Jump to content
The Education Forum

Has anyone attempted to explain....


Recommended Posts

From your photo, Paul, you're a young man. When you were 24 years old, did you, or anyone that you knew, have such demonstrable intelligence associations (to put it broadly) as Oswald had at 24, and for several previous years?

No one I know did. No one my friend, an Army captain, knew, did.

Something was up with that Oswald fella. Way too much action in his life to be a loner, or an unaffiliated operator.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 99
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Two HUGE facts to remember:

NO witness can say with 100% certainty that Oswald carried THAT rifle into the TSBD on Friday, November 22, 1963, or on any other day.

NO witness can place Oswald in ANY 6th floor window with ANY rifle at the time the fatal shots were fired.

I don't think you can distill all the evidence that points firmly at LHO into these two "huge" facts. If this was all that was presented to a jury, they may well have found him not guilty. As it is, there are numerous other pieces of evidence which prove that LHO killed JFK, and did so on his own.

my goodness, a young lone nutter - how quaint.... So, one and ALL, hear this now: the SBT/WCR/LHO did it all by his lonesome nuttter-xxxxx legacy will live for another 90 days. Cheers.... LMFAO!

I wonder how consipracy theorists feel about having a moron like Healy in their camp. He seems to spend all of his time LMFAO-ing, like some drug-crazed monkey.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Why was Oswald not firing on the motorcade before it turned on Elm? He would have had a wide open shot at the President coming down Houston. But wait till the last second and shoot.

And why Dealey Plaza? Of all the places an assassin could get to JFK, Dealey Plaza hardly seems like a assassin friendly shooting range.....

(these are just thoughts I have when I watch these shows on tv)

John, even if one discounts the practical argument that Oswald worked at the TSBD, Dealey Plaza--particularly that segment of Dealey Plaza--was an ideal location for an assassination attempt.

Why?

1. The turn from Houston onto Elm necessitated the limo's cutting its speed roughly in half. Since it was leading a motorcade, moreover, it would not rapidly increase its speed after completing the turn. This was a huge advantage.

2. Elm Street after the turn ran directly away from The Dal-Tex Building. This would serve as as a second huge advantage for a shooter in that location.

3. By having a shooter in the Dal-Tex, the trajectories of the TSBD sniper's nest window would be closely replicated, increasing the chance the shooting could be blamed on a lone "commie".

4. By firing the shots when the limo was heading down Elm, by the knoll, the illusion could be created that the shots came from the front, or even from the south. This would help add to the confusion, and help insure the escape of the snipers.

Yeah I agree - it is a good area for a sniper team. Buildings in all directions with open windows, people everywhere and a virtual echo chamber (all of dealey plaza) to confuse the direction of the shots. Never was I saying that Dealey Plaza WASN'T a good place for an assassination, just that a lot of things had to go perfect for it to be pulled off.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Two HUGE facts to remember:

NO witness can say with 100% certainty that Oswald carried THAT rifle into the TSBD on Friday, November 22, 1963, or on any other day.

NO witness can place Oswald in ANY 6th floor window with ANY rifle at the time the fatal shots were fired.

I don't think you can distill all the evidence that points firmly at LHO into these two "huge" facts. If this was all that was presented to a jury, they may well have found him not guilty. As it is, there are numerous other pieces of evidence which prove that LHO killed JFK, and did so on his own.

my goodness, a young lone nutter - how quaint.... So, one and ALL, hear this now: the SBT/WCR/LHO did it all by his lonesome nuttter-xxxxx legacy will live for another 90 days. Cheers.... LMFAO!

I wonder how consipracy theorists feel about having a moron like Healy in their camp. He seems to spend all of his time LMFAO-ing, like some drug-crazed monkey.

I feel great having David Healy in my "camp" his research is outstanding, have you read TGZFH Paul?

If not then read it ASAP

Link to post
Share on other sites
I feel great having David Healy in my "camp" his research is outstanding, have you read TGZFH Paul?

If not then read it ASAP

I have read parts of TGZFH. It's not worthy of sensible critique.

I'd suggest you read this ASAP: http://home.earthlink.net/~joejd/jfk/zaphoax/, in particular this page: http://home.earthlink.net/~joejd/jfk/zaphoax/healy.html.

Edited by Paul Baker
Link to post
Share on other sites

I see all the arguments about the Z film and how things are incorrect and out of place or whatever, but WHAT does forging/editing it accomplish?

There is nothing the conspirators could take out/replace that would further convince the public that LHO was the only shooter.

If there is, please enlighten me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I see all the arguments about the Z film and how things are incorrect and out of place or whatever, but WHAT does forging/editing it accomplish?

There is nothing the conspirators could take out/replace that would further convince the public that LHO was the only shooter.

If there is, please enlighten me.

Darkening the back of JFK's head to mask the rear exit wound blowout. Sanitizing the view by reducing number of frames in which blood spray appears, making temporal wound seem an exit wound. Painting in an overlarge temporal wound skull flap to disguise frontal entrance. Making the timing of the shots harder to establish. Masking wounding of JFK with overlarge Stemmons Freeway sign, now undamaged by rifle fire miss.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to post
Share on other sites
Darkening the back of JFK's head to mask the rear exit wound blowout. Sanitizing the view by reducing number of frames in which blood spray appears, making temporal wound seem an exit wound. Painting in an overlarge temporal wound skull flap to disguise frontal entrance. Making the timing of the shots harder to establish. Masking wounding of JFK with overlarge Stemmons Freeway sign, now undamaged by rifle fire miss.

Two important questions to consider:

1. Why did 'they' leave the apparent rearward headsnap in, which gave fuel to the conspiracy fire when the film was first shown on American TV in 1975?

2. How did 'they' ensure that the altered Zapruder film was consistent with the entire photographic record of events in Dealey Plaza on that fateful day? (Please spare us any reference to any of Jack White's 'studies', all of which have been debunked).

I'd be interested to read sensible answers.

Paul.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Darkening the back of JFK's head to mask the rear exit wound blowout. Sanitizing the view by reducing number of frames in which blood spray appears, making temporal wound seem an exit wound. Painting in an overlarge temporal wound skull flap to disguise frontal entrance. Making the timing of the shots harder to establish. Masking wounding of JFK with overlarge Stemmons Freeway sign, now undamaged by rifle fire miss.

Two important questions to consider:

1. Why did 'they' leave the apparent rearward headsnap in, which gave fuel to the conspiracy fire when the film was first shown on American TV in 1975?

2. How did 'they' ensure that the altered Zapruder film was consistent with the entire photographic record of events in Dealey Plaza on that fateful day? (Please spare us any reference to any of Jack White's 'studies', all of which have been debunked).

I'd be interested to read sensible answers.

Paul.

1) Because there is no way to mask the headsnap, only to do aftermarket explaining away - the "jet effect," the neuromuscular spasm...

2) It just does not match with all other photos in Dealey, as at the NW corner of Houston/Elm, and at the NW side of Elm east of the Pergola. It doesn't even match eyewitness testimony (Hill, Moorman). After multiple viewings of the photos and films, there are nagging dissimilarities that you can sense even before you tote them up.

See also edited post #16 above.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to post
Share on other sites
Darkening the back of JFK's head to mask the rear exit wound blowout. Sanitizing the view by reducing number of frames in which blood spray appears, making temporal wound seem an exit wound. Painting in an overlarge temporal wound skull flap to disguise frontal entrance. Making the timing of the shots harder to establish. Masking wounding of JFK with overlarge Stemmons Freeway sign, now undamaged by rifle fire miss.

Two important questions to consider:

1. Why did 'they' leave the apparent rearward headsnap in, which gave fuel to the conspiracy fire when the film was first shown on American TV in 1975?

2. How did 'they' ensure that the altered Zapruder film was consistent with the entire photographic record of events in Dealey Plaza on that fateful day? (Please spare us any reference to any of Jack White's 'studies', all of which have been debunked).

I'd be interested to read sensible answers.

Paul.

All of Jacks work has been debunked? By who? You?

Please show me all of Jacks work that you debunked

Link to post
Share on other sites
Darkening the back of JFK's head to mask the rear exit wound blowout. Sanitizing the view by reducing number of frames in which blood spray appears, making temporal wound seem an exit wound. Painting in an overlarge temporal wound skull flap to disguise frontal entrance. Making the timing of the shots harder to establish. Masking wounding of JFK with overlarge Stemmons Freeway sign, now undamaged by rifle fire miss.

Two important questions to consider:

1. Why did 'they' leave the apparent rearward headsnap in, which gave fuel to the conspiracy fire when the film was first shown on American TV in 1975?

2. How did 'they' ensure that the altered Zapruder film was consistent with the entire photographic record of events in Dealey Plaza on that fateful day? (Please spare us any reference to any of Jack White's 'studies', all of which have been debunked).

I'd be interested to read sensible answers.

Paul.

what we need Paul are your replies in a public, face-to-face forum (with cameras rolling). A forum where you can't hide behind aliases, thus certifying your experience, capability and viability answering/commenting on technical questions, especially film composing techniques regarding case relate films-photos. And lest we forget, your blanket approval of *known* WCR failings. Till then, son you're just another lone nutter-xxxxx with an opinion demonstrating not a clue concerning the photographic record of the JFK assassination.

Carry on (as I'm sure you will in that typical nuuter-xxxxx inane way)

Link to post
Share on other sites

RE: John Dugan Nov 3 2009, 06:15 AM

"but to think that The Umbrella Man had ANYTHING to do with the shooting is realllllly stretching it. There is already a perfect explanation as to why TUM was there and what he was doing. To think that he could take a shot, and hit his target with some kind of device with any sort of accuracy is not physically possible, imho."

John, here is the relevant testimony Louis Witt (TUM) gave to the HSCA:

"I think I went sort of maybe halfway up the grassy area (on the north side of Elm Street), somewhere in that vicinity. I am pretty sure I sat down....(When the motorcade approached) I think I got up and started fiddling with that umbrella trying to get it open, and at the same time I was walking forward, walking toward the street....Whereas other people I understand saw the President shot and his movements; I did not see this because of this thing (the umbrella) in front of me....My view of the car during that length of time was blocked by the umbrella's being open."

HSCA Vol. IV, p. 432f

That description doesn't tie in with the photographs here. The umbrella is clearly above his head, he is standing still. Whoever is holding that umbrella had a perfect view.

In fact have a good look at all the available photos and film. Good luck finding anything that ties in with Witt's testimony. There's nothing in Witt's story that suggests he was even there and frankly I'm amazed that the HSCA didn't pick up on it. They were too busy laughing at the Umbrella malfunctioning when it was opened during his testimony.

By the way, I 100% agree with you. In my opinion TUM didn't shoot any darts, bullets... whatever from his Umbrella. However, we're a long way from having

"a perfect explanation" as to what TUM was doing there.

Back to the thread. The main reason the 6th floor shooter didn't take the obvious shot in my opinion is, he would have been immediately spotted. He waited until just about everyone was looking away from the Book Depository at JFK givng him time to get at least 2 shots off before being spotted.

Edited by Mark Haley
Link to post
Share on other sites
it doesn't matter who fired the shots, the Secret Service still did not move to protect the president when the shots rang out.

You mean other than jumping out of the follow up car into JFK's? There was only a few seconds between the 1st and last shots. No one had shot at a president since 1932. Or 1901 since FDR was president elect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Tom Scully
it doesn't matter who fired the shots, the Secret Service still did not move to protect the president when the shots rang out.

You mean other than jumping out of the follow up car into JFK's? There was only a few seconds between the 1st and last shots. No one had shot at a president since 1932. Or 1901 since FDR was president elect.

Hey, Len !

...........................................

4054586197_1f20c35c52_o.jpg

http://news.google.com/archivesearch?um=1&...nge=1951%2C1994

PRESIDENT RESTING; Excitement in Front of President's Residence, …

- New York Times - Nov 2, 1950

With Pvt. Joseph O. Davidson at his side, they blazed away .t Collazo. Mr. Davidson was the only member of the uniformed force in front of Blair House who ...

Gunmen 'Just Took a Chance' to Kill Truman,... - Los Angeles Times

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truman_assassination_attempt

The assassination attempt on U.S. President Harry S. Truman occurred on November 1, 1950.

.....Torresola realized he was out of ammunition. He stood to the immediate left of the Blair House steps while he reloaded. At the same time, President Truman, who had been taking a nap in his second-floor bedroom, awoke to the sound of gunfire outside. President Truman went to his bedroom window, opened it, and looked outside. From where he stood reloading, Torresola was thirty-one feet away from that window. It is unknown whether either man saw the other....

My point is that we now know that the SAIC in New Orleans, John W. Rice, was a member of a group of Secret Service agents in the field who in the aggregate, made up, by their experience in November, 1950 related to the attempt on Truman's life, an institutional memory, both in the field at the various Secret Service offices in cities across the country, as well as in those members assigned directly to the protective services detail. This is a memory based on first hand experience or of being on the detail during the 1950 attempt, a memory that Len denies existed in 1963.

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/selec...rt/part-1d.html

n that was too definitive

The Secret Service was deficient in the performance of its duties

The Department of Justice failed to exercise initiative in supervising and directing the investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in the assassination

The Federal Bureau of Investigation performed with varying degrees of competency in the fulfillment of its duties

The Central Intelligence Agency was deficient in its collection and sharing of information both prior to and subsequent to the assassination

The Warren Commission performed with varying degrees of competency in the fulfillment of its duties

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...