Michael Walton

And the craziness on this post just keeps right on going. Jesus. Bill Miller - I've been reading your posts here and you've been doing a good job. Then you said the Babushka lady was Bev Oliver. Bawahaha! No xxxxing way that is Bev Oliver. Do the research and you'll find she's just a hanger on in this case like the other wack job ----- (sorry can't even remember her name but it's the woman who wrote she knew LHO in NO). If you continue to believe it's Oliver, then my respect for your analysis on this thread will definitely drop a notch or three.

You might want to look up a thread on this forum called "Swan Song" or as I called it "The 67% Solution." Start #ss end backwards on it and you'll find there was no film alteration, cutting, copying or pasting of the film, of any film.

I'm not sure who wrote the blurb on the Amazon buy page, but it's very valuable information. This is especially for those LN-ers who, to this day, love to say, "Oh, Oswald was just a random, troubled loser who decided on a whim to take his rifle to work with him on 11/22 and score one of the most spectacular feats of shooting in world history." The book's first chapter contains new revelations about how Oswald was a witting false defector to the USSR in a CIA plan to surface a KGB mole in the CIA.

Just today I read an article where a guy was detailing another guy's journey from Seattle to Green Bay for the playoff game. He goes on and on down to the minute of how the guy's flight was postponed, then delayed, then cancelled, then he's bused to his hotel, and so on. In one part he then says something like: "Then the Uber driver picks him up and wouldn't you know...the driver is from Seattle and moved to Green Bay four months earlier." After reading the very first post of this thread I was like: OK, fine. DeM marries the woman who Zapruder knew (or maybe didn't know). Big Deal. Has anyone ever seen Zapruder talking on live TV as he describes what he saw on 11/22? He seems pretty shook up. As I've said numerous times on this forum, not everything is a conspiracy in the Kennedy case.

David, As I've mentioned in the past - you've done a great job of collecting footage, photos and so on of Kennedy. But it's such a weirdly strange phenomenon with you - you dig up all manner of Kennedy media to share on your site, and yet you believe little old Lee Oswald gunned him down with two perfect shots, one with a super bullet that went through two male adults causing all manner of injuries, and with a second bullet that splattered Kennedy's head all over the place and even had so much power to it that it threw his body violently backward. But his third shot was so way off target that it hit the curb of the street kicking up debris which hit a bystander. Then this same assassin rushed down the steps, out the building, took a bus, then a cab to his rooming house, was walking down the street going somewhere, pumped numerous shots into a policeman that called him over to his car, threw his wallet down at the scene, emptied his gun of the shells, threw a jacket off, went to a theater to hide out, was captured and arrested, claimed that he was nothing but a patsy, and then gunned down two days later in the police department's jail. So it's a weirdly strange thing with you, digging up all of this media for your website and yet believing that *that's* what happened. Could it be because you're of of those flag-lapel wearing, flag-waving "USA USA" kind of guys, believing your government got it 100% right? I'm just trying to figure it out here.

I notice that Lance Payette likes to play it soft here as a "lawyer" - oh, I'm just an objective lawyer here and I do legal work, and I have no vested interest in this and don't care who Kennedy was or is and I'm oh-so objective...blah blah blah... So I'll leave you with this Lance... https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62268#relPageId=29 This is one of your best buds - a fellow lawyer and with the backing of the full force of the US government and the media elite, this is what the full force of the US government is saying after the one and sole suspect had been gunned down on live TV in front of a city's entire police force by an "upstanding" citizen who shed a tear or two for the murdered president's wife. Now ask yourself this Lance - if the US government had truly been crying about the loss of their slain president, do you think one of its top lawyers would have ever written a memo like the above if they truly and honorably had every vested interest in finding out what happened on 11/22? Let's take away some of things we know - and none of the people below means these people planned the murder; it's simply a way of showing how vigorously (or not) they - the most powerful people in the US government - were going to pursue what happened: Allen Dulles - Kennedy fired his ass because he misled him on the Bay of Pigs; he later is quoted as saying "That Kennedy fellow really thought he was going to be president." Johnson - couldn't stand the Kennedys Hoover - also couldn't stand the Kennedys and it was rumored that Kennedy was going to fire his ass after the '64 election. So let's change hats for a minutes - let's say that these three guys above absolutely loved Kennedy like Obama seems to love Biden and vice versa. Do you really truly think that the memo link above would have been written? To just "cut off all speculation" of conspiracy? Do you not see that this memo pretty much is the government's marching orders on how to conduct the Warren investigation in the ensuing months? I think not. I think they would have put the full force of the investigation into play and would have found out everything that had happened. But because that's not the case, there was relief and joy that he was out of the way and business as usual could return. And so doing what lawyers do best, twisting and turning and sweeping and muddling, they could twist a line of testimony here, cajole or threaten a witness there, and POOF we have the Warren Report which remarkably meets the same guidelines down to a "T" of what Katzenbach wrote in his memo seven months before.

I did this little gif focusing on Brennan... he doesn't appear to be looking up at any time... and he kinda shoots himself in the foot with this testimony, no? David Joseph's GIF, though nice, shows Brennan way too early. The frames he used are of the Z film at the very beginning when the limo is first gliding down Elm. If you believe what Josh Thompson, others and I do, that the shots do not start until Kennedy first appears from behind the sign, then those frames in the GIF are showing Brennan before the shots are even fired. Again, I know this will cause further debate because a lot of people here will now say, "Oh, no....the shots started way earlier than what Walton is saying here." I don't believe the did for the main reason that the bad guys were not dumb. They had to make a somewhat plausible shooting sequence and if they fired any earlier than what we see in the Z film, it would have been impossible to hit Kennedy from the fake "sniper's lair" because the large oak tree was blocking any clear shot. So if Brennan is saying he heard a shot and looked up and saw the rifle, you're not going to see it in David's GIF because Brennan was already out of the frame in the Z film. You can see it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9w6zveedj0o

John Butler, Please go fly a kite. And when it tangles up on the moon, grab the string and hoist your way up there onto the surface of the moon. And while you're up there, look for the floodlights that were used to fake the moon landing. And also, say Hi to Dr. Manhattan for me (yes, I'm getting my heavenly bodies mixed up here but who cares). I mean, really John, do you not know how outrageously ridiculous this post sounds?

unsub...

I don't buy the "Two Oswalds and Two Mothers Created by the CIA" theory. It's simply too silly and too outrageous and not plausible. I do think there was "someone" going around in Dallas months before the shooting acting like Oswald and doing memorable things (i.e., like shooting another guy's target at a shooting range). And we mustn't forget that even Hoover told LBJ that the guy in Mexico had a different voice and appearance than the Oswald in jail that weekend. I do think the BYP's are fakes - Oswald himself said they were when he was shown them that weekend.

Respectfully, I disagree with the Zfilm alteration. I think the one we've been seeing for years is the one that came out of Abe's camera. I also believe that not everything is a conspiracy in the case. Months ago I made a combo video that pretty closely synched up the FBI reenactment film with the Zfilm. I wish I had kept it but I got rid of it because I was so pXXXed off because of all of the batXXt crazy stuff I was reading on this forum. I said to myself you know what? Fxxxk it. But anyway, the clearest shot at the earliest possible moment was right when you see Kennedy appear from behind the sign in the Zfilm and I say "clear" because in the reenactment film, the large oak tree obstructed a clear shot from the 6th floor until that moment. Sure enough, this is when he first reacts to the shot and then from there it lasts from first to 313 for about 6 seconds or so. No wonder Josh Thompson called his book way back in the late 1960's Six Seconds in Dallas. He got it right then. The Bad Guys were not stupid - they had to know that in order to frame Oswald, they had to make his fake shooting somewhat plausible in the eyes of police and investigators. Why in the world would they have taken a first shot way up earlier on Elm Street? It doesn't make sense and flies against plausibility and common sense. To take this even further, if it had really been Oswald shooting, alone, why in the world didn't he just shoot Kennedy as he was coming toward the building on Houston? There's a very good reason for that - the Bad Guys planned it out to have the crossfire start down on Elm because that's where they felt they could have the most coverage, most hidden places, and most accessibility to get away with it. And that's pretty much what happened. *** Brad - I hate to say it but from the garbage I've read elsewhere and on this forum, CTers do NOT always help the case by seeking the truth. As a matter of fact, they do the opposite. Their idea of the truth is truly crazy s##t and off the reservation, kooky stuff. Unfortunately, these same people played right into the hands of people like Posner et al. Mention a CT to him and his ilk, and all they have to do is smirk and roll their eyes. Then people come here and elsewhere and read the crazy s##t and they can't help but go along with Posner. Sad but true.

https://kennedysandking.com/news-items/castro-figured-out-the-jfk-case-in-five-days-speech-of-november-27th-1963

Bump...

LHO was, however, stupid enough to hand over his rifle to the JFK shooters that morning -- so LHO did know that something was wrong immediately after the shots were fired -- and that he had to go home to get his pistol, and that he might have to shoot somebody with it. That sounds about right, Paul. Oswald, in the vestibule, with the pistol (a la Clue). And oh, don't forget, everyone, I have all of the answers on this and the Ed Walker angle. Learn about it by buying my book So, so funny. Ray Mitchum - great post about the Allman quote. See, there is still a good reason to come to this forum to learn something new.

Dear Jim, It's funny how the Russian-speaking... Remember back in the day when you attended grade school? You'd be paying attention to the teacher and then you'd feel a sting on your ear. You'd look down, find a rubber band on the floor, look behind you and there'd be "Tommy" covering his mouth while stifling a laugh. Remember those days? There's always a "Tommy" out there, causing mischief, pestering people, doing borderline bully stuff. The choice is either to ignore a "Tommy" or "tell the teacher." In most cases, it's best to just ignore because then a "Tommy," when ignored, will just tuck tail and go on to harass the next party. On the interwebs, there's actually a term for a "Tommy" -- it's a t-r-o-l-l. I mean, did you ever notice "Tommy's" avatar? I have sunglasses on too but I had them on because I was outdoors. Our "Tommy" is indoors and has sunglasses on. That should tell you all you need to know about our "Tommy" here. And here's something else. Here's how much our "Tommy" thinks of this forum. I call it: Tommy This is a Test Graves

Chris, so according to your logic, one of them is driving with one hand on the handlebar while another one has a smile on his face. And they...what? Shot their gun and killed Kennedy?

It's really sad that no one else has commented on this outstanding, incisive article posted on Kennedys and King. While others on this forum are haggling over blurred pixels and whether Mary Moorman was really in Dealey during the murder (Mary Moorman? We're now even debating if a witness who was interviewed and photographed numerous times was even there), the article is a real eye-opener about how f##cked up this country really truly is and the old adage - "The more things change, the more they stay the same" - has never been truer. I do have one question - why is it that when Kennedy wanted to reach out to Russia and Cuba he was basically pilloried, while crooked ba##ard Dick Nixon goes over to Russia and China in the 70's and he's hailed as an esteemed statesman? This from a guy who disrupted peace talks for Vietnam in '68 and who used one of the most outrageous foreign policies in US history (the "madman theory")?

John Butler - not everything about this case is a conspiracy. Ask yourself - the Bad Guys really, and I mean really, wanted Kennedy dead. And in addition to that, they also didn't want to get caught. Otherwise, the patsy story would be completely ruined. So do you really think that they would have taken a risk of trying something insane way up earlier from the kill zone? They had it all planned out down there in the plaza - great shooting locations, fewer people down there, the SS would have let their collective guards down a little bit ("we're almost done and at the Trade Mart"), places where they could shoot undetected, throw their weapon to a spotter and blend in or disappear, and so on. All they needed was that quick 5-6 second kill zone. And that's pretty much what happened. So why in the world would you and others ever think that they'd want to do something way up on Main and Houston...and then you're even saying that they somehow got a hold of the Muchmore film to add a "ghost" in the film to cover it all up? Do you not see how illogical, implausible and crazy this is?

Does all of this really matter? The guy standing in the back of the entrance could be LHO. We'll never know until the TV station releases a clean copy of the film showing him standing there.

Please, for the love of god, tell me you're not serious about this? Please. But if you are, then wow. I mean, just, wow.

The really sad thing about all of this spear phishing is how stupid people are to fall for it in the first place. Always err on the cautious side but, nope, they see a "your system has been compromised, change your password" or whatever and sure enough, they go ahead and click. Instead of stopping for a moment and saying "Wait a minute. Why out of thousands of others am I getting this?" and just deleting and reporting it. As for JFK vs Trump, yes, two very different men with different agendas. Didn't Kennedy say, "My father always told me businessmen were son of bitches." And didn't Dulles himself say, after Kennedy's death, "That Kennedy really thought he was going to be president." In other words, truly govern. But as for Trump, all we can do is wait and see. I do understand why he won - there are many, many people out there who think the so-called American Dream is passing them by. Unfortunately, what they don't understand is the dynamics of this country have changed dramatically since post WWII. The middle class boom from manufacturing jobs is long gone and with businesses constantly looking for ways to maximum profits - like shipping jobs overseas - those blue-collar jobs are not coming back. Businesses are not content with making a billion bucks - they just *have* to make it $1,000,000,001.00. I even blame Obama and his lack of grassroots efforts to find his true successor instead of it letting the Clinton "machine" hijack the nomination. You might want to read this for more info: https://newrepublic.com/article/138635/dont-blame-hillary-clinton One other thing to keep in mind about the so-called low unemployment rate. The jobs filled are service-sector jobs (restaurants; etc.) paying low wages. They are *not* high-paying manufacturing and borderline white-collar jobs.

SANDY - The guy on the steps, wearing a red shirt, sure looks like he's drawing a handgun and aiming it in the limo direction. Probably nothing. But hey, that's what it looks like. Yes, Sandy, it's clear - you're either off the reservation, your meds, or both.

You're amazing, Sandy. Unbelievably amazing. A pistol? Boom - a shot? - OMG! So where are the police reports stating witnesses saw this guy brandishing something [pistol] or taking a shot mere feet from the President of the United States, who just so happened to have his head blown apart in two seconds before? You're wrong about Robin's clip - it is much much clearer on the one I posted because it pinpoints the movements of him compared to the camera moving around in the unstable one. I really truly feel horrible when new people come to this board and read the dreck you and others (like the guy posting that "Oswald" wore a mask when he had his picture taken for his passport) post here. I'm reading your post above again and it actually sounds almost comical, like you're trolling here. Or did you just go off your medicine today?

Amazing what people see and imagine what they're seeing. The red-shirt guy is obviously clapping, then is startled when the head shot hits. He throws his arms and hands from clapping to a "defensive" type position, then starts to try to run. Watch the stabilized version I posted and it's clear that's what's happening. You can even see his hands moving in a clapping motion right before he's startled. And yet...a gun, Sandy, from his pocket? Hands in his pocket, Bill? Although I've always admired Robin's work, the YouTube stabilized video I posted shows a whole lot more. Did either of you bother to watch it? I mean, wow. Just wow. Is it any wonder that witness statements are one of the weakest links in *any* investigation? Here's a video that you can watch over and over again and yet, two people here still don't see what's happening in it and one does. Amazing.

You might want to take a look at this photo here: Yes, this is a woman with makeup and without, but the point is people do and can look different in different photo settings. A mask? Yikes, we're now getting into "no moon landing" territory here. Let's try to be plausible and realistic here. Thank you.