• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories VI: Lyndon Johnson's Revenge

Status
Not open for further replies.
manifesto said:
Evidence for this?
Click to expand...
Oswald's finger and palm prints on the murder weapons.
Oswald having bought the rifle.
The records of this having been printed directly from microfiche records.
Oswald having photographed himself with the rifle.
Those photographs being from Oswald's camera.
Those photographs showing no signs of forgery.
The wounds JFK having been caused by bullets from Oswald.
The only bullets recovered being from Oswald's rifle.
The filmed footage of JFK being shot from behind.
Oswald's already having used the rifle to attempt another murder.
The fibre evidence, tying the wounds to Oswald's bullets.
The bag the rifle was transported in.
 
Tomtomkent said:
Oswald's finger and palm prints on the murder weapons.
Oswald having bought the rifle.
The records of this having been printed directly from microfiche records.
Oswald having photographed himself with the rifle.
Those photographs being from Oswald's camera.
Those photographs showing no signs of forgery.
The wounds JFK having been caused by bullets from Oswald.
The only bullets recovered being from Oswald's rifle.
The filmed footage of JFK being shot from behind.
Oswald's already having used the rifle to attempt another murder.
The fibre evidence, tying the wounds to Oswald's bullets.
The bag the rifle was transported in.
Click to expand...

Oswald's matched signature on the back of one of the backyard photos.
Oswald's possession of the forged Selective Service ID with the name A Hiddell, the same name used to order the rifle.
Oswald picked out of a police lineup by Howard Brennan
Oswald having no proveable alibi during the shooting.
Oswald's fresh prints in several places around the sniper's nest window.
Oswald's rifle missing from its location in the Paine's garage.
Oswald telling several proveable lies while under questioning.
Oswald fleeing the scene of the crime within 3 minutes.
Oswald's consciousness of guilt (fleeing immediately to his rooming house to arm himself, shooting JD Tippett, attempting to shoot officers in the Texas Theater)
 
manifesto said:
1. The average speed of the motorcade on Main Street?

2. McLain’s speed on Main Street?

3. The Harley model McLain drove?

Three questions.
Click to expand...

Shouldn't you have established all that BEFORE you started arguing McClain was in the right spot at all times?

Now you're just shifting the burden of proof once more.

Hank
 
manifesto said:
Evidence for this?

Why do you ask?
Click to expand...

Because is you claim the photos are faked ( which is possible with 1960s tech, just easily detectable with analysis*) then you also have to explain why there is a film negative of Oswald with the weapons. Negatives would seem to be harder to fake.


* And to date no decent analysis of the backyard photos has shown fakery.
 
traxy said:
This is the actual synchronization point.

https://imgur.com/a/1m8H174

The presidential limo isn't in view at this point in the Hughes film. It is in view in Zapruder, at frame 150.

What is in view is the white SS vehicle (still on Houston street, about to begin its turn) and the car in front of it (fully in the Elm-Houston intersection).

BOTH of those vehicles are in the same position in BOTH films.

Synchronization.
Click to expand...
So, how do you know they are in the same positions in these two frames?
 
manifesto said:
.I’m almost certain that Oswald was telling the truth when he stated that the photo was a fabrication.
Click to expand...

So explained why Oswald's wife and mother both said they possessed and destroyed a photo of Oswald with the rifle inscribed "to my daughter June with love" on the day after the assassination. At the same time Oswald was denying he owned any rifle and denied that was him in the photograph, his mother and his wife were destroying another photo of him with his rifle.

Or should we expect "More on this later"? ;)

Hank
 
kookbreaker said:
Because is you claim the photos are faked ( which is possible with 1960s tech, just easily detectable with analysis*) then you also have to explain why there is a film negative of Oswald with the weapons. Negatives would seem to be harder to fake.


* And to date no decent analysis of the backyard photos has shown fakery.
Click to expand...
No, I do not claim they have been faked. I claim they could have been faked and, yes, it was easy to do this in 1963 without leaving any conclusive evidence of this being done.
 
HSienzant said:
So explained why Oswald's wife and mother both said they possessed and destroyed a photo of Oswald with the rifle inscribed "to my daughter June with love" on the day after the assassination.
Click to expand...
It was his shot gun he owned in Minsk and he held it with his both hands over the head.


At the same time Oswald was denying he owned any rifle
Click to expand...
He sold the shot gun before traveling back to the US.


and denied that was him in the photograph,
Click to expand...
I believe him. You are saying he was lying?


his mother and his wife were destroying another photo of him with his rifle.

Or should we expect "More on this later"? ;)
Click to expand...
He was a member in a Minsk hunting club and there were photos taken of him with his shot gun.

Hank
Click to expand...
Yes, Hank, I can debate only a limited subjects at a time.
 
HSienzant said:
Shouldn't you have established all that BEFORE you started arguing McClain was in the right spot at all times?

Now you're just shifting the burden of proof once more.

Hank
Click to expand...
No, I’m not shifting the burden of proof. If you are claiming that the HSCA acoustic evidence have been refuted, you are the one who has to provide the evidence for this.

Or, are you saying that I have to provide the evidence supporting your proclamations?

How weired is that?
 
manifesto said:
So, how do you know they are in the same positions in these two frames?
Click to expand...

I used my eyes.

The white SS car is about to begin its turn from Houston to Elm. The car immediately in front of it is halfway in the intersection.

Both vehicles are in relatively the same position in both films (+/- a few frames). Roll one of the films forward 2 seconds and they are no longer even close to synchronized.

Ergo there is not 2 seconds of "wiggle room" for McLain to reach the first microphone spot.
 
traxy said:
https://imgur.com/a/hP5lUd4

The "LIMO" in the Z frame appears 4 different times. Once in the yellow circle labelled "LIMO", once just about to go behind the Stemmons sign, once behind the Stemmons sign, once a few feet past the Stemmons sign.

That image is only meant to show what vehicles are common to both films. It's not showing the sync points. It's an amalgamation of several different frames composited together...unless you think there were 4 Kennedys rolling down Elm Street that day.

This is the actual synchronization point.

https://imgur.com/a/1m8H174

The presidential limo isn't in view at this point in the Hughes film. It is in view in Zapruder, at frame 150.

What is in view is the white SS vehicle (still on Houston street, about to begin its turn) and the car in front of it (fully in the Elm-Houston intersection).

BOTH of those vehicles are in the same position in BOTH films.

Synchronization.
Click to expand...

He will hand wave that away with something like I've studied the two and they don't match.
 
manifesto said:
No, I do not claim they have been faked. I claim they could have been faked and, yes, it was easy to do this in 1963 without leaving any conclusive evidence of this being done.
Click to expand...

Please show us how it was easily achievable without leaving any conclusive evidence. Explain the process.
 
manifesto said:
No, I do not claim they have been faked. I claim they could have been faked and, yes, it was easy to do this in 1963 without leaving any conclusive evidence of this being done.
Click to expand...

So, magic. Do you have any evidence of how easy this was to do, not just your bare assertion?
 
manifesto said:
No, I do not claim they have been faked. I claim they could have been faked and, yes, it was easy to do this in 1963 without leaving any conclusive evidence of this being done.
Click to expand...

Easy, you say? Then please explain the process. Especially for film negatives.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom