Jump to content
The Education Forum

Brad Milch

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Brad Milch

  1. I agree, Chris. To enlighten Kathy a bit more (in case she doesn't get around the Internet as much as some of us do), all JFK websites are routinely bombarded by trollers. Their individual or concentrated effort are the reason many of those that posted videos at YouTube & initially welcomed comments were forced to disable comments altogether. Trollers use the comments to hijack the topics & create chaos. A worse case scenario of this would be the comments Jeff Morley or his outside help published at his website that appeared to many readers to be the work of Mr. McAdams & his 'cheerleaders', both spending more time at Jeff's website than they did at alt.jfk. On a good day, most, if not all of Jeff's reader's comments were from the 'McAdams gang'. After sifting through the garbage, probably a lot of Jeff's readers forgot what the original topic was about. There was a lot of complaining & many readers told Jeff they were abandoning his ship as a result of the apparent trolling. EF readers see this garbage routinely when they travel around from one JFK Forum to another. I'm sure Debra Conway & her former staff could tell you horror stories about when their original Lancer Forum suffered the worst, most extreme form of trolling as a cyber attack victim. Why would someone attack a respected webmaster such as Robin Unger, a man who has contributed countless good things to the JFK assassination research community, is like asking how could someone aim a weapon at the head of a man sitting next to his wife as a passenger in a car during a parade & squeeze the trigger (JFK). Or do basically the same to another man walking home with his wife (John Lennon). Or steer a couple of passenger airliners full of innocent, terrified people of all genders & ages into two giant New York skyscrapers. Or nail a man of worship, faith & peace to a cross & leave Him on it to die in agony for the crime of disturbing the peace. Some people do things that defy reason & rationality. Sincerely, Brad Milch
  2. @Kathy: Setting up a phony agitator or 'disillusioned' researcher is an old trolling trick used in JFK forum after JFK forum. I suspect if that was the case here at EF, the purpose was to demonstrate that JFK CT visuals analysts are the bad guys & those that don't believe any of the JFK visuals were alteration victims are the 'good guys'. I believe it was Jim DiEugenio that warned the Forum in the past couple weeks that ROKC comedian wanna-be's had infiltrated EF. If Jim's warning is accurate & my suspicions are correct, the EF admin & readers are being played by sick minds. Flooding the 1st page topic board with frivolous topics is another trolling trick. It's purpose is to knock serious topics that are of interest to EF readers out of sight, back to page 2, 3 & beyond. The more elaborate ones will have animated gif's posted to 'back up' the questions raised in the topic title. For example: "Is the meridian guy in the coveralls hiding a weapon as JFK drives by?" or 'Is the woman in red stealing the purse from the woman in pink on the Elm Street sidewalk?, followed by a looped Zapruder film animation are examples of the Forum being punked by sickos. Len Osanic had a good list of how to spot when a JFK forum has been invaded by trollers posted at his Black Ops Radio blog site. It should still be posted there. It's free to read. If Robin never gets his apology due him, it will probably be because his 'agaitator' was never here at EF in the 1st place. Respectfully & Sincerely, Brad Milch
  3. Quote: I'm with Jim on this one. Dealey Plaza is public place. Those who want to be alone can find a private spot. Freedom of assembly and speech. That's what it's all about. (Have a problem with porn? Install software to block it. For some reason I never see it, even without the software. There already must be something in place.) - Sandy Lawson Throughout history, lots of people had an attitude that they could do as they please, wherever & whenever. They had the right to (in their minds). Let's see...some names that quickly come to mind: Hitler, Stalin. Sodom & Gomorrah. Many of the people that got themselves arrested yesterday & last night around the world probably thought they had the right to do whatever they got busted for. Brad Milch PS: When I address Jim DiEugenio, it's as a student addressing a college level educator. Nothing personal, just questions a skilled educator should be able to easily handle when dealing with a classroom full of adults that don't all think the same thoughts on any given issue. As for the excessive price Robert Groden wanted for his (then current) book, in all fairness, I honestly don't remember if he offered to autograph it or not for 100 bucks. I do remember thinking of how many groceries I'd have to skip over while existing on a small retirement pension in order to pay the man. I decided in my mind that I wouldn't pay 100 US dollars for any book (even if Moses autographed it). I realize Robert Groden is a hero to some people & a selfish scoundrel to others. The impression he gave me will stay with me forever, regardless of how he appears to others.
  4. @Bill Miller I consider your analysis of the Blevins Dillard photo as adequate to the debate. I do hope Mr. Blevins reads what you wrote & responds here at EF or in his future YouTube visual analysis videos. I'll have to go through all his videos on his channel to determine what else he has analyzed in the JFK ambush films before I draw my own opinion as to how good or bad his take on the JFK visuals is. Since you tell us that you bought the same negative of the Dillard photo that Mr. Blevins used in his analysis video with the difference being your photo shows nothing in the sniper's nest window vs. Mr. Blevins shows what appears to be LHO's half body in the photo, questions should arise as to what the heck is going on here? Who got punked, Blevins or Miller (lol). Or is Blevins guilty of punking us all? Perhaps you might post a copy of your Dillard photo so that EF readers can compare it to the images Mr. Blevins has presented in his YouTube analysis video? For me, like the rest of the controversy that continuously swirls around the JFK assassination, it's a case of black & white, it is or it isn't. The image is LHO, or it isn't. I honestly can't remember when I first saw the Dillard photo. Whether it was on TV, newspapers or books, I don't recall attention being drawn to a face in the window until just recently. If the image has been manipulated somewhere in the timeline of the Dillard photo, that should lead to an investigation of the matter that might settle the issue one way or another. If the Dillard image was the victim of manipulation, EF readers should note that the manipulated image (if it was) was not passed off to the public as showing LHO in the sniper's nest window by any of the early investigators (including the DPD, Dallas County Sheriff's Dept., FBI & WC). The MSM didn't draw attention to the 'LHO face' in the Dillard image either. So why is the LHO face there in Mr. Bleviins' version of the Dillard photo (since the photo wasn't used to either incriminate LHO or used as proof he wasn't a shooter)? If the image is genuine, I see what appears to be LHO leaning forward behind 2 stacks of boxes, one stack closer to the window than the stack behind it with a camera up to his face. In private correspondence, some friends of mine see a microphone (as from a walkie talkie) up to 'LHO's' mouth, as if he's talking to someone on a radio. None of us sees things exactly the same. That's one of the reasons I would never attempt to be a visuals analyst. I know from my own experiences in life that some people wouldn't see the ocean (if pointed out to them) if they fell into it face first (lol). Sincerely, Brad Milch
  5. Quote: I think we would have won and been able to determine who was the original motivator behind depriving the American people of their first amendment free assembly and free speech rights. And make no mistake, this was a three sided operation between the Sixth Floor, Belo Corporation and the mayor's office. - Jim DiEugenio Every coin has an opposite side, Jim; The fight over free speech first amendment rights is what enabled the Internet to become swamped with pornography websites & unsolicited porn email ads parents kids see & read (and view images) on a daily basis. You happy with your kids seeing that garbage, Jim? How about the rights of people to pay respects to their murdered President without vendors setting up tables a few yards where the poor man was slaughtered depicting horrific color autopsy photos (the same photos Earl Warren was afraid vultures would obtain from the WC & hawk in public)? How would you feel if your brother or father was one of the victims of 911 & you went to the site of the attack to pay your respects & vendors had tables set up there selling photos of your relative's body? Imagine how Caroline would feel if she visited Dealey Plaza & stepped out of the Zapruder cupola (as I did) and was greeted by a 'vendor' hustling books & magazines containing her deceased father's head blown apart, displayed on a flea market table for all to see? What about Caroline & her children's rights? What's up with that, Jim? Before Groden impatiently shooed me away from his little merchandise table for interfering with his sales (I didn't buy anything he was selling; I told him all that stuff can be obtained for free at the library), I did look around & noticed some thing things missing: decency, integrity, respect for the deceased & their living relatives, & respect for Dealey Plaza visitors to visit the site in peace being among them. It will take the best of the best authors to convince me that stuffing money in the wallets of any Dealey Plaza 'vendors' (be they Robert Groden, or anyone else) exploiting the death of President Kennedy for personal profit is a cause worth fighting for. So far, no authors have convinced me..... Brad Milch
  6. @Michael: I'm consider myself a student of the case. I'm always open to learning truthful info. Spinmasters don't impress me much. Like me, most of them were not present when the crimes occurred. That's our common denominator. At times, I find it difficult to distinguish from those fighting for the truth vs. those fighting to sell books & DVD's on the case. To prevent myself from being a hustling victim, I usually wait for my local library to obtain some materials & check it out there. That has it's downfalls too: while recently reading Zapruder's granddaughter's book for free at the library, the uncontrollable urge to yell at her overcame me several times. The same thing happened while reading Clint Hill books on the assassination. As we all know, yelling at the library is not good. Not good at all (lol). My personal interest in the JFK case, I can trace back to my 5th grade teacher, Mrs. Rogers, when the assassination & aftermath happened in real time. Mrs. Rogers was probably close to retiring when I was one of her young students (I was 11). She was in her late 40's or early 50's. Mrs. Rodgers would settle an argument with her by spanking someone's palm with her ruler or sending them & their desk to an impromptu bivouac out in the hallway outside her classroom (I could swear I saw David Von Pein out there several times!). Although never having served in the US military or worked for the US Government as a civilian in any capacity, Mrs. Rodgers felt both were involved in the murder of JFK. She didn't buy the 'LHO did it alone' story one bit. I was always curious as to why she felt that way. I've learned along the way from then until now. I'm still learning. That's why I am attracted to the Education Forum. It's an online educational institutional experience for free. Here at EF one can find educators as diverse as Mrs. Rogers to Jim DiEugenio to Paul Trejo to David Von Pein. Some of the best, most expensive colleges in the world can't claim that! Brad
  7. My one & only personal experience with Robert Groden & his sidekick dates back a few years. It's not intended to influence anyone. It happened as I'm about to describe. It is what it is. I was visiting Dealey Plaza & Groden walked up to me outside the north pergola shelter (cupola) where Zapruder & Sitzman were stationed creating the Zapruder film. I asked him if he was Robert Groden & he said he was. I shook his hand & complimented him on his contributions to humanity in getting the Zapruder film viewable to the public on TV back in 1975. Then I made my first mistake: I asked him a question about the assassination. Groden motioned for me to follow him to his table that held stacks of his books, magazines & DVD's. He picked up a copy of 'The Search For Lee Harvey Oswald', held it in front of his body & told me 'the answer is in here'. How much for the book? 100 bucks he told me (I discovered later it was around 19 bucks in bookstores). I asked him another question. Groden held up something else & told me 'the answer is in here'. I'm starting to think this guy is hustling me. Then the sidekick comes over. He saw everything that happened during the ambush, he claims. He was THERE, he tells me. He saw this, he saw that. He heard this; he heard that. A shooter was here; a shooter was there. He knew all the Dealey Plaza witnesses, where they lived & what they ate for supper. He knew everything there was to know about the Dealey Plaza ambush. He held up a copy of Altgens 5 & pointed to where he said he stood during the JFK ambush as proof that what he was saying was genuine. I walked over to where Mr. Sidekick claimed he was standing in Altgens 5. I squatted down to an adolescent's height & looked at Elm Street, from the intersection to the triple overpass. The dip in the road was so deep just after the intersection that cars traveling down Elm Street seemed to disappear from sight from that point most of the way to the overpass from Mr. Sidekick's alleged position on Houston Street in Altgens 4.. It became apparent to me that with the streets lined with spectators & a motorcade passing though, plus the pandemonium following the attack on JFK & John Connally,this sidekick guy didn't see a darn thing half a century ago (if it really was him in the Altgens 5 photo). At this point, I'm thinking this sidekick guy was trying to hustle me too. A genuine Texas hustling team. Sheesh! I didn't see anything like this on Geraldo Rivera's 'Goodnight America' TV show all those years ago.(note: in all fairness, since Mr. Sidekick didn't try to sell me anything, what he showered me with would be called 'shuck & jive' in the part of the USA I was raised & educated in; universally referred to as BS) As I do with all people that impress me as hustlers, I left without saying a word, with my money still n my pocket. I haven't given much thought to either of those two (Groden or sidekick) since. I have sometimes wondered what it was about me that gave them both the impression that I had just arrived in America & Texas directly from a banana boat. Sincerely, Brad Milch
  8. Quote - Whoever posted that phony video alleging to show Oswald in the window was not up to speed at all. IT was exposed here over two years ago as a fake - Jim DiEugenio I am surprised at you Jim. You usually demand a high quality of proof each step you take in this case. Where is the proof the video is phony? The analysis of the superior Dillard image was just posted a couple days ago at YouTube. There hasn't been enough time transpire to properly analyze the new material. Would Government involvement in determining the Dillard photo captured LHO taking photos in the sniper's nest moments after the shooting convince you? It's well established what you think about past government determinations & conclusions in the JFK cold case. David Von Pein & his siblings constantly remind us (smiles). I believe the image is genuine simply because Walter Cronkite didn't jump on the photo & beat his competitors at showing it on TV, unless he balked at showing an image of LHO with a camera in his hand instead of a rifle. As for me, I believe the image is genuine. It allows me to bring closure to the JFK case somewhat. I've still got a few questions about who put LHO on assignment to photograph persons or events during the ambush of JFK, what happened to his film & camera & a few other things still hanging in the air after half of century. With closure, the self-appointed thread housekeepers (also known as xxxx) won't have to work so hard at being obnoxious. And just think, I achieved closure without buying anyone's book of errors & fables. Brad Milch
  9. @John Apparently the trolls want a piece of both of us, John. We should start a xxxxx bait club (LOL). BM
  10. John: There is some new analysis of a super clear copy of the famous Tom Dillard photo of the TSBD posted at YouTube. If I post the link here, a large image of the video narrator's analysis video will appear that will be distracting to your thread. EF readers (and you) can quickly find the video at YouTube by typing into YouTube's search engine : Analyzing Dillard Image/ JFK Assassination. If the video poster has not corrected the loud volume problem at the video's intro section since I watched & downloaded the analysis video, be sure to lower your headphone volume until the narrator starts talking. Upon studying the image of what appears to be LHO in the portion of the sniper's nest window next to where a rifle barrel was alleged to have been fired from, notice what appears to be a small camera in front of LHO's face. If the image of LHO standing behind some boxes is genuine (I believe it is) & not a hoax, LHO was also filming someone or something during the assassination. His camera appears to be pointing south from the TSBD 6th floor window. Perhaps LHO was also filming what was apparently cut out of the films you mentioned. I posted this info in another thread and a person I believe to be trolling quickly moved to kill interest in it. Sincerely & Respectfully, Brad Milch PS: If the Dillard image of LHO in the sniper's nest window is genuine (I believe it is) & LHO was also filming during the assassination, it indicates to me that he went to visit Marina & his children on the Thursday before the JFK ambush to pick up his camera. His camera equipment may have been what was supposedly in the package Buell Westley Frazier claims LHO carried with him on the shared ride LHO participated in the morning of the JFK ambush. If I am not mistaken, a camera belonging to LHO was missing from the DPD or FBI inventory of his possessions post-assassination.
  11. @Alistair: The beauty of the gift of a democratic society, wherever it is on earth, is people have a choice between doing their own thinking, seeing with their own eyes, reaching their own conclusions or being micro-managed into believing what someone they don't even know thinks. Or even worse...wants them to think. For the free thinkers here at or reading EF as 'lurkers', I made my contribution. For the micro-managers, I have the 'ignore' function to rescue me. To them, I say 'Bye bye forever'.... Brad Milch PS: @Paul Trejo: Because I used the ignore function, I have to post a reply to your post here, for the time being, Paul. If you've never had cause to use it yourself, it's kinda like a shark cage. I can still sense the sharks swimming around me, but now I don't have to see their dorsal fins in my face each time I post something (LOL). You bring up great points for consideration, Paul, for those following your reseach in this thread as well as those checking out the new video analysis of the Tom Dillard photo I gave a link to above. I'm no photo analyst, but to me, the image of what appears to be LHO in the new video analysis I posted looks to be that of LHO holding a small camera to his face. The direction of the camera is in the area of the South pergola & the old Federal building behind it. Having read much research on LHO allegedly being an Intel operative, I immediately thought: what a slick way to get LHO to stand in the sniper's nest: his handlers give him an assignment to photograph someone or something during the assassination. This is the same thought many of those that participated in the 'LHO in the doorway' thread felt. It's understandable that those who worked hard on that thread would not want to see LHO's image elsewhere. EF readers will probably be more concerned which is correct: LHO in the sniper's nest, LHO in the doorway, or neither (or 'both' for the Harvey & Lee research followers). For the benefit of EF lurkers that can't comment, I also see what could be additional faces directly behind the 'LHO in the sniper's nest' Dillard image. I don't see anyone holding a gun to the man in the window's head either, suggesting to me that, if a genuine image, LHO wasn't forced to stand where Tom Dillard captured him in one of his TSBD photos. To my eyes, LHO is standing behind some boxes. The line of the boxes is visible just below the large rectangular black shadow that separates the upper from the lower section of the window. By following the line of the top box, I make out another row of boxes closer to the window. Around 'LHO's' face I see a reflection of a large crowd standing in front of the reflecting pool. The reflection in the window is very similar to the scenes in the Dorman film, from a slightly higher position. A skilled visuals analyst without a paid agenda can probably take it further. What I wrote is what I see in the clearer image. EF readers may want to look for those items when they examine the new visual analysis for themselves. I can't help what I see. EF readers can't help what they see either. The trick is understanding what we see. That's where the pros come into play. Like buying a used car, some salespersons are honest & others have hidden agendas. For the fakery part: why didn't Henry Wade, Jesse Curry, Will Fritz, J. Edgar Hoover on up to LBJ use the image (if it was faked)? Can you imagine the public response had Walter Cronkite shown the global public a photo on TV of what appeared to be LHO peering out the sniper's nest window moments after the shots? Seems more likely to me that the image was simply overlooked in the poor photo analysis of the day. This isn't to say the Dillard photo wasn't faked. One could honestly ask what JFK visual hasn't been accused of alteration? Others might wonder why some fight so vigorously for the honor & integrity of the Zapruder film & not the Dillard photo? What's up with that? Do researchers only fight for the authentication of visuals supporting their works when that work is threatened by allegations of visual fraud? But then again, what the heck does a Louisiana man know about this this old Texas super crime stuff, anyway (smiles)? Sincerely & Respectfully (to you, Paul & all good, loyal EF readers), Brad Milch
  12. Aliistair: The thread you referenced concerns a bad copy of the Dillard photo. The link I posted is for a version of the Dillard photo closer to the original photo (the video narrator explains this). One has to watch the video to obtain that info & see the comparison made between the clearer image & what was discussed in the past with an inferior image. The narrator just posted this video yesterday (with the clearer image analysis); talking about it in past threads on any JFK forum could not be possible where I live. I obviously don't live on 'I know everything there is to know about everything there is in life street' like some claim to house themselves (smile). David Von Pein & I don't agree in this area of the JFK discussion: I believe Mr. Oswald was caught on film in the sniper's nest. Had the photo been faked, surely early investigators & the WC would have used it & newspapers globally would have splashed it across their front pages. I believe new visuals analysis has brought out something that was overlooked in the past half century. In regards to Paul Trejo's research, if the new visual analysis is accepted globally as genuine, Paul will have to re-explain his LHO 'handing off his rifle to someone he trusted' research to include LHO standing in the sniper's nest window just moments after the shooting occurred. For others who refuse to accept that LHO was at least one shooter, regardless of what evidence is shown them, this new visuals analysis will surely be rejected. It's been said before that one cannot teach an old dog new tricks, no matter what method of schooling is employed. Regards, Brad Milch
  13. @Paul, Alistair & David Von Pein: I wonder if you fellows have seen this analysis of LHO & how it will affect your critical thinking both of you have expressed in this thread (and elsewhere on EF threads in the case of DVP) if that really is LHO in the sniper's nest window: Possible Hearing Damage Warning! Turn your headphones volume way down during the beginning of the video! It certainly looks like LHO peeking out of that window to my eyes.... Best wishes: Brad Milch PS: I'm curious about the relationship in time between this Tom Dillard photo & DPD motorcycle officer Marion Baker dashing towards the south entrance of the TSBD (as captured in the Darnell film). If the two visuals are in close in time proximity, it suggests to me that the man in the window that appears to be LHO saw officer Baker heading inside the building. That in itself may explain LHO's alleged speed in getting himself off the 6th floor of the TSBD, past the stairway women & into the lunchroom to be greeted by officer Baker's pistol pushed up against his gut. People have been known to move extremely fast when a cop is coming after them (smiles)...
  14. My two cents: From what I have read, seen & considered about the JFK ambush, I see 3 distinct possibilities: - The attack came from outside the 'shields' of JFK while a car passenger during his parade. - The attack came from inside the 'shields' of JFK while a car passenger during his parade (inside job). - A combination of the two above I suspect JFK might have been finished off inside the tunnel of the triple underpass by inside elements, outside elements (or both, if the Dealey Plaza ambush had failed). SS agents appearing to respond to the gunfire by positioning themselves as 'shields' could just as easily have finished JFK off. If JFK had made it alive to Parkland, I believe his non-coup security would have taken over the ball game. As a living Commander In Chief, that security would have included Federal & State militia that would have simply outnumbered the attackers. Where the motorcade is said to have stopped just west of the triple overpass would have also made a great spot for the killers to finish the job IMHO. The LHO 'happenstance' explanation of the crime simply is too 'fishy' for the majority of interested people to bite into. It's been that way since day 1 and after over 53 years since the crimes occurred, no effort to convince the public otherwise has been successful. Sincerely, Brad Milch
  15. Thank you for your kind words, John: For those who are interested in film & photo special effects, it may come as a shock to learn that optical printers were used in the filming construction of the 1932/1933 movie 'King Kong'. I would suggest to google search for 'optical printers', King Kong, film special effects for starters. Those fools stalking & poking you are not amusing EF readers, John. The readers are following your threads looking for explanations & ideas. They aren't interested in reading what some anonymous poster thinks is impossible or mistaken. People prefer to make up their own minds. The blacks up on the overpass with the fellow that looks to have a rifle resting on the overpass arm could have been marshalled to that spot by the fellow with the rifle. There is testimony & interview comments scattered throughout the JFK ambush story that a railroad detective was supposedly on top of the overpass or behind the grassy knoll privacy fence before, during & after the ambush. His identity & why he was there has never been determined. The identities of the black people on top of the overpass & why they were there to be photographed by Cabluck from the window of one of the motorcade press busses also slipped through the cracks over time. It wouldn't surprise me if the rifleman found them all drinking in one of the parked train Pullman cars & took them up to the overpass under pretense of arresting them. Something along those lines. Your work is bringing us all closer to the truth of what happened to JFK, John. For that, you deserve a historian/investigative journalist prize, not juvenile ridicule. All the best to you, distinguished Sir, Brad Milch
  16. @John Butler & Chris Davidson: The work you both are doing in analyzing the Dorman vs. Z-film appeals to a lot of us interested in the visual record of the JFK ambush. Trying to figure out what devious people appear to have done to some (or all) of the JFK ambush photos/films in an attempt to disguise the truth of the event is not easy work when one wasn't actually there to see alterations performed or have it explained why scenes were being changed. I, for one, never bought the 'Elsie Dorman held the camera to the side of her face' story about her film. I don't believe that story. Even a toddler knows to look through a viewfinder to take a photo. I suspect Elsie caught the action down on the street below her window as it happened and the handlers of her film (early investigators) moved the focus up from JFK's touring car & the SS followup car tailgating it to the sparse line of spectators closest to the reflecting pool. This would have been a slick way of destroying Elsie's film without actually tossing the entire film in a furnace or setting it on fire with a match. With the parade vehicles removed, the spectators could be moved around at ease in scenes because there are no vehicles to establish time. From what I have read, an optical printer can reframe a photo or strip of film to take the focus off of one subject & onto another. I believe it's important to note that a motorcade vehicle stopped in front of the TSBD before JFK's entourage arrived. I believe it was the pilot car that did this. I'm one of the group of skeptics that believes the pilot car (or another parade car, if the not the pilot car) dropped off the shooters of JFK in front of the TSBD. They mingled with the crowd with overcoats hiding their weapons. When the motorcade rounded the corner, one or more shooter either mounted the bumper of JFK's limo, the running boards or rear bumper of the SS vehicle (or both vehicles), rode a shot distance down the Elm Street incline, attacked JFK & John Connally, dismounted near the Newmans & ran up the steps of the pergola. In respect to the intersection of Houston & Elm streets, I believe scenario I described is what has been cut/manipulated out of the ambush films. When John Butler opens a thread on the frontal shooter, I expect he'll explore the image of a man in a suit & hat that appears to have the butt of a rifle resting on the overpass bridge apron (as seen in the Cabluck photo). Near him is a group of black people who do not look like railroad workers. I believe this person also departed the car that stopped in front of the TSBD & walked over to the overpass. I agree with John that the Altgens 7 photo is a fake. I believe the railroad workers we see in Altgens 7 originated in additional photos Altgens snapped before or after the ambush in an attempt to hide the shooter with the suit & hat. For me, the common denominator in all the JFK ambush visuals is the SS followup car practically vanishes from the Elm Street intersection forward. One cannot track the SS followup car the entire journey it made down Elm Street during the ambush. I believe the answers to the assassination are contained within that simple fact. Sincerely, Brad Milch
  17. Slipping back in LHO's timeline a bit, I'd like to comment on what might, could or should have been playing on LHO's mind at that point in time between the hardship discharge & the undesirable discharge. From my own personal experience in the military, a lot of young soldiers do not have a clue as to what they are going to do to support themselves once separated from the military. All of the available options for education & employment aren't always presented to them in a timely manner that enables a timely response. For example, it wasn't until several years after I was honorably discharged from the Army that I learned that had I applied for a position with a post office, I would have been placed on the priority list above 30 point veterans waiting in line for jobs for a 90 day period. Unfortunately for me, I learned this info too late to take advantage of it. I'm presuming LHO may have landed in a similar boat in his exit from the military. [Note: Had I known about, applied for & gotten accepted as a postal worker when I separated from the military, I might have found out for myself why the mail carrier, no matter where I have ever lived, cannot seem to find my correct mailbox on a day to day basis & place only MY mail in it. I might have also learned why the mail carrier is late all the time & appears tired often, as if having just run a marathon [LOL]. Not being properly prepared for return to civilian life may be the reason so many veterans end up hanging out in bars & honky tonks, involved in drugs, involved in fights, murders & arrests, alcoholics & the rest of the sordid things that type of life often rewards its participants with on their journey down the road to skid row. I'm looking at this part of the story as comparing similarities between LHO & myself: - Neither of us were born into a family of wealth that could or would support us in any way, shape or form - Both of us liked to read & watch TV programs - Neither of us had a dependable father - Both of us were veterans - Both of us served our country overseas during the Cold War - Both of us served in the military at about the same age (LHO started at age 17, I started at age 19) - Both of us enjoyed the company of & interaction with women - Both of us married young in age in relationships that culminated in disaster (with alleged hanky panky prevalent by both relationship members) At this point in LHO's saga, I'm thinking along the lines that LHO should have been pursuing what doors his time in service could open for him in the areas of employment & education. From there, LHO should have been pursing correcting the losses his undesirable discharge bought him; the doors that would never open up for him. I can envision LHO camping out on the doorsteps of his local VA upon his return to the USA from Russia until what was wrong in his life (undesirable discharge) was repaired. It might have been possible for LHO to have returned to active/reserve duty to 'work off' the undesirable discharge. I can also envision LHO realizing in Russia (via family letters & US Embassy briefings) that denouncing his US citizenship & threatening to divulge military secrets to an enemy would cost him his opportunity to attend college & earn a degree under the US G.I. Bill. Not to mention the risk of US authorities arresting & detaining LHO for treason once he stepped foot out of the Soviet Union. I'm not sure about it, but it might have been possible for LHO to have attended a Russian college while the VA paid for it under the G.I. Bill (had LHO not pulled his 'defection' stunt). The dates between LHO's hardship discharge vs. when the undesirable discharge kicked in would certainly factor in to what was possible in LHO assistance & aid available to him at that point in his strange, busy young life. Brad Milch
  18. @Paul Trejo: I expect this thread will appeal to a multitude of Education Forum readers as it progresses, particularly those either currently serving our country in the military, in a reserve status, employed by military contractors, separated or retired from past federal service. The common denominator for all of us is we all know there is a chain of command that extends up to the President of the USA, we all know what the consequences of breaking the rules are, nothing is done without approval & 'going rogue', if caught at it, usually results in severe consequences. Some might even equate what happened in the LHO saga during & after his military service to real life events presently happening in their own careers. I'll be the first to admit that, as a former US soldier & now retired Federal servant, the story of LHO before & after his military service is really weird to me. Much of it doesn't make any sense to me at all. In a lot of the story, I try to place myself in LHO's shoes & ask myself what would I do in the same situation? Who would I go to for help if I felt I had been shafted? Would I have exhausted all means of attempts at remedy before I might contemplate bringing a weapon to my place of employment & horrifically ambushing two defenseless men & murdering one of them instantly and the other over time (John Connally). I'll be looking to answers to those questions as this thread progresses. So far, Paul has opened the door to allegations that LHO worked for the ONI during his marine service overseas. Is that really the case? Doesn't this place LHO in a category of 'elite service' to the USA (similar to the Navy Seals, Green Berets & other Special Forces)? If so, why didn't LHO appeal to his Congressman, State Senators, the Pentagon, VA on up to the then President of the USA, legal assistance available to him, etc. when his discharge from the military was downgraded to 'undesirable' & placed him in an economic & educational prison? Taking the government of the time period at its word that LHO was the solo assassin of JFK & J.D. Tippit, how does one explain abandoning all the help available to LHO to get him back on his feet following his undesirable discharge to the extreme action of allegedly blasting an unsuspecting man's brains out of his head & all over his wife sitting beside him in a car on a public street? Sincerely & Respectfully, Brad Milch
  19. Fascinating reads, Paul, Alistair & Joe! One could certainly find motivation for LHO to allegedly abuse Marina for pressuring him to quit the ONI program (that Paul tells us LHO was involved in) & thus receiving an undesirable discharge as a result. It appears to have been the old 'YOU ruined my life' story that has historically cancered its way into many, many relationships with disastrous results throughout time (if that was the case in LHO's relationship to Marina). Quick question for Paul: where is the LHO ONI Program paperwork? Anyone who's ever been in the US military knows nothing is done without paper orders, particularly when G.I.'s are sent somewhere on missions. It's understandable that soldiers on sensitive, dangerous missions wouldn't carry incriminating paperwork on their persons. Such a paper trail would be maintained somewhere in the headquarters that soldier was assigned to. Apparently, John Connally & his pretty wife Nellie had their own misconceptions about LHO's discharge from the Marines. I recall several interviews in which John Connally stated he felt LHO was shooting at him & hit JFK by accident. Nellie told Larry King in 2003 that John Connally was involved in not re-instating LHO's discharge back to Honorable IIRC. Nellie also felt LHO was shooting at her husband & hit JFK by accident. I guess I'm not the only one that mis-remembers stuff (sniffle). Best, Brad Milch
  20. Thank you for the clarification, Alistair! It's been awhile since I booted up, wore the uniform & was a 'lean, mean fighting machine' (lol). If I am not mistaken, undesirable was about as bad, if not equal to dishonorable coming out of the US military. I can certainly appreciate researchers who believe LHO fell into the wrong company (such as right wing extremists) when he was out of the military that may have taken advantage of him. If I recall correctly, Vincent Bugliosi argued against LHO being an intel operative for the Navy because of the undesirable discharge he received. Some have argued that the discharge was a deception that allowed LHO to continue intel work as a civilian. I really don't know one way or the other. How the learned researchers spin it matters to me. I do know that when I was a Federal employee, getting fired from a Civil Service job was about the worst thing that could happen to someone who had invested a lot of years in serving the country. Kinda like a one way ticket to skid row (Desolation Row, as Bob Dylan would have it). Some fought back with lawyers, but the outcome wasn't always rosy. Paul Trejo's analysis appeals to me in several ways. Placing myself in LHO's shoes, I can understand him wanting a piece of John Connally for turning his back on him. Connally's signature on a reversal of LHO's discharge from undesirable to honorable would have turned LHO's world around 360 degrees. I can also envision LHO working with others that may have told him they'd be the shooter if LHO could smuggle a weapon into the TSBD & help them escape the building. Respectfully & Sincerely, Brad Milch
  21. Paul, I always enjoy what you write & your take on the assassination, so please don't take this the wrong way: Researchers continuously forget LHO's dishonorable discharge (that he wrote Secretary of the Navy John Connally about, in an attempt to have it reversed). Without that dishonorable discharge hanging over his head, LHO could have applied for & possibly gotten a CIA job without leaning on the likes of Guy Banister to 'pull strings' for LHO. Ditto for most Federal jobs. That DD ruined LHO's veteran status. I believe it also killed his right to attend college under the G.I. Bill also. Of note to those who believe LHO did intel work for the Navy, specifically ONI: Such work would have qualified LHO for positions within the CIA & FBI, had he not had a Dishonorable Discharge hanging over his head like a Felony conviction. IOW, LHO could have achieved his intel goals on his own without the assistance of shadowy others had he not had a Dishonorable Discharge. Had LHO been doing clandestine work for the Navy (or any other Federal agency), LHO could have used such experience to join Jesse Curry's or Bill Decker's elite group of undercover officers (had he wanted to). Instead of being accused of murdering a Dallas police officer, LHO could have been one himself. 6 months of Army service without a dishonorable discharge was all that was needed to qualify for a Civil Service (Federal) job as a Veteran during the Viet Nam thing. LHO had radar (Air Traffic Controller?) experience as well as foreign language proficiency (Russian) just a few years before I served our country. LHO could have scored a lot of good Federal & civilian jobs with just his military & veteran status (minus the Dishonorable Discharge). Without the Dishonorable Discharge, LHO could have attended colleges & earned his own degree (while getting paid by the Government). He could have joined his wife Marina's status as college educated. I know this for a fact: Viet Nam & the college that followed my HONORABLE Discharge opened the door to Federal employment that allowed me to retire at age 52. None of that would have been possible with a DISHONORABLE Discharge dragging behind me like a ball & chain. I'm more prone to believe that, if LHO was a shooter (solo or with help), he was aiming at John Connally for ruining his life. John Connally's signature on reversing LHO's Dishonorable Discharge could have turned LHO's life completely around. In short, the Navy & John Connally stuck it to LHO & LHO stuck it right back on Nov 22, 1963. David Von Pein knows this area much better than me....jump in here & go for it, David! Sincerely & Respectfully, Brad Milch
  22. Very interesting analysis, John! I noticed an open window in the reflection of the building (TSBD?) in the reflecting pool water. The image looks to me to be more like the open window of the 5th floor directly under the 'sniper's nest', if it's not Elsie Dorman's window. Let's hope the cyber bullies stay out of your thread(s) & leave you alone while you do your thing. There's nothing positive for anyone to be learned from bullies of any kind. What might be what is being attempted to distract from your analysis? Let me skip over the diversion tactics & get to the beef.... ...It might be this: all of the ambush films appear cut when the parade car traverses Houston Street or turns onto Elm Street. One cannot observe the actions of the SS car occupants the entire journey from Houston to Elm Street. Dan Rather slipped out an interesting observation when he told CBS News TV viewers that, upon seeing one of the Zapruder copies on Monday, 25 Nov 1963, that an SS agent was riding the bumper of JFK's parade car before the shooting began (Rather's 3 different CBS News TV descriptions of what he saw when the Zapruder film was projected in Zapruder's office can be viewed on YouTube. Rather also described viewing the Z-film on a Dallas radio broadcast). If all those photographers captured a man in a suit mounting either the bumper of JFK's parade car or the SS followup vehicle before the shooting began on Elm Street, it is understandable why such a scene would be cut out of the films by those attempting to conceal the truth of the President's murder. I doubt JFK would have turned around if he felt or sensed someone mounting the rear of his touring car because he was used to SS agents mounting & leaving the vehicle during motorcades (as Clint Hill did several times in the Dallas motorcade). How difficult would it have been for a shooter (or two) to join either of the two vehicles, shoot the President in the back & the back of his head, wound John Connally from point blank distance & simply dismount the car & run past the Newman family at the base of the pergola on Elm Street, escaping the scene? That scenario would explain why the Newmans saw men with automatic weapons run past them from (what they believed to be) the SS Queen Mary when the ambush ended & others saw SS men surround the JFK car during the shooting; some smelling gun smoke in the kill zone. Respectfully & Sincerely, Brad Milch
  23. @Kathy & James: Out of curiosity, what is the 'Premier' JFK forum? What do the numbers show? After the recent Presidential campaign & election with the alleged voter fraud hanky panky shenanigans, I'm a bit suspicious of Internet ratings these days. I always considered EF to be the 'Premier' JFK forum. It's so much more improved & exercises free speech more than Lancer tried to be when that website was shot down in flames a few years back. What do the topics & contributors that attracted the most visitors to EF tell the administrators? Which ones repelled interest? I'd like to see Larry Rivera & Dale Meyers post here at EF. The work they do separate of each other is always a good read for me. Who they may associate with means nothing to me. With the popularity of Blogs as an example, how about EF playing 'mother ship' to members individual blogs? All blogs would fall under the umbrella of EF. Each 'Blogmaster' could control who posted in their blogs if they find themselves under stalking/hi-jacking attack, thus keeping topics better focused. EF would collect the blogs visitor counts as its own tally. Personally, I expect interest in the JFK case to rise when the enslaved documents are finally released to the public in October of 2017. Respectfully & sincerely, Brad Milch
  24. @Michael Walton: I vividly recall as an 11-year old being asked by our teacher (Mrs. Rodgers) to gather around her desk, look at the Life Magazine she had displayed & find for her in the Z-frames Life magazine published just where JFK looked back at the TSBD & was shot in the throat (as Life claimed was seen in the Z-film). None of us could. Neither could Mrs. Rodgers. Years later, when I learned that both the SS & FBI of that time had Zapruder film copies when Life published that disinformation, I wondered why neither agency complained about what Life published if it wasn't factual. When the WC was first published & Mark Lane drew attention to the splices in the Z-film, my first thought was that JFK's supposed 'turning back to look at the TSBD & being shot in the throat by LHO' had been edited out of the film. Sincerely, Brad Milch
  • Create New...