Michael Kalin

I'm done with this pettifogging digression into WM -- too many rambling discussions that lead nowhere with no end in sight. If you wish to pursue the morality angle it might be best to open another thread. Maybe others will requite your tender concern for a surly ogre. Getting back to the subject of this thread, it's been established that the proposed scenario is untenable. The timestamps are mush. OP doesn't have a factual leg to stand on.

Here's what Myers wrote about the coup de grace: There is no reason to believe that paraphrasing quotes when rendering comments was not Myers' standard procedure, tainting every direct quote that appears in WM. I have no idea what impelled him to come clean in this instance.

The 1:18 timestamp on channel 2 is merely nominal because of the synchronicity & observer problems you keep ignoring. The dishonesty relative to Markham consists in using a fraudulent timestamp procedure to give the lie to her testimony. She knew when she left the washateria, same time every day. Nothing that appears on the radio tapes says otherwise. The manufactured Tatum quotation is not a typo. The related sham forensic analysis proves it was injected with malicious intent to deceive. Some good news. Into the Nightmare is still in print!

The SBT's got nothing to do with my contempt for WM. The book's gross dishonesty is the problem. A few logical examples follow. 1) A sham timestamp analysis (discussed this thread). 2) Delaying Markham's stated time of departure from her house for the sole reason that his scenario required it. ("Reliable evidence, which is discussed later in this chapter, pins the shooting time to about 1:14:30 p.m. -- which means that Markham probably didn't leave the washateria before 1:11 p.m.") Hint: the radio tape does not have mike keying sounds at the alleged time which is bogus anyway. 3) Injecting false content into the Tatum interview for the sake of promoting the red herring Galaxie jockey into an eyewitness of a coup de grace that never occurred ("shot him again -- in the head"). This is followed by a sham forensic analysis, too tedious to type out. It's the next paragraph. McBride's Into the Nightmare is a much better book, certainly far more honest. I'm sorry to hear it may be out of print.

A lull gave me a chance to pursue a hunch that the timestamp issue was vented within recent memory. Sure enough, Tom Gram in the "New Article by Dale Myers on Tippit" thread questioned the validity of Myers' timings derived from the timestamps. Upshot was an admission by Myers relayed from his weblog that the "time sequence was in fact accurate, to within one-minute." So shitcan the seconds. Better yet OP participated in this thread but evidently didn't get the message. Best of all the claim of one minute accuracy is nonsense. It does not take into account the lack of synchronicity with a known time source. The clocks were certainly not synchronized with each other, and there is also the observer's height relativity problem. Does anyone know Jackson's height, and how to adjust his timestamps accordingly? The result is attempting to achieve absolute timing accuracy by stopwatch based on the timestamps is a silly waste of time. I'm guessing by dint of intense jawboning the range of accuracy might be talked down to plus or minus three minutes. Greg, you participated in this discussion extolling Myers' book far beyond its ever diminishing worth. You should know better. The man's an intellectual disgrace. Reading the rest of the thread is highly recommended. The cross-posting at JFK Assassination Forum has an interesting comment by Dan O'meara concerning LHO's time of arrival at Beckley. The site is usually open to the public at large but sometimes a member login id is required. Beware -- it has a poor S/N ratio.

You did provide the link in a previous comment. Sorry, my oversight, but no joy. The pay wall is detrimental. I'm waiting for OP to support his thesis by addressing the issues. He gets to the brink of critical review, draws his brakes, makes derisive comments and vanishes from the scene. The behavior is reminiscent of earlier generations of parking lot attendants, the kind that crunched the gears while riding the clutch, then growled at the owner. It's not my intention to give you the bum's rush, but this thread belongs to someone else. While I still have your attention here's an explanation of an item you brought up previously: I joined this forum mainly to discuss issues related to the Tippit murder that were obviously borked repeatedly for many decades (i.e. did not conform to the factual reality as difficult as that may be to ascertain). I'm no high-level guy, instead try to plant my feet firmly on the ground, failing that at least keep my head out of the clouds. Only discussions with Donald Willis (for example, concerning Benavides) zeroed in on the nuts-and-bolts details, resulting in a change of opinion. What else is the purpose of discussion?

OP must backup his claims with evidence. Unless this happens they are subject to dismissal out of hand, imposing no burden of falsification on anyone. The reason for "60 years of tons of argument" is the interminable succession of bogus overlays, submerging the event under an ocean of red herrings. It started with Leavelle's framing of LHO. If progress is ever to be made the mise en scene must be drained of the dreck that pollutes it. Do you have a link to the Garrison article by Gavan McMahon?

See the link provided in my first comment. Per CE1974 there are grave difficulties with the timestamps. One factor verges on hilarious: the dispatchers' heights! An assertion of a deduced accuracy to a second is subject to Hitchens Razor: It states "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence". Consider it dismissed. News to me that James Markham's career as gang leader rose again -- shades of the Bonnie & Clyde theory featuring the master thief who got busted for stealing cigarettes from a blind news vendor. Do you have a link to the Garrison article?

I will not discuss matters in the subjunctive. Oswald's arrival "at Tenth and Patton (from the rooming house on his way to the bus stop at Marsalis and Jefferson) at 1:11," five minutes after the murder occurred, invalidates the entire chronology.

Ha! You give no quarter to anyone when it comes to turning a phrase. I'm hoping a stiff breeze blows through this thread soon. It's like waiting for Godot.

Matt, thanks for the compliment. Sorry I can't contribute more to your extensive commentary in other threads (pretty much limited to random drive-by quips), but I haven't yet decided to open up a second thematic research front. Scope is a problem. The Tippit mise-en-scene is relatively tight with clearly separated overlays. Other areas relative to JFK's assassination sprawl like Milton's chaos -- vague & vast. In a holding pattern now, waiting for the OP to support his argument with evidence. Not expecting much, but he fooled me once (the Bowley parking location issue). Might have to eat some crow again, but there's nothing I can do about his attitude problem. You remarked elsewhere on the tendency of many contributors to propose arguments consisting of their private belief systems. Two of the main practitioners are active in this thread. The major domo was another, but happily he received a game misconduct penalty. Now I can put him on ignore. His failing was an inability to keep the moderation function separate from the expression of his personal views regarding content. They should be posted as a "member" not a "moderator." I hope site administration remedies this defect. In the meantime what will it be -- more crow or unadulterated billingsgate?

Same guy. His weblog is replete with obiter dicta -- ad hoc infections -- as if With Malice were not sufficiently pestilential in and of itself.

Incessant bilderdash! You're the one who harps on the Bowley parking location issue, not me, which you abandoned months ago without disclosing the importance. My interest in this thread was described in my first comment: The two big problems are: 1) Markham's evidence that the shooting occurred at 1:06 and 2) deducing times from the radio tapes, in this post presented as if accurate to the second. Much speculative effort follows from the absurd 1:17:41 time assigned to Bowley's radio call, but none of it merits serious discussion until you deal honestly with the aforementioned deficiencies. Your lengthy scenario dissolves into the void unless you can establish a factual basis for the times when events purportedly occurred. Care to take a crack at it? Start by addressing the two big problems described above.

I agreed long ago that I was mistaken about Bowley parking west of the murder site, having been misled by the HSCA investigative report. Your gloating masks an inability to explain why this makes a material difference in the scheme of events. His watch said 1:10 regardless of where he parked. Now tackle the relevant time issues.

You ought to tackle the critical time issues you dodged in the Ted Callaway & The 1:15 Shooting "sea lion" thread you resurrected to no effect. The two big problems are: 1) Markham's evidence that the shooting occurred at 1:06 and 2) deducing times from the radio tapes, in this post presented as if accurate to the second. Much speculative effort follows from the absurd 1:17:41 time assigned to Bowley's radio call, but none of it merits serious discussion until you deal honestly with the aforementioned deficiencies.