Michael Walton

Oh OK. I just looked at it and it's a SWF file and then they have the video file itself pulling into that player. Here's something you may want to try but probably won't work: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-to-download-embedded-flash-swf-files-using-your-browser/

David - that last link you posted says you have to load Flash. That's old tech. Wouldn't it be better to switch over to new tech for video display?

So based on this continuing thread, which I thought had ended due to its sheer hilariousness, let me just recap not only this funny thread but others for the kids. We're expected to believe the following: Lee Oswald had a clone, a boy who looked somewhat like him, was found in Hungary, brought over here, had a mother who also looked almost the same as Lee's but had a unibrow...and never smiled. This all was started by some unnamed US government agency and supposedly happened back in the early 1950's. Even though this happened 10 years before Dallas, we have no idea WHY the government would take little Lee and his clone, and their smiling and unsmiling Moms, under their wings. Both boys and their un-unibrow and unibrow Moms were living in different places, but then were switched and lived in the place where their clone was previously. On 11/22, Lee was arrested for JFK's murder and the clone and his unibrow Mom were never heard from again. The author of the above and his followers wrote a book about the above and sell it for $60. And many people out there actually believe the story and bought the book. *** And some other hilarious nonsense while we're at it: All of the films shot on 11/22 were scooped up by the government. The government then proceeded with altering all of these films to take out any and all signs of conspiracy. But in the Zapruder film, which shows that the shot sequence the government is trying to pass down as the official sequence, shows that it could not have happened that way. But - OOPS - the government, after removing all instances of conspiracy, leaves that part in. Maybe the film editors were out that day. This we do not know for sure. And for all of the government's film editing prowess, one film was not doctored but simply squirreled away, never to be seen again in over 50 years. That's the Babushka lady's film. And many people out there actually believe the scooped-up-and-altered films story. *** And then: A woman named Judy Baker holds onto her income statements from 1963 - 30 years afterward - like most people in America do. We never hear from her about anything in the way of a love affair with Lee Oswald until over 30 years after the alleged affair takes place. But she writes a money-grubbing book stating that she knew Oswald, had an affair with him, and was doing cancer research and gave cancer cells in a jar for him to take with him while he went to Mexico City. And many people out there bought the book and actually believe her story. And some people who used to believe but no longer do have said this Baker woman is persuasive and hypnotic, never mind that these same people didn't have it in them to see through charlatans. You know, the same kind of people who would fall for crystal ball and tarot card readings. *** Then we have a pretty good theory here, the mystery of a guy named Prayer Man, who looks like Oswald and is actually seen in films during and immediately following the shooting, standing in the shadows of the entrance of the building where he works. While this was happening, the real Oswald is supposedly up on the sixth floor firing his gun and killing Kennedy. If Prayer Man is Oswald, then it's a deal breaker, the ultimate proof once and for all that conspiracy took place in the Kennedy murder. And yet, the same people who fall for the ridiculousness of the Lee and his clone, the scooped up film alterations, Judy Baker, and many many other crazy stories, often times argue AGAINST the Prayer Man theory. These same people say the figure in the films is a woman, or he's too short, too tall, too this, too that, he wears a dress, and on and on. Some even question if the figure and/or others in the images are even there, or how could the photos depict the figures, without having any clue at all how photography techniques and angles work. Some of these people are double and triple majors in college. We know this because when all other arguments are ended on this forum, they revert to the number of pieces of paper hanging up on their walls, or because a report told them they're very intelligent. *** So, kids, this is the current state of the JFK assassination research community. Is it any wonder why, when people on national TV are interviewed about the assassination and the conspiracy theory community is mentioned, these talking heads just smirk and shake their heads?

Did you ever find the color reenactment?

So accept the lies with truth? I don't share your relativistic view on this.I'm sorry Pamela, I see it as you spent 7 years with a money grubbing fraud. My thoughts exactly. Blame goes both ways too. Yes Baker is a fraud but there's equal blame for those who fall for it. What did PT say about suckers?

thanks

OK thank you very interesting, Chris. I was just looking for the handwritten one by LHO and her copied version. I can't seem to find it on MF - would you happen to know where they are online and posting a link to them here please? BTW - why do they always mention she's a Quaker? It seems like everywhere you look it's mentioned. I came across a site about her papers on Swarthmore and the very first sentence is, "Ruth is a Quaker..." Can you imagine if she was Jewish and everywhere you'd go, it'd say, "Ruth, a Jew....?" Personally, I've always felt it was too good to be true for her to be there and to control the situation with Oswald and his wife, along with George DeM and others.

robin unger

Thanks Pat.

Was Judith Baker there promoting her "Here Lee take these living cells with you to Mexico and say hi to Sparky for me" story? The first post on this thread says she was going to speak. Any event with her there should raise alarm bells.

Chris could you clarify this thread please? All you did was post a picture and then yes or no. Thanks.

George I'm confused by your answer. All Putin said was if the intel agency could pull off the assassination why would we not think in this day and age that they couldn't create a false story with the Trump thing? That's all he said. I'm amazed that you took this and puffed it up into something more.

Very well said Andre. The transporting of live cells and the Sparky line move her silly story right up there with Oswald and his clone and his sad/smiling mother. And yet people continue to fall for all of this nonsense? Simply amazing.

David Josephs, I can't help it that I have to see this case simply. Many murder cases are simple. Look at the Manson murders. They tried to say it was because Manson wanted to start a world war and all of that garbage. It was much simpler than that - he simply held a grudge with Melcher because Melcher said he was going to publish his music. When it didn't happen, and because CB was a psychopath, he wanted revenge. CB even went to Cielo a few weeks before the murders to confront Melcher. When he learned that he was gone and saw the pregnant Tate there, he sent his minions a few weeks later and the rest is history. The same with 11/22. You pretty much proved one important aspect of the frame up of LHO, that he was being manipulated and took the fall for the murder of Kennedy. And that he was not in MC. But it seems you and others like you don't want to leave well enough alone - you just keep going on and on and on with other silliness. You see conspiracy everywhere, under every nook and cranny, even getting to the point where instead of proving a result with evidence, you're going in the opposite direction - deciding on a conclusion FIRST, then working your way backward to try to prove it. You brag you're a math major but math doesn't work that way either. And as Kirk is saying here, you're arguing against what I'm saying here - Baker is a fraud - and yet it's OK that Brown has admitted that she was snookered by Baker and knows better. Yet, when I call it out, I'm all wrong and confused and don't know any better. You're not always right on this case, David, but you're arrogance knows no bounds. You're always right and try to prove with a confusing collage of documents and multiple arrows pointing all over the place. And all the rest of us who disagree are always wrong and stupid and confused and just...."hey, just go away." Kirk - I'm curious. That line at the end of your post about Sparky Rubenstein. Did Baker actually say that in a book or something? If so, that should make a lot of alarm bells go off, but I guess people like Josephs are willing to just look away.

Pamela Brown, among others, was one of faker Judy Baker's acolytes? For seven years? Who knew? I'll just never understand why there are so many gullible people in this case. I mean, I read Lifton's Best Evidence back when it first came out and I was - GASP - 16 years old at the time. After I read it, I was like, Wow! Now, over 30 years later, there's no way it happened like that and I've found that many money-making authors will latch on to a sentence fragment in the testimony and - PRESTO - they have a new "angle" on the case. This case is much, much simpler than many people like to believe. And yet, older people - not 16 year-olds - continue to fall for Harvey and Lee, the faking of the Zapruder film, and all the other silly stories. But to think a serious researcher will fall for a woman's creative writings when we never heard from Baker until 30 years - yes, that's right 30 years - after the assassination and support her loony stories for seven years is mind-boggling. But I digress.

Joe I agree about the tap and patsy statement. I take them both as a very brief yet revealing opening of a window before it was slammed shut again. I wasn't aware that they tried to change the date of the tap. Is there a link to that?

DAVID LIFTON - I really do believe that Ruth Paine owes history a more detailed explanation as to what the FBI reported. A woman as intelligent as she is--remember, she has an IQ of 145 (which was ascertained by another researcher, based on a document)--surely can provide a more detailed explanation than the superficial one that you report. Further, I believe that if you have an ongoing relationship with her, its worth pressing her further on this particular matter. A good reply here. And also just circling back not so much who ordered the wiretap but why was it there in the first place. All supporters of the lone nut theory have always sort of shrugged at this kind of thing, as if the Paines, and Oswald too, were just gobbled up in an historical event. In my mind, this idea that these people were mere nobodies does not have, as you eloquently said previously, the "ring of truth." I also like to say "what are the odds?" What are the odds that mere nobodies would have a tap on their telephone? Why not the people next door to the Paines? Why not my family who lived 1,000 miles away? There has to be something more to it than mere happenstance.

Here's a nice presentation on the 100th: https://kennedysandking.com/jfk100 ...and their trailer: https://youtu.be/yXbv3Wbt2cY

Doug, thanks for posting this. It's actually somewhat balanced as they didn't try to gloss over the witnesses who reported shots from the knoll. The artwork is great too.

Thanks Thomas it helps a lot when someone summarizes something this complex.

Thanks, Jeff.

To reply to this thread by bumping it, what should really be bumped are the very first two posts from way back. The reason being as much as I think John McAdams is a complete and mean asshole (look on Kennedys and King for his story) he's right. I think Judy Baker is a fraud and did not know Lee Oswald. No one knew about this woman until 30 years after the assassination. Her story is one of those attention-seeking types, just like Bev Oliver and "I was the babuska lady." Now if I sound mean here I'm just aggravated as xxxx about people claiming to be involved in this case when they're really doing it for attention, cash, or both.

Jeff - thanks for posting. Would you happen to know where the phone tap originated from - meaning from M Paine's place of work or their home phone?

I agree, Joe thanks.

Off topic of course but if ever a photo spoke a million and one words, it's that winking photo. I tend to transpose it to an event today and then ask yourself "could you see it happening in that event?" An example is Biden winking to a crony if Obama has been murdered and both men standing next to Michelle who has blood all over her. I just cannot see it happening like the LBJ one.