Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
41
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Last post by Richard Smith on March 16, 2025, 02:13:17 PM »
Quote from: Michael Capasse on March 16, 2025, 01:49:05 PM
Marina was an admitted liar. Her testimony to the Commission cannot be trusted.
Her visa was up at the end of January '64. She was under "protective custody" with the threat of deportation until the day she testified.

A Statement to the Assassination Records Review Board
from Marina Oswald Porter, September 17, 1996
=====================================================

"This case has never been OPENED. The twenty-six volumes of the Warren Commission do not support its conclusions. My final conclusion
is that the man--Lee--was not on the sixth floor. We're not even sure about the rifle. According to the local police chief, we never could
put the rifle and the person (Oswald) together. Lee was charged with the crime. They showed him a picture, said this is a rifle, this is
you; he denied it. But they never showed him the weapon for identification. I'm the one who was supposed to identify the rifle,
and I did, believing in the authorities' good intentions . But I was the worst of all. I knew nothing of weapons or guns; I knew nothing."

https://jfk.boards.net/post/7364

Again, can you tell us what Marina lied about rather than making a conclusory statement that she is a liar?  If she is a liar in your opinion in an effort to implicate Oswald, then surely you must have specific examples.  Right?  Bizarrely you have posted a statement in which Marina appears to express skepticism of Oswald's guilt.  Something that you would likely agree with.  Is she lying in that context?  Wasn't she still subject to pressure to implicate Oswald?  Can you understand how that actually conflicts with your baseless suggestion that she was lying to implicate him in the crime?  Whew.  You need to get your story straight. It's like a pretzel. Even self-contradictory.
42
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: U.S. Politics
« Last post by Michael Capasse on March 16, 2025, 02:07:55 PM »
Quote from: Richard Smith on March 16, 2025, 02:04:03 PM
Nope.  Trump is not erasing minorities and women.  He is simply erasing the distinctions between veterans being made by woke groups designed to perpetuate a false narrative by dividing Americans into separate groups.  They are all veterans regardless of race or gender.  There are no white, black, male or female veterans.   They should be celebrated due to their service.  Not their race or gender.  This is mostly a nothing burger except for those who constantly want to play the race and gender card for political reasons.  If you really cared about women, you would be concerned with those women who were assaulted and murdered by the illegal aliens who Old Joe allowed to flood into the country.  But you support that policy.  Instead you want to nitpick something ridiculous like this nonstory.

Wow. Just Wow. You are gone.

Quote
"Arlington National Cemetery has purged its website of pages about notable Black, Hispanic and women veterans, as well as information about the Civil War and Black history, as the Trump administration’s ongoing effort to remove references to “diversity and inclusion” on government webpages."
43
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: U.S. Politics
« Last post by Richard Smith on March 16, 2025, 02:04:03 PM »
Quote from: Michael Capasse on March 16, 2025, 01:55:02 PM
What are you talking about? This is Trump's doing.

"Arlington National Cemetery has purged its website of pages about notable Black, Hispanic and women veterans, as well as information about the Civil War and Black history, as the Trump administration’s ongoing effort to remove references to “diversity and inclusion” on government webpages."

Nope.  Trump is not erasing minorities and women.  He is simply erasing the distinctions between veterans being made by woke groups designed to perpetuate a false narrative by dividing Americans into separate groups.  They are all veterans regardless of race or gender.  There are no white, black, male or female veterans.   They should be celebrated due to their service.  Not their race or gender.  This is mostly a nothing burger except for those who constantly want to play the race and gender card for political reasons.  If you really cared about women, you would be concerned with those women who were assaulted and murdered by the illegal aliens who Old Joe allowed to flood into the country.  But you support that policy.  Instead you want to nitpick something ridiculous like this nonstory.
44
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: U.S. Politics
« Last post by Michael Capasse on March 16, 2025, 01:55:02 PM »
Quote from: Richard Smith on March 16, 2025, 01:33:06 PM
LOL.  What is disgusting is trying to divide Americans into groups and then pit them against one another.  That's the how the Democrats try to win elections.  By convincing groups that they are victims of oppression by other groups and need their help.  The results speak for themselves.  All veterans are Americans.  They should all be celebrated for that reason.  Their race and gender are not important.

What are you talking about? This is Trump's doing.
A president that called our veterans, "suckers & losers"

"Arlington National Cemetery has purged its website of pages about notable Black, Hispanic and women veterans, as well as information about the Civil War and Black history, as the Trump administration’s ongoing effort to remove references to “diversity and inclusion” on government webpages."

45
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Last post by Michael Capasse on March 16, 2025, 01:49:05 PM »
Quote from: Richard Smith on March 16, 2025, 01:40:25 PM
So many words but again no responses.  Again, can you tells us what Marina lied about?  And it's not a logical inference that someone who buys a rifle will use it to shoot?   HA HA HA HA.  Can you tell us what someone would do with a rifle?  It appears to have a singular purpose, but do you think Oswald intended to so something other than fire it like using it as a hockey stick to gain entry into the NHL?  It's embarrassing to see the lengths that you will go to avoid admitting the obvious.

Marina was an admitted liar. Her testimony to the Commission cannot be trusted.
Her visa was up at the end of January '64. She was under "protective custody" with the threat of deportation until the day she testified.

A Statement to the Assassination Records Review Board
from Marina Oswald Porter, September 17, 1996
=====================================================

"This case has never been OPENED. The twenty-six volumes of the Warren Commission do not support its conclusions. My final conclusion
is that the man--Lee--was not on the sixth floor. We're not even sure about the rifle. According to the local police chief, we never could
put the rifle and the person (Oswald) together. Lee was charged with the crime. They showed him a picture, said this is a rifle, this is
you; he denied it. But they never showed him the weapon for identification. I'm the one who was supposed to identify the rifle,
and I did, believing in the authorities' good intentions . But I was the worst of all. I knew nothing of weapons or guns; I knew nothing."

https://jfk.boards.net/post/7364
46
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Last post by Michael Capasse on March 16, 2025, 01:44:11 PM »
Quote from: John Mytton on March 16, 2025, 07:40:23 AM
In his letter to the Attorney General, General Walker saw the bullet on TV during a HSCA broadcast and describes the bullet found at his house as a "hunk of lead" and "baring no resemblance to an unfired bullet in shape of form"

The bullet fragment from the Walker residence has a fair amount of lead showing.

CE 399 would be seen on a low res 1970's television broadcast to appear to be "unfired"

Conclusion

The HSCA showed CE 399 as opposed to the Walker bullet, and from Walker's very own description in the above letter it's clear he saw CE 399.

CE399? - Do you actually think Walker confused any reference of source that was given by Blakeley as HIS bullet?
Do you actually think the picture in the 70's would have such a low resolution that he would confuse the shape or color/tone that he saw?
I don't, that's lame

Two Dallas Police reports cite the bullet as steel jacket from a 30.06 cal. shotgun.
Dallas Morning News reported it the next day, "steel jacket bullet" https://jfk.boards.net/post/4796
Walker, an Army General with extensive military experience held the bullet in his hand.

These documents from the Weisberg collection raise serious doubts that the Carcano was the rifle used in the Walker shooting.
http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/W%20Disk/Walker%20Shooting/Item%2005.pdf

The evidence against Oswald is broken and inconsistent, everywhere you look.
47
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Buell Wesley Frazier
« Last post by Richard Smith on March 16, 2025, 01:40:25 PM »
Quote from: Tom Sorensen on March 16, 2025, 07:08:37 AM
We have arrived at the rabbit hole.

Looks like you already went over the edge.

We have the testimony of Oswald's own wife that he practiced with the rifle and that he told her that he did so.

Strange wording, "his own wife" as opposed to "his wife," which should have sufficed. Doubling down on her claim ("and") doesn't improve her credibility. She's a known liar.

Your rebuttal is that she could be lying despite there being apparent no reason for her to lie about him practicing with the rifle.

I pointed out your incorrect use of "confirm." I didn't speculate about her intend motive. Her claim remains unconfirmed.

It is not a crime to practice firing your rifle.   

Strawman, I didn't claim that.

We have the logical inference that if Oswald ordered a rifle with his limited means and was so excited to get it that he posed for pictures, he intended to use it.

Wrong, we have Richard's flawed inference. What you have at best is intent intend to pose in front of a camera with a rifle.

There is otherwise no explanation for ordering the rifle.

I just told you there is; you fail again.

So many words but again no responses.  Again, can you tells us what Marina lied about?  And it's not a logical inference that someone who buys a rifle will use it to shoot?   HA HA HA HA.  Can you tell us what someone would do with a rifle?  It appears to have a singular purpose, but do you think Oswald intended to so something other than fire it like using it as a hockey stick to gain entry into the NHL?  It's embarrassing to see the lengths that you will go to avoid admitting the obvious.
48
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: U.S. Politics
« Last post by Richard Smith on March 16, 2025, 01:33:06 PM »
Quote from: Michael Capasse on March 16, 2025, 12:43:49 PM
Did he promise this too?
it is Disgusting.

Arlington Cemetery strips content on black and female veterans from website.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cz03gjnxe25o

LOL.  What is disgusting is trying to divide Americans into groups and then pit them against one another.  That's the how the Democrats try to win elections.  By convincing groups that they are victims of oppression by other groups and need their help.  The results speak for themselves.  All veterans are Americans.  They should all be celebrated for that reason.  Their race and gender are not important.   
49
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: David Harold Byrd
« Last post by Lance Payette on March 16, 2025, 01:28:05 PM »
Dan seems to have lost enthusiasm for his Byrd thread. Well, Factoid Busting does tend to have that effect.

I realize this isn't f-a-s-c-i-n-a-t-i-n-g to most - Factoid Busting does tend to be rather dull - but according to the SEC at the end of 1962 Ling-Temco-Vought had nearly 3,000,000 shares of common stock outstanding, with less than 8% owned by management. The paper I linked makes clear that 1963 was a time of massive reorganization by LTV, in which the number of shares was greatly reduced, numerous subsidiaries were created and numerous shares were exchanged in the process. Hence, the supposedly suspicious acquisition of the rather odd and comparatively insignificant number of 132,000 shares by Alpha-Omega in 1963 is surely attributable to this activity rather than to Ling and Byrd being tipped off that JFK would be assassinated (or even participating in the assassination themselves) and buying 132,000 shares in anticipation that LBJ's favors would cause the shares to explode in price (they were already fabulously rich and LTV was already awash in government contracts). This is yet another example of what entirely speculative Conspiracy Think looks like.
50
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The Parkland Doctors, Part One
« Last post by Steve M. Galbraith on March 16, 2025, 01:09:44 PM »
Among other things, Fred quotes the doctors themselves - in press interviews, in their testimony, in speeches, in their own writings (!) - where they admit to being confused or where they give confusing and contradictory accounts. It's all there.

The "back of the head" proponents love to cite McClelland. The Thompson drawing (which he didn't make), et cetera. But McClelland wrote three hours after the assassination that the cause of death was a wound to the *left* side of JFK's head. He wrote that. A few days later he's interviewed by a medical journal and says the wound was on the *right* side of the head. Then later he says back/rear of the head. So what account should we believe? If any?

But this is all dismissed as Bugliosi and Posner hearsay?

In any case, no reasonably intelligent person is going to accept the judgments about wounds on a person from ER doctors who spent 20 minutes trying to save the patient's life versus the judgments of autopsy doctors who examined that same patient for four hours. Especially when the latter have the physical evidence supporting them. Who thinks the ER doctors would be better, more accurate? Conspiracy world is another universe, another realm where up is down and down is up as long as it support a conspiracy.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10