JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Lance Payette on March 26, 2025, 06:33:49 PM
-
Now let’s consider the matter of frontal gunmen in our quest for sane conspiracy thinking …
Ever ponder how much conspiracy thinking – and particularly wild conspiracy thinking – revolves around the existence of frontal gunmen? You know, the Assassin Cops on the triple overpass, Ed Hoffman's Suit Man with a smoky rifle behind the picket fence (or James Files with his Buck Rogers pistol, as the case may be), Badge Man, Black Dog Man, Oatmeal-Faced Alien Man (OK, I just invented him for fun), the Storm Drain Shooter, assorted three-man teams of snipers, spotters and cheerleaders. I’m tellin’ ya, it’s a wonder 30 innocent bystanders weren’t shot in the flurry of hypothesized bullets.
Think how much flows from one or more frontal gunmen and the conspirators’ need to hide the fact that JFK was shot from the front: Alterations to the Z film and other photographic evidence! Body alterations! Fake autopsy photos and X-rays! CIA-issued dissolving ice bullets for the throat wound! Lying doctors! Witness intimidation! Umpteen Mysterious Deaths! False FBI reports! Umbrella Man and Dark Complected Man making frantic signals like assassination traffic cops!
What percentage of really wild conspiracy thinking is necessitated solely by frontal gunmen? I don’t know – maybe 75%? Much of it flows backwards – e.g., the Z film was altered to disguise a frontal headshot and, ispo facto, there was a frontal gunman and, ipso facto, James Files was telling the truth.
Let’s step back and ask ourselves what possible sense a frontal gunman would make in a rational conspiracy. What thinking could possibly have led to the use of one or more frontal gunmen?
JFK coming down Houston or going down Elm was a piece-of-cake shot for a competent sniper with a sniper-quality weapon in the Dal-Tex Building or possibly the County Records Building (or the TSBD, of course, but we’ve already decided it makes no sense for anyone other than LHO to be shooting from there). For LHO to be a plausible patsy, our sniper could have been equipped with any 6.5 mm ammunition, possibly even 6.5 Carcano so long as he was sure the gun and scope were accurate. A shot from the Dal-Tex Building could plausibly be attributed to the 6th floor of the TSBD – far more plausibly, certainly, than a shot from the front.
The reality is, the assassination of JFK required, at most, a plausible patsy in the TSBD and a competent sniper in roughly the same vicinity. Absolutely a piece of cake. Clean, tidy, no serious issues, no need for much if anything in terms of a cover-up. (If LHO were wholly innocent, as many CTers speculate, him being a plausible patsy is no simple matter, but we’ll overlook this pesky issue for our purposes here.)
Why, then, MASSIVELY increase the risk and complexity with a frontal gunman at any of the posited locations, thereby necessitating a MASSIVE and almost comically complex cover-up? Does this make any sense at all? Of course, it doesn’t.
The typical justification is that a frontal gunman was some sort of insurance in case the rear gunman (be he LHO or a sniper) failed. The problem being, any shot from the front would tell the world that this was a conspiracy and LHO was not a lone gunman. My first thought was, “Perhaps they hoped the investigators would just assume the frontal gunman was a pro-Castroite like LHO.” This logic works to an extent, but it still precludes Oswald as the lone assassin, opens to the door to a much wider investigation with all the risks this would entail, and fails to account for the MASSIVE efforts at cover-up that most CTers think actually occurred (i.e., if the frontal gunman were a pro-Castroite like LHO, there would be no need to cover up a frontal shot at all).
If the conspirators were concerned about the competence of LHO in the TSBD or their sniper in the Dal-Tex Building, then simply put a second sniper at the rear to be used only if needed. (Does the Mafia use back-up hitmen? Probably not, I would guess.) No sane conspirators – be they CIA, Army Intelligence, Mafia or trained anti-Castro Cubans – would incur the MASSIVE risk and complexity a frontal gunman (or gunmen) would entail. It simply makes no sense at all – does it? And neither does all the wild conspiracy theorizing associated with it – does it?
At an early stage of the Prayer Man brouhaha at the Ed Forum, I was gobsmacked by the whole thing and asked how LHO standing in full view on the steps of the TSBD at the time of the assassination could possibly make sense under any conspiracy scenario. I got precisely one attempt at an explanation. A guy named Sandy explained that the conspirators were “sending a message.” I'm paraphrasing, but the supposed message was basically: “We're so completely in control that we don’t even CARE if our supposed patsy is photographed in full view on the TSBD steps when he is supposed to be on the 6th floor shooting JFK. Don’t mess with people as bad as us, fools.”
This actually made sense to Sandy, hopefully not to you. It was then that the scales fell from my eyes and I realized that those caught up in the Conspiracy Game really don’t even care if what they say makes sense. The trick is to maintain your own common sense, logic and rationality when assessing what they say. I don't feel the need (for example) to agonize over Ed Hoffman and his tale of Suit Man with a smoky rifle (a black powder blunderbuss, perhaps?) because it simply makes no rational sense.
-
You will shortly begin to rethink your Frontal Shooter conclusion. The Frontal Shooter murder scene has been altered. And this murder scene alteration was done shortly after the assassination. It is impossible to accurately evaluate a possible frontal shooter(s) when the position of possible shooter(s) with respect to land marks has been erroneous. Over the course of the last year, my research has found that the Gordon Arnold, Black Dog Man, Badge Man, etc murder scene was ALTERED. Much More Later.
-
You will shortly begin to rethink your Frontal Shooter conclusion. The Frontal Shooter murder scene has been altered. And this murder scene alteration was done shortly after the assassination. It is impossible to accurately evaluate a possible frontal shooter(s) when the position of possible shooter(s) with respect to land marks has been erroneous. Over the course of the last year, my research has found that the Gordon Arnold, Black Dog Man, Badge Man, etc murder scene was ALTERED. Much More Later.
LOL!
Good one!
-
There is also some simple logic that can be used.
Over 95% of eyewitnesses say that the shots came from only 1 direction meaning no crossfire.
The echo chamber of Dealey Plaza made some people have difficulty with the precise location but as just explained if shots were coming from either end then that would be immediately obvious but I digress, since the shots came from only 1 direction and since we know that both Connally and Kennedy were shot from behind therefore all shots came from behind!
(https://i.ibb.co/bggV6yDN/Pie-chart-direction-of-shots.jpg)
JohnM
-
You will shortly begin to rethink your Frontal Shooter conclusion. The Frontal Shooter murder scene has been altered. And this murder scene alteration was done shortly after the assassination. It is impossible to accurately evaluate a possible frontal shooter(s) when the position of possible shooter(s) with respect to land marks has been erroneous. Over the course of the last year, my research has found that the Gordon Arnold, Black Dog Man, Badge Man, etc murder scene was ALTERED. Much More Later.
You keep teasing us with your Impending Bombshell. Out with it, my good fellow! Unless the Murder Scene Alteration involved placing everything west of the TSBD somewhere to the east of it via a manipulation of the Space-Time Continuum, I'm guessing the Impending Bombshell won't cause me to rethink my position. But go for it! David Lifton once made sense to me, so you never know what incipient wackiness might be lurking in my genes.
Don't forget that your Bombshell will also need to address how, given a patsy in the TSBD, the Altered Frontal Stuff meshes with common sense, logic and rationality. Even if Black Dog Man was actually standing in the middle of Elm, you'll still need to address the points in my original post.
-
You will shortly begin to rethink your Frontal Shooter conclusion. The Frontal Shooter murder scene has been altered. And this murder scene alteration was done shortly after the assassination. It is impossible to accurately evaluate a possible frontal shooter(s) when the position of possible shooter(s) with respect to land marks has been erroneous. Over the course of the last year, my research has found that the Gordon Arnold, Black Dog Man, Badge Man, etc murder scene was ALTERED. Much More Later.
How many bad guys and bad gals do you figure were involved in the wholescale altering, Storing?
Oodles and gobs?
-
There is also some simple logic that can be used.
Over 95% of eyewitnesses say that the shots came from only 1 direction meaning no crossfire.
The echo chamber of Dealey Plaza made some people have difficulty with the precise location but as just explained if shots were coming from either end then that would be immediately obvious but I digress, since the shots came from only 1 direction and since we know that both Connally and Kennedy were shot from behind therefore all shots came from behind!
(https://i.ibb.co/bggV6yDN/Pie-chart-direction-of-shots.jpg)
JohnM
Right, and this is consistent with what Lee Bowers said - i.e., from his tower, loud noises at the TSBD sounded as though they were emanating either from the TSBD or the triple overpass. I've experienced this phenomenon myself, where you would absolutely swear that loud noises were coming from down the street to your right when they were actually coming from your left - but they didn't sound like they were coming from both directions. The problem is surely exacerbated with high-velocity rifle shots.
-
The problem with claiming that ALL shots were fired from the Sniper's Nest is that TSBD employees were streaming back inside that building following the Kill Shot. The vast majority of these employees were watching the motorcade from the Stemmons Sign back up to the steps in front of the TSBD. ALL of these people had no issue with going straight back into this alleged hornet's nest. There is No getting around that. With respect to Lee Bowers, never forget that Bowers gave WC Testimony of seeing a White Shirted Man standing (S) of the E-W section of picket fencing, "in line" with the Triple Underpass. The NIX FILM clearly shows a White Shirted Man running up The Steps immediately following the Kill Shot. None of the 3 Men standing at the bottom of The Steps was wearing a White Shirt. NONE!
-
The problem with claiming that ALL shots were fired from the Sniper's Nest is that TSBD employees were streaming back inside that building following the Kill Shot. The vast majority of these employees were watching the motorcade from the Stemmons Sign back up to the steps in front of the TSBD. ALL of these people had no issue with going straight back into this alleged hornet's nest. There is No getting around that. With respect to Lee Bowers, never forget that Bowers gave WC Testimony of seeing a White Shirted Man standing (S) of the E-W section of picket fencing, "in line" with the Triple Underpass. The NIX FILM clearly shows a White Shirted Man running up The Steps immediately following the Kill Shot. None of the 3 Men standing at the bottom of The Steps was wearing a White Shirt. NONE!
The few people who reentered their place of work were confused about the directionality of the shots by the echoes of the three muzzle blasts and the three supersonic "cracks" that they heard in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza.
D'oh
-
Lance make an excellent point. The usual lame counter is for "Cross Fire". But "Cross Fire" is the tactic of the few against the many. Not for trying to kill one person.
If Kennedy ducks down, he is no longer vulnerable to a rearward shooter but he is also no longer vulnerable to a frontal shooter. If you miss the first shot, you have screwed up and if Kennedy ducks, you have no real shot.
-
You will shortly begin to rethink your Frontal Shooter conclusion. The Frontal Shooter murder scene has been altered. And this murder scene alteration was done shortly after the assassination. It is impossible to accurately evaluate a possible frontal shooter(s) when the position of possible shooter(s) with respect to land marks has been erroneous. Over the course of the last year, my research has found that the Gordon Arnold, Black Dog Man, Badge Man, etc murder scene was ALTERED. Much More Later.
But you do not deal with Lance's main point. Why make things complicated for yourself by using a frontal shooter and then have to fake the evidence. It makes no sense.
-
The problem with claiming that ALL shots were fired from the Sniper's Nest is that TSBD employees were streaming back inside that building following the Kill Shot. The vast majority of these employees were watching the motorcade from the Stemmons Sign back up to the steps in front of the TSBD. ALL of these people had no issue with going straight back into this alleged hornet's nest. There is No getting around that. With respect to Lee Bowers, never forget that Bowers gave WC Testimony of seeing a White Shirted Man standing (S) of the E-W section of picket fencing, "in line" with the Triple Underpass. The NIX FILM clearly shows a White Shirted Man running up The Steps immediately following the Kill Shot. None of the 3 Men standing at the bottom of The Steps was wearing a White Shirt. NONE!
With respect to Lee Bowers, never forget that Bowers gave WC Testimony of seeing a White Shirted Man standing (S) of the E-W section of picket fencing, "in line" with the Triple Underpass. The NIX FILM clearly shows a White Shirted Man running up The Steps immediately following the Kill Shot. None of the 3 Men standing at the bottom of The Steps was wearing a White Shirt. NONE!
No, there is a negro man wearing a brown cardigan who turns and runs back up the steps! Compare the brown cardigan to the white motorbike cops helmets and the white concrete fence.
Nix.
(https://i.ibb.co/3yF2ZQkr/Nix-brown-cardigan-man.jpg)
BTW you've never explained the significance of the "man in the brown cardigan" running up the steps, AFTER the shots were already fired?
Nix and Zapruder
(https://i.ibb.co/MDg8ryfR/Nix-and-Zapruder.gif)
Muchmore
(https://i.ibb.co/spTfqJpM/Muchmore2d.gif)
JohnM
-
Lance make an excellent point. The usual lame counter is for "Cross Fire". But "Cross Fire" is the tactic of the few against the many. Not for trying to kill one person.
If Kennedy ducks down, he is no longer vulnerable to a rearward shooter but he is also no longer vulnerable to a frontal shooter. If you miss the first shot, you have screwed up and if Kennedy ducks, you have no real shot.
If Kennedy ducks down
A professional hit would not wait the 5 seconds between the neck shot @ about Z224 when Kennedy emerges from behind the sign in Zapruder and the headshot at Z313, for the simple reason as you say, Kennedy could have ducked(because the "hitmen" had no way of knowing that Kennedy was essentially paralysed) or even Jackie could have pulled Kennedy down and out of the way. The only person who was forced to wait, was the guy on the 6th floor who had to eject a shell and rechamber another bullet and then take careful aim and even then he nearly missed by hitting the upper part of Kennedy's head.
JohnM
-
The few people who reentered their place of work were confused about the directionality of the shots by the echoes of the three muzzle blasts and the three supersonic "cracks" that they heard in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza.
D'oh
So these eyewitnesses that were stretched from the Stemmons Sign back to the TSBD Front Door "were confused", but those that said they heard shots coming from the direction of the TSBD were Not? Your bias prevents you from being objective.
-
Lance make an excellent point. The usual lame counter is for "Cross Fire". But "Cross Fire" is the tactic of the few against the many. Not for trying to kill one person.
If Kennedy ducks down, he is no longer vulnerable to a rearward shooter but he is also no longer vulnerable to a frontal shooter. If you miss the first shot, you have screwed up and if Kennedy ducks, you have no real shot.
With respect to the "ducks down" stuff that you mentioned above, you are radically underestimating the elevated position atop the Grassy Knoll vs Elm St.
-
But you do not deal with Lance's main point. Why make things complicated for yourself by using a frontal shooter and then have to fake the evidence. It makes no sense.
You need to open your mind. What makes you believe all shooters would be working together?
-
That is Not a "BROWN Cardigan", no matter how hard you guys try to make people believe that. And on top of that, you can see the man's bare arm from the wrist to up beyond the elbow. This "brown cardigan" mantra is right in line with trying to convince people there are 3 men standing at the bottom of The Steps on Willis 5. Total baloney.
-
You need to open your mind. What makes you believe all shooters would be working together?
One should never open one's mind to the point one's brain falls out.
If there were multiple shooters was it by coincidence they showed up at the same place?
If brought in, does it make sense for the 'boss' would perfer them to be unaware of each other? That one missed shot might freeze another shooter as he would be wondering what the hell is going on?
-
One should never open one's mind to the point one's brain falls out.
If there were multiple shooters was it by coincidence they showed up at the same place?
If brought in, does it make sense for the 'boss' would perfer them to be unaware of each other? That one missed shot might freeze another shooter as he would be wondering what the hell is going on?
You must be unfamiliar with the CIA and FBI using the "compartmentalize" approach to everything they do. The right hand Never knows what the left hand is doing. It's Not my job to school ya, but "You're Welcome" just the same.
-
That is Not a "BROWN Cardigan", no matter how hard you guys try to make people believe that. And on top of that, you can see the man's bare arm from the wrist to up beyond the elbow. This "brown cardigan" mantra is right in line with trying to convince people there are 3 men standing at the bottom of The Steps on Willis 5. Total baloney.
This is the man on the steps, next to Hudson. He is not wearing anything white except whatever he is wearing beneath his sweater/jacket, white T-shirt or white sports/dress shirt.
This frame is from the Darnell film. He's standing with his wife and baby in front of the park bench where they were seated prior to the man going down the stairs. Note the mans posture. It's identical to the man seen in Willis slide 5 standing next to Hudson. (https://i.imgur.com/QoxVFFb.png)
-
I love it! I start a thread about how the very notion of frontal gunmen makes no rational sense, and by page 2 we're discussing multiple compartmentalized shooters and Brown Cardigan Man! I believe this is known as "business as usual" at an internet forum ...
Well, hell, maybe I'll invent a narrative to go with Oatmeal-Faced Alien Man and launch an entirely new Conspiracy Factoid.
-
This is the man on the steps, next to Hudson. He is not wearing anything white except whatever he is wearing beneath his sweater/jacket, white T-shirt or white sports/dress shirt.
This frame is from the Darnell film. He's standing with his wife and baby in front of the park bench where they were seated prior to the man going down the stairs. Note the mans posture. It's identical to the man seen in Willis slide 5 standing next to Hudson. (https://i.imgur.com/QoxVFFb.png)
Any Adult seated on that bench would have been at a level well above the top of the short wall. ALL the images taken at the time of the Kill Shot and immediately thereafter do NOT show anyone seated on that Bench. The Woman You continue claiming was sitting on that bench? NOPE! And the man running Up-the-steps on the NIX FILM is wearing a WHITE SHIRT. This is clear. You continue pushing some very old and very erroneous JFK Assassination "tales". Please go back and do some research using the much improved assassination image clarity. Technology has passed you and the "tales" you tell by.
-
Any Adult seated on that bench would have been at a level well above the top of the short wall. ALL the images taken at the time of the Kill Shot and immediately thereafter do NOT show anyone seated on that Bench. The Woman You continue claiming was sitting on that bench? NOPE! And the man running Up-the-steps on the NIX FILM is wearing a WHITE SHIRT. This is clear. You continue pushing some very old and very erroneous JFK Assassination "tales". Please go back and do some research using the much improved assassination image clarity. Technology has passed you and the "tales" you tell by.
Marie Muchmore's film, and Mary Ann Moorman Krahmer's Polaroid snapshot both show the same man standing on the step beside Emmet Hudson.
The Muchmore film shows the man beginning to turn and run up the stairs, and the Nix film captures him in flight.
We've all been through this with you before, and you continue to say the man in the Nix film is wearing a "white shirt". It certainly is not white by any stretch, and it's the same man captured in the Moorman Krahmer Polaroid, the Willis #5 slide, the Nix and Muchmore films, as well as the James Darnell footage. Live with it.
-
Marie Muchmore's film, and Mary Ann Moorman Krahmer's Polaroid snapshot both show the same man standing on the step beside Emmet Hudson.
The Muchmore film shows the man beginning to turn and run up the stairs, and the Nix film captures him in flight.
We've all been through this with you before, and you continue to say the man in the Nix film is wearing a "white shirt". It certainly is not white by any stretch, and it's the same man captured in the Moorman Krahmer Polaroid, the Willis #5 slide, the Nix and Muchmore films, as well as the James Darnell footage. Live with it.
Steve, you have done nothing with respect to this case for decades now. It has passed you by. You have No Idea what has recently been done, or what is currently being done. You cling to this OLD Stuff like the lady sitting on the bench, 3 guys standing at the bottom of The Steps on Willis 5, the cardigan man, and all of this has already been 86'd. But, you continue rerunning it because you and the other Old Time JFK Assassination Researchers have nothing else to contribute. Why? Because you are inactive. There's an entirely new generation that have dug into this case and turned many of these Old Time Assassination Conclusions, (like you are proffering), inside out. Researchers like Holland and Posner are aware of this and are desperately trying to change the previously accepted JFK Assassination ground rules. They are doing this in order to try and keep themselves and their LN supporting "evidence" relevant. Your spouting this old stuff only Proves 1 thing. Your day is done.
-
Marie Muchmore's film, and Mary Ann Moorman Krahmer's Polaroid snapshot both show the same man standing on the step beside Emmet Hudson.
The Muchmore film shows the man beginning to turn and run up the stairs, and the Nix film captures him in flight.
We've all been through this with you before, and you continue to say the man in the Nix film is wearing a "white shirt". It certainly is not white by any stretch, and it's the same man captured in the Moorman Krahmer Polaroid, the Willis #5 slide, the Nix and Muchmore films, as well as the James Darnell footage. Live with it.
Hi Steve, I hope you are well.
I don't think Royell believes any of his nonsense, his sole purpose is his attempt to upset people.
I have proven Royell wrong on so many of his theories like the Nix film shows Elm street running up hill, the follow up Police car having no antennae, just insignificant stuff and when you prove him wrong he never says thank you, but just moves on to his next absurdity. One of his latest claims is he has seen an uncropped photo of the aftermath of the Limo and claims there is dried blood on the headrest proving blah, blah, blah but will he post his photo or in fact any photo, not on your nelly, we just gotta take his word for it! And as for his claim about the white shirt man as seen in Nix comes from YouTube where highly compressed videos are a way of life! Sheesh!
As you say there is a stack of evidence that there was three men on the steps, this photo from Moorman was on the UPI network the next day and at the very least on Sunday was on the front page of newspapers.
(https://i.ibb.co/vCfrhKFG/Moorman-UPI-23-11-63.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/8nFS0YrS/Moorman-photo-newspaper-Sunday-24th.jpg)
JohnM
-
Steve, you have done nothing with respect to this case for decades now. It has passed you by. You have No Idea what has recently been done, or what is currently being done. You cling to this OLD Stuff like the lady sitting on the bench, 3 guys standing at the bottom of The Steps on Willis 5, the cardigan man, and all of this has already been 86'd. But, you continue rerunning it because you and the other Old Time JFK Assassination Researchers have nothing else to contribute. Why? Because you are inactive. There's an entirely new generation that have dug into this case and turned many of these Old Time Assassination Conclusions, (like you are proffering), inside out. Researchers like Holland and Posner are aware of this and are desperately trying to change the previously accepted JFK Assassination ground rules. They are doing this in order to try and keep themselves and their LN supporting "evidence" relevant. Your spouting this old stuff only Proves 1 thing. Your day is done.
You've never done a single thing with this case except post garbage theories that few-if any-believe, Royell! You've done absolutely NOTHING except piss people off with your nonsenicals! You have no idea what I have done with this case besides what I did with the acoustics. NONE whatsoever! If anyone's day is done, its yours, Storing. But then, you've never had a "day" to begin with, so, just live with it. Keep posting your nonsensicals and get laughed at and ignored. You do a really good job at that! So put that in your beverage and drink it!
-
Hi Steve, I hope you are well.
I don't think Royell believes any of his nonsense, his sole purpose is his attempt to upset people.
I have proven Royell wrong on so many of his theories like the Nix film shows Elm street running up hill, the follow up Police car having no antennae, just insignificant stuff and when you prove him wrong he never says thank you, but just moves on to his next absurdity. One of his latest claims is he has seen an uncropped photo of the aftermath of the Limo and claims there is dried blood on the headrest proving blah, blah, blah but will he post his photo or in fact any photo, not on your nelly, we just gotta take his word for it! And as for his claim about the white shirt man as seen in Nix comes from YouTube where highly compressed videos are a way of life! Sheesh!
As you say there is a stack of evidence that there was three men on the steps, this photo from Moorman was on the UPI network the next day and at the very least on Sunday was on the front page of newspapers.
(https://i.ibb.co/vCfrhKFG/Moorman-UPI-23-11-63.jpg)
(https://i.ibb.co/8nFS0YrS/Moorman-photo-newspaper-Sunday-24th.jpg)
JohnM
Hi John!
I am doing well, thanks, and I hope you are also!
I couldn't agree with you more. Royell has never done a thing for this case. He's a laughing stock, and most people ignore the constant tripe that he posts here.
He's one of the "dime a dozen" conspiracy theorists.
We'll always have people like Royell Storing posting opinions in these forums. And most of us know what opinions are like...
Storing will bring up a topic, and as soon as someone pokes holes in it, he goes wild by claiming that because they easily point out his errors, they're bringing up "old stuff".
That's the best he can do. He's a clown.
-
The Muchmore images of 3 Men standing on the bottom of The Steps does Not disprove the WHITE SHIRT MAN moving Up-the-Steps on the NIX FILM. What Muchmore does is Prove there is a major issue regarding these JFK Assassination Images contradicting each other. Also, do Not forget that Lee Bowers gave WC Testimony corroborating a WHITE SHIRT MAN being in this same area. And you can also include the Willis 5 photo showing Only 2 men standing at the bottom of The Steps. Willis 5 adds a 3rd JFK Assassination Image at odds with the Muchmore images of 3 Men standing at the bottom of The Steps.
And just so the Old Guard knows, I have 2 JFK Assassination Issues currently in the fire and I just put a Blockbuster 3rd issue to bed last week. Specifically what has the Old Guard JFK Assassination Research Community been doing with their time lately? Gumming shredded wheat?
-
The Muchmore images of 3 Men standing on the bottom of The Steps does Not disprove the WHITE SHIRT MAN moving Up-the-Steps on the NIX FILM. What Muchmore does is Prove there is a major issue regarding these JFK Assassination Images contradicting each other. Also, do Not forget that Lee Bowers gave WC Testimony corroborating a WHITE SHIRT MAN being in this same area. And you can also include the Willis 5 photo showing Only 2 men standing at the bottom of The Steps. Willis 5 adds a 3rd JFK Assassination Image at odds with the Muchmore images of 3 Men standing at the bottom of The Steps.
I really don't know why you continue to lie? I really don't know?
There is nothing wrong with the JFKA images and to continually suggest that there is "major issues" and especially since you have never proved any of your allegations seriously harms your credibility, no that's a mistake, you never had any credibility.
Anyway all the images are perfectly consistent.
1) Willis 5 is pretty blurry and there is not enough image information to deny that there is 3 men with 1 man partially obscured by the one in front. And the guy on the right is wearing what appears to be a darker cardigan.
(https://i.ibb.co/GQGJ0qk4/Willis-5-crop.jpg)
2) Moorman shows three men on the steps. and the guy on the right is wearing a darker cardigan.
(https://i.ibb.co/C59pYxpN/Moorman-finger-print.jpg)
3) Muchmore shows three guys on the steps with the guy on the right wearing a darker cardigan.
(https://i.ibb.co/spTfqJpM/Muchmore2d.gif)
4) Nix shows three men on the steps with one disappearing into the shadows.
(https://i.ibb.co/0VBhv3g2/Nix122frame.gif)
5) This high res Nix frame shows the man who is about to enter the shadow is wearing a darker top which is brown.
(https://i.ibb.co/7tNRsWNt/Nix-brown-cardigan-man.jpg)
JohnM
-
Maybe it's just me, but I see five men on the steps, two with guns and one wearing a Packers sweatshirt. Are we on the same page here, Royell?
Honestly, what is the issue even supposed to be??? In my review of the evidence, I did find - really! - a shower curtain for $68 that is nothing but the three guys on the steps. The ad explained that Royell's White Shirt Guy was actually one of the gunmen and that this is quite obvious. Is that what you - I mean we - believe, Royell?
-
:D
Light Brown Cardigan/Sweater With White Shirt Underneath The Cardigan/Sweater
(http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/Cardigan.gif)(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSoMkxyLnER5bZ1aY26eWvN09IGP0oQdQPl5A&s)
-
With respect to WILLIS 5: "...not enough image information to Deny that there is 3 Men with 1 man partially obscured by the one in front'. When has it EVER been PROVEN that there are 3 Men standing at the bottom of The Steps on Willis 5? It NEVER has been Proven. The Old Guard JFK Assassination Researchers have simply Agreed among themselves that are 3 Men standing there. That's PROOF of Nothing. That's merely an Agreement on the level of the Secret Handshake used by Den 3, Pack #625, Cub Scouts of America. The MISSING 3rd Man in Willis 5 is Emmitt Hudson. Hudson was wearing Lightly Colored Slacks and a Whitish BRIGHT Hat on 11/22/63. Where is there any trace of Lightly Colored Slacks, (either leg), or a White'ish BRIGHT Hat anywhere in the Willis 5 photo? There is absolutely NO trace of Hudson's Lightly Colored Slacks from the ground upward, or his WHITE Hat from Head Height Downward. Just tell me what You actually SEE on Willis 5. NOT what you Think is Supposed to be there. That 3rd Man is simply NOT THERE on Willis 5.
With respect to the NIX FILM - We see the BACK of the WHITE SHIRT MAN as he moves Up-the-Steps. His WHITE Shirt is covering his entire BACK. The man wearing a GREEN Cardigan would have his GREEN Cardigan covering his entire BACK. We see absolutely NO GREEN on the BACK of the WHITE SHIRT MAN as he moves Up-the-steps. NONE! ALL we see is WHITE. Total WHITE! And do Not forget that the Original NIX FLIM has been missing for decades.
We have a Stark Discrepancy between assassination images. These images flat-out contradict each other. Just tell this Forum what you actually SEE on these assassination images. NOT what you Think should be there.
-
Wow, the price is already up to $88!
https://pixels.com/featured/close-up-of-jfks-assassin-moorman.html?product=shower-curtain&srsltid=AfmBOorQq5Qbvlr8HJEk2Wg5iMJKZBIeyZeNM7wfLR9PZLriz42yHTRq
Anyone who does not have one of these puppies cannot realistically call himself a JFKA researcher.
I'm told that if you're in the shower looking out, that's when you see the other gunman and the guy in the Packers shirt.
(https://render.fineartamerica.com/images/rendered/default/shower-curtain/images/artworkimages/medium/3/close-up-of-jfks-assassin-moorman.jpg?&targetx=-131&targety=0&imagewidth=1050&imageheight=819&modelwidth=787&modelheight=819&backgroundcolor=171717&orientation=0)
-
Yet another tedious example of an argument that goes like this:
"This vast conspiracy that I just dreamed up in my head would never do something like X, because it makes "no sense" to me. Therefore there was no conspiracy. Therefore, Oswald did it."
-
Yet another tedious example of an argument that goes like this:
"This vast conspiracy that I just dreamed up in my head would never do something like X, because it makes "no sense" to me. Therefore there was no conspiracy. Therefore, Oswald did it."
Which JFKA conspiracy, vast or otherwise, do you prefer, Iacoletti?
-
Yet another tedious example of an argument that goes like this:
"This vast conspiracy that I just dreamed up in my head would never do something like X, because it makes "no sense" to me. Therefore there was no conspiracy. Therefore, Oswald did it."
Goodness, you ARE having a bad day!
No, not a "vast conspiracy" dreamed up in my head. Not at all. Go ahead and explain to us how ANY conspiracy - even a teeny-weeny-tiny one - makes any sense at all with (1) a frontal gunman and (2) a patsy on the 6th floor of the TSBD. Better yet, tell us how YOUR pet theory makes any sense.
It's not a matter of not making sense "to me." It's a matter of not making sense "at all." But go ahead - dare to step out of Inane One-Liner Mode and tell us how it makes sense to you. Or are you perhaps one of those conspiracists for whom "making sense" isn't a requirement of your religion?
-
Which JFKA conspiracy, vast or otherwise, do you prefer, Iacoletti?
The following exchange is typical of Iacoletti, when confronted with the massive manipulation of evidence they constantly endorse, the cowardly CT will inevitably imply that the conspiracy only involved a few people but how that covers every facet of their constant allegations is never explained, so instead they continue with brainless blissful ignorance and never confront where their endless evil assertions lead.
Based on the typical responses of any number of CT's at a least a Hundred, but ask any of these same CT's how big the Conspiracy was and they will always say it was only a small conspiracy! Go figure?
Caprio, Weidmann and Iacoletti are classic examples of this Tardis like logic.
No, that would be the strawman conspiracy that the ODIA nuts like to pretend that a conspiracy would have to be.
JohnM
-
Is it a "Conspiracy" when ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, NY Times, etc ALL hide the Fact that Joe Biden was in rapid mental decline from Alzheimer's/Dementia? Organizations/People Know what they are expected to do. They do Not have to "huddle up" or be told. They Know.
-
The following exchange is typical of Iacoletti, when confronted with the massive manipulation of evidence they constantly endorse, the cowardly CT will inevitably imply that the conspiracy only involved a few people but how that covers every facet of their constant allegations is never explained, so instead they continue with brainless blissful ignorance and never confront where their endless evil assertions lead.
JohnM
Yes, when Dan posited his "simple" LBJ-Byrd-Cason-Shelley-Sniper theory I tried to get him to explain precisely how that would have worked and what it actually would have looked like, which was "not so simple." CTers never seem willing or able to articulate a plausible, coherent theory from A to Z. It's always just supposed flaws and inconsistencies in the LN narrative, ergo there must have been a conspiracy - precisely as Bugliosi said. This was the point of my "If I had planned the conspiracy" thread - once you really try to nail down how your pet theory actually would have worked and what it actually would have looked like, it quickly starts to fall apart. Iacoletti in particular seems unwilling to deal in substance, even when attacking the LN narrative. Oswald owned a rifle? "LOL" says Iacoletti.
-
Is it a "Conspiracy" when ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, The Washington Post, NY Times, etc ALL hide the Fact that Joe Biden was in rapid mental decline from Alzheimer's/Dementia? Organizations/People Know what they are expected to do. They do Not have to "huddle up" or be told. They Know.
He was tired, he had a cold, and Trump swamped him with lies.
Speaking of conspiracies, does Putin pay you, Storing, or do you do it for free?
-
Yes, when Dan posited his "simple" LBJ-Byrd-Cason-Shelley-Sniper theory I tried to get him to explain precisely how that would have worked and what it actually would have looked like, which was "not so simple." CTers never seem willing or able to articulate a plausible, coherent theory from A to Z. It's always just supposed flaws and inconsistencies in the LN narrative, ergo there must have been a conspiracy - precisely as Bugliosi said. This was the point of my "If I had planned the conspiracy" thread - once you really try to nail down how your pet theory actually would have worked and what it actually would have looked like, it quickly starts to fall apart. Iacoletti in particular seems unwilling to deal in substance, even when attacking the LN narrative. Oswald owned a rifle? "LOL" says Iacoletti.
Oswald owned a rifle? "LOL" says Iacoletti.
It's ironic when CT's use acronyms like "LOL" and "ROFL" because they are the some of the most miserable people on Earth.
Anyway just for the rifle alone, off the top of my head, there is many, many steps and a lot of forging, planting and lying, which all requires compliant participants in many different forensic fields and government agencies and civilians, etc., etc. But still the keen CT will say that their conspiracy only required someone to have access to the evidence and abracadabra, we have a tiny conspiracy!
1) Like forging the mail order.
2) Forging the envelope
3) Forging the Money order.
4) Getting the mail order onto Kleins microfilm
5) Getting the money order into the Federal reserve.
6) Forging internal Kleins paperwork.
7) Forging the backyard photos or at least have Oswald pose with an identical rifle with a unique identical mark on the forestock.
8] Have Marina lie about the rifle at Neely street
9) Have De Mohrenschildt lie about seeing the rifle at Neely street.
10) Have Marina lie about the rifle in the blanket and fake looking pale when the rifle wasn't there.
11) Plant the rifle in the Depository.
12) Have Wesley lie about where in his car he saw the long package.
13) Have Fritz lie when he says Oswald told him he he only had his lunch.
14) Plant the fibers on the rifle
15) Plant the prints on the rifle.
16) Have Day lie about recovering a palm print.
17) Plant Carcano bullet fragments in Kennedy's Limo.
18) Plant Carcano shells in the sniper's nest.
19) Have multiple Police Officers lie about the brown sack in the Sniper's nest
20) Manufacture the appropriate sized Rifle paper bag.
21) Plant Oswald's prints on the bag
I could go on but why bother?
JohnM
-
Goodness, you ARE having a bad day!
No, not a "vast conspiracy" dreamed up in my head. Not at all. Go ahead and explain to us how ANY conspiracy - even a teeny-weeny-tiny one - makes any sense at all with (1) a frontal gunman and (2) a patsy on the 6th floor of the TSBD. Better yet, tell us how YOUR pet theory makes any sense.
It's not a matter of not making sense "to me." It's a matter of not making sense "at all." But go ahead - dare to step out of Inane One-Liner Mode and tell us how it makes sense to you. Or are you perhaps one of those conspiracists for whom "making sense" isn't a requirement of your religion?
Why do you keep demanding that I "explain" things I have never claimed?
-
The following exchange is typical of Iacoletti, when confronted with the massive manipulation of evidence they constantly endorse, the cowardly CT will inevitably imply that the conspiracy only involved a few people but how that covers every facet of their constant allegations is never explained, so instead they continue with brainless blissful ignorance and never confront where their endless evil assertions lead.
I've never endorsed any "massive manipulation of evidence". Next strawman?
-
Yes, when Dan posited his "simple" LBJ-Byrd-Cason-Shelley-Sniper theory I tried to get him to explain precisely how that would have worked and what it actually would have looked like, which was "not so simple." CTers never seem willing or able to articulate a plausible, coherent theory from A to Z.
Like your orthodoxy is a "plausible, coherent theory from A to Z".
It's always just supposed flaws and inconsistencies in the LN narrative,
Because there are...Yet you still latch on to it with religious abandon and pretend you're being "logical".
ergo there must have been a conspiracy - precisely as Bugliosi said.
Bugliosi made up a lot of arguments to then pretend like he was refuting too.
This was the point of my "If I had planned the conspiracy" thread - once you really try to nail down how your pet theory actually would have worked and what it actually would have looked like, it quickly starts to fall apart. Iacoletti in particular seems unwilling to deal in substance, even when attacking the LN narrative. Oswald owned a rifle? "LOL" says Iacoletti.
Unsubstantiated claims can be dismissed (and laughed at) without substantiation.
-
It's ironic when CT's use acronyms like "LOL" and "ROFL" because they are the some of the most miserable people on Earth.
Anyway just for the rifle alone, off the top of my head, there is many, many steps and a lot of forging, planting and lying, which all requires compliant participants in many different forensic fields and government agencies and civilians, etc., etc. But still the keen CT will say that their conspiracy only required someone to have access to the evidence and abracadabra, we have a tiny conspiracy!
1) Like forging the mail order.
2) Forging the envelope
3) Forging the Money order.
4) Getting the mail order onto Kleins microfilm
5) Getting the money order into the Federal reserve.
6) Forging internal Kleins paperwork.
7) Forging the backyard photos or at least have Oswald pose with an identical rifle with a unique identical mark on the forestock.
8] Have Marina lie about the rifle at Neely street
9) Have De Mohrenschildt lie about seeing the rifle at Neely street.
10) Have Marina lie about the rifle in the blanket and fake looking pale when the rifle wasn't there.
11) Plant the rifle in the Depository.
12) Have Wesley lie about where in his car he saw the long package.
13) Have Fritz lie when he says Oswald told him he he only had his lunch.
14) Plant the fibers on the rifle
15) Plant the prints on the rifle.
16) Have Day lie about recovering a palm print.
17) Plant Carcano bullet fragments in Kennedy's Limo.
18) Plant Carcano shells in the sniper's nest.
19) Have multiple Police Officers lie about the brown sack in the Sniper's nest
20) Manufacture the appropriate sized Rifle paper bag.
21) Plant Oswald's prints on the bag
I could go on but why bother?
The problem with all of "Mytton"'s silly lists like this is that they begin with a false premise. None of these things (authentic or not) tell us a single thing about who killed Kennedy. The fact that they cannot be authenticated is just gravy. And also as is the case with "Mytton"'s lists, many of the claims implicit in it aren't even accurate or provable.
-
The problem with all of "Mytton"'s silly lists like this is that they begin with a false premise. None of these things (authentic or not) tell us a single thing about who killed Kennedy. The fact that they cannot be authenticated is just gravy. And also as is the case with "Mytton"'s lists, many of the claims implicit in it aren't even accurate or provable.
Iacoletti,
How many bad guys and bad gals do you figure were involved in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the shooting, and the cover up?
Just a few?
-
The problem with all of "Mytton"'s silly lists like this is that they begin with a false premise. None of these things (authentic or not) tell us a single thing about who killed Kennedy. The fact that they cannot be authenticated is just gravy. And also as is the case with "Mytton"'s lists, many of the claims implicit in it aren't even accurate or provable.
Hilarious, so owning the murder weapon, tells us nothing! You can't make this up!
JohnM
-
Hilarious, so owning the murder weapon, tells us nothing! You can't make this up!
Like you can prove what the murder weapon was or who owned it.
Only with unsubstantiated claims like "he was photographed with it".
Hilarious.
-
Like you can prove what the murder weapon was or who owned it.
Only with unsubstantiated claims like "he was photographed with it".
Hilarious.
Did the evil, evil, evil bad guys and/or or the evil, evil, evil bad gals put Oswald's prints on the short-rifle that's alleged to have belonged to him?
-
Did the evil, evil, evil bad guys and/or or the evil, evil, evil bad gals put Oswald's prints on the short-rifle that's alleged to have belonged to him?
Oswald's partial palmprint was found on an index card.
-
The doctors in the film contend one of the bullets that hit JFK entered through his throat, meaning it was an entrance wound from the front — and that there were potentially two gunmen, with Oswald firing from the rear.
In this exclusive clip from JFK: What the Doctors Saw, two of the Parkland doctors remember the initial testimony of Dr. Malcolm Perry, the surgeon who attended to JFK (and later Oswald).
“So, at the press conference, Dr. Perry, in describing the [throat] wound here, said that he thought it looked like an entrance wound,” offers Dr. Robert McClelland in the doc clip.
https://www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv-movie-news/jfk-assassination-parkland-hospital-doctors-entrance-wound-two-gunmen-1234876218/
-
The doctors in the film contend one of the bullets that hit JFK entered through his throat, meaning it was an entrance wound from the front — and that there were potentially two gunmen, with Oswald firing from the rear.
In this exclusive clip from JFK: What the Doctors Saw, two of the Parkland doctors remember the initial testimony of Dr. Malcolm Perry, the surgeon who attended to JFK (and later Oswald).
“So, at the press conference, Dr. Perry, in describing the [throat] wound here, said that he thought it looked like an entrance wound,” offers Dr. Robert McClelland in the doc clip.
Yes, Jim Carrico M.D. was the first physician to treat Kennedy in the trauma room and he was the first to notice the small bubbling wound in the front of the neck. The doctors recognised this as an entrance wound.
So the question is: is it possible for an exit wound from a ball-headed bullet to be very small like that?
(https://dyingwords.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/JFK-Throat-Exit.jpg)
-
With respect to WILLIS 5: "...not enough image information to Deny that there is 3 Men with 1 man partially obscured by the one in front'. When has it EVER been PROVEN that there are 3 Men standing at the bottom of The Steps on Willis 5? It NEVER has been Proven. The Old Guard JFK Assassination Researchers have simply Agreed among themselves that are 3 Men standing there. That's PROOF of Nothing. That's merely an Agreement on the level of the Secret Handshake used by Den 3, Pack #625, Cub Scouts of America. The MISSING 3rd Man in Willis 5 is Emmitt Hudson. Hudson was wearing Lightly Colored Slacks and a Whitish BRIGHT Hat on 11/22/63. Where is there any trace of Lightly Colored Slacks, (either leg), or a White'ish BRIGHT Hat anywhere in the Willis 5 photo? There is absolutely NO trace of Hudson's Lightly Colored Slacks from the ground upward, or his WHITE Hat from Head Height Downward. Just tell me what You actually SEE on Willis 5. NOT what you Think is Supposed to be there. That 3rd Man is simply NOT THERE on Willis 5.
With respect to the NIX FILM - We see the BACK of the WHITE SHIRT MAN as he moves Up-the-Steps. His WHITE Shirt is covering his entire BACK. The man wearing a GREEN Cardigan would have his GREEN Cardigan covering his entire BACK. We see absolutely NO GREEN on the BACK of the WHITE SHIRT MAN as he moves Up-the-steps. NONE! ALL we see is WHITE. Total WHITE! And do Not forget that the Original NIX FLIM has been missing for decades.
We have a Stark Discrepancy between assassination images. These images flat-out contradict each other. Just tell this Forum what you actually SEE on these assassination images. NOT what you Think should be there.
"His WHITE Shirt is covering his entire BACK"
Royell, get it together. What you are seeing is the intense sunlight reflecting off the tan cardigan! Look at how the sun reflects of his shoulder which is clothed in his tan cargigan - it looks white!
(https://i.postimg.cc/bNSZwmf7/Screenshot-2025-04-06-100316.png) (https://postimages.org/)
-
"His WHITE Shirt is covering his entire BACK"
Royell, get it together. What you are seeing is the intense sunlight reflecting off the tan cardigan! Look at how the sun reflects of his shoulder which is clothed in his tan cargigan - it looks white!
(https://i.postimg.cc/bNSZwmf7/Screenshot-2025-04-06-100316.png) (https://postimages.org/)
This is a high resolution Nix frame, Storing's belief comes from an undisclosed YouTube video and if Storing had a shred of credibility he would post a link, but even then the process of copying and pasting a link is beyond Storing's technical abilities.
In this frame there is a number of white objects like the wall and the cop's helmet and the brown cardigan is not even close, so whatever Storing was looking at was either highly processed, was suffering from YouTube compression or this is just another attention seeking game typical of Storing.
(https://i.ibb.co/7tNRsWNt/Nix-brown-cardigan-man.jpg)
JohnM
-
Oswald's partial palmprint was found on an index card.
Should it not have been put on an index card?
-
With respect to the NIX FILM showing the Man moving Up-The Steps, how about just telling this forum what you actually SEE? Not what that man Should be wearing, or how the Objects around him look. WHAT COLOR do you SEE across the Back of this man? The shirt on his BACK is WHITE, and this White Shirt Man is corroborated in the WC Testimony of Lee Bowers. Bowers gave WC Testimony as to SEEING a WHITE SHIRT MAN (S) of the E-W Picket Fence, "in line" with the Triple Underpass. Corroborated SLAM DUNK!
-
Should it not have been put on an index card?
Is that supposed to prove that it was on a rifle?