Bernice Moore

Sorry Greg you feel so snarky against some who think differently than you, and believe in john armstrong's work, i cannot figure out why it is so apparently offensive to you, i do not recall others telling you what to believe, to each their own i thought, really i used to....anyway i did find this info out for you, now i hmmm wonder why people bother at times, anywhere here it is...fwiw and for whatever you do with it..this is from a 63 directory..from a friend...b I have a 1963 Ft. WorthPolks Directory, will list the Oswalds.Charles 2821 NW 31stJewel same as aboveJohn G. 1824 6th Av.Margt 1073 5th Av Apt 6Robert 7313 Davenport Av. 2220a Thomas Place is a B.J. Cox2220b Thomas Place is Vacant

QUOTE DOUG; 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 has become all about money and control..which only breeds more greed...for more, more , more, are you now going to start charging for yours,?or for any information you or one can supply like docs . news paper clipingss, gifs, video clips etc..?? i doubt it very much, and such, i'm not and i do not see any others doing so...but greed breeds more greed, more,control, more .avarice..and that is what i see within the TSBD MUSEUM, and there have been no improvements when it comes to such, unless one kisses butt or grovels then perhaps one may receive such copies free, hmmmmmm well it's a thought.and it has happened...but do not try to do so if you have a different opinion and not agree with gary or the standard tsbds pro the w/c is right stand......imo... Bernice: The 6th Floor is not $5 a person. Adults are charged $13.50, seniors and children 6-18 $12.50 and the large groups of children 5 and under are free. I am certain that parking is extra. Doug Weldon ;)I DID A QUICKIE SEARCH THAT WAS A FIGURE THAT POPPED UP, AT FIRST I HAD NEAR A MILLION BUT I CORRECTED IT, BUT I HAD THOUGHT I HAD READ IT WAS MANY MORE, BUT...THOSE ARE HEFTY CHARGES,AS IS, BUT ALL IS EXPENSIVE THESE DAYS BUT JUST THE SAME, $25.00 FOR TWO ON OAP, IS A SLICE OUT OF Such and lordy add it up for a family of four,that's 52.00 holy mollie , NO BREAKS FOR THE WEARY ARE THERE,THE STICK IT TO EM, PARADE, I TOOK THE 5 AS JUST A FIGURE AS EVEN AT THAT , THAT IS QUITE A HUGE PROFIT, I WOULD THINK, MORE THAN ENOUGH TO KEEP ALL IN PIPSQUEAK CONDITION...OH YES I IMAGINE PARKING WOULD BE A PLUS, BUT SEEING HE IS THE POPE OF DEALEY PLAZA AS RICH CALLED HIM,.. :blink:GEE, I'LL BET HE HAS MISSED THE OLD FENCING BETWEEN THE TWO...LOL ..yeah sure, i'll bet llh.... sorry bout the caps, i am having extra problems with pinkies and the ole lap here this evening...btw here is another photo compliments of vince's site FREE..GET THAT FREE.... of a younger don lawton when he was a police officer,...take care best bB) :ph34r:i am trying again to post this it is not taking, dad durn that gremlin... when i preview it it looks fine but, is not posting again ... :huh:it's those quote tags again, dad durn em... b maybe this time ta da.... ;)ps is there a charge also for the elevator or washrooms, how about the use of the garbage bin... sheesh...and hey what does he charge for his autograph... enquiring minds want to know...

COMP RYBKA TAMPA FLORIDA THE IDING AS LAWTON WAS MY MISTAKE NOT VINCE'S I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR....B

DELETED

much better of Don Lawton; b

lawton and rybka from vince's site thanks vince, again...and for free... :D b

Bernice Moore']Thanks for the link. Both show different positions. .... Dave, what really is the use of Gary's link if we cannot capture a copy of the photo he has posted on his site, to compare. So much for not sharing. There it goes again. Thanks for trying. quote David; Gary asked that I only post a link to the picture (via the Sixth Floor Museum page). But what is there to gripe about, Bernice? I provided a perfectly good link to the Dillard picture via a 6FM link. And the Museum's "zoom/slider" feature is very useful too. I like the way the Museum's site has displayed its photos and films. Very classy. :blink:b; hallo david you cannot download it..the photo;..duh... Gary asked that I only post a link to the picture (via the Sixth Floor Museum page). antti having trouble again posting replies on this thread fyi.. and with quote tags...thanks... yes,David it is a very classy set up,and should be the money is there to do so, but as mentioned, if you cannot download even you, so that one can compare and study photos side by side to each other, then of what aid in the research is there, none.you must study and compare.....for instance Robin and some others have very good photo sites, that they have assembled, their photos are free some of which they have paid for many they have received and or copied from the posts on the web, which you have also taken advantage of, but with no charge,do you charge for any copies made from your site, no, i do not think so not that i have seen or is that about to come, seeing you agree with the tsbdm. others such as with Rich's site for years as well as Lancer and this E.F that are posted,do so for free, or is this the coming thing, in your opinion, as you appear to be supporting such,or do i step one hallowed toes here, i do not, nor do others charge they post if they have such on the web for all, or if asked, for free, so why does the tsbd museum charge if you want a copy..they post on their site,on the web, when all they must do is enable their program so they can be copied.... 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 has become all about money and control..which only breeds more greed...for more, more , more, are you now going to start charging for yours,?or for any information you or one can supply like docs . news paper clipingss, gifs, video clips etc..?? i doubt it very much, and such, i'm not and i do not see any others doing so...but greed breeds more greed, more,control, more .avarice..and that is what i see within the TSBD MUSEUM, and there have been no improvements when it comes to such, unless one kisses butt or grovels then perhaps one may receive such copies free, hmmmmmm well it's a thought.and it has happened...but do not try to do so if you have a different opinion and not agree with gary or the standard tsbds pro the w/c is right stand......imo...

No, Bernice, actually it isn't the one that I linked to earlier. Yours is a different picture entirely, but it was obviously taken from the same vantage point and the same camera (Dillard's). Here's the higher-quality Dillard photo that Gary Mack provided me a link for: http://www.jfk.org/g...4.003.0009.0003 thanks for the link, both show different positions...b ps dave what really is the use of Gary's link if we cannot capture a copy of the photo he has posted on his site, to compare, so much for not sharing, there it goes again...thanks for trying.. b

greg i do not know what happened i replied to yours on the previous page but it ended up at the bottom of this page so i have copied and pasted yours...best b Quote greg burham post # 105;''The alleged Sitzman photo(s) and/or frame(s) are inconclusive, IMO. However, even assuming that they are pictures of her--still--she is NOT the person who FILMED THE ASSASSINATION. Abraham Zapruder allegedly did the filming. Except, we can not confirm the presence of the man through clear photographic records; we cannot confirm that the man who claims to have filmed the assassination was even there from the film record. Yet we are expected to accept the "film record that he allegedly shot" as authentic despite inconsistencies found therein. This is weird logic, to be sure. The film record does not definitively establish that Zapruder was the photographer that day. Why? Zappy apologists would have us believe that it is because of the "lack of reliability" of the film stock, camera quality, skill of the photographers, distance from target (Zappy) etc., that obscures Zapruder's presence. We should therefore IGNORE the lack of evidence and instead we should embrace the official story: Zapruder was there. But, Mary Moorman took her polaroid within an acceptable proximity of the subject. In fact, Gary Mack claims that he located Badgeman in the Moorman polaroid! Tell me this, Gary: Why is it that even though Badgeman is obscured by foliage, by shadow, and is tiny behind the wall -- by comparison -- to the man claiming to be Zapruder who is standing on the pedestal, who is not hiding behind a wall, who's not in shadows, who's in BROAD DAYLIGHT, and he's elevated on top of a PERCH--yet, the detail in Badgeman's image is much higher than the detail in the alleged image of Zapruder! If we can discern Badgeman's detail, Gary, certainly we should be able to discern Zapruder's detail, right? C'mon, admit it... It's beyond obvious. Yet, these same people fail to apply the same standard to the Zapruder film itself! GO_SECURE monk ----------------- A WISE MAN CAN ACT THE FOOL...BUT A FOOL CAN'T ACT THE WISE MAN hi greg; some mighty good comments. no we cannot see facial features of either abraham nor marilyn, but as you state all are expected to believe it is them because imo he took the film of the assassination so says the w/c and government, if not his family owes back 16 million plus interest, and that is never going to happen not now, so all the go alongs with the gov and w/c and such keep on, carrying on that Zapruder did take the film and Marilyn held onto him, yet there is no proof of such, and i did think in this research land one needed proof,:unsure:well that is what above Dean has been told about his research imo, and why can't Gary show abraham and marilyns facial features clearly when he was able with Jack to find and clearly show his research find..:blink:the BDM bet you do not get a satisfactory answer from gary... .?? b

Yes that Dillard is or was around, i had two which i thought closely fit, but smaller and was not sure which one was the correct photo,but have no idea where they came from now but more than likely at one time from rich's site... here fwtaw are both.the smaller first is the one dave is referring to....b

Quote Bill Miller;'' 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 to be made from all of this ... the answer may be what I just said 'poorly researched'. Bill speaking only for myself, as far as those photo frames , the one of Sitzman being interviewed after,and those of her seen on the sidewalk in front of the tsbd after, were not available a few years ago, perhaps to you or some but they were never shared if so, until Robin, obtain the films, and copied frames showing her within, one time some years back i did have a copy of the gif of the hesters and marilyn shown by zapruder before the motorcade came but that was not readily available,either and then it was lost , and for a few years it was not available on the web at all, until someone perhaps you obtained that early part of the zapruder film and created that gif, which also was not readily available and disappeared some time ago, until again Robin had access and posted his gif of such for all, about a year or so ago, if it or any of these were available to those who cannot do the gifs from films etc, they were not shared, and please leave the ask Gary part alone, the one time i did make a request some years back to him it was about an article he had written about the wiegman film in one of his copies of his magazine, i asked if it was possible for a copy as i was studying that film at the time, i received a reply to the effect he had them in a box the magazines, and the article was not available, so i still wait, i did not bother to ask further, I just want you to realise that even though perhaps these films etc were available to you, and others, who also knew how to capture frames and prepare gifs, all did and do not, so i wanted to make it clear to Dean and others, whomever is interested, that the playing field has not been even, as some have had the availability of such, but to those that had a different opinion than them, they were not it appeared, as they certainly were not shared, ,,but thanks to Robin who has shared with all, perhaps and hopefully so,this is showing that the new younger generation of researchers such as Robin and martin hindrich who also shares so willingly,,it is a sign of more open minds than some within the older generation,though there are some within that older generation that did,, not enough did so imo... i am sorry to say, as well as to those who still hoard information and such and they are out there, without a doubt,,so cheers for Robin..and Martin, . and yes she may be seen clearly Marilyn in the pre motorcade zapruder film,clip,as well as after in some frames, but her facial features are not seen clearly within the photos and other films taken that day just as zapruder's features are not,...while.on the pedestal.if there, which until we do see them clearly, will and has created doubt within the studies, as each are entitled to their own opinion and should not be ridiculed, nor mocked for such. and those who do so have proven they lack a sense of fairness and open mindedness within the studies as they continue to do so and have never appeared to learn...........imo...b

Possibly so, but Sharples probably had nothing to do with Camarillo or the Oxnard phone call. What is intringuing about the Colorado oil wells, though, was that DeMohrenschildt was apparently working there during the time he was a partner of Edward G. Hooker, his brother Dimitry's wife's son. Hooker had been the man who introduced George to Lynn Sharples, who later became a doctor. All that happened before he met the love of his life, Jeanne LeGon, whose husband Robert lived in California with their daughter Christiana until he was sent off to the mental ward in Camarillo. I wonder if there was someone there trying to find out nuclear secrets from him. I seem to recall Jeanne's brother Sergei Fomenko was also involved in atomic research in California, working for Howard Hughes and Linnet Company of Beverly Hills; then Ramo-Wooldridge in Los Angeles; then North American Aviation. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=484769 http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=350065 http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=10 The mention of Richard Sorge's name in connection with that of LeGon's daughter was a matter that seemed to fascinate Mary Ferrell who followed it in her chronologies: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=484603 http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=484583 http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=484594 Incidentally, more information about Hooker's relationship to George H.W. Bush appears in Russ Baker's book, Family of Secrets. It will probably be hard for Forum members to believe, but I really feel uncomfortable posting material that deals with the esoteric and the strange UFO type material, as I am all too aware that these topics seem to give a impetus to the LN crowd, that feeds into the "Frank Sinatra's drummer killed JFK" type material, but nonetheless. Rosicrucian undercurrents to the Oxnard call have been brought to the surface by a very esteemed researcher....as some are aware. Readers may also be aware of the fact that Aldous Huxley died on the same day that JFK did..... Somewhere in that esoterica, is a very interesting factoid that relates to Ojai, which is not a far leap from Oxnard. In Peter Washington's tome, Madame Blavatsky's Baboon, Aldous Huxley is a very featured name. pages abound, in fact; While Huxley is somewhat rightly associated with topics like LSD and Timothy Leary, in Washington's book, he is almost like a mystical version of Thomas Merton as far as his role in the anti-war movement, of his time. And of course, one cannot help but think of JFK And The Unspeakable author Jim Douglass, when one thinks of Thomas Merton. One factoid is that the Theosophical Society owned property in Ojai see pages 276, 278 By 1947 the Society owned five hundred acres at Ojai, the small tract of land bought by Annie Besant had been gradually extended until the Society owned a medium-sized estate in the Valley, and the Order of the Star held its first annual meeting there in 1928. Ojai was now the focus of Krishnamurti, [Lord Maitreya is channelled through Krishnamurti, and Maitreya is considered by some evangelical Christian's and Catholics to be the anti-Christ....no joking Robert]...... Another name of interest is Baron van Pallandt ....see page 317 ie among the Victorian liberal intelligentsia was Bertrand Russell......the house at Ojai became a second home to the itinerant Huxley's, Final thoughts; What's in a name? Huxley had a contemporary, or friend named Gerald Heard..... And another strange coincidence is that in 1942 Gerald Heard who was into "experimental communities," was "given the money" to establish a sort of monastery at Trabuco, 60 miles South of L.A., Calif. see page 323 Washington notes, "The building was constructed under the direction of [Christopher] Isherwood's energetic cousin, Felix Greene, who had given up his job with the Quaker service committee, in Philadelphia. ibid. If any of you remember Ruth Paine's July 1964 Redbook Interview, the one where she said "she was glad to hear of Ruby's killing Oswald." Jessamyn West did the interviewing, what is, I believe remarkable, is that West was a cousin of Richard Nixon's, who was connected to both California [Whittier College] and Pennsylvania. Nixon's maternal side of the family produced Thomas and Sarah Melhausen from County Kildare, Ireland and were converted to the teachings of George Fox, the founder of the Society of Friends, (Quakers) they settled in Chester Pennsylvania and Anglicanized their name to Milhous.* * see pages 120, 118 Mrs. Paine's Garage - Thomas Mallon and page 8 The Nixon Nobody Knows - Henry D. Spalding what all this means is not exactly a fact too me, but it seems to connect on some level. C.S.LEWIS;JFK; HUXLEY

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 home. Among many things Gary has told me is that what was labeled as a recording room at the Dallas Police Department in 1963 was not for recordings at all but it was actually a file room. That's logical. Why would anyone call a "file room" a file room? How silly. How does Gary know it was not a recording room? It is because he was in that room a few years ago. I guess that once a room is used for something it can never be used for any other purpose even forty plus years later. It is like Gary saying on one of his programs that a shot from the south knoll area could not have hit Kennedy because the shot would have to go through the windshield. REALLY? I am sure that Gary was never aware that anyone suggested that. Gary has also said that if Oswald was recorded in 1963 it could not have been used UNLESS BOTH the prosecutor and defense attorney AGREED IT COULD BE USED in court. Of course if the statements by Oswald were exculpatory the prosecutor would want the recording to come in and if it was inculpatory a good defense attorney would let the recording be admitted in order to hang his client. I tried to list all of the circumstances that both attorneys would have let such a recording come in to a trial. The one instance I could think of was if Oswald had simply said the sky was blue that day. Whoops! That would be irrelevsnt. There would not be any circumstances so why would anyone in Texas ever make a recording in 1963?Anything mopre meaningful than that which is irrelevant? NO. I have practiced law for over 32 years and have both prosecuted and defended cases. Gary's version of the law would have been unique in that it never has been such in any state ever, even Texas, except as Gary contends, for Oswald's case in 1963. Texas must have been part of a parallel universe that year. Then again, David, as you suggested, what does one expect of the Secret Service, that they would use themselves as human shields to protect the President. How ridiculous. WAIT, they are supposed to do that. David, I sincerely give you a lot more credit than that for your positions and for myself, I am not certain whether it was Rybka or Lawton shrugging at Love Field. However, I am going to need more evidence than Gary Mack being told by someone if it was so. My first question to Lisa, the author, is HOW did they confirm it was Lawton? Did they see the film? I would want to see a picture of Rybka or Lawton. It would be embarassing if a few posts from now if you then became absolutely convinced it was Rybka. Wow. I would not box myself in on such limited evidence. I admire your confidence. Doug Weldon I shouild acknowledge Bernice Moore for finding the recording room. There was a larger room labeled as for "records." That certainly cannot be for files. It is too logical. Well, it is getting late here in Michigan and I am heading to the kitchen to get some sleep. Doug Weldon Doug; David; Pleased it was the correct photo, out of so many, your very welcome...the taping room, catch was found on this site, i have mentioned the site in the past, he has a large collection of information, and is very active on the alts, by the name of Tomlin i believe, he has a fountain of information, so thanks to his research that became available...http://www.whokilledjfk.net/.... As David says quote ''Thank you, Gary, as always''. it is nice to be nice and say thankyou always and appreciate any help, but imo it seems Gary is always quite anxious to help out any lnr that comes along very readily and merrily...now a days... in fact it would appear too much so....especially in any videos that he has been connected with in the past few years. .. .thanks ..imo...b

Dean all i have is the photo is marked with INTV, that is a reporter who interviewed her shortly after the assassination,name gone, that photo had nothing to do with Stone, and Marilyn i believe had died by the time the film came out, but i will look that up.nope,.she died aug 11 1993, but she was not in the movie....b possibly John Wiseman merely told us in his memo of 11/23/63 that he talked to Marilyn Sitzman and an unnamed man who thought the shots came from the Depository (XIX, 535-6). could this be Wiseman interviewing Sitzman?

http://www.acorn.net...e/d_rather.html Forward with considerable violence ; klein..b

My review of The Kennedy Detail (NOT the detailed one I am working on now) [/url] #1 can't wait to read the one your working on now...b

;)thanks Vince... we most are very aware who have been making up stories for nearly 50 years, and they still are very poor at such, as you have shown, you caught them again...take care..best b:lol:

David I believe this is the crop of the photo, Doug Weldon refers to, if not he will correct, for now...b

thanks Jim i really enjoyed that post of yours in particular the info on the south knoll,mentioning the neglectful Gary.. . i have a photo of that area, of a slope going down towards the parking lot, which i have always wondered about, i will find and see that you get it, let me know if it is of the same spot or similar...carry on... take care ..b

Right on jim; dave ;It is not what is seen in any other photograph of JFK'S Presidential Motorcades in any other city in the USA or the world for that matter. What is most obvious is What is Not seen in Dallas, Texas on November 22,1963.. There had recently been an assault on Adlai Stevenson the month before on Oct.24.1963 the incident had shaken Dallas leaders as well as the President's supporters. On ''United Nations Day''Stevenson had been in the city to make a speech, as the U.S Ambassador to the U.N.at the Memorial Theatre . When Dallas right-wingers heard of Stevenson's visit, they planned their own rally for the night before. Their rally included the speaker Major General Edwin Walker, a right-winger that had been fired by the Kennedy Administration for using his position to foist his political views onto the troops under his command. Walker's speech that night was largely a lambasting of the United Nations, and its 'goal' of taking the American freedoms, power and wealth and sharing it with other countries.see http://www.dealey.org/dallash16.htm . then on NOV.9/63 The threat from Florida revealed by Joseph Milteer had been uncovered. all these occurrences and threats were known before the trip to Dallas. Yet as we see below in just a few of the photos taken on Nov.22/63 of the motorcade within that city, the dereliction of their duties of the Secret Service Agents is seen in the laxity of any protection provided for him, by the hungover agents and is very obvious, amidst the huge crowds in particular on Main Street. dates and information see http://www.acorn.net...3/VP/02-VP.html not to mention any details of the spitting occurrence on one of their own that had previously occurred,who at the time was running for V.P .. LBJ and lady bird in Dallas in Nov./60..All of these were high red alerts to the secret service which they obviously chose to ignore..the only man that is seen on occasion is that of clint hill on the back of the limo shielding jackie, but none ever doing the same for JFK...THE CENTURIONS LET THEIR GUARD DOWN IMO DELIBERATLEY..

Thanks Robin, nice,,,Marilyn never mentioned these two stops that she apparently made on her way back to Zapruder's offfice, as far as i have uncovered, many thanks..take care b..

i oopsed forgot the attachments couldn't find full edit... so here they are pretend they are attached above, sorry bout that. ..b

:ph34r:Now here is a newspaper about the presidential visit and the concerns, then a photo of the crowds they were running into on main street in dallas that day, now think about it for one second, the only ss agent that moved to the back of the limo at all that afternoon was one, who was protecting jackie, by the name of clint hill..that dog don't hunt ..

here's Berlin,where they knew how to position to protect, along the sides and front were their famous white mice motorcycle police protection squad...as well as us ss on the back...

:(SS drinking article; b jim you and will notice this is conveniently when the first mention, to help cover butts, was made of jfk requesting they stay off the back of the limo...they were very quick in covering said butts and the media of course complied in not checking or researching what was being issued to them, b