Michael Cross
-
Posts
217 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Michael Cross
-
-
On 1/28/2019 at 10:41 AM, Lewis Reynolds said:
From what i can see its two parents with two children (both in red). In the first frame the right hand side child is visible with mum. The other is hidden by the car.
In he second frame the left hand side child is visible with dad, and the right hand side child is hidden by people.
Yes, you're right. My bad.
-
1 hour ago, Chris Davidson said:
Altgen's 6 taken at approx z255 = 486-255 = 231/18.3 = 12.62sec while the Wiegman/Bell sync at least 22sec after the headshot, followed by Couch does not = Altgens crossing the street a few seconds after Altgens 6?
Altgens is seen(in Couch) crossing the street as Wiegman makes his run down the knoll.
Look closely down the street toward the lightpost. Guess who that is crossing?
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwrExtVD005OS3QxMXNBemRkSGs/view?usp=sharing
How striking is it that those vehicles and motorcycles are STOPPED?!
-
That's a great read Jim. Chris Davidson has a gif with an apparent muzzle flash in the area described - if memory serves.
-
2 hours ago, David Josephs said:
Two parents, two kids both dressed in red....
Chris is not saying the are the same people.... so what’s the fascination Dave?
btw, nice to see you on here again...
Not to speak for Dave, but they seem to move with the car albeit not perfectly - I wondered if it's an alteration error.
-
3 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:
Pam,
Do you think this is the same version that
Rich Della Rosa
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XrRbkY9gEnQ
and
William Reymond
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSdyqDBTpeo
said they saw?
Steve Thomas
I'm wondering that as well. Greg Burnham has seen it as well.
Pamela?
-
4 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
What does the position of Specter's RIGHT hand have to do with anything?
And: the last photo you used isn't good at all for your "Left to Right" purposes. That's a photo from the SS re-enactment, using a standard Lincoln car. That's not a stretch Lincoln like SS-100-X.
Here's the correct angle (slight Right to Left):
Taillight to center line is slight? Hardly.
-
13 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:
Oh my. LOL. That's hilarious.
-
5 minutes ago, David Josephs said:
FWIW - the rebuttal of a LNer...
FC - ever hear of COINTELPRO TECHNIQUES FOR DISRUPTING FORUMS?
Here are a few which apply perfectly...
9. Play Dumb. No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.
13. Alice in Wonderland Logic. Avoid discussion of the issues by reasoning backwards or with an apparent deductive logic which forbears any actual material fact.
19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the 'play dumb' rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon.) In order to completely avoid discussing issues, it may be required that you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.
'Zactly. FC in another thread talking about LHO's own actions as proof. Presumably like vehemently denying he shot anyone. It really feels like we've had a couple of disinfo artists deployed here.
-
But was his gun sighted for a downhill angle? I'm guessing it was, that those "recreating" the shots, being experts, knew that a gun with sights adjusted for flat ground will miss high when fired at a downhill angle, and accordingly, set their sights for the angle. All "evidence" is that LHO practiced on flat land. If so, his gun would miss high.
-
David, as always, presents evidence, visual aids, real data.
FC deflects and distracts. DVP offers opinion.
Can't debate those that ignore data, facts. They'll just point "hey look over there" rather than deal with what's true. Splices. Multiple splices . . .
-
The coat is worse than the shirt. That is a LOW hole!
-
14 minutes ago, Lance Payette said:
Perhaps those who insist there was "butchery" can explain themselves. Was it a big ugly gash by the time the death stare photo was taken (and probably before the body left Parkland)?
Nice assumption about Parkland, completely not based in fact. Any argument based on that assumption is groundless.
-
4 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said:
Seems we have found ourselves a French Brian Doyle.
Indeed. Ignoring what doesn't fit his agenda.
-
Yes yes, you're the authority. We all bow down to your superior knowledge. Case closed as they say.
That Gerald Ford character moving the back wound up was quite a thing though. Not sure why that was necessary given your overwhelming evidence.
-
I've thought about it. In detail. There are enough points of fact to dismiss the WC and your theory. Yet I cast no personal dispersions at you, as you did in your post to others. Not humor or irony or sarcasm.
-
25 minutes ago, David Josephs said:
http://www.freehomepage.com/jfkresearch/c2766.html
The photo on the left (top) was selected for publication in Life Magazine. In this photo, the serial number C-2766 is clearly visible on the barrel base (bottom left). The Warren Commission photo of the serial number (bottom right).
Please note the difference in the numbers themselves. The most obvious difference can be seen in the 2, which is far more ornate on the FBI / Warren Commission rifle. Notice the way the vertical shaft is thinner at the bottom and balloons out at the top, and the way it narrows to a fine line as it curves left. It then ends with a teardrop that nearly touches the left side of the vertical shaft. By comparison, the lines that form the 2 on the Life rifle are fairly consistent in thickness, with plenty of space between the end of the loop and the left side of the vertical shaft.
Also note the C in both photographs. While the Life photo shows a C with a rounded bottom, the Warren Commission C has a serif on the bottom which somewhat resembles a G.
Curious to hear how the WC apologist would rationalize this damning discrepancy . . .
-
13 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:
Interesting picture. Ropes up to keep the crowd back, cops spaced out on foot facing them. Only four motor cycle cops, everyone spaced out wide and clear from the six deep crowd.
Yes, but no agents on JFK's car, windows open with people hanging out, people on the balcony . . .
-
3 hours ago, David Josephs said:
David, I'm trying to send you a message, the forum says you can't receive?
-
FWIW I'm with David on this. Lighting changes features. But there are too many similarities. Would be interesting to try facial recognition software.
-
Agreed and agreed.
-
5 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:
Happens to the best of us...
Aren't there frames of the Zap showing JFK with his left forefinger extended?
Not that I can distinguish. If you can find one I'll recant. I'm not certain.
-
22 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:
I agree with Gil's analysis that JFK was grabbing at the tie with his left forefinger.
Then the finger stiffens.
Cliff, your certainty that you are correct gets in the way of your reading skills I think. I've been referring to THIS statement by you when I say that you can't see what an individual finger does. You can guess, infer . . . hypothesize.
-
On 9/24/2018 at 5:07 AM, Ray Mitcham said:
Why would a secret service man want to know if there was another way out fo the building? Strange.
Fake SS in Dealy that day. Perhaps one of them.
-
2 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:
Certain of what?
Who in the world is going to react to a shot in the back by putting their hands in front of their throat?
It seems to me folks engage in witness bashing when Glenn Bennett's notes are ignored, and the testimony of close proximity witnesses are ignored.
From the WC testimony of close proximity witness Linda Willis:
<quote on>
Mr. Liebler: Did you hear any shots, or what you later learned to be shots, as the motorcade came past you there?
Miss Willis: Yes; I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time, and then there were two real fast bullets together. When the first one hit, well, the President turned from waving to the people, and he grabbed his throat, and he kind of slumped forward, and then I couldn't tell where the second shot went.
<quote off>
From the WC testimony of close proximity witness Nellie Connally:
<quote>
Mrs. Connally:...I heard a noise, and not being an expert rifleman, I was not aware that it was a rifle. It was just a frightening noise, and it came from the right. I turned over my right shoulder and looked back, and saw the President as he had both hands at his neck.
Mr. Specter: And you are indicating with your own hands, two hands crossing over gripping your own neck?
Mrs. Connally: Yes; and it seemed to me there was--he made no utterance, no cry. I saw no blood, no anything. It was just sort of nothing, the expression on his face, and he just sort of slumped down.
<quote off>
Certain that he's grabbing his tie. Or extending a finger. If you read my response I said I was inclined to agree with Gil's hypothesis, but that the idea you can see WITH CERTAINTY what JFK's hands, let alone individual fingers are doing is nonsense. At least in the images on this thread.
Trying to Understand this Bronson Frame
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Yes, and David presents cogent, verifiable evidence. If he forms a thesis, it is based on data that can be verified, which should be the standard for all research.