JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Thomas Graves on July 03, 2019, 02:41:05 AM
-
We now know that the four headscarf-wearing women who were standing shoulder-to-shoulder in Zapruder and who were labeled by Robin Unger as "Berry, Thornton, Burney, and (unknown)," and who are currently labelled by Don Roberdeau as "Berry, Thornton, Burney, and Jean Newman" (LOL) ...
... were actually Karen Westbrook, Carol Reed, Karan Hicks, and (big and tall) Gloria Calvery.
So where in the heck were Berry, Thornton, and Berry?
(We already know that Jean Newman was standing where Roberdeau originally had her -- just to the right of suit and trilby-wearing Ernest Brandt, who, in turn, was standing next to his young client, John Templin.)
-- MWT ;)
-
Here are excerpts from Berry's and Thornton's 4/01/64 FBI statements:
Berry -- "At approximately 12:35 P.M. I was standing on Elm Street in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building with Betty Thornton, also an employee at Scott-Foresman..."
Thornton -- "At approximately 12:35 P.M. I was standing with Jane Berry, another employee of Scott-Foresman, on Elm Street in front of the Texas School Book Depository Building ..."
There is no FBI statement by Peggy Burney on this date because she didn't work in the TSBD -- she worked for Abraham Zapruder at Jennifer Juniors Clothing Company in the Dal Tex Building.
However, on 11/23/63 in the Dallas Times Herald newspaper, Burney was quoted as saying she was standing "at the curb on Elm Street about a third of the way from Houston Street near the overpass."
-- MWT ;)
-
I've just now read in an old post at jfkassassination. net which says that Peggy Burney's first cousin was Vivian Castleberry (nee Anderson; b.1922, d.2017), women's page editor at the Dallas Times Herald newspaper, and from Burney's 11/23/63 report in that paper I've gleaned that Margaret (Peggy) Burney was married, and that she was the head of the shipping department at Jennifer Juniors.
Here's Castleberry's obit. in which her maiden name, Anderson, is mentioned.
Could Mrs. Margaret (Peggy) Burney's maiden name have been Anderson, too? Were Castleberry's and Burney's fathers brothers?
Regardless, I hope to find some kind of photo of Burney from over the years to give us an idea what she may have looked like on 11/22/63.
https://www.dallasnews.com/obituaries/obituaries/2017/10/05/vivian-castleberry-pioneering-dallas-journalist-empowered-women-dies-95
-- MWT ;)
-
"We now know"
:D
-
The fact that Berry and Thornton both said they were standing together on Elm Street but are not visible in the group of people stretching from A. J. "Hardhat" Millican to Sharron Simmons (the gal wearing the light-blue headscarf near the Stemmons sign in Zapruder), suggests that they must have been in the group of people stretching the other direction, i.e., between A. J. and the "island" in front of the TSBD entrance.
-- MWT ;)
-
For what it's worth, since Peggy Burney was a first cousin of a 41 or 42 year-old woman (Castleberry), I assume that Berry was between 37 and 47 years of age at the time.
Approximately.
-- MWT ;)
PS Having re-read her newspaper account, I realize now that she must have been standing near the Houston-to-Elm curve, because SHE says she was standing on Elm Street, and that JFK "was waving and smiling" when the limo "made the curve around the corner".
(Alternatively, she may have been standing near the intersection on Main and Houston if the newspaper editor's comments are correct, i.e., that she "was in the crowd at the corner of Main and Houston".)
In the article she says the limo was about 15 feet past her when she heard the first shot, but I think she's really referring to the second shot, for the simple reason that she says that JFK "ducked" after that "first" shot, and that, in so many words, that the next one blew JFK's brains out.
-
For what it's worth, since Peggy Burney was a first cousin of a 41 or 42 year-old woman (Castleberry), I assume that Berry was between 37 and 47 years of age at the time.
Approximately.
-- MWT ;)
PS Having re-read her newspaper account, I realize now that she must have been standing near the Houston-to-Elm curve, because she says JFK "was waving and smiling" when the limo "made the curve around the corner".
(Alternatively, she may have been standing near the intersection on Main and Houston if the newspaper editor's comments are correct, i.e., that she "was in the crowd at the corner of Main and Houston".
In the article she says the limo was about 15 feet past her when she heard the first shot. but I believe she's really referring to the second shot, for the simple reason that she says, in so many words, that the shot after that one blew his JFK's head off.
Even though you are relying on "reports" and or interviews/stories, people are fairly Loose with their verbiage. In general, they are Not precise. A good example of this is the WC Testimony of Emmett Hudson and his description of where he thought the shots came from. Much like following the directions of a gas station attendant, You need to proceed with caution.
-
Even though you are relying on "reports" and or interviews/stories, people are fairly Loose with their verbiage. In general, they are Not precise. A good example of this is the WC Testimony of Emmett Hudson and his description of where he thought the shots came from. Much like following the directions of a gas station attendant, You need to proceed with caution.
Royell,
Gee, thanks for the advice.
-- MWT ;)
-
I wish I had been in Dallas all those years since 11/22. I would have figured out everything that needs to be known now. I wish there had been more researchers of my quality. Everyone will agree with me, I’m sure.
-
I wish I had been in Dallas all those years since 11/22. I would have figured out everything that needs to be known now. I wish there had been more researchers of my quality. Everyone will agree with me, I’m sure.
Denis,
Would you have figured out where Zapruder employee Peggy Burney was standing during the motorcade?
Would you have figured out where Scott-Foresman Publishing Company colleagues Betty Thornton and Jane Berry were standing during the motorcade?
Would you have found each one of them in at least one film or photograph?
Hint: Unger and Roberdeau got it all wrong regarding those three in that they are totally confused about the identities of the four shoulder-to-shoulder headscarf-wearing gals in Zabruder. (From left to right: Karen Westbrook, Carol Reed, Karan Hicks, Gloria Calvery)
-- MWT ;)
-
I would have figured out all of this and much more! And you know more than anyone else!
-
I would have figured out all of this and much more! And you know more than anyone else!
Yet you're still not convinced that those four headscarf-wearing gals in Zapruder are Westbrook, Reed, Hicks and Calvery???
LOL!
-- MWT ;)
-
LOL!
-
[...]
Denis,
Please show us where Zapruder employee Peggy Burney, and Scott-Foresman colleagues Jane Berry and Betty Thornton were standing during the motorcade.
Thanks,
-- MWT ;)
-
They’re standing on Elm Street!
-
They’re standing on Elm Street!
Find them.
-
I will try! Eventually.
-
Denis,
Please show us where Zapruder employee Peggy Burney, and Scott-Foresman colleagues Jane Berry and Betty Thornton were standing during the motorcade.
Thanks,
-- MWT ;)
At what point do you realize that your chain is being pulled?
-
Hint: Unger and Roberdeau got it all wrong regarding those three in that they are totally confused about the identities of the four shoulder-to-shoulder headscarf-wearing gals in Zabruder.
...or Tommy is.
-
...or Tommy is.
Iacoletti,
Do you still agree with Westwood-Pillbox that the black-haired, dark-complected gal next to "me, Karen Westbrook!" (i.e., "Gloria Calvery") in the Z-film is "probably (lily-white, brown-haired) Carol Reed," or do prefer the theory that self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob bailed on her two Texas School Book Company colleagues (Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons) to join South-Western Publishing Company colleagues "Calvery and Westbrook" by the Stemmons sign, and that two of their colleagues, Carol Reed and Karan Hicks, bailed on them?
"Both, depending on the situation, Tommy."
LOL
-- MWT ;)
-
Westbrook was there, you were not.
QED
-
Westbrook was there, you were not.
QED
Iacoletti,
Yeah, "Pillbox" was there.
Nearly 56 years ago, and with her colleagues Calvery, Hicks, and Reed (four gals in total).
But there are only three gals standing together by the Stemmons sign in the Zapruder film, and the one on the left has black hair and a dark complexion, just like an American Indian (e.g. Stella Mae Jacob) would have.
(The two women to their left are Inez Juanita "June" Hart Dishong and her unnamed-by-her colleague from Higginbotham-Bailey.)
-- MWT ;)
-
Serendipitously segueing this thread into what I've posted on another one ("Why Did The First Shot Miss?"), I've just now stumbled upon the FBI's 11/25/63 report regarding the observations of Mrs A. G. (Jane) Berry that says she was standing (with her colleague Betty Thornton on Elm Street in front of the TSBD, according to her 4/01/64 statement to the FBI) "just west of the building," and that as the limo was passing her, she heard the first of three shots ring out.
Which, if she was standing near the tip of the "island" or at the very base of Elm Street, would appear to jibe with what Amos Euins and Patricia Ann Lawrence (married name Donaldson) say in the excellent video, The Lost Bullet -- that the first shot ran out right after the limo had passed the black-and-white "Highway 80" signs on the "island".
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10406#relPageId=45
-- MWT ;)
-
Serendipitously segueing this thread into what I've posted on another one ("Why Did The First Shot Miss?"), I've just now stumbled upon the FBI's 11/25/63 report regarding the observations of Mrs A. G. (Jane) Berry that says she was standing (with her colleague Betty Thornton on Elm Street in front of the TSBD, according to her 4/01/64 statement to the FBI) "just west of the building," and that as the limo was passing her, she heard the first of three shots ring out.
Which, if she was standing near the tip of the "island" or at the very base of Elm Street, would appear to jibe with what Amos Euins and Patricia Ann Lawrence (married name Donaldson) say in the excellent video, The Lost Bullet -- that the first shot ran out right after the limo had passed the black-and-white "Highway 80" signs on the "island," and even more so if Berry (and Thornton) were standing on the Elm Street Extension sidewalk or in the curving line of spectators from the tip of the "island" to the Elm Street Extension curb.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10406#relPageId=45
-- MWT ;)
"Dupe"
Sorry.
-- MWT ;)
-
Yeah, "Pillbox" was there.
Yeah, giving witnesses cute little nicknames really convinces anyone that your opinion is correct.
::)
-
Yeah, giving witnesses cute little nicknames really convinces anyone that your opinion is correct.
::)
Iacoletti,
Westbrook's "identification" of herself and her good bud, Gloria Calvert (sic) in the Z-film (from behind and 54 years after-the-fact) was so far off that "Pillbox" may very well be a very apt "play" on her married name, don't you think?
Btw, which theory do you prefer today -- 1) that Carol Reed (or Karan Hicks) had black hair and an American Indian-like dark complexion, or 2) that black-haired and dark-complected Stella Mae Jacob bailed on her two Texas School Book Company colleagues (Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons) in order to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with South-Western Publishing Company colleagues Gloria Calvery and Karen Westbrook, while two of their colleagues (Reed and Hicks) bailed on them?
-- MWT ;)
PS If #1, above, then where-oh-where is Karan Hicks?
PPS Oops, my bad. I confused Westbrook with Mary Woodward Pillsworth (someone who, when interviewed by Stephen "Smilin' 'n Noddin'" Fagin, did have an excellent memory, btw).
Hmm.
Can I change her nickname to "Can't Tell" Scranton?
EDIT: But you know something?
I kinda like "Pillbox" for her.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pillbox_(military)
-
Westbrook's "identification" of herself and her good bud, Gloria Calvert (sic) in the Z-film (from behind and 54 years after-the-fact) was so far off that "Pillbox" may very well be a very apt "play" on her married name, don't you think?
Merely calling a witness wrong (particularly about who she herself is) is not a particularly compelling argument that your opinion is correct.
-
Merely calling a witness wrong (particularly about who she herself is) is not a particularly compelling argument that your opinion is correct.
Iacoletti,
You just don't get it.
Despite your apparent wishes otherwise, Westbrook was wrong.
Too bad she couldn't remember she was standing three people to the left of her good friend and colleague Gloria Calvert [sic], and that she wore her dress to the motorcade, not her raincoat, and that her headscarf was very light blue, not medium blue, and that Calvert's [sic] hair was much redder than strawberry-blond Holt's, and that Calvert [sic] was so ... large.
The assassination must have been very traumatic for Westbrook to have messed up her memory so much.
But then again, it was 54 years earlier, and from behind ...
-- MWT ;)
-
Iacoletti,
You just don't get it.
Despite your apparent wishes otherwise, Westbrook was wrong.
(https://media.tenor.com/images/267122b38ed9e140b94a72c40b27ec4a/tenor.gif)
Merely calling a witness wrong (particularly about who she herself is) is not a particularly compelling argument that your opinion is correct.
-
(https://media.tenor.com/images/267122b38ed9e140b94a72c40b27ec4a/tenor.gif)
Iacoletti,
Cute!
Did they teach you how to do that in your software debugging class?
Since you refuse to answer my earlier questions, let me rephrase them into just one for you.
Which of these seven gals, if any, lied (or were mysteriously mistaken) in their FBI statements as to who they watched the motorcade with?
1) Stella Mae Jacob of Texas School Book Company
2) Gloria Holt of Texas School Book Company
3) Sharon Simmons of Texas School Book Company
4) Karen Westbrook of South-Western Publishing Company
5) Carol Reed of South-Western Publishing Company
6) Karan Hicks of South-Western Publishing Company
7) Gloria Calvery of South-Western Publishing Company
For Karen Westbrook Scranton's memory to be correct, the answer is "everybody, myself included".
https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/pdf/WH22_CE_1381.pdf
-- MWT ;)
-
(https://media.tenor.com/images/22b2b30a8958eca99a16425a2b4f9473/tenor.gif)
Here's where Tommy just declares that "with" must mean standing side-by-side for the entire duration of the motorcade and even several minutes afterwards.
Because.....well, because he said so.
-
Here's where Tommy just declares that "with" must mean standing side-by-side for the entire duration of the motorcade and even several minutes afterwards.
What you're really saying is that all seven of those gals played fast-and-loose, syntactically speaking, with the FBI in their signed statements.
Your insinuating that only serves to highlight the ludicrousness of your "position" on Calvery.
You must be really desperate to "prevent" Gloria Calvery's getting to the TSBD steps within 25 seconds after the final shot, as depicted in Darnell.
Why is that, John?
Are you afraid that that would somehow implicate Oswald in the assassination of JFK?
-- MWT ;)
PS Have you actually read Karen Westbrook's FBI statement?
-
Calvery, Hicks, Reed, and Westbrook's statements are almost word for word identical, or hadn't you noticed?. Do you really think they wrote them independently?
Iacoletti,
What probably happened is that one of those four gals told the FBI guy what she did and who she was with, and the FBI guy or stenographer used that as a template for the other three gals' statements.
Regardless, they all signed off on their own individual statement, suggesting that each and every one of them agreed that the information in it was accurate to the best of their knowledge (I'm thinking about the "about halfway between Houston Street and the Triple-Underpass," here).
It's interesting that you're ascribing to each of those four gals lackadaisical (to the point of careless) useage of the word "with" (and "went", and "when", etc) in their statements in such an ab-normal, counter-intuitive way (given the serious context of having witnessed the assassination of an American president, and now giving a signed statement about same to the freakin' FBI), Iacolletti.
I guess what you're really suggesting is that Karan Hicks, for example, should have said, "Well I went with my three colleagues to a spot on the north side of Elm Street about half-way between Houston Street and the Triple-Underpass, but that's not actually where I was when President Kennedy was shot, because, well ... I kinda wandered off a bit just before that, and I guess I musta wandered so far away from them that I ended up even not being "caught" by anybody's camera, gosh darn it!"
-- MWT :D
PS Now that I've nailed you on this, wanna talk about the FBI statements of Jacob, Holt, and Simmons?
-
a) your assumed individuals are not only NOT halfway between Houston and the underpass, but the person Westbrook identified as herself is closer to the halfway point.
b) who are you to decide for other people you've never even met what is "abnormal and counter-intuitive"?
c) you don't actually know which of your backs-of-heads is or is not Karan Hicks either, so stop pretending like you know things you don't actually know.
-
a) your assumed individuals are not only NOT halfway between Houston and the underpass, but the person Westbrook identified as herself is closer to the halfway point.
b) who are you to decide for other people you've never even met what is "abnormal and counter-intuitive"?
c) you don't actually know which of your backs-of-heads is or is not Karan Hicks either, so stop pretending like you know things you don't actually know.
All seven of those gals in those two groups are so far off from being halfway between Houston Street and the Triple-Underpass, that your Westbrook's and Calvery's being about twenty feet closer to that mythological halfway point is meaningless in the context of figuring out who-is-who in the photos and films.
"Normal" is a statistical concept, Iacolletti. Maybe you're at the far left side of the Bell-Shaped Curve in non-nerdish English language comprehension, and you just can't realize that when the vast majority of people say they "went" (on foot) with someone to a presidential parade, and that the were "with" that person when something happened there, that yes, it really does mean they were standing (or sitting) virtually "shoulder-to-shoulder" with that person, or at least close enough to them as to make it possible to "catch" them "together" there in a photograph or film when that something that happened ... happened.
Where's Karan Hicks, Iacoletti? Can you find her in any photos or films?
Where's Carol Reed? Can you find her in any photos or films?
No???
Why do you suppose that is?
Do you really think lily-white Carol Reed's that black-haired, dark-complected gal on the left in your and Westbrook's three-gal group, or hey, maybe it's lily-white Karan Hicks, instead, and it was Carol Reed who went wandering off!!!
If you grudgingly accept that it's self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob (which it is) then you still have to explain how it is that Reed and Hicks were not "caught" in any photos or films, and why they both played so fast-and-loose with "with" in their FBI statements, and willfully misrepresented where they actually were, and whom they were "with," if anybody.
-- MWT :D
-
Moved here from another thread.
Quote from: John Iacoletti on July 10, 2019, 11:32:46 PM
...and you're identifying people fifty-six years after-the-fact, and from behind. The difference is, she was actually there.
Now please stop hijacking every thread for your pet obsession.
Iacoletti,
Not only from behind, but with common sense, and with realizing, among other things, that Gloria Calvery was a very tall and large gal, indeed, and that the black-haired, dark-complected gal on the left in that group of three near the Stemmons sign in Zapruder must be self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob, and that the two gals to her right must be her colleagues Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons, not some two-woman permutation of the bogus Speth/Unger/Roberdeau "Calvary [sic], Hicks, Reed, Westbrook" matrix.
-- MWT ;)
PS It's funny that years ago, when I first got into this "Where's Gloria Calvery???" thing (and eventually discovered self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob and her two colleagues in the Zapruder film), "researchers" were already convinced that Robin Unger's "Gloria Calvary" (sic), was, based on the way she looked in the short Darnell clip, probably a Black woman, or in Unger's case, a Mexican.
Funny in that at least they realized that the three gals in that Darnell clip were the same three gals who are standing by the Stemmons sign in Zapruder, something that you still deny.
LOL
Wake Up, Neo
Modify message
« Last Edit: Today at 01:09:08 AM by Thomas Graves »
-
All seven of those gals in those two groups are so far off from being halfway between Houston Street and the Triple-Underpass, that your Westbrook's and Calvery's being about twenty feet closer to that mythological halfway point is meaningless in the context of figuring out who-is-who in the photos and films.
The statements are either meaningless for determining who is who or they are not. Now let's discuss how both Simmons and Holt said they were standing on the South side of Elm Street. While we're at it, let's talk about how Judy Marie Johnson said that she was "standing with" Holt, Jacob, Richey, Arnold, and Dragoo at the southwest corner of Elm and Houston.
"Normal" is a statistical concept, Iacolletti. Maybe you're at the far left side of the Bell-Shaped Curve in non-nerdish English language comprehension, and you just can't realize that when the vast majority of people say they "went" (on foot) with someone to a presidential parade, and that the were "with" that person when something happened there, that yes, it really does mean they were standing (or sitting) virtually "shoulder-to-shoulder" with that person, or at least close enough to them as to make it possible to "catch" them "together" there in a photograph or film when that something that happened ... happened.
This is just a verbose way of saying "I want 'standing with' to mean 'shoulder to shoulder', therefore that's 'normal'". Who are you to speak for the vast majority of people, much less for TSBD office workers you never met?
Where's Karan Hicks, Iacoletti? Can you find her in any photos or films?
Where's Carol Reed? Can you find her in any photos or films?
No???
Why do you suppose that is?
Because I don't just bestow names upon heads in photos with no evidence like you do.
Do you really think lily-white Carol Reed's that black-haired, dark-complected gal on the left in your and Westbrook's three-gal group, or hey, maybe it's lily-white Karan Hicks, instead, and it was Carol Reed who went wandering off!!!
"Lily white"...."dark complected".....LOL
Is this supposed to somehow show that Westbrook doesn't know who she is? What even makes this a "three-gal group" as opposed to three people you're just picking out of a line of people and assuming they are together?
If you grudgingly accept that it's self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob (which it is)
It's possible. You certainly haven't proven it to any degree that approaches your certainty about it.
then you still have to explain how it is that Reed and Hicks were not "caught" in any photos or films,
How do you know whether or not they were "caught" in any photos or films?
and why they both played so fast-and-loose with "with" in their FBI statements,
Why, because you see yourself as the arbiter of what "with" means?
and willfully misrepresented where they actually were, and whom they were "with," if anybody.
You mean like "on the South side of Elm street" or "at the southwest corner of Elm and Houston"? Or is somebody only "willfully misrepresenting" things when you want them to be?
-
Not only from behind, but with common sense,
"common sense" as defined by what Tommy guesses.
and with realizing, among other things, that Gloria Calvery was a very tall and large gal, indeed, and that the black-haired, dark-complected gal on the left in that group of three near the Stemmons sign in Zapruder must be self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob,
Even if she is a "dark-complected gal" (whatever the hell that means), why does it then follow that it "must be" Jacob?
and that the two gals to her right must be her colleagues Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons,
and even if it is Jacob, why do the "two gals to her right" must be Holt and Simmons?
-
"common sense" as defined by what Tommy guesses.
Even if she is a "dark-complected gal" (whatever the hell that means), why does it then follow that it "must be" Jacob?
and even if it is Jacob, why do the "two gals to her right" have to be Holt and Simmons?
Iacoletti,
Do you agree that Westbrook's "probably Carol Reed" gal on the left is back-haired and dark-complected?
(https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z060.jpg)
If so, do you think she's Carol Reed, or maybe even Karan Hicks?
-- MWT ;)
-
Do you agree that Westbrook's "probably Carol Reed" gal on the left is back-haired and dark-complected?
Do you agree that Carol Ann Reed had dark hair? Also, do you understand the difference between "probably" and "there's no doubt in my mind"?
And while we're trying to identify "complexions" in this oversaturated Costella frame, what would you say the "complexion" of the motorcycle cop on the right of the photo is?
-
Do you agree that Carol Ann Reed had dark hair? Also, do you understand the difference between "probably" and "there's no doubt in my mind"?
And while we're trying to identify "complexions" in this oversaturated Costella frame, what would you say the "complexion" of the motorcycle cop on the right of the photo is?
Iacoletti,
1) In the Zapruder film, does the hair of the gal we're talking about only look "dark" (in the context of your argument -- "dark brown"), or does it look "black', as in ... b-l-a-c-k?
2) How is it that in that "oversaturated" Costella frame (Z-60, and a few frames around it), said "oversaturation" happened to miss the necks of John Templin and suit-wearing Ernest Brandt, and the legs of journalist Maggie Brown?
https://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z060.jpg
-- MWT ;)
-
Iacoletti,
You don't have to put my name in every post.
1) In the Zapruder film, does the hair of the gal we're talking about only look "dark" (in the context of your argument -- "dark brown"), or does it look "black', as in ... b-l-a-c-k?
It looks like whatever you want it to look like.
2) How is it that in that "oversaturated" Costella frame (Z-60, and a few frames around it), said "oversaturation" happened to miss the necks of John Templin and suit-wearing Ernest Brandt, and the legs of journalist Maggie Brown?
Stop pretending like you know for a fact who any of these people are, or what their "complexion's" might be.
-
You don't have to put my name in every post.
It looks like whatever you want it to look like.
Stop pretending like you know for a fact who any of these people are, or what their "complexion's" might be.
Iacoletti,
Does Westbrook's "probably Carol Reed" in Zapruder look to you as though she has black hair, or just "dark" hair?
Are you suggesting that you don't know who I'm referring to in the Zapruder film when I say "John Templin," "Ernest Brandt," and "journalist Maggie Brown"???
If so, why don't you look them up on Robin Unger's labeled-in-yellow Z-frame? They're about the only people that he did get right.
-- MWT ;)
-
So now you're back to just declaring yourself correct again.
-
So now you're back to just declaring yourself correct again.
Iacoletti,
It's interesting that in your increasingly desperate refusal to admit that Gloria Calvery was photographically "captured" on a TSBD lower step about 20 seconds after the assassination, you not only irrationally deny that Westbrook's putative (lilly-white) "Carol Reed" has an American Indian-like dark complexion and black hair in Z-60 (and the frames around it), but you also, in a patently desperate attempt to deflect from and deny that obvious fact, deem to quibble with my reliance on Robin Unger's and Don Roberdeau's well-established identifications of John Templin, Ernest Brandt and journalist Maggie Brown, three people in said frames whose very white skin shows up clearly in what you claim is a grossly "oversaturated" film.
Shall I study graphic arts and computers and figure out how to draw nice big red circles around those three people so you'll know who I'm talking about, and then you, too, can notice how much lighter their skin color is than Westbrook's "Carol Reed" (self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob), or some other equally lilly-white South-Western Publishing Company employee whom Westbrook might desperately hope that gal is?
Like ... Karan Hicks, perhaps?
You know, Westbrook's and Calvery's colleague who, as did the aforementioned Carol Reed, told the FBI that she had watched the motorcade with Calvery and Westbrook?
LOL
-- MWT ;)
-
The identification that Westbrook made of herself (who, as I keep reminding you, was THERE), while fallible, is more credible than "Tommy thinks it's somebody else".
Further attempts to insist you are correct with no actual evidence will be ignored.
-
The identification that Westbrook made of herself (who, as I keep reminding you, was THERE), while fallible, is more credible than "Tommy thinks it's somebody else".
Further attempts to insist you are correct with no actual evidence will be ignored.
Dear Iacoletti,
Please don't run away, now, foolishly believing that you've "won," and that it's "set in concrete" that Karen Westbrook Scranton was right in "identifying" herself and her friend and colleague, "Gloria Calvert" [sic], in the Zapruder film, from behind, and fifty-four years after-the-fact.
You haven't even answered any of my questions, yet.
For example, if the three gals near the Stemmons sign weren't self-described Amercan Indian Stella Mae Jacob and her two colleagues from the Texas School Book Company, Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons, where, then, were they during the motorcade?
Their FBI statements, all of which were probably written from a verbal "template" one of them had created in making her own statement to the FBI, have them situated exactly where Westbrook's "probably Carol Reed, Gloria Calvert [sic], and me, Karen Westbrook!" group was, standing, i.e., on the curb and about 50 yards down (from the TSBD) towards the Stemmons Expressway Underpass, but incorrectly "placed"on the south side of the street, as can be readily verified by looking at the photos and films and realizing that there was no trio of women standing near the Babuska Lady, or Hill and Moorman, or anywhere else, on the south side of Elm Street.
-- MWT ;)
Thank you for finally admitting, though, that Westbrook was fallible in her "identifications," especially seein' as how she made them fifty-four years after-the-fact ... and from behind.
-
Everybody's fallible - even you (though you'll never admit it).
I've answered your questions repeatedly, you just don't like the answers. Which is why it's futile to engage in your broken record shtick.
-
Thomas, worth noting is that KarenWestbrook identified a PersonImage as herself, about a half century after the DealeyPlaza shooting of JohnKennedySr and JohnConnallyJr, based on the SixthFloorMuseum filmed interview, by viewing films and/or photos of PersonImages. And, her Motorcade viewing companions' PersonImages were identified by herself the same way, but placed with her Image accordingly. To my knowledge, there is no video or audio Of Ms Westbrook providing any similar PersonImage identity information that was produced on 11/22/'63. And, to me at least, that would tend to dilute any "being there" valuation.
Jack LARRY,
Not sure what your point is ...
(We know that Westbrook was there, just not right there.)
-- MWT ;)
-
Thomas, worth noting is that KarenWestbrook identified a PersonImage as herself, about a half century after the DealeyPlaza shooting of JohnKennedySr and JohnConnallyJr, based on the SixthFloorMuseum filmed interview, by viewing films and/or photos of PersonImages. And, her Motorcade viewing companions' PersonImages were identified by herself the same way, but placed with her Image accordingly. To my knowledge, there is no video or audio Of Ms Westbrook providing any similar PersonImage identity information that was produced on 11/22/'63. And, to me at least, that would tend to dilute any "being there" valuation.
"Diluted" as much a guy squinting at the backs of people's heads in a film about a half century later?
-
Everybody's fallible - even you (though you'll never admit it).
I've answered your questions repeatedly, you just don't like the answers. Which is why it's futile to engage in your broken record shtick.
Dear Iacoletti,
Nope.
All you've done (for the most part) is come up with implausible assertions, objections and denials.
Examples:
1) The black-blouse and black headscarf-wearing gal in Betzner-3 seems at first glance to be wearing glasses, but upon enlarging her face one can see that it's just a shadow, or a tree branch.
2) The gal on the left near the Stemmons sign in Zapruder-frame 60 (and the frames around it) only appears to have a dark complexion, due to over-saturation in the Costella Combined Edit Frames, despite the fact that at least three other spectators in said frames - Unger's and Roberdeau's "Maggie Brown, John Templin, and Ernest Brandt" - clearly have significantly lighter skin in it.
3) The three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner clip aren't women, but men who are wearing very long bermuda shorts with long-sleeved upper garments in late November, or very high, flesh-colored cowboy boots.
4) The medium-blue thing (which is the same color as the headscarf "Karen Westbrook" is wearing) on or near the head of the person on the right in said Pergola Patio trio doesn't have to be a headscarf, it could very well be could be a balloon, or an umbrella, or a ......
5) It's reasonable to assume that although all of the seven gals in the two groups at issue (the Jacob, Holt and Simmons group, and the Calvery, Hicks, Reed and Westbrook group) told the FBI that they had walked with two (or three) of their colleagues to a general area down Elm Street to watch the motorcade, some of them did not stand sufficiently near other members of their group to be caught on film while watching the motorcade.
6) It's reasonable to assume that one of these two groups (the trio comprised of self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob and her colleagues, strawberry-blonde Gloria Holt and Sharron Simmons) is not visible in any of the photos or films taken that day.
7) It's reasonable to assume that the spectators in two particular groups did not actually stay in their respective group during the motorcade, but mingled with members of the other group.
8 ) It's reasonable to assume that there were two gals wearing black-blouses, black headscarves and mid-toned skirts watching the motorcade, and that there were two gals dressed in white dresses and white headscarves watching the motorcade, and that they formed two black-white couples, but only one of these black-white couples was "caught" on Elm Street during the motorcade by Zapruder, as it was standing about a 20-second walk from the TSBD steps, and the other black-white couple was not caught in the Zapruder film during the motorcade, but was caught by Darnell about 20 seconds after the assassination, on the lower steps of the TSBD as they are evidently returning to that building, and it's just a coincidence that the first black-white couple is nowhere to be seen in any of the photos or films at this time (about 20 seconds after the assassination or at any other time after that.
9) etc
-- MWT :D
-
Well Mr Graves, my name is not Jack, and have been called much worse, but apparently the point was missed, and I will withdraw the post.
Sorry about that, Larry.
I must have been thinking of Jumpin' Jack Flash, or maybe the U.S. Army code clerk the Ruskies recruited in 1949 and code named "Jack" (who not only was never uncovered, but inadvertently caused the Korean War).
My bad.
Your comrade-in-arms,
-- Mudd Wrassler Tommy ;)
-
You know what I'm not seeing in your latest ridiculous list of strawman claims that I never made?
Any evidence that the person who Karen Westbrook identified as herself is actually Sharon Simmons.
-
You know what I'm not seeing in your latest ridiculous list of strawman claims that I never made?
Any evidence that the person who Karen Westbrook identified as herself is actually Sharon Simmons.
Dear Iacoletti,
Strawman claims you've never made?
LOL
What are you talking about?
You've said or strongly suggested every single one of those things on this forum.
Sharron Simmons?
Why have you waited so long to bring her up? Are you hoping she'll be your "ace in the hole" now that you've gone "all in"?
Are you suggesting that since she hasn't come forward and identified herself in the photographs, that it couldn't be her wearing the blue headscarf near the Stemmons sign?
Maybe she values her privacy, or doesn't want to get involved. Had you thought of that?
Haven't you seen the photos of her that have been posted on the Internet?
Go to page five of Sandy Larsen's EF thread Did Shelley and Lovelady Leave the TSBD Steps Before Officer Baker's Arrival and then Return?, and on page 10 of my thread, Were TSBD Employees Jacob, Holt and Simmons Misidentified as Calvery, Hicks and Reed? and see for yourself the resemblance between Sharon Simmons and the headscarf-wearing gal in the short Darnell clips.
-- MWT ;)
-
Dear Iacoletti,
Nope.
All you've done (for the most part) is come up with implausible assertions, objections and denials.
Examples:
1) The black-blouse and black headscarf-wearing gal in Betzner-3 seems at first glance to be wearing glasses, but upon enlarging her face one can see that it's just a shadow, or a tree branch.
2) The gal on the left near the Stemmons sign in Zapruder-frame 60 (and the frames around it) only appears to have a dark complexion, due to over-saturation in the Costella Combined Edit Frames, despite the fact that at least three other spectators in said frames - Unger's and Roberdeau's "Maggie Brown, John Templin, and Ernest Brandt" - clearly have significantly lighter skin than her.
3) The three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner clip aren't women, but men who are wearing very long bermuda shorts with long-sleeved upper garments in late November, or very high, flesh-colored cowboy boots.
4) The medium-blue thing (which is the same color as the headscarf "Karen Westbrook" is wearing) on or near the head of the person on the right in said Pergola Patio trio doesn't have to be a headscarf, it could very well be could be a balloon, or an umbrella, or a ......
5) It's reasonable to assume that some assassination witnesses in two groups who told the FBI that they walked with two (or three) of their colleagues to a spot "about 50 yards down down Elm Street" / to a spot "about halfway between the TSBD and the Triple Underpass" to watch the motorcade did not stand sufficiently near the other members of their respective groups to be caught on any film, period, while watching it.
6) It's reasonable that one of these two groups (the trio comprised of self-described American Indian Stella Mae Jacob and her colleagues, strawberry-blonde Gloria Holt and Sharron Simmons) is not visible in any of the photos or films taken that day.
7) It's reasonable to assume that the spectators in two particular groups did not actually stay in their respective group during the motorcade, but mingled with members of the other group.
8 ) It's reasonable to assume that there were two gals wearing black-blouses, black headscarves and mid-toned skirts watching the motorcade, and that there were two gals dressed in white dresses and white headscarves watching the motorcade, and that they formed two black-white couples, but only one of these black-white couples was "caught" on Elm Street during the motorcade by Zapruder, as it was standing about a 20-second walk from the TSBD steps, and the other black-white couple was not caught in the Zapruder film during the motorcade, but was caught by Darnell about 20 seconds after the assassination, on the lower steps of the TSBD as they are evidently returning to that building, and it's just a coincidence that the first black-white couple is nowhere to be seen in any of the photos or films at this time (about 20 seconds after the assassination), or at any other time after that.
9) etc
-- MWT :D
Edited and bumped for John Iacoletti.
-
You've said or strongly suggested every single one of those things on this forum.
BS:
Those are all things you invented to avoid arguing honestly. I haven't claimed any of those things. I merely pointed out that your arguments rely on a lot of unwarranted assumptions.
Are you suggesting that since she hasn't come forward and identified herself in the photographs, that it couldn't be her wearing the blue headscarf near the Stemmons sign?
No, I'm suggesting that you done exactly nothing to show this is Simmons rather than Westbrook. All you've done is arrogantly pronounce Westbrook wrong and yourself right.
Maybe she values her privacy, or doesn't want to get involved. Had you thought of that?
Is this supposed to be evidence that it's her?
Haven't you seen the photos of her that have been posted on the Internet?
Go to page five of Sandy Larsen's EF thread Did Shelley and Lovelady Leave the TSBD Steps Before Officer Baker's Arrival and then Return?, and on page 10 of my thread, Were TSBD Employees Jacob, Holt and Simmons Misidentified as Calvery, Hicks and Reed? and see for yourself the resemblance between Sharon Simmons and the headscarf-wearing gal in the short Darnell clips.
LOL. For the millionth time (this is why this is futile), the Darnell clip tells you nothing about who is who in Zapruder. But I don't believe that the girl with the big safety pin on her collar is the right Sharon Simmons anyway. She's the wrong age, unless she was a prodigy who graduated high school at 16. I found a way more likely candidate at a different school. Your confirmation bias though would cause you to see a resemblance anyway, regardless. You are notorious for seeing what you want to see.
-
[.....]
Iacoletti,
Have you posted, anywhere, your "way more likely candidate" for Simmons?
I'd love to see it.
-- MWT ;)
PS Your continued denying that the Townner clip captured, on the Pergola Patio, the same three gals that Darnell captured, and that they, in turn, are the same three gals that are standing near the Stemmons sign in Zaruder is, well, mind-numbing, imho.
Correlations between the three gals in Zapruder and the three gals (you do agree they're females, don't you?) in the Towner clip:
1) The one on the left in both has very dark hair and is wearing a white skirt and a dark-brown, long-sleeved upper garment.
2) The one in the middle in both has light-colored hair and is wearing a dark-colored long-sleeved dress or raincoat.
3) The one on the right is wearing a light-blue headscarf and a dark-colored long-sleeved dress or raincoat.
(Fwiw, none of them appear to be particularly short, or particularly tall, or particularly thin, or particularly obese.)
Correlations between the three gals near the Stemmons sign in Zapruder-frame 60 and the three gals in the two short Darnell clips:
1) The one on the left in both has back hair, is dark-complected, and is wearing a dark-colored coat.
2) The one in the middle has light-colored hair and is wearing a dark-colored upper garment.
3) The one on the right in both is wearing a headscarf -- light-toned in the b&w Darnell clips, consistent with the light-blue one the gal on the right is wearing in Zapruder. Also, she is wearing a dark-colored rain jacket in both.
.....
PPS What, exactly, have I "invented" so that I can "argue dishonestly"?
You don't remember saying or implying those things?
Your insinuating that I'm dishonest is a classic case of the pot calling the kettle "black," dude.
-
For Iacoletti:
Do you really think real-deal Sharon Ann Simmons, as depicted in her 1962 Adamson High School yearbook (see her on page 10 of my thread at the EF titled "Were TSBD Employees Jacob, Holt, and Simmons Misidentified as Calvery, Hicks, and Reed?"), looks significantly different from the headscarf-wearing gal in the Darnell clips?
I don't.
Regardless, it's kinda hard to tell if they're the same people, seein' as how she (Simmons) has the side of her face and her ears covered with that headscarf in Darnell, wouldn't you say, and given the fact that she looks kinda glum, seein' as how she's just seen the handsome and charismatic President of the United States get his head blown off?
-- MWT ;)
PS Where's Karan "The Wanderer" Hicks in Zapruder? And Carol "Ramble-On" Reed? Off camera, talking with some complete strangers?
PPS Nice find, btw.
-
Have you posted, anywhere, your "way more likely candidate" for Simmons?
Looks like you found it.
PS Your continued denying that the Townner clip captured, on the Pergola Patio, the same three gals that Darnell captured, and that they, in turn, are the same three gals that are standing near the Stemmons sign in Zaruder is, well, mind-numbing, imho.
Of course it is. You think "looks that way to Tommy when he squints at a blurry image taken at a distance" is a good argument.
You don't remember saying or implying those things?
I didn't say any of those things. Those were all your appeals to ridicule, because you pretend to see all kinds of detail in blurry images taken at a distance. Provide links of me ever making any of those statements.
-
For Iacoletti:
Do you really think real-deal Sharon Ann Simmons, as depicted in her 1962 Adamson High School yearbook (see her on page 10 of my thread at the EF titled "Were TSBD Employees Jacob, Holt, and Simmons Misidentified as Calvery, Hicks, and Reed?"), looks significantly different from the headscarf-wearing gal in the Darnell clips?
I don't.
Just as I said. You claimed that the first "Sharon Simmons" looks like Darnell woman, and now you're claiming that the other completely different Sharon Ann Simmons also looks like Darnell woman. No matter who Sharon Simmons turns out to be, you're going to claim that it's her. Classic confirmation bias.
But it still doesn't matter, because for the million-and-third time: the Darnell clip tells you NOTHING about who is who in Zapruder.
Regardless, it's kinda hard to tell if they're the same people, seein' as how she (Simmons) has the side of her face and her ears covered with that headscarf in Darnell, wouldn't you say,
Most honest thing you've said yet. Oh wait...you can't see ANY PART of the face of the woman next to the sign in Zapruder, and yet you still claim to know exactly who she is.
PS Where's Karan "The Wanderer" Hicks in Zapruder? And Carol "Ramble-On" Reed? Off camera, talking with some complete strangers?
I don't know. All you see are backs of heads. Why is this concept so hard for you? Do you feel like a made-up answer is better than no answer?
-
Just as I said. You claimed that the first "Sharon Simmons" looks like Darnell woman, and now you're claiming that the other completely different Sharon Ann Simmons also looks like Darnell woman. No matter who Sharon Simmons turns out to be, you're going to claim that it's her. Classic confirmation bias.
But it still doesn't matter, because for the million-and-third time: the Darnell clip tells you NOTHING about who is who in Zapruder.
Most honest thing you've said yet. Oh wait...you can't see ANY PART of the face of the woman next to the sign in Zapruder, and yet you still claim to know exactly who she is.
I don't know. All you see are backs of heads. Why is this concept so hard for you? Do you feel like a made-up answer is better than no answer?
Dear Iacoletti,
Why do you choose to ignore the fact that the three gals in the Darnell clips are: 1) the same as the three women standing next to the Stemmons sign in Zapruder, and 2) the same as the three women on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film?
The dead giveaway that the above is true is that the gal on the right in both Zapruder and Towner not only seems to be the same morphologicallly speaking, but is wearing a light-blue headscarf and a "black," full-length, long-sleeved garment, plus the fact that she is accompanied by two women who, respectively, look identical in both films, i.e., one has "black" hair and is wearing a dark-brown, long-sleeved upper garment with a white skirt, and another companion who is wearing a long-sleeved, "black," full-length garment ... and who just happens to have light-colored hair.
"Cha-Ching!"
.....
It's interesting to note that the three gals I'm talking about in the Towner film and in the Darnell clips are still in the same left-to-right (or right-to-left, if you prefer) sequence they were in while watching the motorcade in Zapruder.
.....
Even if there had been 10,000 people in Dealey Plaza that day, taken all together any reasonable person would conclude that these three gals must be the same people, based on statistical probabilities, alone.
The fact that there weren't 10,000 people in Dealey Plaza that day, but more like 200, makes it even more obvious.
Unless, of course, you insist that the gal on the right in Towner isn't wearing a light-blue headscarf and a "black" raincoat-like garment, and the gal on the left neither has "black" hair nor is wearing a dark-brown, long-sleeved garment and a white skirt, and that the gal in the middle has light-colored hair and is wearing ...
.....
Why are you suddenly obsessing on Sharon Simmons, the gal who's the hardest of the three in Darnell to identify by face (because she's wearing that side-of-face-hiding headscarf)?
.....
If Zambanini got it wrong, it's because her gal is smiling widely, like some people try to do when they're having their driver's license photo or their mugshot photo taken.
And why, pray tell, do they do that?
Because they know that smiling distorts one's face and makes one ... harder to identify from their photo.
-- MWT ;D
PS No, I'm not saying that girl was smiling like that in her high school photo
because she was a devious felon ... .
-
Thomas,
Admittedly I have only skimmed over this thread, but I believe SharonAnnSimmons would be at least age 75 now, however, I believe MsSimmons, aka SharonNelson, unfortunately may now be deceased.
Larry,
It would be nice if she were alive and amenable to submitting herself to a videotaped interview, but that would just be "icing on the cake" as far as I'm concerned.
Anyone who so stubbornly argues against the obvious visual correlations between the three gals by the Stemmons sign in Zapruder, the three gals on the Pergola Patio in Towner, and the three gals walking towards the TSBD in Darnell, as Iacoletti does, is a T-R-O-L-L in my book.
-- MWT ;)
-
Why do you choose to ignore the fact that the three gals in the Darnell clips are: 1) the same as the three women standing next to the Stemmons sign in Zapruder, and 2) the same as the three women on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film?
Because calling something a "fact" doesn't make it one.
The dead giveaway that the above is true is that the gal on the right in both Zapruder and Towner not only seems to be the same morphologicallly speaking, but is wearing a light-blue headscarf and a "black," full-length, long-sleeved garment, plus the fact that she is accompanied by two women who, respectively, look identical in both films, i.e., one has "black" hair and is wearing a dark-brown, long-sleeved upper garment with a white skirt, and another companion who is wearing a long-sleeved, "black," full-length garment ... and who just happens to have light-colored hair.
BS: You "see" what you want to see. It's blurry blobs all the way down.
It's interesting to note that the three gals I'm talking about in the Towner film and in the Darnell clips are still in the same left-to-right (or right-to-left, if you prefer) sequence they were in while watching the motorcade in Zapruder.
No, they're actually not. "Cha-Ching!"
Even if there had been 10,000 people in Dealey Plaza that day, taken all together any reasonable person would conclude that these three gals must be the same people, based on statistical probabilities, alone.
"reasonable person" as defined as "agrees with Tommy".
Why are you suddenly obsessing on Sharon Simmons, the gal who's the hardest of the three in Darnell to identify by face (because she's wearing that side-of-face-hiding headscarf)?
In case you've forgotten, you're arrogantly calling Karen Westbrook wrong about who she herself is.
-
In case you've forgotten, you're arrogantly calling Karen Westbrook wrong about who she herself is.
.....
Because she is wrong, Iacoletti.
Which is totally understandable, seein' as how she was trying to please Stephen "Smilin' and Noddin' Fagin" and his audience, and was doing what he had probably suggested that she do: Look at "herself" there by the Stemmons sign, from behind, from the spacial distance of Zapruder's 8mm camera, and yep, fifty-four years after-the-fact.
"You know, Karen, so we can clear up this here Thierry 'Fake News' Speth, Robin Unger, and Don 'I'll Get It Right Eventually' Roberdeau ... mess!"
"Look! Right there, Karen!, in that very exciting, close-to-the-fatal-headshot position you were in with your pal (strawberry-blond???) Gloria Calvery!"
"Yes, Stephen, ... and who's that gal on the left, you ask? Well, it's probably (mysteriously black-haired and dark-skinned) Carol Reed, but I'll be danged if I know where that mischievous Karan Hicks done went to, Steve."
.....
"Blobs all the way down," Iacoletti?
According to that lady at the Bertrand Russell lecture, it's "turtles all the way down," not blobs.
.....
Regardless, have you had your eyes checked lately, John?
Do you still contend that those three people on the Pergola Patio in Towner might not be women, but men who are wearing long-sleeved shirts and long bermuda shorts, or maybe even regular pants tucked into very high, flesh-colored cowboy boots?
Oh yeah, and that that macho dude on the right is holding a Little-Boy-Blue-colored helium-filled balloon, or maybe a Little-Boy-Blue-colored "Welcome to Dallas!" sign?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_blue
-- MWT :D
-
Thanks Brian. Maybe another SharonAnnSimmons, born in Dallas, 1942, and passed away in 2017. Possibly, SharonAnnSimmons/Nelson was born in 1944.
Brian,
Please don't interview her.
I'm afraid you'll "eff" it up, somehow.
LOL
-- MWT ;)
-
In case you've forgotten, you're arrogantly calling Karen Westbrook wrong about who she herself is.
.....
Because she is wrong, Iacoletti.
There's some powerful evidence. Tommy says so. ::)
Do you still contend that those three people on the Pergola Patio in Towner might not be women, but men who are wearing long-sleeved shirts and long bermuda shorts, or maybe even regular pants tucked into very high, flesh-colored cowboy boots?
Do you still contend that they must be women because you think your blobs have bare legs?
Oh yeah, and that that macho dude on the right is holding a Little-Boy-Blue-colored helium-filled balloon, or maybe a Little-Boy-Blue-colored "Welcome to Dallas!" sign?
Do you ever get tired of making up crap and claiming that I said it? Do you content that a blue area on your blob must be a scarf, merely because you want it to be a scarf?
-
Brian,
Please don't interview her.
I'm afraid you'll "eff" it up, somehow.
And then he'll lie about what she said anyway.
-
And then he'll lie about what she said anyway.
Iacoletti,
Why does the power-that-be at this wonderful forum let you get away with calling other members liars?
I thought that was against the rules.
-- MWT ;)
-
Do you still contend that they must be women because you think your blobs have bare legs?
Do you ever get tired of making up crap and claiming that I said it? Do you content that a blue area on your blob must be a scarf, merely because you want it to be a scarf?
Dear-oh-dear Iacoletti,
That "blue area" is on the head of a barelegged person, who just happens to be accompanied by two other barelegged people on the Pergola Patio.
What could that "blue area" possibly be, if not a headscarf, be it on the head of a woman, or on the head of a bermuda shorts-wearing dude, or on the head of a cowboy who's wearin' high, flesh-colored cowboy boots over his Levis, and who plum forgot to wear his cowboy hat that day?
A balloon? A sign? A blue seagull?
Regardless, it's quite a coincidence that it's the same color as the headscarf your "Karen Westbrook" is wearing in the Zapruder film, isn't it?
And that your "Karen Westbrook," being an office-workin' female and anticipating watching the President of the United States go by, is wearing a dress (or is nude under her raincoat!) and therefore is barelegged, as are her colleagues "Gloria Calvert" (sic) and "uhh .. probably Carol Reed".
-- MWT :P
The pertinent part of the Towner film can be viewed here:
https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-sqkOATiPTRk/W7DNxeK1b9I/AAAAAAAACbU/iwsvC5zr4AEO1Baql7VTHg78v8gq73ryACLcBGAs/s1600/towner2.gif
-
Dear-oh-dear Iacoletti,
That "blue area" is on the head of a barelegged person, who just happens to be accompanied by two other barelegged people on the Pergola Patio.
What could that "blue area" possibly be, if not a headscarf, be it on the head of a woman, or on the head of a bermuda shorts-wearing dude, or on the head of a cowboy who's wearin' high, flesh-colored cowboy boots over his Levis, and who plum forgot to wear his cowboy hat that day?
A balloon? A sign? A blue seagull?
More ridiculous nonsense in lieu instead of a demonstration of how you know it's specifically a scarf.
Regardless, it's quite a coincidence that it's the same color as the headscarf your "Karen Westbrook" is wearing in the Zapruder film, isn't it?
Is it? Says who?
-
I suggested back in April that you believe the gal on the right in the Towner trio might not be wearing a blue headscarf, but holding a blue balloon, or a blue sign, or have a pet blue parrot on her shoulder (or some-such-thing), instead.
Yeah, because that's what you do. You make up ridiculous nonsense strawmen to argue with.
And you never responded except to say that since all you could see on the Pergola Patio was "blobs," those three people on the Pergola Patio could very well be Bermuda-shorts (or high, flesh-colored cowboy boots) wearin' men, instead of women.
The bermuda shorts and the high, flesh-colored cowboy boots was more nonsense that you made up.
So, is your plan to just keep creating new threads with the same old garbage and hope that something sticks instead of actually coming up with something new to back up your assumptions?
-
Oh dear oh dear Iacoletti,
Why then did you go to the trouble of posting that big photo of those five male models wearing Bermuda shorts and long-sleeved upper garments on that thread?
Was is just because you thought they looked "hot"?
Because you insisted that bare legs = women. One counter-example disproves the hypothesis.
-
Because you insisted that bare legs = women. One counter-example disproves the hypothesis.
In the context of a cool, gusty, late November day in Dallas, Texas, no, it doesn't, does it.
Regardless, can you think of any other "counter-examples" which would tend to disprove the "hypothesis" that the three people on the Pergola Patio must be women because their legs are bare from about the knee, down?
Oh yeah, and because they're wearing dresses, or raincoats over their dresses?
And one of them is even wearing a blue headscarf?
Ef·fem·i·nate (I had to look it up for spelling purposes) Cowboys, or Really Stylin' Dudes, wearin' high, flesh-colored boots?
Anything else?
Good old "over-saturation"?
Anything else?
-- MWT :D
-
In the context of a cool, gusty, late November day in Dallas, Texas, no, it doesn't, does it.
(https://www.shared.com/content/images/2019/01/shortsinwinter.jpg)
Are you claiming that somehow it's too cold for men to bare their legs, but not women? That's rather sexist of you.
-
(https://www.shared.com/content/images/2019/01/shortsinwinter.jpg)
Are you claiming that somehow it's too cold for men to bare their legs, but not women? That's rather sexist of you.
How absurd, what are you trying to prove with a photo taken God knows where, decades later, shouldn't your argument at least be about what people wore in 1963?
Here is some photos from around Dallas on the 22nd and I can't find even 1 guy wearing shorts, much less three in a row?
(https://www.aljazeera.com/mritems/imagecache/mbdxxlarge/mritems/Images/2017/10/29/5389c4e84ac245bcb21ef05536dac8e6_18.jpg)
(https://jfkfacts.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Screen-Shot-2015-01-30-at-5.48.50-PM.png)
(https://i.postimg.cc/KvDGS1K4/run-knoll.jpg)
(https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth184817/m1/1/high_res/)
JohnM
-
How the hell would you know whether or not people are wearing shorts in a big crowd of people where you can't see their legs?
But the point is, even if Tommy thinks his blobs are bare legged, and therefore more likely to be women, so what?
-
How the hell would you know whether or not people are wearing shorts in a big crowd of people where you can't see their legs?
I didn't ask you to do an clothing audit on every man woman and child in Dallas, I just want you to support your "photo evidence" and at least demonstrate that at least 1 man in Dallas in November 1963 can be seen wearing shorts?
But the point is, even if Tommy thinks his blobs are bare legged, and therefore more likely to be women, so what?
If it makes no difference then why post the photo of the guy wearing shorts?
JohnM
-
I didn't ask you to do an clothing audit on every man woman and child in Dallas, I just want you to support your "photo evidence" and at least demonstrate that at least 1 man in Dallas in November 1963 can be seen wearing shorts?
Why?
If it makes no difference then why post the photo of the guy wearing shorts?
Because Tommy appears to think that a blob that appears to him to be a bare-legged person must necessarily be a woman, because it was a "cool, gusty, late November day in Dallas, Texas".
What are you, his surrogate?
-
Thomas, worth noting is that KarenWestbrook identified a PersonImage as herself, about a half century after the DealeyPlaza shooting of JohnKennedySr and JohnConnallyJr, based on the SixthFloorMuseum filmed interview, by viewing films and/or photos of PersonImages. And, her Motorcade viewing companions' PersonImages were identified by herself the same way, but placed with her Image accordingly. To my knowledge, there is no video or audio Of Ms Westbrook providing any similar PersonImage identity information that was produced on 11/22/'63. And, to me at least, that would tend to dilute any "being there" valuation.
Anyone care to translate this for us?
-
Why?
Because Tommy appears to think that a blob that appears to him to be a bare-legged person must necessarily be a woman, because it was a "cool, gusty, late November day in Dallas, Texas".
What are you, his surrogate?
Why?
You posted the completely irrelevant photo not me, I don't care one way or another, I was just giving you some advice so you could have a little credibility.
Because Tommy appears to think that a blob that appears to him to be a bare-legged person must necessarily be a woman, because it was a "cool, gusty, late November day in Dallas, Texas".
An image that appears to be a blob, sometimes isn't.
(https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/images/universe/20190410/blackhole20190410.jpg)
What are you, his surrogate?
No, I just find this entire debate fascinating.
JohnM
-
You posted the completely irrelevant photo not me, I don't care one way or another, I was just giving you some advice so you could have a little credibility.
It's perfectly relevant to the argument that Tommy made. As amusing as it is to banter with you, a guy who thinks "cop said so" is good evidence of anything has no business talking about credibility.
An image that appears to be a blob, sometimes isn't.
No, the image is still a blob. And if you don't know what it is, then you don't know what it is -- even if you think you have a good guess.
-
It's perfectly relevant to the argument that Tommy made. As amusing as it is to banter with you, a guy who thinks "cop said so" is good evidence of anything has no business talking about credibility.
No, the image is still a blob. And if you don't know what it is, then you don't know what it is -- even if you think you have a good guess.
Iacoletti,
When you watch those three people walking across the Pergola Patio in a blown-up version of the Towner film, can you see, in any of them, any separation between their respective clothed thighs, indicating that at least one of them is a guy who's wearing very long bermuda shorts, or maybe, just maybe ... regular pants tucked into his very high, flesh-colored boots?
Or not, ... suggesting very strongly that all three of them are three women -- three women wearing skirts (or dresses), with-or-without raincoats over them?
-- MWT ;)
PS Or maybe you can't be scientifically certain they're even human beings, because, to you, they just look like animated ... "blobs"?
-
More creative blob interpretation.
Yawn.
-
More creative blob interpretation.
Yawn.
Iacoletti,
Yes, I know. The dress-like, non-separating, non-bermuda-shorts-or-pants-like skirts and raincoats above those three gals' bare lower legs (as they're walking across the Pergola Patio in the Towner film) must be a figment of my imagination.
Because, unfortunately, no one but me can discern such things, or if they can, they're unwilling to speak up about it and incur your apparent "Oswald Is Innocent At All Costs!" wrath and invective
Iacoletti, overheard at a bar in Texas: "Can I have another Blobs on the rocks, bartender? I'm so addicted to that stuff. And while you're at it, you'd better give me a big plate of re-fried beans, smothered with Hatch habaneros and lots and lots of cheese. Why the habaneros? Well, so it'll be really, really hot when I blow it out my you-know-what at the forum!"
-- MWT ;)
-
Because, unfortunately, no one but me can discern such things, or if they can, they're unwilling to speak up about it and incur your apparent "Oswald Is Innocent At All Costs!" wrath and invective
I never said that Oswald was innocent at all costs. If you ever decide to stop making up things to argue about, let me know.
Iacoletti, overheard at a bar in Texas: "Can I have another Blobs on the rocks, bartender? I'm so addicted to that stuff. And while you're at it, you'd better give me a big plate of re-fried beans, smothered with Hatch habaneros and lots and lots of cheese. Why the habaneros? Well, so it'll be really, really hot when I blow it out my you-know-what at the forum!"
You probably think your ranting and raving is cute and clever, but you're just a waste of space.
-
You probably think your ranting and raving is cute and clever, but you're just a waste of space.
Iacoletti,
Why, then, do you continue to read them and reply to them? Aren't you wasting time and space by doing so?
-- MWT ;)
-
Endorsement of your opinion from the guy with 429 falsehoods and fabrications is hardly helpful.
Iacoletti,
Why are you so concerned about Gloria Calvery's position on Elm Street during the assassination --especially since "your Calvery" (Gloria Holt) and "my Calvery" (Gloria Calvery) were standing only about 20 feet from each other, and seein' as how you seem to believe Calvery was a non-factor immediately after the assassination (as far as possible interactions with other witnesses is concerned)?
Are you really SO OBSESSED with historical accuracy on such "trivial details"?
Or ... do you have a "hidden agenda"?
Gotta keep her away from those steps and ... Prayer Person?
-- MWT ;)
-
I never claimed to know where Gloria Calvery is.
Iacoletti,
Are you saying you don't necessarily agree with Karen Westbrook's "identification" of herself and Gloria Calvery in the Zapruder film?
-- MWT ;)
-
Just diving in here for the hell of it. So Tom G asks John I this question:
---------------------
Iacoletti,
Why are you so concerned about Gloria Calvery's position on Elm Street during the assassination --especially since "your Calvery" (Gloria Holt) and "my Calvery" (Gloria Calvery) were standing only about 20 feet from each other, and seein' as how you seem to believe Calvery was a non-factor immediately after the assassination (as far as possible interactions with other witnesses is concerned)?
Are you really SO OBSESSED with historical accuracy on such "trivial details"?
---------------------
...and if you go back to the very first post of this thread - way back on July 3 - Tom G starts it off like:
---------------------
We now know that the four headscarf-wearing women who were standing shoulder-to-shoulder in Zapruder and who were labeled by Robin Unger as "Berry, Thornton, Burney, and (unknown)," and who are currently labelled by Don Roberdeau as "Berry, Thornton, Burney, and Jean Newman" (LOL) ...
... were actually Karen Westbrook, Carol Reed, Karan Hicks, and (big and tall) Gloria Calvery.
So where in the heck were Berry, Thornton, and Berry?
(We already know that Jean Newman was standing where Roberdeau originally had her -- just to the right of suit and trilby-wearing Ernest Brandt, who, in turn, was standing next to his young client, John Templin.)
-- MWT ;)
------------------------------
Hahahahahaha! Preaching to the choir much? Hahahahaha!
-
Are you saying you don't necessarily agree with Karen Westbrook's "identification" of herself and Gloria Calvery in the Zapruder film?
Correct. But her identification of herself carries more weight than some conclusion that you made by squinting at some blurry images.
-
Hahahahahaha! Preaching to the choir much? Hahahahaha!
Right?
This is the guy who has created multiple threads and polls and continues to post obsessively about these "trivial details".
-
... But her identification of herself carries more weight than some conclusion that you made by squinting at some blurry images.
"Identified herself" from the backside of a headscarf in Zapruder and in the Willis image, actually famous among buffs for being blurred, that includes virtually no facial features. That's heavy sure enough, but that air of self importance because of just being there and now, part of living history, is adorable no?
-
"Identified herself" from the backside of a headscarf in Zapruder and in the Willis image, actually famous among buffs for being blurred, that includes virtually no facial features. That's heavy sure enough, but that air of self importance because of just being there and now, part of living history, is adorable no?
Well put, Barry.
How did Karen Westbrook "identify" herself in the Zapruder film 1) from behind, 2) at a considerable distance from from the camera, 3) while wearing a headscarf, 4) fifty-five years after the fact?
Answer: By confusing Gloria Holt's strawberry-blond hair with Gloria Calvery's dark red hair, and mistaking Sharon Simmon's "Baby Boy Blue"-colored headscarf for her own lighter-blue one.
Those two unfortunate juxtapositions evidently cast a voodoo spell on her, and smilin' and noddin' Stephen Fagin of the The Sixth Floor Museum certainly didn't help, and may have even pushed her in that direction.
-- MWT ;)
-
How did Karen Westbrook "identify" herself in the Zapruder film 1) from behind, 2) at a considerable distance from from the camera, 3) while wearing a headscarf, 4) fifty-five years after the fact?
Because she was there, knew her coworkers, and knew where she stood and with whom. Tommy, on the other hand, was not there, knows nobody, and has to rely on his own ignorant opinion based on squinting at blurry images and pretending that he sees things.
-
Because she was there, knew her coworkers, and knew where she stood and with whom. Tommy, on the other hand, was not there, knows nobody, and has to rely on his own ignorant opinion based on squinting at blurry images and pretending that he sees things.
Iacoletti,
Although Zapruder's camera was some distance from dark-complected Stella Mae Jacob, strawberry-blond Gloria Holt, and "Baby-Boy-Blue" headscarf-wearing Sharon Simmons -- i.e., your "uhh ... maybe Carol Reed, definitely Gloria Calvert [sic], and me, Karen Westbrook!" --, the images in his film are sharp and clear and it's easy to see how (see my previous post, above) your beloved Westbrook was so horribly mistaken during her 2017 Sixth Floor Museum interview with Stephen "Smilin' n' Noddin'" Fagin.
-- MWT ;)
-
Although Zapruder's camera was some distance from dark-complected Stella Mae Jacob, strawberry-blond Gloria Holt, and "Baby-Boy-Blue" headscarf-wearing Sharon Simmons -- i.e., your "uhh ... maybe Carol Reed, definitely Gloria Calvert [sic], and me, Karen Westbrook!" --, the images in his film are sharp and clear and it's easy to see how (see my previous post, above) your beloved Westbrook was so horribly mistaken during her 2017 Sixth Floor Museum interview with Stephen "Smilin' n' Noddin'" Fagin.
Claiming over and over again that you are correct doesn't actually make you correct.
-
Claiming over and over again that you are correct doesn't actually make you correct.
Iacoletti,
It doesn't make me incorrect, either.
Why do you claim over and over that it's impossible to tell if the three people walking across the Pergola Patio in the Towner film are women, or bermuda shorts-wearing men?
-- MWT ;)
-
It doesn't make me incorrect, either.
So why do you persist in stating your "could be correct, could be incorrect" wild-ass guesses as facts?
Why do you claim over and over that it's impossible to tell if the three people walking across the Pergola Patio in the Towner film are women, or bermuda shorts-wearing men?
I never said anything about bermuda shorts. That was your exercise in make-believe. Your blobs aren't women just because you want them to be women.
-
I never said anything about bermuda shorts. That was your exercise in make-believe. Your blobs aren't women just because you want them to be women.
Iacoletti,
Why, then, did you post a photo of four(?) young guys wearing bermuda shorts and long-sleeved shirts on a nice, summer-looking day, and another photo of a guy wearing them on a cold-looking day (with snow on the ground, iirc), if not to "support" your theory that those three people on the Pergola Patio could very well have been males wearing bermuda shorts (with one of them carrying or wearing something "Baby Boy Blue" in color near-or-on his head!)?
To a presidential motorcade. In late November. In conservative 1963 Dallas.
Either that, or that those three people were still guys, all right, and all three of 'em were wearing regular trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots.
Any fanciful scenario incorporating three men on the Patio, but definitely not three women, and especially not the same three women who were standing near the Stemmons Sign in the Zapruder film -- your "Uhh ... probably Carol Reed, definitely Gloria Calvert (sic), and me, "Baby Boy Blue"-headscarf-wearin' Karen Westbrook!" ...
-- MWT ;)
-
Because of your silly assertion that they had to be women because you thought you saw bare legs in the midst of the blob.
-
Because of your silly assertion that they had to be women because you thought you saw bare legs in the midst of the blob.
Iacoletti,
Yet "in the midst of the blob" you discern three guys who are either 1) wearing bermuda shorts and long-sleeved shirts, or 2) long-sleeved shirts and trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots.
Can you think of any other scenarios incorporating "three guys on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film", Iacoletti?
Or has your fervid imagination run dry, now, and you're gonna have to resort to your ace-in-the-hole fall-back defence -- "Those three "people" you claim to see when you squint real hard might not be human beings, after all, but moving, vertical .... uhh ... something-or-other. ... I got it! I got it! ... BLOBS! ... WALKING BLOBS!, that's what they might be!"
-- MWT ;)
-
Yet "in the midst of the blob" you discern three guys who are either 1) wearing bermuda shorts and long-sleeved shirts, or 2) long-sleeved shirts and trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots.
Wrong again, mud wrassler. I discern indistinct blobs.
-
It's a fact that this is Johnny Depp, John Travolta, Hugh Jack(man), Samuel L. Jackson, and Julia Roberts.
If you don't believe it then you must prove that they are not.
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/men-blobs.jpg)
-
Wrong again, mud wrassler. I discern indistinct blobs.
Iacoletti,
Then why did you posit that those indistinct blobs could very plausibly be three guys who were either wearing long-sleeved shirts and (really, really long) bermuda shorts to a presidential motorcade in conservative 1963 Dallas on a cool and blustery late Fall day, or trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots?
Can't you think of any other "plausible" scenarios regarding those three ... (gasp) ... vertical ... (gasp) ... walking ... (gasp) ... BLOBS?
Just those two?
-- MWT ;)
-
Then why did you posit that those indistinct blobs could very plausibly be three guys who were either wearing long-sleeved shirts and (really, really long) bermuda shorts to a presidential motorcade in conservative 1963 Dallas on a cool and blustery late Fall day, or trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots?
I didn't posit that. I asked you how you knew that said blobs are women.
-
I didn't posit that. I asked you how you knew that said blobs are women.
You did posit those two inane theories as "alternatives" to the rather obvious, no-squinting-required fact that those three people are women.
Regardless, I've since pointed out to you that the garments those three people are wearing roughly from their knees up can be seen, upon close and honest observation, to not separate like bermuda shorts or trousers when those people move their legs while walking, but instead "stay in one piece," just like a dress, or a skirt, or a raincoat over a dress or a skirt. This, combined with the fact that the lower legs of all three of those people are "flesh-colored," proves beyond a reasonable doubt that those three people are women, not men.
-- MWT ;)
PS Continue on, Iacoletti, and show us just how un-reasonable you can be in your vain mission to deny that those three people are the same people as your Zapruder-based "uhh ... probably Carol Reed, definitely Gloria Calvert (sic), and "Baby Boy Blue" headscarf-wearing me, Karen Westbrook!"
-
You did posit those two inane theories as "alternatives" to the rather obvious, no-squinting-required fact that those three people are women.
No, actually I didn't. You made those up in a lame attempt at ridicule.
Regardless, I've since pointed out to you that the garments those three people are wearing roughly from their knees up can be seen, upon close and honest observation, to not separate like bermuda shorts or trousers when those people move their legs while walking, but instead "stay in one piece," just like a dress, or a skirt, or a raincoat over a dress or a skirt. This, combined with the fact that the lower legs of all three of those people are "flesh-colored," proves beyond a reasonable doubt that those three people are women, not men.
Here we go again. You look at indistinct blobs and see what you want to see.
(https://i0.wp.com/sluggerotoole.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/ccimage-12333501043_d789c80069_o.jpg)
-
Just as a reminder, this is what Tommy is so convinced he knows the identities of.
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/towner-blobs.png)
-
Just as a reminder, this is what Tommy is so convinced he knows the identities of.
(http://iacoletti.org/jfk/towner-blobs.png)
Iacoleti,
You should have worded your caption, "These are the three people Tommy's so convinced he knows the identities of," but instead you wrote a watered-down version of, "This is the BLOB Tommy's so convinced he knows the identity of."
Regardless, why don't you post the film clip so we can watch how those (really, really long) "bermuda shorts" or "trousers stuffed into flesh-colored boots" of yours don't look like bermuda shorts or even trousers stuffed into really high, flesh-colored boots when those three people are walking?
Surely you can over-enlarge it enough, or darken it, or manipulate it somehow so that we can't tell for sure whether or not those three "men" are wearing dresses, or raincoats over dresses, instead!
-- MWT Walk:
-
Regardless, why don't you post the film clip so we can watch how those (really, really long) "bermuda shorts" or "trousers stuffed into flesh-colored boots" of yours don't look like bermuda shorts or even trousers stuffed into really high, flesh-colored boots when those three people are walking?
More of your trademark master baiting. It's not my bermuda shorts and flesh colored boots. That nonsense that you made up because you can't actually prove who these blobs are.
-
More of your trademark master baiting. It's not my bermuda shorts and flesh colored boots. That nonsense that you made up because you can't actually prove who these blobs are.
Iacoletti,
Look at it this way -- If those three people on the Pergola Patio (you do agree they are people, don't you?) are not:
1) Men who are wearing long-sleeved shirts and really long bermuda shorts, or
2) Men who are wearing long-sleeved shirts and trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots
... then what are those three "gay blades" wearing?
I honestly can't think of any other possibilities for three fashion-conscious dudes who are 1) at a presidential motorcade 2) in conservative 1963 Dallas 3) on a cool and blustery Fall day.
Can you?
-- Mudd Wrassler Tommy Walk:
-
Iacoletti,
Look at it this way -- If those three people on the Pergola Patio (you do agree they are people, don't you?) are not:
1) Men who are wearing long-sleeved shirts and really long bermuda shorts, or
2) Men who are wearing long-sleeved shirts and trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots
... then what are those three "gay blades" wearing?
I honestly can't think of any other possibilities for three fashion-conscious dudes who are 1) at a presidential motorcade 2) in conservative 1963 Dallas 3) on a cool and blustery Fall day.
Can you?
-- Mudd Wrassler Tommy Walk:
When you're done coming up with fanciful stories, perhaps you'd like to demonstrate how you know who these blobs are with something beyond obnoxious sarcasm.
-
When you're done coming up with fanciful stories, perhaps you'd like to demonstrate how you know who these blobs are with something beyond obnoxious sarcasm.
Iacoletti,
Where's the "beef"? Don't like the implications of what you posited about those three people a few months ago?
Not my problem, Iacoletti.
You painted yourself into a corner, and now you're gonna need a lot of thinner to get it off your high, flesh-colored boots.
Iacoletti,
Look at it this way -- If those three people on the Pergola Patio (you do agree they are people, don't you?) are not:
1) Men who are wearing long-sleeved shirts and really long bermuda shorts, or
2) Men who are wearing long-sleeved shirts and trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots
... then what are those three "gay blades" wearing?
I honestly can't think of any other possibilities for three fashion-conscious dudes who are 1) at a presidential motorcade 2) in conservative 1963 Dallas 3) on a cool and blustery Fall day.
Can you?
-- Mudd Wrassler Tommy Walk:
......
Reality check:
All I did in the above post was to remind you of the two (2) "Three Men On The Pergola Patio" wardrobe scenarios you proffered on another thread a few months ago.
Can't you come up with any more, anymore?
Hmm. Come to think of it, I can -- Maybe those are three dudes ... in drag!
-- MWT ???
-
Iacoletti,
Where's the "beef"? Don't like the implications of what you posited about those three people a few months ago?
No, I don't like you making up dishonest crap to bait people with instead of just supporting your own arguments with evidence.
I don't have to prove that your wild-ass guesses are wrong.
-
No, I don't like you making up dishonest crap to bait people with instead of just supporting your own arguments with evidence.
I don't have to prove that your wild-ass guesses are wrong.
Iacoletti,
They were your two "wild ass" guesses (paraphrased for everybody, below):
1) "The three people walking across the Pergola Patio in the Towner film could be three men who happened to be wearing long-sleeved shirts and very long bermuda shorts."
2) "The three people walking across the Pergola Patio in the Towner film could be three men who happened to be wearing long-sleeved shirts and trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots."
Have you thought of any more "Three Men On The Pergola Patio" wardrobe scenarios since then, Iacoletti?
-- MWT Walk:
-
Iacoletti,
They were your two "wild ass" guesses (paraphrased for everybody, below):
And by "paraphrased", you mean made up by you and attributed to me. Dishonest scum.
-
And by "paraphrased", you mean made up by you and attributed to me. Dishonest scum.
Iacoletti,
Do you deny saying or implying that the three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film could have been men who were wearing bermuda shorts?
-- MWT ;)
PS I can't find the "flesh-colored boots" post. Did you edit it or delete it?
-
PS I can't find the "flesh-colored boots" post. Did you edit it or delete it?
Of course you can't, because I never said it. You made it up. Same with "bermuda shorts".
-
Of course you can't, because I never said it. You made it up. Same with "bermuda shorts".
Iacoletti,
Don't you remember posting this photo of the five Bermuda shorts-wearing dudes a few months ago?
Why in the world did you do that, John?
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1780.msg53653.html#msg53653
Iacoletti: "Well, if that doesn't scream "women", then I don't know what does."
(https://www.clydefitchreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/shorts-trend-ft.jpg)
-- MWT ;)
PS I'm still looking for the photo you posted of the young guy wearing Bermuda shorts in the snow in some city, which photo you posted in response to my claiming that it was implausible that anyone, not to mention three people, would have been wearing Bermuda shorts on such a cool and blistery late-Fall day in Dallas. Remember? (I'll post it here when I find it.)
Edit: Here it is. I found it on page 8 of this very same thread.
.......
Iacoletti: Are you claiming that somehow it's too cold for men to bare their legs, but not women? That's rather sexist of you.
(https://www.shared.com/content/images/2019/01/shortsinwinter.jpg)
-
Quote me ever saying that your Towner blobs are men wearing bermuda shorts, or even using the term "bermuda shorts".
Or admit that that's just a load of your trademark Tommy BS.
-
Quote me ever saying that your Towner blobs are men wearing bermuda shorts, or even using the term "bermuda shorts".
Or admit that that's just a load of your trademark Tommy BS.
No, Iacoletti, you're far too clever for that.
What you strongly implied by posting those two photos (and with the telling words you "captioned" them with) in the context of the ongoing little "debate" we were having at the time on various and sundry threads was that the three people on the Pergola Patio weren't necessarily women wearing what appeared in one case to be a knee-length skirt, and in two cases calf-length dresses (or perhaps raincoats over their dresses) for the simple reason that they could very well have been men who were wearing (implausibly long) Bermuda shorts while watching the presidential motorcade on a cool and blustery late November day in conservative 1963 Dallas.
Or, as I believe you stated in words, that they very well could have been men wearing trousers tucked into high, flesh-colored boots ... while watching the motorcade in conservative 1963 Dallas.
(Have you thought of any other possibilities, yet?)
-- MWT ;)
Iacoletti: "Well, if that doesn't scream "women", then I don't know what does."
(https://www.clydefitchreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/shorts-trend-ft.jpg)
Iacoletti: "Are you claiming that somehow it's too cold for men to bare their legs, but not women? That's rather sexist of you."
(https://www.shared.com/content/images/2019/01/shortsinwinter.jpg)
Edit: Given the context of our little debate (three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film), and the immediate issue (their gender), it's clear from the top photo, above, and the "caption" you wrote for it that you're suggesting I might have mistaken three Bermuda shorts-wearing guys on the Pergola Patio for women.
The only problem is, the "Bermuda shorts" that your presumptive men on the patio are wearing are a lot longer than the shorts in the photo you provided, and when you closely watch those three people in the film as they're walking, you realize that the garments they're wearing aren't Bermuda shorts (or even trousers tucked into flesh-colored boots), but a skirt in one case, and dresses (or raincoats covering skirts or dresses) in the other two.
-
No, Iacoletti, you're far too clever for that.
Then stop claiming that I said things I didn’t actually say. It’s dishonest and just makes you look more foolish than you already are.
What you strongly implied by posting those two photos
That’s your problem in a nutshell. You are unable to distinguish between inferences that you make and what other people actually say.
Or, as I believe you stated in words, that they very well could have been men wearing trousers tucked into their high, flesh-colored boots ... while watching the motorcade in conservative 1963 Dallas.
There you go again. No, I did not state that in words or in any other way.
(Have you thought of any other possibilities, yet?)
I don’t care what’s possible. I care about what you can demonstrate with evidence, not speculation and conjecture. Unlike you, I have no problem accepting “I don’t know” as an answer when that’s all you’ve got.
Edit: making up more creative stories about what you think you see when you “closely watch” fuzzy images is an exercise in futility. Who are you trying to kid?
-
Then stop claiming that I said things I didn’t actually say. It’s dishonest and just makes you look more foolish than you already are.
That’s your problem in a nutshell. You are unable to distinguish between inferences that you make and what other people actually say.
There you go again. No, I did not state that in words or in any other way.
I don’t care what’s possible. I care about what you can demonstrate with evidence, not speculation and conjecture. Unlike you, I have no problem accepting “I don’t know” as an answer when that’s all you’ve got.
Edit: making up more creative stories about what you think you see when you “closely watch” fuzzy images is an exercise in futility. Who are you trying to kid?
Iacoletti,
Why did you post those two photos (and write the "captions" the way you did) of Bermuda shorts-wearing guys on the world-renowned JFK Assassination Forum, if not to try to convince us that the three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film might not be women, but three Bermuda shorts-wearing guys, instead?
Note: The operative word in my post is "might".
-- MWT ;)
-
Why did you post those two photos
Already answered. Why do you ask the same questions over and over again?
Note: The operative phrase in my post is "might be".
Your blobs “might be” lots of things. For once show some integrity and admit that you’re trying to pull a giant bait and switch here by leaping from “might be women” to “specifically Simmons, Holt, and Jacob”.
-
Already answered. Why do you ask the same questions over and over again?
Iacoletti,
Did you answer that question on this thread, or on another one some time ago?
I can't find it, so please freshen my memory.
Why did you post the photo of the five or six guys wearing Bermuda shorts in nice weather, and the photo of the guy wearing Bermuda shorts in the snow?
To suggest that the three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film might be three guys wearing really, really long Bermuda shorts to a presidential motorcade on a cool and blustery late-November day in conservative 1963 Dallas, even though when you watch them walking you can tell they're wearing dresses, or raincoats-over-dresses, instead?
Was that it?
-- MWT ;)
PS What's that blue thing on the head of the one on the right, something that's "coincidentally" the same color as the headscarf your "Karen Westbrook" is wearing in the Zapruder film?
-
Well put, Barry.
How did Karen Westbrook "identify" herself in the Zapruder film 1) from behind, 2) at a considerable distance from from the camera, 3) while wearing a headscarf, 4) fifty-five years after the fact?
Answer: By confusing Gloria Holt's strawberry-blond hair with Gloria Calvery's dark red hair, and mistaking Sharon Simmon's "Baby Boy Blue"-colored headscarf for her own lighter-blue one.
Those two unfortunate juxtapositions evidently cast a voodoo spell on her, and smilin' and noddin' Stephen Fagin of the The Sixth Floor Museum certainly didn't help, and may have even pushed her in that direction.
-- MWT ;)
Having watched it again carefully, I tend to agree, the ID of Calvert(is that what she called her?) itself is very weak and again from behind. The idea that she immeadiatly thought the shots came from her building was questioned briefly and, she caved, revealing that she went back there first, then saw policemen coming inside, thats how/when she knew. But this ID of "Calvert" and someone dissagreeing with her was deemed funny by the pair of them. I don't get it and quite honestly, I wouldn't put much trust in what she said about the assassination at all, sorry.
-
I can't find it, so please freshen my memory.
You'll just misrepresent it again. What's the point?
You made the silly argument that because you thought you saw bare legs in your Towner blob that this meant that it must be women. I was pointing out that even if it actually is bare legs that you think you see, that doesn't prove anything about their gender.
Likewise, even if you think you see a blue scarf, that doesn't somehow make it Sharon Simmons. Because, among other things, you don't even know what colors Sharon Simmons was wearing that day.
Bottom line: what you think you see is not some standard of reality. I couldn't care less about what you think you see.
At least admit that all of your pronouncements about who is who in the Z film are pure speculation.
-
Having watched it again carefully, I tend to agree, the ID of Calvert(is that what she called her?) itself is very weak and again from behind. The idea that she immeadiatly thought the shots came from her building was questioned briefly and, she caved, revealing that she went back there first, then saw policemen coming inside, thats how/when she knew. But this ID of "Calvert" and someone dissagreeing with her was deemed funny by the pair of them. I don't get it and quite honestly, I wouldn't put much trust in what she said about the assassination at all, sorry.
That doesn't somehow make Tommy Graves' wild-ass guesses more reliable than an actual witness.
-
You'll just misrepresent it again. What's the point?
You made the silly argument that because you thought you saw bare legs in your Towner blob that this meant that it must be women. I was pointing out that even if it actually is bare legs that you think you see, that doesn't prove anything about their gender.
Likewise, even if you think you see a blue scarf, that doesn't somehow make it Sharon Simmons. Because, among other things, you don't even know what colors Sharon Simmons was wearing that day.
Bottom line: what you think you see is not some standard of reality. I couldn't care less about what you think you see.
At least admit that all of your pronouncements about who is who in the Z film are pure speculation.
John,
Are you saying that the three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film are so "blob"-like that you can't say whether or not their lower legs are bare?
Really?
(https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/towmer4.gif)
-- MWT ;)
PS Have you ever seen a man wear a headscarf (a blue one in this instance)?
PPS How can anyone "misrepresent" a non-existent answer or a non-answer?
PPPS When you applied the word "scum" to me in an earlier post, were you subconsciously referring to yourself?
-
Sorry John but I strongly dissagree, even an amatuer researcher's opinion is better than a, you say actual, I say, damned witness. We''ve given these people and their memories too much credit for far too long. I'm not only certain this one is BSing but I'm confident she knows she is too.
I'm more than happy that that's Darnell in Towner running toward three blobs if you like, we know the three women he shot walking away from the west shelter area in his own film, they are a perfect match for the Zfilm girls, it's them and in Towner one of those blobs has a blue scarf and it's next to another with what seems like red hair. Also the Darnell element again, it's him, there's a newspaper in his tan suited, right pocket and the timing and positions are perfect to match the film credited to him. Always moving, reacting and/or filming, that's our Jimmy, even when he's stood still as in the Martin group scene, James' stabilized gif shows he was winding his camera in preperation for the next shot... he was on fire.
If you want to talk real proof then as far as I'm concerned you may as well ask me to prove that's really Abe Zapruder on the pedestal in Willis.
Westbrook could convince a jury no doubt about it, she's good and I'm sure those teens loved her and left thinking "three shots only" and "Lee was a creep" and trusted her when she saifd she was looking right at the Pres' through the whole thing. I don't, I've heard it all before and I'm sure I could convince her, those teens and a jury she's mostly wrong about almost everything.
Am I wrong? Has it been covered already? She thinks she knows a woman better than the woman's own son because the back of her redhead next to a blue scarf but cannot even get her name correct. Who is CALVERT? She's read that beforehand, not remembered it.
-
Are you saying that the three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film are so "blob"-like that you can't say whether or not their lower legs are bare?
Sigh... they’re whatever you want them to be, Tom.
PPS How can anyone "misrepresent" a non-existent answer or a non-answer?
You misrepresent everything.
-
Sorry John but I strongly dissagree, even an amatuer researcher's opinion is better than a, you say actual, I say, damned witness. We''ve given these people and their memories too much credit for far too long. I'm not only certain this one is BSing but I'm confident she knows she is too.
Based on what? And for what purpose?
I'm more than happy that that's Darnell in Towner running toward three blobs if you like
What’s your evidence for this being Darnell?
If you want to talk real proof then as far as I'm concerned you may as well ask me to prove that's really Abe Zapruder on the pedestal in Willis.
That’s a good analogy. If Willis was the only thing we had to go on, then we wouldn’t know who that was on the pedestal.
Am I wrong? Has it been covered already? She thinks she knows a woman better than the woman's own son
You do know that the son was born in 1977, right? And that he picked a different person in the Z film than either Tommy or Westbrook?
because the back of her redhead next to a blue scarf but cannot even get her name correct. Who is CALVERT?
She doesn’t say “Calvert”. She says “Calver”. She’s just not emphasizing the “y”. How do you know how Calvery said it?
-
Based on what? And for what purpose?
What’s your evidence for this being Darnell?
That’s a good analogy. If Willis was the only thing we had to go on, then we wouldn’t know who that was on the pedestal.
You do know that the son was born in 1977, right? And that he picked a different person in the Z film than either Tommy or Westbrook?
She doesn’t say “Calvert”. She says “Calver”. She’s just not emphasizing the “y”. How do you know how Calvery said it?
Iacoletti,
Do you think the three slowly moving, vertical objects on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film are ... human beings?
Impossible to say?
Way too ... "blob"-like?
Would you rather that film not exist ... or at least that part of it?
-- MWT ;)
-
John, Tommy,
Darnell has a newspaper in his pocket in an image from Main St and again when he's seen on the Elm St/ extention in Cook(see James' Darnell thread), the suit, the body type, even for me now, the way he works, constantly reacting to stuff he sees, it's done for me, that's him in Towner.
Now we have the footage credited to him of the three girls, consider where he's running to in Towner, where he'll be when(let's assume) he gets ahead of them and points his camera at them, it's very good, too good for this/me.
I'll get back to Westbrook and the son, i just lost what I wrote.
Use anything you like with Zapruder John, Willis, Betzner, Bell, Wiegman even Rickerby and anything I've missed, you cannot prove it's Abe to the standards you're requesting.
-
Do you think the three slowly moving, vertical objects on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film are ... human beings?
It doesn't matter what I (or you) think they "look like" any more than it matters if you think a cloud looks like an ice cream cone.
-
Use anything you like with Zapruder John, Willis, Betzner, Bell, Wiegman even Rickerby and anything I've missed, you cannot prove it's Abe to the standards you're requesting.
Not true. You don't know when or from where the Darnell clip was taken. You do know that both Willis 5 and Zapruder were taken at the same time and you can also tell where and at what Z frame the Willis 5 photo was taken. You also have testimony from both Zapruder and Sitzman that they were on that pedestal during the motorcade.
-
Horse hockey. You don’t know that's Darnell or that he’s getting ready to film anything. You’re just assuming it.
-
Horse hockey. You don’t know that's Darnell or that he’s getting ready to film anything. You’re just assuming it.
Iacoletti,
Do you still think the three women on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film might actually be guys with trousers tucked into very high, skin-colored boots?
-- MWT ;)
-
Do you still think the three women on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film might actually be guys with trousers tucked into very high, skin-colored boots?
Yawn. I guess it’s Tommy storytime again.
Seek treatment.
-
Yawn. I guess it’s Tommy storytime again.
Seek treatment.
Iacoletti,
Maybe it is you who is in dire need of treatment -- so you can learn how to tell, from a distance (and maybe even close-up ?) raincoat or dress-wearing women from Bermuda shorts-wearing men, one of whom is wearing a "Baby Boy Blue" colored headscarf!
(Learning how to tell the truth would be nice, too, but I'm afraid that it might be too late for you on that score.)
-- MWT ;)
-
Maybe it is you who is in dire need of treatment -- so you can learn how to tell, from a distance (and maybe even close-up ?) raincoat or dress-wearing women from Bermuda shorts-wearing men, one of whom is wearing a "Baby Boy Blue" colored headscarf!
...and once again, reiterating a wild-ass guess for the umpteenth time doesn't make it even a tiny bit more proven.
-
...and once again, reiterating a wild-ass guess for the umpteenth time doesn't make it even a tiny bit more proven.
Iacoletti,
Do you honestly think the three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film might be men?
Or is it too hard to say ... because they just look like three moving vertical "blobs" to you ... with all of them having bare lower legs and one wearing a blue headscarf?
LOL
-- MWT Walk:
-
Seriously, dude. Stop asking the same damn questions over and over again and just LET IT GO.
-
Seriously, dude. Stop asking the same damn questions over and over again and just LET IT GO.
Seriously, Iacoletti, have you always had as hard a time telling women from men as you're having with those three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film?
-- MWT ;)
-
(https://media.tenor.com/images/c1e048bf419146f25eeb54b5df2d4b0a/tenor.gif)
-
(https://media.tenor.com/images/c1e048bf419146f25eeb54b5df2d4b0a/tenor.gif)
Iacoletti.
If you're so tired, why are you putting so much energy into this?
Hidden agenda?
-- MWT :)
-
Based on what? And for what purpose?
What’s your evidence for this being Darnell?
That’s a good analogy. If Willis was the only thing we had to go on, then we wouldn’t know who that was on the pedestal.
You do know that the son was born in 1977, right? And that he picked a different person in the Z film than either Tommy or Westbrook?
She doesn’t say “Calvert”. She says “Calver”. She’s just not emphasizing the “y”. How do you know how Calvery said it?
I base my opinion on Westbrook upon scores and scores of witnesses statements that I've read and/or listened to whilst cross-referencing the real evidence, that and the track record of the SFM. She's there for one reason only, to confirm that the version of events the SFM has been selling them and their parents all these years is backed up by actual/damned witnesses who were there. Three shots only, from one direction, the building and Oswald was indeed really creepy.
What does she get out of it? Recognition, a little cash and perhaps the chance of further appearances.
Darnell in Towner, I've already said, newspaper in right hand pocket and he's running from the Sitzman position(where he filmed her) toward another spot where he filmed three more girls. There is no visible problems with either the timing or positions of anyone in Towner when compared to the two clips credited to Darnell. He came out of the RRY with everyone else that wasn't police or already there beforehand, his scenes from behind the wall are evidently from around that time. Early. There he's within earshot of Sitzman too, that's the next piece that's been credited to him, his fliming of her being interviewed and there is no reason to believe that the Towner film was taken any later than 10-15mins after the kill.
I don't know much about the son, that he picked yet another person in the evidence is no surprise, the one we like in Z is pretty much disguised, perhaps he'll come around. Westbrook would need a serious intervention. But I'll wait until I hear him say Calvery, struck me as odd and again, I don't trust her.
Darnell with newspaper in right hand pocket, ten minutes before we see the same thing in Towner. Suit, build, position, timing all good, nothing to worry about and what if... if he came back and said he didn't remember shooting any of those aftermath scenes, like Altgens did for at least one of his images, would that seriously bother you? Not me. Altens 8 is exactly that because we say so. You can't rely on memory, only evidence and Towner works for both me and Jimmy.
(https://jfkassassinationfiles.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/jackson-bob-on-main.jpg)
-
Not true. You don't know when or from where the Darnell clip was taken. You do know that both Willis 5 and Zapruder were taken at the same time and you can also tell where and at what Z frame the Willis 5 photo was taken. You also have testimony from both Zapruder and Sitzman that they were on that pedestal during the motorcade.
The Darnell clip you're referring to with the 3girls has very little to go on except it's position, that we can pin down, everything we need is there. Also if Towner was just a little sharper we could actually match those people in the background near the pergola to those in his own film, not just those near the "windows" but people near the Sitzman position which he also filmed(and theres a chance we haven't seem all of that clip yet).
Testimony don't prove a thing.
Sitzman was there, right there on that spot within minutes, it's her, proven by hard evidence from Darnell of her face and a few other images taken later around the TSBD and it matches the woman seen in Bell and the early frames of Z as well as the woman caiming to be her in filmed interviews taken years later.
For Zapruder there's nothing but a body in a suit and one half decent shot of his face that bears very little resemblance to him but some of us except it and live with it. Those are the facts.
-
Based on what? And for what purpose?
What’s your evidence for this being Darnell?
That’s a good analogy. If Willis was the only thing we had to go on, then we wouldn’t know who that was on the pedestal.
You do know that the son was born in 1977, right? And that he picked a different person in the Z film than either Tommy or Westbrook?
She doesn’t say “Calvert”. She says “Calver”. She’s just not emphasizing the “y”. How do you know how Calvery said it?
Iacoletti,
No he didn't.
He picked your "Glasses Woman" in Betzner-3, the same woman who is so large and tall in Zapruder.
You just made that up.
-- MWT ;)
-
I base my opinion on Westbrook upon scores and scores of witnesses statements that I've read and/or listened to whilst cross-referencing the real evidence, that and the track record of the SFM. She's there for one reason only, to confirm that the version of events the SFM has been selling them and their parents all these years is backed up by actual/damned witnesses who were there. Three shots only, from one direction, the building and Oswald was indeed really creepy.
What does she get out of it? Recognition, a little cash and perhaps the chance of further appearances.
Darnell in Towner, I've already said, newspaper in right hand pocket and he's running from the Sitzman position(where he filmed her) toward another spot where he filmed three more girls. There is no visible problems with either the timing or positions of anyone in Towner when compared to the two clips credited to Darnell. He came out of the RRY with everyone else that wasn't police or already there beforehand, his scenes from behind the wall are evidently from around that time. Early. There he's within earshot of Sitzman too, that's the next piece that's been credited to him, his fliming of her being interviewed and there is no reason to believe that the Towner film was taken any later than 10-15mins after the kill.
I don't know much about the son, that he picked yet another person in the evidence is no surprise, the one we like in Z is pretty much disguised, perhaps he'll come around. Westbrook would need a serious intervention. But I'll wait until I hear him say Calvery, struck me as odd and again, I don't trust her.
Darnell with newspaper in right hand pocket, ten minutes before we see the same thing in Towner. Suit, build, position, timing all good, nothing to worry about and what if... if he came back and said he didn't remember shooting any of those aftermath scenes, like Altgens did for at least one of his images, would that seriously bother you? Not me. Altens 8 is exactly that because we say so. You can't rely on memory, only evidence and Towner works for both me and Jimmy.
(https://jfkassassinationfiles.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/jackson-bob-on-main.jpg)
In order to put Darnell in position to film the Sitzman interview, You are being extremely liberal with your 10-15 Minutes after the Kill Shot time stamping of the Towner footage showing the Pergola. Your 10-15 minute time stamping does Not fit the time stamping Towner herself applied to her own footage. Also, I find it difficult to understand why a seasoned film journalist such as Darnell would elect to stand there and film a possible Sitzman Interview when he himself had No means to also record the accompanying Verbiage. All hell is unfolding around Darnell, yet he slams on the brakes and instead chooses to film what amounts to a Fractured Flicker interview? Highly, Highly, unlikely and simply Not in step with Darnell being almost consistently In Motion from the time the Kill Shot was fired.
-
In order to put Darnell in position to film the Sitzman interview, You are being extremely liberal with your 10-15 Minutes after the Kill Shot time stamping of the Towner footage showing the Pergola. Your 10-15 minute time stamping does Not fit the time stamping Towner herself applied to her own footage. Also, I find it difficult to understand why a seasoned film journalist such as Darnell would elect to stand there and film a possible Sitzman Interview when he himself had No means to also record the accompanying Verbiage. All hell is unfolding around Darnell, yet he slams on the brakes and instead chooses to film what amounts to a Fractured Flicker interview? Highly, Highly, unlikely and simply Not in step with Darnell being almost consistently In Motion from the time the Kill Shot was fired.
Maybe he intuited that she was telling a reporter or an FBI agent what she had seen and heard, realized that she had had an excellent view of the assassination, thought that what she was telling him might be kinda interesting, and decided to mosey on over to them and do a little simultaneous eavesdropping and filming?
How much time do you figure he spent with them, anyway?
An hour?
Two?
LOL
-- MWT ;)
-
Maybe he intuited that she was telling a reporter or an FBI agent what she had seen and heard, realized that she had had an excellent view of the assassination, thought that what she was telling him might be kinda interesting, and decided to mosey on over to them and do a little simultaneous eavesdropping and filming?
How much time do you figure he spent with them, anyway?
An hour?
Two?
LOL
-- MWT ;)
Has anyone Ever viewed the Entire Sitzman Interview or even Know with certainty how long it lasted? All we ever see is an extremely quick video snippet or still frame. Zapruder possibly being visible in Any portion of this Sitzman interview would impact his accepted timeline. This would include the timeline of Zapruder bumping into Harry McCormick.
-
Seriously, Iacoletti, have you always had as hard a time telling women from men as you're having with those three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film?
-- MWT ;)
Can you post the pictures again
Thanks
-
Can you post the pictures again
Thanks
Bill,
Which "pictures" are you referring to?
Iacoletti and I have argued about several people in a lot of photos, frames, and films.
Big, tall Gloria Calvery (and her three headscarf-wearing colleagues -- Karan Hicks, Carol Reed and Karen Westbrook -- to her immediate left in Zapruder) ?
Stella Mae Jacob, Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons by the Stemmons sign in Zapruder (Iacolett's and Westbrook's "... uh ... probably Carol Reed, definitely Gloria Calvery, and definitely me, Karen Westbrook!") ?
The three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film? (Stella Mae Jacob, Gloria Holt and Sharon Simmons, aka Iacoletti's "blobs" or "men wearing Bermuda shorts") ?
-- MWT ;)
PS He and I haven't argued about Jane Berry, Betty Thornton, and Peggy Burney (the original subjects of this thread) for the simple reason that I haven't been able to identify them yet!
One thing's for sure, though, they certainly aren't the women Robin Unger or Don Roberdeau mislabled several years ago (Hicks, Reed and Westbrook). LOL
-
Go to page 21 to see the photo he posted of some male models wearing Bermuda shorts.
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1780.200.html
And scroll down the first page of this thread to see the three people on the Pergola Patio he thinks might be dudes wearing Bermuda shorts:
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1303.0.html
-- MWT :D :D :D
-
I never said that your Towner blobs might be dudes wearing Bermuda shorts. You made that up.
Have the Russkies landed yet?
-
I never said that your Towner blobs might be dudes wearing Bermuda shorts. You made that up.
Iacoletti,
Why, then, did you post a photo of guys wearing Bermuda shorts on a thread in which you had already stated, in so many words, that the images of the three people on the Pergola Patio in the Towner film were so "blobish" that not only could it not be determined whether or not they were the three women standing by the Stemmons sign in Zapruder, but whether or not they were even women?
Of course you didn't outright say it. You're far too clever for that.
But you certainly insinuated it with that photo and, after I'd pointed out that it was a cool and blustery day in late November, another photo showing a guy wearing Bermuda shorts in the snow.
LOL
-- MWT ;)
-
Of course you didn't outright say it.
You're damn right I didn't.
I'm not going down your endless rabbit-holes of insinuations again. You cannot prove that the Towner blobs are who you want them to be. Period.
Let it go.
-
You're damn right I didn't.
I'm not going down your endless rabbit-holes of insinuations again. You cannot prove that the Towner blobs are who you want them to be.
Iacoletti,
The funny thing is that you, for some strange reason, don't even want them to be women.
Because if you were to admit that they're women, it would put even more pressure on you to admit that the one on the right is not only wearing a headscarf, but a headscarf the same color that your and Westbrook's "Westbrook" by the Stemmons sign in Zapruder is wearing.
And then you have the damn gall to claim it was I who posted those photos of those guys wearing Bermuda shorts?
LOL
-- MWT :D
PS The results on your poll are now 7 yes, 3 no (one of which was undoubtedly cast out of pure spite by my nemesis, "Mike" Clark), and one weasley undecided.
-
Enough of your lies! I didn't claim you posted any photos of guys wearing Bermuda shorts. Seriously Tommy, let it go. Trying to engage with your blatant dishonesty is futile.
-
Enough of your lies! I didn't claim you posted any photos of guys wearing Bermuda shorts. Seriously Tommy, let it go. Trying to engage with your blatant dishonesty is futile.
Iacoletti,
Fine. So now you're finally admitting that you posted them.
Why did you post them?
What point were you trying to make?
-- MWT :D
-
In order to put Darnell in position to film the Sitzman interview, You are being extremely liberal with your 10-15 Minutes after the Kill Shot time stamping of the Towner footage showing the Pergola. Your 10-15 minute time stamping does Not fit the time stamping Towner herself applied to her own footage. Also, I find it difficult to understand why a seasoned film journalist such as Darnell would elect to stand there and film a possible Sitzman Interview when he himself had No means to also record the accompanying Verbiage. All hell is unfolding around Darnell, yet he slams on the brakes and instead chooses to film what amounts to a Fractured Flicker interview? Highly, Highly, unlikely and simply Not in step with Darnell being almost consistently In Motion from the time the Kill Shot was fired.
Okay, 8-10 minutes for all three segments. Darnell/Sitzman-Towner-Darnell/3G.
Darnell stopped to film when he needed to.
Check out the scenes from Parkland, lots of people talking but few of them heard but at least the newsmen got something. That's what you did.
Do you see one of the three girls actually talking to the camerman as he filmed them? And you ask why he would do such a thing?
Darnell filming Sitzman tells me one thing for certain, what she was saying was newsworthy and probably something he'd remember and pass on to his studio. Get it?
Darnell was kicked out of the hotspot by the cops about 5-7 minutes after the HS along with most everyone else, as his scene behind the wall helps document.
He was right where he was supposed to be and stays there looking for leads. In less than ten minutes he probably has two witnesses on film saying that JFK was hit the head. Who else had that? If he told his studio that's what they said, then they know that's exactly what they said and then we'd know, when they played the footage.