Why do you assume their always has to be some ‘bad intent’ from a LNer?
You need to ask?
Yes, I do. It seems strange for me that you would think that LNers have bad intent.
Why do you think that?
Aren’t you implying that you think we are all involved in a Large-Secret-Enduring conspiracy? Why else would we all have bad intents? By coincidence?
. . .
Actually, I always assume that an LN is simply mistaken, but then - in most cases - they refuse to have an open and honest discussion, start making up false narratives and ignoring logic and an obvious fact.
Might I recall where you once argued that a police car on it's way to the Tippit scene with full lights and sirene on would stop for a red traffic light?
No, I don’t recall saying that. Can you post a link to this?
What I recall saying is that a police car summoned to the Tippit murder scene, but many, many miles away, with other police cars already at scene, or much closer than he, might elect to proceed at normal speed rather than high speed while using sirens and flashing lights. And yes, while proceeding at normal speed, he would not run red lights. If he proceeds at high speed, even with lights and sirens, while running red lights, he is more likely to cause a serious accident, then arrive at the Tippit murder scene in the nick of time.
It would be different if he was just a quarter mile away and it was reported a suspect was getting away and he was the closest to the scene. In that case, yes, flashing lights, sirens, and a high-speed approach would be appropriate. But not from many miles away.
Are you certain you didn’t miss report what I said? Or, for that matter, in my mini-debate with Bill Brown you concluded Brown was right because, you said, you followed the evidence (in this case the DPD radio recordings) when in fact those recordingd provided no support for your conclusion at all.
The words are hard to make out but I think that experts who examine the tapes back Brown’s arguments. In any case, I haven’t looked into it very much myself.
Of course, your claims have absolutely no support from the dictabelt tapes. At best,
At best, your scenario has no more support than Bill’s.
In any case, any question about what the dictabelt recording says or doesn’t say should not be directed to me or Bill but to our true expert on the subject. Steve Barber.
Agreed, again, but now let's apply this to the Tippit witnesses, where the LNs have no problem accepting the fact that all the witnesses at the line ups identified Oswald as the man they saw. There, all of a sudden, all witnesses are correct and none of them just identify the most likely person in the line up. What is your opinion about that?
I always found the Officer Tippit witnesses to be the weakest reasons to think Oswald killed Officer Tippit. Because eyewitness identifying suspects is not reliable.
Where have I said otherwise?
But Oswald being found a half hour within a half mile (as I recall) of the murder scene. Oswald being found with the loaded murder weapon that matched shells found at the scene. Oswald being found with bullets in his pocket of the same type used to kill Officer Tippit. Oswald’s suspicious behavior just before entering the theater and within the theater. And Oswald pulling a gun on the first police officer to approach him in the theater. If I can explain away all this, I can explain away any evidence against anyone. All these things I find incredibly incriminating against Oswald.
In any case, what is my intent? My intent is to confirm that most witnesses, perhaps all, did not remember the movement of JFK’s head immediately after he was shot in the head. If this is so, then it is not strange for Dan Rather to not remember the movement of JFK’s head from his one viewing of the Zapruder film.
Comparing apples and oranges. Witnesses at Dealey Plaza were in the action (so to speak) with shots being fired and unaware where they come from. They had very little time and interest, I imagine, to observe what was going on the the limo. Rather, on the other hand, had no such things going on and knew in advance what he was going to see.
Yes. But Rather did not know what he should look for. He did not know he should see which direction JFK’s head moved after being shot. He did not know if he should try to see if Connally and JFK were struck at the same time or different times. All these issues came up later.
Like the Dealey Plaza witnesses, I think Rather was surprised just how bloody awful the head shot was and didn’t note what direction JFK’s head moved.
When asked about it later he, subconsciously, guessed what happened.
In any case, no one can come up with a single Dealey Plaza witness who saw the head move forward. Thus answering my basic question. This has point has been somewhat lost with you concentrating on other matters that have no bearing on my one question. But it is clear that no one can come up with a single such witness.
