Bill Fite
-
Posts
279 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Bill Fite
-
-
Another comparison to the 1930s rise of fascism.
from: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/08/trump-homegrown-fascism-inequality-poverty :
Tens of millions of the precariat were already living in a de facto Great Depression before the pandemic, and many working-class jobs will not return in the short term – if ever. This widening disparity creates a level of rage among voters that inexplicably continues to evade Beltway journalists’ understanding.
It’s not that difficult to grasp meaning. Just look to the past. I’ve long been a student of the 1930s – fascism was on the rise in the US throughout the Great Depression. It’s something that never went away; it’s part of the American DNA. Many of the 74 million who voted for Donald J Trump in 2020 would be quite happy with authoritarian leadership. They aren’t going to vanish with the inauguration of Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.
...
In early 1939, a n a z i rally at Madison Square Garden drew 20,000 people. The rising authoritarian movement was the subject of a 9,000-word 1940 Harper’s magazine article, The American Fascists, by Dale Kramer.
In the modern era, the Youngstown State labor studies professor John Russo recognized early that anger over the loss of good jobs was leading to a resurgence of fascism. When I interviewed him in 1995, he foresaw the emergence of a Trump-like figure. When I went through Ohio recently on my cross-country journey, John doubled down on his 1995 prediction; he feels that the threat from the far right will not abate. Trump lost “and the thing I say is, ‘So what?’ Right now we are at a tipping point in terms of what the American economy is going to look like, what the American social structures are going to look like,” Russo told me. “2024, that’s going to be the seminal election.”
Russo says there will be “contested terrain”, a fight between progressives and rightwing authoritarianism between now and 2024. If a smarter, more effective Trump comes along, he or she could eclipse the threat that Trump presented to American democracy.
-
15 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:
Since nobody has started a new thread regards this being the 57th anniversary of JFK's assassination, I thought I'd at least mention it on this our most active one .
I surfed the main internet news sites for anything on the anniversary and all that popped up were two brief editorial pieces. One in a Tallahassee, Florida newspaper and another one in Texas I believe.
The one from Florida just expresses the writer's "well read on the subject" conclusion that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in doing JFK.
I guess when the JFK event passed the 50 year old historical mark it's anniversary is no longer considered worth mentioning in our main stream media anymore.
I haven't been in any grocery stores this week to see whether the National Enquirer has any anniversary memorial front page mention of JFK's killing or of Trump's pet conspiracy belief that Ted Cruz's father was involved.
Even Coast to Coast which used to have JFK specials that the host stated were the broadcasts of highest listener interest did not have one.
-
14 hours ago, Robert Wheeler said:
Do you really think Biden won?
I'm going to assume you know how the process works better than most Americans. In 2000 we did not know until December 12 when the Supreme Court gave their decision.
This is going to be 2000 on Steroids. Pennsylvania, Georgia, North Carolina, Michigan, Wisconsin, Arizona and Nevada are all going to court.
This graph below shows the problem with just the Michigan count.
See where the Biden count increases vertically (after the 3rd vertical line in the graph below.)?
That is 138,000 votes for Biden.
It is the equivalent of tossing a coin and having it land on "heads" 138,000 times in a row.
The probability of tossing a coin 138,000 times and having it land on its head is 1 / 4.1 ^690,000.
Also expressible as 1 divided by 4.1 raised to the 690,000 power.
Also expressible as 1 / 410000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 + 689,950 more zeros.
The estimated number of atoms in the observable universe is 10^80.
Wisconsin has the same observable problem
If you sort data, you get plots like this.
In person votes counted first then mail-in & absentee ballots was the sorting used, no?
BTW - the same vertical jump is shown earlier in the plot where the red line jumps up vertically.
-
On 4/30/2020 at 1:16 PM, Joseph McBride said:
But this is not just Donald Trump. The crisis has shown definitively that Trump’s presidency is not an aberration. It has grown on soil long prepared to receive it. The monstrous blossoming of misrule has structure and purpose and strategy behind it.
Has anyone else read In the Garden of Beasts: Love, Terror, and an American Family in Hitler's Berlin?
It's a history of the American Ambassador to Germany's family in the 1930s by Eric Larson.
It recounts the riots in the streets between the brown shirts and the socialists in the years 1933-1937 while William Dodd a professor of history at the University of Chicago was ambassador, his dealings with the German govt, helping American victims of poopoo violence in the streets & his daughter's romantic involvement with both the head of the Gestapo and a Russian spy.
It's hard not to see some parallels to today with two groups facing off in demonstrations although there hasn't been the same level of violence between them.
-
1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:
How COVID-19 Deaths Are Counted
Assigning a cause of death is never straightforward, but data on excess deaths suggest coronavirus death tolls are likely an underestimate
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-covid-19-deaths-are-counted1/this
-
2 hours ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:
(a) look at the 2.5 million or more US servicemen who were active in any given year in the 1950s;
(b) find one with an aptitude for languages;
(c) and allow him to learn Russian to the level at which he could understand what was being said around him, perhaps adding some tuition if required.
The task could have been accomplished in a year or two.
Speaking as someone who
* took French (a much easier to learn language than Russian) in High School and College passing all courses with a C or better grade - 4 years in total
* is married to a French speaker
* worked in France w French companies for 5 years
* was exposed to the French language living in France for 13 years & more importantly while raising a child bilingually learning more French by osmosis over the last 20 years
It seems to me that you are totally overestimating the level of conversational understanding that a US serviceman could achieve in 2 years of training at age 19 or over (languages are best learned before the age of 9). The extensive vocabulary, knowledge of local idioms and accents, and understanding of any slang adds to the difficulty.
Also the difficulty of learning Russian specifically, with its Cyrillic alphabet and difficult pronunciations makes it a lot more difficult than French, Italian, Spanish, etc.
I find it difficult to believe that it could be done.
Should be easy enough to prove tho -- just find a graduate of a military language school in a 2 year period that speaks Russian fluently, can read Russian language papers & magazines and has a great vocabulary covering military, technical, slang & local accents and variations.
Got one? -- I'm willing to be convinced.
-
4 minutes ago, Robert Wheeler said:
The whole appeal of Trump in the 2016 Republican primaries was that he was not an insider. He was not another Bush. Sanders strong performance in 2016 and 2020 was for the same reason. He was not another Clinton or Biden.
For all practical purposes, Obama was an outsider in the 2008 primaries running against the chosen inevitable nominee.
-
45 minutes ago, Mark Stevens said:
It's been some time since I was familiar with what all was done as far as rifle testing. I do recall that the FBI did test fire the weapon and did not find any nitrates on the person firing the gun. This included hands and face and included multiple firings.
Considering that, and the overall facts regarding gas ejection when firing a bolt action rifle, what you've stated is not actually "evidence for not firing a rifle." It fits with the characteristics of bolt action rifles and with that particular rifle. It really isn't evidence in either direction.
The false positives were on the cheek, depending on what you are referring to as false positives. The cheek was not negative but since the outside of the test was contaminated it was I believe either thrown out or considered a false positive.
Again, positive GSR tests for Oswald do not in any way indicate he handled, fired, or possessed a gun that day. All this indicates is that he came into contact with those substances at some point before he was tested. Since he was tested hours after being placed in at least 5 situations where cross-contamination from law enforcement was likely, any test in my mind is invalid and inaccurate.
Additionally, the NAA is not infallible and a judge would not allow an expert to state a person had definitely handled or fired a gun, only that they might have based on what the test indicates.
Ok -- thanks for that.
I'm under the impression that the FBI test subjects NAA turned out positive from the above site:
QuoteEventually, nearly twenty years after the assassination, some of the results of the NAA tests were made available to Weisberg. He concluded that there had in fact been seven controlled tests:
The tests given me show that in seven ‘control’ cases where others had fired a rifle this evidence was left on the cheeks.
(Harold Weisberg, Post Mortem: JFK Assassination Cover–Up Smashed, Weisberg, 1975, p.437)
-
2 hours ago, Tommy Tomlinson said:
And the subsequent NAA on the face cast had issues of contamination?
No -- the paraffin test from his cheek, chemical spectroscopy and NAA tests on the paraffin were all negative. Evidence for not firing a rifle.... leading to the FBI 7 agent NAA test firings ... their NAA tests on their paraffin samples were all were positive. The issue here is whether or not a false negative result for GSR has a high probability. From what I've read it doesn't although I've never found
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Separately, the false positives are on the hand paraffin.
The NAA on the paraffin from his hands was positive which could have been a result of working with the print in the books, or just handling a handgun (which we know he did). The NAA on the paraffin tests from his hands could have been false positives.
The internal WC memo summarizing the FBI NAA results stated something to the effect that at best all they could say was that LHO had handled a handgun that day.
Here's a link that discusses it: http://22november1963.org.uk/jfk-assassination-neutron-activation-analysis
-
1 hour ago, Mark Stevens said:
Even the best GSR tests have their shortcomings and test accuracy can be impacted by a variety of factors. Two factors which are relevant considering Oswald is the passage of time between the alleged firing of shots and the time the test was taken, additionally it's more likely whatever traces were found on Oswald were a result of cross-contamination than was from him firing a gun.
I think people look at this the wrong way by looking at false positive rates.
It may be more interesting to look at false negative rates of tests for GSR.
As I understand it:
- LHO's paraffin test results were negative for the presence of gunshot residue.
- The FBI then ran chemical spectroscopy tests, a more sensitive test, on the paraffin which were also negative for the presence of GSR.
- The FBI then took the paraffin, sent it to Oak Ridge Labs for Neutron Activation Analysis tests, an even more sensitive test. Again the results were negative. At this point, the probability that LHO fired a rifle is very low.
- So, the FBI had 7 agents shoot the (or another) MC rifle. Paraffin casts were taken and sent to Oak Ridge for NAA to discredit the test. However, all 7 tests were positive for GSR.
- The end result is that if we knew the false negative rate for NAA tests for GSR you would have estimates for the probabilities that LHO fired or did not fire a rifle.
Note: This is a completely different statistical analysis from the discredited NAA on the composition of the bullets. In that case there is a statistical variance (spread) on the proportions of the chemical composition of the bullets. That variance makes it impossible to determine whether fragments are from the same bullet as composition proportions not only vary widely from bullet to bullet but within samples from the same bullet.
Here, the test is only whether GSR chemicals are present or absent.
If I remember correctly, the NAA is sensitive enough that washing your face and hands would not affect the test and that in fact NAA on paraffin from LHO's hands was positive for GSR indicating that he may have handled a pistol -- however, this could be due to contamination from handling the books and cartons, etc. as discussed above in the false positive case.
In summary, the tests are evidence that LHO did not fire a rifle.
This is discussed in Head Shot: the Science Behind the JFK Assassination by G Paul Chambers.
-
42 minutes ago, Jeremy Bojczuk said:
Allow that person to learn Russian to the required level, and perhaps provide some formal tuition if he needed it.
Lots of luck with that. Russian is probably one of the hardest languages for an adult to learn. A serviceman of age 19+ is well beyond the age where it's easy to learn another language which is anytime less than 9 years old.
-
On 8/16/2020 at 10:38 PM, Cliff Varnell said:
Add DCM holding up a fist during the early shooting sequence — a military signal for “hold fire.”
Could it be the signal for HALT for the driver to react to?
-
19 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:
Walking or taking a bus 6 and 1/2 miles ... with his rifle in hand?
Owned didn't own a typical rifle carrying case.
He wrapped/stored his rifle in a blanket.
When he took his rifle to General Walker's residence and retrieved it later after burying it after the shooting that night, same question.
A man carrying a long rifle while daytime walking in public or sitting on a city bus was still a suspicious arousing thing back in 1963.
Yep... and there's no bus driver, passenger or passer-by who noticed him and recognized him on TV a week or two later (Nov 22-24) that I am aware of.
-
1 minute ago, Steve Thomas said:
Bill,
Yes, it is. You can also go here and read what Oswald was supposed to be doing in Irving while he is also supposed to be shooting a gun at the Sports Drome:
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=40391#relPageId=286&tab=page
Steve Thomas
Thanks.... surely the ever-vigilant Ruth Paine or Marina would have noticed Oswald's 3-5 hour absence from the house since he would have had to walk or take the bus.
-
On 9/3/2020 at 8:00 PM, Steve Thomas said:
Mr. LIEBELER. Am I correct in understanding that during the period October and November of 1963, you were the operator of the Sports Dome Rifle Range at 8000 West Davis?
Mr. DAVIS. That is D-r-o-m-e. It is Sports Drome.
Mr. LIEBELER. I was pronouncing it Dome.
Mr. DAVIS. I thought you were.
Mr. LIEBELER. Are you still operating that rifle range?
Mr. DAVIS. Yes, we are.Google Maps 8000 W. Davis:
8000 W. Davis in Dallas is also 8000 E. Main Grand Prarie
Aside: That's a long way from Ruth Paine's house - 6.9 miles - to go shoot.
-
On 9/1/2020 at 10:16 AM, Sandy Larsen said:
For nothing??
So what if most covid-19 deaths occur in people with co-morbidities? A lot of seniors have multiple chronic conditions and with meds live meaningful lives. I think it's disgusting that there are people who think that those lives don't matter and who won't wear a mask because there's little in it for them.
I agree.
I had been waiting quite a while for the US to release the mortality stats covering the CV pandemic.
The best estimate for total CV related deaths would be the difference between the observed deaths and the expected (average) deaths over the time frame. CV can cause death directly or indirectly by using health-care resources like ICUs.
The results are not good:
source: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/08/12/us/covid-deaths-us.html
"Across the United States, at least 200,000 more people have died than usual since March, according to a New York Times analysis of estimates from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. This is about 60,000 higher than the number of deaths that have been directly linked to the coronavirus."
(Very good plots by region and state at link)
Additionally, I run a plot from time to time to check the US death rate per million population with some other countries for comparison. The data is from https://ourworldindata.org/coronavirus. There is no excuse for the USA's performance.
-
20 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:
In response to so many experts who have stated hitting a bullseye on an 8 to 9 inch wide target at 265 feet using an MC with scope is very doable if not routine,
If you really wanted the experiment(s) to be accurate shouldn't requirements include but not be limited to something like:
* test shooters would have to be ex Marines with roughly LHO's rifle range scores
* test shooters should only have fired a rifle since leaving the marines in roughly the same time frames LHO is absolutely known to have practiced
* test shooters get 1 attempt of 3 shots
to make it a more accurate test.
-
29 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:
BF, I'm sorry. Could you explain your last post response a bit more?
What are you saying regards my points of comparative analysis between the recreation shooters and the actual Dealey Plaza shooter?
I feel that the JFK shooter would have an even tougher time in his successful JFK shooting attempt than the recreation shooters already experienced.
Making it tougher to conclude Oswald himself did the shooting.
My take from a possible psychological angle is that Oswald would have been under so much stress it would have made this shooting feat even more improbable than it already was.
Yes, I agree w you... sorry. I was just trying to say that LHO was not a professional assassin so would have had lower probability of success as you said.
-
1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said:
Thank you Bill Fite.
As much as Jim Di clearly exposes the false and falsely manipulated CBS conclusions, your above post greatly enhances his truth deception research and findings including the contrary bullet deformation and grain loss variation after firing into a goat carcass and cadaver wrist bones, gunpowder residue present on "all" 7 Carcano MC test firing subjects but none on Oswald, etc.
My little add on that I have posted before regards the physical and mental stress conditions on a JFK shooter ( allegedly Oswald ) versus anyone trying to duplicate the shooting scenario is this:
One must consider how much stress was on the shooter of JFK.
He has one opportunity and about 6 seconds ( less after he misses his first shot completely!) to hit his target ... the President of the United States!
In broad daylight and in front of hundreds of bystanders and security just 100 to 300 feet away, who he knows will probably be looking up in his direction, especially by the time of his third super loud cannon boom shot.
Making bulls-eye hits with his crap rifle on an 8 to 10 inch wide moving target almost a football field away is an extremely difficult challenge on it's own, but doing this under fear of your own immediate death might tend to makes one hands a little more sweaty and shaky than shooters replicating the shots under extremely relaxed and less extreme life and death worry and rushed conditions.
He knows he is in the most extreme life and death risk situation, perhaps just seconds away. He has an escape plan but it is so simple ( RUN AND THROW THE GUN DOWN) between some boxes, that he fears it is as risky as the actual shooting.
If the shooter isn't hyper-anxious and scared during this whole episode, he must be either drugged with Valium or Manchurian Candidate hypnotized.
These psychological dynamics put upon such a shooter are real.
They must be considered in any replicated setting of trial shooters versus the real experience of the actual shooter imo.
The hyped up gun aiming Marion Baker reported scene of Oswald casually sipping a soda pop in the 2nd floor TXSBD lunch room also begs the suspicious question of improbable calmness considering what Oswald allegedly pulled off just a very few minutes before.
If Oswald was the shooter, his calmness and coolness under the most heightened life and death risk that could befall him any second all around him in his ridiculously simple running and walking away escape plan is so incongruous it's almost unbelievable.
Just my 2 cents worth.
Yeah..... we're not talking about an anti-Castro Cuban trained to assassinate Fidel, or a mafia hit man, or an assassin for hire from Marseille, or a military trained assassin, etc. but a hypothesized guy with a junk weapon and no experience or training other than Marine basic training (assumption). So, I agree his probability was probably lower, but the above is a conservative estimate w/o that assumption.
btw - the prob(success) on the deformed bullets should have been
total successes, likewise on the prob(failure) .... sorry about that.
-
On 8/29/2020 at 3:41 AM, James DiEugenio said:
In other words, after Crossman failed to do what CBS wanted him to do, they dumped him and kept his failure secret.
With an enlarged target the marksman were allowed to make at least three runs apiece. And they practice to their heart's content before. Roger was not sure how much the target was broadened, but he said it was probably at least twice as much as the real target would have been, and probably even more.
Another lie--which I did not know about at the time-- is what I wrote about the show dumping 17 runs because of mechanical failure. Tink Thompson communicated with one of the producers. He told Tink that was not accurate. Most of those were simply failures of marksmanship, not mechanical. And it was not just 17.
In other words, no one has ever done what the Commission says Oswald did in a real and accurate reconstruction of the crime. And just remember: there is no credible evidence of any practice by Oswald. And every person, including the FBI, said that his alleged rifle was just about inoperable. This is why Craig had to use a completely different model in every way.
CBS was lying and they knew they were lying. And they fired Roger for exposing their lies.
On 8/29/2020 at 3:29 AM, James DiEugenio said:"Why did Rather and Wyckoff have to stoop this low? Because of the results of their rifle firing tests. As the critics of the Warren Report had pointed out, the Commission had used two tests to see if Oswald could have gotten off three shots in the allotted 5.6 seconds revealed in the Warren Commission, through the indications on the Zapruder film. These tests ended up failing to prove Oswald could have performed this feat of marksmanship. What made it worse is that the Commission had used very proficient rifleman to try to duplicate what the Commission said Oswald had done. (See Sylvia Meagher, Accessories After the Fact, p. 108)
So CBS tried again. This time they set up a track with a sled on it to simulate the back of Kennedy’s head. They then elevated a firing point to simulate the sixth floor “sniper’s nest”, released the target on its sled and had a marksman fire his three shots.
In watching the program, a question most naturally arises. CBS had permission to enter the depository building for a significant length of time, because Rather was running around on the sixth floor and down the stairs. In the exterior shots of Rather, it appears that the traffic in Dealey Plaza was roped off. So why didn’t CBS just do the tests right then and there under the exact same circumstances? It would appear to be for two reasons. First, the oak tree would have created an initial obstruction for the first shot. Second, there was a rise on Elm Street that curved the pavement. This was not simulated by CBS.
CBS first tried their experiment in January of 1967. They used a man named Ed Crossman. Crossman had written several books on the subject and many articles. He had a considerable reputation in the field. But his results were not up to snuff—even though CBS had enlarged the target size! And even though they gave him a week to practice with their version of the Mannlicher Carcano rifle. (Again, CBS could not get the actual rifle the Warren Report said was used by Oswald.) In a report filed by Midgley, he related that Crossman never broke 6.25 seconds, and even with the enlarged target, he only got 2 of 3 hits in about 50% of his attempts. Crossman stated that the rifle had a sticky bolt action, and a faulty viewing scope. What the professional sniper did not know is that the actual rifle in evidence was even harder to work. Crossman said that to perform such a feat on the first time out would require a lot of luck.
Since this did not fit the show’s agenda, it was discarded: both the test and the comments. To solve the problem, CBS now decided to call upon an actual football team full of expert riflemen—that is, 11 professional marksmen—who were first allowed to go to an indoor firing range and practice to their heart’s content. Again, this was a major discrepancy with the Warren Report, since there is no such practice time that the Commission could find for Oswald.
The eleven men then took 37 runs at duplicating what Oswald was supposed to have done. There were three instances where 2 out of 3 hits were recorded in 5.6 seconds. The best time was achieved by Howard Donahue—on his third attempt. His first two attempts were complete failures. It is hard to believe, but CBS claimed that their average recorded time was 5.6 seconds. But this did not include the 17 attempts CBS had to throw out because of mechanical failure. And they did not tell the public the surviving average was 1.2 hits out of 3, and with an enlarged target. The truly striking characteristic of these trials was the number of instances where the shooter could not get any result at all. More often than not, once the clip was loaded, the bolt action jammed. The sniper had to realign the target and fire again. According to the Warren Report, that could not have happened with Oswald."
Maybe this should be looked at in terms of probability models.
If we take a simple Bayesian coin-tossing model we could start from the unbiased position that the odds are 50:50 on making the shot in the allotted time.
This is modeled as 1 Success and 1 Failure. The probability of success = 1 / (1+1) = 0.5.
If I am understanding correctly:
Taking the results of the experiment described above and starting with S=1 & F=1 we would get
probability of success = (3+1) / (3 + 34 + 1 + 1) = 0.1025 or about a 10% chance of success.
However, that only looks at one of the experiments that have been run. For the lone nut hypothesis to be true all would have to occur so the probabilities of success have to be multiplied together to get the probability of lone nut success.
Another experimental result that is known is shown in the WC exhibit of MC bullets fired into goat carcasses and human cadaver wrists. I believe there were 3 shown all of which were deformed.
So following the same logic as above
prob(success) = 1 + 0 bullets tested that were not deformed
prob failure = 1 + 3 bullets that were deformed
prob of success = 1 / 5 = 0.2
So after just those 2 experiments the probability of a lone assassin is now
prob(make shot = success) * prob(bullet will not be deformed) = 0.0205 or 1 in 50 successes
The list of other evidence that could be estimated by experiments might include but not be limited to:
* how many times in a number of trials an object (for example a watermelon) suspended from above by strings or below by a spring goes back in the direction of the shooter when shot by a MC rifle & ammo.
* how many times in a shot from the angles between the TSBD window & JFK exits the side of the skull instead of the right front face
* other experiments
Another experimental result that could be included is the Neutron Activation Analysis on the paraffin test from LHO's cheek. The paraffin test was negative for gunpowder residues. So the FBI went to the next step and ran a chemical spectroscopy test. It was also negative. The FBI then sent it off to Oak Ridge Labs for NAA. It turned out negative again. (Note this is a test for any presence and not to be confused with the test for distribution of chemicals that failed to show statistical significance that the bullet fragments all came from the same bullet batch)
The FBI then had 7 agents fire the MC rifle, took their paraffin tests and had NAA tests done. All 7 were positive for gunpowder chemicals.
So that would be a prob(lone nut) = 1 / (1+1+7) = 0.1111 again factoring in the 1:1 50:50 starting probability.
Multiplying that by the previous result gives approximately a 0.002 probability of a lone assassin passing all 3 tests successfully.
Of course any evidence that would make the hypothesis of a loan assassin impossible would reduce the final probability to 0. Back and to the left and the larger bullet fragments being in the back of the skull and smaller in the front in the autopsy x-rays accomplish this for some based on the law of conservation of momentum.
-
4 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:
I do have a serving member of the British special forces as a fishing buddy for a few years and discussions about such topics to come up. He is absolutely trained not to freeze in very perilous situations, he is a door kicker.
I had some emergency training years ago -- airplane crashes / flight attendant training.
We were told that until the crash landing one would not know what people would do in such a stressful situation:
* positive panic - move to help others and save as many as possible
* freeze - self explanatory
* negative panic - panic and get in the way, possibly negatively panicking others.
I have no idea if this is valid or not.... but that is what they told us.
-
Interesting video.
Just as "experiments can prove a theory" they can also disprove one as the video demonstrates.
-
3 hours ago, George Govus said:
Jimmy Dale Gilmore had something to say about that.
So did Jimmy Buffet
-
14 minutes ago, Karl Hilliard said:
What particular issue/& section/page is this?
Oh... sorry - that was from:
QuoteThe Dallas Morning News reported that a man had run alongside Kennedy’s limousine a few minutes before the assassination, shouting a warning before being tackled by Secret Service agents from the followup car to Vice President Johnson’s vehicle, three car lengths behind the president.
McBride, Joseph. Into the Nightmare: My Search for the Killers of President John F. Kennedy and Officer J. D. Tippit (p. 524). Hightower Press. Kindle Edition.
RARE ABC video of reporter Ron Gardner confirming my research: building rooftops WERE guarded before and during the JFK era! 11/22/63
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Hi Vince,
What do you make of this (one of the most surprising entries for me in the Master Chronology of JFK Assassination Book II: Death)?
Brown Ph.D, Walt. Master Chronology of JFK Assassination Book II: Death (Kindle Locations 850-858). Kindle Edition.