Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Why classify information?  (Read 13053 times)

Offline John Iacoletti

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10812
Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #48 on: January 17, 2022, 11:14:41 PM »
Advertisement
Remember while reading this nonsense that Martin refuses to admit that he is a CTer.  The evidence is just all faked.  He doesn't have to explain why.  It just is.  Take his word for it.

Martin didn't say "the evidence is all faked", Strawman "Smith".

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #48 on: January 17, 2022, 11:14:41 PM »


Offline Jack Nessan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 921
Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #49 on: January 18, 2022, 05:18:32 PM »
Then don't watch the cop shows. Actual knowledge of the subject you are posting about does not seem to be an obstacle for you. The cop show reference was an attempt to help you. Obviously you have very little understanding of ballistic analysis techniques and how it is used to match bullets to firearms.
Both the HSCA firearms experts along with the WC firearms experts matched the bullet and fragments to the LHO rifle found on the 6th floor.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

The fragments chain of custody is not in question. CE 267 and CE 269 are matched to LHO's rifle found on the 6th floor by DPD. The rifle found on the 6th floor is the rifle used to assassinate JFK.

Mr. FRAZIER - That was found by the Secret Service upon their examination of the limousine here in Washington when it first arrived from Dallas, and Commission No. 567 was delivered by Deputy Chief Paul Paterni and by a White House detail chief, Floyd M. Boring, to a liaison agent of the FBI, Orrin Bartlett, who delivered them to me in the laboratory at 11:50 p,m., on November 22, 1963.

Mr. SPECTER - Was there another fragment, was there any other fragment found in the front seat of the car?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. Alongside the right side of the front seat, Commission Exhibit No. 569, which is the base portion of the jacket of a bullet was found, and handled in identical manner to the Exhibit 567.


-------------------------------------------

If you don't believe Officer Barnett's statement you should not have posted it or are you in the habit of posting whatever. Along with Harkness and Sawyer's time stamps, it completely ended the Adams and Styles early departure timeline and why they never encountered LHO coming down or Baker and Truly going up the stairs.

Styles and Adams never emerged out the back of the building for at least the first 3 minutes after the shots were fired. This is proven by Officer Barnett's testimony about watching the rear of the building. By the way thanks for posting his statement, it was really helpful with understanding their movements.


Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7407
Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #50 on: January 18, 2022, 06:22:51 PM »
Then don't watch the cop shows. Actual knowledge of the subject you are posting about does not seem to be an obstacle for you. The cop show reference was an attempt to help you. Obviously you have very little understanding of ballistic analysis techniques and how it is used to match bullets to firearms.
Both the HSCA firearms experts along with the WC firearms experts matched the bullet and fragments to the LHO rifle found on the 6th floor.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Wow, a pathetic appeal to authority by an arrogant patronizing ignoramus who can't even begin to grasp the significance of my question let alone answer it. It doesn't get any better than that.

Why do most, if not all, LNs display such an amazing level of ignorance?

Quote
The fragments chain of custody is not in question. CE 267 and CE 269 are matched to LHO's rifle found on the 6th floor by DPD. The rifle found on the 6th floor is the rifle used to assassinate JFK.

Mr. FRAZIER - That was found by the Secret Service upon their examination of the limousine here in Washington when it first arrived from Dallas, and Commission No. 567 was delivered by Deputy Chief Paul Paterni and by a White House detail chief, Floyd M. Boring, to a liaison agent of the FBI, Orrin Bartlett, who delivered them to me in the laboratory at 11:50 p,m., on November 22, 1963.

Mr. SPECTER - Was there another fragment, was there any other fragment found in the front seat of the car?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. Alongside the right side of the front seat, Commission Exhibit No. 569, which is the base portion of the jacket of a bullet was found, and handled in identical manner to the Exhibit 567.

-------------------------------------------

The fragments chain of custody is not in question.

You cleary do not have the knowledge of rules of evidence to make such an hilarious claim. Frazier just told the WC that the crime scene (which the limo was) had been contaminated and it seems they couldn't care less. Wow!

Quote
If you don't believe Officer Barnett's statement you should not have posted it or are you in the habit of posting whatever. Along with Harkness and Sawyer's time stamps, it completely ended the Adams and Styles early departure timeline and why they never encountered LHO coming down or Baker and Truly going up the stairs.

Styles and Adams never emerged out the back of the building for at least the first 3 minutes after the shots were fired. This is proven by Officer Barnett's testimony about watching the rear of the building. By the way thanks for posting his statement, it was really helpful with understanding their movements.

More BS. Who said I don't believe Barnett's statement? I'm not sure what you actually think his statement means, but it does, in no way, whatsoever prove that Adams and Styles did not leave the TSBD within around 60 seconds after the last shot. In fact, we know from the Stroud letter that Dorothy Garner said the girls had gone down the stairs before she [Garner] saw Baker and Truly come up. That alone is sufficient to conclude that they left the 4th floor before Baker and Truly even got to the stairs on the 1st floor.

This is proven by Officer Barnett's testimony about watching the rear of the building.

What testimony would that be? Barnett was watching the fire escape on Houston and only briefly went to the back, where he saw some officers. He wasn't watching the rear of the building and most certainly did not get to the point on Houston where he could observe the back of the building until several minutes after the shots. It's all in his testimony. Do you have a reading problem or a comprehension problem? Or maybe both?
 
« Last Edit: January 18, 2022, 11:40:50 PM by Martin Weidmann »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #50 on: January 18, 2022, 06:22:51 PM »


Offline Jack Nessan

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 921
Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #51 on: January 19, 2022, 04:43:33 PM »
Wow, a pathetic appeal to authority by an arrogant patronizing ignoramus who can't even begin to grasp the significance of my question let alone answer it. It doesn't get any better than that.

Why do most, if not all, LNs display such an amazing level of ignorance?

The fragments chain of custody is not in question.

You cleary do not have the knowledge of rules of evidence to make such an hilarious claim. Frazier just told the WC that the crime scene (which the limo was) had been contaminated and it seems they couldn't care less. Wow!

More BS. Who said I don't believe Barnett's statement? I'm not sure what you actually think his statement means, but it does, in no way, whatsoever prove that Adams and Styles did not leave the TSBD within around 60 seconds after the last shot. In fact, we know from the Stroud letter that Dorothy Garner said the girls had gone down the stairs before she [Garner] saw Baker and Truly come up. That alone is sufficient to conclude that they left the 4th floor before Baker and Truly even got to the stairs on the 1st floor.

This is proven by Officer Barnett's testimony about watching the rear of the building.

What testimony would that be? Barnett was watching the fire escape on Houston and only briefly went to the back, where he saw some officers. He wasn't watching the rear of the building and most certainly did not get to the point on Houston where he could observe the back of the building until several minutes after the shots. It's all in his testimony. Do you have a reading problem or a comprehension problem? Or maybe both?

You are treated in a manner reflecting the manner with which you represent yourself on this forum. 100% pompous bluster with zero knowledge. It would not be possible to not talk down to you.

---------

It appears you are all talk and no action. I guess you won't admit you were wrong so I will help you. You could not be more wrong.

Officer Barnett stayed at the back of the building for three minutes.

DPD Officer Welcome Barnett:  Barnett was on foot patrol at the corner of Elm and Houston, directly in front of the TSBD main entrance.  At about 12:20 PM he looked up at the windows of the TSBD and saw nothing unusual.  At 12:30 PM he heard shots, and he says that he suspected that the shots came from the top of the TSBD, and that the shooter would run down the fire escape, so he ran up Houston street to the back of the TSBD, and carefully watched the back door and the fire escape for signs of anybody climbing down.  About three minutes later, Sergeant Howard ordered him to the front of the building to get its name; so, he did.

No mention of seeing anyone emerge out of the back of the TSBD.

-------------------------

The fragments were matched to the rifle independently by three different FBI Experts.

Mr. EISENBERG - Mr. Frazier, did any other firearms experts in the FBI laboratory examine the three cartridge cases, the bullet, and the two bullet fragments which you have testified as to today?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, all of the actual firearms comparisons were also made by Charles Killion and Cortlandt Cunningham. These examinations were made separately, that is, they made their examination individually and separately from mine, and there was no association between their examination and mine until both were finished.
Mr. EISENBERG - Did the three of you come to the conclusions which you have given us today as your own conclusions?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG - Did anyone in the FBI laboratory who examined the evidence come to a different conclusion as to any of the evidence you have discussed today?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir

------------------------------

There is no problem with the evidence and how it was gathered.

Frazier examined the car that had been under continual Secret Service guard.

Mr. FRAZIER - I examined the car to determine whether or not there were any bullet fragments present in it, embedded in the upholstery of the back of the front seat, or whether there were any impact areas which indicated that bullets or bullet fragments struck the inside of the car.
Mr. SPECTER - With respect to the fragments first, what did your examination disclose?
Mr. FRAZIER - We found three small lead particles lying on the rug in the rear seat area. These particles were located underneath or in the area which would be underneath the left jump seat.

-------------------------

LHO's rifle which had been discovered on the 6th floor was independently matched to the bullet fragments by no less than three different FBI experts. Is this where you finally admit you were wrong?



Offline Martin Weidmann

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7407
Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #52 on: January 19, 2022, 05:25:24 PM »
You are treated in a manner reflecting the manner with which you represent yourself on this forum. 100% pompous bluster with zero knowledge. It would not be possible to not talk down to you.

---------

It appears you are all talk and no action. I guess you won't admit you were wrong so I will help you. You could not be more wrong.

Officer Barnett stayed at the back of the building for three minutes.

DPD Officer Welcome Barnett:  Barnett was on foot patrol at the corner of Elm and Houston, directly in front of the TSBD main entrance.  At about 12:20 PM he looked up at the windows of the TSBD and saw nothing unusual.  At 12:30 PM he heard shots, and he says that he suspected that the shots came from the top of the TSBD, and that the shooter would run down the fire escape, so he ran up Houston street to the back of the TSBD, and carefully watched the back door and the fire escape for signs of anybody climbing down.  About three minutes later, Sergeant Howard ordered him to the front of the building to get its name; so, he did.

No mention of seeing anyone emerge out of the back of the TSBD.

-------------------------


I don't know where you got this quote from (if it is indeed a quote and you didn't make it up yourself) but it isn't from his WC testimony. Better check that before you embarrass yourself any further.

I'll do you one better. Here's the relevant part of his testimony;

Mr. LIEBELER - What did you do when you concluded that the shots were coming from that building?
Mr. BARNETT - I ran to the back of the building.
Mr. LIEBELER - Ran down Houston Street?
Mr. BARNETT - Yes, sir.
Mr. LIEBELER - There is a door in the back of the Texas School Book Depository. Does it face on Houston or around the corner?
Mr. BARNETT - It is around the corner from Houston Street.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you go in the building?
Mr. BARNETT - No, sir; I didn't get close to it, because I was watching for a fire escape. If the man was on top, he would have to come down, and I was looking for a fire escape, and I didn't pay much attention to the door. I was still watching the top of the building, and so far as I could see, the fire escape on the east side was the only escape down.
Mr. LIEBELER - Since you surmised that the shots had come from the building, you looked up and you didn't see any windows open. You thought they had been fired from the top of the building?
Mr. BARNETT - That's right.
Mr. LIEBELER - So you ran around here on Houston Street immediately to the east of the Texas School Book Depository Building and watched the fire escape?
Mr. BARNETT - I went 20 foot past the building still on Houston, looking up. I could see the whole back of the building and also the east side of the building.
Mr. LIEBELER - Did you see anybody coming off the fire escape up there, or any movement on top of the building?
Mr. BARNETT - Not a thing.
Mr. LIEBELER - What did you do after you went around behind the building?
Mr. BARNETT - I went looked behind the building and I saw officers searching the railroad cars. I looked around in front towards the front of the building and I saw officers going west.
Mr. LIEBELER - Going west down the little street there in front of the School Book Depository Building?
Mr. BARNETT - Yes; but there was no sign they were going into the building or watching the building, so I decided I was the only one watching the building. So since this was the only fire escape and there were officers down here watching the this back door, I returned back around to the front to watch the front of the building and the fire escape. Then I decided maybe I had been wrong, so I saw the officers down here searching.


Initially, Barnett didn't get any further, on Houston, than about 20 foot from the front corner of the building, where he was when the motorcade passed by. Only later did he go to the back of the building but by then other officers were already there.

Barnett also did not stay at the back of the building for 3 minutes. He testified that he was at the location marked "9" on CE 354 when he heard the shots.

https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0487a.htm

He then ran about 20 foot down Houston and watched the fire escape. On some point he went to the back of the building (still staying on Houston) and saw cops there, so he ran back up Houston to his original location ("9"). From there he ran along the street in front of the TSBD towards to railway yard. He then returned to the location marked "8" on the map. He estimated that all of that took him 2 1/2 minutes, which means that he could not have been at the back of the building for more than a few seconds.

And this part of the testimony shows conclusively that either Barnett's time estimate is wrong or he couldn't have done his run between 12:30 and 12:33, because the front door of the TSBD wasn't sealed off until after 12:36.

Mr. LIEBELER - Do you think it was as quickly as 2 1/2 minutes from the time the last shot was fired until the time you got to the front door? Do you think it was that quick?
Mr. BARNETT - I believe it was 2 1/2 minute probably from the time I ran from the back to the front. That was probably 2 1/2 minutes. Then it took me 20 or 30 seconds more before I got to the front there.
Mr. LIEBELER - So you recollection is that it was fairly short order that you got to the front door?
Mr. BARNETT - Three minutes at the most.
Mr. LIEBELER - Now who was the one sergeant who instructed you to post yourself there at the door, or was it somebody else?
Mr. BARNETT - Sergeant Howard.
Mr. LIEBELER - You remained there at the door for how long?
Mr. BARNETT - Until 3 o'clock. Close to 11:30 to 3 - close to 12:30 to 3.

And finally, to debunk your misrepresentation completely, Barnett did not carefully watch the back door, as you claim. He actually testified that he didn't pay much attention to the door, so even if he was there within a minute of the shots (which he wasn't) it is still possible that he didn't see anybody coming out of the back door simply because he wasn't looking.

I see you still have no explanation for Dorothy Garner saying the girls went down the stairs before Baker and Truly came up. Now, there's a surprise....  :D

Quote

The fragments were matched to the rifle independently by three different FBI Experts.

Mr. EISENBERG - Mr. Frazier, did any other firearms experts in the FBI laboratory examine the three cartridge cases, the bullet, and the two bullet fragments which you have testified as to today?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, all of the actual firearms comparisons were also made by Charles Killion and Cortlandt Cunningham. These examinations were made separately, that is, they made their examination individually and separately from mine, and there was no association between their examination and mine until both were finished.
Mr. EISENBERG - Did the three of you come to the conclusions which you have given us today as your own conclusions?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.

Mr. EISENBERG - Did anyone in the FBI laboratory who examined the evidence come to a different conclusion as to any of the evidence you have discussed today?
Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir

------------------------------


You still don't get it. Pfff... Oh well, I can't fix stupid

Quote

There is no problem with the evidence and how it was gathered.

Frazier examined the car that had been under continual Secret Service guard.

Mr. FRAZIER - I examined the car to determine whether or not there were any bullet fragments present in it, embedded in the upholstery of the back of the front seat, or whether there were any impact areas which indicated that bullets or bullet fragments struck the inside of the car.
Mr. SPECTER - With respect to the fragments first, what did your examination disclose?
Mr. FRAZIER - We found three small lead particles lying on the rug in the rear seat area. These particles were located underneath or in the area which would be underneath the left jump seat.

-------------------------

Yes, Frazier examined the car after others had already been through it. Frazier did not find the fragments, you were talking about earlier, himself. They were given to him. Only in your fairyland is that not an evidentiary problem.


Quote
LHO's rifle which had been discovered on the 6th floor was independently matched to the bullet fragments by no less than three different FBI experts. Is this where you finally admit you were wrong?

There's nothing to admit. You jump to conclusions, misrepresent the evidence and make assumptions. You do all that, but you can't answer a simple question;

Where did Frazier or any other expert say when the bullets were fired by that rifle?

Perhaps if you watch some more cops shows you might find an answer.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2022, 08:01:30 PM by Martin Weidmann »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #52 on: January 19, 2022, 05:25:24 PM »


Offline Jake Maxwell

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 383
Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #53 on: January 19, 2022, 09:37:35 PM »
Below is from a CNBC article dated 10/28/2017.
Why were intelligence officials so persistent 54 years after the assassination?
I’m not sure they were trying to protect individuals by keeping records classified... but perhaps protect the integrity of their own government agency...
It is a real puzzle...


"It was a showdown 25 years in the making: With the world itching to finally get a look at classified Kennedy assassination files, and the deadline for their release just hours away, intelligence officials were still angling for a way to keep their secrets. President Donald Trump, the one man able to block the release, did not appreciate their persistence. He did not intend to make this easy.

Like much else surrounding investigations of the 1963 killing of President John F. Kennedy, Thursday’s release of 2,800 records from the JFK files was anything but smooth. It came together only at the last minute, with White House lawyers still fielding late-arriving requests for additional redactions in the morning and an irritated Trump continuing to resist signing off on the request, according to an account by two White House officials. They spoke only on condition of anonymity to discuss internal discussions."
« Last Edit: January 19, 2022, 09:39:41 PM by Jake Maxwell »

Offline Jerry Freeman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3725
Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #54 on: January 20, 2022, 12:44:38 AM »

Officer Barnett stayed at the back of the building for three minutes. Barnett was on foot patrol at the corner of Elm and Houston, directly in front of the TSBD main entrance.  At about 12:20 PM he looked up at the windows of the TSBD and saw nothing unusual.  At 12:30 PM he heard shots, and he says that he suspected that the shots came from the top of the TSBD, and that the shooter would run down the fire escape, so he ran up Houston street to the back of the TSBD, and carefully watched the back door and the fire escape for signs of anybody climbing down.  About three minutes later, Sergeant Howard ordered him to the front of the building to get its name; so, he did. No mention of seeing anyone emerge out of the back of the TSBD.

   
Quote
About three minutes later, Sergeant Howard ordered him to the front of the building to get its name; so, he did.   
Where is that? As Martin mentions...I fail to see this in any testimony. Besides, why would Barnett need to go back to the front to identify a building he was stationed at in the first place and that every cop in town knew the name of anyway? Three minutes wouldn't have been enough time to see much of anything. The whole world could have seen someone coming down the fire escape [see picture]--However there was a scuttle hole from the roof down to the seventh floor for easy access. Not many knew this fact.
As originally built----



JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #54 on: January 20, 2022, 12:44:38 AM »


Offline Mike Orr

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 397
Re: Why classify information?
« Reply #55 on: January 20, 2022, 06:20:13 AM »
The reason to classify information for so many years( 75 )was for all of us to die within that period and at a certain point in time , those of us would either be to old or already dead !!!!!!!!!!!!!