Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
31
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Luna committee is bogus ...
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 04:36:41 PM »
Judyth Vary Baker?

Now there's a blast from the past. Does anyone believe anything that ditz has to say?
32
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Dr. E. Forrest Chapman
« Last post by Charles Collins on Today at 04:35:07 PM »
Quote from: Jack Nessan on Today at 04:22:54 PM
You are not explaining the dent, you are just hoping you stumbled onto an alternative explanation. You didn't. What on the rear bridge of the receiver can cause a dent with a dimple in the middle that makes the top of the lip flare out.



The image below is CE 543. It is difficult for me to tell from the photo, but if the lip is flared out it isn’t by much. The yellow circle is a round circle approximately the size of the mouth of the shell. The blue circle depicts an arc at a similar radius as the outside of the bridge on the rifle. The edge of the bridge could have made that dent in my opinion.




33
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Applying Logic and Critical Thinking to the JFK Assassination
« Last post by Michael T. Griffith on Today at 04:30:59 PM »
In his 2009 article on evidence that Cuban intelligence had foreknowledge of the assassination and that Castro approved/allowed the hit on JFK, Gus Russo claims that while Oswald was at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City, he wept and proclaimed that he would prove his revolutionary loyalty by killing "that bastard, Kennedy":

At the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City, Oswald pulled a gun, wept, and claimed that he would prove his revolutionary loyalty by killing "that bastard, Kennedy." ("Did Castro Okay the Kennedy Assassination?", American Heritage, winter 2009, https://www.americanheritage.com/did-castro-okay-kennedy-assassination)

This was the basic fable that was energetically pushed by elements of the Intelligence Community and the news media soon after the assassination, i.e., that Oswald the devout Marxist killed JFK in the service of or in support of the Soviet Union and Cuba. This tale is still peddled by some lone-gunman theorists to this day.

Yet, this tale makes it all the more puzzling that Oswald did not do what other ideologically motivated presidential assassins have done, namely, proudly take credit for his deed and justify his deed as a worthy act done in support of a noble cause and/or done as a necessary act to combat evil. 

Oswald did the exact opposite. He adamantly insisted he was innocent. He fiercely denied shooting JFK and/or Tippit. He said the evidence against him was fraudulent. He even said he was a patsy.



34
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Making of a Conspiracist
« Last post by Mark Ulrik on Today at 04:28:03 PM »
Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on Today at 03:39:59 PM
[...] They should read some of Dr. David Mantik's research on the DNA evidence that proves that DNA from most of the hijackers was found at the WTC site, at the Pentagon crash site, and at the crash site in PA, proving that planes did in fact hit the Pentagon and Shanksville, PA. [...]

I asked you recently in another thread where to find that research, but you refused to answer. Apparently, it's reserved for private email chains.
35
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Dr. E. Forrest Chapman
« Last post by Jack Nessan on Today at 04:27:03 PM »
Quote from: John Corbett on Today at 04:19:58 PM
I didn't even cite Brehm's words. I cited what he was seen doing on the Z-film.

Sometimes a witness can be too close. It can create tunnel vision and lack of perspective.

 It can create tunnel vision and lack of perspective.

You mean like this. You are interpreting what Brehm thought and heard that is contrary to what he said took place while he was standing there and watched it unfold.
36
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: How could former Marine sharpshooter Oswald miss everything with his first shot?
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 04:26:09 PM »
This is the greatest gun safety lecture I have ever seen:

https://www.bing.com/videos/riverview/relatedvideo?q=cop+inadvertently+shoots+himself+while+giving+gun+safety+lecture&mid=89E6605E5F21D2126B9389E6605E5F21D2126B93&churl=https%3a%2f%2fwww.youtube.com%2fchannel%2fUC4s_EWP1K3Nu81A-Uh5wVFg&FORM=VIRE
37
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Dr. E. Forrest Chapman
« Last post by Jack Nessan on Today at 04:22:54 PM »
Quote from: Charles Collins on Today at 04:03:07 PM

The mouth of the shell came within a fraction of an inch and a few degrees of rotation of striking the bridge. That’s pretty darned close. Hitting the edge of the bridge could create the dent in CE 543. Duplicating the dent isn’t necessary to show the likelihood that it did happen.

You are not explaining the dent, you are just hoping you stumbled onto an alternative explanation. You didn't. What on the rear bridge of the receiver can cause a dent with a dimple in the middle that makes the top of the lip flare out.
38
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Dr. E. Forrest Chapman
« Last post by John Corbett on Today at 04:19:58 PM »
Quote from: Jack Nessan on Today at 03:51:49 PM
No, both men clearly describe two shots total. That is why people use words like first and second or immediately. You know words like that. That way nobody is left wondering or in your case creating your own narrative.

J Corbett ---“Brehm can be seen clapping after JFK had slumped over after the second shot struck him”

Really. You purposely changed Brehm's words to try and support this goofy theory? He never said the second shot hit him. 

Brehm said “"The first shot must not have been too solid, because he just slumped.” ----- There is no second shot to it. He could not have made it any clearer, first shot struck JFK. Unbelievable that you would do that.

Maybe you don't think Brehm was close enough to be a good witness.

I didn't even cite Brehm's words. I cited what he was seen doing on the Z-film.

Sometimes a witness can be too close. It can create tunnel vision and lack of perspective.
39
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Dr. E. Forrest Chapman
« Last post by Jack Nessan on Today at 04:16:35 PM »
Quote from: Charles Collins on Today at 02:06:12 PM
Below is a screenshot of the video showing an ejected empty cartridge just after it bounced off of the rear bridge.




Based on what I can see in this video, I think that there is reason to believe that the slight indentations on the other empty cartridges besides CE 543 might have also been caused by an impact with the rear bridge. The reason that CE 543 didn’t have one of those marks (that some have assumed are some unexplained chamber marks) is that CE 543’s impact with the rear bridge was closer to the mouth of the cartridge.

So, it happened repeatedly but just with Oswald's rifle and on every one of the shells, 30+, that was produced while testing the rifle in time trials, also including both shells listed as CE 557 and the unfired cartridge, CE 141, ejected after the rifle was found on the 6th floor. As absolutely incredible as this proposed idea is, and to take the disbelief to a new level, the depth of the chamber mark is different depending on when in the firing sequence the chamber mark on the shell was produced and the shells landed on the bridge of the receiver in exactly the same spot on every shell casing, no variance. As preposterous as all of this is, CE 543 still has no chamber mark and a dented lip that cannot be explained, both deformities indicating it was not fired in the rifle.


40
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Making of a Conspiracist
« Last post by Michael T. Griffith on Today at 04:10:27 PM »
Quote from: Fred Litwin on Today at 01:43:59 PM
The Making of a Conspiracist

This is a story I did not want to write. One of my friends and collaborator over the years has now turned into a full-fledged conspiracist -- he has
become a 9/11 truther, a believer that the Mossad killed Kennedy and that the Jews have contributed nothing to humanity. It's quite a sad
story -- to see this personally.

https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/the-making-of-a-conspiracist

If I could make just one suggestion, I would recommend that you distinguish between 9/11 conspiracy theorists, who constitute a tiny fringe and whose views have been rejected by every government study and investigation, and those who posit a conspiracy in the JFK assassination, who constitute a majority of Americans and Europeans and who have included U.S. presidents and vice presidents, members of Congress, members of the military and the intelligence community, numerous experts in relevant fields, and the House Select Committee on Assassinations.

I would change the title of the thread to "The Making of a 9/11 Conspiracist."
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10