Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
Pardon me, Mark, but this cannot be ignored. Tommy is wearing his disability on his sleeve. If TDS, vote fraud, antifa, or Biden era "lawfare" actually existed,
Tommy could be a true believer in all of them and still not be as divorced from reality as he is in his suspicion of you, quoted above!

Tommy, regardless your position on the influence of nature vs nurture,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture

....Mark has an unrivaled background, either way.
(Mark, I'll delete the text following this line, if you prefer....)

His grandma's obit, which I located, motivated by my own curiousity. In the more than the dozen years I have known Mark, I am confident I would
have had to pry out the details of what shaoed his development, if I had not established a starting point to question him.

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/143570513/katherine-m-mcandrew

Consider who Mark's grandma's two siblings were, as well as her son, Mark's uncle Bill. A hint... who did Garrison complain to the FCC was not willing
to grant him "equal time"?

Google AI
Google AI :
Mark's first cousin, uncle Bill's daughter.:

Mark was author Leo Damore's researcher. He attempted to talk some sense into Princeton educated psychologist, Peter Janney, son of the personnel director
of the CIA. Obviously Dr. Janney "knew what he knew," and was beyond Mark's fact supported counsel.
Yeah, cousin Mary got hit on the head by a rock thrown towards one of Mayor Daley’s finest.  Gave her some ‘street cred’ lol.  But making matters worse for me was running into Peter’s mom at Hillwood, where my wife was a volunteer. We talked mostly about what was happening underneath the sea, and why we should start there instead of spending so much money in outer space.
2
MTG-

I could never make heads or tails of the acoustics evidence, and have no idea what anyone is talking about. I heard the tape, and it is a series of clicks.

There are problems with every scenario. For example, if JFK was struck from the GK, why an "exit wound" in the right rear lower portion of his skull?

If JFK was struck from the front, how did bullets pass through the limo windshield? The HSCA sent a guy to look at the windshield, and he saw no through-and-through hole.

If JFK was only struck from the rear (my view, btw), why the "back and to the left" motion of JFK's head?

Why did the Connallys report no gunshot from the front?

The HSCA seemed satisfied JFK was struck from the rear, although having doubts about Baden is justified.

I strongly suspect the cadence of shots is what matters, which was too-rapid for a lone gunsel armed with a single-shot-per-bolt-action rifle.

The "Secret Service" man on the GK flashing a SS credentials at not one, but two, law enforcement officers...remains totally unexplained by the LNT'ers, or the WC, or the HSCA for that matter. That defies the imagination.


3
MTG--

Evidently I am more odious than you!

I am still banned from the EF-JFKA.

I like it here more anyway. I do wish, in both forums, participants would adopt a more collegial tone.
4
Just the opposite...I had recently finished Michael Collins Piper's book 'Final Judgment' when Tappy Wright came out with his claim that Jimi manager Michael Jeffery confessed to murdering Jimi...It was the Bahamian dirty money laundry offshore banks that made me realize the same pattern between Jimi's assassination and Kennedy's...When you follow the money those banks were of prime interest to the same CIA dirty money interests that influenced the Kennedy assassination...The fact Michael Jeffery was British Intelligence led to his knowledge of those banks and I suspect Jeffery wasn't stealing Jimi's money for himself but was following orders, instead, as part of an anti-communist black ops funding program...This would explain Jeffery's strange death in a mid-air plane collision where French Air Traffic Control was conveniently on strike...BCCI, Permindex - it is highly possible Jeffery was funneling Jimi's money in to those covert programs which explains the urgency to murder Jimi as well as Jeffery...

I'm the only person who realized the forensic evidence at Jimi's autopsy proved homicide when the correct timeline was inputted...I met Wecht and interviewed him on this...I'm also friends with the doctor who tried to save Jimi...This, of course, earns me elevated banning at The Education Forum - even though its is prime material and leads in the field...It strains credulity that CIA didn't know exactly what happened to Jimi and why...

Why, why, why would intelligence forces have wanted to murder Jimi Hendrix? I didn't see a credible motive in your reply. And why, why, why would the CIA have cared what happened to Jimi Hendrix?

Did you know that Hendrix was a veteran? He served in the Army before the Vietnam War got going. Did you know that Hendrix voiced support for our soldiers fighting in Vietnam?

The idea that Secret Team elements killed Hendrix strikes me as unbelievable as the claim that the Secret Team murdered John Lennon and Princess Diana.

5
Great news: Yesterday I received an email from the new lead moderator of the Education Forum (JFK Assassination Debate) advising me that my ban has been lifted and inviting me to resume posting in the forum. And, William Niederhut is no longer a moderator.

If you see a decrease in the frequency of my posts and replies, it will be because I have resumed posting in the Ed Forum. 
6
Your only counter-argument is that Baker should have seen Shelley and Lovelady ahead of him??
You seem to imagine that the first floor is a wide open, empty space.
It's nothing of the sort.
You also seem to imagine that everyone travelled in the same straight, diagonal line that led directly from the entrance of the first floor to the elevators. (What makes you think they travelled in a diagonal line anyway?)
I can't help it if you have no idea how cluttered this space was.
At least you've grasped the concept that Shelley and Lovelady could just move into this space while Baker and Truly were interacting in the lobby.
As I said, it's not a difficult concept to grasp.
Your counter-argument is really weak which is very telling.
You are having a problem visualising what is happening because you imagine the first floor to be empty. Once you grasp how cluttered it was it might become clear why Baker didn't see Shelley and Lovelady near the back of the first floor.



So, that's your main counter-argument dealt with.
What else do you have?

Also, why would Lovelady/Shelley want to go to the freight elevators and then just lay around there?


Lay around there?
What are you talking about?
What are you imagining?
That the first floor is this wide open, empty space with a few hammocks in it?
It's hard to discuss these issues with someone who can't grasp the basic realities of the situation.
What makes it even harder is that you never pay attention to what anyone else is posting.
Look back a few Replies and you'll see I posted this:

The question is - what were they up to?

What were they covering up?

What is there, towards the back of the first floor, that could be so important?


It has been demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that Shelley and Lovelady lied about their movements.
The lied to cover up their real movements.
They lied to cover up the fact that they immediately made their way towards the back of the first floor where they were seen by Adams and Baker.
That they lied is not up for debate.

My opinion is that Adams/Styles got their timeline screwed up.

The reason your opinion is wrong is because it is based solely on the lies of Shelley and Lovelady.

They literally have no reason to be there at that point in time. None.

You literally have no idea if that is true.
Just because you can't imagine what they are up to doesn't mean anything.
They were witnessed in that area approximately 50 - 60 seconds after the shooting. Just because it's not clear what they were doing there doesn't mean they weren't witnessed there. That would be a crazy way to look at things.

  Bump - cluttered freight elevator area
7
The TSBD front entrance door swings both ways so it was probably swung inwards if a lot of people were going in along with Baker.

There might be an issue with the front desk area by Truly office as a bottleneck because it required a part of the counter top to be swung open but I’m not certain if it was locked or not. Probably was not,  as Truly would be fumbling for a key.

None the less, it was closed when Truly got there and he had to open it so he and Baker could go thru. It’s in Truly WC testimony somewhere about them getting delayed at this countertop area by Trulys office.

This might explain the gap of time between Lovelady/Shelley seeing Adams and Styles going past the elevators while Truly/Baker did not.

   Based on the accepted timeline, Lovelady/Shelley have :35 to get back to the far corner/Stairwell on the TSBD 1st Floor. And Lovelady is Not even facing the TSBD at the beginning of this :35 second mark. If I am to accept they went through the TSBD front door, the timelines have to be reset/extended. I do Not believe we are seeing Officer Baker running across the Island at :20 Seconds after the kill shot. These timelines have been Quickened/Manipulated in order for Officer Baker to glimpse Oswald on the other side of the vestibule door leading into the 2nd Floor lunchroom.
8
The TSBD front entrance door swings both ways so it was probably swung inwards if a lot of people were going in along with Baker.

There might be an issue with the front desk area by Truly office as a bottleneck because it required a part of the counter top to be swung open but I’m not certain if it was locked or not. Probably was not,  as Truly would be fumbling for a key.

None the less, it was closed when Truly got there and he had to open it so he and Baker could go thru. It’s in Truly WC testimony somewhere about them getting delayed at this countertop area by Trulys office.

This might explain the gap of time between Lovelady/Shelley seeing Adams and Styles going past the elevators while Truly/Baker did not.

9
Frazier said he has never seen those documents before.  As for the rest, how about you wait and see?

You want to criticize me over "With Malice", yet you literally ran the other way when I challenged you to a live debate.  There are many podcasts and Youtube channels which would host such a thing.  In a live, real-time debate, I wouldn't be able to run off and use that book as a reference while you and the host hold for a few minutes.  Right?

And yes, we have known notarized Frazier signatures for comparison purposes.  Duh.

You're just going to have to wait and see.  Or you can act like a dickhead.

Frazier said he has never seen those documents before.  As for the rest, how about you wait and see?

And there it is. Frazier denied it and Billy doesn't like that.

You want to criticize me over "With Malice",

No... read the damned book as often as you like, just don't pretend it's "research"

In a live, real-time debate, I wouldn't be able to run off and use that book as a reference

I don't think you would need to use the book as a reference, as long as you can control the conversation. You have been dealing with this stuff for a great number of years and most likely have the details of your preferred narrative in your head, just like religious zealots can quote any part of the bible. Where it gets tricky is when you are confronted with different points of view that undercut what you are saying and for which you don't have an answer. History shows that rather than entering into an honest and open discussion and accepting that you might be wrong about some details, you will instantly start making up stuff and denials and that's where a live debate loses it's value and becomes a mere contest in which your ego will do anything to win. It has very little to do with the facts.

And yes, we have known notarized Frazier signatures for comparison purposes.  Duh.

That would be great, if it were true, but I seriously doubt it. But I could be wrong. Why don't you post just one of those signatures? Would be a perfect way to shut me up, right?

I have now blocked Martin Weidmann.  I've been a member here since 2008 and this is the first time I've blocked anyone.

If he somehow decides to take me up on my challenge to a debate (yeah right), could someone please let me know?  Thanks.

I have now blocked Martin Weidmann.

Insults didn't work, so now Billy is running.... Go figure!
10
I have now blocked Martin Weidmann.  I've been a member here since 2008 and this is the first time I've blocked anyone.

If he somehow decides to take me up on my challenge to a debate (yeah right), could someone please let me know?  Thanks.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10