|
|
#341
March 5th 04, 06:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Pres. Kerry's NASA
"Rand Simberg" wrote in message
.. . Eric is the master of the non-sequitur. I am the master of the non-sequitur. I may not make much sense, but I do like pizza. The first time somebody laid that one on me, I laughed 'til I cried. Of course, it's always possible the fact I'd been without sleep for something like 20 hours might have had something to do with that... -- Regards, Mike Combs ---------------------------------------------------------------------- We should ask, critically and with appeal to the numbers, whether the best site for a growing advancing industrial society is Earth, the Moon, Mars, some other planet, or somewhere else entirely. Surprisingly, the answer will be inescapable - the best site is "somewhere else entirely." Gerard O'Neill - "The High Frontier" 
|
|
#342
March 6th 04, 01:28 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pres. Kerry's NASA
|
|
#343
March 6th 04, 03:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pres. Kerry's NASA
|
|
#345
March 7th 04, 02:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pres. Kerry's NASA
|
|
#346
March 7th 04, 02:24 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT: JFK books (was Pres. Kerry's NASA)
"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
... : since Newman is a professor at Maryland where the Archives are now housed, : that's hardly surprising. Posner lives in NYC and is a freelance : investigative journalist and attorney, he's moved on to other things in his : career. Peter Dale Scott lives and teaches in CA, yet he gets to the archives. It is the difference between a true researcher and a huckster. Like Richard Hoagland, Posner is a huckster. no, it just means that Peter Dale Scott has made the JFK case his one big hobby that he spends a lot of time on. Posner wrote a book about it and moved on. That doesn't make the man a huckster, it just means he's not an obsessive-compulsive personality like a lot of CTers. : But the WCH is the BEST eveidence for a conspiracy. You ought to read it : sometimes. : been there, done that What did Lee Bowers see while in his tower? he saw three cars enter the area, circle around like they were looking for a parking place and then turn around and leave, then after the third shot he saw some sort of commotion that he couldn't describe but that made him think something had happened there. That's not much to base a conspiracy theory on, sport. Especially since he couldn't even reliably determine the time that the three cars appeared. And especially since he seemed to be trying hard not to come out and say that while the TSBD was being renovated he did a little moonlighting as a laborer while he was clocked in on the Railroad's dime  And *most* especially since he went into some detail about how you often cannot tell where a sound in DP was coming from: Mr. BELIN - And were you able to form an opinion as to the source of the sound or what direction it came from, I mean? Mr. BOWERS - The sounds came either from up against the School Depository Building or near the mouth of the triple underpass. Mr. BALL - Were you able to tell which? Mr. BOWERS - No; I could not. Mr. BALL - Well, now, had you had any experience before being in the tower as to sounds coming from those various places? Mr. BOWERS - Yes; I had worked this same tower for some 10 or 12 years, and was there during the time they were renovating the School Depository Building, and had noticed at that time the similarity of sounds occurring in either of those two locations. Mr. BALL - Can you tell me now whether or not it came, the sounds you heard, the three shots came from the direction of the Depository Building or the triple underpass? Mr. BOWERS - No; I could not. Mr. BALL - From your experience there, previous experience there in hearing sounds that originated at the Texas School Book Depository Building, did you notice that sometimes those sounds seem to come from the triple underpass? Is that what you told me a moment ago? Mr. BOWERS - There is a similarity of sound, because there is a reverberation which takes place from either location. Mr. BALL - Had you heard sounds originating near the triple underpass before? Mr. BOWERS - Yes; quite often. Because trucks backfire and various occurrences. so your "star witness" just confirmed a major rebuttal of the Grassy Knoll Shooter theory g : : And people in Dealey Plaza heard a varying number of shots from a : varying : : number of locations. Moral of the story: people don't all remember the : same : : event the same way, and eyewitness testimony is unreliable. : : Yes, and no. There were too many people that said a shot came from the : Grassy Knoll to dismiss that area as a possibility of having a shooter. ahem : Second, *none* of the ballistics evidence supports a shot from the front. : The "back and to the left" thing that's repeated ad infinitum is based on : simple ignorance, False. YOU got tired of hearing it, it IS in the Zfilm. sorry, I didn't explain that thoroughly. Yes, JFK's body moves back and to the left after the head shot. No, that doesn't prove that the shot came from the right front, or anywhere else for that matter. *That* is what is based on simple ignorance, people just assume that an object will push whatever it impacts forward in a straight line. Very simple physics experiment to disprove the universality of that: take a glass of water and drop something in it. Which way does the water splash? Right, it's directly *toward* the source of the impacting object, not in a straight line away from it. And no, that doesn't *prove* that the head shot came from the TSBD either, it just illustrates that there are many more variables involved than where the bullet came from. xamination of the actual evidence (for : instance, it totally ignored the fact that a large chunk of JFK's skull flew : straight *up*, as can clearly be seen in the Zapruder film. That doesn't : support a shot from the GK. Why not? The Harper Fragmant was found behind where the vehicle was and in the infield area. Motorcycle cop on that side get splattered. Up and back and to the left fits pefect with ALL the evidence better than from the Sniper's Nest. except that the motorcade was moving. The head matter got left behind and smacked into the next vehicles. Another experiment for you: while you and a friend are driving in tandem in your subdivision, wait until you get to an easy landmark (your mailbox or something) and throw a handful of dirt straight up out of the window. Will the dirt hit your friend's car? Sure, because after you release the dirt it suddenly loses the forward momentum your car gives it, and meanwhile your friend's forward momentum brought him up to the point where the dirt is still swirling in the air, so he gets hit by it. : Third, Dealey Plaza is an echo chamber, it's very hard to tell with any : certainty where sounds are coming from, especially during a sudden, : stressful event like the assassination with all the crowd noise, automobile : motors, "ricochets" of every sound, etc. It is not an echo chamber. It has tall building but on behind not in front. see above : Being in New Orleans in the summer of 63. : Oswald grew up a gypsy, his mother moved them all over the place, back and : forth, all of LHO's life. He was just in NO looking to make a living for his : family, nothing more sinister than that. Right, he just up and leaves Dallas to go get a job there at that time and he ends up handing out communist literature as a hobby. Sounds like he was doing some kind of low level operration to me. Sounds like he was desperately trying to fit in *somewhere* and basically losing it to me. : Moving him around as an agent would be : simple in fact. That is assuming he and others think that he's merely : trying to expose communists by pretending to be one. : hell of an unsubstantiated assumption there, sport. Fits perfect with his being babysat by CIA agents with Russian backgrounds and his constant dealings with the FBI. um, his "constant dealings" with the FBI amounted to him telling Hosty to go get stuffed and leave his wife alone IIRC. : : That all fits with the visit to Mexico City as well. : : : why would a "sheep dipped" assassin take a Greyhound bus all the way : across : : Mexico? : : To look like he is trying to redefect, but this time to Cuba. There is no : proof that Oswald ever actually went. In fact, the only photo of someone : that was Oswald in MC looks more like Al Bundy that LHO. Surely you have : sen the photo? : Sure, and there is also no proof that the Al Bundy clone (glad someone else : noticed that g) who's in that picture claimed to be LHO. The voice on the tapes did NOT sound like Oswald as they were much deeper. you've heard the tapes, then? : So in this case, anything the CIA did wrt the MC SovEmb while LHO was in MC : is therefore somehow involved with LHO, Wait. It seems that someone wanted to have Oswald setting off alarms within the intelliegnce community and it worked. The CIA, at least the part involved in covert activities in MC, were being used to create an image of Oswald as a communist defector. Where was the press lady equilvalent in MC as was in Moscow? Oswald walking into the US Embassy in Moscow and saying he wants to become a good prole is a news story. Oswald taking the bus down to MC and then bugging people at the Cuban and Soviet consulated for a few days and being rebuffed is quite another. Short answer: by that time LHO was old news and nobody cared. ; and therefore a sign of conspiracy. : But at the same time, the CT literature is rife with examples of people : treating the JFK case as if it existed in a vacuum, totally ignoring that : lots of daily-grind, random, totally unconnected events were happening all : around the events that did have a bearing on the case. Sorry, it is just that when one is told that a lone nut killed another lone nut that killed the president, and there was no conspiracy involved; well, let's just say "no, we want to take another look." Absolutely, take another look. But when you do you see there's really nothing there. : yep, among other places it's in the photo spread in Case Closed. So what? : Looks like someone wanted to protect Walker's privacy is all. What does his license plate ripped off a picture have to do with his privacy. Surely, his license plate would be expected to be on a car? sigh Eric, are you just desperate for attention, is htat why you ask so many totally moronic questions? Even you should be able to figure out that somebody could look at a picture of Walker's care, get his license tag number, and find out where he lived. : I am not buying that. We simply don't accept people back like that. : And your evidence for that assertion is...? My dad worked in Oberammagau in the Army/G2. Good starting place, no? depends on what he did in G2 and whether he had any knowledge of the protocols for handling returning defectors, if there indeed were any protocols. My father worked for the Air Force for thirty five years. That doesn't mean he knew how to fly a fighter jet, if you get my meaning. : But his showing up (supposedly) in Mexico City was no joke. It scared the : hell out of US officials. : not really, they just automatically perked up when an American starts : hanging around the Cuban and Sov embassies talking about wanting to go to : Russia. It would be stupid if they *didn't* pay attention to him, but there : is no evidence that LHO's trip "scared the hell out of" anybody. On 11/22/63 the incident of Mexico City scared the hell out of the CIA. you're wavering between two different things here, sport: there's the CIA reaction the weekend when LHO was in MC, and there's CIA's reaction right after the assassination when they learned about LHO's trip. The former created nothing but routine surveillance. The latter was just part of the "track down any leads" chaos of that weekend after the assassination. : Can you say "compromised"? : can you say "routine surveillance"? You need to read Newman's book, "Oswald and the CIA". Eric, please do us all a favor and actually read the entire post ebfore you start replying to it. And then go back and proofread your reply before you hit the Send key. You'll look like less of an impulsive idiot that way. : LHO goes down to MC : and sets off all kinds of alarms, yet we can't place him there. : wrong and wrong please provide a reference to your opinion. you first, since it's your theory... : : Ah, no... LHO to return to the US in the manner in which he did : : MUST have cut a deal with the State Dept. and act in some official : : capacity upon return. : : : sheesh. : : No, a fact. They even gave him a loan to make the move. Why can't we see : his tax records of 1963 if he was such a loser nobody? : because he was a loser nobody who assassinated a President, and all his : personal records were classified and then declassified according to the JFK : Records Act. All? Not his tax records. All the records have NOT been declassified. Much has but not all. shrug so what is it you think a tax form is gonna tell you, anyway? : Newman shows all the classic blunder patterns of a CTer. Yet, he was in the military, in intel and spends loads of time doing research. Can we say more qualifed than ANY lone nut author. All of them in fact. I'll put it this way: Phil Corso was in Army intel and then spent a number of years in a classified R&D office at the Pentagon. He wrote a book that claims that every major scientific advance of the last fifty years was pirated off the crashed UFO at Roswell, adn he claims to have personally seen the corpses of the little green men. Is he more qualified than anybody that says the UFO stuff is a crock of ****? Again, Eric: most people spend their entire lives being only barely adequate at their jobs. Some people are not only just marginal performers, but they're crazy as loons to boot. That specifically includes people who write books. : * he claims that hte CIA impersonated LHO and/or the Cuban consulate staff : in several of those calls; unfortunately, that would indicate that LHO was : *not* in any way connected to the CIA. Why is that? The concept of 'need to know' has the CIA keeping secrets from itself. All the time. Are you really THAT clueless?? : If they indeed were "fishing" for : information on what he had been up to, that indicates they had no clue who : he was or what he was doing. The group in MC? Sure, I can buy that. : If LHO had been part of a CIA-involved : conspiracy, I'm sure the local agents would have been given strict : instructions that they never saw or heard about him being in MC. Which is EXACTLY what they did, until the tapes showed up and they could not explain the tapes away. They had to admit Oswald was there, yet cannot prove that the real Oswald was there. so in other words you agree with me that the CIA knew nothing about LHO, but you want to twist it into something sinister regardless. Sheesh. : * if the CIA had tried to impersonate Oswald and/or Sylvia Duran to get : information from the Soviet officials...that would be incredibly stupid of : them. Why on Earth would someone that for all they know sounds nothing like : the actual people involved risk a call to someone who had been speaking with : Oswald and Duran over the last couple of days? The CIA officially has never been accused of killing JFK. To think so would be to claim JFK called for his demise, a suicide if you will. What makes you think those with an intel background, involved with the plot, would not know how to sound alarms about LHO in MC? IOW, a faction in intel not acting within an official capacity? These folks know how to keep secrets. someone please parse this into coherent English for me willya, and also 'splain what it remotely has to do with my point? : If they had been doing some : sort of "fishing" expedition, they would hav epretended to be some other : Cuban official doing a follow-up call, not the actual people involved. Also, : whoever was "impersonating" Oswald got his disjointed speech patterns and : Narluns amnnerisms down pretty damn well. If you listen to the radio : interview he did in New Orleans, or to the tapes his Russian friends made of : him, or to the interviews in teh Dallas PD building the weekend of the : assassination, tehy sound an awful lot like the Oswald that called the : Soviet embassy while sitting in teh Cuban embassy. Not according to Hoover. Much deeper voice. Ah, that's what you were thinking about. Again: there was an awful lot of bad information being pronounced by an awful lot of official people that weekend. Rumors were flying and took on lives of their own, nobody had the slightest clue what was going on, everybody was panicking and strressed to the max, and everybody was desperately trying to grab pieces, any pieces, and fit them together into a coherent picture. That specifically includes the FBI and their sister agencies. : * Newman draws a lot of his "analysis" on subtle anomalies in the : transcripts of LHO's phone calls in MC. But those are English transcripts of : conversations done in Spanish and pidgin Russian, recorded with very low-fi : equipment. It's simply not feasible to draw any meaning from strange turns : of phrase. FOr instance, Newman points out that Duran at one point tells her : Soviet counterpart that "There is an American here who says he has been to : the Russian consulate", and then asks why she would use "says he has been" : when she had spoken with her Russian counterparts about it just the day : before? But she was speaking SPanish, and there may well be a turn of phrase : in Spanish where that doesn't mean "he claims to have..." but has some other : mundane nuance that an English translation doesn't pick up on. Newman also : goes to great length to point out that when "Oswald" was then put on the : line he made a bunch of totally meaningless remarks that are inconsistent : with the events that had happened in the last 24 hours, such as asking : whether he had given the Sovs his address. But what Newman totally fails to : remember (though he mentions the fact several places, including in the : middle of this very transcript!) is that Oswald's Russian was very poor, he : had very little fluency in the language. The transcript sounds exactly like : someone trying like hell to remember the few words of Russian he knows and : use them to convey a meaning that they just won't fit into. IOW, he was : trying to make sense but he didn't have the Russian vocabulary to get his : point across, so he just flailed away using the few words he could muster. : Then the Russian consulate got fed up and just asked him to come over in : person. Right and meet with Valerie Kostikov, head of KGB assassinations in the western hemisphere. THAT is what scared the CIA and LBJ. okay, that's a plausible explanation. It still doesn't prove that there was any real connection between teh two men, though. All accounts are that Kostikov, probably because he happened to be the senior official on duty when LHO arrived, only spoke a few words with him and dumped him off on an underling at the first opportunity. Again: ships pass in the night. I've got a photograph of me standing next to Bob Dole, who exchanged probably as many words with me as Kostikov did with Oswald. Absolutely no connection or involvement, just a brief, random interaction. : *Newman points out several times that Oswald repeatedly asked about the : status of his visa request, even though he never filled out the paperwork : the Soviet officials offered him. That could be interpreted as an impostor : fishing for information, but it also is classic Oswlad: he never filled out : the paperwork to renounce his American citizenship while he was in Russia : trying to defect, he apparently botched his request to emigrate back to : America and had to wait over a year to get approval, IIRC there was some : sort of foulup in getting his discharge papers from the Marines, etc. etc. The Marines didn't feel like granting a defector anything beneficial to him. THAT is the screwup. Wrong. LHO got his discharge papers a week or two *before* he left for Europe, and for all anybody in the Marines knew he was going to go to school in Switzerland or wherever it was he applied to. The defection happened after Oswald was already in Moscow, not before. And by that time he was officially discharged from the USMC. : And he repeatedly showed an almost instinctual use of bluffing and bullying : to try to get things done instead of going through "proper channels" all his : life. He was a consummate BS artist (though he never could get the hang of : getting any actual results out of all the bluffing), and so when he went to : the Cuban embassy he told them that the Sovs had already approved his : transit visa, when they had done no such thing. then instead of filling out : the paperwork and waiting several months, he just kept bluffing until it was : obvious that he was getting nowhere. And all this caused lots of intel sensitive traffic that got noticed. Not lots, and it didn't make much of a splash apparently, other than as I say a slightly elevated level of surveillance. : *Newman mentions that Oswald told the Cubans that someone was trying to kill : him back home adn almost begged them to let him into the vountry. So riddle : me this: if he were so afraid of getting killed by THEM...then why the hell : did he even show up to work on the morning of 11/22?!? No doubt to be in the lunchroom on the 2nd floor while the real assassins were on the 6th. But be there he must so as to get the deed pinned on him. Eric, you do realize that you just suggested that Oswald *wanted* to be framed, yes? Otherwise, as I suggested, he would have invented an excuse to either not show up that morning or leave early. He would have been away from the TSBD at the time the motorcade passed the building. You really outdid yourself on this one, sparky. : He had to have known : by that point that JFK's motorcade route would pass literally in front of : the building where he worked. At the very least he would have learned about : it when he came to work that morning. Oswald had long been a big fan of spy : novels, and he would have almost certainly either have seen or known about : "The Manchurian Candidate", which hit the screen a year earlier. Oswald was : smart enough to have immediately realized that he would be the perfect : Manchurian Candidate (actually Parallax View, but that movie was a decade in : the future) if somebody wanted to get rid of JFK. JFK zooning right by his : office would be too much of a coincidence if LHO was somehow "dirty" and : also feared he was getting set up for something. "I'm a patsy." I'd rather not know that much about you, sport g : So why didn't he just : either call in sick that day, or show up for work and then invent some : excuse to have to go hoome at lunch? Wasn't there a guy who did that? Went into a bank and fired some shots and got locked up in Sept. of that year? ?!? There was another TSBD employee who called in sick that day. No idea who it was, but I'd imagine that was a common occurrence, as it still is in most offices today. You hardly ever get everybody showing up for work at the same time. : His rooming house was an easy bus trip : from Dealey Plaza, he could have just spilled some food on his shirt and : asked to take a long lunch to go home and change, or whatever. Then when he : gets to the rooming house he makes sure that he's seen while the motorcade : is in progress. Easy alibi if he was worried about being set up for a crime : he wasn't going to commit. Why be in the 2nd flooe lunchroom at the time of the assassination buying a coke? Not outside with everybody else? Because he wasn't in the lunchroom during the assassination, that's another garbled "fact" that one CTer claimed long ago, and others have quoted as "evidence" ever since. The officer who ran into the TSBD (Hargis?) testified that he saw LHO *entering* the lunchroom (which is actually a break room, it's about the size of your living room) and called him over. The only people who recalled seeing LHO right before the assassination can't place him at the time, only a few minutes before. The building is small enough that in two or three minutes you can be anywhere in the building after starting ffrom anywhere else. It's a *small* building, I don't have to tell you that since you've been there. : Or Alek Hidell was his alias. : that's a tautology, he ordered the Carcano and his pistol under that name : IIRC. THe point is that him using an alias doesn't make him a spook, just a : petty criminal. Lots of people do that. Hosty's note probably indicates more about LHO having been a spook. another two-wheel screech around a corner, sport. All the "Hosty note" thing proves is that the FBI had been maintaining contact with LHO (for perfectly normal reasons, i.e. keeping occasional tabs on a former defector who had been arrested for handing out Communist material in NO), and after LHO was murdered whoever was Hosty's boss decided (in finest bureaucratic tradition) to cover his an dhis office's ass by getting rid of the note. Again, nothing more than typical government CYA, no reason to read anything else into it. : a) Kostikoff was under diplomatic cover, which means he also had to spend a : lot of time doing his "day job" at the embassy; b) Kostikoff very briefly : conferred with Oswald in the lobby, then turned him over to Nechiporenko. : Then Kostikoff had later discussions with Nechiporenko and Duran about : Oswald's requests. The assertion that LHO "supposedly met with" the head KGB : assassin is misleading and bordering on downright disengenuous. Jim MacNeil : "met with" LHO just minutes after the assassin, does that mean that Oswlad : was an NBC operative? hell no, it just means that ships pass in the night. Then why was LBJ scared about it if there was nothing to be scared about? uh, because LBJ was a typical bully who was terrified that something bad was going to happen to *him*? I don't believe that Kostikov meeting with Oswals was sinister in and of itself. What I believe is that someone else wanted to make it appear to be sinister. And it worked. you startred off fine, then drifted once again. Guess that's an improvement though. : There are : several recordings that were intercepted that have the two meeting, Oswald : identifying himself my name, and not sounding anything like LHO! : I've never heard these recordings, nor seen transcripts that prove : conclusively that the person claiming to be LHO was in fact someone else. : There are, however, plenty of transcripts and notes about conversations : where the American doesn't state his name, just mentions his previous : contact. You can read into that what you will, I read into it that : surveillance is a very imprecise art and people don't give the information : you'd want them to in normal conversation. Wasn't Kerry Thornley thougt to be an Oswald double? nope, Thornley was the Marine who enjoyed debating religion and politics with LHO while they were both in the Corps. That ended when LHO got his feelings hurt after Thornley made fun of him. : Now, : after the assassination of JFK guess : what comes out of the FBI by way of Mexico City? Those recordings from : early October 1963 of Oswald and Kostikoff! THAT is how LBJ convinced : Warren to head the commission. : Here's the relevant part of LBJ's conversation with Hoover on 11/23/63 (the : day after the assassination when things were still total chaos and nobody : had a clue what was going on): : JOHNSON: Have you established any more about the [Oswald] visit to the : Soviet Embassy in Mexico in September? : HOOVER: No, that's one angle that's very confusing for this reason. We have : up here the tape and the photograph of the masn who was at the Soviet : embassy, using Oswald's name. That picture and the tape do not correspond to : this man's voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears that : there is a second person who was at the Soviet Embassy. Right. That is pretty telling. except that there's no indication that the second person at the Soviet Embassy had anything whatsoever to do with Oswald or vice versa. Hoover got a highly scrambled account of the surveillance is all. : This seems awfully suspicious until you remember just how chaotic that : weekend was. Rumors and bad "facts" were flying all over the place just like : they always do when a disaster happens. The probability is that the MC field : office had at some point (either in October while LHO was in MC, or in a : rush to compile all available data in teh hours after the assassination) : conflated two separate visits by two totally unconnected men. In short, the : FBI got it wrong, which they have an annoying tendency to do, especially : during crunch time. Nothing more mysterious than that. Too convenient for the lone nut theory. It is another case when evidence conflicts with your point of view, then ignore it. Believe me, as head of the coverup, the last thing Hoover wants is evidence of a conspiracy. But that is exactly what he is talking about when he's dicsussing the tapes and photos. So now you're saying that Hoover was the "head" of teh conspiracy?!? : no, it doesn't. FOr the simple reason that a coup requires many more people : to not only be involved but to keep their mouths shut about it afterwards. : Two losers trying to be the Lone Ranger is much more likely. Less fun to : think about, but oh well. But people can keep their mouths shut. And how big does this coup have to be people-wise, IYO? Depends on which alleged coup you mean. A mafia hit, a couple dozen people. Any of the different flavors of They, you're talking several times that many. : To that I say: : The folks that state that the lone nut theory is true can't handle the : possibility that a coup d'etat happened in their great USA. : sure we can, but the evidence simply does not support the conclusion. Wrong! You filter the evidence until it fits your belief. The conspiracy theories are based upon all that you ignore. oh nok, we don't ignore it, we *laugh at it* : Coups are : the byproducts of backward Banana Republic nations, not the greatest : country on Earth. Not only was it a coup but it was one that they got away : with as well. : Here's the huge, huge problem with a coup: what if it fails, which they : usually do? Do they? No, the only ones that you know about are the ones that fail. coughDiemcough : Surely, read "Lyndon" by Merle Miller, around page 321. I can get the : exact page if you like. : since you were talking about what the WCR (or at least Earl Warren) says, : why should I want you to quote from a biography of LBJ? Because it is Warren talking about the assassination. Your approach reminds me of the Christians that haven't read any other book than the Bible. Great book but didn't help us get to the Moon. ?!? There is plenty of evidence of a coup. Where was LBJ from a small town in Texas IIRC and how and who put him into power? he was originally elected to teh Senate in 1948 if memory serves, before that he'd been in teh state legislature. I forget "who" got him elected, but he had been in teh Senate for two terms when he got tabbed to be JFK's running mate. : No doctor, bloodstains or not, destroys forensic evidence. It is NOT his : place to do so. : According to whom? First, he didn't *destroy* the evidence, he simply : recopied it. And for the umpteenth time, in 1963 there was very little : understanding of "forensics" (if that term had even been coined yet) as we : know it today. Chain of custody procedures and evidence-handling procedures : were primitive by today's standards. You have to apply the standards that : were in place at the time, sport. IOW, don't look at the mishandling with suspicion, make it fit your theory. There is too much to ignore and try and explain away. Eric, what part of "there were no formal procedures in place in 1963 to handle something like an assassination investigation" don't you understand? You're Monday-morning quarterbacking based on what we know and understand well after the events in Dallas. But at the time nobody had a clue what they were doing, so they did things they thought were for the best. That's not conspiracy, just well-intentioned ignorance. As opposed to the other kind... : Nobody "officially" performed surgery on the head, yet evidence that : surgery was performed on the head exists. : Citations, please...? The FBI Siebert report, see: http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/ Sibert's partner that day, Francis O'Neill, told Posner that "(w)e weren't doctors, and it was weither Humes or Boswell, but I just wrote it down as I understaood it. There wasn't any surgery on the head, only my misunderstanding of what the doctors were talking about". The chief forensic pathologist on the HSCA (which concluded that the assassination was probably a conspiracy, so you probably believe them) says flat out that David Lifton, who based huge chunks of his book on the Sibert memo of 11/26/63, "just doesn't know what he is talking about". Even Cyril Wecht totally dismisses Lifton's claims, if that makes you feel any better. : I see you haven't changed your position. : actually I have, I used to believe the "Mortal error" scenario (the head : shot accidentally fired by one of JFK's bodyguards) until I saw the Bronson : film. Before that, the very first CT book I ever read was Crenshaw's, and : for awhile I believed that one until I read more about the case. Read Summers' book "Conspiracy". don't even get me started g : Right makes me think a entrance shot to the right rear could NOT exit the : right front. : have you looked at the models? Did you look out the sixth floor windows down : to the mark on the street? Yes. I bullet that enters the rear right will exit the front left not the front right. Only if the bullet entered the skull from the 3-6 o'clock quadrant. That simply wasn't the case, it was coming in on a right-to-left trajectory wrt the skull's centerline. Again, that's because of the curve of Elm and Kennedy's tilt to his left at the time of the headshot. : I have. Connolly saying "no,no" is after JFK was holding his hands to his : throat. How could a man say "no,no" if he were hit by the same bullet? : well, he is widely quoted as having said "they're going to kill us all!" : after he had collapsed, go figure But, "no, no" was before he was hit and after JFK was hit. Interesting to do with a single bullet theory. only if you don't know when each man was hit. : Weisberg, Newman, Lane, Epstein, : Summers, Buchanan, Josiah Thompson, Peter : Dale Scott: read "Deep Politics and the Death of JFK". It is truely an : enlightning book. : I think you mean it's *truly* an *enlightening* book, and I would advise you : that so is a basic grammar text. You going for grammer flames is even low for you. You can't %$^# spell the word, "the" as you spelled it "teh" several times. sheesh, of course I can spell "the". What you are describing is a phenomenon I call "computer dyslexia". I have no idea what the proper terrm is (assuming there even is a proper term), but as best as I can suss it, here's how it happens: You start to type a word on the keyboard. Before you're finished typing the word your mind has gone on to either the next word or, quite often, something extraneous (the phone rings or somebody walks by in the hall, whatever). At that point, as you finish typing the word, your brain has moved that thought from the "current" buffer to the "cache", and to dig it out your brain has to "rewind" as it were. So you type the next few letters in reverse order because that's the way your brain is now accessing that information, last-in-first-out. That's a very, very common phenomenon with computers. It happens to a wide variety of people, none of whom (myself included) seem to show any signs of "standard" dyslexia. It's just that the speed with which we interact with computers has occasionally gotten faster than our brain's ability to clear out the "current" buffer, if you get my meaning. So: if I put a few "teh"s in a post it's not because I don't know how to spell the word, Eric. It's just a neurological phenomenon unique to typing words on a computer keyboard. Now if I used "they're" when I should have used "their", or "truely" instead of spelling it the correct way with the "e" dropped, *that* is bad grammar. So get off the superiority kick before I slap you around with some razor sharp wit! as if g : I'm wondering if you come from the school that says: : : liberal = dumb : conservative = smart : no, I come from the school that says that if the liberals didn't exist, teh : conservatives would have to invent them. The again. Well, same could be said of conservatives, etc. exactly : One of my favorite memories from college, one that I can share, at any rate : - one day in an economics class someone asked the professor (a memberof : the Cato Institute) whether he was a Democrat or Republican. His answer: : "I'm an economist". : Classic g I haven't heard of the Economist Party. Is it libertarian? sigh the point he was making was that he isn't a politician, he's just an economist. Just assume it's funny : Well, let me put it this way: : We all start out as liberals. Then we learn a few things and we become : conservatives. Most stop right there. Others of us continue to grow and : become liberals again! : So what you're saying is that you're in your second childhood, that figures : Right, and that will make me live longer as well. Liberals live longer than conservatives. well, the longest life expectancy on the planet is supposed to be the Chinese, so I guess you're right about that : Earth as well, but probably someplace where the air hasn't fouled up my : ability for critical thought. : coughBerkeleycough Well, so you can go and debate Peter Dale Scott on the assassination as he is right where you live. Isn't Berkeley a hotbed of liberalism? I have no idea, I've never been anywhere near Berkeley. : Buchanan's book was huge in Europe. I suspect that it, like "Farewell : America" (ever read it?), was frowned upon and was difficult to get when : it came out. : shrug the regview sounds like it's just garden-variety CT drivel, no : different than all the others. Except he's not afraid to tie it into Texas oil money. neither was whoever wrote "The Texas Connection", which was just as moronic and intellectually-challenged as any other CT tome. : I am anything but close-minded, I assure you. I go to enormous lengths to : study all aspects of a topic, ussally well past the point where each side is : starting to repeat itself. Do you know anything about experiential learning? in a nutshell, "experience begats reflection begats action". Nice idea, but in practice it seems to be just one fo those rationalizations why making stupid students take exams "lowers their self-esteem". **** that ****, you want self esteem you go do something to earn it. But we digress g -- Terrell Miller "It's one thing to burn down the **** house and another thing entirely to install plumbing" -PJ O'Rourke
|
|
#347
March 7th 04, 02:29 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pres. Kerry's NASA
Tom Merkle ) wrote:
: (Eric Chomko) wrote in message ... : : So, because someone else, a Jew, gavemoney to the Nazis in the 30s, this : somehow nullifies Prescott Bushes money ties to them? : It does since there's no evidence of communication or collusion with : Thyssen's German (and hence Nazi) efforts! : : Read this and respin your post above: : http://www.geocities.com/bushfamilynazis/ : : Eric : Eric, if you don't even read your own sources all the way through, : what's the point of posting them? : Note this article makes several early 'scandalous' observations : without any overt reference to actual primary sources. I direct you to : the bottom portion of the article, that reveals this crucial fact: : "The essence of this story has been posted for years : on various Internet sites, including BuzzFlash.com and : TakeBackTheMedia.com, but no online media seem to : have independently confirmed it." : Do think the most prominent public family since the Kennedys has not : been exhaustively researched on this topic? Don't be naive. No major : media has independantly confirmed it because, after detailed : investigation into the evidence supporting the theory originally put : together by Anton Chaitkin, they determined there was NO SUPPORT for : the claims, just inference and name-calling. These claims emerged so : late after the war because the tenuousness of the links would have : been deemed rediculous by any who actually remembered that Nazi : Germany was the US's second largest trading partner during that time : frame. See he http://www.lumiya.com/comment/Bush%2...%20Dynasty.htm Eric : Tom Merkle
|
|
#348
March 7th 04, 03:04 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT: JFK books (was Pres. Kerry's NASA)
Jim Davis ) wrote:
: Eric Chomko wrote: : There is no proof Oswald shot Tippet or any other policeman. : Words fail me. A dozen witnesses place Oswald at the scene. Did any of them pick him out of a lineup or was that the cab driver that took him home before the Tippett murder? Surely, you are aware of all the controversary surrounding the shells being different that Oswald's gun? Whether is was a semiautomatic or not? The different color jackets? The route Oswald would have had to take to leave his house, kill Tippett and get to the theather? Tippet's death, like the JFK assassination itself is not a open and shut case. : Didn't his gun jamb? : No, it most certainly did not. When they did a powder burn test on Oswald, what did it prove? : The number of bullets didn't match and the : original reports of the shell from the Tippett murder were of a : different caliber than Oswald. : No. Oswald's gun was a .38 rechambered to handle .38 special ammo. : He used 2 different makes of ammo: Remington-Peters and Winchester- : Western. 2 shells of each were found, while 3 of one type of bullet : and 1 of another were recovered from Tippit, meaning at least one : shell and bullet were not recovered. All four recovered shells were : matched exclusively to Oswald's revolver. All bullets were : consistent with Oswald's gun but only one could be matched : exclusively to it. But they never provd Oswald fired a shot due to the lack of powder burns. And the match to Oswald's gun was done days later after several vollyes back and forth between Dallas and DC with the evidence. The screwups smack big-time of a coverup. : On the same token Oswald said to Dohrenschildt (who would up : dead supposedly of suicide before testifying to the HSCA back in : 78) that he liked Kennedy and his politics. : He liked Kennedy's politics so much he tried to start a Fair Play : for Cuba chapter in New Orleans. That whole ting was a charade. Didn't you see the film JFK where Oswald's literature had Bannister's address stamped on it? An anti Castro operation tolerating Oswald renting a room in their building?!?!? Sheep-dipping! : : : Now, why would it do that? If a remarkable circumstance is : : equally consistent with both official and other theories why : : would it count only against the official version? : : What remarkable circumstance are you hypothesising here? : Take your pick, say Ruby shooting Oswald. That is the point there are so many circumstances. Too many in fact, to not lead to speculation of a conspiracy and coverup. : : I suspect that many a believeer : : in the LNT would never believe it were it not the offical : : explanation. : : : Sure, and Brad Guth suspects that many a believer in the Apollo : : moon landings would never believe it were it not the official : : explanation. : : Ah, make ALL conspiracy theories on the same level as the : Roswell alien hoax. Are you following a script? Are you to : become predictable now? : I see you don't like your intellectual integrity questioned either. No, I'm questioning your agenda. : : Are you sure you care to descend to this level of discourse, : : Eric? : : No, but you just did. : Yes, I did. I think I made my point. What point? I seem to have missed it. : : : Can your father give a source for the law, regulation, order, : : or whatever that *required* Oswald to be interviewed in 1962? : : Probably only military defectors. For ex-military defector that : are actually redefecting with a native wife and infant child, : I'd suspect that that would be under the domain of the FBI : (Legat) and/or CIA. : You seem to have retreated a further step. First, you claim we : don't let people like Oswald back into the US. Then, you claim we : do let people like Oswald back into the US but they're required to : be debriefed in Europe first. Now, you only "suspect that would be : under the domain of the FBI and/or CIA". It is a manner of who does the debriefing, not whether there is a debriefing. Way too much evidence gets explained away with the Lone Nut Theory based upon government incompetence. : Can you quote ANY law that is covered under : a cloak of secrecy? Noit only do I bet that you can't, you : probably are allowed to do so. : That's why I restrain myself from throwing around charges of : conspiracy and murder I can't back up. : Therefore, LNT is true? : Yet, no one was there : Eric, there were plenty of people there. People *do* have memories. : Appendix XI of the WCR reproduces various reports of Oswald's : interrogation. But no one felt that it should be written down. Why? : and neither are there any transcripts. Not : only does the aspect of remaining silent carry the rejoinder : that any information can be used against you. The latter implies : that it will be written down or taped; recorded in some fashion. : No, it does not imply that it will be; it implies that it can be. "Can and will" is what it states. : Yet, we are to believe that on the evening of 11/22/63 and the : morning of 11/23/63 in DPD NOTHING was ever reorded and that : that was noraml for the time. No!!!! : I am sorry you find this well documented fact so hard to believe. : Yes, I do, that plus no debriefing is just too convenient for the LNT. : Close enough. It wasn't days or weeks later. The point is that : he never admitted to doing so. And that is rare in politcal : assassinations. His one chance as a loser to get heard and he : denies it. And then he is silenced. Even you must find this at : odds with the Lone Nut Theory. Either that or your truely have : Orwellian-level abilities of brainwashing inherent. : This is beyond bizzare, Eric. You are actually claiming that : Oswald's denials are inconsistent with his acting alone? No, it is just that for the LNT to be so certain by those that believe it, I find that Oswald's denials ironic, that's all. : : : What was said or not : : said in the interrogation has no logical connection to whether : : Oswald was given ample opportunity to secure counsel. He was : : allowed phone calls. He was allowed a visit from the Dallas : : Bar. He was allowed a visit from the ACLU. He was allowed a : : visit from his family. He foolishly persisted in trying to get : : a New York attorney who wasn't reachable. Are you denying any : : of this? : : How do you know all what he was allowed? THERE IS NO : DOCUMENTATION!!! : Again, Eric, people *do* have memories. Was Gregory Olds of the : ACLU mistaken or lying we he visited Oswald to see if he wanted a : local attorney and said that he was satisfied Oswald rights were : not being violated? Was H. Louis Nichols of the Dallas Bar mistaken : or lying we he visited Oswald and said that Oswald declined his : offer to find a local attorney but asked for help in getting Abt? : Was his brother Robert mistaken or lying? Was Mrs. Paine mistaken : or lying? You have to stop kidding yourself. Right, Oswald rights were not violated right up until the time he was killed while in custody. And the latter you find routine? Especially in light that NO counsel, for whatever reason, was given. Epstein and Lane go into all this in great detail. : : And before he gets cousel he gets killed while in : : police custody. Do you not see soemthing suspicious about : : that? : : : Yes, it leads me to suspect that someone wanted to kill Oswald. : : Right, to keep him quiet about the conspiracy that killed : Kennedy. : Non sequitur, Eric. Only if you believe in the LNT based upon emotional reasons. : : : What if that scenario came out of the USSR at that time with : : the premier, would you be so open minded? : : : I treated official pronouncements from the Soviet government : : with great scepticism *regardless* of the conclusions drawn. : : Exactly, yet your own healty scepticism gets tossed in the US as : if we are simply above that sort of thing. : What makes you think that my scepticism got tossed? Because I : didn't come to the same conclusions you did? No, because you haven't shown the ability to look at things objectively. That appears to be a symptom of those that believe in the LNT. : "It can't happen : here" is at the root of your belief that Kennedy was killed by a : lone nut. : And how, pray tell, could you possibly know that? Is the US capable of having a coup on its soil? : : I treat official pronouncements from the US government with : : great scepticism *regardless* of the conclusions drawn. : : You seem to give the WC findings a pass in this case. : Really, why does it seem that way? Because I don't reject their : findings out of hand? No, because you don't question them. : : : Given the fact there is no such person as "Clay Bertrand", I : : would guess the recant. : : Clay Bertrand was a alias for Clay Shaw, right? : No, wrong. That was Jim Garrison's particular delusion. : : : Yes, they are. What leads you to suspect Craig was a greater : : leader or had more courage than others? : : Well he didn't automatically tout the lone nut scenario of three : bullets, one shooter and from the SE corenet 6th floor of the : TSBD like virtually all the others. : Textbook circular reasoning. We know that Roger Craig is a : courageous leader because he didn't tout the lone nut scenario. And : we know the lone nut scenario is nonsense because that courageous : leader Roger Craig said so. : : : Eric, I repeat that comments like these say volumes about how : : you approach the Kennedy assassination. : : Penn Jones spent half a lifetime putting together a list of : starnge deaths in the case. : None of which are strange, many of which are "in the case" only by : the most tenuous of connections, and one which might not even be a : death. Who is on Jones' list that isn't dead? : But since he was just a general in : the Army, what does he know? : I've noticed credentials only impress you when they're held by : people you agree with. Seems to go both ways. Walker was scum. Do you agree? : : Are you saying that Oswald never said to leave Ruth Paine out of : this? : No one but Craig seems to remember this. But since there were no : records kept of Oswald's interrogation it *couldn't* have happened, : right? How did Craig even know who Ruth Paine was? : : : The guy on the GK right after the assassination with SS : : credentials while all the SS in Dallas that day were in the : : motorcade. : : : Yet another change of subject. What guy is that? : : The only guy to stop people from going to the parking lot by : flashing credentials immeditaley after the assassination. It is : in several books, moat notably Josiah Thompson's "Six Seconds in : Dallas". : Only one person (Patrolman J. M. Smith) claimed to have seen a : Secret Service agent on the GK. This guy did not attempt to stop : Smith in any way; Smith went about his business which was to check : out the parked cars. The guy never claimed to be a Secret Service : agent; when he saw Smith approaching with a drawn gun he : immediately flashed his credentials which Smith assumed were Secret : Service. The man's identity has never been determined but there is : no reason to believe he had anything to do with Kennedy's murder; : indeed if he *was* involved one wonders why he hadn't left long : before. That is easy. He was covering for those on the GK who did shoot Kennedy. : I don't think there is too much point in continuing the exchange, : Eric. Please feel free to have the last word. Done. I wonder if you have sent anytime on alt.conspiracy.jfk? Your name looks familar. Eric : Jim Davis
|
|
#349
March 7th 04, 03:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
OT: JFK books (was Pres. Kerry's NASA)
"Eric Chomko" wrote in message
... : 2. The motive could very well have been political. Kennedy was : strongly anti-communist and Oswald rabidly pro-Marxist. On the same token Oswald said to Dohrenschildt (who would up dead supposedly of suicide before testifying to the HSCA back in 78) that he liked Kennedy and his politics. I think you mean DeMohrenschildt : Sure, and Brad Guth suspects that many a believer in the Apollo : moon landings would never believe it were it not the official : explanation. Ah, make ALL conspiracy theories on the same level as the Roswell alien hoax. Are you following a script? Are you to become predictable now? Guth has nothing to do with the Roswell thing unless I've missed something. He thinks the Apollo landings were faked and his meisterwerk is the one about Venus being an inhabited tropical paradise, but some sort of "out of focus lens" effect makes it look like a cloudcovered hellhole. Or something. I'm sure he'll be more than happy to tell you all about it. : Yes, a suspect has a *right* to counsel, but he has no *obligation* : to obtain one. A suspect has a *right* to remain silent but he has : no *obligation* to do so. There is no evidence that Oswald was not : given ample opportunity to obtain counsel and overwhelming evidence : that he was given ample opportunity to obtain counsel. Yet, no one was there and neither are there any transcripts. Not only does the aspect of remaining silent carry the rejoinder that any information can be used against you. The latter implies that it will be written down or taped; recorded in some fashion. now you're getting stuff out of order again. The "anything you say can be used against you" thing is part of the Miranda warning. Miranda was only arrested a few months before the JFK assassination, and the Supreme Court didn't even hadn down its decision until 1966. It was only in the late '60s that the phrase you are talking about had any meaning, in 1963 it hadn't even been invented yet. And as we've stated several times now, in 1963 Texas state law specifically prohibited any material from a pretrial interrogation from being used in court, so state law was even *more* protective of suspects than the Miranda rights. Yet, we are to believe that on the evening of 11/22/63 and the morning of 11/23/63 in DPD NOTHING was ever reorded and that that was noraml for the time. No!!!! again, Eric, please try to comprehend what people are telling you instead of just getting all het up with the same old inaccurate crap for the umpteenth time, okay? Close enough. It wasn't days or weeks later. The point is that he never admitted to doing so. And that is rare in politcal assassinations. His one chance as a loser to get heard and he denies it. he also denied being a communist on the NO radio debate until the host forced him to admit that he had not been honorably discharged from the Marines and had defected to Russia. Since the Russia thing was LHO's crowning achievement, one would think that he would have been bragging about it on a radio interview, but instead he tried to pretend it never happened. Why? Because he thought it would suit him best at the time. And then he is silenced. Even you must find this at odds with the Lone Nut Theory. Either that or your truely have Orwellian-level abilities of brainwashing inherent. or we have a much better understanding of the random dip****ness that makes up the vast majority of human behaviour... Penn Jones spent half a lifetime putting together a list of starnge deaths in the case. But since he was just a general in the Army, what does he know? erm, he was a magazine editor, not an Army officer. ANd the eighteen people he listed were mostly only tangentially connected to the case (i.e. they were one of the cast of thousands interivewed by the WC), and they didn't die mysteriously. Jim Marrs expanded the list to over 100 people, and again out of thousands who were somehow involved in the case, it's normal that a couple hundred would die in the intervening years. Most of the people on the "mystery death" list died years or decades later. There were only fourteen people who died within a year of the assassination, which is the period one would think they would be at the greatest risk of being "silenced". And most of the people on the list had nothing to do with teh assassination, they were in teh friend-of-a-friend bucket. : The guy on the GK right after the assassination with SS : credentials while all the SS in Dallas that day were in the : motorcade. : Yet another change of subject. What guy is that? The only guy to stop people from going to the parking lot by flashing credentials immeditaley after the assassination. It is in several books, moat notably Josiah Thompson's "Six Seconds in Dallas". this is another classic pattern in the CT literature. One "researcher" will make an unsubstantiated claim or ask a rhetorical question or something, and later "researchers" will quote it, totally out of context, as demonstrated fact. -- Terrell Miller "It's one thing to burn down the **** house and another thing entirely to install plumbing" -PJ O'Rourke
|
|
#350
March 7th 04, 02:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Pres. Kerry's NASA
: It does since there's no evidence of communication or collusion with
: Thyssen's German (and hence Nazi) efforts! Criticising ones ancestors is a cheap shot. How does anyone know what one's ancestors did. What if one of your ancestors was a cannable, what if he kept slaves? What if one of your ancestors worshipped some pagan deity and made human sacrifices to that god? Can I say therefore a person with ancestors like that would make a lousy President? Nothing can be done about one's ancestors, so examining ones lineage is a cheap form of attack that proves nothing. Tom
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | April 2nd 04 12:01 AM |
| Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | February 2nd 04 03:33 AM |
| Selected Restricted NASA Videotapes | Michael Ravnitzky | Space Shuttle | 5 | January 16th 04 04:28 PM |
| Selected Restricted NASA Videotapes | Michael Ravnitzky | Space Station | 5 | January 16th 04 04:28 PM |
| Unofficial Space Shuttle Launch Guide | Steven S. Pietrobon | Space Shuttle | 0 | September 12th 03 01:37 AM |
Linear Mode
