Michael Clark

What about the curb/Teague bullet? The trajectory of that shot points to a Dal-Tex shooter, don't you think?

Paul, your post shows your bias... "Several" implies more than twice and can mislead the reader into thinking that she was beaten with some frequency through a 4 month period. The evidence does not show that. The evidence shows that she may have been hit once, possibly twice, during that period.

Thanks, Paul I am glad to hear that my tendency to bump old threads is not necessarily frowned upon. In this case, it was intended to bump a link to a site with relevant reading material, so I saw little harm in doing so. I now have a good number of stored PDF's to read when I am away from a data connection. Thanks for the particular recommendation of Joachin's book. I find the earliest accounts and documentation to be of particular interest inasmuch as it fascinates me that so much was known so early-on. It is likewise a very sad testament to the fear which, I believe, prevailed at the time. If it were not for this fear, it seems, the truth would have been much more clear to people, and spoken-about, as I was growing-up. As an anecdotal note, regarding that fear, I believe I came-of-age, in this context, as 15 year-old, when I was watching the movie Flashpoint (TV-HBO). It was not until the end of the movie that I realized that it was about the JFK assassination. I watched Kris Kristoferson hold up the rifle and yell "Who are you! Who are You!", as images of the assassination flashed on the screen. I remember feeling afraid, like I was watching something that I should not have been watching. Another deeply-defining moment of that movie was the part where Kurtwood Smith, the bad G-man, explained (going from memory) that "every morning I wake up and thank god for corruption, crime and lawlessness" because it gave hiim a job, or allowed him to define himself; or something like that...... I can't emphasize how deeply that affected me. I was a different kind of kid, they were different times, I guess, Cheers, Michael

Wow! That's the first I ever heard of this! Macbeth: "Nothing is, but what is not!". Cheers, Michael

Bump

A Dal-Tex shot explains a lot for me. It makes the dual wounding of JFK and JC more plausible. It explains why I see JFK and JC react simultaneously; but it does not, and nothing will, for me, explain a pristine bullet. Of course this leaves other questions. I don't believe in a throat exit wound. So a bullet entering JFK and wounding JC would have to exit JFK's chest, for which there is no evidence. Since everything is on the table, in my fluid CT, I have to consider that all kinds of things were swapped and manufactured. So, I consider an exit wound through JFK, exiting near the nipple, and barely penetrating JC, and the related evidence being swapped and injuries being manufactured on JC. The leg wound on JC may have been intentional i(another GK shooter) n order to disable him from making efforts to save JFK. I am new to all of this but I have realized that there is almost nothing I can accept at face value from the official story, the Z film, or the "evidence". I also am considering Ashton Grays "no neck wound" theory. Cheers, Michael

No one is making LHO out to be a choir-boy. That is a fact. Your statement to the contrary is incorrect and is insulting to those at whom your assertion was directed.

Paul, That is not what is going on with your postings. You are misrepresenting things that incriminate Oswalds character and saying that you are doing it to make researchers look foolish. Half-hearted readers see your stuff, and you know it. If they, and we, are fortunate, they will read on and see that your claims are misleading at best; many will not. The best we can do is refute your claims with as little effort and time as possible. For example, there is a thread waiting for your attention.....

And, am I correct that Mr. Kleinlerer actually gave an affidavit, and the Comission didn't see fit to actually have him testify, even though he lived in or near Dallas? Cheers, Michael

Ha ha! Your timing was perfect, I spent a bit too much time trying to make a Margarita joke for your other post, the one that was in the wrong thread, and this came along. I hope you caught it as a joke. No insult or accusation... Cheers, Michael

It doesn't matter when you can no longer count how many Margaritas you've had. Cheers, Michael

Paul wrote: "or to actually watching Lee Oswald slapping Marina in the face -- hard -- twice". ---------------------------- Paul, how many people testified to "actually watching Lee Oswald slapping Marina in the face -- hard -- twice"? ....just for the sake of clarification. Cheers, Michael

Good stuff. Thanks.

Perhaps you can demonstrate with some photo-analysis?

There's lots of funny stuff in this case. Baker said some funny stuff too.

The accused would be found guilty. Cheers Michael

I am curious as to why the pronunciation indicates the first vowel as taking a schwa. I would think it would be a short "U". Anyway, it's not everyday that I come upon a new word and it's far rarer to have the opportunity to use the word "schwa". I am satisfied, time to go out and enjoy a part of this sunny day. Cheers, Michael

New word for me..... dudg·eon ˈdəjən/ noun a feeling of offense or deep resentment. "the manager walked out in high dudgeon" synonyms: indignantly, resentfully, angrily, furiously; More

"Well Put" would be an understatement. How to get President Trump on board? Perhaps convince Trump that he is becoming a victim of the same forces that killed JFK; controlled LBJ; set-up Nixon for his fall and installed Ford; crushed Carter by squashing the hostage rescue and thwarting an October Surprise; tried to asassinate Reagan and eventually put Bush 1 in power; Acquiesced to a Clinton Presidency which had knowledge (Mena, AR.) of a drug-running clandestine covert war against the world; and once again installing a flunky Bush for two terms. If Trump doesn't smash these forces, we will end up with a Ford-modeled Pence Presidency, tout de suite. Cheers, Michael

This link doesn't work anymore. I am trying to find it. If anyone has a good link, please post! Cheers, Michael

Oswald never got a trial. He may have been serving his country dutifully. His character was asssassinated after he was murdered. He may have hit her in order to try to save his or both of their lives. That may have cost him his life. He never had a chance to face accusations of spousal abuse. The accusations of spousal abuse serve as character assassination after the fact. I seee nothing but victims. Cheers, Michael

It does get sketchy Mr. P. Bottom line is the stakes are high. If he didn't kill the president, then someone else did. Whether he is a wife beater or not has nothing to do with whether he killed the president. Whether he is a wife beater or not should have no bearing on whether the bad guys get away with it not. It's ultimately a diversion set-up by the bad guys. Cheers, Michael

Baker picked a line based as much on where he was heading as on who he had to dodge. His mind was on pigeons and a rooftop shooter. He did as I would do, and ran to have a look around back before heading in. He knew other cops would be right behind him. No one saw him running up the stairs.