Steve - As you see above, I have been repeatedly saying that the Bell Film shows Wiegman rumbling/stumbling (W) across the Knoll Grass. Just like a football player running (R) - (L) across a TV screen. We clearly see the (L) profile of Wiegman's face as he moves (W) across the Knoll Grass.
  There is absolutely ZERO PROOF that Wiegman ever was "sprawled" across the steps as You claim. Wiegman Never said he did this and No Eyewitness Ever reported seeing him do this. This claim of Wiegman being "sprawled" across the steps while filming the Hester's is nothing more than another JFK Assassination Urban Legend.

Can someone explain to me why any of this matters?

I have previously informed Tom that he is on Ignore, which he is, but I gather from the various threads he's started that I have set him off.

My point here is not directed at the substance of Newman's work. I find it boring and mind-numbing. My life for the past 75 years has been rather pleasant, so hats off to the KGB if they've been in charge all that time. Keep up the good work, comrades!

I was struck by Royden's article about Angleton's KGB mania and his paranoid view of the KGB as being "10 feet tall." My view of the KGB (including several trips to Belarus) is pretty much the same as my view of all government agencies: mostly bureaucratic clowns, "Boris and Natasha" stuff in the case of the KGB.

My point was that if Newman purports to be doing serious, scholarly work, then (1) he would be publishing in the numerous scholarly, peer-reviewed outlets for precisely this sort of work instead of self-publishing unintelligible document dumps, and (2) his work would have caused at least a ripple in the community of serious scholars interested in precisely this aspect of Cold War history. The fact that the only ripples have been in the CT community should tell CTers something about the quality of the work. That's all.

lol lance never read any of sir graves’ one or two posts because he had him on “ignore”.  a genius-level move i must say !  i couldn’t ignore anyone, too much of a voyeur, bien sur.

SMG-

Well, there is a lone witness statement that LHO was seen at Alpha 66's house in Harlandale in Dallas, shortly before the JFKA.

I think the Baer and Latell make fascinating reading. Both CIA guys.

No, nothing proven, but the LNT is not proven either, in fact largely dismissed by the HSCA-1979, and remains implausible on many levels.

If shots were fired too quickly on 11.22 to have been issued by a single-shot-per-bolt-action rifle...then who fired the shots? 

There is nothing that I see in Baer's theory where he says Oswald had links, direct or indirect, to Cuban intelligence. His theory is that Oswald (for some reason) told Alpha 66 that he was going to shoot JFK (when and where did this happen?). And Cuban agents who had infiltrated Alpha 66 then reported Oswald's threat/promise back to Havana.

Here is Baer as to why Cuba didn't tell the US about this threat:  "It’s risky if there are actual Cuban agents shooting the President, that’s Armageddon, nuclear war. But if you simply hear rumors of this, you don’t do anything. I’ve seen that happen in the CIA, where we heard stuff and didn’t pass the details to another government because it was a hostile government."

So Oswald's supposed threats become "rumors" that Havana heard? That's why they didn't tell the US? Did Oswald make the threat or was it just a rumor?

This really sounds like he's throwing things against the wall and hoping something sticks.

    The above is exactly what I have been saying. The Bell Film shows Wiegman to be stumbling as he moves (W). He is facing (W) and moving (W). Just like a ball carrier in a football game moving from the (R) to-the (L) across your TV screen. Instead of a football, Wiegman has his camera in 1 hand and the other hand is outstretched as he braces himself for possibly falling to ground.
    Those that have bought into the Urban Legend of  Wiegman being "sprawled" across the steps, have yet to explain WHEN Exactly does Wiegman move (W) across the knoll in order to arrive alongside the Newman Family? From where we see Wiegman on the Bell Film, he is still (E) of the Newman Family. Wiegman at some point has to move (W) in order to run down the knoll and end up alongside the Newman Family at the bottom of the knoll. Which is what we see Wiegman doing on the Couch Film. Running DOWN the knoll.

 You've never said anything such about him "tripping and falling".
And that is not what he did, and it's stupid to believe such a thing happened. This film sequence showing Wiegman is less than a second in length, and you're turning it into a motion picture.  It doesn't show Wiegman moving in any direction except upward as in getting up off the ground after he filmed the Hester's reacting to the shooting.  YOU MAKE THINGS UP Royell.  This is one thing you're very good at.

I guess the schmuck who started this thread is unaware of the fact the Democrats invented gerrymandering.

ME: Was gerrymandering invented by Democrats?

Google AI: The term and specific event that coined "gerrymandering" involved Massachusetts Governor Elbridge Gerry in 1812, who belonged to the Democratic-Republican Party—the political ancestor of today's Democratic Party. However, the practice itself existed before that name was coined, and both major modern political parties have used it throughout American history.

Origins of the Term

• The 1812 Event: According to the History of Gerrymandering, Governor Elbridge Gerry signed a redistricting bill in Massachusetts designed to benefit his Democratic-Republican allies by packing and cracking Federalist voting districts.

• The Cartoon: A local newspaper, the Boston Gazette, printed a political cartoon showing one jagged, bizarrely shaped district as a salamander, combining Gerry's name with the animal to create the word "gerry-mander".

• Earlier Examples: Political manipulation of boundaries predates 1812. For instance, in 1788, Anti-Federalists in Virginia—including Patrick Henry—redrew congressional lines to try and block James Madison from winning a seat.

Evolution and Modern Use

• Party Evolution: The Democratic-Republican Party split over time. Elements of it evolved into the modern Democratic Party, while other eras and realignments saw different groups adopt boundary manipulation tactics.

• Bipartisan Practice: Over the past two centuries, according to Gerrymandering in the United States on Wikipedia, both Democrats and Republicans have utilized redistricting and advanced mapping software when they held state legislative power.

ME: Which modern U.S. political party did the "Democrat-Republican Party" most closely resemble?

Google AI: The historical Democratic-Republican Party does not perfectly align with either modern U.S. political party, as its 19th-century platform contained elements that are now split between both sides of the aisle. Because the political landscape has completely shifted over more than two centuries, political scientists and historians look at the comparison in two distinct ways:

1. Ideologically: It most closely resembles the modern Republican Party

If you look strictly at core governing philosophies, Thomas Jefferson’s platform shares major principles with modern conservatives:

• Small Federal Government & States' Rights: Democratic-Republicans deeply mistrusted a centralized federal authority. They argued that most governing power should be left to the individual states—a cornerstone of modern Republican philosophy.

• Strict Constitutional Interpretation: Jefferson and Madison championed a "strict constructionist" view of the U.S. Constitution, meaning the federal government only has the exact powers explicitly written in the document. This is highly similar to the originalist judicial philosophy favored by modern Republicans.

• Low Taxes and Debt Reduction: Upon taking power in 1801, Jefferson prioritized cutting federal taxes (like the whiskey tax) and aggressively paying down the national debt.

In this ideological framework, their rivals—the Federalists—were much closer to modern Democrats because they advocated for a powerful central government to direct the national economy.

2. Institutionally and Culturally: It most closely resembles the modern Democratic Party

If you look at the party's lineage and its targeted voting base, it shares a direct connection with modern Democrats:

• Direct Lineage: The Democratic-Republican Party is the direct organizational ancestor of today's Democratic Party. When the party fractured in the 1820s, Andrew Jackson’s populist wing absorbed the machinery of the party and shortened the name to the "Democratic Party".

• Coalition of the "Common Man": Jefferson’s party positioned itself as the defender of the working class (primarily agrarian farmers and laborers) against what they viewed as a wealthy, urban, Federalist elite. This anti-elitist rhetoric and focus on the "common citizen" shares strong roots with the populist elements of the modern Democratic party.