Jump to content
The Education Forum

Research and its progress


Recommended Posts

Compared to most of you I would not call myself a researcher because I only started my interest about 2 years ago and I haven’t read all theories that are out there. I would consider myself as a logical thinking person with some good analysing skills. If I take a step back to overlook the case it would be interesting to know what new facts so far have been discovered within the last 40 years that weren’t puzzeling or known before. The reason for that is that IMO it all circles around a few topics as there are:

-The single bullet theory, that is discused since the very beginning.

-The shots, grassy knoll, TSBD, DalTex etc.

-The gun.

-LHO, all from his childhood up to his trip to Russia and back ending with the assasination.

-Jack Ruby, owner of a night club some mafia connections and the killer of LHO.

-Officer Tippit, killed but does not play a big part even it is a fact.

-Who was in Dallas and who was not.

-CIA, SS, FBI, Exil-Cubans, Oil Tycoons, Rightwingers, Dallas Police you name it.

So what would researchers call a big step forward since it all started? Is or are there certain new facts that all agree on? When yes, what are these and what did these change?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

A very interesting question.

I am not sure if it necessarily gets us closer to solution, but I think John has put together very interesting information on Grant Stockdale; Ellen Rometsch; the Bobby Baker case and other matters that may prove significant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Small grammar lesson:

An apostrophe in "it's" is to demonstrate a contraction only (i.e. "it is" contracted).

Its meaning the possessive of a genderless subject has no apostrophe.

Example:

The inspector closely examined the jet and its engines.

To put an apostrophe in for the possessive of it is a very common grammatical error.

But:

Gee, it's cold outside!

So easy rule: Unless you mean "it is" never put an apostrophe in "its". It's wrong!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

George Bollschweiler Posted Today, 08:06 AM

  Maybe my expectations were a little high but it seems that nobody

except Tim has anything to say, quite surprisingly. Is that really all? 

George,

Many books have been published since the 1960's. Practically all of them provide some new detail, refer to new interviews or at the least present a new theory. Of course the basic facts of the case were known in 1963, but since then the investigation has come a long way.

The conspriators have done an excepetional job in destroying evidence, providing false/misleading evidence (disinformation) and eliminating and threatening witnesses. Therefore IMO it is unlikely that any hard evidence will be found which could be used in legal proceedings.

Some books published in the last few years are: Crossfire, Blood Money & Power, Someone Would have Talked. An interesting TV documentary started in the 1980's is The Men who killed Kennedy (a total of 9 episodes have been completed). The last three episodes were pulled off the air due to legal prosecution by a group of individuals. They are also officially not availbale on DVD or video any more, however, the first 6 series are.

The books and the videos I mentioned have provided new information, details and interviews on this case. I believe no new major facts of the case have come to light since 1963-1964.

I will try to answer your questions. Question one: What may seem a big step forward to one researcher may seem a minor step to another. The answer will depend on who you ask. In my view, we have taken thousands of little steps since 1963.

Question two: I can't define any new "facts" that all researchers can agree on, as to me it seems many researchers seem to follow their own line of inquiry and the leads that make sense to them. The case is so big that most will only focus on the issues they find interesting.

Other researchers may have a different view.

Edited by Antti Hynonen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Compared to most of you I would not call myself a researcher because I only started my interest about 2 years ago and I haven’t read all theories that are out there. I would consider myself as a logical thinking person with some good analysing skills. If I take a step back to overlook  the case it would be interesting to know what new facts so far have been discovered within the last 40 years that weren’t puzzeling or known before. The reason for that is that IMO it all circles around a few topics as there are:

-The single bullet theory, that is discused since the very beginning.

-The shots, grassy knoll, TSBD, DalTex etc.

-The gun.

-LHO, all from his childhood up to his trip to Russia and back ending with the assasination.

-Jack Ruby, owner of a night club some mafia connections and the killer of LHO.

-Officer Tippit, killed but does not play a big part even it is a fact.

-Who was in Dallas and who was not.

-CIA, SS, FBI, Exil-Cubans, Oil Tycoons, Rightwingers, Dallas Police you name it.

So what would researchers call a big step forward since it all started? Is or are there certain new facts that all agree on? When yes, what are these and what did these change?

Greetings:

With the help and assistance of many good researchers in this case, too many to personally acknowledge in this short reply, I have managed to assemble a collection of proofs respective of the physical evidence which shows beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of evidence tampering and criminal obstruction of justice.

The alledged kill-shot rifle currently in the National Archives is an out and out forgery.

The Mike O'Niel Photo shows a very rare and valuable Moschettieri del Duce Carcano as opposed to a standard military field Carcano.

That there were at least three other Carcanos submitted at different times and presented as the kill-shot weapon.

That WC CE-399 and HSCA-399 are two different bullets fired from different weapons.

That two of the spent cartridges are in fact 6.5x54mm Mannlicher Schoenauer cartridges which cannot be chambered or fired from any Carcano rifle.

That the recovered unfired cartridge is in fact an Italian made cartridge and that it could or would not have been produced by the Western Cartridge Corporation.

That no standard military FMJ bullet fired from any position would produce the wounding consistant with the initial Parkland MD's evaluations.

That Dr. Guinn's NAA examinaton of CE-399 is hopelessly flawed and innacurate.

That the .38 Special alledgedly owned by Lee Oswald did not kill J.D. Tippet.

That the spent cartridges recovered at the Tippet crime scene were in fact rimless cartridges which had been fired from a Colt .38 caliber Super-Auto.

Such are the facts of the case that I am prepared to place in front of a grand jury should one ever be convened.

Respectfully:

Edited by John Ritchson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Compared to most of you I would not call myself a researcher because I only started my interest about 2 years ago and I haven’t read all theories that are out there. I would consider myself as a logical thinking person with some good analysing skills. If I take a step back to overlook  the case it would be interesting to know what new facts so far have been discovered within the last 40 years that weren’t puzzeling or known before. The reason for that is that IMO it all circles around a few topics as there are:

-The single bullet theory, that is discused since the very beginning.

-The shots, grassy knoll, TSBD, DalTex etc.

-The gun.

-LHO, all from his childhood up to his trip to Russia and back ending with the assasination.

-Jack Ruby, owner of a night club some mafia connections and the killer of LHO.

-Officer Tippit, killed but does not play a big part even it is a fact.

-Who was in Dallas and who was not.

-CIA, SS, FBI, Exil-Cubans, Oil Tycoons, Rightwingers, Dallas Police you name it.

So what would researchers call a big step forward since it all started? Is or are there certain new facts that all agree on? When yes, what are these and what did these change?

Greetings:

With the help and assistance of many good researchers in this case, too many to personally acknowledge in this short reply, I have managed to assemble a collection of proofs respective of the physical evidence which shows beyond a reasonable doubt the existence of evidence tampering and criminal obstruction of justice.

The alledged kill-shot rifle currently in the National Archives is an out and out forgery.

The Mike O'Niel Photo shows a very rare and valuable Moschettieri del Duce Carcano as opposed to a standard military field Carcano.

That there were at least three other Carcanos submitted at different times and presented as the kill-shot weapon.

That WC CE-399 and HSCA-399 are two different bullets fired from different weapons.

That two of the spent cartridges are in fact 6.5x54mm Mannlicher Schoenauer cartridges which cannot be chambered or fired from any Carcano rifle.

That the recovered unfired cartridge is in fact an Italian made cartridge and that it could or would not have been produced by the Western Cartridge Corporation.

That no standard military FMJ bullet fired from any position would produce the wounding consistant with the initial Parkland MD's evaluations.

That Dr. Guinn's NAA examinaton of CE-399 is hopelessly flawed and innacurate.

That the .38 Special alledgedly owned by Lee Oswald did not kill J.D. Tippet.

That the spent cartridges recovered at the Tippet crime scene were in fact rimless cartridges which had been fired from a Colt .38 caliber Super-Auto.

Such are the facts of the case that I am prepared to plcae in front of a grand jury should one ever be convened.

Respectfully:

_________________________________________

Great post John. I am continually impressed with your posts.

I disagree with the poster who said no new evidence since 63-4. There has been a ton of new evidence. Just a couple of examples here:1975 CIA and Mob work together to off Castro. Proof of either surgery on JFK's body (Lifton's Best Evidence) so that the autopsy photo's do not match what Parkland hospital docs found, or in the alternative, the autopsy photos are just forgories. In the censorced thee hours of TMWKK there is one extremely interesting hour, the whole John Leggit matter, the mortician who "fixed" JFK's body. I happen to also believe Judyth Baker, who was also censored. And the Mac Wallace stuff in the "Guilty Men" segment, (the 3rd censored hour)- is a case near and dear to my heart, as it is the one I have most studied, the Tx connection. Now whether or not Mac Wallace actually fired a gun that day is not yet proven to me, but he was there, on the 6th floor. The fingerprint match is proof, and a latent print only lasts about 10 days, so it is doubtful that someone was framing Wallace to frame LBJ (As John suggested sometime back). John did not believe LBJ would use a man like Wallace, but he did, over and over. The Grand Jury investigation into Henry Marshall's impossible "suicide" is just one of the many murders Wallace did (allegedly) for LBJ.

All the proof that John Newman came up with in JFK and VietNAM, and Oswald and the CIA connection.

And on and on.

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

_________________________________________

Great post John. I am continually impressed with your posts.

I disagree with the poster who said no new evidence since 63-4. There has been a ton of new evidence. Just a couple of examples here:1975 CIA and Mob work together to off Castro.  Proof of either surgery on JFK's body (Lifton's Best Evidence) so that the autopsy photo's do not match what Parkland  hospital docs found, or in the alternative, the autopsy photos are just forgories. In the censorced thee hours of TMWKK there is one extremely interesting hour, the whole John Leggit matter, the mortician who "fixed" JFK's body. I happen to also believe Judyth Baker, who was also censored. And the Mac Wallace stuff in the "Guilty Men" segment, (the 3rd censored hour)-  is a case near and dear to my  heart, as it is the one I have most studied, the Tx connection. Now whether or not Mac Wallace actually fired a gun that day is not yet proven to me, but he was there, on the 6th floor. The fingerprint match is proof, and a latent print only lasts about 10 days, so it is doubtful that someone was framing Wallace to frame LBJ (As John suggested sometime back). John did not believe LBJ would use a man like Wallace, but he did, over and over. The Grand Jury  investigation into Henry Marshall's impossible "suicide" is just one of the many murders Wallace did (allegedly) for LBJ.

All the proof that John Newman came up with in JFK and VietNAM,  and Oswald and the CIA connection.

And on and on.

Dawn

Thanks Dawn, :D

I also would recommend taking a good, hard look at a man named, Jack Lawrance,

if my spelling is correct, as a possible candidate for the actual kill-shot.

I am still researching this possibility and will post more if I find and substance to it, but the initial research is coming from Sam McClung and I've learned over the years to not lightly dismiss his work and analysis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Dawn Meredith

I'm not saying there were no new evidence at all otherwise I would belive in the

LN theory and I would not be on this forum. But I'd like to compare this with the

medical resaerch, every year we invent hundreds of new pills but the last big step forward was the discovery of penicillin.

When I look at the replies so far, Tim, John and you listet up diffrent points

you have discovered and others may follow so it might leads to a so called "fil rouge" that could be the base for a cooperation and coordination between the

researchers. Something may not everybody wishes when looking at some

arguments going on in forums.

IMO the goal must be the reopening of the JFK assasination case not by a commision but in a court room. To achive this a big step forward is needed

otherwise I would ask you why this did not happen until now?

Regards

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also would recommend taking a good, hard look at a man named, Jack Lawrance, if my spelling is correct, as a possible candidate for the actual kill-shot. (John Ritchson)

Hi John,

You may already know this but Jack Lawrence is actually Reverend Jack Lawrence from the Abney Street Church in West Virginia.

I corresponded with the good reverend a few years ago and let's just say that he was less than helpful. :ph34r:

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Does anyone have anything else on Jack Lawrence?

Where in West Virginia?

I also would recommend taking a good, hard look at a man named, Jack Lawrance, if my spelling is correct, as a possible candidate for the actual kill-shot. (John Ritchson)

Hi John,

You may already know this but Jack Lawrence is actually Reverend Jack Lawrence from the Abney Street Church in West Virginia.

I corresponded with the good reverend a few years ago and let's just say that he was less than helpful.  :ph34r:

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...