The Backyard Photos

[Greg Parker]

The evidence comes from a prominent academic who authored a book about his time as an exchange student in the Soviet Union. It was an Embassy official who mentioned to him at a wedding of another student, that he had recently attended a wedding between a US citizen and a Russian woman in Minsk. This evidence would be accepted in a court of law as an exception to the hearsay rule.

Before we get to decide that someone's evidence is admissible, that person would AT THE VERY LEAST have to Have A NAME.

Do you have a NAME for your so-called witness?

No, I didn't think so.

Therefore you don't have a witness whose evidence is admissible.

You have a witness who has no name --and no identity.

Try again Mr. Parker.

For those genuinely interested, the witnesses name is Loren Graham (his wife is also a witness) http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/jfk-f1/a-marriage-of-connivance-t26.htm

[Craig Lamson]

Can Bill Kelly be serious? They are obvious fakes intended to frame the patsy. I cannot believe that any

serious student of JFK does not know that by now. Jim Marrs and I dispatched Farid's false claim a long time

ago. I thought all of you were current on these things. Check out "The Dartmouth JFK-Photo Fiasco", first here,

You, Marrs and that hack Mazza did nothing of the sort. Oh, you penned a lot of words, waved your hands mightly and proclaimed the matter setted, but you offer ZERO proofs that can withstand technical examination.

In fact the total lack of photographic knowlege presented to the dumb as bricks readers is simply mind numbing. No Fetzer all you haved done is parroted the technically inept claims without understanding a stitch of what you parroted.

Par for the the Fetzer course.

These really take the cake! Talk about ignorance of the highest level. He must have made the mistake of listening to Jack WHite...

"And the face has a square chin, not Oswald’s pointed chin; the finger tips of the right hand are cut off; and the figure is too short to be Oswald when the newspapers are used as an internal ruler. You can even see an insert line between the chin and the lower lip! But none of this impressed Professor Farid."

"I would claim the body shadow comes from that sinking sun and that those light sources exist because the photo was reconstructed on a “ghost mat” that came from the Dallas Police Department. It is a blank cut-out mat of Oswald’s body, in which pieces are reinserted. Sadly for the DPD those pieces were shot with the light at various angles. That’s what causes the conflicting shadows in the backyard photos, not my or his impairment."

What a complete hack! And of course Fetzer..ever the willing parrot fall hook, line an sinker....

The claims for the backyard photos being fake are simply silly on there face and are also a massive display of photographic ignorance. Maybe thats why they have such a rabid following amoung some gullible JFK CT's.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

The evidence comes from a prominent academic who authored a book about his time as an exchange student in the Soviet Union. It was an Embassy official who mentioned to him at a wedding of another student, that he had recently attended a wedding between a US citizen and a Russian woman in Minsk. This evidence would be accepted in a court of law as an exception to the hearsay rule.

Before we get to decide that someone's evidence is admissible, that person would AT THE VERY LEAST have to Have A NAME.

Do you have a NAME for your so-called witness?

No, I didn't think so.

Therefore you don't have a witness whose evidence is admissible.

You have a witness who has no name --and no identity.

Try again Mr. Parker.

[Greg Parker]

The evidence comes from a prominent academic who authored a book about his time as an exchange student in the Soviet Union. It was an Embassy official who mentioned to him at a wedding of another student, that he had recently attended a wedding between a US citizen and a Russian woman in Minsk. This evidence would be accepted in a court of law as an exception to the hearsay rule.

Before we get to decide that someone's evidence is admissible, that person would AT THE VERY LEAST have to Have A NAME.

Do you have a NAME for your so-called witness?

No, I didn't think so.

Therefore you don't have a witness whose evidence is admissible.

You have a witness who has no name --and no identity.

Try again Mr. Parker.

I don't know what game you're trying to play Ray, but this nonsense was disposed of in post #17

[J. Raymond Carroll]

genuinely interested, the witnesses name is Loren Graham (his wife is also a witness) http://reopenkennedycase.forumotion.net/jfk-f1/a-marriage-of-connivance-t26.htm

You know Greg, THere was once as time when I thought you were a SERIOUS PERSON.

[Greg Parker]

genuinely interested, the witnesses name is Loren Graham (his wife is also a witness) http://reopenkennedy...nivance-t26.htm

You know Greg, THere was once as time when I thought you were a SERIOUS PERSON.

I don't think it behooves you to judge who is serious and who is not.

Not when you make the type of claims you have here.

According to you, Oswald had Marina take the BY photos of him for the specific purpose of rubbing his Soviet friends noses in America's freedom. By November however, he still had not sent them to his friends, but had found the time to send them to leftist newspapers.

In the meantime, Marina is writing cryptic messages on the back of copies for George DeM.

That's some hypothesis, Ray.

As with all of your constructions - at least of late - they are designed to navigate readers away from any suspicion regarding Marina and Ruth Paine - without regard to the acrtual evidence, and away from any evidence suggesting Oswald had a role in intelligence operations - witting or otherwise.

And you have the hide to say I sound like McAdams.....?

Edited August 1, 2010 by Greg Parker

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Oswald had a role in intelligence operations - witting or otherwise.

Anyone who thinks Lee Oswald was an intelligence operative has NO CLUE. Sorry Greg, but that includes YOU!

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Greg Parker says:

Professor Loren Graham was contracted prior to the writing of this article, but was unable to recall any details above and beyond what is contained in his book. Leonard Kirsch returned to live in the US after his wife was issued an exit visa in 1962. He died suddenly of a heart attack in 1977, age 42.

Attempts are now being made to find out if a guest registry was made at the Oswald wedding, and if so, where a copy might be found.

In the world of Lee Oswald's accusers (Which mainly includes the DPD, Jim Garrison, the Warren Commission & The HSCA) this kind of GARBAGE is allowed to masquerade as incriminating EVIDENCE?

Spare me please!

[William Kelly]

Hey,

I type in a few ideas, Ray responds, I take a nap, and a few hours later there are twenty responses and hundreds of views. What happened? It must be a slow Saturday night.

And thanks for your responses Greg, especially to Prof. Fetzer, because my approach was to avoid the issues that always come up when they start arguing about whether the photos are faked or not. Even if they are faked, there's a reason for what the photos are saying - and it isn't just to establish a visual connection between the alleged assassin and the alleged murder weapons. There's more to it than that.

And Greg has convinced me that the so-called Walker Note was not associated with the Walker shooting as I and others had assumed, but involved another incident, one that only involved Oswald and not as serious as a shooting. Like Oswald getting arrested for distributing FPCC leaflets in Dallas, as I have recently learned that he did - or getting into a fight over distributing same, as he claimed in a letter to FPCC BEFORE the New Orleans incident.

Ray's comments are also welcome, even though he's getting a little cranky and critical and offbeat. If Oswald didn't have a role in intelligence operations, then what was he doing?

And I agree with most of Jimmy D's comments, as I usually do.

I don't think we've exausted this analysis yet.

Keep it comming.

BK

Edited August 1, 2010 by William Kelly

[J. Raymond Carroll]

10] Ibid. That evening, Graham asked his wife what she recalled of the conversation. Her memory matched his. Asked if it might be possible that the official had only said he'd heard of the Oswald wedding, Pat Graham conceded it was barely possible, but that she really had no doubt he said he'd attended. In fact, since the embassy claimed not to have known about the Oswald wedding until 8 days after the Grahams met this official, the only other way they could have known prior to that would be through contact agents in the Soviet bureaucracy - which seems unlikely - and at the very least - still amounts to a cover-up for reasons unknown.

Of course I am only an innocent country boy.

But no matter how innocent I MAY BE, THIS IS a pile of uncorroborated hearsay, and I reject it positively!

I am an old- fashioned person who is persuaded only by EVIDENCE, and Mr. Parker don't got ANY.

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Ray's comments are also welcome, even though he's getting a little cranky and critical and offbeat. If Oswald didn't have a role in intelligence operations, then what was he doing?

BK

I know it is a radical concept, Bill, but there ARE PROVEN cases where totally INNOCENT people have been accused of serious crimes.

Do you deny that Lee Oswald could be one of those cases?

PS. I am ready to kick the daylights out of ANYONE who calls me cranky, critical and offbeat.

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Absolutely, I a think Lee Harvey Oswald was an intelligence operative - probably CIA, had a 201 file, fake defection to Russia, sheep dipping in New Orleans where he hung around and ultra-right crowd when he was not posing as a pro-Castro Marxist passing out flyers are participating in radio debates.

Not to mention he got a $400 LOAN to come back to the USA, after "betraying" his country, giving away radar secrets at the height of the cold war.

And I do think Judyth Vary Baker's story just CONFIRMS that Lee Harvey Oswald was a US intelligence agent; I think it is almost a certainty!

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Absolutely, I a think Lee Harvey Oswald was an intelligence operative - probably CIA,

Then you have been swallowing CIA (Angleton) propaganda.

Not to mention he got a $400 LOAN to come back to the USA,

If he was really a spy he would not have needed a loan, DUH!

after "betraying" his country, giving away radar secrets at the height of the cold war."

There is Not A SHRED OF EVIDENCE that Lee Oswald gave away radar secrets. You just made that up , You xxxx!

And I do think Judyth Vary Baker's story just CONFIRMS that Lee Harvey Oswald was a US intelligence agent; I think it is almost a certainty!

That just shows what a FOOL you are trying to be!

[Greg Parker]

Greg Parker says:

Quote

Professor Loren Graham was contracted prior to the writing of this article, but was unable to recall any details above and beyond what is contained in his book. Leonard Kirsch returned to live in the US after his wife was issued an exit visa in 1962. He died suddenly of a heart attack in 1977, age 42.

Attempts are now being made to find out if a guest registry was made at the Oswald wedding, and if so, where a copy might be found.

Ray replied:

In the world of Lee Oswald's accusers (Which mainly includes the DPD, Jim Garrison, the Warren Commission & The HSCA) this kind of GARBAGE is allowed to masquerade as incriminating EVIDENCE?

Spare me please!

What the hell are you talking about, Ray? This is not an accusation against Oswald. It is simply the memory of a notable academic, of a conversation had with an embassy official in the Soviet Union. It meant nothing to Prof. Graham until he mentioned it in passing many years later to Priscilla Johnson MacMillan. It was only when she replied that Oswald supposedly had no such contact with officials outside the embassy, did he realise it may have some significance. It is what it is. An embassy official told the Grahams that he attended the Oswald wedding. He later learned this was not part of the official record, and was warned by PJM not to say anything about it because of what it suggested. It may be of some interest that PJM did not seem to doubt Graham's word.

Now if you can possibly tear yourself away from constructing straw arguments, maybe you can get back on topic and tell us why Oswald couldn't find the time between March '63 and the day of his death to post the BY photos to his friends in the SU?

Ray, quoting from my piece on Loren Graham, and commenting on same:

10] Ibid. That evening, Graham asked his wife what she recalled of the conversation. Her memory matched his. Asked if it might be possible that the official had only said he'd heard of the Oswald wedding, Pat Graham conceded it was barely possible, but that she really had no doubt he said he'd attended. In fact, since the embassy claimed not to have known about the Oswald wedding until 8 days after the Grahams met this official, the only other way they could have known prior to that would be through contact agents in the Soviet bureaucracy - which seems unlikely - and at the very least - still amounts to a cover-up for reasons unknown.

Of course I am only an innocent country boy.

But no matter how innocent I MAY BE, THIS IS a pile of uncorroborated hearsay, and I reject it positively!

I am an old- fashioned person who is persuaded only by EVIDENCE, and Mr. Parker don't got ANY

Um. I've already established that Graham's testimony would be accepted in a court of law as an exception to the hearsay rule.

Now, about the BY photos...? Anything?

Ray, quoting one of my earlier posts to this thread:

Oswald had a role in intelligence operations - witting or otherwise.

And his reply:

Anyone who thinks Lee Oswald was an intelligence operative has NO CLUE. Sorry Greg, but that includes YOU!

As with all of your constructions - at least of late - they are designed to navigate readers away from any suspicion regarding Marina and Ruth Paine - without regard to the acrtual evidence, and away from any evidence suggesting Oswald had a role in intelligence operations - witting or otherwise.

As can be seen, I never said Oswald was an intelligence operative. I pointed out that Ray will steer away from evidence suggesting that LHO might have been involved in intelligence operations either in a witting or unwitting capacity. Ray was quoting out of context in a blatant attempt to mischaracterize what I had said.

Is there any lengths you will not go to, in order to avoid acknowledging the corner you painted yourself into re the BY photos?

[J. Raymond Carroll]

Professor Loren Graham was contracted prior to the writing of this article, but was unable to recall any details

No surprise that Graham could not recall details of something THAT NEVER HAPPENED!

Attempts are now being made to find out if a guest registry was made at the Oswald wedding, and if so, where a copy might be found.

As I have indicated before, this is one of the DUMBEST pieces of JFK inquiry EVER!

In the world of Lee Oswald's accusers (Which mainly includes the DPD, Jim Garrison, the Warren Commission & The HSCA) this kind of GARBAGE is allowed to masquerade as incriminating EVIDENCE?

Spare me please!

What the hell are you talking about, Ray? This is not an accusation against Oswald.

If you are not accusing Lee Oswald, as you keep proclaiming, then please tell us, FOR THE LOVE OF GOD,

WHO do you think was involved in the KILLing of JFK?