Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1

OK, let's discuss and debate. I think BRW had no reason to lie and neither did Jarman and Norman. I have posted my opinion on the subject already. The totality of all the statements of the Three Amigos (sounds much better than The Three Stooges) were covered in their testimonies before the Commission. I think relying on Arnold Rowland's testimony is foolish. I agree with your following statement "Williams went to the 6th floor to eat his lunch and watch the motorcade prior to joining Jarman and Norman on the 5th floor on the day of the assassination. Agree or disagree?" I won't be able to fully engage until Thursday night at the earliest as I have some commitments.

Thanks Oscar. What about the first statement? Was Williams handwritten first day statement consistent with what Jarman and Norman indicated prior to their appearances before the WC? Does it indicate that he went downstairs for lunch then went up with them to the fifth floor just before the assassination? Yes or no?
2
So what if he was there?

If-if-if......

Lame.

 :D
3
General Discussion & Debate / Re: Did Oswald Go To Mexico City?
« Last post by Oscar Navarro on Today at 12:36:43 AM »
Oswald was never in Mexico City.

The uber erudite David Joseph's has long proved that already.

Anything else on Oswald and Mexico City is pure supposition  piled upon "what-if's" and therefore a complete waste of time.

I would suggest viewing that Oswald/Mexico City thread on the Education Forum along with all of David Josephs' hard work and input on this subject and put this ersatz "debate" about Oswald being there to bed already.

Try as you might, you will NEVER be able to put Oswald there, simply because he wasn't. To drag it on is a mere exercise in typing, period.

As a challenge, I defy ANYONE to produce a photograph, ANY photograph of Oswald in Mexico City....just one.    Walk:

See Replies #15 and #18
4
General Discussion & Debate / Re: Theory-In-Progress
« Last post by Johnny Dolan on Today at 12:36:35 AM »
Could? If? Maybe? Suppose?

Anything of substance here?

Didn't think so.

 Walk:
5
Thomas G Buchanan, 1964 book. Read it and learn something?

Another ALT fringe JFK theory.

Not worth wasting another keystroke on.

 ::)
6
General Discussion & Debate / Re: Lack Of Damage To CE-399
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 12:35:22 AM »


Does that look like the shape of a bullet?
No. But it is smaller than the length of the bullet. So it could be from a yawing bullet but not a sideways impact. In the case of CE399 which is 2.8 cm long, in order to make a 3 cm wound BC's back wound due to tumbling it would have to hit side-on.
Quote
I'm sorry but I don't see where you get 3 cm from. Yes, the Cosine of 75 is 0.25. Well, closer to 0.26 really. How are you applying that to get 3 cm?
A pristine bullet striking at an angle x to the perpendicular to the surface will make an elliptical entrance wound whose length to width is in proportion to:1/cos x.  The wound was described as roughly 1.5 cm long. If the width was .75cm it was roughly twice as long as the width so it could be made by a bullet striking at an angle of 60 degrees. 3 cm is 4 times the width which makes the angle cos -1(.25) = 75 deg.  If we had accurate measurements we could be more accurate in the angle.

Quote
Sturdivan doesn't need to explain it. The above photo speaks for itself.  Also, "elliptical" and "ovoid" are synonymous with one another.

Synonyms for ovoid
Synonyms

elliptical (or elliptic), oval, ovate
An egg shape or ovoid shape is not symmetrical. An ellipse is.  If you don't care about being accurate you can use them any way you want. If you want to say that an egg is an ellipsoid or a sphere go ahead. But it is incorrect.
7
KGB did it canard again? LOL

I suggest the originator of this thread read Thomas G Buchanan's book about this.

What another *waste of time* thread.

I mean who buys into this refuse?

"No, said the wise man"

 :'(
8
General Discussion & Debate / Re: What happened to the Mauser?
« Last post by Tim Nickerson on Today at 12:30:53 AM »

            Nice of you to change your previous declaration of, "Never received ANY Damage" to, "Never received Any NOTICEABLE Damage". Why not just admit you got carried away and move on?

What is the difference? If it's not noticeable then how can one say it's been damaged?
9
General Discussion & Debate / Re: Name your shooter
« Last post by Colin Crow on Today at 12:30:31 AM »


for Bill.....have a laugh
10
General Discussion & Debate / Re: Did Oswald Go To Mexico City?
« Last post by Johnny Dolan on Today at 12:29:42 AM »
Oswald was never in Mexico City.

The uber erudite David Joseph's has long proved that already.

Anything else on Oswald and Mexico City is pure supposition  piled upon "what-if's" and therefore a complete waste of time.

I would suggest viewing that Oswald/Mexico City thread on the Education Forum along with all of David Josephs' hard work and input on this subject and put this ersatz "debate" about Oswald being there to bed already.

Try as you might, you will NEVER be able to put Oswald there, simply because he wasn't. To drag it on is a mere exercise in typing, period.

As a challenge, I defy ANYONE to produce a photograph, ANY photograph of Oswald in Mexico City....just one.    Walk:
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10