Off Topic Messages

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:47 am

jak wrote:
TCB-FAN wrote:
jak wrote: I found this guy under my wheelbarrow just before Xmas at 2:30 am.


That must have been the best Xmas present ever ! Hope you adopted him. :)


As much as we were not prepared for another dog,the wife and I fell in love with this little girl.I have no idea where she came from.She ran straight to me when she saw me.Shes been to the vet and has gotten a clean bill of health.She is already one of the family.I will post a better pic in the animal photo thread.My comments about a Ruby are a little tongue in cheek of course.Yet there is a lot to be said about a persons devotion to their pets.



Yeah Jak, these guys who haven't been line or interbred, are the best family members! Hardy and tough with the best personalities :D

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Thu Jan 16, 2014 1:50 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
mike edwards66 wrote:
jak wrote:Knowing he wouldnt make it back home Ruby would not have left his beloved dogs stranded.As the owner of many dogs myself,this is the strongest piece of evidence Ruby wasnt part of a conspiracy.You dog owners know this is true.


If accurate, that is compelling evidence.


There is far more compelling evidence which makes the above seem like poppycock. Which it is.


Only a rascal could describe a man's love for his best friend as poppycock.

Unless of course, you mean that the tale itself, is poppycock, in which case please elaborate.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Thu Jan 16, 2014 6:15 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
ranskal wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:No worries there a-tall.

Lee Oswald didn't shoot anyone on 11-22-1963.


Ack.

Check out I.A. http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/


It is sad you are so bereft of knowledge on this subject, and yet remain so resolute in your belief. I used to be like you, until I educated myself. You care enough to post again and again on these topics, take a giant leap and read even one of the recommended books I posted on page 1. You might find that your preconceptions are very, very wrong.

Of course, when you understand the truth of 11-22-1963, then you are stuck with the notion that our most cherished institutions are not legitimate, and that is a whole 'nother can of worms.


I continue to post on these topics because I have always been interested in this tragic event, I like to learn, and I like to hear other's opinions. I am not getting that when I post, I just get replies telling me how uneducated or ignorant that I am on the topic. Instead of doing that, why not provide your opinion and spur up a discussion.

Who do you think killed the President?

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Thu Jan 16, 2014 6:47 am

ranskal wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:It is sad you are so bereft of knowledge on this subject, and yet remain so resolute in your belief. I used to be like you, until I educated myself. You care enough to post again and again on these topics, take a giant leap and read even one of the recommended books I posted on page 1. You might find that your preconceptions are very, very wrong.

Of course, when you understand the truth of 11-22-1963, then you are stuck with the notion that our most cherished institutions are not legitimate, and that is a whole 'nother can of worms.


I continue to post on these topics because I have always been interested in this tragic event, I like to learn, and I like to hear other's opinions. I am not getting that when I post, I just get replies telling me how uneducated or ignorant that I am on the topic. Instead of doing that, why not provide your opinion and spur up a discussion.

Who do you think killed the President?


Since you like to learn, choose even one of the books I recommend reading, and dive in. When you are finished, we shall continue the conversation. Deal?

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Thu Jan 16, 2014 6:48 am

mike edwards66 wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:There is far more compelling evidence which makes the above seem like poppycock. Which it is.


Only a rascal could describe a man's love for his best friend as poppycock.

Unless of course, you mean that the tale itself, is poppycock, in which case please elaborate.


That's what I mean. The compelling evidence is provided in several of the recommended books on page 1.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Thu Jan 16, 2014 5:06 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
mike edwards66 wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:There is far more compelling evidence which makes the above seem like poppycock. Which it is.


Only a rascal could describe a man's love for his best friend as poppycock.

Unless of course, you mean that the tale itself, is poppycock, in which case please elaborate.


That's what I mean. The compelling evidence is provided in several of the recommended books on page 1.


What ? Allen Dulles was wrong on all counts all along ? He was one of the most trusted and reputable figures in U.S. Government history ! How dare you !

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Fri Jan 17, 2014 1:52 am

It's a perplexing conundrum, and we, in our liftime, will never know the answer.

If it was a conspiracy, a lot of people have kept the secret, for a long time.

If it was Oswald, he's fooled a lot of people, for a long time.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Fri Jan 17, 2014 2:55 am

mike edwards66 wrote:It's a perplexing conundrum, and we, in our liftime, will never know the answer.

If it was a conspiracy, a lot of people have kept the secret, for a long time.

If it was Oswald, he's fooled a lot of people, for a long time.



It's an unsolvable puzzle with lots of missing pieces. We will never know for sure what really went down in Dealey Plaza that awful day. It's mind perplexing to say the least.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Fri Jan 17, 2014 5:35 am

mike edwards66 wrote:It's a perplexing conundrum, and we, in our liftime, will never know the answer.

If it was a conspiracy, a lot of people have kept the secret, for a long time.

If it was Oswald, he's fooled a lot of people, for a long time.


Some have not kept the secret, and many have not been fooled. That is part of what educating oneself regarding the murder of John Kennedy provides an interested individual. See the book list on page 1.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sat Jan 18, 2014 3:04 pm

After I read a lot of books and I saw a lot of Discovery films, one thing in my mind continues to bother me: how could Oswald shoot 3 bullets in 6 seconds and kill JFK with a cheap old gun with a damaged telescope? 3 experts in shooting tested the gun and failed to reach the target, even after they fixed the telescope. And there is no evidence that after the army Oswald ever went to practice shooting in a polygon test.
Last edited by jurasic1968 on Sat Jan 18, 2014 9:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:22 pm

jurasic1968 wrote:After I read a lot of books and I saw a lot of Discovery films, one thing in my mind continue to bother me: how could Oswald shoot 3 bullets in 6 seconds and kill JFK with a cheap old gun with a damaged telescope? 3 experts in shooting tested the gun and failed to reach the target, even after they fixed the telescope. And there is no evidence that after the army Oswald ever went to practice shooting in a polygon test.


It's a topic, probably the most talked about topic many have debated for years, but other topics like was Oswald on the sixth floor during the shooting and how did Oswald get the rifle to work are questions often overlooked when trying to answer did Oswald kill JFK?

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sat Jan 18, 2014 8:10 pm

I read that in the 1979 report of the JFK murder, it was a recording of Oswald voice saying "I didn't shot anybody, no sir" and it was checked on the lying detector and the result was that Oswald was telling the truth. So if this fact is real, how we can believe he killed JFK?

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sat Jan 18, 2014 9:51 pm

A young Bill O'Reilly files his report on the "umbrella man" theory back in 1979.

phpBB [video]

November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sun Jan 19, 2014 7:37 am

Did anybody see the NBC 50th anniversary show that interviewed people that were around then? They spoke to the person that drove Oswald to work that day as well as his landlord. If you didn't see it, you should look for it and watch it.


Randy

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sun Jan 19, 2014 8:31 am

ranskal wrote:Did anybody see the NBC 50th anniversary show that interviewed people that were around then? They spoke to the person that drove Oswald to work that day as well as his landlord. If you didn't see it, you should look for it and watch it.


Randy


No one should be content with corporate media reports when wanting to learn what really happened, and why.

Looks like you aren't going to entertain my offer, then?

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sun Jan 19, 2014 12:43 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:No one should be content with corporate media reports when wanting to learn what really happened, and why.



Why not ? The neo-con sheeple love the mainstream media.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sun Jan 19, 2014 1:22 pm

TCB-FAN wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:No one should be content with corporate media reports when wanting to learn what really happened, and why.



Why not ? The neo-con sheeple love the mainstream media.

Sweet Neo Con -it was a song recorded by Rolling Stones.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sun Jan 19, 2014 5:24 pm

ranskal wrote:Did anybody see the NBC 50th anniversary show that interviewed people that were around then? They spoke to the person that drove Oswald to work that day as well as his landlord. If you didn't see it, you should look for it and watch it.


Randy


This one?

Frazier speaks starts 2:10…
phpBB [video]

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sun Jan 19, 2014 6:05 pm

EPA4368 wrote:
ranskal wrote:Did anybody see the NBC 50th anniversary show that interviewed people that were around then? They spoke to the person that drove Oswald to work that day as well as his landlord. If you didn't see it, you should look for it and watch it.


Randy


This one?

Frazier speaks starts 2:10…
phpBB [video]



No, that one is from Fox. The one I saw was on NBC. I am out of town but when I get back, I will watch this video.


Randy

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sun Jan 19, 2014 6:09 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
ranskal wrote:Did anybody see the NBC 50th anniversary show that interviewed people that were around then? They spoke to the person that drove Oswald to work that day as well as his landlord. If you didn't see it, you should look for it and watch it.


Randy


No one should be content with corporate media reports when wanting to learn what really happened, and why.

Looks like you aren't going to entertain my offer, then?


Actually, I ordered Murder in Dealey Plaza before I left town.



Randy

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:43 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:It's really such a sad story. It seems likely Lee Oswald was an insider working to prevent an assassination, while actually being set up to be the fall guy after the murder. Like a good soldier, the 24 year-old kept his cool, waiting for help to arrive, and instead was shot dead to ensure he would not reveal his secrets.


Mercy. Poor little Lee. Such a good boy, tossed under the bus unfairly, and so grossly misunderstood. One classy American, he was. Lord-a-mighty. To steal a line from baseball broadcasting legend Jack Buck, "I cannot believe what I just read." "Sad story"? "Good soldier"?

Honestly, I cannot believe how such a learned individual can post something so foolish.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:47 pm

ranskal wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:No one should be content with corporate media reports when wanting to learn what really happened, and why.

Looks like you aren't going to entertain my offer, then?


Actually, I ordered Murder in Dealey Plaza before I left town.



Randy


Great. Please return to the conversation after you've given that one a thorough review.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Mon Jan 20, 2014 12:35 am

ranskal wrote:
Actually, I ordered Murder in Dealey Plaza before I left town.



Randy




Just keep in mind that book you ordered is written by one man's interpretation of what happened on 11-22-63. Everyone has their own version of what took place that day. The author's thesis is no better than what is reported on Fox News documentaries of the event. Seems like everyone, including their aunt has their own story to tell about 11--22--63. I've come to the conclusion that no one is closer to the truth than the person(s) responsible of that horrible deed that took place that awful day. If you think the author has no political agenda behind selling his book, think again.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Mon Jan 20, 2014 1:02 am

KHoots wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:It's really such a sad story. It seems likely Lee Oswald was an insider working to prevent an assassination, while actually being set up to be the fall guy after the murder. Like a good soldier, the 24 year-old kept his cool, waiting for help to arrive, and instead was shot dead to ensure he would not reveal his secrets.


Mercy. Poor little Lee. Such a good boy, tossed under the bus unfairly, and so grossly misunderstood. One classy American, he was. Lord-a-mighty. To steal a line from baseball broadcasting legend Jack Buck, "I cannot believe what I just read." "Sad story"? "Good soldier"?

Honestly, I cannot believe how such a learned individual can post something so foolish.


Since you've already admitted on this forum you have read virtually nothing on this subject, why you are compelled to post such a condescending and ignorant comment is a mystery. Perhaps it's because the truth of 11-22-1963 is something too disturbing for you to contemplate. That's OK. It is why the lie has persisted for over 50 years, and may be seen perpetuated on this topic from a number of forum members.

It's always easier to turn a blind eye to subjects that may be unpleasant.

Re: November 22, 1963 (Rare Photo)

Mon Jan 20, 2014 1:08 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
Since you've already admitted on this forum you have read virtually nothing on this subject, why you are compelled to post such a condescending and ignorant comment is a mystery. Perhaps it's because the truth of 11-22-1963 is something too disturbing for you to contemplate. That's OK. It is why the lie has persisted for over 50 years, and may be seen perpetuated on this topic from a number of forum members.

It's always easier to turn a blind eye to subjects that may be unpleasant.


Did it ever occur to you that sometimes you just need to "cool it" a bit ??