Jump to content
The Education Forum

LHO in Doorway


Wade Rhodes
 Share

Recommended Posts

Thank you, Ron. I assume you do not believe Oswald was in the doorway?

Moreover, if he was being set up as a patsy, one would think the conspirators would ensure he was not with a bunch of witnesses at a place he could be photographed! So whether shooter or patsy, it seems logically unlikely that he was in the doorway.

------------------------

Gratz:

Far from me to impugn the "sworn?" testimony of folks that wished they had been Hoboken, NJ that day; but, if some "gummint" official "really" asked me about having been in the same city as LHO, I would have mumbled *&^%$!! "...Say WHAT? MoFo??!! Like "Davy" told Winslow: "....Briefing...at the MI/HQ...on Sunday, November, 17th, 1963....for a security detail at MIA....NAH!!!...I think I was in Chicago that day !!"

The "patsy" plotters physically controlling LHO 24/7? NOT!! They didn't then, nor they do NOW, really give a xxxx where "Ozzie" might have been standing [or squatting on a commode]!! They had MULTIPLE patsies.

First, I can't believe that YOU believe that the final transcripts are actually what was said -- and if said, not coached and parroted out of sheer terror. Worse, the FBI/SS, et al. agents who later refuted many of the "302s", transcripts, LHMs -- did not always voluntarily do so, it seems that some seriously nasty folks chatted with these "darlins'" while being hosted at some rather remote and ominous locales. Scared xxxxless, is too mild of a term for those "investigator's" feelings -- as they were months later being confronted with "inaccuracies" -- by a few PAID operators. You know, the kind who are prepared to go to extremes in order to determine whether these clowns were also complicit in the hit plot, and not just "along-for-the-cover-up". One didn't have to be a Hannsen, Ames, Howard, Walker, et al. to be convinced of the many benefits of "going along" with the Hoover "script" back in the old days.

Did LHO cautiously check out the "whos" standing in the doorway? -- Ya know...for his future ass-covering alibi? And then stroll on up to the 6th Floor. If he did, than he was lap-dancing with the "ouga-bouga" who was still chomping his (whole) chicken down to the bones, and washing it down with a Coke -- all the while chokin' the other chicken while leering at a girly mag.

Now I get it, the lap-dance got him so angry...that he pushed the black dude out of the way and cranked off some perfect "Camp Perry" shots at the nearest targets of opportunity !! You know, LBJ and the "Babushka" gal -- but, he missed and accidentaly hit somebody else ??!!

Get REAL, or give-it-up !!

Kellog's Corn Flakes,

GPH

____________________________________________

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Three witnesses confirm the fact that Lovelady was with them on the steps of the Depository, William Shelley (6H328), Sarah Stanton (22H647), and Wesley Frazier (22H675). But in the WCH, Shelley testified under oath that Lovelady was SITTING DOWN on the top step directly in front of Shelley, and that is why the man pictured in the Doorway is not Lovelady, and J. Edgar Hoover knew it. Even Lovelady claimed that he was with Shelley, and the man in the Doorway appears to be alone and he is wearing Lee Harvey Oswald's shirt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shelley testified under oath that Lovelady was SITTING DOWN on the top step directly in front of Shelley, and that is why the man pictured in the Doorway is not Lovelady

Lovelady testified that he sat down on the steps to eat his lunch. Obviously Shelley saw him doing it. I imagine that Lovelady got up when the motorcade arrived, whether or not Shelley noticed. How could Lovelady see anything sitting down, with everyone in front of him standing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Three witnesses confirm the fact that Lovelady was with them on the steps of the Depository, William Shelley (6H328), Sarah Stanton (22H647), and Wesley Frazier (22H675). But in the WCH, Shelley testified under oath that Lovelady was SITTING DOWN on the top step directly in front of Shelley, and that is why the man pictured in the Doorway is not Lovelady, and J. Edgar Hoover knew it. Even Lovelady claimed that he was with Shelley, and the man in the Doorway appears to be alone and he is wearing Lee Harvey Oswald's shirt.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the hair line is not a good argument as other (new orleans for example ) of Oswald shows similar hairline to doorway guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you, Ron. I assume you do not believe Oswald was in the doorway?

Moreover, if he was being set up as a patsy, one would think the conspirators would ensure he was not with a bunch of witnesses at a place he could be photographed! So whether shooter or patsy, it seems logically unlikely that he was in the doorway.

------------------------

Gratz:

Far from me to impugn the "sworn?" testimony of folks that wished they had been Hoboken, NJ that day; but, if some "gummint" official "really" asked me about having been in the same city as LHO, I would have mumbled *&^%$!! "...Say WHAT? MoFo??!! Like "Davy" told Winslow: "....Briefing...at the MI/HQ...on Sunday, November, 17th, 1963....for a security detail at MIA....NAH!!!...I think I was in Chicago that day !!"

The "patsy" plotters physically controlling LHO 24/7? NOT!! They didn't then, nor they do NOW, really give a xxxx where "Ozzie" might have been standing [or squatting on a commode]!! They had MULTIPLE patsies.

First, I can't believe that YOU believe that the final transcripts are actually what was said -- and if said, not coached and parroted out of sheer terror. Worse, the FBI/SS, et al. agents who later refuted many of the "302s", transcripts, LHMs -- did not always voluntarily do so, it seems that some seriously nasty folks chatted with these "darlins'" while being hosted at some rather remote and ominous locales. Scared xxxxless, is too mild of a term for those "investigator's" feelings -- as they were months later being confronted with "inaccuracies" -- by a few PAID operators. You know, the kind who are prepared to go to extremes in order to determine whether these clowns were also complicit in the hit plot, and not just "along-for-the-cover-up". One didn't have to be a Hannsen, Ames, Howard, Walker, et al. to be convinced of the many benefits of "going along" with the Hoover "script" back in the old days.

Did LHO cautiously check out the "whos" standing in the doorway? -- Ya know...for his future ass-covering alibi? And then stroll on up to the 6th Floor. If he did, than he was lap-dancing with the "ouga-bouga" who was still chomping his (whole) chicken down to the bones, and washing it down with a Coke -- all the while chokin' the other chicken while leering at a girly mag.

Now I get it, the lap-dance got him so angry...that he pushed the black dude out of the way and cranked off some perfect "Camp Perry" shots at the nearest targets of opportunity !! You know, LBJ and the "Babushka" gal -- but, he missed and accidentaly hit somebody else ??!!

Get REAL, or give-it-up !!

Kellog's Corn Flakes,

GPH

____________________________________________

Not much new, but a very funny post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where did that 1971 picture of Bill Lovelady wearing Oswald's shirt come from?

Over the years, researchers have been asking the wrong question; Was it Oswald or was it Bill Lovelady in the doorway?

We now know that it was both. and that is a stunning development.

The Kennedy assassination mystery was like a one thousand piece puzzle with 10,000 pieces, and that has changed.

Now, the Kennedy assassination is still a one thousand piece puzzle, but we can now discard about 5000 pieces.

I know tht John McAdams publishes that 1971 picture of Bill Lovelady to "prove" that the man in the doorway had Lovelady's hairline, but what is the source of that picture?

Why did Bil Lovelady where a shirt to resemble Lee Harvey Oswald in 1971?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

What a complete waste of time on a dead issue.

As is the case in many other of the issues.

Nevertheless, it continues!

Certainly gives cause and reason for no one to pay any attention to anything related to the assassination, when even this can not be ended forever.

Oh how I agree with the above two statements. Round and round and round we go, were it stops nobody knows. Its championing this sort of "evidence" that allows Mcadam's et al to marginalise ALL researchers as buff's or looney C/T types.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Credit Allan Eaglesham for annotation.

6320.jpg

I think I agree with Alan.

(I can see value in this sort of discussion irrespective of conclusions. It may build community and give practice in relating and in logic. Personally I'd prefer everyone just concentrate on my 'some coincidences topic'. but what the heck...)

Edited by John Dolva
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Over the years, researchers have been asking the wrong question; Was it Oswald or was it Bill Lovelady in the doorway?

We now know that it was both. and that is a stunning development.

I know tht John McAdams publishes that 1971 picture of Bill Lovelady to "prove" that the man in the doorway had Lovelady's hairline, but what is the source of that picture?

Why did Bil Lovelady where a shirt to resemble Lee Harvey Oswald in 1971?

The question was answered years ago. Only those that don't know the facts keep bringing it up.

"We now know it was both". We "know" no such thing.

"Stunning development"? The only thing stunning is that you believe this junk.

Why did Billy Lovelady wear a shirt to resemble LHO? He didn't, plain and simple.

It's misstated, speculative, untrue junk such as this that gives the entire research community a bad name.

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...