JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fiver
    replied
    Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
    The Dallas Police executed a search warrant on Saturday, November 23, 1963 at the home of Ruth Paine. During that search, police claimed to have found pictures of Oswald with a rifle and handgun in a holster on his hip. ( Stovall Exhibit D ) But the itemized list of things they recovered during that search ( Stovall Exhibit B ) does not include the photographs or negatives, or an ad from Klein's they recovered showing the alleged murder weapon. Why not ?
    I see your source hasn't bothered to read the witness testimony.

    Mr. BALL Now, did you make a list of what you had found and took with you on that day?
    Mr. STOVALL. Yes, we did.
    Mr. BALL. Is this the list?
    Mr. STOVALL. Yes, it is.
    Mr. BALL. And where was that made?
    Mr. STOVALL. That was made down at the city hall in the Homicide Bureau.
    Mr. BALL. I would like to mark this as "Stovall Exhibit B."
    (Instrument referred to marked as "Stovall Exhibit B," for identification.)
    Mr. BALL. Now, at that time did you find any snapshots that appeared to be Oswald in the photograph?
    Mr. STOVALL. Yes, sir; Rose did, and when he looked at them, he said, "Look at this." At the time he said that--he showed us the snapshots and the negatives to me.
    Mr. BALL. Did they show you what appeared to be Oswald in the snapshots?
    Mr. STOVALL. Yes.
    Mr. BALL. He had the negatives and snapshots?
    Mr. STOVALL. Yes.
    Mr. BALL. And he showed Oswald--what was significant about the photograph?
    Mr. STOVALL. He was in a standing position just outside of the house holding a rifle in one hand and he was wearing a pistol in a holster on his right hip and he was holding two papers in the other hand.
    Mr. BALL. Did you take the snapshots?
    Mr. STOVALL. Yes, we took the snapshots.
    Mr. BALL. And the negatives?
    Mr. STOVALL. Yes.
    Mr. BALL. Where are they listed on this exhibit--this Exhibit B?
    Mr. STOVALL. I believe we listed them where we've got "Miscellaneous photographs and maps." There were several other photographs that we took when we were there.

    Mr. BALL. Now, you also found a magazine advertisement from Klein's Department Store, Klein's in Chicago?
    Mr. STOVALL. Yes, sir; that was in the same box with the photographs.​

    Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
    [B]So are we to believe that they had this rock solid evidence linking Oswald to the rifle and the handgun, both murder weapons, and they didn't even put them on the evidence list and didn't even photograph them with the rest of the evidence they confiscated ?
    Your source is lying again.

    Dallas police did photograph the backyard photos.





    Leave a comment:


  • FISHY1118
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    Nope. Gil Jesus’s opinion. His opinion doesn’t count.

    Ive already posted a link to all of the real experts who examined all of the photographs and x-rays and found absolutely zero evidence of tampering. On conspiracy theorists who don’t live in the real world disagree. Flat Earthers, Hollow Moon, Chemtrails, Sandy Hook, Pizzagate…the lust goes on. How can anyone believe conspiracy theorists.
    Oh so when you see "Actual Evidence" you don't agree with you simply ignore it and it doesn't count? Is that it ? .

    Thank you for confirming that.

    And just to educate you a little on your Autopsy experts who examined the back of jfk head photo, how many were there with clint Hill and the back of the limo on the 22nd of November 1963 ?.

    THE HOLE IN THE BACK OF HIS HEAD THE SIZE OF I COULD PUT MY FIST IN .

    Deal in real facts ,not warren commission conspiracy.



    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by Patrick Differ View Post

    How is Knott Lab a lie? You haven't answered the question regarding their results. You just mimic the Party Line.
    Knott Lab results are clearly faked by those that are ‘in on it.’

    I assume that we can all play that game?

    Fair’s fair.

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

    I thought I just post "Actual Evidence" as requested by Herlock no matter what source it comes from .

    You can thank me by accepting the fact the warren commission lied..

    The fake Autopsy photos = case closed.
    Nope. Gil Jesus’s opinion. His opinion doesn’t count.

    Ive already posted a link to all of the real experts who examined all of the photographs and x-rays and found absolutely zero evidence of tampering. On conspiracy theorists who don’t live in the real world disagree. Flat Earthers, Hollow Moon, Chemtrails, Sandy Hook, Pizzagate…the lust goes on. How can anyone believe conspiracy theorists.

    Leave a comment:


  • FISHY1118
    replied
    Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
    I thought that I’d make a suggestion to help Fishy avoid the taxing effort of cutting and pasting the entirety of Gil Jesus’s website onto here by posting this link.



    No need to thank me.

    And by the way, the answer to the question on the link is…yes he was.
    I thought I just post "Actual Evidence" as requested by Herlock no matter what source it comes from .

    You can thank me by accepting the fact the warren commission lied..

    The fake Autopsy photos = case closed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Patrick Differ
    replied
    Originally posted by Fiver View Post

    Advanced technology has repeatedly proven that the photographs were real, the ballistics were real, the fingerprints were real, and the x-rays were real. Yet Conspiracists cling to a Conspiracy that was so good at forging evidence that they could fool technologies that weren't invented yet, yet so stupid that they needed to forge evidence.
    How is Knott Lab a lie? You haven't answered the question regarding their results. You just mimic the Party Line.

    Leave a comment:


  • cobalt
    replied
    Dulles had been sidelined, but JFK was not intent on breaking up the CIA.
    The best known quote is JFK vowing to break the CIA 'into a thousand pieces.' A massive undertaking which was not possible during his first term so was put on the back burner. Had JFK been re-elected in 1964 then he presumably would have made some moves to curb its influence.

    Of course the CIA acted with impunity post the assassination, as did the FBI. When the Head of State is assassinated in public in any country then the sacking of senior security officials, even if only for public consumption, inevitably follows. This did not happen in the USA in 1963/64 which indicates the confidence Johnson retained in those who had overseen his rise to power.
    As for expanding the war, I think McCone was instrumental in making Laos the most bombed country on the planet. Maybe if he had not resigned he could have celebrated the expansion of the conflict into Cambodia. ​

    Oswald met Kostikov at the Soviet Embassy. Kostikov and other employees at the Soviet Embassy have said so
    .

    There is no reliable evidence they ever met. Kostikov could not speak English and Oswald's Russian was basic.

    So faking a phone call to the Embassy was unnecessary and shows incompetence by the Conspirators.
    Maybe the conspirators did not trust that the testimony of Soviet embassy employees would be accepted to the degree that you do. This would be the same people guaranteed to deny Kostikov was part of an assassination department. The phone call established a link between a fake Oswald and Kostikov which was independent of dodgy witnesses. A type written letter discovered by Mrs. Payne helped cement the spurious Oswald/Kostikov link.

    Thanks for admitting you have no evidence that McCloy was initially skeptical about the Lone Gunman theory.
    Maybe your browser is playing up again. Try obscure sites like 'Wikipedia,' 'Politico,' and 'Spartacus Educational,' the latter of which provides most detail on McCloy's conversion to the WC narrative.

    Leave a comment:


  • FrankO
    replied
    Originally posted by Fiver View Post
    I had seen it before, but thanks for posting it, Fiver. It's indeed a good documentary.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fiver
    replied
    Originally posted by Patrick Differ View Post
    The worst outcome was Vietnam. 58000 deaths. While those on this post may think this is about- whether Oswald did it or not, is really not the issue at all.
    Again, the myth that JFK wouldn't have escalated the war in Vietnam. This was the President whose brinksmanship led to the Cuban Missile Crisis.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fiver
    replied
    Originally posted by Patrick Differ View Post
    80% of Americans believe that its government lied to them regarding JFK, RFK and MLK.
    Reality is not an opinion poll.

    And your numbers are wrong. 50% of Americans believe in a conspiracy. 28% believe Oswald acted alone. 22% didn't know.

    And of those who believe there was a conspiracy, 43% believe the US government was involved.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fiver
    replied
    Originally posted by Patrick Differ View Post
    Using advanced technology today, not even dreamed of in 1963 , to prove an event that took place in 1963 is a lie!
    Despite advanced engineering and the fact that the technology is proven, the government is always right. Rubbish and technology averse.
    Advanced technology has repeatedly proven that the photographs were real, the ballistics were real, the fingerprints were real, and the x-rays were real. Yet Conspiracists cling to a Conspiracy that was so good at forging evidence that they could fool technologies that weren't invented yet, yet so stupid that they needed to forge evidence.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fiver
    replied
    Originally posted by cobalt View Post
    Your understanding of how a conspiracy works may not be comprehensive. The impersonation of Oswald was a bit more than an unfortunate student prank. The point of the bogus call was establish a link between Oswald and the KGB, specifically an officer called Kostikov from memory, who was allegedly head of an assassination unit. The fact this 'prank' call took place around two months before the JFK assassination speaks for itself. It also suggests the fake caller was aware that US intelligence intercepted and recorded calls made to foreign embassies in Mexico City. This indicates inside knowledge by the conspirators.
    Oswald met Kostikov at the Soviet Embassy. Kostikov and other employees at the Soviet Embassy have said so. So faking a phone call to the Embassy was unnecessary and shows incompetence by the Conspirators.

    Leave a comment:


  • Patrick Differ
    replied
    Using advanced technology today, not even dreamed of in 1963 , to prove an event that took place in 1963 is a lie!
    Despite advanced engineering and the fact that the technology is proven, the government is always right. Rubbish and technology averse.

    80% of Americans believe that its government lied to them regarding JFK, RFK and MLK. The 60s affected those of us who grew up in that America. It included 58,000 who died in Vietnam as a result of that assassination. Including personal friends and neighbors. Americans have skin in this game.

    it did not help that the government hid information. That only grew the suspicion. The WC pushed one outcome and never entertained others. Their word was good enough. But then 2 others RFK and MLK were murdered...again by some " lone nut", That only grew suspicion.

    The worst outcome was Vietnam. 58000 deaths. While those on this post may think this is about- whether Oswald did it or not, is really not the issue at all.

    The issue is whether the government lied about all 3 murders and whether these 58000 deaths could have been prevented.

    Americans have historically never trusted government. That is even more true in 2025.

    Peace

    Leave a comment:


  • Herlock Sholmes
    replied
    Originally posted by FrankO View Post
    Yes Mike, I find it hard to understand how some can use the Z-film in support of a point they want to make and then, when that very point is countered by something or some things that is/are to be seen in that film, they say they trust other evidence over the film, that some frame or other is not what it looks like or try to make some point by stating that it was only 18.3 frames per second.

    If the film is to be fake or tampered with, then, indeed, why did they leave in the initial forward movement of the president's head immediately after the fatal shot, why didn’t they erase Connally’s right hand & hat after frame 224 or instead add blood on his hand? Why not go all the way with it while they were at it?
    It makes no sense at all Frank. The wound at the side of the President’s is clearly visible but there is none at the back of his head. That should be an end to all discussion of a rear head wound. Witnesses are fallible, film isn’t. But in this case conspiracy theorists turn this logic on its head and desperately claim that witnesses were correct (at least a % of them were. The ones that didn’t agree were mistaken of course) but the film footage lies and they do this whilst saddled on the highest of horses. They suggest that we are the gullible ones for favouring the technology over human senses and memory.

    Leave a comment:


  • Fiver
    replied
    Originally posted by cobalt View Post
    Feel free to use the browser device on your internet connection. Not that McCloy's conversion should be much of a problem for WC disciples. Better a sinner who repents after all.
    Thanks for admitting you have no evidence that McCloy was initially skeptical about the Lone Gunman theory.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X