Shooter, Radioman, Spotter

[Bill Miller]

Linda Willis claims to have run along after the motorcade also, as per her Warren testimony - yet we see no such thing in the Zapruder film. She claimed to have stopped opposite the Stemmons Sign, and saw Kennedy's headshot - that would place her next to the Brehm's roughly.

You appear to have misinterpreted what she was trying to say. Looking over her Dad's shoulder face on at the Stemmons Road sign is "across from it" to some people.

So who is the lady in blue - why would Rosemary have been running with her, and why would the lady in blue continue to the corner where Rosemary is standing. Only Rosemary or Linda could supply the answers I guess. To the best of my knowledge, this woman is unidentified. But something is really odd about the whole routine.

I didn't know there was a routine for seeing the President of the United States.

Bill

[Mark Stapleton]

Linda Willis claims to have run along after the motorcade also, as per her Warren testimony - yet we see no such thing in the Zapruder film. She claimed to have stopped opposite the Stemmons Sign, and saw Kennedy's headshot - that would place her next to the Brehm's roughly.

You appear to have misinterpreted what she was trying to say. Looking over her Dad's shoulder face on at the Stemmons Road sign is "across from it" to some people.

So who is the lady in blue - why would Rosemary have been running with her, and why would the lady in blue continue to the corner where Rosemary is standing. Only Rosemary or Linda could supply the answers I guess. To the best of my knowledge, this woman is unidentified. But something is really odd about the whole routine.

I didn't know there was a routine for seeing the President of the United States.

Bill

Bill,

There is no routine for watching the President pass by and I don't think any such assertion was made. You're just being needlessly pedantic.

Edited June 21, 2006 by Mark Stapleton

[Brendan Slattery]

Shooter: LHO

Radioman: exists only in your imagination

Spotter: see above

[Pat Speer]

Lee, the young woman screaming about the bushes was probably Gloria Calvery, who ran up to Billy Shelley and Billy Lovelady after the shooting and said much the same thing. She was talking about the plants down by the stockade fence (at least that's where everybody she spoke to ended up running). As far as the unidentifieds in the Plaza, if you look at the Croft photo etc you'll notice that few, if any, of the black women in the photos, ever came forward or were ever identified. It seems likely they wouldn't talk to the cops, and the cops wouldn't go looking for them. You said that Mudd has been identied. Can you point him out to me?

Dynamics again - for Location Number One.

In the Dorman, following the shooting, we have an unknown number of individuals who appear to be searching the area of the corner of the concrete structure at the North Peristyle bushes. There was a hedge in back and some sort of red bushes in front of the hedge running along the structure there. These individuals, seen in Dorman, would be standing in the bushes, as far as I can tell. I can't match the perspective, since I wasn't on the 4th floor. This comparison, at top left, was made from a photo taken across the street. I removed the saturation on the crop of a Dorman frame, top right, so you can see these folks easier. One appears to be a child [3]. The 2 men at left, as per the uncropped animated GIF, are watching the activity [oops - not in the crop]. The woman in the blue top [4] seems to be running to join the individuals [1 & 2?] at the corner in the bushes.

Can't help but wonder if this isn't the Willis family - but no clue. I don't ever recall having read anything about such an incident anywhere, where folks were searching the bushes after the shooting - aside from Joe Marshall Smith across the street. I was hoping to find Rosemary Willis to enquire, but never managed to get in touch with her. If anyone has a line on Rosemary Willis, feel free to pass this bit along to her for comment. Her comment about a shot coming from over her right shoulder was intriguing. As posted previously elsewhere, the fact that none of the 23+ witnesses standing opposite on the North side of Elm, as seen in the Croft photo have ever been identified [with the possible exception of F. Lee Mudd] - even more intriguing.

As per an earlier post - the only references I have seen which could shed light on this oddity are a) the statement made by Joe Marshall Smith in which a woman told him that 'They are shooting the President from the bushes!' and the Psychiatric report on Weitzman, where his Doctor says that he saw 2 men crouched in the bushes that were not there after the shooting. On the first, the woman encountered by Smith was in hysterics - as per his account. Perhaps he searched the wrong bushes. On the second, doesn't even buy a cup of coffee.

Anyone know any more about this location or references to shooters crouched in bushes?

By the time of the 1964 FBI re-enactment, these bushes were cut back. The only record I have been able to find for this area is the Z-film, the Dorman, and the view from behind the retaining wall of the agents looking at the lunch bag on the bench - but the area is not entirely visible, and that was hours later. Hughes pans over in this direction, but doesn't capture the area. The FBI re-enactment photo captures the area, but 2 months later.

Bottom crop from z202 [tnx to RU], slightly enhanced.

- lee

Edited June 21, 2006 by Pat Speer

[Mark Stapleton]

Shooter: LHO

Radioman: exists only in your imagination

Spotter: see above

Instead of hindering this thread, why don't you participate in forums which deal with matters which more closely resemble your bizarre theory.

Sites dealing with little green men from Mars and witches on broomsticks have roughly the same level of credibilty as your fantasy about LHO shooting JFK. I have as much tolerance for irrepressible crackpots as the next person, but this thread is asking serious questions about generally accepted facts regarding Dealey Plaza. So go away.

Of course, maybe you're not just a harmless crackpot but someone with an agenda. Always a possibility on forums like this.

[Brendan Slattery]

Instead of hindering this thread, why don't you participate in forums which deal with matters which more closely resemble your bizarre theory.

So bizarre that none of you losers has managed to put a dent in it lo these past 43 years. I liken you to isolated Japanese soldiers in 1946 and beyond, blissfully unaware that the war has ended. Of course, they were detached from their units and from all forms of official communication. What's your excuse?

Sites dealing with little green men from Mars and witches on broomsticks have roughly the same level of credibilty as your fantasy about LHO shooting JFK. I have as much tolerance for irrepressible crackpots as the next person, but this thread is asking serious questions about generally accepted facts regarding Dealey Plaza. So go away.

Nah, there's so much to ridicule right here. I imagine I'll be busy for quite some time, provided the super scary "military industrial complex" doesn't get me first.

Of course, maybe you're not just a harmless crackpot but someone with an agenda. Always a possibility on forums like this.

Time to up your meds, Mark.

[Al Carrier]

Instead of hindering this thread, why don't you participate in forums which deal with matters which more closely resemble your bizarre theory.

So bizarre that none of you losers has managed to put a dent in it lo these past 43 years. I liken you to isolated Japanese soldiers in 1946 and beyond, blissfully unaware that the war has ended. Of course, they were detached from their units and from all forms of official communication. What's your excuse?

Sites dealing with little green men from Mars and witches on broomsticks have roughly the same level of credibilty as your fantasy about LHO shooting JFK. I have as much tolerance for irrepressible crackpots as the next person, but this thread is asking serious questions about generally accepted facts regarding Dealey Plaza. So go away.

Nah, there's so much to ridicule right here. I imagine I'll be busy for quite some time, provided the super scary "military industrial complex" doesn't get me first.

Of course, maybe you're not just a harmless crackpot but someone with an agenda. Always a possibility on forums like this.

Time to up your meds, Mark.

To John Simkin,

While I have to admit that I have put Purvis on my top ten most disliked list, he does provide research, right or wrong and who I am to say. Research is the issue here and all should be welcome, regardless of who agrees or disagrees. If he can prove the majority wrong, fantastic, we have learned from him.

But Brendan on the other hand has provided nothing but personal attacks and his own unsupported opinion to attack others research. He has become a germ attacking every thread he can and provides nothing but insults. I know this is your site, but don't you think it is time to give this horses rear side the boot? Or are you going to continue to allow him to interject his crap on every thread?

Al

[Al Carrier]

Actually Al;

Just perhaps there is developing a "following" of persons who now are beginning to recognize the quite simple forensic; ballistic; pathological; and physical facts of the assassination, and in so doing, are also beginning to recognize that you have been blowing smoke and BS.

you keep outdoing yourself with rudeness and namecalling,

Just my nature! I have always been quite rude; crude; and generally socially unacceptable when dealing with ignorance, as well as ignorant persons.

Hell, I even dislike myself when I do something stupid.

Just remember! You are the one who started this off, long ago, and therefore you are also the one who

has "painted" yourself into this corner without even demonstrating the investigative capability to determine that the Z-312/313 headshot was ABSOLUTELY NOT the final shot fired in the sequence of the three shots fired from the TSDB.

And, not only did I, with all of my lack of qualifications, easily recognize this, but I also knew where to look to find the evidence necessary to fully support this fact.

Meanwhile, you, "Great CSI"/Scout Sniper/Follower of Brother "Dangerous Dan Marvin" have quite obviously given little attention to the witness testimony; determination as to the location of these witnesses; correlation of their testimony with that information of Dealy Plaza which is necessary in order to accurately place JFK at the time of the shots, and for that matter, completely failed to provide a single iota of factual evidence related to the assassination.

Thereafter, it is also quite obvious that you have also completely failed to attempt to study and understand the forensic and pathological evidence as well.

So Al! How about "amazing" us with all of the separate and independent research which you have conducted!

How about describing for us all of your discussions with personnel in the FBI Lab who conducted testing of the JFK evidence.

How about describing for us all of the discussion which you have had with anyone associated with the autopsy of JFK.

How about describing for us all the discussions which you have had with anyone from Parkland Hospital.

How about describing for us all of the work which you have done as regards providing "abolute proof" of the phoniness of the WC re-enactment of the assassination.

How about providing anything, anything at all, of true relevance in which it can be independently checked out and verified as factual information related to the events in Dealy Plaza on 11/22/63!

I would be careful on using the term "dumbass".

Us "good ole boys" of the South have multiple sayings. One of which is: "If the shoe fits, wear it"!

Mr. Purvis,

Have you ever considered that the reason persons are not engaging your uneducated theories is because this has all been gone over for several years and what you present is nothing new but just reproductions of the "official" findings that were laughable in '64, in '78 and even more so today. If you would watch previous threads on this, Lancer and other forums, these issues have been successfully challenged to show that they are crap. I have been seriously researching the Kennedy assassination now for 15 years, and I mean seriously by doing my own research and testing. Not just reading others work. I have went beyond the ballistic issues that you keep delving into several years ago as there is nothing more to prove to show it is rediculous. The testing being done and presented to the public today to show the "official scenario" is realistic is so full of holes and I have posted on them time and again. Yet you chose to ignore that and attack me personally and keep bringing up Dan Marvin.

What have I done recently to further research? A couple of other researchers know of my endevors over the past couple of years of tracking down actual suspects in the hands-on crime in DP. I have actually obtained service records and interviewed family members. This is cutting edge and not rehashing testimony of fourty years ago that is actually more relevant at the time than it is today as time dictates accuracy and false testimony of fourty years ago is just as false today, when weighing it against real evidence.

I have not been forthcoming to all on my research in recent years out of respect to surviving family members of those suspect in this crime. The key word here that you would not understand is "respect", as you have none for anyone.

May I lament on an oldy but goody? Old soliders never die, they just fade away. Please fade away and allow serious research to continue. I am sure you have neighbors in good ole Mississippi you can mess with who are of your same level of education. Jethro and the gang maybe?

Al

[Brendan Slattery]

Al, you're a coward. You have so little faith in your own convictions that you ruthlessly attempt to snuff out any and all dissent. Even worse, you had to tattle to the moderator like an 8-yo girl. In short, anything that’s protected in regular society should be permissible in a group such as this. Wanna keep child porn and spam out? Be my guest. But don’t take away my right to offend, either wittingly or unwittingly. That’s what a democracy is all about. Otherwise, you’re left with the Internet’s version of a banana republic with the moderator as dictator. If my posts routinely abused and harassed others in a trollish manner, or contained frequent profanity, then he’d have every right to exile me. But we all know that’s not what's happening here. And “hurt feelings” is not an adequate excuse for banishment. If someone can say there was a spotter in the flower bed, then I can claim that LHO was the sole assassin. In a mere two weeks, I have provided tons of useful and on-topic photos on all aspects of the assassination, from Bill Greer, to the Rybka controversy, to motorcade security in general. Does that not constitute "research"? Last time I checked, this was the "JFK Assassination Debate," not the "Pro-Conspiracy Forum." Purvis is pro-LN; so am I. Are you trying to eliminate the competition and turn this into one big echo chamber? John McAdams, to his credit, is constantly bombarded and harassed by conspiracy enthusiasts on his newsgroup. Number of people banned? Zero. Please try to follow his example.

Edited June 21, 2006 by Brendan Slattery

[Al Carrier]

Al, you're a coward. You have so little faith in your own convictions that you ruthlessly attempt to snuff out any and all dissent. Even worse, you had to tattle to the moderator like an 8-yo girl. In short, anything that’s protected in regular society should be permissible in a group such as this. Wanna keep child porn and spam out? Be my guest. But don’t take away my right to offend, either wittingly or unwittingly. That’s what a democracy is all about. Otherwise, you’re left with the Internet’s version of a banana republic with the moderator as dictator. If my posts routinely abused and harassed others in a trollish manner, or contained frequent profanity, then he’d have every right to exile me. But we all know that’s not what happening here. And “hurt feelings” is not an adequate excuse for banishment. If someone can say there was a spotter in the flower bed, then I can claim that LHO was the sole assassin. In a mere two weeks, I have provided tons of useful and on-topic photos on all aspects of the assassination, from Bill Greer, to the Rybka controversy, to motorcade security in general. Does that not constitute "research"? Last time I checked, this was the "JFK Assassination Debate," not the "Pro-Conspiracy Forum." Pervis is pro-LN; so am I. Are you trying to eliminate the competition and turn this into one big echo chamber? John McAdams, to his credit, is constantly bombarded and harassed by conspiracy enthusiasts on his newsgroup. Number of people banned? Zero. Please try to follow his example.

Brendan,

Do your research please! You have provided nothing other than to try and derail serious threads. You are similar to Purvis with the exception that Purvis is trying to introduce "something" and you are simply attacking others. It is time you grow up and get another hobby. Come back when you grow up, okay. Why is it that persons who have nothing serious to add to a serious topic resort to personal attacks that are consistent with 10 year olds. I have two kids who I would punish for behaviour consistent with what you and Purvis display.

I deal with mentality like this at work when citizens caught with their hand in the cookie jar turn it on my officers and accuse them of wrong doing. It is time society steps forward and calls people for what they are!

Al

[Nick Bartetzko]

Instead of hindering this thread, why don't you participate in forums which deal with matters which more closely resemble your bizarre theory.

So bizarre that none of you losers has managed to put a dent in it lo these past 43 years. I liken you to isolated Japanese soldiers in 1946 and beyond, blissfully unaware that the war has ended. Of course, they were detached from their units and from all forms of official communication. What's your excuse?

Sites dealing with little green men from Mars and witches on broomsticks have roughly the same level of credibilty as your fantasy about LHO shooting JFK. I have as much tolerance for irrepressible crackpots as the next person, but this thread is asking serious questions about generally accepted facts regarding Dealey Plaza. So go away.

Nah, there's so much to ridicule right here. I imagine I'll be busy for quite some time, provided the super scary "military industrial complex" doesn't get me first.

Of course, maybe you're not just a harmless crackpot but someone with an agenda. Always a possibility on forums like this.

Time to up your meds, Mark.

I guess everyone has a personal style of communicating. I'm not a fan of the ridicule, insult, in your face method. It's interesting that some people are such strong believers in conspiracy and others in the government "lone nut" version or the revised "lone nut with someone shooting from behind the fence, but he missed" version. Over the years, I've been to Dallas a few times, read many books, looked at the various photos and films, studied the government's version(s) and I hardly think this is an open and shut case. Some of the troubling issues are:

1) Oswald's negative nitrate test on his face

2) Dr David Mantik's opinions of the xrays based on his work with optical density

3) AARB witness statements of the back of the head wound vs the summary report written

4) the AARB comments of Agent Sibert regarding the photos of the head

5) the comment of Dr Perry to Harold Weisberg in 1966 about the "ring of bruising" of the neck wound

6) the missing photos of the chest cavity

7) the issues raised by Doug Horne regarding the brain examination(s)

8) official government reports moving the head entry wound by 4"

9) Joseph Milteer's taped comments made 11-9-63

10) Rose Cheramie's comments

11) witness testimony of 2 individuals on the 6th floor

12) the Z film which to me, a layman, seems to show JFK is pushed forward and JBC is pushed downward. I've never understood how one bullet could account for such dissimilar movements.

These are a few troubling areas recalled from memory. My thanks to John Simkin for this forum and allowing all, in their own unique way, to voice their opinions.

Regards

Nick

[Brendan Slattery]

I did my research, Al. I laboriously scrolled through all 16 pages of this provocative thread. Lots of "This Old Car" talk, but no spotter or radioman to be found. That leaves us with one corner of one very ugly building, concealing one very ugly and dangerous individual. Don't like my posts? Don't read 'em.

[Guest Stephen Turner]

i dont believe that there is any sinister reason behind Brendan's post's, he is just having tremendous fun messing with the "lefties" heads. Anyone with a young child can witness the same, although less sophisticated, behaviour on a daily basis. If you dont like it ignore it, and post around him, unrewarded behaviour will cease, no need for any banning. That said he made some very salient points on the Rybka thread, and as a L/N may have a role to play here.

[Lee Forman]

Lee, the young woman screaming about the bushes was probably Gloria Calvery, who ran up to Billy Shelley and Billy Lovelady after the shooting and said much the same thing. She was talking about the plants down by the stockade fence (at least that's where everybody she spoke to ended up running). As far as the unidentifieds in the Plaza, if you look at the Croft photo etc you'll notice that few, if any, of the black women in the photos, ever came forward or were ever identified. It seems likely they wouldn't talk to the cops, and the cops wouldn't go looking for them. You said that Mudd has been identied. Can you point him out to me?

Don Roberdeau has identified him on his plat - using his Plat and F. Lee Mudd's account, I assume he would be the individual wearing the hat, seen in Croft's photo, standing on the sidewalk. We would need Don to confirm how he ID'd this individual 'clear as Mudd.'

On Roberdeau's Plat, as pointed out too many times probably, not one of these individuals seen in Croft on the sidewalk -- aside from possibly Mudd -- has been identified to the best of my knowledge. Mark Oakes may know more.

I can't find the full transcript of Mudd's interview for some odd reason.

Everyone seems to assume that Joe Marshall Smith went running off in the direction of the 'bushes' along the backside of the Pergola, based upon his encounter with an hysterical woman - I just don't know. There is an exhibit which details Joe Marshall Smith's original location and where he ran - I posted it here earlier - ce354. His starting point was on the corner of Elm and Houston - at the DalTex. He seems to have run in a fairly straight line. When he is asked about why he ran in this direction, it isn't exactly clear that he is following any direction provided by the hysterical woman. It sounds more likely that he is following instinct and where he believed he heard the sound coming from himself.

Mr. LIEBELER. I show you a picture, an aerial view of the area that is marked Commission Exhibit No. 354. Could you locate the Texas School Book Depository Building in there?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; it should be right there.

Mr. LIEBELER. Yes; that is it on the left-hand side of the picture, and of course, the intersection of Elm and Houston is right off opposite the corner there, right at the corner of the Texas School Book Depository Building, and you were standing to the east?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; right here.

Mr. LIEBELER. Of Houston?

Mr. SMITH. Right along in this area.

Mr. LIEBELER. There is, in fact, a picture of a car stopped there right at the intersection of Elm and Houston, and you had been standing back in the vicinity of the automobile?

Mr. SMITH. Just about the middle of Elm Street here.

Mr. LIEBELER. I will put the No. 4 in a circle on the spot of approximately where you were standing at the time the motorcade went by. Is that approximately correct?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. You were facing east up Elm Street away from the triple underpass?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. So that your back was in fact turned to the School Book Depository Building?

Mr. SMITH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now there are two or three other buildings here in the immediate vicinity as you are facing east on Elm Street. There is a building on your left, which is directly across Houston Street from the School Book Depository Building. Do you know what building that is?

Mr. SMITH. I know, but I can't remember now.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you observe any activity in any of the windows of that building?

Mr. SMITH. No, sir; I didn't

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have occasion to look to the windows of that building at any time when the motorcade came by? That would be the building to your left.

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir. I don't recall, but I know that I must have, because. I was trying to keep all the crowd in sight that was around. I know that I must have glanced at it, but I don't recall seeing anything unusual.

Mr. LIEBELER. What about the building across Elm Street on your right? That is the county building?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. There are a series of windows in that building facing the triple underpass. Could you observe those windows from the point where you were standing?

Mr. SMITH. No, sir; not where I could tell whether they were open or closed.

Mr. LIEBELER. Because you were standing too far up Elm Street to have a good vantage point from which to observe these windows?

Mr. SMITH. I mean on Houston Street.

Mr. LIEBELER. That is what I mean.

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. You wouldn't have been able to see the windows of the building that is down on the intersection of Main and Houston Streets at all from where you were standing?

Mr. SMITH. No.

Mr. LIEBELER. If you could have seen, it would have been with great difficulty, so you weren't in position to observe those windows, and you didn't in fact observe them, is that correct?

Mr. SMITH. Correct.

Mr. LIEBELER. While you were standing here and the motorcade went by, tell us what happened at that point.

Mr. SMITH. I heard the shots.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you turn to watch the motorcade? Did you turn to watch the President as the motorcade went by?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; I glanced around and was watching the crowd to make sure they stayed back out of the way of the motorcade, and also to make sure none of the cars started up or anything. Then I heard the shots, and I immediately proceeded from this point.

Mr. LIEBELER. Point 4 on Commission Exhibit No. 354?

Mr. SMITH. I started up toward this Book Depository after I heard the shots, and I didn't know where the shots came from. I had no idea, because it was such a ricochet.

Mr. LIEBELER. An echo effect?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir.; and this woman came up to me and she was just in hysterics. She told me, "They are shooting the President from the bushes." So I immediately proceeded up here.

Mr. LIEBELER. You proceeded up to an area immediately behind the concrete structure here that is described by Elm Street and the street that runs immediately in front of the Texas School Book Depository, is that right? Mr. SMITH. I was checking all the bushes and I checked all the cars in the parking lot.

Mr. LIEBELER. There is a parking lot in behind this grassy area back from Elm Street toward the railroad tracks, and you went down to the parking lot and looked around?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; I checked all the cars. I looked into all the cars and checked around the bushes. Of course, I wasn't alone. There was some deputy sheriff with me, and I believe one Secret Service man when I got there.

I got to make this statement, too. I felt awfully silly, but after the shot and this woman, I pulled my pistol from my holster, and I thought, this is silly, I don't know who I am looking for, and I put it back. Just as I did, he showed me that he was a Secret Service agent.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you accost this man?

Mr. SMITH. Well, he saw me coming with my pistol and right away he showed me who he was.

Mr. LIEBELER. Do you remember who it was?

Mr. SMITH. No, sir; I don't--because then we started checking the cars. In fact, I was checking the bushes, and I went through the cars, and I started over here in this particular section.

Mr. LIEBELER. Down toward the railroad tracks where they go over the triple underpass?

Mr. SMITH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Did you have any basis for believing where the shots came from, or where to look for somebody, other than what the lady told you?

Mr. SMITH. No, sir; except that maybe it was a power of suggestion. But it sounded to me like they may have came from this vicinity here.

Mr. LIEBELER. Down around the---let's put a No. 5 there at the corner here behind this concrete structure where the bushes were down toward the railroad tracks from the Texas School Book Depository Building on the little street that runs down in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building.

Mr. SMITH. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now you say that you had the idea that the shots may have come from up in that area?

Mr. SMITH. Yes, sir; that is just what, well, like I say, the sound of it. That was the most helpless and hopeless feeling I ever had.

- lee

[Mark Stapleton]

Al, you're a coward. You have so little faith in your own convictions that you ruthlessly attempt to snuff out any and all dissent. Even worse, you had to tattle to the moderator like an 8-yo girl....don’t take away my right to offend, either wittingly or unwittingly. That’s what a democracy is all about. Otherwise, you’re left with the Internet’s version of a banana republic with the moderator as dictator. If my posts routinely abused and harassed others in a trollish manner, or contained frequent profanity, then he’d have every right to exile me. But we all know that’s not what's happening here.

Mark Stapleton: “I feel sympathy for Lee. Look what the lone nut loonies are doing to his excellent thread.”

Mark,

I feel the same way, and would ordinarily apologize for sticking my own dim-witted butt into the thread. But apparently that’s the point and the strategy when someone like Lee posts an excellent thread—if you’re opposed to what he’s after or what is being said, then the best approach is to [expletive deleted] all over it. And it works: people get bored, irritated, tired, confused, and then drop out.................And why should anyone bother to stay in when confronted with gems like these?

“Christ, could you be more smug and condescending? Tom dares to stray from the party line and he's not being ‘intellectual’ enough for you? As opposed to the grossly anti-intellectual, anti-US poison you spread here and at Spartacus? No wonder anti-Americanism is on the rise in Europe.

“It’s the same recycled nonsense from amateurs who are not board certified or credentialed in any way. Hell, even the 1976 House investigation concluded that the (alleged) Knoll shot MISSED. But when has reason ever mattered to the buffs?

“Whoop-dee-doo....stop wasting my time.

“He’s good at some things, so therefore he must be good at others? Brilliant lawyers know how to perform surgery?”

“Jumping out of airplanes or manning a post does not confer upon him scientific expertise. Posting his CV was a lame and desperate attempt to change the subject.

“And when he didn’t know enough about a subject, he shut up. Something to ponder.

“Excuse me Mr. Stalker, but how am I attacking Tom? I thought I was attacking (questioning?) Bill’s credentials and the dimwitted defense offered up by Dan. Keep your eye on the ball, Mark.

“Tom, it just occurred to me that those military citations Dan posted are yours, not Bill’s. No one bothered to correct me when I ascribed them to Bill, and I just realized the mistake. Now we just have to figure out why your military background would bolster Dan’s pro-conspiracy case.”

Since the later gems were based on the member’s apparent total confusion as to what he was talking about, and no one had the goodness of heart to correct him, this all speaks for itself, doesn’t it? It’s like watching the drunkest, mouthiest guy at the bar going on and on and on; he deserves to be knocked on his arse, but you always know he’s eventually gonna do something stupid or really embarrassing. And has no shame and/or can't stop when it does happen. (Keep your eye on the ball, and when you don’t know enough about a subject, just shut up. Something to ponder.)

This is not, unfortunately, about someone who's totally oblivious and has no self-consciousness. It might seem that way when he writes, "If my posts routinely abused and harassed others in a trollish manner, or contained frequent profanity, then he’d have every right to exile me. But we all know that’s not what's happening here." He has to be aware that he "routinely abuses and harasses others in a trollish manner," doesn't he? That's what trolls are about, and then they deny they're doing it. So keep up the good work, Lee; you must really be onto something to have gained the honor of this kind of all-out assault. And everyone: try as much as possible to ignore this mouthy punk; he ain't worth the strain and effort we all had to endure when we squeezed out the last [expletive deleted] we took.

Daniel,

You make a good point. When Brendan tries to interrupt and distract a thread it indicates that the thread annoys him, hence the thread must have merit.

It's hard to believe we have a real, live Warren Commission disciple in our midst. After all these years, I didn't think any rational person could form such a view--goes to show that life is full of surprises I guess. I wonder what he thinks about alchemy. There's a lot of base metal out there.

I like this thread because it's a real attempt to solve one of history's most intiguing mysteries--or at least to throw up a few realistic suggestions. No one knows with certainty where the shooters and those assisting them were located--does anyone really believe the shooters would be out there on their own, with no cover? Lee has put in a painstaking effort to throw light on some possibilities. Unlike Bill Miller's constructive critiques, I feel Brendan's strange and provocative denigration of Lee's efforts to be cheap and tactless. I feel compelled to respond.

I agree with Steve Turner that adherents of the lone nut theory have just as much right to be here as those who espouse other crackpot theories. They are always great entertainment value. Where's Gerry Posner? They could be a better act than Martin and Lewis.