Power cut important clarification required

[John Iacoletti]

He had folks on the elevator who worked there and knew how to operate the elevator.  Once he lets them off he is suddenly stuck because it is not a typical elevator.

How was it not a "typical elevator"?  You're just making things up as you go along and digging your hole deeper.

And why they stop an elevator going UP if their intent was to trap the patsy coming DOWN.

LOL.  Richard thinks that power only works in one direction.

  And how long after the assassination this Mooney elevator trip occurs.  10 minutes or more?

You tell us, Mr. "Many Minutes".

[Richard Smith]

"Many of your fellow CTers" is just your euphemism for Richard's latest strawman.  Who suggested a building-wide power outage?  And you're so busy being an arrogant ass with your "follow along with your finger" nonsense, that you didn't even realize that Tom showed that the sign was on a completely separate meter and circuit.  It had nothing to do with the building power.

So what?  That somehow shows that the elevators had power when Mooney and Adams tried them?  By your twisted logic, power outages never occur anywhere, because the power is on at other times.

LOL.  And you lecture me about reading comprehension.  Go ahead, quote Tom Sorenson ever saying that power to the elevators was turned off to delay the escape of the patsy from the upper floor.

Your strawman arguments usually are.

...and how do you know that?  Mary Bledsoe?  How did you even determine that it was "many minutes after the assassination" when Mooney tried the elevator?  How many minutes?

Of course he is.  Duh.  It takes more time to use the stairs.

So now the breaker box is "in plain sight" of the elevators on the first floor.  This just keeps getting better and better.

I agree.  Your "fantasy conspirators" strawman are always absurd and laughable.  But you never deviate from the same old shtick.

He said "we had no more power on the elevator".  He didn't say he couldn't figure out how to work it.  He had just operated it to get to the second floor.  Do you think he forgot how to push a button?

But wait, are you also going to claim that Adams also didn't have a clue how to work an elevator that she used all the time in the building where she worked?

Johnny going to cry soon?  For a guy who whines about name calling this is a great post.  Not going to wade through yet more of your compulsion driven contrarian nonsense.  Just to note that you have dishonestly cited the information contained in Tom's article which says nothing about the sign being on a separate meter (and the article is discussing a different sign from a decade prior and not the Hertz sign).  And even if this were the case it in no way precludes a power outage to the entire building from affecting the sign.  You have previously declared victory on this point by lending support to Walt's baseless claim that the Hertz sign was battery powered.  Now without missing a beat it is suddenly on an electrical meter.  And on and on with the ad hoc reasoning.  As for the theories of other CTers about this power outage, anyone can go back and read them on this thread.  They can speak for themselves.  No reason to go through it yet again to satisfy your contrarian hobby.   

[John Iacoletti]

Johnny going to cry soon?  For a guy who whines about name calling this is a great post.  Not going to wade through yet more of your compulsion driven contrarian nonsense.

This is Richard-ese for "my ridiculous argument was destroyed, but I need to try to save face somehow".

  Just to note that you have dishonestly cited the information contained in Tom's article which says nothing about the sign being on a separate meter (and the article is discussing a different sign from a decade prior and not the Hertz sign).

From 1953, the infrastructure was in place on the TSBD roof for a devoted high voltage power line on its own independent circuit and utility meter

Face it, Richard.  You made a silly argument that the Hertz sign being illuminated at 12:30 somehow proved that there was never a power outage inside the building.  Just own it instead of trying to cover it up with your usual arrogant condescending routine.

As for the theories of other CTers about this power outage, anyone can go back and read them on this thread.  They can speak for themselves.  No reason to go through it yet again to satisfy your contrarian hobby.

Yeah, right.  No examples then.  That's what I figured, yet another Richard Smith strawman.  Do you actually think you're fooling anyone?

[Richard Smith]

This is Richard-ese for "my ridiculous argument was destroyed, but I need to try to save face somehow".


Face it, Richard.  You made a silly argument that the Hertz sign being illuminated at 12:30 somehow proved that there was never a power outage inside the building.  Just own it instead of trying to cover it up with your usual arrogant condescending routine.

Yeah, right.  No examples then.  That's what I figured, yet another Richard Smith strawman.  Do you actually think you're fooling anyone?

Note that John is citing to Tom's commentary as fact rather than the information actually contained in the article which says nothing about the sign being separately metered or continuing to function if the power to building has gone out.  Tom merely expressed his opinion on that matter.  John apparently has confused the two in his haste to be correct about something for once.  And the sign being discussed is a different sign from 1953 and not the Hertz sign.  Although I agree it may have relevance and it's a good find which puts to rest the baseless contention of Walt that Johnny so desperately wanted to be true that the Hertz sign was battery powered.  I know Johnny don't cry.  It wasn't your claim per se so you can run away now after making a big noise about it. 

[John Iacoletti]

Note that John is citing to Tom's commentary as fact rather than the information actually contained in the article which says nothing about the sign being separately metered or continuing to function if the power to building has gone out.  Tom merely expressed his opinion on that matter.

Tom doesn't "merely express his opinion" without backing it up with enormous amounts of data.  You on the other hand take your "mere opinions" and state them as facts.  For example that the Hertz sign being illuminated at 12:30 "proves" that there was never a power outage inside the building, or that Luke Mooney didn't know how to work an elevator.

Although I agree it may have relevance and it's a good find which puts to rest the baseless contention of Walt that Johnny so desperately wanted to be true that the Hertz sign was battery powered.

You just can't help yourself can you, Mr. Strawman?  Yeah, I desperately want Walt to be right, that's why I keep a list of his fabrications.  Yet, you're the one who claimed that it was connected to the TSBD power with no evidence whatsoever and then demanded that I do research to prove you wrong.  Which is how you argue every aspect of this case.  Oswald did it unless you can prove he didn't.  Oswald did it unless you can prove there was a cadre of fantasy conspirators.  Blah blah blah insult insult blah blah blah.

  I know Johnny don't cry.  It wasn't your claim per se so you can run away now after making a big noise about it.

No, but you're sure running away from the claim that you made, aren't you?  I'm not crying -- I'm laughing at your ridiculous pompousness.

[John Iacoletti]

Anyway here's some more frameshots of the back of the building and the 6th floor.

And this gif should put any guessing to bed, through the sniper's nest window in the TVmovie we see the same 3 buildings beyond that actually exist there.

Credit where due.  I think you nailed it here.  Well done.

I watched Ruby and Oswald last night.  It was a pretty decently done telling of the official narrative, with only a couple of minor discrepancies (like where Frazier parked) and some very contrived dialogue ("here's your officially timestamped receipt, Mr. Ruby").  But they had more attention to detail than any other movie I've seen.

[Martin Weidmann]

Tom doesn't "merely express his opinion" without backing it up with enormous amounts of data.  You on the other hand take your "mere opinions" and state them as facts.  For example that the Hertz sign being illuminated at 12:30 "proves" that there was never a power outage inside the building, or that Luke Mooney didn't know how to work an elevator.

You just can't help yourself can you, Mr. Strawman?  Yeah, I desperately want Walt to be right, that's why I keep a list of his fabrications.  Yet, you're the one who claimed that it was connected to the TSBD power with no evidence whatsoever and then demanded that I do research to prove you wrong.  Which is how you argue every aspect of this case.  Oswald did it unless you can prove he didn't.  Oswald did it unless you can prove there was a cadre of fantasy conspirators.  Blah blah blah insult insult blah blah blah.

No, but you're sure running away from the claim that you made, aren't you?  I'm not crying -- I'm laughing at your ridiculous pompousness.

One of the articles says that the Ford sign required more power than an average city block would use in one day. Another article says that the sign was powered by sixty-five transformers....

And Richard thinks they just connected it to the electricity supply of the TSBD.... Go figure!