Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Thread: Death of the lunchroom hoax

  1. Default Death of the lunchroom hoax

    This mega-essay is finally gratefully finished and is available at my website's ESSAYS section at http://www.jfkinsidejob.com/death-of...unchroom-hoax/

    It is 90 pages long with about 75 photos & scans of document-portions and news paragraphs. This is required reading for anyone even tangentially affiliated with the 2nd-floor lunchroom issue. It will take 6-8 hours to absorb, and the reader might split that up into 3-4 sittings.

    Please give it your careful attention. This will become the standard reference for the lunchroom encounter topic. Every last hoax argument has been refuted.

    This is also a definitive disassembly of Bart Kamp's mega-essay Anatomy of the Second Floor Lunchroom Encounter. I found over two dozen egregious errors, a half-dozen of those gigantic enough to be called whoppers. And numerous faulty explanations derived from these basic errors of fact.

    Kamp's technique of writing without footnotes lets him say whatever he thinks he can get away with in his attempt to push his theory on unsuspecting readers. Along with several instances of misquoting people to try and tailor their statements to advance his thesis.

    In short, Kamp's essay is one of the sloppiest pieces of scholarship ever to come down the pike. Those who have endorsed his work never bothered to do any simple fact-checking. This will embarrass you for the remainder of your research careers.

    You may not like me, but you will eventually thank me for straightening out this holy mess.

  2. Default DEATH of the "D o t L H" attack on Mr. Kamp

    I had just dove in without a preface.... The following is what jumped out at me in my first look thru of this work. I now understand that the lunchroom scene never occurred and was simply a way to cover for whoever it was coming down the stairs that these men ran into... MANY people were leaving and moving about in the TSBD at that time... something Richard fails to inform....

    In any case, I felt it important to touch on a few things that I feel Mr. G over-reached upon...

    Darnell filmed at almost exactly 20 degrees to the TSBD landing (Wiegman filmed at approximately 30 degrees). Darnell’s Camera Car 3 was about “70 feet from the closest point of the building”,1 and so about 75 feet from Frazier, and about 76.5 feet from PrayerMan. Their respective heights, above the Depository landing, were measured on my Darnell blowup as 5.2 and 4.4 cm. Since Frazier was 72.25 inches tall,
    1 Pictures of the Pain by Richard Trask, p. 424
    PrayerMan calculates to (4.4/5.2)(76.5/75)(72.25) = 5’ 2 ½”, to a reasonable approximation. This is a good 6 inches shorter than Oswald, and typical of the height of a woman. Based on the height analysis alone, it can be stated unequivocably unequivocally that PrayerMan is not Lee Harvey Oswald.

    1. PM is farther away than Frazier

    - 4.4 is 15.4% shorter than 5.2 yet they are not on the same “image plane” … nor have you determined a scale. In fact, you don’t even use the word SCALE in your entire paper yet you can claim these measurements are accurate. ???
    - Frazier was 76.5” tall… 15.4% shorter than that would be 64.7” or 5’4.7”
    - Yet as we said, PM is easily 4 feet over to the left and 3 feet further back…. How do you think that changes these ratios? Well, it would make the PM, farther away, taller than the ratio’s result… the only way PM is 5’4” is if he was standing next to Frazier and slightly in front based on the angle of the photo.

    Add, as well, the complete lack of precision in the measurements and it is any wonder there are errors when he extrapolates them down to pixel and millimeter lengths? I'd suggest Richard go to a University which can perform Photogammetry and do precise measurements - if you are going to use this as a debating point.

    Photogrammetry is the science of making measurements from photographs, especially for recovering the exact positions of surface points. Photogrammetry is as old as modern photography, dating to the mid-19th century and in the simplest example, the distance between two points that lie on a plane parallel to the photographic image plane, can be determined by measuring their distance on the image, if the scale (s) of the image is known.
    The scale of a map is the ratio of a distance on the map to the corresponding distance on the ground.


    1. The button argument is pure conjectural BS… there is not enough info in the images to allow a conclusion like that…

    - the PM piece of the image relates to a piece of the negative shown in scale to the size of the photo at the top left of this analysis
    - Assuming that level of detail is possible results in erroneous conclusions - such as there not being a uniform layout of these "buttons" .... additionally, there is so much pixelization due to the size of the area, Richard will now claim to tell us what time the watch on the wrist shows.... all kidding aside... buttons? Pu-lease.



    1. We’re now using Holmes’ testimony and memory of the interrogations?? This is the same man who claims to have found and acquired the Postal Money Order 10 hours before it was ever found… as well as the key Postal Inspector who cannot show any of his assets reporting about OSWALD receiving a rifle at his PO Box at the main downtown post office….
    2. It is next claimed that because Truly and Baker’s testimony is so eerily similar – it MUST have happened that way… 13 points of similarity…. And they both testified on the same day, with Mrs. Reid – the only other person to have seen Oswald INSIDE the TSBD


    • This storytelling fest is all the more remarkable once their mutual coordination is recognized- because a comparison of these parts of their testimonies shows 13 points of correspondence. Assuming each man actually spoke the words that are written- which were dutifully transcribed by the court stenographer- such coordination would have required many long hours of mutual preparation and a near-flawless delivery of their scripts.
    • There is no doubt that many of the 13 items occurred on the way to and up the stairs.
    • What I find a bit too much commentary is his passage:
      The machinations required to pull off a hoaxing of Truly & Baker’s testimonies begin to rival the production of an off-Broadway play. And the hoaxers have never presented one scintilla of evidence to support any claim that such shenanigans ever occurred.

      So now we need to prove the negative? Let's look a bit closer to the 13 items of concurrence:

      Any bearing on the location of the encounter?

    1- While inside the front lobby, Baker asked Truly where the stairs were
    (WCH III pp. 221, 249) no bearing
    2- Truly ran into the swinging door at the will-call counter and Baker bumped
    into him (222, 249) no bearing
    3- Truly pressed the call button and the freight elevator did not come down
    (223, 254) no bearing
    4- Truly & Baker looked up the elevator shaft (223, 254) no bearing
    5- They saw that the elevators were stuck upstairs (240, 254) no bearing
    6- Truly yelled up the shaft twice (223, 249) no bearing
    7- Truly led the way up the stairs (224, 250) now this has a direct bearing based on the closing mechanism on the door, seeing Oswald thru the window and the discounting of the person in Baker’s affidavit.
    Once again we need to sift thru commentary about “hoaxsters” and how this or that “could not be possible” – which over and over again reveals the lack of substance in the argument made up for by denouncing the belief in the opposite. Very juvenile.
    ----- One of the consequences of believing the hoax is that one has to believe that the
    accounts given above were epic fables. One has to believe that Baker & Truly
    confabulated, on camera, an explicit encounter with the alleged assassin- that they
    lied about this investigative focal point, and did so flawlessly. Plus the hoaxer has to
    remain in denial about the arguments thus far presented that establish the reality of
    the lunchroom incident.-----
    8- Baker & Oswald were just inside the lunchroom door area (225, 250) Once the “3rd or 4th floor” becomes the 2nd floor lunchroom, where else could they be?
    9- Baker was facing Oswald (225, 250) ditto
    10- Baker asked “Does he work here?” and Truly said “Yes” (225, 251) affidavit
    11- Baker left immediately (225, 251) No pointing the pistol? No noticing the man was not out of breath nor nervous? He just left – did not go back out the door, he just kept going up the stairs
    12- Oswald was calm and collected (225, 252) NOT in the affidavit
    13- Oswald had no change of expression as Baker’s gun was pointed close to him

    • (225, 252) NOT in the affidavit


    1. He uses something MARVIN JOHNSON supposedly said and footnotes MARVIN JOHNSON!
      - …On about the 4th floor Baker apprehended a man walking away from the stairway on that floor. Officer Baker started to search the man, but the building manager stated that the man was an employee of the company and was known to him. Officer Baker later identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the man he had seen on the 4th floor of the Texas Book Depository.20
      20 WCH XXIV p. 307

      https://www.maryferrell.org/archive/docs/001/1140/images/img_1140_325_300.png is page 307... which is simply a page from his report.

      IN OTHER WORDS… there is nothing to corroborate MARVIN JOHNSON ever hearing Baker associate ANYONE with the man coming down the stairs that he and Truly encounter, let alone that it was Oswald… If it was Oswald, wouldn’t honestly putting him on the stairs COMING DOWN so soon after the shooting be more incriminating than if he was in the lunchroom? And the reality is… we have no idea who the person coming down was… ATF was already in the TSBD, Sheriff’s deputies were ALREADY IN THE BUILDING….

    ------------------------
    I’d rather not get into an analysis of his attack on Bart Kamp’s work. The simple reason is that Mr. Gilbride is not being forthright with us at most every turn. Here is the first point taken:

    1)
    Why did Baker not call this in? implying that he was disobeying a direct order from Chief Curry by racing into the Depository

    Gilbride then goes on to explain that Baker knew better than Curry and since Curry was in the lead car, he could not know from where the shots came.

    Here is the actual testimony which Richard paraphrases:

    Mr. BAKER - I heard Chief Curry, the chief of the police over there, say, "Get some men over on the railroad track." I think everyone at that time thought these shots came from the railroad track.
    Mr. BELIN - By "everyone" do you include you, too?
    Mr. BAKER - No, Sir. I had it--
    (I had it…. What?)
    I was in a better position due to the wind and you know under it, that I knew it was directly ahead, and up, and it either had to be this building here or this one over here.

    So, Officer BAKER unilaterally decides to disobey a direct order and NOT go over to the RR track…. Because he “had it….” He knew better.

    What is Gilbride’s reply? But there were plenty of officers ahead of Baker who could check behind the picket fence.

    That is not the point now is it Richard? These officer should do as ORDERED… Baker it appears has another agenda.

    DJ

    I will take some time and see if the critique of Bart’s work crawls out of the muck at some point along the way yet to automatically assume that this is any more or less accurate simply because of the time, effort and images is to once again sell oneself short.

    I find this work attack-oriented, highly subjective and basically incorrect on so many accounts it would take the hours Richard asks us to take to read it, just to identify all the inaccuracies and opinion-based conclusions.

    The excuses made for MARVIN JOHNSON's report claiming to add significant detail and FACT without a shred of support is representative of the entire piece...
    Sometimes you get shown the light
    in the strangest of places
    if you look at it right.....
    R. Hunter

  3. Default

    Its really a shame it has come down to this.

    Two galleries at a football game.

    I put a lot of the blame on Duncan McRae. You know, the guy who couldn't find his data.

  4. Default ...quite disappointing...

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Gilbride View Post
    This mega-essay is finally gratefully finished and is available at my website's ESSAYS section at http://www.jfkinsidejob.com/death-of...unchroom-hoax/

    It is 90 pages long with about 75 photos & scans of document-portions and news paragraphs. This is required reading for anyone even tangentially affiliated with the 2nd-floor lunchroom issue. It will take 6-8 hours to absorb, and the reader might split that up into 3-4 sittings.

    Please give it your careful attention. This will become the standard reference for the lunchroom encounter topic. Every last hoax argument has been refuted.

    This is also a definitive disassembly of Bart Kamp's mega-essay Anatomy of the Second Floor Lunchroom Encounter. I found over two dozen egregious errors, a half-dozen of those gigantic enough to be called whoppers. And numerous faulty explanations derived from these basic errors of fact.

    Kamp's technique of writing without footnotes lets him say whatever he thinks he can get away with in his attempt to push his theory on unsuspecting readers. Along with several instances of misquoting people to try and tailor their statements to advance his thesis.

    In short, Kamp's essay is one of the sloppiest pieces of scholarship ever to come down the pike. Those who have endorsed his work never bothered to do any simple fact-checking. This will embarrass you for the remainder of your research careers.

    You may not like me, but you will eventually thank me for straightening out this holy mess.

    As I continue to read, and appreciate RichardGillBride's essay, that presents compelling reliable evidence that the SecondFloorLunchRoom Encounter is not a "hoax", and did occur as testimony indicates, I suppose it shall be forever quite disappointing to me to read the repeated criticisms by others of DPD SoloMotorcycleOfficer MarrionLewisBaker, as a trained law enforcement officer, doing his job quite courageously and following his instincts. He did not receive a "direct order" to disregard the TSBD Building and go to the railroad track area, as some have posted. He bravely, and alone, entered the building that appeared to be the location of a gunman, or gunmen, shooting from an upper area and possibly at the JohnFitzgeraldKennedySr Presidential Motorcade, that also included the FirstLady, JacquelineBouvier Kennedy,Texas Governor JohnBowdenConnallyJr and FirstLady IdanelBrillConnally in the PresidentialLimousine, and followed by a Limousine carrying VicePresident LyndonBainesJohnson and wife ClaudiaAlta"LadyBird"Johnson, along with US Senator RalphWebsterYarborough, with PoliceOfficer Escorts, SecretServiceAgents, as well as other FederalAgents, and other dignitaries and NewsReporters/Camermen at various positions in the motorcade. I have to consider other bravery as well, including that of TSBD BuildingSuperintendent RoySansomTruly, as he and OfficerBaker were among the first to began a building search for a shooter. Just maybe, those of us that can recall 11/22/'63, and the early ambiguous and chaotic reports of the assassination attempt tend to have a different perspective overall.

    Larry
    StudentofAssassinationResearch


  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LR Trotter View Post


    As I continue to read, and appreciate Richard GillBride's essay, that presents compelling reliable evidence that the Second Floor Lunch Room Encounter is not a "hoax", and did occur as testimony indicates, I suppose it shall be forever quite disappointing to me to read the repeated criticisms by others of DPD Solo Motorcycle Officer Marrion Lewis Baker, as a trained law enforcement officer, doing his job quite courageously and following his instincts.

    He did not receive a "direct order" to disregard the TSBD Building and go to the railroad track area, as some have posted. He bravely, and alone, entered the building that appeared to be the location of a gunman, or gunmen, shooting from an upper area and possibly at the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Sr Presidential Motorcade,


    that also included the FirstLady, Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy,Texas Governor John Bowden Connally Jr and First Lady Idanel Brill Connally in the Presidential Limousine, and followed by a Limousine carrying Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson and wife Claudia Alta"LadyBird"Johnson, along with US Senator Ralph Webster Yarborough, with Police Officer Escorts, Secret Service Agents, as well as other Federal Agents, and other dignitaries and NewsReporters/Camermen at various positions in the motorcade. I have to consider other bravery as well, including that of TSBD Building Superintendent Roy Sansom Truly, as he and Officer Baker were among the first to began a building search for a shooter.


    Just maybe, those of us that can recall 11/22/'63, and the early ambiguous and chaotic reports of the assassination attempt tend to have a different perspective overall.

    I am a bit confused LR. Is accuracy no longer required to make a statement of FACT? The man was in Dealey Plaza not 50 yards from the "railroad" track yet this beat cop knows better than the chief of Police... because he, "Had it ---" Had what LR? What do you think Baker knows despite being told to go to the RR yard? No, he did not disobey a direct order nor do I believe I say that... I said that he overrode the Police Chief's order due to his having knowledge he believed Curry didn't... ok... this is not a "make or break" moment.

    The entire rest of that run on sentence has no bearing on the man Baker calls out in his affidavit... or that Gillbride stretches the truth by claiming Johnson hears and relays things Baker said that were never written down or attributed to Baker... but he does so anyway?

    And that doesn't even bother to touch upon the Prayerman analysis which uses junk science to make visual measurements and comparisons - which I also show distorts the conclusion that PM was 5'2".

    I truly do not understand you POV on this one LR.... color me confused..



    Mr. BAKER - I heard Chief Curry, the chief of the police over there, say, "Get some men over on the railroad track." I think everyone at that time thought these shots came from the railroad track.
    Mr. BELIN - By "everyone" do you include you, too?
    Mr. BAKER - No, Sir. I had it--
    (I had it…. What?)
    I was in a better position due to the wind and you know under it, that I knew it was directly ahead, and up, and it either had to be this building here or this one over here
    Sometimes you get shown the light
    in the strangest of places
    if you look at it right.....
    R. Hunter

  6. Default

    David,

    Just an observation. I have to work for a living, and don't have 26 hours each day to respond to your posts. I will do the best I can to comprehensively respond to you tonight. But please, in the future, no writing off the top of your head. Put in a handwritten draft and then condense that. Thank you.

    And you seem to possess computer photography-posting skills. In that arena you are superb. Are you inclined to share that skill with one you disdain- to show him the ropes on how a photo gets posted on this Deep Politics site- or prefer to keep that knowledge under wraps?

  7. Default

    This new mega-essay is not an attack on Bart Kamp. It is an attack on the unsuspecting readers who fell for Sean Murphy's mullarkey. Bart has to be critiqued for his error-riddled thesis, which masquerades as award-winning scholarship. It's a garbage theory he's being the huckster for.

    David Josephs: "MANY people were leaving and moving about in the TSBD at that [lunchroom scene] time... something Richard fails to mention..."

    Bullcrap. No one has put more work into which specific people were in which specific place inside the TSBD than myself. You never bother reading my material, which is all publicly-available. Maybe you can enlighten us as to which people were moving where, and when, David? And do try to incorporate that into the theme and space of that section of your essay.

    *********************************

    David Josephs: "...yet they are not on the same 'image plane'... nor have you determined a scale..."

    Bullcrap. I have provided that scale. Trask determined that Camera Car 3 was approximately 70 feet from the closest point of the TSBD. That closest point wasn't Frazier. The closest point was the east corner of the building. Frazier then measures approximately 75 feet to Camera Car 3. And Camera Car 3 then measures about 76.5 feet to PrayerMan.

    Please look at the diagram on p.6; there are two separate drawings of the Darnell camera position, with the TSBD landing drawn to scale. In the real world, off the diagram, the TSBD landing is 4 ft. x 11.5 ft.

    And because PrayerMan is at the front of the landing, you can see from my compass arcs that PrayerMan & Frazier are very nearly in the same "image plane"- only a 76.5/75 = 1.04% correction needs to be made for perspective.

    ***********************

    "I'd suggest Richard go to a University which can perform photogrammetry..."

    What you have before you, which you apparently unable to discern, is photogrammetry. If you are unhappy with it, why don't you show us your own abilities at photogrammetry? So as to ascertain PrayerMan's height?

    I came up with a scientifically sound estimate of 5' 2 1/2"- nowhere near Oswald's height.

    Tell us why you think PM is in the corner, David. And don't forget to include the Wiegman film forensic that shows the vertical border-strip of the plate-glass partition at PM's east shoulder.

    - which proves he was on the front part of the landing.

    *************************

    David Josephs: "The button argument is pure conjectural BS... assuming that level of detail is possible results in erroneous conclusions..."

    Bullcrap. How do contrast-enhanced artifacts line up in vertical symmetry? They're not random artifacts!!

    Any professional photo-analyst would confirm that they are most probably buttons. I still have a faint hope that they're circular pieces of styrofoam.

    *********************

    I have some inside skinny from my high-up JFK contacts in the biz that the guy who got banned from this Deep Politics forum for expressing dissent against that garbage lunchroom hoax theory- well, he done convinced Debra Conway that Bart Kamp's award be revoked. She had nothing to do deciding on the award and it was Larry Hancock's mistake. But the fumage is so strong from those cuckooheads defending the award, they've outlawed free speech as regards anything Murphyesque. Go figure.

    Do have a nice day, unless you've made other plans.

  8. Default ?

    Quote Originally Posted by David Josephs View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by LR Trotter View Post


    As I continue to read, and appreciate Richard GillBride's essay, that presents compelling reliable evidence that the Second Floor Lunch Room Encounter is not a "hoax", and did occur as testimony indicates, I suppose it shall be forever quite disappointing to me to read the repeated criticisms by others of DPD Solo Motorcycle Officer Marrion Lewis Baker, as a trained law enforcement officer, doing his job quite courageously and following his instincts.

    He did not receive a "direct order" to disregard the TSBD Building and go to the railroad track area, as some have posted. He bravely, and alone, entered the building that appeared to be the location of a gunman, or gunmen, shooting from an upper area and possibly at the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Sr Presidential Motorcade,


    that also included the FirstLady, Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy,Texas Governor John Bowden Connally Jr and First Lady Idanel Brill Connally in the Presidential Limousine, and followed by a Limousine carrying Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson and wife Claudia Alta"LadyBird"Johnson, along with US Senator Ralph Webster Yarborough, with Police Officer Escorts, Secret Service Agents, as well as other Federal Agents, and other dignitaries and NewsReporters/Camermen at various positions in the motorcade. I have to consider other bravery as well, including that of TSBD Building Superintendent Roy Sansom Truly, as he and Officer Baker were among the first to began a building search for a shooter.


    Just maybe, those of us that can recall 11/22/'63, and the early ambiguous and chaotic reports of the assassination attempt tend to have a different perspective overall.

    I am a bit confused LR. Is accuracy no longer required to make a statement of FACT? The man was in Dealey Plaza not 50 yards from the "railroad" track yet this beat cop knows better than the chief of Police... because he, "Had it ---" Had what LR? What do you think Baker knows despite being told to go to the RR yard? No, he did not disobey a direct order nor do I believe I say that... I said that he overrode the Police Chief's order due to his having knowledge he believed Curry didn't... ok... this is not a "make or break" moment.

    The entire rest of that run on sentence has no bearing on the man Baker calls out in his affidavit... or that Gillbride stretches the truth by claiming Johnson hears and relays things Baker said that were never written down or attributed to Baker... but he does so anyway?

    And that doesn't even bother to touch upon the Prayerman analysis which uses junk science to make visual measurements and comparisons - which I also show distorts the conclusion that PM was 5'2".

    I truly do not understand you POV on this one LR.... color me confused..



    Mr. BAKER - I heard Chief Curry, the chief of the police over there, say, "Get some men over on the railroad track." I think everyone at that time thought these shots came from the railroad track.
    Mr. BELIN - By "everyone" do you include you, too?
    Mr. BAKER - No, Sir. I had it--
    (I had it…. What?)
    I was in a better position due to the wind and you know under it, that I knew it was directly ahead, and up, and it either had to be this building here or this one over here

    What POV of mine are you talking about David? Where in my post do I bring up anything about the "PrayerPersonTheory"? I am confident in my evidence based conclusion about the identity of the person represented in the image in shadow. And, I am convinced that reliable evidence is sufficient to conclude that the SecondFloor LunchroomEncounter is not a hoax, and occurred at 12:31pm/12:32pm CST, which places LeeOswald on the 2nd floor at the time.

    You seem to have overlooked a portion of Officer Baker's statement, as he dismounted his motorcycle, he heard ChiefCurry over the radio say, "Get some men over on the railroad track." OfficerBaker then commented, I think everyone at that time thought these shots came from the railroad track.
    Mr Belin - By "everyone" do you include you, too?
    As for OfficerBaker's statement, in response to Mr Belin's question regarding where he felt the shots originated from, "No, sir. I Had it--I was in a better position due to the wind and you know under it, that I knew it was directly ahead, and up, and it either had to be this building here or this one over here". To me, I would have to conclude that OfficerBaker, unscripted, was about to say something like "No sir, I had it in mind due to better positioning", and reworded his thought slightly.

    The over the radio command, whether by ChiefCurry or SheriffDecker, to "Get some men over on the railroad track", sounds to me like direction to a supervisor, and not meant to disrupt an apprehension attempt effort already in progress.

    Larry
    StudentofAssassinationResearch


  9. Default

    Richard... I will address your reply later today....

    That you believe ratios and 2d measuring gets you to accurate height is laughable....

    Buttons... Right... I Show the original negative size.... You think a button at that distance is larger than a pixel?

    All in due time Richard... I have read your work for years so don't make assumptions. This one point though needs more discussion as your assumptions and repeated mention of "hoaxsters" betrays a paranoia of the rebuttal that you need to curtail within the presentation itself.

    Calling the opposing viewpoint a hoax is intellectually depraved and too much like the current administration's SOP to not raise alarms.
    Sometimes you get shown the light
    in the strangest of places
    if you look at it right.....
    R. Hunter

  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Richard Gilbride View Post
    David,

    Just an observation. I have to work for a living, and don't have 26 hours each day to respond to your posts. I will do the best I can to comprehensively respond to you tonight. But please, in the future, no writing off the top of your head. Put in a handwritten draft and then condense that. Thank you.

    And you seem to possess computer photography-posting skills. In that arena you are superb. Are you inclined to share that skill with one you disdain- to show him the ropes on how a photo gets posted on this Deep Politics site- or prefer to keep that knowledge under wraps?
    It would be a pleasure to work thru some of debate points together Richard...

    I too work for a living... Hard to tell if that wasn't a barb in my direction, yknow,? I don't just write off the top of my head either... I post what you wrote and reply.... I have all my resources digital and searchable.... I keep indices of links virtually anything I need....

    The simple reality is that the man in Baker's affidavit was closer to the 6th floor sooner and matched the general b.s. description... If that really was Oswald closer to the 4th floor rather the 2nd.... Why move him farther away?

    In any case... Let me know what Your like to do with photos.... If you have the large, raw source files or scans that would be better....

    What were you thinking?
    Sometimes you get shown the light
    in the strangest of places
    if you look at it right.....
    R. Hunter

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •