Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
31
On the other hand, Roberdeau’s map seems to me to have Betzner’s position correctly aligned with the corner of that building on the east side of Houston Street.



That may be true, but from my own research years ago I know that Roberdeaux originally (maybe still has?) misplaced several witnesses, including, iirc, Ochus V. Campbell and Gloria Calvery.

Is his map still viewable in blown-up form online?
32
What?? No mention of my Russian connections? You're slipping.

By supporting The Traitorous Orange Xxxx (rhymes with "bird") here and elsewhere, you are, at best, a KGB*-cherished "useful idiot."

That, Storing, is your "Russian connection" -- unless, of course, you're a full-on KGB* agent.

Are you?

*Today's SVR and FSB
33
Too many  coincidences beyond what is statistically probable compels the skeptic to question the orthodox narrative of an isolated incident theory.  Ie: Nothing to see here, it was simply an act by a single person completely independent of the various persons he had contact with preceding the event.

So although it’s not impossible that Oswald could be a lone kook who for whatever reason felt compelled to shoot JFK, the amazing variety of persons that Oswald had contact with , characters like Jack Ruby and George DeMorenshield, or Guy Bannister, or in a photo with identifiable Alpha 66 BOP operatives, makes it extremely difficult  to accept Oswald was just an isolated nut.
34
Hardcore tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist that you are, I'm surprised that you admit it's Betzner.

   What?? No mention of my Russian connections? You're slipping.
35
"MUCH Smaller than a typical 35mm camera"?  Nope. We can see the flesh tone of the entire side of his face clear up to his hairline. No camera there.

Hardcore tinfoil-hat JFKA conspiracy theorist that you are, I'm surprised that you admit it's Betzner.
36

He has a small Kodak 120 (el cheap) camera that he is holding in front of his eye. It is much smaller than a typical 35mm camera. It uses much smaller film also. I can’t quite read the serial number though….

    "MUCH Smaller than a typical 35mm camera"?  Nope. We can see the flesh tone of the entire side of his face clear up to his hairline. No camera there.
37
Here is a closer view with Betzner circled in red. He has both hands up around his face. He is obviously holding his camera to his eye. Sorry if you do not see this. That’s the best I know how to do for you. Believe otherwise if you wish. I couldn’t care less.


Mr. Storing has stated that there is no evidence - none at all - that Oswald shot JFK. No physical evidence, no circumstantial evidence, no eyewitness evidence (Brennan was imagining it was Oswald?). He does not say that the evidence is inconclusive. Or weak. Or not dispositive (as the lawyers like to say). He says there is none.

On the other hand, he knows as a fact that JFK's body was surgically altered before the autopsy to hide/disguise the wounds from the shots from the front.

I would suggest then that you are not going to find common ground with him on this issue. Or just about any. But good luck; you'll need it <g>.
38
     I believe what we are seeing is a shadow on One Side of his face.  Image analysis is Not easy. Take your time and think it through.


He has a small Kodak 120 (el cheap) camera that he is holding in front of his eye. It is much smaller than a typical 35mm camera. It uses much smaller film also. I can’t quite read the serial number though….
39
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Operation Mincemeat
« Last post by Martin Weidmann on February 18, 2025, 06:52:46 PM »
Just in case some of you have missed it,

The point of posting about Operation Mincemeat is to show how the British managed to fool Hitler's entire intelligence operation with a few forged documents and a totally false narrative.

Just place a few pieces of evidence, either through manipulation or falsification, at crucial locations (possibly backed up by a cover up) and, bingo!

Only a few people were responsible for that operation, yet on this board we have LNs claiming that a conspiracy to set up Oswald would need to involve thousands of people.

In the knowledge that talking about a possible conspiracy is blasphemy for the LNs, let me be clear; I'm not saying this is what happened in this case, just that it was not impossible.

The LNs will probably freak out about this nevertheless, but there it is!  Thumb1:

40

     I believe what we are seeing is a shadow on One Side of his face.  Image analysis is Not easy. Take your time and think it through.   
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10