Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10
51
Answers do indeed destroy narratives. That's why LNs don't answer critical questions.

In the past 20 years I have met only one LN who had the cojones to agree that certain claims in the WC reports were not supported by evidence

Such as...
Quote
and that certain parts of the narrative were extremely problematic.

Such as...

[quote[
He died a few years ago but I still miss our open and honest discussions. Too bad there are not more LNs like him. Instead I'm dealing with a bunch of lying, dishonest weasels who are desperately trying to defend the indefensible.
[/quote]

Projecting again.
52
   These LN's are stuck now. All they can do is make stuff up whenever they are forced into the jackpot. I got a card carrying LN now claiming Officer Haygood made 2 separate trips into the railroad yard. I got another claiming Amos Euins was Not loaded into Inspector Sawyer's car until 1:00 PM. Jam 'em up and they immediately rewrite 62+ yr old history on-the-spot. They rely on people Not knowing to begin with or having forgotten over the course of time. Not happening with some of us still ready to get in their grill.

They rely on people Not knowing to begin with or having forgotten over the course of time.

Royell, in other discussion I don't agree with you, but in this case you are absolutely right.

I have tried to figure out what would cause that level of determination to misrepresent and lie about evidence and make stuff up in a 6 decades old case the general public nowadays hasn't got a clue and doesn't give a damn about. One would think it should be possible to have a normal discussion with those creeps, but for some reason they keep defending an indefensible case.
53
Which medical school did you attend?
This is a physics issue. Lungs expand to draw air into the lungs because they are in a sealed low pressure pleural cavity. If the seal is breached and air is allowed to flow into the pleural cavity, the lung will collapse. If there is a hole from the back to the pleural cavity and a hole from the front, there are two pathways for the pleural cavity to draw air. There is nothing obstructing the back/right armpit prior to about z280. 
Quote
I am not impressed by arguments that begin, "So-and-so said..." because I know there are other so-and-sos who have said something different. That's why I put my faith in forensic evidence. It is a much more reliable way of determining the truth because it can often tell us which so-and-sos got it right and which so-and-sos got it wrong. I've seen the Z-film enough times to know JFK didn't seem to react until he was hit by the SECOND shot coming at or about Z222.
That's not forensic science. That is you interpreting what you think has happened in equivocal parts of the zfilm. Not even the WC went as far as to say they could tell when the first two shots occurred. In fact, they had a whole section that explained all the various possibilities that they considered.

Studies have shown (Loftus, Eyewitness Testimony) that witnesses are quite accurate and complete in recalling details that more than 50% of the witnesses recalled. For details that were not as easily noticed, they are still likely to be more than 50% accurate and complete.  In this case, many people recalled three shots, that JFK reacted to the first and that the last two were close together.  Here is the chart from Loftus, Ch. 3 (p. 27):


Quote
I do not know why JFK did not react to the sound of the first shot but he was hardly the only one. Clint Hill didn't react to that first shot and he only remembers hearing 2 shots, the second and the third. Charles Brehm can be seen in the background of the Z-film still clapping after JFK had been hit by the second shot.
Maybe Charles Brehm and JFK did not react before z193 because there had not been a shot. That would fit with Betzner, Croft, Linda Willis, Phil Willis, Mary Woodward and another dozen or so witnesses along Elm St.

And maybe Clint Hill did react to the first shot. He said he did.  He said he stepped off the car after hearing the first shot and seeing the President react.  He said later during an interview at the Sixth Floor Museum that he was told by others in the car that the second shot happened after he leapt off the running board but he did not hear it, possibly because he was along side of the QM engine.  He said he heard the third shot and saw its effects.  So, according to Hill, he recalled the first and last shots.
Quote
More So=and-so-said crap. I will never understand why people put so much faith in eyewitness accounts because eyewitnesses can be, and frequently are dead wrong about important details. I believe witnesses who can be corroborated. The others, not so much.
Witnesses are most often corroborated by other independent witnesses.  If 20 people independently recalled JFK reacting to the first shot, you might want to explain the probability that they independently recalled that and independently failed to see JFK continue to smile and wave for several seconds...

Quote
Well if you want to believe witnesses, JBC said he instantly recognized the first shot as the sound of a high powered rifle and that it was an assassination attempt.  He said he turned to look over his right shoulder because that's where the sound seemed to come from.  He can be seen turning to look over his right shoulder beginning at Z164, so he is corroborated.

....
So, yes, I believe JBC was trying to get a look at JFK but was unable to do so.
So why do you think JBC did not turn his head rearward if he was trying to look at JFK?  He never turns to face the rear. I can't find anywhere before z230 where he attempts to look over his shoulder.  That requires turning one's face relative to one's shoulders. I can turn my head more than 90 degrees.  He didn't try to turn it at all relative to his shoulders.
54
Answers do indeed destroy narratives. That's why LNs don't answer critical questions.

In the past 20 years I have met only one LN who had the cojones to agree that certain claims in the WC reports were not supported by evidence and that certain parts of the narrative were extremely problematic. He died a few years ago but I still miss our open and honest discussions. Too bad there are not more LNs like him. Instead I'm dealing with a bunch of lying, dishonest weasels who are desperately trying to defend the indefensible.

   These LN's are stuck now. All they can do is make stuff up whenever they are forced into the jackpot. I got a card carrying LN now claiming Officer Haygood made 2 separate trips into the railroad yard. I got another claiming Amos Euins was Not loaded into Inspector Sawyer's car until 1:00 PM. Jam 'em up and they immediately rewrite 62+ yr old history on-the-spot. They rely on people Not knowing to begin with or having forgotten over the course of time. Not happening with some of us still ready to get in their grill. 
55
Answers do indeed destroy narratives. That's why LNs don't answer critical questions.

In the past 20 years I have met only one LN who had the cojones to agree that certain claims in the WC reports were not supported by evidence and that certain parts of the narrative were extremely problematic. He died a few years ago but I still miss our open and honest discussions. Too bad there are not more LNs like him. Instead I'm dealing with a bunch of lying, dishonest weasels who are desperately trying to defend the indefensible.

56
Oswald made a special trip to Irving on Thursday after work.  He told Buell Frazier that this special trip was so that he could retrieve some curtain rods for his room on Beckley.

After the assassination, Oswald leaves work and makes his way to the rooming house on Beckley.  He does not have any curtain rods with him.

If Oswald simply left the Depository because he was told there would be no more work that day and therefore decided to go to his room, why didn't he take the curtain rods with him as he traveled from the Depository to his room on Beckley?

I don't believe for a second that Oswald went to Irving to get curtain rods. I believe it was a white lie to avoid having to tell a 19 years old co-worker that he was really going to try to save his marriage. He had not seen his kids during the previous weekend and Marina was angry with him. It would be a valid question to ask why he did not wait until the upcoming weekend, but when matters of the heart come in to play, people are frequently not rational. Frazier said he loved kids. Not only his own, but all sorts of kids in Inving that he would play with. The human side of Oswald is very often ignored or simple dismissed. We don't know what happened between Marina and Lee from Monday to Thursday, but perhaps Oswald simply figured he couldn't wait any longer.

Nobody knows what was in the bag Oswald carried on Friday morning, so it could easily have been a mere prop to satisfy Frazier's possible curiosity that he got rid of as soon as he entered the TSBD. Was that the case? I honestly don't know and nobody does. It's just a possibility which LNs will instantly dismiss. Some things will never change.

The problem is this case is there are so many assumptions and so few verifiable dots to connect that you can make up any kind of narrative you like and that's exactly what happened. Does the narrative have any relation with reality? I seriously doubt it.
57
Oswald made a special trip to Irving on Thursday after work.  He told Buell Frazier that this special trip was so that he could retrieve some curtain rods for his room on Beckley.

After the assassination, Oswald leaves work and makes his way to the rooming house on Beckley.  He does not have any curtain rods with him.

If Oswald simply left the Depository because he was told there would be no more work that day and therefore decided to go to his room, why didn't he take the curtain rods with him as he traveled from the Depository to his room on Beckley?

Why would Oswald have thought it was necessary to make a special trip to Irving to get the curtain rods. Why not just get them on his normal weekend trip to Irving. I think he needed to go to Irving on Thursday to get something that he needed before the weekend. Gee, I wonder what that could have been.
58
In Andrew’s Z190 1st shot theory, which shot  is CE 399?

And what’s the likely path of z190 shot after it exited JFKs throat?

My best guess would be that since  the Z190 bullet trajectory is more acute than a Z223 shot  trajectory   that the bullet after exiting JFK throat would have gone thru the front seat just to the left of Kellerman and buried into the front dash board.

Not saying I’m agreeing with this Z190 1st shot idea but at least it’s consistent with 3 shots fired in about 6.6 secs which is close together as most witness heard and a fair match to Harold Norman’s spacing in his boom click  click sequence.

And if I’m remembering  right, Andrew has the 2nd shot at about Z285? And that shot then must be the one That went thru JCs wrist bone and then into his left thigh yes?

Yet it looks like to me that JC has already lifted up the hat suddenly by Z230 which is about 2.5 secs BEFORE Z285. If the hat is up in his right hand at Z285, not sure how the shot at Z285 which strikes him in the left thigh would  have gone thru the wrist?

You have correctly identified one of the problems with Andrew's misguided beliefs in that JBC suddenly flipped his right arm upward at Z226 which is the same frame that JFK's arms started moving upward. Coincidence? NAH!!!

I don't know how you concluded 3 shots were fired in 6.6 seconds.
59
Oswald made a special trip to Irving on Thursday after work.  He told Buell Frazier that this special trip was so that he could retrieve some curtain rods for his room on Beckley.

After the assassination, Oswald leaves work and makes his way to the rooming house on Beckley.  He does not have any curtain rods with him.

If Oswald simply left the Depository because he was told there would be no more work that day and therefore decided to go to his room, why didn't he take the curtain rods with him as he traveled from the Depository to his room on Beckley?
60
This BS again?

We've just discussed most of it in the "Podcast on Tippit" thread, where you ran away because you didn't want to question about Earlene Roberts and now you want to do it all over again.

Oh well, have fun, but dealing with your propaganda once in a month is more than enough for me.

Earlene Roberts account is probably one of the least important pieces of evidence we have. She said Oswald came and went ABOUT 1:00. I have no reason to doubt that. She said he had his jacket on. While I have no reason to doubt that either, I wouldn't take it to the bank solely her word. The fact Oswald was seen throwing the jacket under a car and a jacket was retrieved from there that was identified belonging to him is enough for me. It witl never be enough for the dedicated CTs. They aren't in search of answers. Their game is to come up with excuses to reject evidence. Like Oswald's jacket that was found under the car.
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 ... 10