Ray Mitcham

I note you haven't mentioned how you can tell the color of Doorman's eyes from an image that is too small to show a plaid. This is Doorman's stance. shirt outlined in yellow.

Ray, I appreciate your opinion on DOORMANS shirt being a plaid, although IMO it is not plaid, the image is too small to determine if there is a pattern. yet you can tell the color of Doorman's irises? Stop kidding me. If DOORMAN is not OSWALD, who is he? Lovelady. Ray, what do you believe you colored in? Doorman's sleeve. That is most probably ROY LEWIS's arm and hand, it is not a part of DOORMAN No "probably". You are wrong. It is Doorman's arm. ROY LEWIS is many feet in front of DOORMAN, DORMANS arm could not extend to space where LEWIS is located. It isn't Lewis's arm. It is Doorman's.

The two shirts are totally different. Doorman is wearing a plaid shirt. Oswald is wearing a shirt with a very small pattern. Here is Doorman's shirt bucket filled with two different colors. The above shirt matches the shirt that Lovely is wearing in the DPD photos.

So you think that the shirt Oswald is wearing in this photo is the same as the shirt Doorman is wearing? Bump.

So you think that the shirt Oswald is wearing in this photo is the same as the shirt Doorman is wearing?

Bob, is it your contention that doorman is wearing a plaid shirt?

Bob, I have no intention of insulting you. I was just warning you about what would happen if you continue with this stupid theory. Cinque was a guy who had the same theory and he has been laughed off every forum he has put the theory forward. He even said that the photo of Lovelady (The one which you say you can even tell the difference in the color of the irises- sheesh!) had been altered to show that Oswald had been given Lovelady's hair style. I would hate to see the same fate befall you. Perhaps you would answer the following asked of you on another site by another poster. "So, what you're saying is, the conspirators realised that the man IN THE CHECKED SHIRT was in fact Oswald. So they had to force Lovelady to say he was wearing a checked shirt in order to place Oswald in the snipers nest. They also faked films and photos of Lovelady in the checked shirt to further enforce this argument. They even forced Lovelady to pose in the checked shirt in 1971. All this because Oswald wore a loud checked shirt on 22 November 1963? So Bob, was Oswald wearing a loud checked shirt that day?"

Bob, you are in danger of becoming a laughing stock like Cinque. Doorman is Lovelady, no matter what you try to infer that in the black and white photo his eyes are the wrong color. You say "The iris of the eyes is absolute proof that OSWALD was on the steps of the TSBD during the assassination, absolute proof." when you can't even see the pupils in the photo. Me thinks you are seeing what you want to see. How you can state that Doorman is Oswald, when Doorman has the same shirt on as Lovlady in later photos, and has the same face shape and hair style. You re barking up the wrong tree. Don't let yourself get the nickname Mad Bobby, rather than Bob Mady.

Welcome, Yoni. I hope you enjoy your stay.

I beg to differ, DVP. For height comparison purposes, that's Bonnie Ray Williams on the left in the bottom photo you posted (CE489). Taking the sharp angle of Dillard's camera into consideration, I think the person captured or placed in CE482 must have been taller than Bonnie Ray Williams in order to place his face in the center of that upper window. Here is Bonnie Ray Williams waiting to get into a police car, with Danny Arce and Officer Brown(?) standing right behind him. I'm guessing that Oswald was much closer in height to Arce and Brown(?) than he was to the tallish Bonnie Ray Williams. --Tommy Thanks, Tommy. That's what I thought..

If that's Oswald in the picture, then he is either standing on a box or he is over seven feet tall.

Quote by Pierce Allman. "A very dramatic thing, I can't forget, it at all, I keep hearing the shots. And on the third one the President then - instead of slumping forward it looked like he was, he - he jerked back or was thrown back a little bit. And Mrs. Kennedy then was halfway out of the seat and a Secret Service man - I presume he was - a Secret Service man was then over Mrs. Kennedy. And the car had stopped only momentarily and then immediately sped away at top speed. "

What chains would they be, Harry?

Thread bumped on the first anniversary of the first post on the subject.. Anybody heard from Sean of late?

Why would they, Ken? Did you mean "None of the Italian war vets that I talked to ever called a Carcano a humanitarian rifle"?

That's why the first sentence of my post is a question and not a statement. No, Duncan, Your first sentence was a statement where you accused Bob of still being a " master of bad taste." You appeared to answer your own question by then asking Bob to make a public apology, before you knew the answer.

Duncan, did you not read that Bob said he had been away for some time and had no internet access? By the way "if that was his name" is hardly a "disgusting insulting post." IMO

If the only tube inserted into JFK's chest was on his right side, what is this apparent slit on his left side? In addition it says on the report above, that there was "obvious trachial and chest damage" What chest damage?

Thanks for resurrecting the thread, Rob. I had never read that the doctors at Parkland and the autopsy doctors disagreed about the insertion of tubes into the chest of JFK. If, (and it seems to be a big "if") they were both right, then could there indeed be a case for body substitution? 1. The Parkland surgeons were right. 2. The Bethesda autopsy surgeonswas right. 3. Both sets of surgeons were right. Which contention is correct?

If "A" (the single bullet) is impossible, then "B" needs to be investigated. As James has proven that "A" cannot be true, that leaves us with the problem of "B". Unfortunately, James is correct, you cannot answer his dissertation and you just blather on about trying to prove the alternative. There are a number of solutions to the alternative, but we don't have to prove them to show that the Single bullet Theory is sunk without trace. As you can't accept it because of your flat earth outlook, James is right and you should be completely ignored. As somebody previously said you may be a good librarian, but then nobody would ask a librarian to explain a book to them. Better get back to your cataloguing.

Nope because the autopsy wasn't correctly carried out. If we had the full details and the surgeons had done their job we would; be wondering about thinks like that. But we do know that the magic bullet didn't cause trhe damage it should have. Perhaps you can explain that.

Exactly, Bob. The bullet supposedly entered JFK's back at 17degrees downwards and yet at 25 degrees downwards in Connally. A truly "cruise" missile.

David, you just don't get it, do you? The fact that the single bullet couldn't have happened because of the lack of damage on the alleged path, means it didn't happen. Regarding the two bullets that are missing, there are a number of ways to explain their absence. The magic bullet couldn't have happened. The two missing bullets could have. Belief is a terrible thing. It's like trying to explain that world is round to a flat earther, talking to you.

Thanks for the information, David. At 8.44 Sibert says 'the official" autopsy started". As against the unofficial autopsy earlier? Regarding Humes and the surgery to the head- do you really think that a surgeon would confuse a wound with surgery/ You really are desperate. Once again no answer to James's statements about the damage which would have been caused if the bullet had done as SBT's think. James sinks the single bullet theory completely. The singel bullet theory is the Titanic of the JFK assassination.

Unfortunately, at the present time, I haven't time to listen to the full interviews of Sibert or O'Neill. Perhaps you can tell me exactly what they say regarding the surgery to the head prior to the Bethesda autopsy, and where on the MP3. Nice diversion, by the way, David. Never mind what happened to the two bullets. You still haven't tried to explain why there was not massive damage which the Magic bullet would have to have caused, to have taken the path you advocate.