Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
21
   Just my own personal experience, but I have seen several CRACKED Windshields. I Never initially thought I was looking at a windshield with a HOLE in it. Never. If someone connected to law enforcement claimed that on 11/22/63 that they saw the JFK Limo windshield with a HOLE in it, "big enough to put a pencil through it", I believe that law enforcement official.

When you saw those cracked windshield, did you have knowledge that somebody in the car had just been shot? If you did and you weren't in position to get a close-up view of the crack, I think you would have had a very different judgement. The human mind is subject to suggestion and the sight of a cracked windshield combined with the knowledge that JFK had just been shot would very much influence how those witnesses assessed what they were seeing.
Quote

    There are plenty of images of the JFK Limo sitting at Parkland Hospital with the Limo Trunk CLOSED and no top on the car. These images would therefore be before the trunk was opened and the Limo Top extracted, etc. These images would be FRESH Images of the car. These images show the JFK Limo from the rear toward Parkland Hospital. These images clearly show the inside of the windshield. These images are clear enough to show the 2 Doors on Parkland Hospital that FACED the JFK Limo. These images even show Wiegman on the (R) as he began to approach the JFK Limo with his camera at his face. These are extremely clear images. These are EARLY ON IMAGES of the JFK Limo. It would Not be difficult to Zoom in on the inside of the Limo windshield and examine the alleged Hole/Crack. This Limo "windshield" issue should have been put-to-bed long ago. Maybe it was?

The limo windshield issue should have been resolved a long time ago by the Secret Service's close up examination of the windshield which revealed a strike to the inside surface of the windshield and no penetration through the windshield.
22
The people who claimed there was a bullet hole THROUGH the windshield never got close enough to closely examine it. It's not at all surprising that seeing the crack created by a fragment of the headshot would cause people to believe a shot was fired through the windshield, especially since at the time, none of those people would have had any idea where the shooter had fired from. The Secret Service was able to closely examine the crack and determined the windshield was struck from the inside and the missile had not passed through the windshield. It remained inside the limo.

   Just my own personal experience, but I have seen several CRACKED Windshields. I Never initially thought I was looking at a windshield with a HOLE in it. Never. If someone connected to law enforcement claimed that on 11/22/63 that they saw the JFK Limo windshield with a HOLE in it, "big enough to put a pencil through it", I believe that law enforcement official.
    There are plenty of images of the JFK Limo sitting at Parkland Hospital with the Limo Trunk CLOSED and no top on the car. These images would therefore be before the trunk was opened and the Limo Top extracted, etc. These images would be FRESH Images of the car. These images show the JFK Limo from the rear toward Parkland Hospital. These images clearly show the inside of the windshield. These images are clear enough to show the 2 Doors on Parkland Hospital that FACED the JFK Limo. These images even show Wiegman on the (R) as he began to approach the JFK Limo with his camera at his face. These are extremely clear images. These are EARLY ON IMAGES of the JFK Limo. It would Not be difficult to Zoom in on the inside of the Limo windshield and examine the alleged Hole/Crack. This Limo "windshield" issue should have been put-to-bed long ago. Maybe it was?   
23
TS-

I did not say I thought Trump was innocent of all the allegations against him, or that I admire Trump.

I don't have TDS.

Trump is Trump. Not my cup of tea, but Trump was elected by the American people, he imposed rule of law on our borders, and he may yet take down the IRGC.

Trump appears vainglorious, to put it mildly, and has a short attention span. 

But that is the last I will say about this off-topic.

There is a place in this forum for the red-blue pissing wars, but not here.

If you dislike Trump, fine by me.






24
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Oswald In Helsinki
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 07:45:00 AM »
[...]

John M. Newman says in his 2022 book, Uncovering Popov's Mole, that Bruce Solie, James Angleton's confidant, mentor, and mole-hunting superior in the Office of Security, was a KGB "mole," and that he betrayed CIA's spy, GRU Lt. Col. Pyotr Popov, to Yuri Nosenko's ostensible boss, Vladislav Kovshuk, in Washington, D.C., movie houses in January 1957.

He says that when Popov's handler in West Berlin, Russia-born (probable mole, imho) George Kisevalter, sent a cable to CIA headquarters in April 1958 saying that Popov told him that he'd overheard a drunken GRU colonel boast at a New Year's Eve party that the Kremlin had all of the specifications of the U-2 spy plane, Solie decided to send Oswald to Moscow as an ostensible "dangle" in a (unbeknownst to Angleton and Oswald) planned-to-fail hunt for "Popov's U-2 Mole" (Solie) in the wrong part of the CIA -- the Soviet Russia Division.

Which mole hunt lasted nine years, protected Solie from being uncovered, tore the Soviet Russia Division apart, and drove Angleton nuts.

We know that in the interest of "source protection," Popov wasn't secretly arrested and "played back" against the CIA until November 1958, and that he was publicly arrested on 16 October 1959, the same day that Oswald arrived in Moscow.

https://archive.org/details/SpyWarsMolesMysteriesAndDeadlyGames
25
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Oswald In Helsinki
« Last post by Tom Scully on Today at 07:10:43 AM »
I've merely pointed out how you mischaracterized Rankin's words and the absurdity of anyone needing to expedite Oswald's visa

Mischaracterized Rankin's words?
I was the one who posted Rankin's words. Not you.
Just because I misquoted what I'd already posted you jumped on it because you had nothing else. No argument, No evidence.
That's all you had to troll the discussion with.
Zero contribution. Just trolling.

And you pointed out the absurdity of anyone needing to expedite Oswald's visa??
But Oswald's visa WAS EXPEDITED!
It was done in 24 hours!
What don't you understand about things being expedited?
The only thing "absurd" is your presence on this forum.

In response, I've gotten a blizzard of insults and rants.

Stop playing the victim.
You're nothing but a troll.
If you want respect do something worthy of it.

The CIA, according to the WC Report, was silent on the question of which flight Oswald embarked from to arrive in Helsinki
at a time of day that would fit the post arrival narrative. A cost of $111.90 is listed on pg. 257 of the WueCR with no accompanying supporting info.
Two flights from Paris with one intermediate stop was information not volunteered by the CIA, despite offering no support for a London flight
beyond departure time and unsupported cost. No flight manifests were reported to be found.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0141a.htm.


Kat Ford reported to the FBI that Marina said she first met her future husband after he arrived in Moscow to represent his employer at the Science Fair.
Marina explained why she had an address of a building associated with a residence of Robert E Webster in Leningrad, if memory serves me.

In 1965, Nixon hope to suddenly show up with his lawyer on the doorstep of by then retired Khrushchev, but reportedly could not find him  The after the fact reporting claimed the group obtained visas in Helsinki in as few as three hours.
 
In the early 1980's the name of the lawyer was linked in a Washington Post article, if I recall the , 19809accurately, to the boyhood town of Tampico in Illinois in which
the two had first met. The population was 600 in 1911 and the lawyer's father was the grocer.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170828135015/https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1980/07/15/the-republicans-in-detroit/a1b4b68b-2673-4b6c-b86c-ecac9147f3e0/?utm_term=.550271ac570d
THE REPUBLICANS IN DETROIT
July 15, 1980

I have a copy of the wedding announcement,, circa 1949, stating that the lawyer's best man
was his former OSS advanced weapons development team member, Jim Rand, who happened to be
the employer who sent Robert Webster to that 1959 Moscow Science exhibition where Webster defected to the Soviet Union from.

That same lawyer was assigned a large role in the October Surprise investigation and its mysteries. He died of cancer about 1984 before
that investigation fully ramped up, leaving his longtime employee, Roy Furmark and Bill Casey's assistant, Robert Gates, questioned after Casey had also
suddenly died, holding the bag, so to speak. Gates did such a poor job answering congressional inquiry questions that he could not be advanced as
planned, to receive senate committee approval for his nomination for DCI.

in the early 1980s a Harvard graduate who in 1959 had been a 29 year old PhD Archeology candidate, came across and reread a journal he had been
keeping during a train trip to Helsinki in which he had written the name of his young berth mate of several days on the train. He had completely
forgotten until then that the name of his travel companion he had written in that journal was Harvey Oswald. About 40 years later the Finnish government
released details that supported the man's claims. He the name of that man as #6 and Oswald's just below it as #7.

His recent obit includes a papragraph describing that encounter,
https://onlinedigeditions.com/article/In+Memoriam%3A+William+B.+Trousdale/5078414/857731/article.html

This is attributed to well known US researcher Weberman who allegedly received it from a Finnish researcher who sent it to him.



Quote
https://www.nytimes.com/1965/04/11/archives/nixon-back-in-moscow-debates-again-issue-of-kennedys-slaying-raised.html
April 11, 1965
Nixon, Back in Moscow, Debates Again; Issue of Kennedy's Slaying Raised by University Aide
".... Mr. Nixon arrived this morning as a private tourist with a group of American and Canadian businessmen with whom he had visited Helsinki on business. His trip to Moscow was decided upon on the spur of the moment Thursday after the group had completed its business in the Finnish capital with unexpected speed. To the surprise of all, including the consular officers at the United States Embassy in Helsinki, a Soviet visa came through quickly in less than three hours. On arrival, after a 20-hour train ride, Mr. Nixon told reporters that he had made no arrangements to see any Soviet officials or any United States or other diplomats. He was philosophical about his own changed station in life and that of his debating partner of almost six years ago. I was on July 24, 1959, that Mr. Nixon, in Moscow to open the American National Exhibition, debated with Mr. Khrushchev
26
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 05:53:05 AM »
[...]

Connally was mixed up and you're way off.

Rhetorical question:

Why is it we can see almost all of Connally's white shirt in Z-174, but we can't see his tie?
 
https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z174.jpg

Answer:

Because Connally, having consciously begun by Z-151 to turn his head quickly to his LEFT (and therefore being captured "looking straight ahead" in the Croft photo at Z-161), by Z-169 has started turning his head and upper torso back to his right to see where the shot had come from and to see if JFK is okay.

By Z-174, Connally's upper torso is turned so far to his right that his tie is obscured from our view by a part of the car.

Although Connally continues turning to his right, he can't "see" JFK in Z-179 because JFK has turned HIS head far to HIS right and has raised his hand to wave to someone.

https://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z179.jpg

Connally gives up looking over his right shoulder and starts turning his upper torso and head back to his LEFT, to, as he said, try to see JFK over his left shoulder, but he doesn't make it very far because both JFK and he are hit by CE-399 at approximately Z-222.
27
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 03:51:50 AM »
Bennett was already sitting higher than Ken O'Donnell and would have had no difficulty seeing JFK over top of O'Donnell.  Bennett is in the right rear seat in the QM as seen in the Betzner photo at z186:

Who was it, then, who was sitting on the passenger's side of the car and around Z-145 started leaning far to his right while continuing to look straight ahead?
28
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 03:51:03 AM »
1) Why wasn't she looking at the limo in both of those frames?
She appears to be looking toward her right up to z202.

Quote
2) What was she looking at in Z-148?
She was looking to her right which is where the President's car was.
Quote
3) Why did she start turning her head away from the limo and towards the TSBD by Z-141?
She didn't.  She is always looking  to her right until z202 when she does that major head turn to the rear.
29
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 03:45:58 AM »
at what point do you think Secret Service Agent Glen Bennett started leaning far to his right (in order to see around Ken O'Donnell) to see if JFK was okay?

Bennett was already sitting higher than Ken O'Donnell and would have had no difficulty seeing JFK over top of O'Donnell.  Bennett is in the right rear seat in the QM as seen in the Betzner photo at z186:

30
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Things I don't care about
« Last post by Tom Graves on Today at 03:32:42 AM »
The CIA historian published a CIA-vetted report, on CIA letterhead, that Clay Shaw was a "highly paid contract source" for the CIA in the 1950s.

IIRC, that wasn't the only mistake your boy, J. Kenneth McDonnald, made in that rushed-and-cobbled-together report.

Fred Litwin has written:

As for the document's reliability, researcher Paul Hoch has found another example of where it was wrong. It refers to "records relating to Gilberto Alvarado, who maintained that he witnessed Cubans passing Oswald cash at a party on the night before the assassination." In fact, this description is obviously a confused mashup of two allegations that were separately made: one by Gilberto Alvarado in 1963 (which he ultimately retracted), and another, made later, by Elena Garro de Paz. A different page in the 1992 document correctly describes Alvarado as "the Nicaraguan who claimed he saw Lee Harvey Oswald receive cash in meetings inside Mexico City Cuban embassy." Elena Garro de Paz claimed to have seen Oswald and two companions at a "twist party" in Mexico City. The date given for this twist party (November 21) matches neither allegation and is obviously an error, thus suggesting that the 1992 document is not a completely reliable accounting of what is in the CIA's own archive. On the night before the assassination, Oswald was in Dallas with Marina at Ruth Paine's house (thus he could not have received cash in Alvarado's presence or have been at a party in Mexico City). Oswald was only in Mexico City from September 26 to October 3. If he attended a party - which is a big if - it could only have happened during this time period.
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10