JFK Assassination Forum 
Logo
HomeThe Robin Unger JFK Assassination GalleryYoutube JFK Assassination Video ChannelSearchNotepadLoginRegister

Welcome, http://hairboutique.com/view.php?oemsale=cheap-ms-powerpoint-2016-software-for-sale ms powerpoint 2016 cheap Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
February 27, 2017, 11:24:50 AM
News: Posts and threads containing swear words, personal insults or crudities, content considered by Admin to be spamming, when reported or observed, may be edited or deleted.
The perpetrator of any offense may receive a posting suspension of a period to be determined by Admin in relation to the considered severity of the offense.
Questions relating to deletions or edits will not be answered by Admin via any communication method here or elsewhere.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [ http://hairboutique.com/view.php?oemsale=cost-of-audition-cc-2015-software adobe audition 2015 discount 7] 8 9 10 11 12 price of creative 5 master collection ... 37
The Empty Window  (Read 11945 times)
Super Member
*****

Posts: 9619


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
http://hairboutique.com/view.php?oemsale=cheap-autodesk-autocad-lt where can i buy autodesk autocad lt 2011
Did Lee Oswald "Appear" to defect to Russia in 1959?    Unless you are on that Egyptian River.......   It should be obvious to you that Lee was an intelligence agent......


I do agree that Oswald's defection to Russia and the easy manner of his return is remarkable and could indeed suggest some connections with Government Agencies.

But none of that explains why you consider the Walker shooting a hoax.


http://hairboutique.com/view.php?oemsale=adobe-acrobat-standard-dc-student-teacher-edition-cheap buy online adobe acrobat standard dc student teacher edition This of course calls for me to speculate....Then you'll have the opportunity to point out that I'm merely speculating......

Actually, it wasn't a trick question,Walt. It was just that I can not understand why Oswald would have named "Junior + short individual" at all if he did not want a witness to confirm where he was.

But since you brought it up, isn't your claim that Oswald did not want any witness to confirm his whereabouts speculation as well?


http://hairboutique.com/view.php?oemsale=purchase-microsoft-office-professional-2016 microsoft office professional 2016 costs An honest Cop would have checked with "Junior"  to verify if Lee was telling the truth...... 

I agree... but with Oswald dead perhaps not great interest existed in anything that could give him an alibi.

 
If Junior had told Fritz that Yes,  in fact he and Shorty Norman had walked by the Domino room when they left the front of the building at 12:25, an honest cop would have eliminated Lee Oswald as a shooter.  

Which is probably why it wasn't looked into any further.

But none of that explains why you consider the Walker shooting a hoax.

I'll accept that this is an honest challenge for me to present evidence to support my contention that the walker incident was merely a hoax.

But I doubt tat you'll accept the fact that I'm not William Manchester or any other acclaimed author..... Because I'd have to write a damned  book to present my ideas on why I believe the Walker incident was nothing but a hoax.   I believe the DPD detectives thought it was a hoax and they treated it as such.    They understood that Walker was a high profile member of the Dallas Oil  smeared community. and therefore they humored Walker and went through the motions of investigating the bullet hole in the window....Then they filed the BS in the dust bin and convened to the doughnut shop.   The case lay in the dust bin for eight months.

If they had taken the incident seriously they would have deduced that there was a killer on the loose and would likely have posted round the clock protection for Walker....Is there any record that The DPD had  a patrol cruising Walker's neighborhood??  

In summary.....  I have a large file from which I have reached the conclusion that the Walker incident was a hoax.....


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

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 7428


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But none of that explains why you consider the Walker shooting a hoax.

I'll accept that this is an honest challenge for me to present evidence to support my contention that the walker incident was merely a hoax.

But I doubt tat you'll accept the fact that I'm not William Manchester or any other acclaimed author..... Because I'd have to write a damned  book to present my ideas on why I believe the Walker incident was nothing but a hoax.   I believe the DPD detectives thought it was a hoax and they treated it as such.    They understood that Walker was a high profile member of the Dallas Oil  smeared community. and therefore they humored Walker and went through the motions of investigating the bullet hole in the window....Then they filed the BS in the dust bin and convened to the doughnut shop.   The case lay in the dust bin for eight months.

If they had taken the incident seriously they would have deduced that there was a killer on the loose and would likely have posted round the clock protection for Walker....Is there any record that The DPD had  a patrol cruising Walker's neighborhood??  

In summary.....  I have a large file from which I have reached the conclusion that the Walker incident was a hoax.....

In other words, no evidence whatsoever.


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

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 5183


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

We don't disagree, Martin.  An unknown time between 12:00 and 12:30 is still an unknown time.

Correction:  it's difficult to escape the conclusion that Oswald CLAIMED to have seen Jarman and Norman together IN the domino room between 12:00 and 12:30.  It's a logical flaw to take something that you know happened and then retrofit an ambiguous statement to fit it.  That's how we get the "prayerperson is Oswald" people saying that because  Harry Holmes (of all people) thought the policeman encounter was in a vestibule and there happened to be a vestibule inside the front door then Oswald must have been by the front door.

We don't disagree, Martin.  An unknown time between 12:00 and 12:30 is still an unknown time.

Anything apart from an exact time documented by hard evidence will always be an "unknown time".

Correction:  it's difficult to escape the conclusion that Oswald CLAIMED to have seen Jarman and Norman together IN the domino room between 12:00 and 12:30.

We don't know that Oswald claimed to have seen them in the Domino room. That's just the way it was written in the reports, but whoever wrote it could well have used the wrong word. All we really know is that Oswald claimed to have seen "Junior and a short individual" when he was eating his lunch.

It's a logical flaw to take something that you know happened and then retrofit an ambiguous statement to fit it.

I am not retrofitting anything. I have given you the reasons for narrowing down the time and location to the best of our ability based upon the available information. It so happens that in the narrowed down time frame and location out of all other TSBD employees exactly Jarman (known as Junior) and Norman (who was short) were indeed at the same location within the time frame. You can call it a coincidence if you like, but you can not deny it didn't happen.

That's how we get the "prayerperson is Oswald" people saying that because  Harry Holmes (of all people) thought the policeman encounter was in a vestibule and there happened to be a vestibule inside the front door then Oswald must have been by the front door.

This is in no way the same as the prayer person discussion. But if you can give me another logical explanation for the set of circumstances I have posted earlier, be my guest.

Tell me why I can not reach the conclusion I have given? Does the available information not support the conclusion;

- that the event must have taken place between 12.00 and 12.30 on 11/22/63?
- that the location must have been one of two lunchrooms in the TSBD?


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

At what time though?  Only Fritz puts the Jarman/Norman sighting at "the time the President was shot" (not even a few minutes before), and he says Oswald was having lunch with Norman/Jarman.  You can invent all kinds of different narratives by choosing different pieces of the different accounts.


I am not inventing anything. I have already explained how the only valid conclusion must be that it happened between 12.00 and 12.30 on 11/22/63.

But if all sorts of different narratives can be "invented", please show me. Invent one that covers all the bases of the available information!


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

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 5183


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Jarman and Norman usually had lunch together in the domino room.  It wouldn't take a crystal ball to place them together in the domino room at lunchtime.  As it turns out though, they did not eat lunch together that day.  If there was any actual evidence of Oswald saying that he saw them walk by outside the windows, then I would be impressed.

Jarman and Norman usually had lunch together in the domino room.  It wouldn't take a crystal ball to place them together in the domino room at lunchtime.

Actually it would have been dangerous speculation as not every day the President passes by and has nearly all the staff outside to watch him.


As it turns out though, they did not eat lunch together that day. 

So, what happened to the crystal ball?


If there was any actual evidence of Oswald saying that he saw them walk by outside the windows, then I would be impressed.

I am beginning to doubt that.



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

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 5183


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
But none of that explains why you consider the Walker shooting a hoax.

I'll accept that this is an honest challenge for me to present evidence to support my contention that the walker incident was merely a hoax.

But I doubt tat you'll accept the fact that I'm not William Manchester or any other acclaimed author..... Because I'd have to write a damned  book to present my ideas on why I believe the Walker incident was nothing but a hoax.   I believe the DPD detectives thought it was a hoax and they treated it as such.    They understood that Walker was a high profile member of the Dallas Oil  smeared community. and therefore they humored Walker and went through the motions of investigating the bullet hole in the window....Then they filed the BS in the dust bin and convened to the doughnut shop.   The case lay in the dust bin for eight months.

If they had taken the incident seriously they would have deduced that there was a killer on the loose and would likely have posted round the clock protection for Walker....Is there any record that The DPD had  a patrol cruising Walker's neighborhood??  

In summary.....  I have a large file from which I have reached the conclusion that the Walker incident was a hoax.....

But I doubt tat you'll accept the fact that I'm not William Manchester or any other acclaimed author

Walt, I merely asked to for an explanation for why you believe what you believe. This has nothing to do with who you are. At least not for me.


If they had taken the incident seriously they would have deduced that there was a killer on the loose

It wouldn't be the only killer on the loose back then and the same goes for today. Not every crime gets solved, not every killer gets caught. The mere fact that the case remained unsolved does not justify the conclusion that DPD did not take it seriously.


and would likely have posted round the clock protection for Walker.

Why? Does that happen with everybody who is the victim of an attemped murder that failed? And what if Walker did not want that and did not request protection?


In summary.....  I have a large file from which I have reached the conclusion that the Walker incident was a hoax.....

That's all I wanted to know.



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

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 16570


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
I do agree that Oswald's defection to Russia and the easy manner of his return is remarkable and could indeed suggest some connections with Government Agencies.

Oswald never defected and therefore, his "manner of return" was hardly remarkable.

But I'm curious, what makes you state that Oswald's manner of return was remarkable?


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

   ReplyReply

Super Member
*****

Posts: 7428


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
We don't know that Oswald claimed to have seen them in the Domino room.

That's true, we can't know what Oswald actually said, but every interrogation account that mentions Norman/Jarman has Oswald eating lunch with them or has them walking through/coming in the room where Oswald was.  No account has Oswald saying they walked past the room.

Quote
I am not retrofitting anything. I have given you the reasons for narrowing down the time and location to the best of our ability based upon the available information. It so happens that in the narrowed down time frame and location out of all other TSBD employees exactly Jarman (known as Junior) and Norman (who was short) were indeed at the same location within the time frame. You can call it a coincidence if you like, but you can not deny it didn't happen.

Stating that Jarman and Norman were together between 12:00 and 12:30 is not a remarkable thing to have knowledge of.  It's certainly not any kind of alibi for the shooting that happened at 12:30.

Quote
This is in no way the same as the prayer person discussion. But if you can give me another logical explanation for the set of circumstances I have posted earlier, be my guest.

I'd be glad to.  By cherry-picking the different accounts of the interrogation I could just as easily conclude that Oswald said he had lunch with Jarman and Norman at noon.

Quote
Tell me why I can not reach the conclusion I have given? Does the available information not support the conclusion;

- that the event must have taken place between 12.00 and 12.30 on 11/22/63?
- that the location must have been one of two lunchrooms in the TSBD?

Well for one thing, you're just assuming that what Oswald claimed about seeing Norman/Jarman (whenever and wherever) actually in fact happened.  If I told you that I saw Barack and Michelle Obama together around lunch time today (not a very extraordinary claim), does that somehow prove I really did?


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

   ReplyReply
Super Member
*****

Posts: 5183


As a guest, you are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
That's true, we can't know what Oswald actually said, but every interrogation account that mentions Norman/Jarman has Oswald eating lunch with them or has them walking through/coming in the room where Oswald was.  No account has Oswald saying they walked past the room.

Stating that Jarman and Norman were together between 12:00 and 12:30 is not a remarkable thing to have knowledge of.  It's certainly not any kind of alibi for the shooting that happened at 12:30.

I'd be glad to.  By cherry-picking the different accounts of the interrogation I could just as easily conclude that Oswald said he had lunch with Jarman and Norman at noon.

Well for one thing, you're just assuming that what Oswald claimed about seeing Norman/Jarman (whenever and wherever) actually in fact happened.  If I told you that I saw Barack and Michelle Obama together around lunch time today (not a very extraordinary claim), does that somehow prove I really did?

That's true, we can't know what Oswald actually said, but every interrogation account that mentions Norman/Jarman has Oswald eating lunch with them or has them walking through/coming in the room where Oswald was.  No account has Oswald saying they walked past the room.

Again, what Fitz and Bookhout wrote does not necessarily have to be 100% correct. In fact both reports contradict eachother to some extend (eating lunch with 2 men is something different as seeing them come in and walk through a room) so it is quite possible that what Bookhout wrote about "walking through/coming in" the room could easily have been a simple misunderstanding on his part. Not every person says everything correctly and completely understandable for others the first time around. Perhaps Oswald did in fact say he saw them coming in and walking through the main (shipping and wrapping) room and Bookhout misunderstood it to mean the lunchroom. I admit it is speculation but so is your assumption that what Bookhout wrote is 100% correct.

You have not disputed that the sighting must have happened between 12.00 and 12.30 on 11/22/63 and that one of the two lunchrooms in the was involved. Let's take it from there and try to determine where else and how Oswald could have seen Jarman and Norman if he didn't see them from the 1st floor lunchroom as they walked toward the elevators. If you can not do that, then it either means that Oswald did in fact see them when I think he did or he made it all up and was extremely lucky to pick out of all the TSBD employees exactly those two who we know were actually there.



Stating that Jarman and Norman were together between 12:00 and 12:30 is not a remarkable thing to have knowledge of.  It's certainly not any kind of alibi for the shooting that happened at 12:30.

I never argued that. But your comments do not really address the point I made.

I'd be glad to.  By cherry-picking the different accounts of the interrogation I could just as easily conclude that Oswald said he had lunch with Jarman and Norman at noon.

No you couldn't because we know from testimony that Oswald was still on the 6th floor at noon. But please tell me what have I cherry-picked and/or ignored from the two accounts of the interrogation?

Well for one thing, you're just assuming that what Oswald claimed about seeing Norman/Jarman (whenever and wherever) actually in fact happened.  

That's the conclusion (the only one I have been able to find so far that is supported by and fits with all the known information) I have reached, yes. If you want to call it an assumption, that's fine by me. Basically every conclusion reached solely upon third party information is by defination always an assumption, so that doesn't tell me much.  


If I told you that I saw Barack and Michelle Obama together around lunch time today (not a very extraordinary claim), does that somehow prove I really did?

No, but now you are moving the goalposts.... I never said the available information proved anything. I have merely stated that the available information supports my conclusion that it did happen. I have asked you to provide me with an alternative narrative that would fit all the available information. You said you can invent all kinds of different narratives by choosing different pieces of the different accounts, so I'll ask you again to please do so any provide me with only one such narrative.


-------------------------
« Last Edit: January 11, 2017, 11:00:10 PM by Martin Weidmann »

   ReplyReply
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 37


Jump to:  

JFK Assassination Forum Assassination of JFK discussion and debate surrounding the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy In Dealey Plaza Texas on November 22nd 1963

JFK Assassination Photographs Gallery

JFK Assassination Forum Assassination of JFK discussion and debate surrounding the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy In Dealey Plaza Texas on November 22nd 1963
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines