Post by 19efpppPost by John CorbettPost by 19efpppPost by John CorbettPost by donald willisPost by John CorbettPost by donald willisPost by John CorbettPost by John CorbettPost by donald willisPost by Anthony MarshPost by 19efpppPost by Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)Post by 19efpppPost by John McAdamshttps://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/windows.htm
.John
-----------------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
This is the crap that a 75-year-old right wing political science professor
does in his spare time?
Ad hominem. You're attacking the poster instead of the points made.
Post by 19efpppMaybe he's just too embarrassed to join the "Stop
The Steal" lunacy.
Change of subject to current politics. Don't think we haven't noticed you
haven't dealt with the actual issue at all.
Post by 19efpppBut, still, attacking Fletcher Prouty straw man
arguments...
Prouty claimed the windows should have been closed. The contemporaneous
film from other motorcades establishes that is false. What, exactly, is
the straw man arguments you are referencing here?
Post by 19efpppabout a case "closed" by a thieving cocksucker? Really? Very
sad. Very biggly sad.
Not even sure who, or what, you're commenting on here. But it appears to
have nothing to do with the subject matter of the original post. You can
clarify, or you can change the subject and introduce other logical
fallacies. Your call.
Hank
My call? Tell them I'm not here. Did you know that James Powell didn't
even have a camera when he took the Powell Photo? He must have been a man
of unusual talents.
Powell was acting on his own. His unit was not ordered to go to Deley
Plaza for added protection. When the shots rang out he was too far down
to take a photo so he ran up to the TSBD and snapped a picture. He was
not a professional photograrapher.
Have you read any books on the JFK assassinaion.
When it comes fo photographs you must read/own Picture of the Pain.
If more people had access to POTP, they could understand my
comparison/contrast of the Dillard wide-angle shot as reproduced in both
the Warren Report and POTP. Conversely, if people want to stay benighted,
they will avidly avoid the Trask book....
Yes,
Post by Anthony MarshI know he is a WC defender, bur buy it for the photos.
I doubt many people would find the significance in the varied contrast
between the two photos that you think is so revealing. It is nothing more
than a printing anomaly. The WC cropped and enlarged the photo and
sharpened the contrast to make the employees stand out in the version that
is in the WCR.
Apparently, you're talking about Dillard's deep-focus photo. You must be
if you're talking about the Warren Report. Yes, in that photo you can see
Williams & Norman clearly. But I'm talking about the wide-angle shot,
reproduced on the facing page. No 5th-floor witness is visible in that.
That's because they did not enlarge and sharpen the contrast on that
photo. The images in the window in the enhanced photo in black and white
turn to shades of gray when the contrast is not sharpened. The difference
is simply in how those photos were printed. But why go for such a mundane
explanation when you can dream up something fantastic.
There is no evidence they doctored the photo in any way as
Post by John Corbettyou seem to be alleging. That is a product of your imagination.
Look at the right photo (in the WCR and in POTP) and you can talk about my
imagination....
Based on your response, I assume that you don't have access to "Pictures
of the Pain". And if you do not, there's no point in my responding to you
since you clearly wouldn't accept my word on what you see in the Dillard
wide-angle in Trask.
That's the first thing you've said that I agree with.
Notice that Corbett can't even admit that he doesn't have "Pictures of the
Pain". But I guess it's implicit in his response.
I've never been asked the question. Since you brought it up, no I don't
have it So what?
Post by donald willisNo, it's not a crime
not to have it. But without it, informed discussion is not possible. At
least on this topic....
If that were true, most people in this country don't have that book and
therefore cannot have an informed discussion about the assassination. That
is absurd.
When cornered, LNs do like to generalize. We were speaking of one
photo--without POTP, discussion about that photo is impossible, because
LNs don't trust CT's (& vice versa). And, above, you even seemed to say
just that re yourself & myself.
Post by John CorbettThe Dillard photo, both the wide angle and close up cropped versions are
widely available. If either of these appear different in Pictures of the
Pain, that is a printing issue and not evidence of tampering.
Post by donald willisAnd it's not the "first thing" I've said that he (finally!) agreed
with--he also agreed (finally!) that Bob Jackson indicated a fully-open
window to show how wide the shooter's window was open. Not that he didn't
try to, then, minimize that fact....
That fact
Well, at least you now admit that it's a fact.
is trumped by the forensic evidence and the eyewitnesses that
Post by John Corbettindicated the shooter was on the sixth floor and the photos which show
that window was not wide open. Your inability to weigh evidence leads to
your ridiculous conclusions. You think all that evidence should be
disregarded simply because a few witnesses thought the window was open
farther than it actually was.
I'm just saying that the fact that several (not few) witnesses thought so
should not be disregarded.
Post by John CorbettIn all the years I have dealt with conspiracy hobbyists, you are the only
one I have encountered the believes the shots were fired from the fifth
floor. Conspiracy hobbyists believe a lot of silly things but other than
you, none that I know of have bought into yours. It's an absurdity.
You do know of the poster called 19efppp (roughly)? 19efpp also believe
that shots were fired from the 5th floor, but not by Oswald, as I do.
dcw
Yes indeed! James Jarman, a "colored man," as some 11-year-old "colored
boy" named "Eunis" originally reported, was shooting from the 5th floor.
He was shooting intentional misses as an audio decoy so that the witnesses
would associate the shooting of the president with shots coming from the
building when in actuality, every shot that hit JFK came from the front.
Intentional misses??? So how did Jarman know he wouldn't get accused of
being the assassin? What happened to his rifle? How did "they" know the
witnesses would say the shooter was on the 6th floor? Why did the
recovered bullets match the rifle found on the sixth floor? There are more
holes than cheese in this theory.
Yes, intentional misses. Jarman was doing as he was told.
Evidence provided that Jarman did any shooting of "Intentional misses" and
"was doing as he was told": None provided.
Post by 19efpppHe might not
have even known that the president really was going to be shot.
Evidence provided that Jarman was part of a conspiracy: None provided.
Post by 19efpppHe just
knew his job,
Evidence provided: None provided.
Here's his real job, from the evidence:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/jarman.htm
== QUOTE ==
Mr. JARMAN - I started [working at the Depository] in 1956. I worked from August up until November, and I was laid off until December the same year and I started back again and I worked up until 1958 I believe, 1958 or 1959, and I quit there and went to Parkland Hospital. From there I went back to the Depository. And I got laid off again and I went to Bakers Hotel, and I think it was in 1961 I went back to the Depository and I have been there ever since.
Mr. BALL - What was your job at the Depository in November of 1963, last fall?
Mr. JARMAN - Checker.
Mr. BALL - What does a checker do?
Mr. JARMAN - He checks various orders, books and things that go out to different schools.
Mr. BALL - Do the order fillers bring the books down to where you have your----
Mr. JARMAN - Right.
Mr. BALL - On a table. You have a table?
Mr. JARMAN - I have a table with a scale and I weigh these books up and put the upholstery on them and put them and put them on a little conveyor and the wrappers wrap them or pack them, whichever one it may be.
== UNQUOTE ==
Post by 19efpppand that was to shoot on signals recieved from the
walkie-talkie held by Harold Norman,
Evidence provided that there was any "signals", any "walkie-talkie", and
that Jarman and Norman were part of the conspiracy: None provided.
Post by 19efpppand to not hit anybody with his
shots.
Evidence provided that he was told to fire a weapon and "not hit anybody
with his shots": None provided.
Post by 19efpppWho is this "they" you speak of?
The conspirators who you suggest involved Jarman in an assassination plot,
provided walkie-talkies and a weapon, and also got Harold Norman involved.
I thought this was evident from the points raised above.
Post by 19efpppSince the authorities are the
perps, the physical evidence can be managed.
Evidence the "authorities" are the perps: None provided. Evidence the
physical evidence was managed: None provided. What authorities,
specifically? The Dallas police force? The FBI? The CIA? The Warren
Commission? Who?
Jarman served eight years in the army, with an honorable discharge. You
have no evidence against him whatsoever. Yet you place blame on Jarman and
Norman.
And you try to absolve Oswald of guilt, the same man who left behind his
rifle, and whose shells, bullet fragments, and nearly whole bullet after
killing the president and being arrested resisting arrest trying to shoot
a cop with the same handgun he used in shooting police officer J.D.Tippit
dead.
At its core, this fantasy you suggest is the same methodology used by all
conspiracy theorists. It can be summed up as "Evidence? Who needs
evidence? I've got a theory, and let me ignore the evidence and argue for
my theory".
Some are much better at it that you are. They at least try to build a
bookcase out of the assorted scraps of lumber left behind from the
building of the real bookcase. You don't even attempt to do that. You just
look at the assorted scraps and theorize a bookcase.
And as we've seen, you can't be bothered to actually cite any evidence in
favor of your arguments, even when asked multiple times: "But I do not
accept the burden of proving I'm right because I have to scratch my ass
right now."
From here: https://groups.google.com/g/alt.assassination.jfk/c/-h-Zr8BHPZc/m/MH7iUUJnBAAJ
Hank