Lone Gunman podcast: L. Fletcher Prouty a xxxx?

[Ron Bulman]

7 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

The thing about the photo of Bush at Dealey Plaza it that it becomes the main focus of anyone thinking Bush might have been involved. It’s a distraction. It doesn’t matter if the pic is of him or someone else, unless there is other evidence of his involvement. 
Ron - the allegation that you posted is only that. I’ve never found corroboration. Yet I find it interesting indeed. But if that allegation, made by the Castroite Cuban Fabian Escalante, became a similar focus like the photo, we would have the same problem because it is not provable. Many of you know of my focus on Jack Crichton, Bush’s partner in crime in Escalante’s allegation. A similar problem arises with Crichton, which is the difficulty in proving the existence of his 488th Military Intelligence Detachment, something he repeated often, carried by news articles about him. 
of all the evidence against Bush, I think Hoover’s memo to George Bush of the CIA, discovered by Joseph McBride, is the most incriminating. No one seems to wonder why Hoover would write such a memo. Perhaps someone can answer this question: are there other instances of Hoover identifying the recipient of a memo as a CIA agent? If not, which is what I suspect, then why did he do so in this case? 

My first thought on Hoover's reasoning was he didn't like Bush and was pointing a finger, leaving a clue for anyone who looked in the future.  But that doesn't hold water as he was still director for many more years and the memo would have implicated him and the FBI as well.  Maybe it was to cover his and the FBI's asses, a warning, if we go down, you do too.  IDK. 

[Robert Burrows]

8 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

That's it, Ron.  Thanks.

Interesting thread, with a some informative posts by Joseph McBride, and a of series of glib posts by Denis Morrisette denying GHWB's possible involvement in the JFK assassination op on 11/22/63.

Unfortunately, I did not succeed in pasting the actual photo of Dubya Bush in Dealey Plaza at the top of that thread, and there was, consequently, some confusion by various posters about the subject of that thread.

Here's the photo of Dubya that I tried to link on the original thread.

Taking a page from psychoanalysis, it would be useful, in my opinion, to "explore the resistance" to discussing GHWB's history with the CIA, and his presence in Dallas on 11/22/63.

Here's a matching 1962 profile photo of GHWB that I had not seen before.

GHWB is, obviously, the man in the Dealey Plaza photo.  Kirk's observation about the chin is off, because of the background shadow on the wall.

I cloned the face of the man in the color photo, changed it to black and white, then superimposed it onto the photo on the left.

The result: 

 

[Rob Clark]

[W. Niederhut]

1 hour ago, Rob Clark said:

The last time that this fake, juxtaposed Company photo was posted on the Forum, no one could tell us where it originated.  (I mentioned it above on this thread.)

Only an idiot could believe that the guy looking at the camera (on the right) is the guy in the Dealey Plaza profile shot-- Poppy Bush.

This is the photo-shopped equivalent of the Company sales pitch about the Hoover memo-- claiming that, "Mr. George Bush of the CIA," was a reference to a low level CIA accountant, George William Bush.

Edited November 30, 2020 by W. Niederhut

[W. Niederhut]

12 hours ago, Robert Burrows said:

I cloned the face of the man in the color photo, changed it to black and white, then superimposed it onto the photo on the left.

The result: 

 

Thanks for posting this, Robert.

It's, definitely, "Mr. George Bush of the CIA," in Dealey Plaza.

Next, we can all "explore the resistance" to acknowledging GHWB's presence in Dealey Plaza. 

IMO, it has to do with cognitive dissonance.

No one wants to believe that a POTUS was involved in the murder of another POTUS.

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

The last time that this fake, juxtaposed Company photo was posted on the Forum, no one could tell us where it originated.  (I mentioned it above on this thread.)

Only an idiot could believe that the guy looking at the camera (on the right) is the guy in the Dealey Plaza profile shot-- Poppy Bush.

This is the photo-shopped equivalent of the Company sales pitch about the Hoover memo-- claiming that, "Mr. George Bush of the CIA," was a reference to a low level CIA accountant, George William Bush.

I completely agree. 

[Joe Bauer]

On 11/28/2020 at 12:26 PM, Joe Bauer said:

We now have anatomical structure, build and movement ( walking gait ) identity technology that is so advanced and proven it is used in surveillance in public areas.

We all already know about eye scan, hand print, voice identity and of course DNA technology etc. All advanced enough to successfully identify people beyond just fingerprints.

Yet, now, even a person's gait and other body movements can be analyzed against known computer generated data bases and scientifically measured to help single out a person's true identity.

Using such technology we could determine whether the 11,22,1963 Dealey Plaza 3 Tramp walk-by man is Lansdale or not. There are so many still photos of Lansdale ( front and backside views ) and I am assuming at least a few video's of him walking as well.

Ahh but as always who has the money to afford such a project? Certainly none of us forum members.

Gait recognition technology uses surveillance cameras to identify individuals by the way they walk. And it's unbelievably accurate. This is why the Chinese government is implementing the technology to identify and watch their citizens. ... Your walking style is an identifying characteristic just as much as your DNA.Nov 14, 2018

 

The best way to identify someone is by the way they walk, not ...

Researchers Say Gait Recognition System Offers 99.3% Accuracy. ... The researchers' trained their AI system on a 20,000-footstep database based on 127 individuals, and found that it could identify a certain sample of these individuals with an accuracy of about 99.3 percent.May 28, 2018

 

Researchers Say Gait Recognition System Offers 99.3 ...

findbiometrics

 

The 3 tramp/walking by man photo in Dealey Plaza is of course only a still shot.

Yet, it is a very clear and bright,  light and shadow contrast and detail showing "full body" shot of a man depicting entire head, shoulder, arm, and hand to toe body motion and who is right in the middle of his stride. And a fairly up close shot as well.

I wonder if such a photo ( even though it's a still shot ) could be accurately useful in gait identity technology application in this case?

Edited November 30, 2020 by Joe Bauer

[Joe Bauer]

On 11/29/2020 at 10:57 AM, W. Niederhut said:

That's it, Ron.  Thanks.

Interesting thread, with a some informative posts by Joseph McBride, and a of series of glib posts by Denis Morrisette denying GHWB's possible involvement in the JFK assassination op on 11/22/63.

Unfortunately, I did not succeed in pasting the actual photo of Dubya Bush in Dealey Plaza at the top of that thread, and there was, consequently, some confusion by various posters about the subject of that thread.

Here's the photo of Dubya that I tried to link on the original thread.

Taking a page from psychoanalysis, it would be useful, in my opinion, to "explore the resistance" to discussing GHWB's history with the CIA, and his presence in Dallas on 11/22/63.

Here's a matching 1962 profile photo of GHWB that I had not seen before.

GHWB is, obviously, the man in the Dealey Plaza photo.  Kirk's observation about the chin is off, because of the background shadow on the wall.

Wow...that's close.

However, the forehead front, side and upperr crown back hair line is receded higher and farther back in the Bush 1962 pic imo.

That's the only difference that I can see.

Edited November 30, 2020 by Joe Bauer

[Sandy Larsen]

3 hours ago, Rob Clark said:

 

The tie lengths don't match. Not the same guy.

 

[Sandy Larsen]

14 hours ago, Robert Burrows said:

I cloned the face of the man in the color photo, changed it to black and white, then superimposed it onto the photo on the left.

The result: 

 

I don't see the point in doing that. Of course the two guys will match now.

 

[Kirk Gallaway]

 

3 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Thanks for posting this, Robert.

It's, definitely, "Mr. George Bush of the CIA," in Dealey Plaza.

Next, we can all "explore the resistance" to acknowledging GHWB's presence in Dealey Plaza. 

IMO, it has to do with cognitive dissonance.

No one wants to believe that a POTUS was involved in the murder of another POTUS.

Doesn't this show the willingness to accept anything as evidence that reinforces our bias?

Agreed Sandy,  not sure what Robert B. was trying to accomplish, there's no evidence here.  Comparing George Bush's 1962 face to George Bush 1962 face? Why the reluctance to produce a comparison between the alleged superimposed George Bush 1962 and the face he superimposed it on?? Isn't that a further clue we're looking for?

 I don't accept Rob's photo  either.

Edited November 30, 2020 by Kirk Gallaway

[W. Niederhut]

4 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

 

Doesn't this show the willingness to accept anything as evidence that reinforces our bias?

Agreed Sandy,  not sure what Robert B. was trying to accomplish, there's no evidence here.  Comparing George Bush's 1962 face to George Bush 1962 face? Why the reluctance to produce a comparison between the alleged superimposed George Bush 1962 and the face he superimposed it on?? Isn't that a further clue we're looking for?

 I don't accept Rob's photo  either.

Kirk,

     Look at the two juxtaposed photos I posted above-- of GHWB in 1962 and the mystery man in Dealey Plaza.

      Anyone who can't tell that the Dealey Plaza mystery man is GHWB either suffers from prosopagnosia or needs to have their visual acuity checked.  It's, obviously, Poppy Bush.

      Let's stop the bunk already.

      The denial of obvious empirical evidence like this reminds me of those guys who look at the film and still argue that WTC7 didn't collapse in a symmetrical free fall on 9/11.

Edited November 30, 2020 by W. Niederhut

[Guest]

5 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

 

Doesn't this show the willingness to accept anything as evidence that reinforces our bias?

Agreed Sandy,  not sure what Robert B. was trying to accomplish, there's no evidence here.  Comparing George Bush's 1962 face to George Bush 1962 face? Why the reluctance to produce a comparison between the alleged superimposed George Bush 1962 and the face he superimposed it on?? Isn't that a further clue we're looking for?

 I don't accept Rob's photo  either.

Isn't it a case of looking at the cranial shape, facial features and making an educated decision on whether they are a match? Actually what made things more of a match was the 'invert' function on photoshop, the brow line was absolutely spot on. 

[Guest]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Kirk,

     Look at the two juxtaposed photos I posted above-- of GHWB in 1962 and the mystery man in Dealey Plaza.

      Anyone who can't tell that the Dealey Plaza mystery man is GHWB either suffers from prosopagnosia or needs to have their visual acuity checked.  It's, obviously, Poppy Bush.

      Let's stop the bunk already.

      The denial of obvious empirical evidence like this reminds me of those guys who look at the film and still argue that WTC7 didn't collapse in a symmetrical free fall on 9/11.

Is it possible we have paid shills on this website? 

[Guest]

7 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Wow...that's close.

However, the forehead front, side and upperr crown back hair line is receded higher and farther back in the Bush 1962 pic imo.

That's the only difference that I can see.

In one photo the hair is tidy, the other a little disturbed, possibly a slightly different length. If someone has the original or a decent res version of the origiinal, seeing the ear and reducing shadows will confirm it 100%.