John Butler

Can you find for me that blue-grey building on Houston Street? On Elm Street? You could find it in those days on Main Street just east of the Old Court House. That blue-grey building was torn down sometime later and a parking area was put there. This then changed into the Kennedy Monument. Have you ever wondered why they put the Monument there? You can make preposterous claims but, have you looked at the evidence?

David Von Pein, I see that you are finally getting the picture and beginning to understand what I am saying. Actually, I am not saying this but, the AMIPA film and Jackie Kennedy's statements are: Friday, June 5, 1964 TESTIMONY OF MRS. JOHN F. KENNEDY The President's Commission met, at 4:20 p.m., on Friday, June 5, 1964, at 3017 N Street NW, Washington, D.C. Present was Chief Justice Earl Warren, Chairman. Also present were J. Lee Rankin, general counsel; and Robert F. Kennedy, Attorney General of the United States. When questioned by Rankin she stated on two occasions she didn’t know what the names of the streets where the assassination occurred. Rankin kept zeroing her in on the TSBD and Elm Street moving toward the Triple Underpass. He spends some time doing this. Afterwards, Mrs. Kennedy says the following. Mrs. KENNEDY. You know, there is always noise in a motorcade and there are always motorcycles, besides us, a lot of them backfiring. So I was looking to the left. I guess there was a noise, but it didn't seem like any different noise really because there is so much noise, motorcycles and things. But then suddenly Governor Connally was yelling, "Oh, no, no, no." Mr. RANKIN. Did he turn toward you? Mrs. KENNEDY. No; I was looking this way, to the left, and I heard these terrible noises. You know. And my husband never made any sound. So I turned to the right. And all I remember is seeing my husband, he had this sort of quizzical look on his face, and his hand was up, it must have been his left hand. And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull and I remember it was flesh colored. I remember thinking he just looked as if he had a slight headache. And I just remember seeing that. No blood or anything. And then he sort of did this [indicating], put his hand to his forehead and fell in my lap And then I just remember falling on him and saying, "Oh, no, no, no," I mean, "Oh, my God, they have shot my husband." And "I love you, Jack," I remember I was shouting. And just being down in the car with his head in my lap. And it just seemed an eternity. You know, then, there were pictures later on of me climbing out the back. But I don't remember that at all. Jackie Kennedy’s deleted WC testimony gives one a sense where the wound was. I suppose this is why the testimony was deleted. She said: "I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing -- I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on. .... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top." And, this last bit: From a Jackie Kennedy Interview: JFK Murder Jackie Kennedy Reveals All Rich Torne Published May 10, 2017 Jackie says: “They were gunning the motorcycles, there were these little backfires; there was one noise like that; I thought it was a backfire. Then next I saw Connally grabbing his arms and saying “No No No,” with his fist beating---Then Jack turned and turned--- All I remember was a blue grey building up ahead; then turned back, so neatly; his last expression was so neat; he had his hand out….”

David Von Pein Super Member Members 5,085 posts Gender:Male Location:Indiana, USA Report post Posted 19 hours ago Explain what? I haven't the slightest idea what you think it is that needs to be "explained" in that film clip. Please enlighten me. I have made some notes on a frame of the second back wound on Market Street. I'm sure you will not understand or see what I am talking about. You wont or can't explain what's in the photo because it negates nearly everything you believe about how President Kennedy was assassinated. Francois, Everyone is entitled to their opinion. But, you really should stop using those childish emojis. Sorry, for being off thread but, these fellows needed responses.

As far as the BYP's are concerned, I think everyone has said all that needs to be said. Folks should just stick to their known facts and resist the temptation to argue about this or that in the BYP's issue. The BYP's are fake and that has been proven by many people. The conclusions that the BYP's are fake is real, inescapable, and undeniable.

David Von Pein, There are things that I do not find credible. Among these are the Warren Commission, the conclusions of the HSCA, and Marina Oswald, the double or triple agent. This happened on Main Street in the AMIPA film shot by Robert Yeargan: I sure you can explain this some way.

In the words of a fairly famous politician "What difference does it make now?" Does it matter anything about the camera? Does it matter anything about what Marina said or not? We all know the photos are FAKES. Let's see if I can repeat that FAKES. Jack White listed 15 things. I listed one . Ed Ledoux listed another. I believe Sandy Larsen listed problems. And, many others have pointed out things. What more do you want? People like Von Pein and people like him will never accept that you are right. They have their beliefs and they are religiously applied. I think DiEugenio noticed that the forum is kind of slow these days so he brought back and Oldie but, Goodie.

Tom, I would like to know if you are talking about the Oswald figure's right hand? The one holding the rifle. When I first look at the hand holding he rifle I see it as backward, his hand is reversed and going in the wrong direction. But, on closer inspection the hand appears normal with the fingers going in the right direction. This happens every time I look at the photo. It is particularly noticeable if I haven't looked at the photo in a while. I don't know if this is true or not. It is a speculation based on the appearance of the right hand with the rifle and the highlights and shadows in the photo. What if there were more BYP's than 3. Say there were a half dozen or dozen photos created. Bits and pieces of these photo were used to make the 3 known photos. Let's say a small number were created but they weren't enough to do the job of showing what the editor wanted to show in the 3 BYP"s. He had to go back out and shoot more photos to get one where he could take a hand and a rifle to cutout to match what is seen in 133B. This would explain the time differences noticed in the photos. The shadows indicate different times in the photos. It would explain why I am seeing a hand reversed and then on inspection seeing it as normal. It could explain the ring being on the left hand and the right hand in different photos. 133B is a left, reversed hand with rifle retouched to look like a normal right hand. This may sound like nonsense but, think about it for awhile. This creation of more than 3 photos over time in one day is an adequate answer for the conflicting shadows going in different directions indicating different times in the photo and the highlights and shadows on the figure being confused and unnatural.

I looked at all the photos I could find of the places along this route. I found 30+ unknown photographers and about 16 that could possibly have a camera. A good deal of the imagery was vague or somewhat distorted. There could be argument on some of these I speak of along the route. Some could be said to be waving their hand or clapping hands. But, many had objects in there hands that looked like cameras. I left out controversial camera men such as Bob Yeargan or Prayer Man who has a camera on Elm Street.

This might be helpful in understanding David's excellent map and notions. This shows the location of the known photographers in Dealey Plaza. It leaves gaps that should have had photographers in them taking photos of the President as he passed by. And, this is the second part when the President was at the Houston and Elm intersection. What these two maps do is to simplify by removing extra things on the map other than photographers. I don't think I missed any known photographers. If I did you can add them to this work. The location of the photographers are general and not to the exact dot location.

B. A. Copland, Thanks for your response. I first noticed something was wrong with the visual record 2016 in Dealey Plaza when I saw that Altgens 5 had been photo edited. What was being covered up with the changes in Altgens 5? What was the real story? Those were some of the questions. As more and more material begin to show up as photo edited or contradicted what was seen in other visual records a major assassination coverup was revealed. That's the extent of the work that I have been doing. I first posted some of this material on the forum and met biased, violent controversy in some incidents of the vilest kind. So, I decided to drop out and post this material else where. I created my own website that was not as successful as I would have liked but, really successful enough. The material on the site, about 50+ articles, has went out to almost every country in the world. That surprised me. The reason I am letting the site expire is that it has accomplished its purpose. It was a way to express what I was finding without harassment and ridicule. Towards the end I was just writing filler so that the readers would have something to read. I have copies of all the materials used there so letting the site go is not a big problem. The expense of running the site was marginal and really did not enter into any decision making. The 19th is the last day of the site. Anyone can take the material there and do whatever they want with it. Just copy and paste into a MSWord doc and you have the article. I had a lot of fun writing the articles there because they were so radical. It is the most radical Kennedy Assassination Theory going. It is not radical and challenging because I wanted it to be. It is radical because that is what the evidence I accumulated over time says. For instance, the AMIPA shows a significantly different view of the Kennedy Assassination than any other film in Dealey Plaza. I think I have went further than Jack White and exposed lots of things that people for 54 years didn't consider, missed, or on the other hand ignored because it didn't fit their beliefs. I'm glad you enjoyed that.

Ray, If you disagree with this then I can not help you on other questions about this subject

Sorry Ray, What I meant to say is "If you disagree with this then I can not help you on other questions about this subject."

Corey, J. Edgar Hoover said the evidence against Oswald was not very, very strong. I would think he is referring to things just like you explained in an excellent fashion above. Now that I have my head on straight as concerns this photo, the complaint is that it is an altered photo. The detail in the bottom section of his hair doesn't match the detail in the top section of his hair. Some folks just say that is a difference in the light. But, if you look the detail of the ear and neck are as detailed as the top section of his hair. The hazy, darkened section at the bottom covers the Parkland wound. The wound area has been artificially corrected to appear normal.

Ray, They can be both. The shadows under the steps are natural and caused by the steps. The Oswald figure's shadow is artificial and in the wrong direction. It was probably made by using an airbrush to make the shadow. The shadow under the Oswald figure's nose come from mating a face mask of LHO to the Oswald Figure. The light in the LHO face mask generates a different direction from the light in the overall picture. If you disagree with this then I can help you on other questions about this subject.

Thanks Keyvan and Ray, I should have done my homework. I should have taken more time with that response. I think what happened is what the psychologists call an idee fixe or fixed idea. Once that wrong notion entered my thinking it stayed. I stand corrected. Good job.

Whether something is unspeakable, shocking, or true should not keep someone from posting on this forum what they think is good information. Those who will become offended will let their thoughts be known. No one is shy here. Here’s what I think about the death of Marilyn Monroe: From the internet about a book, The Murder of Marilyn Monroe: Case Closed: “EXCLUSIVE - Bobby Kennedy ordered the murder of Marilyn Monroe by lethal injection to prevent her from revealing her torrid affairs with RFK and JFK: New book sensationally claims to have finally solved the mystery surrounding her death” Investigative journalists Jay Margolis and Richard Buskin believe they have lain to rest any notion that Marilyn committed suicide, and revealed how they think the screen goddess really died The Kennedy brothers were ‘passing her around like a football,' revealed brother-in-law, actor Peter Lawford, years after she died Marilyn knew too much about the Kennedys and threatened to reveal everything Bobby Kennedy did not act alone, the authors claim. Complicit in the murder was Lawford and Marilyn's shrink, who gave her the fatal dose of pentobarbitol This book seems to be backed up by the death bed confession of Peter Lawford. I believe Washington, D. C.’s greatest blackmailer of that era, J. Edgar Hoover, knew this secret and blackmailed Robert Kennedy into not investigating his brother’s death. And, this is the reason Robert Kennedy said publicly until the day he died that he supported the conclusions of the Warren Commission. Marilyn Monroe’s death was the greenlight to the Kennedy assassination.

Keyvan, That's not a photo. It has been taken as a photo and for years gave people false information about the assassination. This is a line drawing from a lady named (or not named) Ida Dox. It is very realistically done and with photgraphic enhancements it looks just like a photo. James DiEugenio Super Member Members 4,555 posts Gender:Male Report post Posted August 6 What the HSCA did with the Ida Dox drawings was a disgrace. BTW, I hope everyone knows, that is not her real name. Would you call this, "protecting the guilty"? John Butler Advanced Member Members 447 posts Gender:Male Report post Posted August 6 (edited) Will I go to heaven if I do as David Von Pein says and just accept the SBT truth? The HSCA is just a reiteration of the Warren Commission and really not worth wasting any time on. The autopsy information fails when confronted with the information from Parkland Hospital. That's why I don't want to get into SBT discussions. The Warren Commission, the HSCA, and the autopsy report are for the most part fiction. I understand that the judge at the Garrison / Shaw trial would not let it be introduced as evidence. Is Ida Dox a man? You can't prove in court anyone fired a rifle from the 6th floor Sniper's Nest so why discuss shooting form the TSBD at all unless it is from some location other than the 4th through 6th floor areas on the east side of the building. Edited August 6 by John Butler James DiEugenio Super Member Members 4,555 posts Gender:Male Report post Posted August 6 One of the judges in the New Orleans circuit would not let the Commission be entered as evidence in court. In fact, he giggled when Shaw's lawyers tried to do so. No she is not a man, but that is not her real name. The HSCA data and raw information is much better than the Warren Commission. Which is why it was classified. The interviews by the HSCA, and by the ARRB under Jeremy Gunn and Doug Horne, the sum total of that evidence contains a quantum leap in this case. I could not have written what I did in The JFK Assassination: The Evidence Today without that declassification and investigatory process. To me it was a continuation and extension in detail of what Finck said under oath at the Shaw trial.

Ray, Asking questions like that leads me to believe you didn't really read what I have posted earlier or you didn't understand what was being said. This is what I said and I am posting this again for your convenience: John Butler Advanced Member Members 445 posts Gender:Male Report post Posted Monday at 10:13 AM (edited) The shadows in the photo that you don't see or ignore: 1.) First off, the background shadows of the scene are natural and real. The shadows of the steps ascending along side the house are real. They move from picture left to picture right. This means there is only one background used and that background has artificial shadows introduced into it. 2.) A cutout of an Oswald figure (not the real Oswald) has been introduced into the photo by photo editing techniques. The editor made a cardinal artistic mistake. He introduced a figure with a shadow moving in the opposite direction of the step shadows. The figure's shadow moves from picture right to picture left. The figure's shadow should move in the opposite direction and be in tune with the steps shadows. This is common mistake with new artists. So, this maybe an indication that the editor was new to this kind of work and was perhaps Roscoe White. (Unnatural) 3.) The third conflicting shadow is the shadow of under the Oswald figure's nose. (Unnatural) It moves straight down indicating the light source is from above. At some point Ray you need to ask better questions or I won't respond. I will use my time to achieve a greater understanding of life on Earth.

Bart, Sorry, many apologies. I just got carried away with the notion that there was a secret list of photographers kept secret for decades and then goes missing. That kind of thing confirms what research I am doing and is at the heart of the unknown photographer problem in Dealey Plaza. Once again sorry.

Robin, I agree. Bronson's perspective is elevated. I always wondered by how much. The article says 55 to 60 inches. That makes sense. Let me run this idea by you and see what you think. On the maps the positions of the known photographers is off. This can be partly explained by putting them on the map based on where they were after the presidential party moved through the Main / Houston intersection. As an example, Hughes is in that "Bronson line" when he filmed the presidential party in the intersection then moved down to the spot where he is located on the maps on the SW corner of Main and Houston. There needs to be two maps. One showing the location of the photographers when the president came through the Main and Houston intersection. A second map would show where they moved to afterwards. As an example, Phil Willis is by the light pole on the NE corner of Main and Houston and then he moves down to the SW corner of Houston and Elm. The second map would show him on the SW corner of Houston and Elm.

Robin, Ok. Thanks. The .gif you did on the Nix film head shot is much better than just looking at it frame by frame. You need a frame by frame analysis but, I have just learned from your .gif work that you also need the motion and sense of seeing the action to arrive at a greater understanding. Great work.

B. A. Copland, We don't know how many photographers had their work and cameras seized after the assassination. The idea of a list is very intriguing. It can't see the light of day because that would expose what was done during the coverup. David Josephs does exceptional work. He has hit on an important idea with his imagery. This clearly shows only one person filming the assassination during the assassination from the passenger side of the limo perspective. That is Abe Zapruder. And, no one else. This is clearly arranged afterwards. And, maybe before hand. I added an extra detail that shows that some of the work of the photographers on the map maybe problematic. I hope he is not too offended by that. There was a line of people crossing the Main and Houston intersection. These maps show these photographers as perhaps in the wrong place. They couldn't film what they did unless they too were in that line of people. I believe these are not Josephs' maps. They were done much earlier. Mistakes were made in placing people where there film showed them to be. I think whoever did the map worked backwards from the scene to find the location of the photographer. It is a sensible thing to do. However, people like Nix could not have taken shots of Houston Street because of that line of people and the people standing on the NE corner of Main and Houston. and Bronson frames showing this line of people: As you can see if you were not in this line of people it would have been difficult to film anything on Houston. People like Robert Croft, Ike Altgens, Dick Bothun, Robert Hughes, Jack Weaver, and others must have been in this line otherwise their film was taken by others. There is some evidence that military photographers were in Dealey Plaza that day. There were at least 30+ unknowns and 16 possible photographers filming that day. Who knows what film went into making the film we call Orville Nix today.

Keyvan, This photo is explained by some work I did on Jackie Kennedy's dress and the blood stains on it. http://jfkrunningthegauntlet.com/2018/07/08/jackie-kennedys-dress-lies-lies-lies/ You will note the mess in the limo. Jackie Kennedy's clothes shouldn't be as "clean" as they are if she sat in that mess. This website expires on Aug. 19, 2018. So, if you want to read this article then it needs to be done by the expiration date.

Ray, Ditto.