• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

single bullet theory is not true says Soily

Appendix 10, starting at page 592, Warren Commission Report:
PHOTOGRAPHS

Two photographs of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle were found among Oswald's possessions in Mrs. Ruth Paine's garage at 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex.383 In one, Commission Exhibit No. 133-A, Oswald is holding the rifle generally in front of his body; in the other, Commission Exhibit. No. 133-B, he is holding the rifle to his right. Also found at Mrs. Paine's garage were a negative of 133-B and several photographs of the rear of General Walker's house.384 An Imperial reflex camera,385 which Marina Oswald testified she used to take 133-A and 133-B, was subsequently produced by Robert Oswald, Lee Harvey Oswald's brother.386 Testimony concerning the photographs, the negative, and the camera was given by Lyndal D. Shaneyfelt of the FBI.387 Shaneyfelt has been connected with photographic work since 1937. He has made 100-300 photographic examinations, and has testified frequently on the subject in court.388
Click to expand...

It goes on for some length after that if you'd care to read it.
 
Damn, carlitos beat me to it with the laughing dogs. Anybody who can describe Jack White as a photographic expert must have such a severe cranio-rectal inversion that he's never seen daylight. I saw his analysis of the 9/11 Pentagon crash scene photos a few years ago, and I've only just stopped laughing.

Dave
 
Here's an excerpt from his destruction by Mickey Goldsmith. Good for a laugh.
Mr. GOLDSMITH. I see that you have taken a ruler and placed it by Oswald's body and also by his rifle; is that correct?

Mr. WHITE. Yes.

Mr. GOLDSMITH. Mr. White, do you believe that an object photographed can be measured simply by placing a ruler against the image in the photograph?

Mr. WHITE. No.

Mr. GOLDSMITH. When you measured the object in this photograph, what did you do beyond using the ruler?

Mr. WHITE. This is strictly a two-dimensional measurement. Obviously I did not take into consideration any perspective which might exist or any other considerations. It is just a mere measurement of the body from the weightbearing foot to the top of the head in each case and of the rifle from the muzzle to the butt.

Mr. GOLDSMITH. Without giving any account to other factors?

Mr. WHITE. That is true. I am not a physicist or any sort of a scientist who could determine anything relating to the perspective. We don't know how close the rifle is to his body. We don't know how close the camera is to the subject, so it would be virtually impossible for just a plain citizen like me to interpret the perspective of this photograph.

Mr. GOLDSMITH. Have you had any training in analytical photogrammetry?

Mr. WHITE. No.

Mr. GOLDSMITH. Have you had any formal training in forensic photography?

Mr. WHITE. No.

[...]

Mr. GOLDSMITH. Mr. White, you have made reference to several points in these photographs that suggest that Oswald's head is disproportionately----

I withdraw the question.

That the body of Oswald is not consistent in the various photographs in light of the head size; is that correct?

Mr. WHITE. Yes.

Mr. GOLDSMITH. To what extent, if any, did you compute photogrammetrically the effect of an object's tilt on its apparent length in the photograph?

Mr. WHITE. As I said, I am not a scientist. I don't indulge in that sort of thing.

[...]

Mr. GOLDSMITH. Mr. White, I just have one question.

Mr. WHITE. All right.

Mr. GOLDSMITH. When you did this study, did you compute photogrammetrically the effect of tilt on the way that the length of an object appears in a photograph?

Mr. WHITE. I conducted a study by photographing a yardstick from three different-

Mr. GOLDSMITH. Mr. White, answer my question. Did you compute photogrammetrically----

Mr. WHITE. What is "photogrammetrically"? Describe to me what "photogrammetrically" is.

Mr. GOLDSMITH. I just have one more question Mr. White. Do you know what photogrammetry is?

Mr. WHITE. No.

Mr. GOLDSMITH. I have no further questions. Thank you.
Click to expand...
He's sort of a microcosm or poster child for the whole assassination conspiracy theory.
 
Last edited:
Fourbrick said:
The pictures are fakes.
Click to expand...

But your fellow CTist disagrees with you.

Interesting, isn't it?

What makes one conspiracy theory better than another?

In the 9/11 sub-forum accusations of cointelpro would be flying between you by now.

You both believe that Oswald wasn't the 'lone nutter', but you can't agree on the evidence for this?

Doesn't give you pause to reconsider?
 
Fourbrick said:
Photographic expert Jack White studied these two photographs for two decades and testified before the House Select Committee. His conclusion is that the photographs are fakes. You obviously know better.
Click to expand...

oh dear.....
 
Fourbrick said:
Nixon was stupid enough to tape all his conversations in the White House. There's clever.
Click to expand...

No one is accusing Nixon of pulling off THE GREATEST, MOST COMPLICATED, AND FLAWLESSLY EXECUTED CRIME IN HUMAN HISTORY.

That's actually an a pros pos example: Nixon was a manipulative criminal who was paranoid and secretive and yet we learned almost everything about his crimes.

Yet no one has whispered a word about a massive plot to assassinate the president.

Riiiiiiight.
 
TraneWreck said:
No one is accusing Nixon of pulling off THE GREATEST, MOST COMPLICATED, AND FLAWLESSLY EXECUTED CRIME IN HUMAN HISTORY.

That's actually an a pros pos example: Nixon was a manipulative criminal who was paranoid and secretive and yet we learned almost everything about his crimes.

Yet no one has whispered a word about a massive plot to assassinate the president.

Riiiiiiight.
Click to expand...

Pfft... Obviously "they" wanted us to find out about Nixon. How naive are you, anyway ? ;)
 
uk_dave said:
But your fellow CTist disagrees with you.

Interesting, isn't it?

What makes one conspiracy theory better than another?

In the 9/11 sub-forum accusations of cointelpro would be flying between you by now.

You both believe that Oswald wasn't the 'lone nutter', but you can't agree on the evidence for this?

Doesn't give you pause to reconsider?
Click to expand...

It's a 47 year old case. Most of the witnesses are dead. Most of the evidence is tainted or gone. The original investigation was a farce, the Dallas police unbelievably incompetent, the FBI destroyed manipulated and fabricated evidence, the autopsy was a total disaster and both sides of the debate have spread such total bollocks that have muddied the water for over 40 years that its now almost impossible to see through the fog. So its hardly surprising nobody can agree. And don't tell me the official side agree, 3 members of the WC didn't agree with their own conclusions, the chairman of the HSCA thought the mafia did it. Even Dale Myers and bugliosi parted ways because they couldn't agree on certain issues. Mack and mysers doesn't even agree with themselves, they both used to be die hard conspiracy theorists (badge man indeed)
 
Soily said:
It's a 47 year old case. Most of the witnesses are dead. Most of the evidence is tainted or gone. The original investigation was a farce, the Dallas police unbelievably incompetent, the FBI destroyed manipulated and fabricated evidence, the autopsy was a total disaster and both sides of the debate have spread such total bollocks that have muddied the water for over 40 years that its now almost impossible to see through the fog. So its hardly surprising nobody can agree. And don't tell me the official side agree, 3 members of the WC didn't agree with their own conclusions, the chairman of the HSCA thought the mafia did it. Even Dale Myers and bugliosi parted ways because they couldn't agree on certain issues. Mack and mysers doesn't even agree with themselves, they both used to be die hard conspiracy theorists (badge man indeed)
Click to expand...

This is very sloppy. The single-gunmen contingent, or sane people, differ with respect to the specifics of the case.

Conspiracy nuts differ in every way possible: it was Castro or LBJ or the CIA or the Russians...THe shots were fired from the Grassy Knoll or a storm drain or by the lemo driver...

There is a total lack of symmetry. Pretending like disagreement over details among a group that consents to a broad theory is the same as people varying wildly on every possible topic is silly. It's the same thing global warming deniers try to do: SEE, SEE!! The scientists can't agree whether sea levels will rise 2m or 2.2m over the next century, therefore everyone's opinion is just as valid and global warming hasn't been proven.

More goofy tactics.
 
Fourbrick said:
Photographic expert Jack White studied these two photographs for two decades and testified before the House Select Committee. His conclusion is that the photographs are fakes. You obviously know better.
Click to expand...

Now I just know you are messing with us. Jack White is a fool who got his butt handed to him when he testified about these photos. http://jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo/hscawhte.htm

He claimed to not have any experience as a physicist or any sort of a scientist who could determine anything relating to the perspective. He also claimed to not have any training in analytical photogrammetry, forensic photography or training in the study of shadows in photographs. In other words, he is a fool for claiming that the photos were faked when he obviously lacked the skills to make that determination.

He is also one of those flakes that uses low resolution photos to prove the Apollo landings did not take place when the readily available high res photos prove just how wrong he is.

Jack White is a known liar and the wrong person to use to back any argument that you want to make. Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas. I hope you are wearing your flea collar.

Ranb

ETA; Fourbrick, why do you claim White is an expert photo analyst when he claims that he is not?
 
Last edited:
We are being kind to White compared to how he is treated at the Apollo hoax forums. The guy makes a real fool of himself on a regular basis. Anyone who questions him is an agent provocateur and his enemy.

Ranb
 
TraneWreck said:
This is very sloppy. The single-gunmen contingent, or sane people, differ with respect to the specifics of the case.

Conspiracy nuts differ in every way possible: it was Castro or LBJ or the CIA or the Russians...THe shots were fired from the Grassy Knoll or a storm drain or by the lemo driver...

There is a total lack of symmetry. Pretending like disagreement over details among a group that consents to a broad theory is the same as people varying wildly on every possible topic is silly. It's the same thing global warming deniers try to do: SEE, SEE!! The scientists can't agree whether sea levels will rise 2m or 2.2m over the next century, therefore everyone's opinion is just as valid and global warming hasn't been proven.

More goofy tactics.
Click to expand...

I would have thought the warren report is true and the Warren report is false were pretty major disagreements myself. I also would have thought Oswald acted alone and it was a mafia conspiracy were fairly major points of diversion too.

And there's an inherent flaw in your criticism, if the conspiracy theorists aren't homogenous then you can't critize them in a broad stroked generalities.

Also i've not had the answer to my questions yet.

Please post the physical evidence that Oswald fired a rifle that day.

Please post the physical evidence that ce399 was fired at Kennedy or was ever in their bodies.

Please post the physical evidence that any of the fragments in connoly were fired from oswalds rifle or came from ce399.

I wait with baited breath.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom