Ron Ecker

I didn't recall Rosemary saying she saw BDM. The odd thing is that no one else saw him. OTOH if it was the black couple that we know was in the area, then people may have seen them in the BDM position and simply thought nothing of it. The other thing is strictly a personal impression, but I've stood where BDM was, and if I had been holding a gun or other weapon there on 11/22/63 I would have damn sure felt conspicuous, so much so that it would be the last place I would shoot at the president from. If it was a shooter, how he got away with it, having the nerve to do it in the first place, seems simply amazing.

The Umbrella Man. (For all we know Black Dog Man was actually a black dog.)

Do you expect anyone here to know that? Do we have some of the shooters here? I believe Kellerman said he heard "a flurry of shots." Well, shouldn't he tell us where each shot came from and the damage it did? Here's what I want to know: Who were the shooters working for?

IOW you can believe the documented accounts of numerous eyewitnesses or you can believe the government. Tough choice!

And CTs of course look for an explanation. I think a reasonable explanation is that a bullet entered the right temple, producing the "explosion," as you put it or the opened flap, and blew out the back of JFK's head. LNs reject any such explanation out of hand, of course, because they believe as a matter of faith that there was no blowout of the back of the head.

Young-Earth creationists and lone nutters are almost like conjoined twins who were separated at birth. Here's a prime example of their parallel "thinking": Young-Earth creationist: There are no transitional forms in the fossil record. I don't care how many you show me. They can't be transitional. Lone nutter: There was no gaping hole in the back of JFK's head. I don't care how many medical witnesses you quote me. They're all wrong. And how do they know this? They each have infallible holy scripture. The young-Earth creationist has the Word of God and the lone nutter as the JFK autopsy report. Both are free of any error, mythology, or agenda. Question either one and you're going to hell!

You've put your finger on the problem though you apparently don't realize it. The LNs already know the truth. Their whole purpose is therefore to argue against those who are trying to find the truth, which is different from what they already have. That's why arguing with them is a joke, like arguing with young-Earth creationists who are in possession of the truth and whose purpose is to attack those who study evolutionary biology and the fossil record.. Elsewhere you say you are not a LN. Then you say you used to be a CT but "grew up." What is that supposed to mean? You are one or the other. Either Oswald did it or he didn't. Unless you are locked into the LN truth with its blinders, the evidence in this case screams conspiracy. .

No, I don't know why the exact number isn't known or stated. There must be a record of them.

The statement says "all of those interviewed," and according to Aguilar that meant "perhaps 13 autopsy witnesses" (p.198), so the statement would be not just a cherry-picked misrepresentation but a lie.

I'm through asking people questions who can't or won't answer them. He's all yours, Jim. Have fun.

So which ones did the HSCA suppress and lie about, the right ones or the wrong ones? Either way, that's some "investigation," isn't it? Ha ha ha ha.

I asked you a question, but I didn't expect you to answer. Just kill the messenger (Aguilar) on the HSCA's documented deceit.

Never mind that Baden didn't have the benefit of the Bethesda witness statements that the HSCA withheld from him. I guess the HSCA didn't want to confuse the poor man.

Yes, evidence that the HSCA deliberately suppressed and lied about. Why do you suppose they would do that?

The Bethesda witness interviews agreeing with Parkland were not included anywhere in the 12 volumes that the HSCA published (Aguilar, Murder in Dealey Plaza, p. 198). To find them, I guess you have to go to an ARRB site, or else search online by the name of the interviewed witness. Edit: I think I've misunderstood you. Are you asking where it is in the HSCA documents that the HSCA lied about the witnesses? The citation in Aguilar is 7HSCA37-39..

And as noted on p. 198, the HSCA report flat-out lied by saying that Bethesda witnesses did not agree with the Parkland witnesses about the wound in back of the head. The interviews of Bethesda witnesses agreeing with those at Parkland were suppressed by the HSCA, but released by the ARRB. The former HSCA chief counsel Robert Blakey said he had no idea who wrote the inaccurate part of the HSCA report. But so what? To lone nutters there is nothing to see here.

Did Lance get abducted by aliens? If so, it's fascinating, based on his photo here, that he came back as a kid.

Cliff and Jake, Okay thanks, I stand corrected. Anytime I depend on my memory nowadays I get taken to the cleaners.

You can really get in trouble that way. You're replacing the blood's DNA with your own. If a crime was committed, you could wind up framing yourself.

I'm not talking about the Connallys. But I'm sure Cliff or someone will correct me if my recollection of LBJ having the clothes cleaned is mistaken.

Also, as I recall, LBJ had the clothes cleaned before handing them over the FBI. Thus the shirt looks cleaner in the later photo. But LBJ wouldn't tamper with evidence (or withhold it from the autopsy), he was just a gentle thoughtful soul.

I don't know what the clue might be, but I remember in one of those innumerable network TV "Oswald did it" documentaries (this one was probably based on Fuhrman's book), Fuhrman and Gary Mack were standing at the sniper's nest window. Fuhrman stated that what Oswald did was "an easy shot." And Mack stood there and nodded his head affirmatively. And that's all you need to know about Fuhrman. And the late Gary Mack.

Ditto.

I keep getting sucked into this. I need more will power. Would you consider the use of two brains in the autopsy to fall under the category of fakery or alteration? There is evidence for it, because the ARRB found it.