Michael Walton

Agreed. She was a very pretty lady. But if it was Files dressed as her then all bets are off.

If you're going to "examine" his theories with the aim of suspecting either Moorman or Hill being involved, why would you exclude the Files or SS theories? You might as well claim Moorman's camera was a live TV feed for Files and the SS to fire their shots. Or better still, it was Files dressed as Moorman firing the shots from his mini Fireball gun specially designed to fit into a cut out of his Polaroid camera. The examination and theories are endless.

I had posted about this previously. A lot of interesting local stuff on her site. Here's my post

Bernie, how dare you! Her name was AnnE Mary Moorman with an E at the end of her first name! Now let me tell you something, Laverick! We all know you're ignorant here! But this is the most ignorant you've EVER shown yourself to be here! You're simply clueless here because they have the EVIDENCE! So just....go awayyyy!!!

OMG. Unbelievable, David Andrews.

Robert Turner - for what it's worth, on your website you say Oswald was killed a few weeks later. He was actually gunned down on 11/24, two days Kennedy's murder. You may want to firm up your website's basic facts on the assassination before branching out to theories on what happened. In other words, if you can't get the basic facts of the case correct, then everything else falls to the wayside, too.

Mervyn, Could it be that after 54 years, there really isn't all that much more to talk about regarding the case? And that the books you mention are just more fodder for the conspiracy theorists and Oswald-Did-It theorists to go off into a corner and start wondering what's missing in the so-called missing narrative? And that these two authors you mention wrote their books to make a buck off the case? Because, well, there are people who believe anything and will, therefore, buy the book? For me, personally, I don't get why there are so many people out there with their own pet theory. Not everything these people think could have happened on 11/22/63. If you're new to this case, my suggestion is poke around here and discover the many outlandish, crazy threads on here - for example, there were two Oswalds, the Z film was faked (and because it was faked all of the other films and photos were faked as well), the basement in the building housing Ruby's nightclub was assassination HQ, Judy Baker had an affair with Oswald, the autopsy photos were faked, General Walker and the Right Wingers murdered JFK....and on and on and on. But it appears that none of these people ever ask themselves how all of this could have happened. In other words, if you believe Kennedy was murdered as a result of a conspiracy, not all of these pet theories could have happened in one grand plan. No assassination HQ was needed; no Oswald clone was needed....and so on. Someone's theory is not correct and I, personally, think many of them are incorrect. If you're new to the case, your best bet would be to start at the link below to learn how the guy they claim was just an angry lone nobody was trained to be a low level agent who did a fake defection to the USSR. Keep in mind that this was NOT done as a grand plan to murder Kennedy; this all happened before Kennedy was even president. After his usefulness for this was up, they didn't quite know what to do with him so he returned to the areas where he grew up. Only when the plan to kill Kennedy (most probably in mid 1963) was hatched did they figure out a way to manipulate him into the building where he could then take the fall for Kennedy's murder. When he was not murdered himself in the movie theatre for also gunning down a DPD police officer but lived until 11/24/63, he, too, had to be murdered which, unfortunately for the nation, took place "in broad daylight" on national TV. Funnily, it appears the planners just gave up the ruse at that point and sent Ruby in to kill Lee right in front of the entire country. But once he was out of the way, the official record could be created about the angry lone screwball who killed Kennedy all by himself. https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/State_Secret.html As the fictional characters in the Godfather said: Tom Hagen: It would be like trying to kill the President; there's no way we can get to him. Michael Corleone: Tom, you know you surprise me. If anything in this life is certain - if history has taught us anything - it's that you can kill anyone. The key, though, is it didn't take a grand plan to kill Kennedy.

Bart call me stupid but what is the significance of the documents you posted above?

The key here is "it could have been jammed" or whatever you want to call it. Was it? Most probably not. The reason is simple. It was not necessary to do so. The shooters were in place and the fake 6th floor nest ready. The car drove down, the shots were fired, and the deed was done....6 seconds in and out. What or how could jamming the band possibly have helped? It wouldn't have helped at all so there's really no reason to speculate about it.

No matter what you want to call it Mike it's still a ridiculous theory that has no basis in reality. And as DiEugenio would call it it's pure speculation.

Very interesting. Looks like that actually confirms there's only one Oswald and actually debunks the HL nonsense. But of course Team H will totally deny it or disagree.

Regarding the article JH posted above with the bad touch up photo, I'm mentioning again that photo here. Yes it's a horrible job but it does NOT mean it was done for sinister reasons. I posted about the mechanics and "art" of touch ups on the other thread here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/?do=findComment&comment=363519 and here... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23677-a-couple-of-real-gems-from-the-harvey-and-lee-website/?do=findComment&comment=364317

Really Gene? This all goes both ways. The folks who post rebuttals to this theory have posted solid rebuttals and we too are attacked for being "ignorant" and worst by the same people you list above. As a matter of fact it got so bad that one unnamed member here was throwing all kinds of venom on MY PROFILE PAGE. When I reported it this member was "banned" from the forum. Guess what? Shockingly this member is now back. And if you don't believe me - which seems to be the modus operandi here on EF - send me a PM and I'll be glad to share the venom. And seriously have you EVER questioned the mere impossibility that two men who supposedly look alike, and whose mothers supposedly look alike, knew all the people that Bernie listed and out of a near impossible odds that none of these people EVER bumped into each other? IMO I probaby have better odds of winning the lottery than I do of that EVER happening. And here's the funniest thing of all. I KNOW President Kennedy was murdered as a result of a conspiracy. Like Bill Simpich and other researchers I have a great deal of respect for but since joining this forum that number has dwindled, there's no doubt in my mind that a conspiracy murdered him and Oswald took the fall for it, then was hushed up himself on 11/24.

Jim HARGROVE, like I said above but which you seemed to ignore, Jim Garrison, bless his heart, was not the be all and end all of the JFK case. Yes, he tried Clay Shaw which was admirable of him and IMO very very brave because what he tried to do - to expose the assassination for what it really was - was greatly undermined by his own government. If you're not familiar with that story, look it up on KAK. But it doesn't mean that everything that came out of his mouth was 100% correct.

I agree with BL here. I find it very hard to believe that with all of these people knowing both Oswalds that both of them would not eventually bump into each other in front of someone. As for Garrison I hate to say it but he's not the be all and end all of the JFK CT community, any more so than Bugliosi was for the LN community.

Mike Clark instead of standing down on the sidelines waving your pom poms and cheering Team Hardly on do you have anything - anything at all - to contribute to supporting or rebutting the Hardly Lee story? The last theory I recall you "contributing" on EF many months ago was the one where you thought the building that housed Ruby's nightclub also was assassination HQ because there was a lot of copper wiring found. Also I remember you saying you didn't like playground tactics around here but from the looks of it you're pulling one because...why? Because Laverick plays the guitar? Let's at least practice what we preach here and discuss the merits, or lack thereof, of the Hardly Lee story.

An interesting website. I noticed the guy doing kids' TV down there in the 60s called Mr Peppermint. Growing up in the Cincinnati area, they had their own kid show called Uncle Al. I wonder who copied whom? Or was it all one big coincidence? LOL

A guy named Dr. Chesser published this a while back about the possible *rear* bullet exit wound: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-application-of-forensic-principles-for-the-analysis-of-the-autopsy-skull-x-rays-of-president-kennedy-and-a-review-of-the-brain-photographs Months before he published it, I posted on this forum about an odd black hole seen in one of the autopsy photos. It concurred about what Chesser wrote above: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/23367-for-debate-the-hairline-spot-seen-in-the-autopsy-photo/ I also made an illustration combining two of the photos to show how a front to back bullet created a tangential wound that exited the rear with beveling around the hole. This would also explain the back and to the left body movement of Kennedy that takes place at Z313.

We have, Jim H, we have. Over and over and over and over again. At this long boring point in time, it's a WIN-WIN for both sides. Team Hardly will continue to say there were two Oswalds and two Oswald Moms and the other end will continue to say there weren't. Hardly says your evidence is correct and ours isn't and we say our rebuttals are correct and you're wrong. Meanwhile, did you reach out to Consortium News like I suggested to let an independent reporter review the Hardly Lee case, to see if it holds water? That's really the only real and final next step for the Hardly story. Otherwise, it's just going to keep going round and round here like a broken record.

So I guess you do believe - like you believe everything else was faked in this case - that the back drop up the street has been somehow faked, right? And if you watch the video, the person who made the video asks the biggest question of all - WHY was it faked? This is what tends to happen on this forum and out there in the world over and over again - everything was faked but the people who think that have no answer for WHY it was faked. There has to be a real and plausible reason for faking something like this. Even your buddy Sandy Larsen doesn't think this was faked so you may want to discuss it more with him; perhaps he can explain to you why HE thinks this is a simple matter of optics or another perfectly simple explanation.

The above video is just more crazy blather from an irrational conspiracy theorist "researcher." Below is a comparison of the Z frame overlaid with the FBI reenactment film shot several months after 11/22/63. As you'll see the background that the "researcher" mentions looks exactly like it did on 11/22. Nothing was cut out or pasted in. As is usually the case with "researchers" out there, they think the government had some all seeing and all knowing power to change the films and photos, find a clone of the accused assassin ten whole years before 11/22 (and whose Mom, by the way, also was a clone of the assassin's Mom) and other kooky theories. Wow, Sandy - what a breath of fresh air to see that you're actually working to debunk a kooky theory such as this one. Congratulations.

I mentioned this recently as well. They said no mainstream outlet would want to hear anything they have to say. I then mentioned Consortium - DiEugenio has been published there. Go there. Present the case. It's not MSM but it's a start. Crickets chirp...not a word from them.

Lance, Sandy's credentials are that he repaired the old tube TVs years ago and he's extraordinarily keen at performing extraordinary troubleshooting of things including this case. One of his abilities was he saw one of the old guys down on the knoll holding a black object/gun. When I called him out on it, he switched tactics and said he was joking. Another ability was that he said that when you throw a baseball from right field to home plate, in order for it to land in the catcher's mitt with no bounce you have to throw it the equivalent of something like 200 feet in the air for it to take place that way. When I explained that I played ball up to my third year in college and that you do NOT have to do that, he simply refused to believe it because his intelligence level and keen analytical abilities were far superior to this old ex-ball player.

Yep, sounds about right coming from Sandy just like he thought it was a fact he saw one of the old guys holding a gun down by the steps during the shooting.

Nice quote, Jim H. Team Hardly NEVER believes anything about the Warren Report EXCEPT when it suits the Team Hardly story.