Kenneth Drew Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Bill, my two cents is not even worth half that amount, but if I were to wager it, I would lean heavily to that being LHO. The main reason I don't think it's Oswald. If anyone were standing there when the president were shot directly in front of him, he would stay there and look until he knew what had happened. He would not just say " what the hell, I need a Coke". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Bill, my two cents is not even worth half that amount, but if I were to wager it, I would lean heavily to that being LHO. The main reason I don't think it's Oswald. If anyone were standing there when the president were shot directly in front of him, he would stay there and look until he knew what had happened. He would not just say " what the hell, I need a Coke". Bill, my two cents is not even worth half that amount, but if I were to wager it, I would lean heavily to that being LHO. The main reason I don't think it's Oswald. If anyone were standing there when the president were shot directly in front of him, he would stay there and look until he knew what had happened. He would not just say " what the hell, I need a Coke". Hi Kenneth Welcome to the EF. There are two responses to the point you make. The first is if you haven't already read this entire thread then I'd recommend you take the time to do that. The case that PM is Oswald is not made just on the basis of the films. Sean Murphy has put up first day newspaper reports, affidavits and other evidence that substantiates the entire argument and these really stand alone without the films of PM. Sean Murphy has also made a very good case that the 2nd Floor encounter with Oswald and Baker (when Oswald was supposedly holding the coke he was so keen for) never occurred. That this meeting between Oswald and Baker happened on the TSBD steps where Oswald was standing and that Oswald had obtained his coke, while on the way downstairs to the first floor, to have with his lunch out on the TSBD steps. To me it is just common sense he would travel downwards from the 6th floor to the 2nd to get the coke and then to the 1st and then the steps outside. Instead of going back inside and upstairs after he'd eaten, to get his drink. The second point is that by his own testimony Buell Wesley Frazier said that after the shots he went down to the basement of the TSBD and had his lunch alone - appetite unimpaired apparently. Does that make him the shooter instead of Oswald? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Assassinations go better with Coca Cola, assassinations go better with Coke! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Assassinations go better with Coca Cola, assassinations go better with Coke! :) But doesn't "Coke add life"? Apologies to all, that is a terrible, distasteful joke - which I completely disown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Assassinations go better with Coca Cola, assassinations go better with Coke! :) But doesn't "Coke add life"? Apologies to all, that is a terrible, distasteful joke - which I completely disown. Shameful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted May 19, 2015 Share Posted May 19, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted May 21, 2015 Share Posted May 21, 2015 Thought provoking stuff courtesy of ROKC. If this doesn't arouse curiosity, I don't know what would. We can only hope we'll have better scans of the Darnell and Wiegman films someday soon. Thought provoking stuff courtesy of ROKC. If this doesn't arouse curiosity, I don't know what would. We can only hope we'll have better scans of the Darnell and Wiegman films someday soon. Thanks for posting that Mr Sorensen. It’s good to know we can count on your sensible approach to get us back on track when we wander off it. Apologies for the levity on here and that poor taste joke btw I hope it didn’t offend you. These floating heads of Oswald are remarkable. I think the one on the left is the most similar except that PM has his head turned more sharply to his left. In fact it looks to me like PM and BWF are looking at each other and maybe, even talking to each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Thought provoking stuff courtesy of ROKC. If this doesn't arouse curiosity, I don't know what would. We can only hope we'll have better scans of the Darnell and Wiegman films someday soon. Thought provoking stuff courtesy of ROKC. If this doesn't arouse curiosity, I don't know what would. We can only hope we'll have better scans of the Darnell and Wiegman films someday soon. Thanks for posting that Mr Sorensen. It’s good to know we can count on your sensible approach to get us back on track when we wander off it. Apologies for the levity on here and that poor taste joke btw I hope it didn’t offend you. These floating heads of Oswald are remarkable. I think the one on the left is the most similar except that PM has his head turned more sharply to his left. In fact it looks to me like PM and BWF are looking at each other and maybe, even talking to each other. Bump. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted May 23, 2015 Share Posted May 23, 2015 Thought provoking stuff courtesy of ROKC. If this doesn't arouse curiosity, I don't know what would. We can only hope we'll have better scans of the Darnell and Wiegman films someday soon. Thought provoking stuff courtesy of ROKC. If this doesn't arouse curiosity, I don't know what would. We can only hope we'll have better scans of the Darnell and Wiegman films someday soon. Thanks for posting that Mr Sorensen. It’s good to know we can count on your sensible approach to get us back on track when we wander off it. Apologies for the levity on here and that poor taste joke btw I hope it didn’t offend you. These floating heads of Oswald are remarkable. I think the one on the left is the most similar except that PM has his head turned more sharply to his left. In fact it looks to me like PM and BWF are looking at each other and maybe even talking to each other. Bump. "Where did you leave the curtain rods, Lee?" "What curtain rods, Buell?" --Tommy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 "Buell, wanna go to the movies after?" "Yeah, Lee. I'll drive". (with thanks to BK). Mick Purdy on ROKC has been doing some interesting research into BWF's movements after the shooting. Turns out not is all as it seems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 Which thread at the ROKC? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanessa Loney Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 Which thread at the ROKC? I think it's the "Buell Wesley Frazier: Where's your Rider?" thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted May 24, 2015 Share Posted May 24, 2015 Interesting theory someone had about lowering a rifle down the elevator shaft from the 6th floor to the basement. Only two questions from me. Could you get a rifle past (or between) the two elevators? Did the elevators go to the basement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B. A. Copeland Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 (edited) Extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence, Sean. I am currently going through this entire topic again (what amazing work!) and I noticed that Pat Speer quoted this common (and with all due respect, oftentimes irrational) line or train of thought to Sean Murphy sometime ago (post #816) and just for the record, most philosophers, probability theorists, etc., do not believe in it anymore for it is unnecessary or demonstrably false. The other issue with the claim is that the "extraordinary" term can be quite subjective and vague. Let's take prayer man and it's probability of being LHO for example: how likely would the evidence be if it had NOT occurred (i.e, if LHO wasn't out front or, to be more precise, if Oswald conceretely NOT PM?). If these events hadn't occurred: -Interrogation of Oswald. -Oswalds' claims during interrogation. -Bookhouts presence and notes of interrogation. -Holmes' presence of the interrogation. -Fritz' notes from Bookhouts interrogation notes. -Bakers asking PM where the stairs were. -Bakers affidavit on 11/22/63. -Storage room incident+witnesses to that event. -FBI's accounting for all TSBD employees on 11/22/63. ....I must ask, how probable would it be for Oswald to have been PM? I think the answer's fairly obvious. Well known Philosopher and Theologian William Lane Craig further or much better explains it (albeit in a Christian theological worldview context): So in the end, Murphy did nor does not need to provide "extraordinary evidence" (whatever "extraordinary" means in context of PM discussion lol...) but just evidence that seems abundant and existent given the argument Sean presents are based on factual events and powerful deductive reasoning. I post this because it might rear it's ugly head in the future again, yet, there is no need for the "extraordinary" in the first place. Edited May 27, 2015 by B. A. Copeland Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Lloyd Posted May 26, 2015 Share Posted May 26, 2015 Kind of like someone saying, for example, that "common sense" prevails...??? Now, I wonder who that would be...????... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts