Jump to content
The Education Forum

Richard Price

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Richard Price

  1. Another reminder of what we have lost. This is a "Face The Nation" broadcast from November of 1967. Less than seven months later, we became almost as much diminished (possibly more so) as we were on Nov. 22, 1963.
  2. Thank you Robert. I mostly read on the forum to try and fill in the many areas of ignorance I have about the assassination(s). Some days I just wake up in one of my moods, as my wife calls them. I read some posts this morning and came across the one I referenced. It just seemed so out of focus with the thinking of anyone who was actually interested in truth, facts and known information about the case, that I had to comment.
  3. Or...perhaps he has shown no remorse because he truly has NO memory of the shooting, which by the way he has continually stated over the years - (without exception, I believe). As one of many people who have studied the evidence with an open mind and read Dr. Noguchi's forensic autopsy, there is absolutely no way Sirhan got close enough to RFK to make at least two of the shots (including the fatal one). I don't have an opinion as to the number of shooters, beyond Sirhan and Thane Eugene Caesar. I think Sirhan was firing live ammo and that Caesar used RFK as a shield (in case one of his shots was on target for RFK. He pivoted RFK and pulled him downward, shooting him at the same time, therefore Caesar was either behind or under RFK during the shots from Sirhan. I do not currently believe Sirhan was firing blanks - too many people were hit with shots and they were all in close proximity to RFK. I do believe Sirhan was simply firing randomly in front of him with no specific target as part of his programming. Feel free to attack any/all of these statements if you like, they are all stated as "my beliefs" or "my opinion", so therefore there is no attempt to identify any of this as FACT. Even the statements of Dr. Noguchi were his opinion based on the facts presented to him at the autopsy.
  4. Hey, there might be something to this! Look at the 3rd paragraph: His report is CONCLUVISE. I think there is a hint in here -CLU-, as in don't have a clue.
  5. Thanks for the heads up and the links. Though I live in Georgia, I emailed in support of the parole. I hope many others take your lead as well. It's probably a long shot since the family is split, but I'm used to tilting at windmills. PS: It worked in the GA Senate races last November at least. Maybe again? We can all only try our best.
  6. Yes! I think he is not allowed to handle hard sharp objects.
  7. John, if you will look 4 posts above yours and directly above my last post, you will find the answer to your questions. Denis replied to my similar question.
  8. Thanks Denis, that was the missing piece. I managed to find an aerial picture which depicted the area and was able to reconstruct the angles. That was much farther away than I had realized. I remember reading about employees working at one warehouse and being sent over to work at the other and just assumed they were walking a short distance (at least a shorter distance than this appears to be).
  9. I am at a loss in studying these photos, particularly the one labeled "McIntire". In this picture the TSBD (back side) is on the left of the photo and the Sunshine Biscuit factory is on the right. I could not reconcile this in my mind, so I looked the location of the Biscuit factory building. This building is located at 603 Munger Ave (since 1903). Using an aerial photo and Google Maps, I find the only way to get an image of the depository angled such that it would appear to the left of the TSBD is to be at least 4 blocks to the NE of the depository almost up to N. Griffith St on the 366 Hwy (today). Something is still not right with the building size/perspective even with this. You can clearly read "Texas School Book Depository" on the building, but it (the building), appears way too large and there is a building showing that is taller than the TSBD. Is this possibly the other warehouse being used by the TSBD instead of the building the shooting occurred at (supposedly)?
  10. I would not support that notion. I think it obvious that tampering has been done to the Zapruder film and the frame posted by John B. is one of the more blatant. I am not a doctor, surgeon or medically trained person, but if this "flap" were real, you couldn't hide it from me no matter what else I was concentrating on. This wound would have been quite gory and IMPOSSIBLE to not be noticed no matter how much you "pressed" it down. The actual wound IMO is by her right hand and is what is eliciting the anguished look on her face. As far as the large wound by the ear goes, Jackie also made the statement (paraphrased here) "from the front, there was nothing" when describing the wounds. I think almost anyone would admit if you were looking head on at someone, you see around their heads to the ear area, therefore negating what she said. Being as close a witness as anyone could be, I don't think she would have said "from the front, there was nothing". PS: I think she also made another statement about holding the BACK of his head on, not the side.
  11. Lawrence, if I am not mistaken, Jackie made a statement to someone, possibly Manchester, stating exactly what you bring up here. I believe the statement was about the ride to Parkland and that she spent her time trying to "hold his head on" or words to that effect.
  12. John, we will have to disagree on the use of a flash by Altgens. He would have had additional lenses, filters, rolls of film, etc., but probably no flash. He was a professional photographer so he would have known there would be absolutely no need for a flash attachment. Flash attachments of that era were quite large and unhandy. Flash photography was mainly used on medium format cameras for up close/indoor photos by the press. Below is an example of a flash available for 35mm cameras. I think you can see that is not what is shown in the Dealey Plaza pictures.
  13. I had not seen the joint schematic/side view of the limo together. The schematic and side depiction are completely different. Is the side depiction supposed to be SS 300x? It has no rear step on bumper. The front door edges (side depiction) are a good 4" to 6" forward of the schematic, the center brace section rear edge is actually at what is shown to be the front edge on the schematic. Whether on purpose or accidental, I think the schematic may represent the POST assassination rebuilt vehicle that Johnson used. I had encountered that thought when I first pulled the schematic up and now I am pretty sure that is the case. However, this is the only schematic I could find and it is labeled as the assassination vehicle. I think that we may need to find the configuration and measurements from another document (IF one exists). This vehicle shows NO handholds on the rear either.
  14. I think that's about as close as one can estimate without a high dollar "scientific study".🤣 PS: I just used the schematic from the House Select Committee which claimed to be the limo as configured on 11/22/63.
  15. I can't resist making one off topic comment. When discussing Trump and flipping, flopping or simply getting involved in ANYTHING there is a simple three word solution given to us by Deep Throat. "FOLLOW THE MONEY". If there is no money going into his pocket, there is NO Trump involvement. The only exception to that if there is one at all, is if by his actions he can call himself "THE GREATEST (fill in the blank). Not a single deep thought is necessary to define DJT!
  16. Chris, thank you for your work. I wanted to point out a couple of inaccuracies to hopefully help you refine your positioning (if you are still refining it). The distance from the inner edges of the handholds, which you reference as antenna is 36" instead of 30", making the center point of the trunk 18" from the mid-line of the trunk. Using measurements from my wife who is approximately the same height, I would also add the following "guestimates": Jackie is 67" tall. Given that she has her knees and lower legs wedged into the front of the back seat for stability, that would leave approximately 47" for her torso and head. Estimate about 9"-10" for her head, that leaves in the range of 37" of her torso (to the shoulders) stretched across the trunk at a slight angle. The distance from the front of the back seat to the front edge of the handholds is approximately 49", therefore her shoulders should reach about 12' forward of the handholds whose rear edge is approximately 6'-7" from the rear edge of the trunk. I don't have a measurement of the handholds from front to back, but they are probably between 1"-2" for ease of grasping when mounting the car. The rearward reach of her hand onto the trunk is more difficult to estimate since her arms are at an angle instead of straight out from her shoulders. Assuming that her arms are in the same proportion as my wife's (same height), her hands could be all the way to the rear at the same position as the rear handholds or within an inch or two. PS: I hope my reply is not replicating (somewhere), I tried to post it and it just disappeared from my screen.
  17. Steve (or anyone else who might know), are there any easy visual cues that would tell you the difference between a 32 caliber and a 38 caliber automatic hand gun? I have no experience with guns, but could easily tell the difference between an automatic and a revolver, however not much more. As an somewhat unrelated question, I scanned the dispatch record at the McAdams site just to see the relevant information being given. At 1:35 there is a transmission about the "Governor's wife" flying in from Austin. Then at 1:52 "39" listed as a single occupant car states "I'm in the sergeant's car and 39 has the tower radio. "4" identified as Asst. Chief N. T. Fisher then asks, "Well, where is he?", to which "39" replies, "He has gone with the State unit to pick up the governor's wife." What is all this about? The Governor's wife as most would know was in the car along with her husband and the President.
  18. I unfortunately have to agree with you on that. If Sirhan were freed, there might be a possibility of someone other than those who have controlled him and access to him to accidentally get access. Even though the odds are long, he (Sirhan) might have some unknown bits of information. I think that he might be killed ala Oswald if it appears to be coming to fruition.
  19. W., (I hate to call you by that since it is forever associated with a former President of dubious [pun intended] distinction), you make very good points. For a long time after 9/11, I didn't give much thought to the "conspiracy theories", then once I retired I began to read again and to watch/look up any subjects that interested me. I have long been one to want to learn about anything that I don't know much/anything about, particularly if it is history related. I first read some articles I found online, then followed up with videos from various sources (mostly YouTube). One of the first videos I watched was a long one by someone affiliated with A&E for 9/11 Truth. While I had to do further research after watching it (some of it was above my pay grade), I found that most, if not all the data and reasoning presented was damning and above reproach by those with an open and unbiased mind.
  20. From an online translator: le gogo - sucker, patsy, zany
  21. It is indeed quite striking and disturbing. I recently had a short conversation with a friend's son who has been working as a civilian contractor at various middle eastern military bases. He said that while stationed with the military, their only news outlet (or at least their primary one) is One America News. He discounts any other source now and says that is the view of most. Extreme right wing media is definitely taking careful aim at those who could cause the most problem in our society.
  22. Is there a problem with the forum servers? I am having problems replying to this topic. I wanted to share what may be all or at least part of the above article. https://spanishhalyon.wordpress.com/2020/08/30/jack-ruby-the-zionist-puppet/
  23. Lawrence, everyone has an opinion about Brennan. After reading as much as I can find on him, including his ghost written book, I would tend to disagree with your above statements. I'm not saying my opinion is any more valid than yours, but I will give it anyway. I'll break it down as follows: a) he would have never held up under cross examination - Who was going to cross examine him, there was no trial. b) he couldn't identify LHO - He didn't identify LHO because that is not who he saw shooting c) Z film shows him looking away at the time of the 1st shot - He said he was looking at a shooter on the 2nd floor from the top in the east end of the RED BRICK building, that is NOT the TSBD, but instead is the Dal-Tex building. As an addendum to a) He did NOT stand up under the cross examination/interrogation of the police who were interviewing him. They got him to acquiesce and accept their story of a shooter in the TSBD. He was followed, surveilled and told not to speak to ANYONE because he might be the ONLY one who saw the assassin and could be a target of any associates of that assassin. This ruse was used by those taking his information until they had him sufficiently scared to follow the official story. Between 11/22/63 and his WC interview, he was reminded again of how vulnerable he was. His once BETTER than 20/20 vision was destroyed when as he said - his eyes were "SANDED" - in what was described as an on the job ACCIDENT. Anyone can attack his story because he never bucked the official one after 11/22, but for at least a couple of hours after 12:30pm that day, he told a different story. Once shown how vulnerable he and his family were to violence, he opted to make his family safe. He, to me, was/is the epitome of the strong silent type in this generation of men. Had the threats only involved himself and not his family, I don't think he would have relented in his original story.
  24. Just perusing the internet on a hot humid day at home and decided to read some of JFK's speeches. I found this and thought some on the forum might not have seen/read this. Our current politicians/lawmakers should have such a deep well thought out definition of what they stand for instead of just relying on labels with absolutely NO underpinnings. In particular, if today's "liberals" could use the English language to define themselves in a similar manner (not just quoting JFK), they might be able to make inroads with those who are now repulsed by the title "liberal" because they don't understand the meaning and the context. https://www.jfklibrary.org/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/liberal-party-nomination-nyc-19600914
  25. Thank you for your reply. Please don't. Sometimes minute things that get included may lead to much more information. I wasn't asking specifically you the question. I thought since you posted it you might have further information on the nexus, but I was directing the question to anyone who might know more about any of the info.
  • Create New...