Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 08:00:55 PM »
Quote from: Andrew Mason on Today at 06:16:53 PM
One has to understand how to assess probabilities of independent events. The probability that 25 would independently imagine seeing the same thing, which did not occur, while none would report what actually did occur, is effectively zero.

Was Hickey barfing, or picking up some litter?

Trying to retrieve a nickel he'd dropped?

Was Bennett leaning over to his right while looking straight ahead because he had a boil on his ass?

Was Roy Kellerman turned far to his right in the Croft photo because he was keepin' an eye on them Black "terrorists"?

Did Rosemary Willis turn her head towards the TSBD because she was hoping to catch a glimpse of LBJ and Lady Bird?

Was Connally's head turned so far to his right at Z-180 because the pretty gal JFK was waving to had caught his eye, too?

Did Jackie turn her head far to her left and have a concerned look on her face in the Z-161 Robert Croft photo because she was worried that he was using the wrong speed film?

2
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Why Altgens 6 Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 07:57:58 PM »
Quote from: Royell Storing on Today at 06:32:19 PM
The CIA altering Oswald's work shirt into a dress neckline is Cinque worthy. You're Not doing your cause any favors with these wild claims.

Dear Stormtrooper Storing,

I think you've got it backwards.

Doyle's saying Larsen claimed that the evil, evil, evil CIA made the Oswald figure look like a woman.

Are you saying that's what the evil, evil, evil CIA did?

-- Tom
3
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Did Bart Kamp Create The Lovelady Image?
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 07:51:00 PM »
Quote from: Royell Storing on Today at 06:38:29 PM
So are you NOW claiming that these 2 women sprinting up the sidewalk are in the Wiegman Film? That we just can Not see them? Is that your new wrinkle? This is what happens when you Fail to thoroughly think through your claim. It requires patching. Again, you need to CHANGE THE TIMELINES.

Dear Stormtrooper Storing,

That's not what Doyle's saying.

He's saying that from their locations on the north side of Elm Street during the motorcade, Calvery and Reed were close enough to the TSBD steps to be able to get there about five seconds before Darnell "captured" them there. In other words, if Darnell had started filming the steps about five seconds earlier, he would have "captured" Calvery's telling Shelley and Lovelady that JFK had been hit.

-- Tom
4
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 07:20:41 PM »
Quote from: John Corbett on Today at 12:47:43 PM
There is no definitive proof as to why JFK turned his head [quickly and briefly to his left at Z-143].

If JFK turned his head at Z-143 in response to Oswald's first, missing-everything, shot, would you expect there to be "definitive proof" of it?

Quote
What I do know is after the first shot, he resumed waving to the spectators on the north side of Elm St. as if nothing was wrong. I seriously doubt that would have been his reaction if he had recognized the sound as a gunshot as JBC did.

JFK evidently he didn't recognize the sound as a rifle shot.

He wasn't the only person in the limo who didn't recognize it as a rifle shot.

Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman said it sounded like a firecracker.

Regarding JFK's waving to the people on his right, maybe he was just returning their waves. Maybe they were smiling at him and cheering, so he figured, "It must have been just another firecracker, or a motorcycle backfire."

Quote
My guess is the roar of the accelerating motorcycle escort muffled the sound of the first shot.

Good point.

Quote
The people who showed the least amount of reaction to the first shot are those closest to the motorcycles. That would be Jack, Jackie, and the agents in the Queen Mary.

I assume that by "the first shot," you mean your first shot at Z-145 or whatever?

Jack and Jackie didn't exactly jump out of the limo and start flopping around on the grass, but they did turn their heads at Z-143 -- Jack quickly, and Jackie in an accelerating manner.

Jack Ready, Glen Bennett, and George Hickey in the Secret Service follow-up car all consciously reacted between Z-140 and Z-150.

Conscious reactions to the sounds of an unexpected nearby gunshot typically occur about a second after the shot.
5
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Oswald In Helsinki
« Last post by Tom Scully on Today at 07:13:36 PM »
Quote from: Benjamin Cole on Today at 01:40:54 AM
Interesting tidbit on LHO first crossing the border into Russia:

"There is also a curious snippet from a man named Bill Trousdale, who happened to share a train from Helsinki into Russia with LHO. Fellow Americans, the pair bantered a bit on the train.

According to JFK Facts, “Trousdale saw Oswald get special treatment from the Russian border guards: “At the border my bags were given pretty thorough going over,” Trousdale wrote, “but they scarcely looked at Lee’s.’”

Was LHO already a de facto KGB asset, and waved through the Russian border?

Some have posited LHO may have been working for CIA'er Bruce Solie, who is further posited to have been a KGB asset.
That is an interesting CT on JFKA-world.

So...how long did LHO remain a KGB asset? Was LHO a witting KGB asset? Did the KGB "lay off" LHO onto G2 or DGI??

Why was LBJ so concerned about LHO-Havana connections?

At least since 2018, Trousdale's claims were public, four or five years before Finland's SUPO released a rail passenger manifest
supporting/confirming Trousdale's recollection.

Quote
https://www.scholarlyroadsideservice.com/blog_entry/travels-with-harvey
Travels with Harvey - scholarlyroadsideservice.com
Feb 15, 2018 · But that evening Alexis and I went on line and confirmed most of the details in stories about Oswald’s travels. All that is left is to see Bill’s diary itself. Roll the clock forward three months …

September, 2023

https://yle.fi/a/74-20064205

And...

substack.com
https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/the-finland-file-how-did-oswald-get
The Finland File: Asked How Did Oswald Get to Helsinki?
Jan 6, 2025 · The file contained a passenger manifest of the train that Oswald took on his way to the Soviet Union, which revealed there was another American …
6
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: JFK's Throat Wound Was an Entrance Wound: Refuting the Shored-Wound Theory
« Last post by Michael T. Griffith on Today at 07:12:45 PM »
Dr. Joseph Dolce was never called to testify to the Warren Commission (WC), even though he was one of the WC's wound ballistics consultants and was the Army's most knowledgeable expert on wound ballistics at the time. Dr. Dolce was a battlefield surgeon in the Pacific, so, needless to say, he had dealt with hundreds of gunshot victims. In 1964, he was the chairman of the Army's Wound Ballistics Board. Dr. Dolce's experience and expertise were so highly regarded that if a VIP or member of Congress were injured, Dr. Dolce was asked to review the case. He had much more experience than the WC's two other wound ballistics consultants, Dr. Alfred Olivier and Dr. Arthur Dziemian. WC staff attorney Arlen Specter never arranged for Dr. Dolce to testify because Dolce had already told him that the single-bullet theory (SBT) was "impossible" and that the wound ballistics test proved this. Michael Green explains:

When Dr. Dolce informed the WC that the tests proved the SBT was "impossible," they ignored him and began to rely on the more compliant and less qualified Olivier and Dziemian. That's why Olivier and Dziemian were asked to testify but Dolce was not. 

Because it was impossible to avoid consulting him on the matter of CE 399 after the autopsy report had been completed, Joseph Dolce, M.D., was part of a staff conference April 21, 1964, chaired by WC counsel Melvin Eisenberg and attended by Dr. Alfred Olivier, chief of the Wound Ballistics Branch of the Biophysics Division at Edgewood Arsenal, Maryland; Dr. F. L. Light of the Wound Assessment Branch at Edgewood Arsenal; Drs. Charles Gregory and Robert Shaw from Parkland Hospital; and later in the conference, Governor John Connally and his wife, J. Lee Rankin, and Warren Commission member John J. McCloy.

Dr. Dolce told the Commission personnel emphatically that it was impossible for CE 399 to have made those wounds. The Commission lawyers and staff tried to muscle him into changing his professional opinion, but he refused, so he was never called as a witness and the test findings were distorted and suppressed.

Dolce advised Chip Selby in 1986,

“The disturbing feature at this conference was that the lawyer [Specter] says, ‘Now Doctor, we want you to tell us exactly how this bullet traveled, the velocity traveled, the velocity lost during the period of travel. And why it came out as a pristine bullet, unmarked bullet.’ I said, ‘Sorry, it doesn’t happen that way. This bullet should have been deformed.’ … they wanted this [CE 399] to be the bullet that caused all of the damage and I did not go along with that". . . .

In fact, after Dr. Dolce told the Commission principals that “This is impossible. It doesn’t work that way,” his group was told to conduct tests at the Edgewood Arsenal using Oswald’s alleged rifle. Dr. Dolce told Selby “that our experiments have shown beyond any doubt, that merely shooting the wrist deformed the bullet drastically [even without it also smashing a rib]. . . in every instance [of 10 bullets] the front, or the tip of the bullet, was smashed. This was not so with [with CE 399]. They did not accept this.” (Harold Weisberg, Never Again, pp.298-299) (Green, "Besmirching History: Vincent Bugliosi Assassinates Kennedy Again -- The Military and Warren Commission Cover-up," https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Besmirching_History.html#ref4)

Green continues by discussing the fraud that Specter committed in leading Olivier through his testimony, and that even then Olivier provided some damaging information:

Instead of Dr. Dolce, Arlen Specter called as his expert witness Alfred G. Olivier, D.V.M, and a supervisory research veterinarian at Edgewood Arsenal. Specter had Dr. Olivier compare CE 399 with a test bullet, CE 853, which was fired through a goat, x-rays of which showed a broken rib. I note that Specter fails to establish that CE 853 broke the rib shown in the x-ray of the goat only because he immediately engages in two other forensic frauds. The first fraud is to have Olivier compare a bullet that testimony implies broke a goat rib with a bullet that allegedly broke both a rib and a radius as though that were a relevant comparison. Even so, Olivier testified that CE 853 was much more badly damaged than CE 399, and was “quite flattened throughout [its entire length, with] lead core extruding somewhat from the rear.” The extruded core looked like a nipple at the base of the bullet. By contrast, Dr. Olivier noted that CE 399 showed only “a suggestion of flattening” and only at its base. The FBI concealed how much more badly damaged CE 853 was by photographing it only along its side, with the flattening symmetrically distributed along its axis so that no damage can be observed. Dr. Olivier testified of CE 399, “Also, the lead core has extruded from the rear in the same fashion, and it appears that some of it has even broken from the rear” (5H80).

Arlen Specter’s second fraud, with Dr. Olivier’s complicity, is to pretend that the base of CE 399 has been damaged. The “extrusion” and the part “broken from the rear” is merely the divot that the FBI cut out to perform its analysis of the bullet core. No forensic expert could testify about a bullet that is the basis for comparison for all its tests and not know that the FBI cut a tiny nick from the tip and a substantial divot from the base for its tests. The divot is visible in the National Archives photo of CE 399 above, and a very clear photo of the divot will be given later in this essay. FBI agent Robert Frazier testified that visual inspection of CE 399 did not demonstrate loss of material from the base. Henry Hurt’s Reasonable Doubt, 1985, provides a pre-divot photograph of CE 399 without extrusion or loss of material, which is one of many reasons why the honest Dr. Dolce stated that the Edgewood Arsenal tests proved it could not have smashed both rib and wrist bones.

Specter and Dr. Olivier address the capacity of a single bullet to cause all the damage done to Kennedy and Connally, and they address a possible bullet flight pattern. In between we see a bullet that shattered a radius bone, and it is “very severely flattened on the end,” looking like a cigarette stubbed out hard in a glass ashtray (5H82, see also CE 856). Specter leads Olivier to testify that CE 399 was “capable” of producing all the wounds – but in that context they ignore whether breaking the bones would leave CE 399 so little blemished (5H90).

Specter never asks the obvious:

“Dr. Olivier, is CE 853 the bullet that broke the goat’s rib shown in this x-ray?”

“How many times did you have to fire bullets through goats’ ribs to obtain a bullet so little damaged as CE 853?”

“Did you ever break a goat’s rib with a bullet that was as little damaged from the impact as CE 399?”

“Dr. Olivier, let us put aside the pretense that the FBI divot was actual damage to CE 399. Even assuming it were possible that CE 399 had been so considerably less damaged after breaking Governor Connally’s rib than CE 853 was after breaking the goat’s rib, would you expect its going on to shatter a radius bone to leave it no more deformed?”

Neither Specter nor Olivier ever alluded to the other nine bullets from the Edgewood Arsenal tests that were grossly deformed from smashing only a radius bone. ("Besmirching History: Vincent Bugliosi Assassinates Kennedy Again -- The Military and Warren Commission Cover-up," https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Essay_-_Besmirching_History.html#ref4)


7
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Did Bart Kamp Create The Lovelady Image?
« Last post by Royell Storing on Today at 06:38:29 PM »
Quote from: Brian Doyle on Today at 04:22:45 PM
1)  I don't need to show Calvery & Reed in Wiegman because the logic of locating both of them in Zapruder and Couch/Darnell trumps any other excuse-making claims...Film evidence that you can see with your own eyes trumps all other disingenuous, inferior claims and dispenses with the need to regress to them...Those making such regressive arguments can be legitimately dismissed and considered as losing their arguments and not answering to the better evidence...They are not to be taken seriously...

2)   Wiegman, as he runs down to the motorcade spectators, is a blurry mess with the camera being swung back and forth...It is not really honest to contend the running women could be seen in that clip...

   So are you NOW claiming that these 2 women sprinting up the sidewalk are in the Wiegman Film? That we just can Not see them? Is that your new wrinkle? This is what happens when you Fail to thoroughly think through your claim. It requires patching. Again, you need to CHANGE THE TIMELINES.
8
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Why Altgens 6 Refutes the Lone-Gunman Theory
« Last post by Royell Storing on Today at 06:32:19 PM »
Quote from: Brian Doyle on Today at 03:47:35 PM
The saddest little man was Sandy Larsen who abused his moderator power to bail out the Prayer Man people with the lie that the clearly-seen dress neckline on Prayer Man in the 6th Floor Museum copy was a CIA forgery designed to conceal Oswald's work shirt collar...

Something the reformed new administration at The Education Forum won't allow any review of lest people realize they are an incestuous den of bogus evidence-intimidating crooks...

I'm sure Larsen, if he were still alive, would enthusiastically back the put-people-on-ignore missive by administrator Iler...

   The CIA altering Oswald's work shirt into a dress neckline is Cinque worthy. You're Not doing your cause any favors with these wild claims.
9
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 06:16:53 PM »
Quote from: Tom Graves on Today at 06:05:35 AM
"Evidence," my you-know-what.

The first shot at "Z-124" sounded different from the other two, probably because the muzzle of Oswald's short-rifle was inside the building for the steeply-downward-angled shot when he fired it.

A lot of people thought it was just another motorcycle backfire, or a firecracker, or even a tire blowout. That, and the fact that Dealy Plaza is an echo chamber, threw off a lot of people. Unfortunately, eighty of them provided their mistaken opinions.
One has to understand how to assess probabilities of independent events. The probability that 25 would independently imagine seeing the same thing, which did not occur, while none would report what actually did occur, is effectively zero.

Quote
Is English your second language?
Yes. Have you considered remedial reading classes? They may help.
10
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 05:57:56 PM »
Quote from: Zeon Mason on Today at 05:36:57 PM
My Bing AI says that a motorcycle backfire can be as high as 100 decibels while rifles from .223 up to 30.06 and .308 caliber are generally about 170 decibels.

Therefore should not Brehm the combat veteran at least have been able to distinguish the difference in sound level of a 100 db motorcycle backfire and a 170db rifle blast?

He seems he should have but obviously he didn't. Why is anybody's guess. Have you ever had the experience of trying to get someone's attention and they don't seem to hear you because their attention is fixated on something else? I have. Many times. I've screamed at someone at the top of my voice and they seem not to hear me even though I knew I had yelled plenty loud enough. I'm sure the sound of my voice reached their ears but not their brains. It can be frustrating as hell but it does happen.

In Dealey Plaza we had lots of spectators probably seeing a POTUS as well as his beautiful first lady for the first time in their lives. I don't doubt that 100% of their focus was on the two people riding in the rear seat of the limo. I can easily understand why some did not recognize the first shot for what it was. With the Secret Service agents, it could be something similar. Of course this wasn't their first rodeo, but their attention would naturally be on the spectators. That combined with the roar of the motorcycles right off the front bumper of the follow up car may have prevented some of them from recognizing the first shot. 
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10