of Tippit's squad car? Tippits, as he fell, being shot by his killer?

Or are they of someone else? If so, whose are they? Something that can still be determined today if fed into a fingerprint computer program.

And then there's the rifle on the work table that appears to be the TSBD wrapping station where the brown paper wrap they say was used to cover and transport the rifle to the TSBD and found on the Sixth Floor by the Sniper's window, a series of very strange photos.

And if that isn't the TSBD wrapping station, what is it?

And who is the artist's sketch of - apparently a suspect of something?

And who are Don Ray Ables, Guy Everett Nice, Beverly L. Horton, Travis Kirk and William Earl Patrick O'Donnell, whose photos and mug shots appear in this collection that is supposed to have something to do with the assassination of President Kennedy, but these people are all new to me.

Has anybody else heard of them before, and considered why they are being included in JFK's murder file?

Maybe I missed something.

If so, please fill me in, Thanks,

So many questions, so little time,

BK

Good call Bill

I said the same thing to myself

Who are these guys in the mugshots?

And the bigger question, WHY are these peoples mugshots in with all this JFK evidence?

Okay, Richard Walter Borchgardt and Ellis Case Brazel were prisoners used in the lineup(s), Don Ray Ables was a police clerk used in the lineup, Guy Everett Nice was a Jewish criminal friend of Ruby, William Earl Patrick O'Donnell was a Ruby pal and criminal, and Travis Kirk was a Dallas lawyer who accused Fritz of allowing Ruby to kill Oswald.

I haven't figured out who Beverly L. Horton is yet, except there are reports of his arrest at Love field among the Dallas City Archives material, but I can't find it.

But those who made up these photo galleries could have filled in the blanks if they knew who these people were, or could have easily found out.

BK

Thanks Bill

Good find Duncan

However I think you have it backwords

You said only one rifle was loaded and the rest were not

Thats not how a firing squad works

One of the rifles has a blank, all the rest are loaded with live ammunition

The reason this is done is so all the shooters can say later if they feel bad about it is that well I could have had the rifle with the blank round and so it was not my shot that killed him

Look closly at the dirt on the hillside, after he is hit with what looks like the first shot fired a bit to early he starts to slump over and the rest of the shooters fire, hitting the hillside and it looks like maybe his back is hit, just look for the falling dirt and rocks from the hillside being hit with multiple shots

Anyways great post Duncan thank you

http://texashistory.unt.edu/explore/collec...s/JFKDP/browse/

You beat me to it, Jack.

See - http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/JFK-Investigati...e-69782592.html

Also - http://texashistory.unt.edu/explore/collec...owse/?start=190

Joe Backes

Agreed, there's some really good stuff here.

How come none of the photos are labeled as evidence with the name of the photographer, date they were taken, where they were processed and when, etc.?

Okay, they were found in a closit and posted because of a grant from these save history people, God bless them, but then there's all the unanswered questions.

Where did the curtain rods come from and whose fingerprints are they, anyway?

And whose fingerprints are those on the fender of Tippit's squad car? Tippits, as he fell, being shot by his killer?

Or are they of someone else? If so, whose are they? Something that can still be determined today if fed into a fingerprint computer program.

And then there's the rifle on the work table that appears to be the TSBD wrapping station where the brown paper wrap they say was used to cover and transport the rifle to the TSBD and found on the Sixth Floor by the Sniper's window, a series of very strange photos.

And if that isn't the TSBD wrapping station, what is it?

And who is the artist's sketch of - apparently a suspect of something?

And who are Don Ray Ables, Guy Everett Nice, Beverly L. Horton, Travis Kirk and William Earl Patrick O'Donnell, whose photos and mug shots appear in this collection that is supposed to have something to do with the assassination of President Kennedy, but these people are all new to me.

Has anybody else heard of them before, and considered why they are being included in JFK's murder file?

Maybe I missed something.

If so, please fill me in, Thanks,

So many questions, so little time,

BK

Good call Bill

I said the same thing to myself

Who are these guys in the mugshots?

And the bigger question, WHY are these peoples mugshots in with all this JFK evidence?

A good thread. Belatedly, thanks, Bernice, for the Mee interview and also the many LHO photos. I was especially interested in seeing if LHO ever posed with his legs contorted anywhere near the way they are in the backyard photos.

Independently, I ran across the web article Robert Walker linked in post #5, and thought the material merited investigation. And, as Bill Kelly pointed out in post #31, the front page stories in the commie papers are provocative. It's an old criminal trick to photograph newspapers containing clues - but I don't know how much subtlety we can ascribe to the photo forgers.

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread411261/pg1

The material at the above top secret link is based on resizing photos taken from different camera to subject distances, and you just can't do that, as the empirical, experimental data I provided above proves. This is UNIMPEACHABLE fact.

But hey, I've not seen many jfk ct's let the cold hard facts get in the way way of a good fantasy.

I have been trying to figure out what group to put you in Craig

Your not a "LNer", your not a "CTer", your not even an "On the Fencer"

Your either an "I dont give a shiper" or a "Nobody"

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14991

Already been posted by Mr White

I think Honest Joe is mentioned in Noel Twyman's "Bloody Treason." Don't quote me yet (I don't own a copy), but Joe may have known Loran Hall over gun-related business.

David

I have been going through my copy (Mint condition I may add ) of "Bloody Treason" for the last 15 minutes or so

No mention of Honest Joe or his Pawn Shop in the index (I looked under his last name, his pawn shop, an Honest Joe)

I am browsing through all the sections that include Loran Hall and Gerry Hemming to see if I spot anything about Honest Joe but have not seen it yet

If anyone knows what page number or what section (Besides the one on Hall and Hemming) to look in I will gladly scan that page and post it on the forum

That sounds great

Could you give us a quick rundown of what is in the transcipts Ken?

I heard it had a better desciption of the two men standing behind the fence

Thanks for the info

Thanks, Dean. I'm going to hold off a bit until others have a chance to get their copies. It shouldn't be too long.

Ken

No problem I will be looking for it

I think im going to watch my copy of "Rush To Judgement" tonight to catch up on what Bowers and others said

No matter how many times I watch it I cant get over the fact that Nix says his film was altered when he got it back from the Govt.

Since I haven't read the book or much of Wilson's claims I can't say for sure but it seems unlikely a technique designed examine high resolution images of steel to detect faults would be of any use detecting photo alteration of low resolution images or detecting details beyond the resolving power of the original/best quality copy.

Jack's test proved nothing, blowing up an image will inevitably reveal detail not viable in less magnified images but IF the date numbers on the plate had been smaller than the grains in the negative no amount of manipulation would make the visible.

I'm still waiting for any confirmation

1) Wilson developed a technique to use images to access steel quality

2) the application of his technique to forensic photography has been recognized by others

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnotology

["Doubt is our product"......]

In other words, Peter has no meaningful response to my points and questions so resorts to insult.

If Wilson's expertise is so beyond doubt, Peter,Dean Jack et.al. should be able respond easily

Well I dont have US Steel's employment records in front of me but it was published that Wilson worked for US Steel for 30 years as a research and development engineer

I also read somewhere that at the time of his retirement he had reach the level of Vice President of US Steel, his system one of the reasons for promotion

I could be wrong about that

That sounds great

Could you give us a quick rundown of what is in the transcipts Ken?

I heard it had a better desciption of the two men standing behind the fence

Thanks for the info

Very interesting email

Thanks for sharing it John

Very nice Jack

Curious deano, just what is "nice" about it and more importantly what is "right"? Perfect way to decide is White is Right or Jack is a Hack...

Jacks assesment of Tom Wilson's work is right

And dont worry Craig, still going to make my threads on my studies, just a little busy with work, you know that little thing that puts food on the table and a roof over your head?

Double post

Very nice Jack

Great link Jack

Just saved a bunch of these to my computer

Im glad to hear that Craig, my opinion of you just went up a notch (not thats its huge to begin with but hey you gota start somewhere)

So I guess my next question is why do you look younger then me in your avatar but yet say you were married in 1972

Have you just countinued to look like your 16 years old your whole life?

If so then congrats on that as well, you must not drink, smoke or eat meat

Hey that photo is a composite of the first shift Craig, the second shift Craig and th3 third shift Craig. These guys in the photo department at Langley are top notch and do really good work. [/sacrasm]

I have heard Langley does good work