Jon G. Tidd Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 None of the photographic material pertaining to the JFK assassination that came into the possession of the U.S. Government is reliable. Unless [a] you're a True Believer, or you believe in the material that supports your view. A pox on PM, who was invented using a blurry image on a film that came, as I understand, into the possession of the U.S. Government. There can be no serious discussion of PM. We can't be sure that the version of the Darnell film we see is original. Even if we assume it's original [a] the PM image is open to honest debate as to height, gender, you name it; and the PM figure is impossibly, yes impossibly, shorter than the Bill Shelley figure (would you bet the farm that's a true, original depiction of Bill Shelley?). I don't want to believe anything about JFK, his foreign policy, his administration, or his murder. I want verifiable facts. The debate over PM is a dead end. Yes, it's fun for enthusiasts. Far better IMO is to latch onto the verifiable facts, some of which are included in Chesser's and Mantik's analyses. I understand this forum is a place to have fun and blow off steam. And to assert opinions. If we want the truth of the JFK, we need to strip down to bare metal and focus on verifiable facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Schmidt Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 In Jon's world there are no verifiable facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Burnham Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 In Jon's world there are no verifiable facts. Huh? Jon did not say that. How inappropriate a response. He even said: "Far better IMO is to latch onto the verifiable facts, some of which are included in Chesser's and Mantik's analyses." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 No, Brian. There are verifiable facts. For example, the bottom of the 6th floor sniper's nest window is verifiably so many feet above ground level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 "The debate over PM is a dead end." Ha ha ha ha, that's even better than MacRae's claims, cool!!! And you are the authority on this matter? Have you read everything about this? It seems you seem to know more about this matter than anyone else who has dug deep in this particular facet of this case. I really would like to see this statement elaborated by you, and please be certain you did not bite more of than you can chew. Thank you kindly John! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon G. Tidd Posted January 5, 2016 Author Share Posted January 5, 2016 Bart Kamp. Please tell me one verifiable fact you discern from the Darnell film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 None of the photographic material pertaining to the JFK assassination that came into the possession of the U.S. Government is reliable. Unless [a] you're a True Believer, or you believe in the material that supports your view. A pox on PM, who was invented using a blurry image on a film that came, as I understand, into the possession of the U.S. Government. There can be no serious discussion of PM. We can't be sure that the version of the Darnell film we see is original. Even if we assume it's original [a] the PM image is open to honest debate as to height, gender, you name it; and the PM figure is impossibly, yes impossibly, shorter than the Bill Shelley figure (would you bet the farm that's a true, original depiction of Bill Shelley?). I don't want to believe anything about JFK, his foreign policy, his administration, or his murder. I want verifiable facts. The debate over PM is a dead end. Yes, it's fun for enthusiasts. Far better IMO is to latch onto the verifiable facts, some of which are included in Chesser's and Mantik's analyses. I understand this forum is a place to have fun and blow off steam. And to assert opinions. If we want the truth of the JFK, we need to strip down to bare metal and focus on verifiable facts. There was a discussion in 2013 on this very forum which was not only epic, but also epically serious. We have said all all along that the picture is just the icing on the cake - that there is enough evidence without it to place Oswald on the steps. He have also known from the start there would be people like you and MacRae trying to throw Spaniards in the works and for that reason, he have spent quite a few man-hours and dollars in trying to obtain the original Darnell for examination. The run-around we have had from the 6th Floor museum and NBC5 is all documented. Our current hopes lay with Jim DiEigenio and Oliver Stone's people. If/when we get a clear from, the results will be published- no matter which way they fall, with other possibilities also in the works. It's hard to take you seriously about wanting verifiable facts when you insist on calling the historical Lee Harvey Oswald "Marina's husband" for precisely the reason that you don't believe he was the the historical Lee Harvey Oswald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 Bart Kamp. Please tell me one verifiable fact you discern from the Darnell film. Answering a question with a question.....voila ain't that a daisy..................... Buell Wesley Frazier standing center top of the stairs. Maddie Reese below. Baker running towards the stairs Roy Edward Lewis walking towards the lamp post Then there are quite a few women moving backwards that I could name, but they are not really important to the PM matter Now then let's go back to my questions shall we? And you are the authority on this matter? Have you read everything about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 None of the photographic material pertaining to the JFK assassination that came into the possession of the U.S. Government is reliable. Unless [a] you're a True Believer, or you believe in the material that supports your view. A pox on PM, who was invented using a blurry image on a film that came, as I understand, into the possession of the U.S. Government. There can be no serious discussion of PM. We can't be sure that the version of the Darnell film we see is original. Even if we assume it's original [a] the PM image is open to honest debate as to height, gender, you name it; and the PM figure is impossibly, yes impossibly, shorter than the Bill Shelley figure (would you bet the farm that's a true, original depiction of Bill Shelley?). I don't want to believe anything about JFK, his foreign policy, his administration, or his murder. I want verifiable facts. The debate over PM is a dead end. Yes, it's fun for enthusiasts. Far better IMO is to latch onto the verifiable facts, some of which are included in Chesser's and Mantik's analyses. I understand this forum is a place to have fun and blow off steam. And to assert opinions. If we want the truth of the JFK, we need to strip down to bare metal and focus on verifiable facts. There was a discussion in 2013 on this very forum which was not only epic, but also epically serious. We have said all all along that the picture is just the icing on the cake - that there is enough evidence without it to place Oswald on the steps. He have also known from the start there would be people like you and MacRae trying to throw Spaniards in the works and for that reason, he have spent quite a few man-hours and dollars in trying to obtain the original Darnell for examination. The run-around we have had from the 6th Floor museum and NBC5 is all documented. Our current hopes lay with Jim DiEigenio and Oliver Stone's people. If/when we get a clear from, the results will be published- no matter which way they fall, with other possibilities also in the works. It's hard to take you seriously about wanting verifiable facts when you insist on calling the historical Lee Harvey Oswald "Marina's husband" for precisely the reason that you don't believe he was the the historical Lee Harvey Oswald. Was it not Carmine Savastano who said something along the same lines as Jon G Tidd said two years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) Bart Kamp. Please tell me one verifiable fact you discern from the Darnell film. For crying out loud - a number of other people can be identified in that film - including Buell Wesley Frazier - who finally admitted it is him to our right of PM. Do you want the bleeding obvious as well, such as it was shot in DP and shows the steps of the TSBD? Or aren't those "verifiable facts" either? Maybe it was really shot in a Hollywood movie lot? Buster Keaton as Marrion Baker, Slim Whitacker as Roy Truly, Fatty Arbuckle as Occhus Campbell, Rudolph Valentino as Bill Shelley, Guinn ("Big Boy") Williams as Billy Lovelady, Lon Chaney as Spotty-Shirt-Bit-of-Arm-Missing-and-Look-at-Those-Ears!-Man (or as he is now known, SSBAMLTEM) and introducing Harris Glenn Milstead as PM and Haley Mills as Mrs. Reid. Edited January 5, 2016 by Greg Parker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David G. Healy Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 old Lampoon Lamson is spending a lot of time trolling these PM threads these days. Wonder why? LMAO! Cat got your tongue there big guy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted January 5, 2016 Share Posted January 5, 2016 (edited) From Jon Tidd: "There can be no serious discussion of PM. We can't be sure that the version of the Darnell film we see is original. Even if we assume it's original [a] the PM image is open to honest debate as to height, gender, you name it; and the PM figure is impossibly, yes impossibly, shorter than the Bill Shelley figure (would you bet the farm that's a true, original depiction of Bill Shelley?)." Bill Shelley? Are you sure you didn't mean Buell Wesley Frazier, Jon? P.S. Speaking of Bill Shelley's height, anyone ever found out how tall he was, assuming he is no longer with us? Edited January 5, 2016 by Robert Prudhomme Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Schmidt Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 (edited) In Jon's world there are no verifiable facts. Huh? Jon did not say that. How inappropriate a response. He even said: "Far better IMO is to latch onto the verifiable facts, some of which are included in Chesser's and Mantik's analyses." WORLD not word. Edit: Plus, how are Chesser's and Manik's analysis variable fact (and not just their interpretation), while all the evidence ever in possession of any government agency, or any film for that matter, is somehow not (and automatically suspect or fake)? Does anyone else see how insanely illogical this is? Edited January 6, 2016 by Brian Schmidt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Schmidt Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 I'm merely trying to call attention to just how asinine I think Jon's approach is. Every record or documentation of the assassination, from pictures and film to medical evidence, is, or probably is fake in Jon's mind. Researching likely conspirators and narrowing down evidence to a plausible scenario gets one no closer to the truth because those conspirators are too obvious. The real conspirators didn't want to be caught so therefore no one would ever suspect them based on research--any amount of evidence be damned. In fact, the preponderance of what researchers have spent decades studying is all a red herring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Parker Posted January 6, 2016 Share Posted January 6, 2016 None of the photographic material pertaining to the JFK assassination that came into the possession of the U.S. Government is reliable. Unless [a] you're a True Believer, or you believe in the material that supports your view. A pox on PM, who was invented using a blurry image on a film that came, as I understand, into the possession of the U.S. Government. There can be no serious discussion of PM. We can't be sure that the version of the Darnell film we see is original. Even if we assume it's original [a] the PM image is open to honest debate as to height, gender, you name it; and the PM figure is impossibly, yes impossibly, shorter than the Bill Shelley figure (would you bet the farm that's a true, original depiction of Bill Shelley?). I don't want to believe anything about JFK, his foreign policy, his administration, or his murder. I want verifiable facts. The debate over PM is a dead end. Yes, it's fun for enthusiasts. Far better IMO is to latch onto the verifiable facts, some of which are included in Chesser's and Mantik's analyses. I understand this forum is a place to have fun and blow off steam. And to assert opinions. If we want the truth of the JFK, we need to strip down to bare metal and focus on verifiable facts. There was a discussion in 2013 on this very forum which was not only epic, but also epically serious. We have said all all along that the picture is just the icing on the cake - that there is enough evidence without it to place Oswald on the steps. He have also known from the start there would be people like you and MacRae trying to throw Spaniards in the works and for that reason, he have spent quite a few man-hours and dollars in trying to obtain the original Darnell for examination. The run-around we have had from the 6th Floor museum and NBC5 is all documented. Our current hopes lay with Jim DiEigenio and Oliver Stone's people. If/when we get a clearer scan, the results will be published- no matter which way they fall, with other possibilities also in the works. It's hard to take you seriously about wanting verifiable facts when you insist on calling the historical Lee Harvey Oswald "Marina's husband" for precisely the reason that you don't believe he was the historical Lee Harvey Oswald. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts