Michael Walton
-
Posts
1,562 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Michael Walton
-
-
The topic is Marina Oswald’s birth certificate, and I apologize for not being able to post a photo of it - some sort of kB problem that’s got me currently baffled. I’ll post it here when I can. For now, if you want to actually see Marina’s supposed birth certificate, CE129, it’s in post #338 at the link below:
HI Tom,
Just wanted you to know I've read your posts whenever I came across them with somewhat baffled fascination. I never commented because I simply had no idea what to say, and I'll bet many others are in the same clueless boat with me. I kind of wish you'd put the post back into the original thread, just in case anyone might come across it some day who might be able to add something substantial. No doubt you have an extraordinary talent with ciphers or cryptography or whatever you call it. If you'd be kind enough to explain to me what the ICO puzzles are and how they relate to Mr. Nagell and if any of this goes beyond him (which it certainly seems to), I'll reciprocate in advance with the following....
Apparently this forum gives us a limited amount of graphic storage on its own servers, but then expects us to find another solution to keep the owners' bandwidth and storage costs halfway affordable. Sandy Larsen explained the simple work-around to me, and so here 'tis: Find any graphic anywhere on the net that you want to reproduce here. Right click on the graphic and select "Copy image address." (I use Linux, but Mac and Windows should be similar.) Then when you reach the point where you want to incorporate the graphic into your post on EF, click the "Image" box on the second line of the Reply menu (at the top of the window) and paste and enter the url you copied into the field that opens up. You'll immediately see the graphic in your composition window, and as soon as you post it so will everyone else. Amazingly simple once you know about it. Thanks again for your work, and please don't give up just because few of us can keep up with you.
Hi Jim,
Thanks for mentioning this. I think it's a good tip for those who want to include images. There is one other way you can host your own images and that's on Google Drive. You have to do a very minor tweak to the code and it does work. Unfortunately, the forum system is rejecting that type of URL (but oddly enough it does work on my Profile page as seen on my profile page). I've reached out to the forum folks and hopefully they will fix it so these Drive linked images work.
But in the meantime, you can upload a photo to a shared Drive folder, then put the link of that image directly into the post or reply. It's not the most elegant solution (forces you to click to open the photo) but it does work.
One other thing - I produced a while back a video tutorial for my soon-to-be ex-client about how to downsize photos using Microsoft Paint. Since not everyone has Photoshop, I made it with Paint since if you have a Windows machine, you should have Paint too. Do you think if this video were posted here it would be a help to the community?
Thanks, Michael Walton
-
I'm not sure about the 3rd photo but I do believe for the first two photos, the guys standing on the steps and started running were captured in the Z film.
As for the "black dog" shape, I'm pretty sure there was a black couple sitting behind the concrete wall eating lunch and waiting for the motorcade to arrive. There's a photo online showing cops holding up a bag that contained their lunch that was left behind but I can't seem to find it.
-
UPDATE - Tom, do you know what's inside of the packages? Below is my reply that I typed after you posted the photos...Hi Tom and David,Thank you for the corrections, especially about what Oswald said about being a patsy. I agree that it's important to be accurate for "lay" folks who visit this forum so we get the info right. Thank you.I confess I've not read Mr. Russell's book but I'd read here and there about Nagell. Just so I have a better understanding of who he is and his history, I read the crib notes on him here:
At least in my mind, reading the above just makes me think Nagell's stories are a little too far-fetched. And with the recent PM revelations, and if LHO is standing there in the doorway area with his arms crossed casually as Kennedy drives by, it just gives me more skepticism about Nagell's claims that he and LHO were trying to prevent the murder from happening.I kind of chalk up the Nagell narrative to how Beverly Oliver claims she's the Babushka Lady.
-
Hi Tom,Thank you for your reply. Here's why I'm skeptical of Nagell. I've never believed for many years now that Oswald was the assassin. I believe, instead, that he was put into position by others to make it *appear* he was the assassin, or the patsy. I say this for a number of reasons:
- He worked for the government when he was in Russia
- After supposedly defecting to Russia during the Cold War, he returned to the U.S. way too easily
- He was a low-level operative doing such things as handing out leaflets in New Orleans and being captured on film while doing so
- He never posed for the backyard photos because those photos were faked to make him look guilty
- He never went to Mexico in the fall of 1963 (Hoover said the man they have photos of and voice recordings of was not the same Oswald in the Dallas jail)
- He was in the doorway as prayer man during the shooting
- He left the TSBD by boarding a bus, got off, hailed a cab, gave the cab to a lady, and took another cab to his rooming house - hardly the actions of a crazed assassin
- He never shot JD Tippit (because there were three[!] wallets that supposedly belonged to him, one of them a throw down at the Tippit murder scene)
- He denied shooting Kennedy
- He said he was out front during the shooting
- He said in time he could show how his face was pasted onto someone else's body in the backyard photos
- In a fit of anger because he was p***ed at his dilemna, he said "I'm nothing but a patsy" for all the world and and cameras to see and hear
- His jail protecter, Fritz, casually walked ahead, breaking the security ring and letting Ruby shoot Oswald to death, silencing him forever
- Before Oswald was barely cold in his grave, the assistant attorney general of the U.S. writes a memo saying to cut off all further conspiracy leads and to get the public to believe that Oswald was nothing more than a loner, crazed, Communist killer
- For final good measure, the finger pointers also decide to tack on that Oswald was the Walker shooter, 9 months after the fact
If you believe the Nagell story, you then have to throw all of the above out and then assume that Oswald really was a hired assassin that planned to kill the president. That, in essence, is why I'm very skeptical of Nagell's claims. Based on the above, there's just too much solid evidence that shows otherwise, that he was nothing more than the fall guy to take the blame for the murders.Thanks, Michael
- He worked for the government when he was in Russia
-
Gene,
I agree with you 100%.
-
Jim,Thanks for the correction. I was getting my committees and investigations mixed up. I do recall reading that the HCSA started off with high-minded goals to find out the truth of the assassination until the major people left as you point out. So "rigged" was not the correct word to use.The Garrison investigation was also intended to reveal the truth through the Shaw trial, but that's the one where "rig" could be applied. And by that I mean it became rigged when the media and intelligence sources were embedded into it to eventually undermine it.
-
David, you can believe what you want to believe, just like I believe what I want to believe. It's interesting that you mention the HSCA photo experts because I've seen elsewhere that lone nut believers tend to not accept the conclusions of that committee due to the fact that their conclusions said that a probable shot from the knoll occurred, thus a probable conspiracy.So I think it's interesting that you're mixing and matching things to support the lone nut belief. In other words, you and others don't want to accept HSCA's conclusions but are willing to accept their 20 photographic "experts" about the backyard photos.Meanwhile, I happen to believe this - Oswald himself said that the backyard photos were faked. He even was smart enough to understand about the concept of pasting his face over someone else's body. I'm sure that because he worked at JCS, he probably had a good understanding of how photography works.I put a great deal of stock into his claim because he also said, and was captured on film saying it, that he was nothing but a patsy. As a teen back in 1975 when I first became interested in this case, I had to look that word up and I bet a lot of other people had to do the same. Can you imagine a Timothy McVeigh or some other genuine kook even knowing what that word means? I think that simple statement he said (patsy) spoke volumes about who he really was. He knew the jig was up and was getting pi**ed about the situation he was in.You'll probably say that Jack White was no expert, but I think White's work on the photos in question point out a lot of glaring problems with them. If you say White is no expert like the "esteemed" experts that the HCSA brought in, then let me ask you this - what exactly makes one an expert in something? You can have 50 degrees hanging on your office wall but not have the ability to figure things out in a creative way; on the other side of the coin, you can have a high school degree and nothing more but have a real knack for coming up with solid conclusions based on accurate and creative analysis.Although we have to give credit to the HSCA for at least trying to come to a more accurate conclusion about a conspiracy, we all know that that committee was rigged from the start, just like the WC was. The Katzenbach memo pretty much proves the walking papers of the WC and Oswald was barely cold in his grave when it was time for the government to cut off all vigorous effort to seek the truth.One final thought - I think the folks who made the backyard photos got greedy. I mean it wasn't enough for them to just have a fake Oswald standing there with a rifle in his hands. They just had to have him holding a Communist paper, a rifle, and even, to boot, a pistol on his hip. When you really think about it, it's almost hysterical how much they went over the top on what they included in them.
-
I'm skeptical - very, very skeptical - of Nagell's claims. And I'm a dyed-in-the-wool conspiracy believer through and through.
-
"I wouldn't be too critical of an error in a caption within a photo section of a JFK book."David, thanks for your reply. I know there is always going to be errors made in publishing. For what it's worth, I've been working in multimedia design and publishing for my entire career. I'm supposed to be the designer, not the content guy, but there have been numerous times where I've received "content" that leaves a lot to be desired in the way of accuracy.To give you a recent example, I was designing a publication and the content person told me to keep "f" in lower case for "fisheries" vs. "Fisheries." I knew it should be "F" because the caption was clearly talking about an organization. I told this person I didn't agree with her and she said it was a "branding" issue (whatever that meant).Then, a few days later, another person submitted an article and had "F" for "Fisheries" like it was supposed to be. I pointed this out to the content person but she still refused to change the "F" to "f" in her caption.So the point of all of this is, yes, there's going to be incorrect spellings here and there, or incorrect things because of the way people perceive things (like the example above). At the same time, Shendon's book is an historical writing of a major event. If the caption error was "Maple Cliff" vs. "Oak Cliff" that's one thing. But to say the fake photo was taken in New Orleans seems, at least to me, a little much.
-
I went to the library to see if there were any Kennedy assassination books and the pickings were slim.
I guess it just goes to show you that where I live they want to affirm the status quo. The one called A Cruel and Shocking Act did pique my interest. But then when I was looking at the photos, I found a pretty blatant error:
The doctored "Oswald with guns" photo taken...in New Orleans? That book went right back on the shelf.
-
And so was LBJ. Now, to be clear, I think LBJ was involved in Kennedy's assassination. But that doesn't make him a racist. LBJ started out as a teacher in a poor Mexican-American school. He developed a sensitivity to the poor and underprivileged. But he was first and foremost a member of the Democratic Party...from Texas...which meant he had to play ball with racists all day long, for many many years.
Lyndon Johnson said the word “n igger ” a lot.
In Senate cloakrooms and staff meetings, Johnson was practically a connoisseur of the word. According to Johnson biographer Robert Caro, Johnson would calibrate his pronunciations by region, using “nigra” with some southern legislators and “negra” with others. Discussing civil rights legislation with men like Mississippi Democrat James Eastland, who committed most of his life to defending white supremacy, he’d simply call it “the n igger bill.”
Then in 1957, Johnson would help get the “n igger bill” passed, known to most as the Civil Rights Act of 1957. With the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act, the segregationists would go to their graves knowing the cause they’d given their lives to had been betrayed, Frank Underwood style, by a man they believed to be one of their own. When Caro asked segregationist Georgia Democrat Herman Talmadge how he felt when Johnson, signing the Civil Rights Act, said ”we shall overcome,” Talmadge said “sick.”
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/lyndon-johnson-civil-rights-racism
Nope, doesn't seem a racist to me.......
Frank, I do agree with you on this. I'm not trying to make excuses here for Johnson but he was from a very different era. Even Lincoln, who we all admire as a great president, wanted to ship African Americans back to a country made for them instead of being fully committed to their rights as American citizens.
-
Bernie,You may want to read this article about why the Arabs hate America.
I know you may say the entire article is hogwash because after all it was written by John Kennedy's nephew so it's biased. I choose to believe it's not, just like I also choose to believe many of the factual articles written about Kennedy's beliefs on getting rid of "colonialism" in third-world countries being dominated by huge corporations harvesting their resources.It's amazing to me how you think Obama and Kennedy are on equal footing in the comparison department. I mean, can you imagine the political ****-storm that would have happened if he'd just come in and completely shut down Guantanamo Bay instead of letting it continue to fester? As a comparable event, Kennedy refused to send in the military during the Bay of Pigs and then did it again when Russia put nuclear arms 90 miles away from Florida. He did this while staring down the likes of cigar-chomping General LeMay and those in his own cabinet. -
Lance - why do you read and post here?
It's not an intellectual game for me. And of course my view of the event is informed by my world view. That doesn't make it wrong. Facts can stand on their own regardless of ones point of view. The reason that most researchers and so called conspiracy researchers come at this from a so-called leftist position is that we care. One of our own was murdered, as was his brother. I certainly could never ascribe to the notion that the Kennedy's were no better than the Bushes. I can and do imagine a better world, while being full cognizant of how unlikely that is and always has been. One can understand history and see clearly the influence of money in the modern world and still hold idealistic views.
You seem very proud of your voting record while being blissfully unaware of the deep forces who are running things. I read your post and don't see the person you see youself as - a clear thinking man swimming against the tide. I see a man who is wearing blinders.
I would suggest in the first place that you stop using left and right so glibly. The whole dual nature of our political landscape is a false dichotomy that is better seen as divide and conquer by those really in control.
Can you at least concede that JFK's murder led directly to the death of tens of thousands of mostly poor American soldiers and ultimately millions of southeast Asains? Can you feel the pain of those deaths? Does my sympathy with the plight of the poor and powerless make me a 'left winger' whose views can then be summarily dismissed as biased?
I do care what you think. If I've made unfair assumptions please straighten me out.
Paul,Thanks for your well-written post here. It's how I feel about 11/22 and beyond as well. On the JFK Library Facebook page, they recently posted a photo of the three brothers. I commented:"The thing I've always loved about the Kennedys is despite their vast wealth, they always wanted to give something back for the common good - the Peace Corps and attempts at universal health care to name a few. With the current state of America's affairs, I don't think there will ever be a family like they were ever again."I still do believe that. John Kennedy was beholden to no one and I think he was doing his job the best way he thought he could for the good of the country. And I could never imagine seeing a photo of him holding hands with - and kissing the cheek of - the leader of a country that holds weekly beheadings at noon in their town square. I know this may sound "political" but it's really not. It's just an illustration of two wealthy families who have held the office of president, and their interpretation of what that office bestows. -
Once again, as I read this forum, it tends to veer way off into space from the original intent of the thread. Yes, I agree that what Mr. Tildon said ("wife beaters were more prevalent back in the 60s") is, to put it bluntly, ridiculous. I totally disagree with that because how in the world would you ever measure that? You can't.But back to the main point of this thread. It's two words here for Lee Oswald. Character. Assassination.The WC and government were doing everything and anything they could to "convince the public" (and I'm putting that phrase in quotes because that's also what Katzenbach said in his memo a few days after Oswald went to his grave) that Lee Oswald was an out-of-control defector/communist wild man hellbent on killing John Kennedy, Tippitt, and for good measure, shooting at Walker. Never mind that he was *never* a suspect to the Walker shooting, which happened seven months prior to 11/22, until he was in his grave.That's the essence of this thread - Lee Oswald = Wife Beater = Murderous Assassin
-
Pat - I think that Mr. Graves asked a pertinent question. Ultimately the only reason that a correct analysis of the wounds matters is if it helps us construct the details of the shooting. I'm not trying to derail the conflicting opinions being argued here about how to read the medical info or disinfo we have. But the only thing that really matters to me is who did it and why. I don't suspect any hidden agenda from you or Greg. But would you both do me/us the courtesy of briefly summarizing your findings as they relate to the kill zone - where did shots originate, how many shooters, the sequence of shots. Please....
I can summarize the kill zone in a nutshell for you here. And I know that Pat and others are going to disagree with me but that's perfectly fine - it's a matter of what they see and what I see. But anyway...The kill zone starts - and IMO nothing beforehand in the way of shots - right as JFK appears again from behind the sign in the Zapruder film. Throughout the motorcade - and you can see it in other films and photos - JFK was basically waving, he'd drop his hand mid-air, he'd fluff his hair, and he'd wave again. He did this throughout the entire motorcade.And the Z-film shows him doing it again - he's looking over to his left while fluffing his hair; the group of ladies on the right side and in front of the freeway sign yelled out, "Mr. President over here." He heard that, quickly looked over to his right at them, and waved. Then his right arm just kind of stops in mid-air. My hunch tells me he - and Connally too - both noticed the open umbrella - perhaps they're a little puzzled by it. But his mid-air arm is now almost resting on the car when he reappears when BAM - the first shot hits him in the throat and his arms jerk toward his neck, then BAM - the back shot hits him. You can clearly see this as the force from the back shot jerks his body quickly backward, then forward.Then, BAM - Connally takes his shot or shots. Then, 4 1/2 seconds later, the "flurry of shells" that Kellerman described come in, slamming into the back of the head, then the front. Somehow - and someone wildly - fired the shot way down, the one that kicked up debris and nicked Tague's cheek. We also have another missed shot that hits the chrome in the car, the one where the bullet nose was found in the front of the car.That's pretty much the gist of it. Keep in mind - and you can see this in the film - it's all happening in real time. The yelling, the waving, the smiles, the parade noises. Everything is smooth and calm before the sign reappearance.Take note that I say above "IMO nothing beforehand in the way of shots." What this means is why would the shooters hurriedly fire before the kill zone? They would have been taking an enormous risk firing earlier because there were men, women, and children around. One stray bullet could have injured these people. Notice in photos and films - and I've always found this "interesting" - the crowds quickly thin out after the freeway sign. There were a lot fewer people around at that point compared to further up on Elm and their chance for success would be much better to keep it within that six-second area.In my opinion, Josiah Thompson had it right way back in 1967 with Six Seconds in Dallas. -
I wanted to add a quick reply here. I hate to speculate - and we'll never know of course - but now that Clint Hill's testimony here is mentioned about seeing the scalp and hair piece on the seat. Perhaps this was the same piece that flew onto the trunk and is what Mrs. Kennedy was trying to retrieve. As gruesome as all of this sounds, it does seem to show that a shot had to have come from the front right in order to force this hair piece backward onto the trunk.
I also think this because it obviously had to take a tremendous amount of force (2,000 mph) to have blown a hole in a human head, ripping out this piece, especially with the way skin is elastic. In other words, it couldn't have just merely fallen onto the seat where Hill saw it.
-
The following image (it may take a moment to load as it's a quite-large animated GIF) gives you a pretty good estimate of the back of the head wound showing a beveled wound of exit.
Granted, it's not perfect because the two photos used were taken at different angles and at different times. If you watch the Z-film and the Nix film you can clearly see when this right frontal shot hits JFK's head, propelling his entire body back and to the left. This is why the cyclist to the left rear was covered with blood, and it's why Mrs. Kennedy, in shock, climbed out to retrieve a piece of the skull landing on the back of the limo.In the above GIF, I've often wondered why the first photo showing an intact rear head is wet and shiny (where the wound would be) where as the surrounding area is dull and dry. I'm not saying that photo is a forgery - perhaps that part was just covered up by the medical people before the photo was taken.One final thought is I'll never understand why it seems like the CT community can never seem to agree on anything, where as the LN commnity has a single modus operandi - come at you with factoids and quotes from the WC. I've read Pat's website several times and you can tell the man is thoughtful and put a lot of analysis and foresight into his work. The same with Jim Di Eugenio. I also like Gil Jesus's work. Then on the other side of the coin you have people who have come up with some pretty far out (i.e., crazy) theories like the Secret Service shot JFK, the Z-film was faked, and on and on.I've been reading and learning about this case since I was 12 years old back in 1975. I remember when I read Lifton's book - and believed it then - but as time has gone on, I've learned to just keep it simple with this case and to not believe anything and everything you read or see.
-
James,
Thanks so much for this additional info. It's very helpful. Do you know where I can download a high-res version of that overhead map you mention? You did a nice job, too, in your animation.
One other thing - what is the slope from the sidewalk up to the pedestal and what is the slope from the top and bottom of Elm?
Thanks again.
-
Thanks Kathy.
-
Thanks, Kathy.
-
I concur with Vince. I've always been impressed with Pat's level of commitment and dedication he put into his site. I've read it several times, especially those times where I'm looking for something new on the JFK case, can't find and just revert back to his site. I especially love the way he completely exposed Dale Myers' hilariously bad 3D animation sequence for the fraud it (and he) are, yet every single time Myers appears somewhere, he just has to pose in front of his bright and shiny Emmy award.
I've worked in multimedia development for 28 years and I have 3 awards too that sit on my desk. Yes, I'm proud that my work has been recognized but I don't pose holding them in holiday or vacation photos
Anyway, there are some things I don't agree with on Pat's site, for example, he believes that shots were fired before John Kennedy disappears behind the freeway sign. I, on the other hand, believe that no shots were fired until you first see Kennedy appear from behind the sign. But as the saying goes, we can agree to disagree.
But a great site by Pat and great videos he produced too. I'd love to take Pat's content and create a brand new visually interesting website for him
-
Can someone here tell me what the Elm Street grade is from the top to the bottom and also how much of a grade the pavilion is from Elm (where Zapruder was)?
Also, what is the picket fence height and the wall height, and the Zapruder pedestal? I found a nice layout of the plaza and am using that but it's incomplete and I'm trying to build a 3D animation sequence. See a snap shot.
Any help is appreciated including if anyone knows where that complete layout is.
Thanks.
-
Thanks Martin. The Shelley photo in NO has some similarities to another Shelley photo found online:
http://www.veteranstoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Bill-Shelley.jpg
However, I'm skeptical regarding the one you have of the "Shelley" standing next to the policeman.
Here is an animated GIF I found of men being loaded into a police car. The "Shelley" in it is dressed in a suit and tie and the other "Shelley" with "Lovelady" is dressed in a work shirt. Also, the "Shelley" in the GIF seems to be a detective who is watching the guys being loaded into the car and probably being taken to the DPD station. So the suit and tie Shelley can't be the same guy in work clothes, unless he was running around changing outfits. I don't think that'd be likely.
http://i797.photobucket.com/albums/yy253/seanmurphyroi/PlazaA.gif
-
Martin - thanks for this additional info. Can you post any links to your previous post or links to the photo you found? I'd love to see it.
Thanks.
The (JFK) Windmills of Pat Speer
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted