Site Search:
 
TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International
Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

JFK Assassination
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Theme



Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

PostPosted: Fri Jul 08, 2011 5:42 pm    Post subject: WRONG Reply with quote

contrarian wrote:
That Italian Rifle has some impressice ballistics. The Marine Corps taught Oswald to shoot. A downhill "going away" shot is an easy one. Oswald did it alone.


Who cares about the shots from behind?

I want to know why three men visited Sylvia Odio during the last week in September before the murder, and one looked like Oswald?

That in itself cries conspiracy, and the Warren Commission did interview Odio but chose not to believe her - how could they when the WC had him in Mexico City trying to get a Cuban visa at that time.

Even without that slip - up ( overlapping sheepdipping ) one or the other ( Mexico City or Odio ) shows that prior to the assassination, forces were setting up Oswald to be the patsy.


Shots smotts - look at what was going on and you can easily see there was a plot in the murder of JFK.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Theme



Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

PostPosted: Sat Jul 09, 2011 1:25 am    Post subject: NO fingerprints Reply with quote

Nowhere Man wrote:

Now, weren't we going scene-by-scene through the Disneyland of disinformation that is JFK-the movie?

No, now we're back to the carcano.

It's been done already.



Alright - I will get out "Crossfire, the Plot that Killed Kennedy" by Jim Marrs which the movie "JFK" was based on and discuss the facts in the case that were shown in the movie.

Anyway - all I am saying is that the material for the movie

DID NOT COME OUT OF THIN AIR as you and JANDAR ASSERT.

Rose Cheramie , for example is a real person as are all the others shown in the movie. To assert otherwise is false and misleading on Jandars part.

As far as the planted carcano, you are stupid for bringing it up because it is your undoing - the issue that really seals your fate as a

LIAR.


You have stated here on this forum that there were FINGERPRINTS on the planted carcano and I have shown that there were not'

You are a LIAR and done here NWM.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pikh6GMyP0A&feature=feedrec_grec_index


Warren Commission Report "developed no identifiable prints"


You are caught dead to right. You are a liar. But I do expect you to try to lie out of this one , as usual, since you are a liar, and that is what liars do.

http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/chapter-4.html#palmprint

Now, how can anyone take NWM seriously after being caught is this lie?

From the Warren Report

A few minutes after the rifle was discovered on the sixth floor of the Depository Building 44 it was examined by Lt. J. C. Day of the identification bureau of the Dallas police. He lifted the rifle by the wooden stock after his examination convinced him that the wood was too rough to take fingerprints. Capt. J. W. Fritz then ejected a cartridge by operating the bolt, but only after Day viewed the knob on the bolt through a magnifying glass and found no prints.45 Day continued to examine the rifle with the magnifying glass, looking for

Page 123

possible fingerprints. He applied fingerprint powder to the side of the metal housing near the trigger, and noticed traces of two prints.46 At 11:45 p.m. on November 22, the rifle was released to the FBI and forwarded to Washington where it was examined on the morning of November 23 by Sebastian F. Latona, supervisor of the Latent Fingerprint Section of the FBI's Identification Division.47

In his testimony before the Commission, Latona stated that when he received the rifle, the area where prints were visible was protected by cellophane.48 He examined these prints, as well as photographs of them which the Dallas police had made, and concluded that:


...the formations, the ridge formations and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either effecting identification or a determination that the print was not identical with the prints of people.

Accordingly, my opinion simply was that the latent prints which were there were of no value.49

Latona then processed the complete weapon but developed no identifiable prints.50

He stated that the poor quality of the wood and the metal would cause the rifle to absorb moisture from the skin, thereby making a clear print unlikely.


Now, is the word no, understood, NWM? Or shall we have a debate about that word? Let me see...is and no are subject to debate, right?

In this case, no doesn't mean no, it means yes, or maybe? Is that how you are going to "debate" this one.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nowhere Man



Joined: 08 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Thu Jul 21, 2011 7:06 am    Post subject: ... Reply with quote

First off,
Quote:

the material for the movie

DID NOT COME OUT OF THIN AIR as you and JANDAR ASSERT.


neither I nor Jandar (may his avatar rest in peace since you began addressing about two years after he last posted here) said the material came out of thin air.

You've been told this numerous times now but have yet to catch on.

This is a straw man--you, with no grasp of logic but fine command of font size, ought to pay attention:

A strawman argument is when you simplify or otherwise twist a real argument to suit your purposes.

I, as an integral part of my being here, try not to do this.

You, on the other hand, do it with almost every post you make.

All of your straw men do not aid your position.

So please stop blathering about Jandar, at least.

Now, we're back to the carcano...
Which we have a clear trajectory on, fragments from Connolly, and a not-pristine stretcher bullet. We've already done this, btw...

You have a story about a windshield and no ballistic evidence...

But, this going in circles is a bit silly. Instead of AHAH-ing everything from still pictures you want to move, drugged out prostitutes who might know that Ruby was Oswald's lover, and a lot of posts in 48 font,

WHY DON'T

You go soak your head and come up with a theory!

I mean, not a spaghetti-flinging affair that looks a lot like the end of Blazing Saddles, but like a cogent, singular, evidence-based summary of what you think happened instead of simply everything and the kitchen sink of what might have happened?

That might serve you better than trying to insist witness evidence is accurate and demonstrate your shameful command of physics.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Theme



Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

PostPosted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 5:48 am    Post subject: Sylvia Odio Reply with quote

I want to know why three men visited Sylvia Odio during the last week in September before the murder, and one looked like Oswald?

That in itself cries conspiracy, and the Warren Commission did interview Odio but chose not to believe her - how could they when the WC had him in Mexico City trying to get a Cuban visa at that time.

Even without that slip - up ( overlapping sheepdipping ) one or the other ( Mexico City or Odio ) shows that prior to the assassination, forces were setting up Oswald to be the patsy.


Shots smotts - look at what was going on and you can easily see there was a plot in the murder of JFK.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Theme



Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

PostPosted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 8:00 am    Post subject: James Hosty dies age 86 Reply with quote

http://www.latimes.com/news/obituaries/la-me-james-hosty-20110621,0,624409.story

Here is another real person who was depicted in the movie , "JFK."



No matter how hard Mr. Hosty tried, the fact remains Oswald was known by the Bureau and him personally, not even fitting the description as a "loner." Far from it.

This is all that has to be done to bring the second false theory down on its knees.

Oswald was a complex character known by the intelligence community.

Loner he was NOT.


Hosty spent nearly five decades defending himself against accusations that he should have investigated Lee Harvey Oswald more closely. 'I'm sorry I ever got the case,' he said in 2003.

Hosty died June 10 of cancer at a hospice in Kansas City, Mo.

Hosty's 1996 book "Assignment: Oswald" was a response to how he was depicted in the 1991 Oliver Stone film "JFK," his family said.


"He was a man on a mission," Hosty's son Tom told the Kansas City Star. "He was determined to get the entire story out there to the American public — to set the record straight."

As recently as 2003, James Hosty told the Star there was nothing he could have done to prevent the assassination given what he knew at the time. He also conceded that he probably would "go to my grave trying to straighten this out."

Long before Kennedy's assassination, Oswald was well-known to the FBI and the Central Intelligence Agency. A former Marine, Oswald had defected to the Soviet Union in 1959, a move that made international front-page news.

Hosty said that in September 1962, after Oswald returned to the U.S., the FBI agent who had the Oswald file determined that it should be officially closed. When that agent retired a month later, Hosty inherited his files. But in early 1963, Hosty came to believe that Oswald and his wife needed further investigation.

He suspected Oswald's wife, Marina, might be a Soviet "sleeper" agent who married him only to enter and spy on America.

( So he allows Oswald to work in a building where President Kennedy will pass by in a few days! )

GREAT WORK FBI

MAKE NO MISTAKE

FBI agent James Hosty is the guy who destroyed critically important assassination evidence -- a written note left by Oswald at the Dallas office of the FBI, two weeks before the assassination. James Hosty admits that he destroyed Oswald's note three hours after Oswald was killed by Jack Ruby. As one who destroyed evidence, how can Hosty possibly be trusted to tell the truth about anything in this matter?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Theme



Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 7:53 am    Post subject: Lee Bowers Reply with quote

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcXJJsZs7LE

"On 22nd November, 1963, Bowers was working in a high tower overlooking the Dealey Plaza in Dallas. He had a good view of the presidential motorcade and was able to tell the Warren Commission about the three cars that entered the forbidden area just before the assassination of John F. Kennedy.

Bowers also reported seeing two men standing near the picket fence on the Grassy Knoll. He added: "These men were the only two strangers in the area. The others were workers whom I knew." Bowers said the two men were there while the shots were fired.

Mark Lane interviewed Bowers for his book Rush to Judgment (1966): "At the time of the shooting, in the vicinity of where the two men I have described were, there was a flash of light or, as far as I am concerned, something I could not identify, but there was something which occurred which caught my eye in this immediate area on the embankment. Now, what this was, I could not state at that time and at this time I could not identify it, other than there was some unusual occurrence - a flash of light or smoke or something which caused me to feel like something out of the ordinary had occurred there."

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKbowers.htm

Lee Bowers also had a finger cut off just before he died and likely did not tell everything out of fear of losing other body parts or his life.

Which he lost anyway.

Lee Bowers is another real person depicted in the movie "JFK."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Theme



Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

PostPosted: Tue Aug 02, 2011 8:05 am    Post subject: Jim DiEugenio on Rose Cherami Reply with quote

1) Why are these records of Rose Cherami being withheld? ( postponed )
08 180-10111-10073 POSTPONED IN FULL
13 180-10104-10459 POSTPONED IN FULL
14 180-10105-10003 POSTPONED IN FULL
21 180-10089-10047 POSTPONED IN FULL
22 180-10095-10160 Rose Cheramie aliases POSTPONED IN FULL






"ARRB documents indicate that an intern at the Louisiana State Hospital named Wayne Owen, told his hometown newspaper in Wisconsin that he and other interns at the hospital learned of the assassination of JFK BEFORE it occurred and that they were told that one of the men involved in the killing was a man named "Jack Rubenstein".
Louisiana State Hospital was the place where Rose Cheramie made her plea to stop the assassination."



Scenes from the movie "JFK" Narrated by Jim DiEugenio.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OOJ-JxyLs9U
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Theme



Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

PostPosted: Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:21 am    Post subject: John Simkin on Stephen King Reply with quote

Article by Adrian Mack:

http://www.straight....lshit-jfk-movie

A troubled loner? That’s how Lee Harvey Oswald is described in the promo for Stephen King’s upcoming book 11/22/63, shortly to be adapted for the screen by filmmaker Jonathan Demme.

A more accurate portrayal of Oswald would present Kennedy’s alleged assassin as an intelligence operative involved in a false defector program, a phony Castro supporter who hung with right wing extremists and anti-Castro groups in New Orleans, a cartoon Marxist befriended by ultra-conservative White Russians in Texas, and a tragic fall-guy who was reportedly seen meeting in Dallas with the CIA’s head of Cuban operations.


Hell, an accurate portrayal would also tell you that there were at least two Oswalds running around for the most part–another rather large indication that Oswald was part man, part weirdo intelligence operation. Perhaps King and Demme would consider revamping their story to include two “troubled loners?” That’d be a start, at least.

But Hollywood doesn’t traffic in accurate portrayals, especially when it comes to JFK. Oliver Stone’s 1991 film is a notable exception. So notable, indeed, that it actually stirred up enough public interest to prompt legislation, even as Stone was being publicly executed by the press—a fate that sits there waiting for any high profile critic of the lone nut myth.


http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=18051
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nowhere Man



Joined: 08 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:01 am    Post subject: ... Reply with quote

Well...

So, let's try to cobble your bits together:

1) On one hand, we have Charmani, a hooker who maybe had evidence of Ruby and Oswald being lovers.

Analysis: this suggests a mafia connection.

2) On another hand, you cling to Love Field footage.

Analysis: LBJ/Secret Service corruption.

3) On yet another hand, the carcano points to someone else firing from the TSB.

Analysis: SBT modified

4) On a further hand, the TSB is just a distraction from the shooting gallery theory, a theory that relies on you for physics.

Analysis: Your physics arguments have been thoroughly rubbished. nPersist with them at your own peril.

5) On still another hand, we have JFK , a conglomertion of competing but not really congruos theories, as overseen by UFO Congressman Garrison, disclaimered by Stone, and holding to an attack on the SBT that's been rubbished for years.

Analysis: This was a movie, not a documentary. People who can't discern that difference really need to get a grip.

So, there's your spaghetti.

Couple it with lies about Ford and pristine bullets, and you have a real nice balogna.

What I mean by that is that all of your poo-slinging coalesces into a big pile of poo. Anyone who wants to believe your version is properly challenged by your own regular and persistent contradictions of what you've just said. IOW, anyone who wants to believe your version cannot because your version is really multiple versions offered up in some pathetic souffle that is not really aided by your 20-point fonts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Theme



Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

PostPosted: Tue Aug 23, 2011 7:48 pm    Post subject: this is going to be fun Reply with quote

This is so great that I am going to savor this and respond bit by savory bit.
Nowhere Man wrote:
Well...

So, let's try to cobble your bits together:

1) On one hand, we have Charmani, a hooker who maybe had evidence of Ruby and Oswald being lovers.

Analysis: this suggests a mafia connection.




Who said that Jack Rubenstein ( Ruby ) BESIDES THE WARREN COMMISSION WHO NWM DEFENDS ! was not a member of the
crime syndicate headed by Carlos Marcello.


http://www.mtgriffith.com/web_documents/hscaonlhoandruby.htm


Bottom line:

The boots on the ground were composed of, but were not limited to, members of organized crime.

Simpleton NWM once again does not know his JFK Assassination 101.

This is basic stuff, just as, for example, Kennedy was hit from the front , as well as the back.



THE HSCA ON JACK RUBY'S MAFIA LINKS

Compiled by Michael T. Griffith

Excerpts from the HSCA Report

The evidence available to the committee . . . showed that he [Ruby] had a significant number of associations and direct and indirect contacts with underworld figures, a number of whom were connected to the most powerful La Cosa Nostra leaders. Additionally, Ruby had numerous associations with the Dallas criminal element.

The committee also examined allegations that, even before the 1947 move to Dallas, Ruby had been personally acquainted with two professional killers for the organized crime syndicate in Chicago, David Yaras and Lenny Patrick. The committee established that Ruby, Yaras and Patrick were in fact acquainted during Ruby's years in Chicago, particularly in the 1930's and 1940's. Both Yaras and Patrick admitted, when questioned by the FBI in 1964, that they did know Ruby, but both said that they had not had any contact with him for 10 to 15 years. Yaras and Patrick further maintained they had never been particularly close to Ruby, had never visited him in Dallas and had no knowledge of Ruby being connected to organized crime.



Indeed,

(IN OTHER WORDS)

the Warren Commission ( LIED ) used Patrick's statement as a footnote citation in its report to support its conclusion that Ruby did not have significant syndicate associations.




On the other hand, ( THE TRUTH IS ) the committee established that Yaras and Patrick were, in fact, notorious gunmen, having been identified by law enforcement authorities as executioners for the Chicago mob and closely associated with Sam Giancana, the organized crime leader in Chicago who was murdered in 1975.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Nowhere Man



Joined: 08 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2011 6:40 am    Post subject: ... Reply with quote

Oh, I get it:

[size=24]
Quote:
Who said that Jack Rubenstein ( Ruby ) BESIDES THE WARREN COMMISSION WHO NWM DEFENDS ! was not a member of the
crime syndicate headed by Carlos Marcello.
[/size]

putting things in HUGE fonts Makes the point,eh?

OK, then let me help you:

You missed the point of my last post

It, if you read it, obviously wasn't questioning Ruby's connection.

Let's discuss this before we move on:

If, at this point in the discussion, you think I was questioning Jack Ruby's mafia ties, you missed the last 50 or so pages.

What I'm waiting for you to do is connect the mafia ties, the Cubans, the secret service, Lyndon Johnson, and Oliver Stone

INTO SOMETHING COHERENT

That's kinda a problem for you, eh?

You instead question my regard for Kennedy, attack me personally, and PUT THINGS IN HUGE FONTS.

Oh noes. This means more than just pasting conspiracy theory pap. It means you have to take a position.

Your position as of now is simply this:

If it supports conspiracy, it's true


That's where you and your compadre stand.

The idea that your bottomless hole of conspiracies don't jive escapes you.

So again:

WHAT IS YOUR THEORY?

Don't come back with Charmani. That's a piece that either supports or conflicts with your whodunnit.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
skinhead



Joined: 11 Jun 2004

PostPosted: Fri Aug 26, 2011 7:04 am    Post subject: Re: ... Reply with quote

Somebody better sig this or I am Never coming back.
Nowhere Man wrote:
WHY DON'T You go soak your head and come up with a theory! I mean, not a spaghetti-flinging affair that looks a lot like the end of Blazing Saddles, but like a cogent, singular, evidence-based summary of what you think happened instead of simply everything and the kitchen sink of what might have happened?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Theme



Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Location: Cedar Rapids Iowa

PostPosted: Sat Aug 27, 2011 10:02 am    Post subject: JFK and the Unspeakable Reply with quote

For those who are really interested in the assassination, I would suggest this book.

I personally agree with Douglass' theory, for the most part,
for I believe that there were a series of overlapping actors in the event, all of whom had the same goal - to get rid of JFK.

It is of no suprise that a simpleton like NWM would seek a simple answer in such a complicated situation. Unfortunately, there just is not one.

"In James W. Douglass' outstanding new book, "JFK and the Unspeakable," the author explains the title in his introduction. Coined by spiritual writer Thomas Merton, The Unspeakable refers to "an evil whose depth and deceit seemed to go beyond the capacity of words to describe." Regarding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the Unspeakable succeeded due to deniability by the nation's citizens of the horrifying truth of the event and to plausible deniability by the government agencies responsible for the murder. (Vincent Bugliosi's recent fictional paperweight is a perfect example of the plausible deniability that allows the Unspeakable to thrive.)

Many excellent books have proven that the assassination of JFK was the result of a conspiracy. Douglass verifies the certainty of the conspiracy and, as the subtitle of the book states, explains "Why He Died and Why It Matters." He scrutinizes the historical facts surrounding the assassination, from the creation of the CIA to the gradual obliteration of the freedoms upon which this nation was founded.

This book is primarily the story of John F. Kennedy who changes from a Cold Warrior to an altruistic leader willing to risk his life to ensure that the world's children will not become victims of a nuclear catastrophe. Equal time is spent on JFK's presidency as on the assassination but one of the many rewards of this book is the author's capacity to show the relationship between his policies and his death. And the book is a tragedy because it gradually becomes obvious that each step he makes toward peace steadily increases the hatred of his enemies who will eventually betray him. "


http://www.amazon.com/JFK-Unspeakable-Why-Died-Matters/dp/1570757550
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ineverlie&I'malwaysri



Joined: 09 Aug 2011

PostPosted: Sun Aug 28, 2011 7:34 pm    Post subject: Re: ... Reply with quote

skinhead wrote:
Somebody better sig this or I am Never coming back.
Nowhere Man wrote:
WHY DON'T You go soak your head and come up with a theory! I mean, not a spaghetti-flinging affair that looks a lot like the end of Blazing Saddles, but like a cogent, singular, evidence-based summary of what you think happened instead of simply everything and the kitchen sink of what might have happened?

What both of you don't get is that it is not up to regicide or me to come up with some neat, all-loose-ends-tied-up theory of the assassination. It is enough to show that there is a lot of evidence contradicting the conclusions of the official fiction.

I'll then leave it up to the scholars to tie it all together.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Nowhere Man



Joined: 08 Feb 2004

PostPosted: Tue Aug 30, 2011 7:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
What both of you don't get is that it is not up to regicide or me to


No, what you don't get is that IT IS up to you and REGICIDE to come up with a logical, testable explanation of what you think happened.

You squeal a lot when pressed for that. You lie about working together. You lie about whether Ford lied. You see evidence that invalidates your theories, then regurgitate them. You regurgitate contradictory theories because, amazingly, it's not your duty to reconcile them. Your compadre can't read a statement without wildly reading in his own crap.

The two of you have this humongous crapburger so fully interlayed with your double-crap-with-cheese that it's actually pretty funny that you demand people come up with crap to compete with you.

Why? Oh, because you're the only one entitled to fling crap. You have the crappyright?

Other people must...what?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... 43, 44, 45, 46, 47  Next
Page 44 of 47

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2013 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe
TEFL Courses, TESOL Course, English Teaching Jobs - TEFL International