Jump to content
The Education Forum

Doug Weldon

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Doug Weldon

  1. Thanks, Jim. That is one hundred percent accurate. It is what a good researcher would do, without making untrue character assassinations and conspiracy theories. And I repeat...Kudlaty was a friend of mine since he was a fellow classmate more than 60 years ago. I hope he still enjoys good health. If so, he will confirm John's story. Jack Jack and Greg: Jack, You make a very good point. I began to look at the issue of the hole in the windshield back in 1993 because of a fluke circumstance. A friend of mine who is both a physician and an attorney saw me one day with a book on the ass
  2. i think i have read where they get over 325,ooo visitors a year, take say just $5.00 a head,for an even figure, that is a tremendous amount of income, :blink:if that is not more than enough to run the busness with a healthy profit left over, then someone is highly lacking in economic skills, and then there is also plus the profit made on everything they sell so why the price on every copy of photo that is wanted or needed for research from the tsbd...that is posted on the web...??? that's is the complaint, not a gripe a ruddy very old complaint, trouble is with the so called tsbd museum it h
  3. And when/if the agent is confirmed to be Donald Lawton, does this mean we can finally put to rest the notion that the shrugging agent was shrugging because he was completely bewildered and miffed at being "left behind" at Love Field? Via such a confirmation of the agent being Lawton, obviously such talk would have to be jettisoned by the YouTubers (and others) who like to create videos using the WFAA-TV videotape footage showing Shrugging Man, because I don't think it's possible for even the silliest CTer to pretend that Lawton was supposed to be a part of the Secret Service crew in the Queen
  4. Gary Mack has supplied a copy of the Tom Dillard photograph in question, and has also added the picture to the Sixth Floor Museum website. Thank you, Gary. As it turns out, I had seen that Dillard photo previously. It's in Vincent Bugliosi's book, "Reclaiming History". It's printed, in a cropped format, on the next-to-last page of Vince's second of two photo sections in the book. The photo is linked below, along with Gary's latest e-mail to me regarding this Rybka/Lawton subject: Subject: RE: Gerald Blaine book... Date: 11/17/2010 4:29:17 PM Eastern Standard Time From: Gary Mack To: Dav
  5. Hello Doug, There is no doubt in my mind that the so-called nebula in the Altgens #6 hole claim is made up of the black woman's hand which is holding a rolled up newspaper. I have studied this extensively and I am 100% certain of my conclusion. Now about the White House Garage photos .... What was said above is accurate. I took a hi-resolution scan of a good print of Altgens #7 and cropped out the damage seen on the windshield. I reversed it and tested it against the chip in the glass in the White House garage photos ... namely the best close up that was taken. One of the things that jumped
  6. I am sure that if you stick around here long enough, there will be THREE OSWALDS, or maybe four. Why stop at two? [Edit: I was present when John Armstrong first presented his "two Oswald" theory in Fredonia, and I have never heard a more sloppy presentation. John Armstrong is a nice man, but he wouldn't know what EVIDENCE is if it jumped up and bit him in the butt! John is not comfortable with public speaking. Please read the book and then form any opinion you wish. Doug Weldon
  7. Dean, your fellow alteration supporters are getting what they deserve in my view. For instance, I had one of them going on years ago about there was no clear image of Sitzman being in the Plaza and yet the woman turns and faces Zapruder's camera just prior to the assassination. That footage is taken at the colonnade with Sitzman talking to her friends - the Hester's. Then there is the interview of Sitzman at the pedestal ,,, pictures of Sitzman near the TSBD ... all showing her in the same clothes as seen on the woman at the pedestal. So why does another poorly researched alteration claim have
  8. Jim: I am reading "Harvey and Lee' now for the second time. There is no possible way that any intelligent and reasonable person could have read the book thoroughly and then trash it. People are not comparing Oswald and Marguerite at diffent times in their life but at the same time. Even as John was writing the book and talking with me there was some evidence that John was more impressed with than I. However, in its totality, I cannot fathom how thouroughly John followed and put the evidence together. It is amazing research. The only small criticism I had was that Armstrong had located Joh
  9. David: Let me understand your position. A few posts ago you indicated that you were certain that it was Rybka who was shrugging. Now, because Gary Mack via hearsay was told that it was Lawton, even though Gary was told by someone (Lisa) who was not there in 1963 and not knowing exactly what she was told, you are now absolutely convinced that it was Lawton seen in the film. Do you know what Rybka and Lawton looked like? Well, if Gary said it was so I guess there is no reason to have a forum or to try to determine the truth behind the assassination. I guess we can all pick up our toys and go
  10. David: Let me understand your position. A few posts ago you indicated that you were certain that it was Rybka who was shrugging. Now, because Gary Mack via hearsay was told that it was Lawton, even though Gary was told by someone (Lisa) who was not there in 1963 and not knowing exactly what she was told, you are now absolutely convinced that it was Lawton seen in the film. Do you know what Rybka and Lawton looked like? Well, if Gary said it was so I guess there is no reason to have a forum or to try to determine the truth behind the assassination. I guess we can all pick up our toys and go
  11. David: John Ready,not Hill, was the agent who was called back. Doug Weldon I know - sorry if that was poorly worded. I ought to have written: "Emory Roberts is recorded as preventing another agent from approaching the limo 'during the shooting.' In the Nix film, it seems as if Hill is almost at the rear bumper when JFK's head flies back. Why was he allowed off the Queen Mary?" Why do you think Hill is wearing a bulletproof vest? Can we spot it on him during other motorcades? David: I cannot say definitively that Hill was wearing a vest. A friend, who is a DEA agent, and wh
  12. I wish to join in the chorus of those who thank Vince Palamara for his work on this case over very many years. Vince dedicated the best years of his young life to shedding light on a most important question: Why did the Secret Service allow the assassination of JFK to happen? I first heard Vince speak about the Secret Service at the Third Decade conference in Fredonia, in the great state of New York, in the Summer of 1991. I predicted then that Vince's work would be a major factor in solving this case, and I repeat that prediction now, almost 20 years later. Of course Justice cannot now be do
  13. Maybe you had received an answer to your question, but didn't catch it. You can post your image again or link it because I am not interested in wasting lots of time with it. I do know that it was not uncommon for newspapers to airbrush photos so to sharpen them up where ever possible. I would have to see your images again, feel free to post a link to them or repost them again. Bill Bill, The detail in the flag between the red arrows. As I asked previously, if someone has a non-newspaper copy of Altgen's with this detail, I'm all ears. It does not exist in any of the best copies that ha
  14. David: Why did the SS feel it was necessary to destroy their records on th motorcades just prior to Dallas? The press bus was moved to the back for the Dallas motorcade. It is not simply a question of filming. It is a question of witnessing. Nobody is suggesting that anyone tried to prevent any photos or filming in Dealey Plaza. The buildings were to be checked and there was to be no non law enforcement people on the overpass. Actually, it IS EXACTLY THE DUTY of Secret Service Agents to be HUMAN SHIELDS. Ready was called back as he started to move to the limo after the first shots. Please
  15. The whole Secret Service topic is total nonsense, mainly because we know (and can prove) that the security for President Kennedy's motorcade on November 22nd, 1963, in Dallas, Texas, was absolutely no different in any substantial way from other pre-11/22/63 motorcades that Mr. Kennedy rode in during his 1,037 days as the 35th U.S. Chief Executive. Vince Palamara is constantly making a huge deal out of the fact that the SS agents did not continuously ride on the back bumpers of JFK's limousine in Dallas (and particularly, of course, in Dealey Plaza). But the SS configuration in Dealey Plaza w
  16. Hello Greg, I think we can agree that JFK was shot and killed only once as he rode down Elm Street, thus any film showing that one event as it happened would be the true film. My point is that multiple names were on a list once as if there was strength in numbers when talking about all the people who allegedly had seen the Zapruder film in its alleged totality. Any variances would then mean that not everyone can be talking about seeing the real deal and must be mistaken as to what film they actually saw so many years ago. For instance if one witness said the limo stopped for half of a second
  17. I hope you have researched his field of view and angle to the limo so to have tested his perception of the event. Some folks saw the parade stop for a few seconds and possibly felt the limo did as well. Others looking at a limo heading away from them and slowing to a near stop may look to be stopped for a brief moment. White House reporter Merriman Smith said that from his angle to the President's car that while the follow-up cars in the parade did come to a halt for a few seconds .... the President's car only faltered. So what I am saying is that a witness can be truthful in saying what they
  18. DellaRosa's site years ago had a list of people who claimed to have seen the 'other film'. I pointed out that some of those witnesses were saying they saw things that were not part of other peoples description. For instance, one person had said that the 'other film' he saw had shown the President and Connally being shot as the car was making the turn onto Elm Street .... other accounting's didn't mention this. So rightfully so, I responded that there seems to be various versions of this so-called 'other film'. That if this so-called 'other film' had actually been witnessed by 'x' number of peo
  19. Vince: The book has Donald Lawton being waved off at Love Field, not Henry Rybka. Which is correct? Many thanks. Doug Weldon
  20. Jack: The fact remains there is NO evidence; ... that Judyth was even briefly acquainted or ever met Oswald ... that Judyth was even briefly acquainted with ANY major player in the assassination ... though Judyth appears to have been a good high school student that she was a "brilliant" student who as a teenager was one of the top cancer researchers in the United States and the world. ... that any of the events that may have been true included Judyth being involved Absent Judyth inserting herself Forrest Gump style into events, there is no serious corroboration for anything that would su
  21. What is your point? Many thanks, Doug Weldon
  22. Thank you for your response. This makes this matter, as it relates to the fatal shot, unresolved. The Kill Shot did not come from the right side, or the so called "Grassy Knoll" area or the fence. No Badgeman, Files , nor does any testimony to that effect matter. The smoke seen in the area seems to have been a diversion, and actors were employed, just like the so called "Three Tramps." This thing keeps getting worse and worse. If that were possible. Peter: I hope that I was clear. Since this thread is about a shot through the windshield I was only confirming that the shot thr
  23. Robert: If you do not believe everything Judyth says, that must mean there are things that she says that you do not believe, therefore she is not telling the truth about some things she says. How do you discern what to believe and not to believe? Is it not suspicious to you that she has contradicted herself on so many points and that she has refused to be questioned by myself or Greg Burnham or such things as that she claims to have LHO's writing on abook but refuses to have it analyzed? It goes on and on. I am curious. How do you differentiate between what she is telling the truth about a
  24. I cannot believe that some still think they see a hole in the windshield in Altgens 6, but if all they have is the less than sharp image Jack posted, then I can understand the mistake. In the full Betzner photo there was a black woman holding what looks to be a rolled up newspaper in her hand as she is waving at the President passing by. JFK had not yet been hit when Betzner took his photo. As the car rolled passed and as the woman lowered her newspaper - Altgens took his photo at a time that at least two shots appear to have been fired. A good quality Altgens 6 photo shows no hole/nebula, b
  • Create New...