Is This Our Man?

[Alan Ford]

Happy to report that the old thread on 'Tan Jacket Man' over on the Education Forum has just been reopened after 7 years------------this time without Mr Scully's intrusive self-obsessed whinging being a feature! 

[Tom Scully]

Happy to report that the old thread on 'Tan Jacket Man' over on the Education Forum has just been reopened after 7 years------------this time without Mr Scully's intrusive self-obsessed whinging being a feature! 

Misleading readers again, Alan? You omitted the fact that the only thing posted in that thread that actually developed into anything meamingful, actionable, or in any way actually informative, happened to be the original research details I posted in that thread in August, 2012. My point in posting there was to contrast the lack of substance...the obviously, astronomically low odds of "Tan Jacket Man," focus ever resolving anything, compared to the usefulness of the details I posted.

Indeed, less than three weeks after I posted in that "tanned" thread you are now gushingly approving of, my original research results (for the first time anywhere) Author Peter Janney was pounding on the door of the actually not missing "bogeyman" of PhD (Princeton educated, doctor of psychology ) Peter Janney's fevered imagination, demanding that the poor man read his fiction misrepresented as factual "game changer," and Janney's pal Douglas Horne was crapping all over himself attacking me for writing a factual review critical of Janney's premise about William L. Mitchell because he, Horne had no factual rebuttal to my well supported research details.

You are resorting to the same tactics against me personally. It's old, deliberately misleading, shallow, and ineffective. As our Mr. Trump currently, if you had something better than attacking in response to valid criticism, he would, and you would.

This is what having class looks like Alan, just an example of a character building tip for future reference...:
I do not expect to influence you, only to provide readers a comparison of who you are, who I am, what you and I have actually contributed, and what the reaction to the research contributions of either of us, by others of some stature has actually been. We are what we post. The "Peter Jannyesque" unrealistic nature of what you emphasize or otherwise find interesting was summed up accurately todat in a recent post on this thread by Tom Graves, ironically the author of the "Tan Jacket Man" thread that stalled back in 2012.

Who was Lt. William L. Mitchell ? And what ... - Mary's Mosaic
http://www.marysmosaic.net/newsletter.htm
Author Peter Janney. ... After reviewing the material pertaining to Lt. William L. Mitchell for more than eight years, Peabody Award-winning ... Roger Charles (Ret.) ...

[Royell Storing]

John,

What does the Grassy Knoll's fence have to do with it?

Doesn't Storing's buddy Alan Ford want Parking Lot Tan Jacket Man to be in the Sixth Floor window during the assassination, showing his length of pipe and bald spot (or whatever) to Amos Euins, down below, and spotted by Officer Baker on the third or fourth floor a few seconds after the assassination?

--  MWT 

     The Baker time stamp is being called into question due to: (1) The Lovelady and Shelley WC Testimony of their going down the Elm Ext 2-3 Minutes AFTER the Kill Shot, and (2) the Darnell Film showing Camera Car #2 at a Dead Stop per Hackerott's examination of the Darnell Film Footage at the Sixth Floor Museum.

[Thomas Graves]

     The Baker time stamp is being called into question due to: (1) The Lovelady and Shelley WC Testimony of their going down the Elm Ext 2-3 Minutes AFTER the Kill Shot, and (2) the Darnell Film showing Camera Car #2 at a Dead Stop per Hackerott's examination of the Darnell Film Footage at the Sixth Floor Museum.

Royell,

Did either Lovelady or Shelley say "two or three minutes," or did you make that up?

--  MWT 

[Alan Ford]

Misleading readers again, Alan? You omitted the fact that the only thing posted in that thread that actually developed into anything meamingful, actionable, or in any way actually informative, happened to be the original research details I posted in that thread in August, 2012. My point in posting there was to contrast the lack of substance...the obviously, astronomically low odds of "Tan Jacket Man," focus ever resolving anything, compared to the usefulness of the details I posted.

Indeed, less than three weeks after I posted in that "tanned" thread you are now gushingly approving of, my original research results (for the first time anywhere) Author Peter Janney was pounding on the door of the actually not missing "bogeyman" of PhD (Princeton educated, doctor of psychology ) Peter Janney's fevered imagination, demanding that the poor man read his fiction misrepresented as factual "game changer," and Janney's pal Douglas Horne was crapping all over himself attacking me for writing a factual review critical of Janney's premise about William L. Mitchell because he, Horne had no factual rebuttal to my well supported research details.

You are resorting to the same tactics against me personally. It's old, deliberately misleading, shallow, and ineffective. As our Mr. Trump currently, if you had something better than attacking in response to valid criticism, he would, and you would.

This is what having class looks like Alan, just an example of a character building tip for future reference...:
I do not expect to influence you, only to provide readers a comparison of who you are, who I am, what you and I have actually contributed, and what the reaction to the research contributions of either of us, by others of some stature has actually been. We are what we post. The "Peter Jannyesque" unrealistic nature of what you emphasize or otherwise find interesting was summed up accurately todat in a recent post on this thread by Tom Graves, ironically the author of the "Tan Jacket Man" thread that stalled back in 2012.

Take your attention-seeking, off-topic nonsense elsewhere Mr Scully--------your attempts to derail this thread are not going to work! 

[Thomas Graves]

     The camera cars being at a DEAD STOP impacts When the camera men jumped out of those cars and Began their filming and traveling on foot down Elm St and across/Up the Knoll. There has always been a concerted effort claiming the Motorcade NEVER came to a complete STOP. We Now Know this is baloney. The question Now is how long was the Motorcade stopped and how long it took for cameramen to bail out of their STOPPED cars. The revelation that the Motorcade came to a complete STOP, calls into question All Time Stamping.

Royell,

I started believing some time ago that the camera cars came to a complete stop.

For about 20 seconds.

The stop, that is.

--  MWT   

[Royell Storing]

Royell,

I started believing some time ago that the camera cars came to a complete stop.

For about 20 seconds.

The stop, that is.

--  MWT   

       The question after learning that indeed the Motorcade did STOP, is why has this been hidden from the public since 11/22/63? I believe the Wiegman Film being promoted for almost 40 years as having been filmed "continuously" was intentionally done to Hide the Motorcade coming to a DEAD STOP. The FALSE Time Stamping of Films, Photos, and the Individuals contained therein has also been done to Hide this DEAD STOP.

[Thomas Graves]

       The question after learning that indeed the Motorcade did STOP, is why has this been hidden from the public since 11/22/63? I believe the Wiegman Film being promoted for almost 40 years as having been filmed "continuously" was intentionally done to Hide the Motorcade coming to a DEAD STOP. The FALSE Time Stamping of Films, Photos, and the Individuals contained therein has also been done to Hide this DEAD STOP.

Royell,

I don't believe any serious researcher has ever claimed that the camera cars just kept on going as though nothing had happened.

There used to be a well-made GIF on the Internet that showed the motorcade's first ten or so vehicles (including motorcycles) in their correct order, travelling down Houston to the Elm Street Curve and down Elm towards the Triple Underpass which showed the camera cars stopping (for only a few seconds, iirc), but I can't seem to find it now.

--  MWT