Rex Bradford joins the Forum

[Jack White]

I am making available to the Penn Jones Collection for COPYING all of my big collection of JFK newsletters,

including Grassy Knoll Gazette, PROBE, and many others. Online will be Page One of each...but the library will have available the entire issue in-house but not necessarily online. Ben perhaps can supply scans by email of specific requests...but he and and one staff member run the entire operation with the help of student volunteers. It is good facility for anyone wishing to donate JFK materials. They also are converting more than 100 of my videos to DVD. These will be listed online, but can be seen only by visiting the library, as many researchers have been doing.

Jack

Thank you Jack. I don’t always agree with Jack’s theories but we are all in his debt for his long crusade to get at the truth. He is always very generous with passing on the information that he has on the case. Out of interest, how many researchers still alive can date their involvement to soon after the assassination took place?

Thanks, John. However, I have few "theories" for you to disagree with.

I seldom theorize. I examine photos and report my findings. These

observations are most often FACTS, not theories. Sometimes from these

facts I deduce that the facts seem to show something...elementary, Watson.

For instance, if I examine the Willis photo and make measurements that

show Zapruder to be 64 inches tall based on the height of the pedestal,

one can hardly describe that as a theory, can one? That observation

can be described as a fact, since it can be replicated by anyone. It can

only be challenged on whether I measured accurately, right? Established

as a fact then, the Willis photo (and any others) must be compared with

the FACT that Mr. Zapruder was in real life 71 inches tall, and then deduce

or conclude that the photo does not accurately depict Mr. Zapruder. THIS

IS NOT A THEORY. Then one may start theorizing WHY THE PHOTO IS

WRONG. There are few reasonable theories. The only theory I can think

of is PHOTO TAMPERING...but I have no way to prove that, so I am

content to point out the discrepancy. This leads to wider questions of

why was the image altered to show a very short Zapruder, which leads

us to question whether he actually took the film, or whether he was

part of some elaborate hoax. We do not know these answers, so we

can only speculate. But if the IMAGE IS NOT ACCURATE, THAT IS

FACT, NOT THEORY. You may challenge my methodology or accuracy,

but not the fact. You are free to come up with your own theory

of why all the photos show A VERY SHORT ZAPRUDER.

Please list for me a few of my "theories" you disagree with, and I

will be glad to discuss them, whether on JFK, Apollo, or 911. Are the

backyard photos of Oswald real? I will show you FACTS that show

they cannot be. Did man go to the moon? I do not know, but I can

show you that the photos cannot be real. Did a giant jetliner crash

into the Pentagon? No. Did Building 6 explode and did Building 7

just fall down? Let me show you the FACTS and you can theorize.

Elementary.

Jack

[Dawn Meredith]

My thanks to Rex for his important HISTORY MATTERS website. My question for him: WHO SCANNED THE ENTIRE 26 VOLUMES, etc.? I own the complete set, and have never even looked at EVERY page, much less scan them. It is a great asset to have them online.

Jack

Thanks. Though it may reflect poorly on my sanity, I admit to having personally scanned every last page of the Warren Report and 26 volumes, HSCA Report and 12 volumes, 14 Church Committee Reports, and much more. I can't claim to have read every page, though. Currently taking the staples out of a few hundred thousand pages of CIA records......

Rex

Rex,

I can't believe I missed this post til just now. You just made may day...tho I am playing catch -up here:)

You guys rock! Mucho appreciation.

Dawn