Can anyone tell me if there are any radar images of the aircraft identified as Eastwind Airlines Flight 507?......Thanx in advance
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Also, I have received several e-mails relating to the fact that I have a forthcoming book on the assassination of President Kennedy. Some have intimated that I must be some sort of "conspiracy nut".......Just for the record, my investigation of several years in preparation for the writing of my book revealed quite the contrary-----My book's conclusion, I can safely give away without fear of jeopardizing any "sales".....( if there ever are any...lol).....is that the Warren Commission was correct when it concluded L.H. Oswald acted "alone and unaided"........There was no conspiracy.
Obviously, we don't want to get into a discussion about the Kennedy assassination on this board......Intersting though you haven't read my book, and already have formed an opnion?........BTW re: Groden, you may want to refer to his testimony at the OJ Simpson trial..........Mr. Groden is the one who needs the help.
Much as I hate to, I have to agree with NoFoB with regard to LHO. There is so much wrong with that conclusion that it would take another 3 years to put the faults to you.
As to the NTSB final report, I am informed that my personal copy of the Blue book is even now winging it's way across the Atlantic.
I shall post the salient points for you NoFoB, I'm sure you'll be captivated!
By the way, a harrier is a hawk - I leave you with that stunning piece of information.
I know nothing of his alleged testimony in the O.J. Simpson trial. But I do know that if you purchase that book I listed, you will find on p.390 irrefutable proof that your conclusion is dead wrong. It contains a blow-up of frame #335 of the Zapruder Film in which one can clearly see the gaping exit wound in the back of JFK's head. That same wound was affirmed by numerous doctors and nurses at Parkland Memorial Hospital in Dallas who initially treated JFK.
You will also find the famous photo of L.H. Oswald holding a rifle in his back yard. In that photo Oswald has a square chin. In other real photos Oswald has a noticeably pointy and dimpled chin. I suppose he doctored his own photos, too.
I don't really want to in this forum, but briefly: You really should look into Groden's analysis of the pictures of OJ's Bruno Malli's....(excuse the spelling if it is wrong) he claimed the photos were "fakes".....I have read High Treason, and address it in my book........ALL of the issues you referred to ie: Oswald photo, Kennedy head wound etc. ARE addressed......I once believed in a conspiracy myself, until I did years of research and found out differently.......If you would care to e-mail me with ANY specific ? re Kennedy OR Groden, I would be happy to respond.
Whatever Groden did in the O.J. trial does not affect his cedibility regardig his JFK research. He researched the assassination for decades and testified in front of the House Assassinations Committee.
I cannot get into a running debate because there are just too many specifics to be addressed in this forum or via e-mail. I only touched on a few.
Groden is not the only author I've read on this subject. I've read Prouty and Fonzi, too.
I recommend Groden's "The Killing of a President: The Complete Photographic Record of the JKF Assassination..." (1993) as a companion piece.
I looked deeply into the JFK assassination some years ago. The totality and weight of the evidence presented by Groden and others has left no doubt in my mind that there was indeed a conspiracy.
I do not know how you reached the opposite conclusion, but I do know that there can be nothing in your book that would change my mind at this point. I've been shown too much evidence to the contrary.
I completely agree with you there - the medical evidence certainly points to shots only from the rear. Any occipital damage supposedly witnessed in Parkland is not evident in Zapruder (313, I believe).
I would imagine in the enhanced Zapruder, that is even more clear.
The evidence points to only entry wounds from the back of the head?
Trevor;
I said that the evidence points to SHOTS from the rear. There is a single entrance wound in the upper back of the head and a single large exit wound at the right side of the head. There are bevels in the skull associated with these two defects which basically confirm their respective directions.
Some of the Parkland doctors mention damage to the occipital area (which is lower back of the head) in their description of events and observations. Many of these doctors also describe damage in the right parietal also, by the way. See alt.assasination.jfk for an in-depth discussion about these so-called back of the head witnesses.
However, if you look carefully at Z313, you will notice no sign of any damage to the occipital. You may also want to talk to someone who has seen the enhanced DVD video of the Zapruder film which is much, much more clear. By the way, a person on the ALT group wrote that he thought it was clear that the bullet had come from the back, after seeing this new versoin of the Zapruder film.
So what you have is a guy [LHO] who had only earlier that year attempted to assassinate a general by shooting at him (bullet was deflected by Gen. Walker's window frame) and had pictures of the general in his possession. LHO was again present at the JFK assassination, and shot a police officer later that day because the officer wanted to ask him a few questions.
All the evidence clearly points to Lee Harvey Oswald as the shooter, IMO.
There wasn't a hint of sarcasm in that post, it was totally straightforward. Point out the sarcasm to me, I can't see it.
'You are deluded' - no sarcasm there, an opinion has been offered. Everything I posted was my opinion, sarcasm was not intended.
I would agree, I did go after you with all the tools I could muster, but you stood your ground and gave as good as you got. (Better, you cb! You used the racist card too!)
Sarcasm is for dodgy ground, JFK (in my never humble opinion) is not dodgy ground.
Anyone who believes that LHO did the deed on his own is, (In my opinion) a ******* *****.
No offense of course.
I've read all the stuff you have NoFoB, over the last 10 years I've read so much stuff that my brain hurts, but it all points to LHO being a patsy, but I'm prolly just a dodgy Brit.
Conviction will not excuse the fact that this idiot is deluded or gullible. Read about the outrageous security (not) on offer for JFK in Dallas that day, the behaviour of certain secret service personnel after the deed, the disgusting obfuscation of both the hospital records, and the later Bethesda debacle, then come back and tell me that LHO did the deed.
And if you still believe that LHO did it on his own, I will believe that you are a complete ****.
No offense of course, you ****.
Any perceived sarcasm is unintentional, this is a subject that I have researched, the Warren commison were ********.
I have offered REPEATEDLY to answer your Questions.....ANY and ALL re: JFK.......However, NOT in this forum, which is for Flight 800 discussion.....If you want to rant and rave, cast aspersions and name call, that is I suppose your prerogative.......If you're interested in truth, you are WELCOME to e-mail me at jstonemusic@earthlink.net and I'll be more than happy to assist.
The bullets, irrespective of who did the shooting, still must conform to the physical evidence and in the above pictures, I do not see damage to the occipital.
Why don't you cite some facts - you have said basically nothing so far.
Just for your interest here is the observations of someone who has watched the Zapruder film just recently and posted to the JFK newsgroup. Nothing to do with the occipital issue, but affirms the contention of one bullet striking both Kennedy and Connolly. -- MEH
---------- Begin Quote ------------
I had a chance to view the DVD release, *Image of an Assassination,* for the first time over the holidays. I found the digital transfer of the film to be an extraordinary improvement over all others I've seen, allowing for a far greater amount of detail to be seen.
The most striking thing about this digitized version, particularly when viewing the enlarged version centered on the images of JFK and Connally, is that it seemed to me that JFK and Connally were both struck at the same precise instant, which I would estimate to be around frames 224-225, that is to say, immediately upon coming into view from behind the street sign. I have viewed the Z film hundreds of times over the years in numerous versions, and never have I been able to discern this, but it seems crystal clear to me on the DVD.
The second most striking thing, I would say, in light of the above, it seems impossible to overstate how obvious it is when two shots hit the motorcade -- that is, the shot that appears to strike both JFK and JBC, and the head shot. In other words, there is no point whatsoever in which there is any indication to the naked eye that a third shot strikes JFK or Connally. There is nothing scientific about this analysis, of course; it is simply my observation, based upon repeated viewings of the various versions of the film available on the DVD, that there appear to be two shots, no more and no less, striking the occupants of the motorcade.
I did not find that the DVD made it any easier to discern where the most likely point for a third shot would be, though I did not have as much time to study the film as I would have liked. My opinion has always been that the most visually apparent point for a third shot would be just prior to the instant where Rosemary Willis, running on the grass alongside the limo, begins to slow down. My opinion has long been that she was responding to the sound of a gun shot, and it has been noted by several researchers that this instant coincides with what appear to be reactions from JFK and Mrs. Kennedy. Some contest this, of course.
Be careful there, 'Bravo' is almost a surrender from you.
I have NO time for those who peddle the LHO as the lone shooter theory, none at all.
I'm just a dodgy Brit, so it doesn't matter to you colonists what I think.
Those who wish to show me JFK's brains leaving his head for the zillionth time are being insensitive, I liked the man, for all his faults, and there is no case in that picture. (I was 13 at the time)
What went on around him - or not - is where the truth lies, look at the evidence, but don't feed me the Warren Commission, that was a pack of wolves who benefitted from the deed.
This whole discussion is completely off topic, and
does nothing to address Flight 800. Where is the moderator? Bob! Oh Bob!
But two words ... "magic bullet" ... as presented by Jim Garrason in Clay Lacy's trial, remains the unexplained anomoly in the case against LHO.
Seems the Warren Comission report and the NTSB Final Report do have something in common, which may be relavant.
They both disrgard the laws of Physics and/or Aerodynamics when addressing pristine bullets and Boeing 747s with one third of the forward fuselage missing. Then they expect the public not to notice it.
This whole discussion is completely off topic, and
does nothing to address Flight 800. Where is the moderator? Bob! Oh Bob!
But two words ... "magic bullet" ... as presented by Jim Garrason in Clay Lacy's trial, remains the unexplained anomoly in the case against LHO.
Seems the Warren Comission report and the NTSB Final Report do have something in common, which may be relavant.
They both disrgard the laws of Physics and/or Aerodynamics when addressing pristine bullets and Boeing 747s with one third of the forward fuselage missing. Then they expect the public not to notice it.
This whole discussion is completely off topic, and
does nothing to address Flight 800. Where is the moderator? Bob! Oh Bob!
But two words ... "magic bullet" ... as presented by Jim Garrason in Clay Lacy's trial, remains the unexplained anomoly in the case against LHO.
Seems the Warren Comission report and the NTSB Final Report do have something in common, which may be relavant.
They both disrgard the laws of Physics and/or Aerodynamics when addressing pristine bullets and Boeing 747s with one third of the forward fuselage missing. Then they expect the public not to notice it.
Firstly, my dear anjin, it was Sate of Louisiana vs. Clay Shaw, not Clay "Lacy".
Be that as it may, I assure you the single bullet violated neither the laws of physics/aerodynamics, or any other laws of which I'm aware. It also was not "pristine". Pristine being a word bandied about by those who don't know the definition of the term pristine as it refers to copper jacketed military ammunition.
I believe in the single bullet theory, because I've done the research. I DO NOT believe in the NTSB "CWT theory"......I guess I'm just an anomaly.
