Paul Bacon

5 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Trollin', Trollin', Trollin' - Trawhide!

Agreed.

9 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Would "Grassy Knoll" set off any alarms?

You made me laugh out loud!

5 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

The things this guy has been saying for the last two weeks are just ridiculous.

Long overdue resignation.  Man, his mania over Oliver Stone was palpable, just read about it.

https://kennedysandking.com/articles/goodbye-and-good-riddance-to-chris-matthews

I believe Joy Reid is taking his place --a woman with great intelligence, insight and courage.  Unlike Mathews, Joy has social skills that will bring out the best in her guests.  I find that replacement ironic, because, as a guest with Mathews, she was treated badly by Mathews on a number of occasions.  It seemed to me that Chris couldn't keep up with her and dismissed her thoughts outright.  But, last night, she was effusive in describing Mathews' helping her with her career.  She's a classy woman.

Thanks to both of you Larry and David, you've just brought me to a new understanding!  And, thanks to you David, I'm seeing how this relates to the Mexico City events.  I've never fully comprehended what that was all about --it's been a weak point in my studying.  I get it now.

Thanks for that Larry.  This helps explain my perception of seeming nonchalance by the perpetrators.  So they must have been very confident in their ability to cover up.

On ‎3‎/‎2‎/‎2020 at 8:42 AM, Ed LeDoux said:

Yep all sounds perfectly logical doesn't it Paul.

I don't completely grasp what you're saying to me in your post, but I'm able to see that you don't buy my idea that witnesses were meant (by the plotters) to see suspicious activity in the TSBD to divert attention away from the actual shooting positions.

My thoughts were prompted by the idea that the original plot may have been intended to implicate the Cuban government in the assassination.  In that case, it wouldn't matter how many men were observed in the TSBD, or who witnessed "Lee Harvey" Oswald running right out the front door into a car driven by another man.  It was only decided, after the fact, that the lie would be lone assassin.

In the end, though, it really doesn't matter.  I am still trying to make sense of all the convoluted evidence.  I'm not even sure I'm making any sense... just floating the idea to see what others thought.

15 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

As to the car and the DCM, well it did happen, that is for certain.  But I can't think of anything more risky and stupid than to plan a pick up on Elm Street after the shooting so whatever that was it must have been somewhat by chance -

Unless the whole idea of that event was to create witnesses noticing the escape, including witnessing that the driver was Cuban --a setup that could imply a Cuban conspiracy.

For about a year, I've been chewing on an idea.  The idea that witnesses were meant to see "movement in the windows of the TSBD", to observe "men with guns", to see "someone who resembled Oswald".  Some of the witnesses who described what they saw, seemed to me to be describing a kind of "laid back" demeanor --almost as if they were trying to be noticed.  Heck, even Umbrella Man and Fist Man were obviously suspicious.

Maybe this was all, in the beginning, to implicate the Cuban government.

When screws are tightened fully, the screw heads will always lie in the same position no matter how many times the pieces are re-assembled if the same screws were used for re-assembling.  I'd say these are two different guns.

Late edit:  I just realized that if the same screws were used, but were put in different holes, that could account for the differences we see.  So the best that can be said is that the gun was disassembled between photos.

My parents moved us from Massachusetts to New Hampshire in '63, in large part, because they had become avid skiers.  Every weekend, us kids would spend the day at the local ski slope, which cost $.50 for the day.  It was a large hill that had, in small portions, every degree of difficulty.  On one side of the rope tow was the main slope that everyone used.  The other side, we simply called "Suicide".

I quit skiing in the early eighties because it had become way too expensive and way too crowded!

On ‎12‎/‎25‎/‎2019 at 9:18 AM, Steve Thomas said:

If the phones became dead, how could another worker be talking on the telephone?

It might have been within this forum (I'm not sure where I read it) that someone suggested that the phone lines didn't actually cease to work, it was just that the lights on the phones went out.  I don't remember how phones were designed in '63, but the idea was that the lights on the phone were powered by house current but the actual communication was powered by the telephone company.  So Geneva Hines may not have been able to take incoming calls.

"-1" is a great moniker for Trump.

It's in the article linked to above.  There were some number of witnesses to an altercation that happened at 10th and Marsallis.  Three men and a woman attacked a man who was then whisked away in a blue car just a few minutes before Tippit was killed.  This is supposedly what drew Tippit to the area, according to some researchers.

This is a great interview Joseph.  What a difficult thing it must be to try to convince listeners , in fifteen minutes, that there was a conspiracy involving the highest echelon of the United States government.  It took me years to fathom the depth of this conspiracy.  You showed terrific discipline.  Thank you for having kept at this for so long.

You stated that you'd interviewed Senator Yarborough and, among other things, he said that during the limo stop Secret Service agents swarmed the car.  I'd never heard that before.  It means the Z film was altered much more than I previously imagined.  Could you say a little more about what he told you about that?

8 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

12 hours ago, Paul Bacon said:

I though Mark Felt was Deep Throat.  It was revealed 10 to 15 years ago--I forget how long its been.  Is this not true?

I thought so too.  They're going way over my head and loosing me in a hurry.  Glad I'm not the only one.  I've not read the book's they speak of.

On behalf of Ron and me, thank you gentlemen .  There just isn't time, in life, to read everything needed to understand CIA shenanigans over the past 5 decades, sheesh. 

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

2. Deep Throat was a composite as is proven in the book, In Nixon's Web

I though Mark Felt was Deep Throat.  It was revealed 10 to 15 years ago--I forget how long its been.  Is this not true?

Pamela, where do you stand now?  Are you saying there was no through and through bullet hole in the windshield?  Or are you just pointing out that the evidence is fuzzy?

I'm very convinced that there was, by virtue of citizen witness testimony (definitely not FBI or SS testimony), the Altgens pictures (as well as one picture I've seen when the limo was at Parkland), and analyses by valued researchers. 

8 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

On ‎11‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 6:05 AM, Paul Bacon said:

Thanks Pamela.  Are you able to point me to some online reading where I can learn more about the "lie"?

Surely you jest...:-)

No Pamela, I was serious.  I can google it, but I just hoped you'd be able to point to a specific link or two were Whitaker's lying was exposed so I wouldn't have to do a lot of searching about that one topic.  I put the word lie in quotations to indicate that it was specifically what I was looking for rather than putting it in quotes to indicate that I was dubious.

I thought you might point me to something freely available on the net rather than my needing to buy something, but if your book covers this in detail, I'll buy it :>).  BTW, thank you for responding to my questions.  Most people on this forum have already dug deep into the weeds on all this stuff.  I've done a good deal of reading about a few aspects of this case, but I don't have a well rounded education.

I always found the evidence for a limousine trip to the Ford plant in the first few days after the assassination very intriguing, but I wasn't aware that it had been debunked.

You're great Chris!  I appreciate that.

Thanks Pamela.  Are you able to point me to some online reading where I can learn more about the "lie"?

13 hours ago, Pamela Brown said:

On ‎10‎/‎20‎/‎2019 at 10:48 AM, Paul Bacon said:

Pamela, are you saying Whitaker lied to Doug Weldon?

Yes.  

Thank you Pamela.  Do you happen to know if Doug Horne now endorses this view?  Just curious--you've been at this for some time.

Thank you very much Chris!  Not to look a gift horse in the mouth, but would you do one at half speed?

It does seem to be human movement.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7A-_eU6vxw

This is a high-def (6 k) Zap copy.  In the comments section, someone speculates that it's a high-def copy of what's in the National Archives.

I must've downloaded it from YouTube, because I have this copy in my JFK files.

Also in the comments section, posted 6 mos. ago, someone noticed the same thing you did Craig:

Dale Lee6 months ago (edited)

Thanks, Kirk, for that thorough review!

I had to laugh though:

4 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

Every step of Hillary's career has been calculated to the nth degree to allow as little spontaneity and leave as little to chance as possible. That's what I can't stand about her.

This is exactly why I voted for her --both times :>)  She's brilliant at it!  And there isn't a politician alive who is any different.  And, since I agree with her stated values, I want her in my tent pissing out.

I don't think that total transparency is even possible for a politician in these polarized times.  It leaves too much grist for the spin mills.  I had hoped that Obama would be different, but he was faced with a reality he had to deal with.

For me, Hillary's consummate, calculating mind would have been overwhelmingly preferable to what we have now!

10 hours ago, Bob Ness said:

11 hours ago, Jeff Carter said:

Why shouldn’t the Trump transition team have been concerned about Obama’s12/16 announcement? It initiated an unprecedented expression of hostility to the Russian Federation, based on unproven allegations, and would have the potential effect of damaging policy initiatives campaigned on by the President-elect.

Because the behavior of the Russians was an unprecedented attack on our country? Maybe that is what everyone was so concerned about? But Trump and his campaign and transition team were attempting to reward them? Jeez. Jeff I don't see why you defend this. It laughable - you sound like Putin et al are bunch school girls being treated so unfairly - it's an outrage!

Besides which, I don't remember Trump ever having any public policy initiatives toward Russia during the election.  At that time, he was denying he had any relationship to Russia.

17 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Let me ask a rhetorical question:  Would Russia Gate have happened if HRC won the election?

Obviously not.

With due respect Mr. Di I disagree with your answer.  Russian meddling would surely be investigated.  Remember, Trump was warned that Russia was trying to make contact with his campaign.  All evidence of Russian meddling would have been thoroughly investigated.   And it would have turned up the same info.  The investigation wouldn't have been impeded by all the stonewalling and lying.