• 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.

JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
I Ratant said:
I still have it! :)
10 minutes ago...
Click to expand...

Response we should expect:
"That clearly illustrates the effect in question, and given the lack of evidence for physical tampering on the photos themselves this clearly indicates that the effects can indeed be replicated with out the need of further complicating factors like a conspiracy. Common sense dictates this is a more likely explanation."

What we actually expect:
"That is just a model. Clone LHO and photograph him on the same spot in identical conditions. It is the ONLY way."
 
I would have expected... and way back when probably suggested to Jack White, as he lives in Dallas, someone truly interested would go to Neely Street on March 31 and shoot a lot of photos of someone/anyone holding a rifle/bat/stick/paper in the poses.
But doing actual legwork is soooooooooooooo hard, compared to quoting someone who has written about it, also without going there.
And, MOF, the sun's position on March 31 also occurs later in the year in the fall, about the time the CTwinkies gather to fester at Dealey Plaza every year.
.
A good site which isn't all that crazy is:
http://www.jfklancer.com/index.html
And of course... :)
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
 
RoboTimbo said:
Wilfully ignoring the fenceposts? Why would that be?

In the fenceposts photo, judging by the shadows, what times are it? LOL.
Click to expand...

But that would suggest there are more probable causes than photo tampering. Phototampering for which no evidence has been provided.
 
I Ratant said:
I would have expected... and way back when probably suggested to Jack White, as he lives in Dallas, someone truly interested would go to Neely Street on March 31 and shoot a lot of photos of someone/anyone holding a rifle/bat/stick/paper in the poses.
But doing actual legwork is soooooooooooooo hard, compared to quoting someone who has written about it, also without going there.
And, MOF, the sun's position on March 31 also occurs later in the year in the fall, about the time the CTwinkies gather to fester at Dealey Plaza every year.
.
A good site which isn't all that crazy is:
http://www.jfklancer.com/index.html
And of course... :)
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Click to expand...

Somebody already has gone the Neely Street Backyard and taken pictures. Some guy from another JFK board determined to prove me wrong. He said he took several pictures and started to get the hang of getting the desired refraction when the owner came out and kicked him out.

Aw, Shucks!​
 
Robert Prey said:
Somebody already has gone the Neely Street Backyard and taken pictures. Some guy from another JFK board determined to prove me wrong. He said he took several pictures and started to get the hang of getting the desired refraction when the owner came out and kicked him out.

Aw, Shucks!​
Click to expand...

"Desired refraction"?

You're just making this story up, aren't you?

BTW, did you look at the video I posted? Guess not.
 
Walter Ego said:
Check, check, check and double check. Yup, that's our Robert. :D
Click to expand...

Yeah, well in this case, it's the Lone Nutter Crank who over-estimates his own knowledge of just who is an expert and who is a crank. Now here are a few real experts not affiliated with American Intel. who have examined the backyard photos and pronounced them "fake."

Malcolm Thompson, past Pres. of the Inst. of Incorporated Photographers in England.

Maj John Pickard, commander of the Photographic Dept. at the Canadian Defense Dept.

Hershel Womack, photo expert and researcher of the Waggoner Carr Collection of Kennedy Materials at Texas Tech University told Mary Fontaine in a 1992 interview with the Houston Post,
"The fact that the matte photograph was worked up from the precise backyard photo that was withheld from the WC makes me suspect that the "ghost' photo, the withheld 133-C photo and Brown's demonstration photo may all have been part of the same trial series. Once the 'practice' was over, and the actual forgery completed, the incriminating materials were discarded -- or so they thought."

I have seen videos entitled "Conspiracy" by Anthony Summers which has explanations by Thompson and Pickard. For this and other anomalies see the series by Jack White on you tube: These are not from the Summers video, but discussions include the evaluations by Thompson and Pickard as well as Jack White.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lXmNStJ3_R0

Part 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVAa3FKZsqE&NR=1

pt. 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2iuFTST7lE&NR=1

pt 4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qKVFgXPi-Gw&NR=1

Thompson, pickard, crowley


pt. 5
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd5TuVK-gM8&NR=1


Of special note is Part 3, in which Marrs recounts the experience of a photo processor Robert Hester who was called from his home to National Photo to process some photos on the night of Nov. 22 which included a backyard photo without Oswald. This was the night of the assassination, the day before the backyard photos were officially "found" in the Paine Garage. Are you listening????Can you comprehend the implication of that???
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
I have seen videos entitled "Conspiracy" by Anthony Summers which has explanations by Thompson and Pickard. For this and other anomalies see the series by Jack White on you tube: These are not from the Summers video, but discussions include the evaluations by Thompson and Pickard as well as Jack White.
Click to expand...

Jack White is a well intentioned but is a demonstrable loon as was noted on the very first page of this thread... and you're still using Jim Marrs as a "reliable" source? :eye-poppi

As to Pickard:

Marrs, in his book Crossfire, spends four and a half pages on the photos... Marrs quotes Maj. John Pickard, commander of the photographic department at the Canadian Defense Department, as saying the photos "have the earmarks of being faked." Yet the [HSCA] Photographic Panel noted that "he (Pickard) had performed no scientific tests on the photos and that he had spent less than an hour examining the 'very poor copies' that were submitted to him." Marrs chose to leave that detail out. Perhaps there is a conspiracy after all.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/toobig.htm
Click to expand...

Gus Russo in his book Live By the Sword: The Secret War Against Castro and the Death of JFK wrote that Oswald showed one of the backyard photos to Michel Payne, Ruth Payne's estranged husband, and sent one of the photos to The Militant, the Socialist Workers Party publication that Oswald was holding in the photos (along with communist publication The Worker). Oswald also gave a signed copy of one of the photos to George de Mohrenschildt, his only real friend in the U.S. after his return from Russia.

The photos were taken in the late afternoon of March 31, 1963 and Oswald probably developed them and made prints at Jaggars-Chiles-Stovall, the photo lab where he was employed and where he probably made up his A.J. Hidell ID. Oswald was proud of the pictures. He showed them off. He sent one to The Militant. Was he was he trying to frame himself before the assassination?
 
Last edited:
As others have pointed out before me: There are 3 photos. That means if they are faked someone had to make 3 different fake photos, with early 1960's technology that would somehow need to pass every scientific test made in the coming decades. I can see the situation:

Photography Guy: Ok, it took me weeks to do this, and I think I haven't slept 2 hours a day but this photo should do the job.
Sinister Intelligence Agency (SIA) Agent: Great! Now make two more.
PG: What!?
SIA Agent: And don't forget to forge his signature on the back of one! Put some snazzy line with it too, OK?
PG: I....
 
kookbreaker said:
As others have pointed out before me: There are 3 photos. That means if they are faked someone had to make 3 different fake photos, with early 1960's technology that would somehow need to pass every scientific test made in the coming decades. I can see the situation:

Photography Guy: Ok, it took me weeks to do this, and I think I haven't slept 2 hours a day but this photo should do the job.
Sinister Intelligence Agency (SIA) Agent: Great! Now make two more.
PG: What!?
SIA Agent: And don't forget to forge his signature on the back of one! Put some snazzy line with it too, OK?
PG: I....
Click to expand...

The JFK conspiracy mongers are fixated on the backyard photos because they show Oswald in possession of the rifle he used to kill JFK (and used in the attempted murder of General Walker) and the handgun he used to kill Officer Tibbit. But there was other evidence connecting the guns to Oswald.

Oswald used the alias "A. Hidell" to order both guns (verified by his handwriting on the order forms) and the guns were sent to his post office box (where "Hidell" was registered to receive mail). His palmprint was on the rifle found on the 6th floor of the TSBD and he was in possession of the handgun when arrested.

If Oswald went to trial, the prosecution would have had sufficient evidence to convict Oswald without even introducing the backyard photos into evidence.
 
BStrong said:
Sounds like the old Robert Murrow story.

Being Sicilian, and having my family landing in New Orleans I have my own opinions on the subject, but the Warren report still stands.
Click to expand...

derail:

What era? My family's Sicilian and landed in New Orleans sometime around the turn of the last century.

Sorry - carry on folks - Robert was about to PWN us all, right? How's that going?
 
Apparently somebody being unable to complete their photographs is evidence the photograph is impossible? How so? They were interrupted before they finished.

Perhaps it was a conspiracy. Somebody knew the guy would get the photo and shut him down...

Seriously though. Of all the many reports proving the photos faked we get citations to the sources with confirmation bias and the one who did no testing. I wonder why none of these conspiracy sites have transcripts of the report in full, or links to an online copy?
 
Right, as I'm not seeing any reason to follow some kind of schedule laid down by a single Conspiracy Advocate, I'm going to ask outright:

Is there any piece of evidence of there being a second shooter at all?

The "evidence" most people point to is the piece of film showcased in the Oliver Stone film where JFK jerks back and away. What this fictionalised version of Garrison fails to notice is the body mass being ejected from Kennedys head at that moment. Basic innertia states if something like a body jettisons mass in one direction it will have a reaction in the opposite direction. Something like a rifle bullet with a small entry wound and devestating exit wound will throw the body backwards.

So where is the evidence of there being a second shooter?
 
Tomtomkent said:
Right, as I'm not seeing any reason to follow some kind of schedule laid down by a single Conspiracy Advocate, I'm going to ask outright:

Is there any piece of evidence of there being a second shooter at all?

The "evidence" most people point to is the piece of film showcased in the Oliver Stone film where JFK jerks back and away. What this fictionalised version of Garrison fails to notice is the body mass being ejected from Kennedys head at that moment. Basic innertia states if something like a body jettisons mass in one direction it will have a reaction in the opposite direction. Something like a rifle bullet with a small entry wound and devestating exit wound will throw the body backwards.

So where is the evidence of there being a second shooter?
Click to expand...

Where can I find this law called "Basic Inertia?"
 
Walter Ego said:
The JFK conspiracy mongers are fixated on the backyard photos because they show Oswald in possession of the rifle he used to kill JFK (and used in the attempted murder of General Walker) and the handgun he used to kill Officer Tibbit. But there was other evidence connecting the guns to Oswald./I].
Click to expand...

Walter, I believe here you are guilty of Asserting the Consequence or in your premise, asserting the very thing you have yet to prove.
 
Walter Ego said:
T
Oswald used the alias "A. Hidell" to order both guns (verified by his handwriting on the order forms) and the guns were sent to his post office box (where "Hidell" was registered to receive mail).
Click to expand...

Or it could mean that the conspirators took pains to make it appear that way. But there is no record that Oswald was even the person who picked up the rifle at the Post Office,
 
Walter Ego said:
. His palmprint was on the rifle found on the 6th floor of the TSBD and he was in possession of the handgun when arrested./QUOTE]

ZZZzzz. This is retracing old ground. "There is evidence that suggests the palm print was obtained from Oswald's dead body at the morgue, or later at the funeral home (Lifton 354-356 n; cf. Meagher 120-127). So suspicious was the palm print that even the WC privately had doubts about the manner in which it was obtained (Garrison 113; Marrs 445; cf. Lane 153-158). "
Click to expand...
 
Walter Ego said:
Jack White is a well intentioned but is a demonstrable loon as was noted on the very first page of this thread..
Click to expand...

Walter, I'm going to have to once again call you out for more of your fallacious reasoning, in this case it would be ad hominem attack in place of a reasoned analysis of the evidence Jack White presents. I just know you can do better.
The use of epithets such as as "Loon" and "Wacktard" do not help your position.
Now why don't you try to attack his evidence, or is that too much to ask?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom