Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11

Those same FBI interview statements as Robin shows here were what was shown to Carolyn Arnold who, upon seeing what FBI quoted her as saying, emphatically rejected it and told Earl Golz that FBI had altered her statement...We have to assume that if Sarah Stanton was speaking up at family gatherings, and repeating her witnessing of Oswald on the 2nd Floor staircase landing, that FBI committed another alteration in the case of Stanton's statement just like they did with Carolyn Arnold and many other witnesses...Sarah Stanton was very lucky to be alive considering what other witnesses were murdered for...No one ever went to Stanton and showed her her FBI statement like Golz did with Carolyn Arnold...But you can be sure that what drove Stanton to repeat her witnessing at family gatherings was her consternation over her witnessing never surfacing in coverage of the assassination...

If one were to accurately translate what Stanton said in this statement (instead of the distorted garbage Bart Kamp has flooded the internet with) you can see she told FBI in this statement that she was up behind Lovelady in the Prayer Man position...She confirmed this when she said she could not see the limousine at the time of the shots...If you look at Darnell, Prayer Man cannot see the limo at the time of the shots due to the west wall of the portal...The 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy finally confirmed this by showing Stanton's dress neckline on Prayer Man...In 2016 Chris Davidson's enhancement of the clear Wiegman frame also proved Prayer Man was Stanton...Davidson admitted he was friends with the Prayer Man people so he never supported his discovery...Stanton is faintly seen up behind Lovelady in Hughes...No effort was ever made to obtain and scan Hughes because the Prayer Man people knew what they would find...

Discussion of this evidence squarely belongs on The Education Forum according to its merit...It is being kept off the forum by a group of insiders who dominate the forum and control the administrator, moderators, and members...These people disallow discussion of the evidence that disproves Prayer Man by means of banning and defamation of those who can prove it - as well as false claims of rules violations...My discovery of Stanton's witnessing of Oswald waiting for Mrs Reid to clear out the Lunch Room is one of the most important discoveries in conspiracy research yet it is purposely kept from The Education Forum where it belongs without accountability by those who are censoring it...
12
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Who was at Parkland
« Last post by Louis Earl on Today at 07:06:17 PM »
Can someone point me to a list of the "Kennedy people" who were at Parkland?
Other than than security people, all I know of is Jackie, LBJ and Lady Bird, Gov. Connolly, Mrs. Connolly, Kilduff, O'Brien, O'Donnell and Powers. 
14


There are people out there straight-facedly saying Trump is unfairly accused...
15
The clique protects Prayer Man and corrupts JFK research...

Even Morley is afraid to elaborate...

Not one word about obtaining and scanning the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy...Instead we get Larry Schnapf pandering to the Prayer Man people and explaining why the Task Force is never going to try to get the 6th Floor copy...That is a direct serving of the Prayer Man groups' (Greg Parker) corruption of JFK research...The reason there is no discussion of the 6th Floor Museum Jones copy showing Sarah Stanton's dress neckline is because the hijacking clique on The Education Forum is completely aware that it proves Prayer Man is Sarah Stanton...The Luna Task Force could obtain the 6th Floor Museum 1st generation copy any time it desired only the Prayer Man people have reached their slimy octopus arm of corruption all they way to Congress via DiEugenio...Ask Andrew Iler how he defines that via the site rules...It isn't what you know it is who you know via the buddy buddy system that fraudulent forum operates under...

How honest is it for Mr Unger to bring the film that finally settled the Prayer Man issue to The Education Forum and not discuss or show its most important aspect?...

The reason there is no participation in Robin's thread over there on the EF is because they know it shows Stanton's dress neckline and they are intentionally de-populating the subject in order to avoid the Prayer Man head-hunters...
16
As I suspected...you lack the backbone to answer the incredibly simple yes/no question that forms the basis of this thread. The thread specifically created to deal with this subject - the ridiculous claims of those who believe Rowland invented a man with a rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD building and, by some miracle, happened to be right.

I understand why you won't just come out and answer a simple yes or no.
You won't do it because of how ridiculous it would make you look...and even you have your limits.

And I will debate you about any aspect of this anytime. As I say, watching you fall apart never gets old.

What I think is immaterial.

This is the truest thing you have ever posted.

Dan O’Meara:
I had to start this thread in response to something a Nutter posted on another thread insinuating that Arnold Rowland made up seeing the man with the rifle on the 6th floor of the TSBD building.
Of all the crazy things the Warren Commission has forced Nutters to believe this has to be right up there.

Who posted it? Why so vague?

Every thread subject is a debate. You do not seem to know that. It is in the heading. Maybe that is why you do so poorly at it. You don't realize where you are at.

You are currently posting on this site.

JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate


Here I will read it to you. ...AND DEBATE.
17
Your entire article is nothing more than a litany of excuses for dismissing all that damning evidence against Oswald. If your excuses carried any weight, you should be able to put together a plausible alternative narrative that takes into account all that evidence including your pathetic excuses. We both know that no such plausible alternative narrative is possible or somebody would have come up with one by now. It's been almost 63 years since the assassination and no one has come close to developing a scenario that explains the entire body of evidence. CTs are in the business of explaining away the evidence as your article demonstrates.

Uh-huh. You bet. IOW, your scenario has been debunked by physical evidence, by scientific evidence, by rifle tests, by reenactments, and by numerous released documents, but it must still be true because no one has presented an alternative scenario that you are willing to accept. That's what you're saying.

How about if you write an article that responds to the points and evidence presented in my article? Hey? Oh, but in order to do that, you'd have to actually read my article.
18
For those who might be interested, I have uploaded a substantially revised and expanded version of my article "Faulty Evidence: Problems with the Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald.".

The new edition examines the following subjects:

-- Oswald and the alleged murder weapon.

-- The ordering of the alleged murder weapon.

-- The paper bag, the blanket, and the fingerprints on some of the boxes near the sixth-floor window.

-- The shirt fibers found on the Carcano rifle.

-- The trigger-guard fingerprints and the dubious claim of Scalice and Powdrill that they are Oswald's prints.

-- The suspicious latent palm print that Lt. Day belatedly claimed he saw and lifted.

-- The alleged ballistic evidence, especially CE 543 (the dented shell).

-- Scientific evidence that Oswald did not shoot JFK.

-- The disclosure of the results of the NAA testing of the paraffin cast made of Oswald's right cheek.

-- PSE polygraph analysis of Oswald's declarations of innocence, and a response to DeGrilla's misleading attack on the PSE evidence.

-- Indications of fraud in the backyard rifle photos.

-- Oswald's marksmanship in the Marine Corps.

-- What Oswald's former Marine colleagues and fellow Minsk gun club members said about his shooting ability (that he was a "poor" and "extremely poor" shot).

-- The alleged lone-gunman shooting feat and the rifle tests done by the WC, CBS, and the HSCA.

-- Oswald's whereabouts before, during, and immediately after the shooting.

-- Witnesses and the police lineups.

-- Howard Brennan.

-- Prayer Man.

-- The single-bullet theory (SBT).

-- Guinn's NAA and the SBT.

-- Problems with the case against Oswald in the Tippit shooting.

-- The wedding ring and cash allegedly left on Marina Oswald’s nightstand on the morning of the assassination.

-- Oswald's post-assassination actions from 12:30 to 1:15.

-- The claim that Oswald snuck into the Texas Theatre without paying.

-- The arrest of Oswald in the Texas Theatre.

-- The Robert Baer team's research.

-- Howard Donahue's research.

Your entire article is nothing more than a litany of excuses for dismissing all that damning evidence against Oswald. If your excuses carried any weight, you should be able to put together a plausible alternative narrative that takes into account all that evidence including your pathetic excuses. We both know that no such plausible alternative narrative is possible or somebody would have come up with one by now. It's been almost 63 years since the assassination and no one has come close to developing a scenario that explains the entire body of evidence. CTs are in the business of explaining away the evidence as your article demonstrates.
19
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 03:30:14 PM »
I made a typo error. I meant Z223. We agree that JFK and JC are reacting to same bullet. Yes I like the Z223 as a 1st shot hit followed  4.8 sec later for 2nd shot at Z312, then a 2.5 sec 3rd shot that was not aimed but just a final “exclamation” shot which a kook like Oswald might have done. ( he kept the rifle sticking out several seconds after Z313 such that Bob Jackson and Malcolm Couch spotted it and saw it “slowly withdrawn” as though the gunman was enjoying watching the pandemonium reactions of the crowd.

Oswald apparently was considering a fourth shot because he chambered his last round. Just as apparent is he decided it wasn't necessary. The evidence for a shot following the headshot is as thin as gruel.
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10