Toni Glover

[Toni Glover]

New interview at Sixth Floor Museum, last November.

[Lance Payette]

New interview at Sixth Floor Museum, last November.

With all due respect to the Sixth Floor Museum and its Oral History Project, and to the people who participate, I think it's all almost entirely bogus.

I happen to have - hold your applause - a very solid intellect, an advanced education, and by any standard a wonderful memory, BUT:

I was discussing with a good friend just yesterday how FANTASTICALLY fallible our memories are. When I try to piece together events of 30, 40, 50 years ago - events I think I recall precisely - I discover my "memories" are a confused and conflated mess that simply can't be trusted. It's absolutely comical. Events A, B and C actually happened years apart, but I have conflated them into a single event. The "memories" of my friend, a retired hydrologist who is eight years younger than I, are an even bigger mess.

The example that started the discussion with my friend was classic: When we lived in Rochester, NY in 1985-86, my late wife and I always watched "This Week with David Brinkley" on Sunday morning. I DISTINCTLY remember watching Norah O'Donnell and thinking she was quite a cutie. Bill Kristol was also on, and my wife liked him. Yesterday, I saw Norah and thought she still looked pretty good for someone who was on TV almost 40 years ago. Oops, Norah is only 51 and was NEVER on "This Week." Bill Kristol wasn't on until 1996, by which time I was living in my present home and had moved twice since Rochester. I had confidently conflated an entire series of memories into one, and it happens all the time.
 
I don't care HOW impactful someone thinks the JFKA was, there is NO WAY memories 30, 40, 50, 60 years later can be trusted. I could regale the Sixth Floor Museum with plausible-sounding "memories" of the JFKA, but all I'm at least pretty sure I remember is that I was eating lunch in the outside lunch area at Alice Vail Junior High in Tucson. Who told us, who I was with, what I was wearing, what I was eating, how I and others reacted, what we were doing 5 minutes before and 5 minutes after - FORGET ABOUT IT.

These characters who come out of the woodwork years after the fact are simply a nuisance. I don't care if what they say is LN-supportive or CT-supportive, it just confuses the issue and should be ignored. I'm looking at YOU, Don Teel Curtis, Dentist of Destiny.

[Charles Collins]

New interview at Sixth Floor Museum, last November.

Thanks for the heads up. I looked at the list of the oral history witnesses. They have links to two of your interviews up, but no link yet for the latest interview. It has been about six months since last November. Hopefully they will make it available soon.

[Lance Payette]

Thanks for the heads up. I looked at the list of the oral history witnesses. They have links to two of your interviews up, but no link yet for the latest interview. It has been about six months since last November. Hopefully they will make it available soon.

Yes, because we need a third interview to assess how the "memories" have improved over the decades.  Jesus.

While we're at it, let's hear everyone else's "memories" of their birthday, Christmas, new puppy, first sexual encounter or anything else when they were ELEVEN YEARS OLD.

I actually have one. Old Mrs. Morrissey, my fifth-grade teacher at Lineweaver Elementary, was an English woman. We were at recess, and I had to come back into the building for something. Mrs. Morrissey was standing at the window, watching the kids at play, and didn't hear me. "Look at the little monsters," she said to herself. "They should all be shot." Yes, that has stuck with me - but pretty much nothing else from my event-filled 11th year. After that, I always kind of liked Mrs. Morrissey.

[Charles Collins]

With all due respect to the Sixth Floor Museum and its Oral History Project, and to the people who participate, I think it's all almost entirely bogus.

I happen to have - hold your applause - a very solid intellect, an advanced education, and by any standard a wonderful memory, BUT:

I was discussing with a good friend just yesterday how FANTASTICALLY fallible our memories are. When I try to piece together events of 30, 40, 50 years ago - events I think I recall precisely - I discover my "memories" are a confused and conflated mess that simply can't be trusted. It's absolutely comical. Events A, B and C actually happened years apart, but I have conflated them into a single event. The "memories" of my friend, a retired hydrologist who is eight years younger than I, are an even bigger mess.

The example that started the discussion with my friend was classic: When we lived in Rochester, NY in 1985-86, my late wife and I always watched "This Week with David Brinkley" on Sunday morning. I DISTINCTLY remember watching Norah O'Donnell and thinking she was quite a cutie. Bill Kristol was also on, and my wife liked him. Yesterday, I saw Norah and thought she still looked pretty good for someone who was on TV almost 40 years ago. Oops, Norah is only 51 and was NEVER on "This Week." Bill Kristol wasn't on until 1996, by which time I was living in my present home and had moved twice since Rochester. I had confidently conflated an entire series of memories into one, and it happens all the time.
 
I don't care HOW impactful someone thinks the JFKA was, there is NO WAY memories 30, 40, 50, 60 years later can be trusted. I could regale the Sixth Floor Museum with plausible-sounding "memories" of the JFKA, but all I'm at least pretty sure I remember is that I was eating lunch in the outside lunch area at Alice Vail Junior High in Tucson. Who told us, who I was with, what I was wearing, what I was eating, how I and others reacted, what we were doing 5 minutes before and 5 minutes after - FORGET ABOUT IT.

These characters who come out of the woodwork years after the fact are simply a nuisance. I don't care if what they say is LN-supportive or CT-supportive, it just confuses the issue and should be ignored. I'm looking at YOU, Don Teel Curtis, Dentist of Destiny.

Boo, hiss!!! I have to “respectfully” disagree with you to a certain extent. I get what you are saying and agree with some of it. Our memories are quite fallible. However ignoring accounts of witnesses who were actually there is like sticking your own head in a hole in the ground. I would much prefer to hear from actual witnesses than read about the opinions of people who were not there when the assassination happened. I believe that we should carefully consider what the actual witness accounts contain, compare it with other evidence, and judge each individual item accordingly, instead of just prejudging and ignoring their accounts due to “pre-conceived old fallible memories.” Only after due process should we consider whether or not to discount some or all of what the witness accounts contain. There are a lot of conflicting accounts, that’s typical and to be expected. It is also why anyone who wishes to hunt for accounts that fit their own pet ideas (aka: bias confirmation) can do so and usually find at least a little thread to hang on to. But they are only fooling themselves if they do not consider the totality of the evidence. Actual witnesses who were there always get my full attention.

[Royell Storing]

    With respect to the memories of 11/22/63 eyewitnesses, I find their peripheral memories to be the most valuable. Glover says that she has no memory of Euins being crouched down below her standing position on the stone pedestal. And she adds that she would have remembered seeing him in this position at that point in time. This is Important Eyewitness Information. Virgin Information. There are far too many researchers looking for a smoking gun of some sort. The remaining eyewitnesses have peripheral memories such as Glover's "No Euins" that has been completely ignored. This is why the Sixth Floor interviews consistently produce Nothing of note. The probing questions are Not Asked. Questions like: (1) Did you see the Umbrella Man? (2) Did you see the Dark Complected Man? (3) Did you see SA Lem Johns jump out of the LBJ SS Car and run down Elm St toward the JFK Limo? (4) Did you smell Gun Powder? (5) Where did you park? (6) What did you see when returning to your car? etc. It's "dots" of information such as this that will solve this case. The Sixth Floor Museum interviews have always been more about selling tickets/$$ and PR vs unearthing real information.     

[Lance Payette]

Boo, hiss!!! I have to “respectfully” disagree with you to a certain extent. I get what you are saying and agree with some of it. Our memories are quite fallible. However ignoring accounts of witnesses who were actually there is like sticking your own head in a hole in the ground. I would much prefer to hear from actual witnesses than read about the opinions of people who were not there when the assassination happened. I believe that we should carefully consider what the actual witness accounts contain, compare it with other evidence, and judge each individual item accordingly, instead of just prejudging and ignoring their accounts due to “pre-conceived old fallible memories.” Only after due process should we consider whether or not to discount some or all of what the witness accounts contain. There are a lot of conflicting accounts, that’s typical and to be expected. It is also why anyone who wishes to hunt for accounts that fit their own pet ideas (aka: bias confirmation) can do so and usually find at least a little thread to hang on to. But they are only fooling themselves if they do not consider the totality of the evidence. Actual witnesses who were there always get my full attention.

The nice thing with Buell Frazier and Dentist Don is that we can see how their "memories" have evolved since 1963 or 1964 and can recognize the obvious fact that memories and truth don't get better with time. They are lying, simple as that, and those of us who aren't wearing tinfoil beanies with propellors on top know it. Those who first surface 30, 40, 50 or more years after the assassination are impossible to cross-reference in this manner. By legal evidentiary standards, they have zero credibility. They may not even be intentionally fabricating, but not only are memories extremely fallible but every one of us, including me, has been subjected to 60+ years of media coverage of the JFKA, mostly CT-oriented because that's more exciting than saying the WC got it right. I just don't think these latter-day witnesses add anything and serve only to confuse. I say again, the number of these characters who have led serious researchers on wild goose chases in the UFO field is just astonishing.

[Lance Payette]

    With respect to the memories of 11/22/63 eyewitnesses, I find their peripheral memories to be the most valuable. Glover says that she has no memory of Euins being crouched down below her standing position on the stone pedestal. And she adds that she would have remembered seeing him in this position at that point in time. This is Important Eyewitness Information. Virgin Information. There are far too many researchers looking for a smoking gun of some sort. The remaining eyewitnesses have peripheral memories such as Glover's "No Euins" that has been completely ignored. This is why the Sixth Floor interviews consistently produce Nothing of note. The probing questions are Not Asked. Questions like: (1) Did you see the Umbrella Man? (2) Did you see the Dark Complected Man? (3) Did you see SA Lem Johns jump out of the LBJ SS Car and run down Elm St toward the JFK Limo? (4) Did you smell Gun Powder? (5) Where did you park? (6) What did you see when returning to your car? etc. It's "dots" of information such as this that will solve this case. The Sixth Floor Museum interviews have always been more about selling tickets/$$ and PR vs unearthing real information.   

OK, an 11-year-old kid at the time does not recall seeing Euins decades later. How on earth is this significant? Despite the lovely and talented Toni Glover feeling sure she would have noticed and recalled a young Black guy in a hat decades later, the lovely and talented Lance says . I can definitely recall being in the Alice Vail lunch area when the JFKA was announced, but I couldn't tell you today if King Kong and Godzilla were standing beside me. This is zero evidence that Euins wasn't there or was lying about where he was - except in conspiracy world, where we lap this stuff up like mother's milk. Perhaps Dentist Don has pushed me over the edge, but I pretty much don't care what anyone said after the mid-1960s.

If anyone cares, the obsessive Dale Myers does a good job of discussing the changes in Euins' story here: https://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2012/01/.

And here's a pretty good collection of all that Euins and Harkness said: https://tangodown63.com/amos-euins-statements/.