Michael Clark
-
Posts
4,737 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Michael Clark
-
-
15 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:
One. That was Alexander Kleinlerer.
--Paul
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
-
10 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:
Dear Michael,
Well, that just proves that the evil, evil CIA made more than one of me (and more than one of my Mother and Brother, as well) seein' as how I quit drinking, smoking, and playing Texas Hold 'Em Poker, for money, five years ago.
Oh, I see. You're referring to yourself. Perfect grammar, though.
-- Tommy
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
-
Just now, Thomas Graves said:
I can neither confirm nor deny that I said that.
-- Tommy
PS wife, rifle, life, or rife?
It doesn't matter when you can no longer count how many Margaritas you've had.
Cheers,
Michael
-
2 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:
Well, well, well, Robert Charles-Dunne. Ready for more?
First point -- I claimed that seven people (nine if we break apart the couples) gave EYE-WITNESS testimony to seeing bruises on Marinas face, or to actually watching Lee Oswald slapping Marina in the face -- hard -- twice.
You took that and change it around so you could offer a straw dog to debate. That's your forte. You lost that debate all those years ago, and if you bring it up again, I'm happy to prove you wrong again.
Regards,
--Paul TrejoPaul 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
-
1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said:
There are no assassins in this manhole. Please close the cover and don't scratch my rifle. ( a funny due to posting issues)
-
1 minute ago, Bill Miller said:
I have done that several times. I offered a slow motion clip of Patrolman Baker running by Roy Truly and towards the stairs. Truly said "but as I came back here" when talking about his moving from the intersection to a position closer to the stairs is where this clip picks up. It appears to me that Truly is watching Baker run by ....... and when Baker goes past him - I see Truly turning around and starts to move in the direction of the stairs.
Mr. TRULY: I heard a policeman in this area along here make a remark, "Oh, goddam," or something like that. I just remember that. It wasn't a motorcycle policeman. It was one of the Dallas policeman, I think-- words to that effect.
I wouldn't know him. I just remember there was a policeman standing along in this area about 7, 8, or 10 feet from me.
But as I came back here, and everybody. was screaming and hollering, just moments later-I saw a young motorcycle policeman run up to the building, up the steps to the entrance of our building. He ran right by me.
Truly continued: And he was pushing people out of the way. He pushed a number of people out of the way before he got to me. I saw him coming through, I believe. As he ran up the stairway--I mean up the steps, I was almost to the steps, I ran up and caught up with him. I believe I caught up with him inside the lobby of the building, or possibly the front steps. I don't remember that close. But I remember it occurred to me that this man wants on top of the building.
There is your film analysis. So what film or photo evidence do you have that Patrolman Baker ran past the stairs so to go look behind the building? Ok - I don't expect that you know of any, so how about the names of any witnesses who said they saw the Patrolman run past the stairs on his way to go look behind the building? I am thinking you do not have any names either. So then explain to me how you discount what several independent witnesses saw based on what you think you would do had you of been Patrolman Bake and you wanted to get to the top floors where you believe shots may have come from. Seems to me that getting inside to an elevator or stairs to catch people trying to come down from the upper floors would be a logical thing to do. And considering that Patrolman Baker or Roy Truly didn't appear to be concerned that the press was rolling through with their cameras in hand ... it seems unlikely to me that they would have re-written Baker's movements and risking someone filming something to the contrary. But hey - that's just me.
Good stuff. Thanks.
-
1 minute ago, Bill Miller said:
Just thought seeing how people did see him run up the stairs and he was the first through the door with Truly and no one reported seeing him run around the building to look in the back ... that possibly to be first through the door that he actually did run up those steps.
Perhaps you can demonstrate with some photo-analysis?
-
4 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:
Funny ... there were witnesses who saw Baker run up the stairs and none who said they saw him running to look around the back of the building.
There's lots of funny stuff in this case.
Baker said some funny stuff too.
-
9 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:
"think I have done about all I can do here but I'll try this one more time as something of a sign-off on this thread.
Take the situation out of the context of the JFK assassination. Forget about “conspiracy theorist privilege” as I call it......"
........ "Now, with all these facts and remembering that the jury in this trial will hear nothing about JFK, be honest with yourself. Who would win?"
The accused would be found guilty.
Cheers
Michael
-
6 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:
New word for me.....
dudg·eonˈdəjən/noun-
a feeling of offense or deep resentment."the manager walked out in high dudgeon"
synonyms: indignantly, resentfully, angrily, furiously; More
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
-
-
5 minutes ago, Robert Charles-Dunne said:
You should reserve your high dudgeon for those who invent an alternate universe of transparently fraudulent details.
...................
.........machine needs to be dusted off again.
New word for me.....
dudg·eonˈdəjən/noun-
a feeling of offense or deep resentment."the manager walked out in high dudgeon"
synonyms: indignantly, resentfully, angrily, furiously; More
-
-
23 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:
I agree with Ken, and Cliff, on this one. I think the basic premise was first articulated by Vince Salandria. In his opinion the WC critics find it too painful to move beyond argument and theory and face the fact that our great president was taken from us by an evil cabal within our own government. Once we stop arguing about detail and agree on that basic premise we are only left with one option - do something about it. We, all of us, are virtually powerless, and that is a debilitating and hopeless state of being. So George, while I appreciate your hopeful and idealistic point of view, I don't find solace knowing that we all care enough to be here sharing words. It's not enough. The guilty have not been bought to justice, and the national psyche was mortally wounded. It's worth remembering that the term 'conspiracy theorist' was a CIA invention meant to forever relegate us to the realm of theory rather than fact.
"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
-
On 11/24/2013 at 6:36 PM, Vince Palamara said:
Agent Sam Kinney's wife BELIEVED LBJ WAS INVOLVED IN JFK's MURDER...WHO SAT NEXT TO KINNEY IN THE FOLLOW-UP CAR? AGENT EMORY ROBERTS, LBJ'S EVENTUAL APPOINTMENT SECRETARY AND DEAR FRIEND---!
http://vincepalamara.com/2013/11/24/sam-kinney-and-his-wife-hazel-disturbing-knowledge/
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
-
13 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:
Some do. If not why are all of these people defending LHO when, by any "normal" standard, there is no defense? Just say OK, he hit her but that is not proof of the murder of JFK, which is a valid position. But the evidence against him concerning abuse of Marina is overwhelming including an eyewitness. How do they deal with that? They either say they simply don't believe Kleinlerer or he has some secret agenda so "poof" it goes away.
Some are saying "he only hit her once" or "she ran into a doorknob" or some such nonsense. If that is not minimizing, I don't know the definition of the word. CTs want to be taken seriously (by the media etc.) but yet they can't understand why they are not. Take your evidence of a JFK conspiracy to any respected journalist. Then, when the subject of LHO's abuse of Marina comes up tell them that "he only hit her once" or whatever excuse you want to use. Then see if they think you are a credible person at that point. As an example, I'll bet Morley wouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole.
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.
-
On 3/2/2017 at 6:20 PM, Sandy Larsen said:
Can anybody point me to a thread that has good pictures of the spectators, or just to the pictures themselves? I'd like to try my hand at trying to identify Calvery.
In case you have not seen this
-
-
5 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:
I try to accept someone at their word until I have reason to believe otherwise. We are talking about Calvery's orbit here, so if you think she placed false information in that orbit, then you have the right to call her on it. To accuse her of posting false information to someone's obituary without first asking her for the source of her information is absurd to me.
He said he is ignoring you. You are trolling.
-
-
29 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:
I believe the first shot caused the back wound. It occurred at or about Z-158 based on the blur analysis of Alvarez, Hartmann and Scott. It was loud enough to startle Zapruder.
People in the parade thought the first shot sounded like a firecracker or backfire. The acoustical experts said it only registered 4 echos and therefore based on their criteria it was not a rifle shot.
However I believe it was a rifle shot except that it was attenuated. The assassin used home made ammunition which is difficult to trace back to the assassin. Since the ammo was faulty the bullet did not travel 2200 ft/sec., more than likely much less than 2200 ft/sec.
George, you previously said, I believe (please correct me if I am wrong. I will try to find your post for a quote from you), that you thought the back wound bullet (first bullet) was tumbling. It could not, I believe, have maintained such a velocity if it was tumbling. I don't believe that faulty propellant could account for a tumbling action.
*****edit. Nothing that I posted above is necessarily in direct contradiction of the point you have made, Mr. Sawtelle.
Cheers,
Mchael
-
We went from almost 4000 users to 40 users in ten minutes.
-
12 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:
I haven't thought much more about it. For one thing, I'm not qualified to discuss the technicalities of photography re Z film alteration, or what the CIA was or was not capable of doing with the film in 1963.
I've wondered, if the film was altered, why they didn't remove the most obvious indication of conspiracy, the backward head snap. I assume it would be because it would be impossible to remove the head snap without alteration being obvious.
As I recall, Sherry Gutierrez postulated that a shot from the south end of the overpass or from the south knoll area cleared the windshield, hit JFK in the right temple as his head was turned, blew out the flap in passing and exited the rear of the head. That sounds like perhaps the most likely scenario, with Jackie then holding the flap down in place on the way to the hospital and it going unnoticed by the busy doctors.
We know there was a conspiracy whether the Z film was altered or not. But if it was altered, the question of who had the means and opportunity to do so certainly narrows the field as to who was involved in the conspiracy.
Thanks Ron, I have not been able to accept an alteration theory because it does not help the WC cover-up at all, as far as I can see.
Thanks for the reply,
Cheers,
Michael
-
I am seeing an explosion of "guests" right now. Over 3000. I PM'd James groden.
What evidence is there that Lee Harvey Oswald beat Marina?
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted · Edited by Michael Clark