"No Blood" at Oswald shooting claims photographer
- Thread starter Jazzz
- Start date
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
intrestingly enough we have had in richard hammonds case a stark example of what may well have killed her.Jazzz said:
He got out of the car and was joking with the ambulance crew even used his mobile after the event then collasped in the ambulance due to sever head trama which caused brain swelling...
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Jazz - sorry, I was just out to gull on the MM tapes; they are in fact a piece of fiction, lifted from James Ellroy's book American Tabloid, altho I understand that they were a fixture of the whole JFK/MM conspiracy nexus (partly I suspect wish fulfilment on the part of JEH who had bugged MMs suite for precisely this purpose).
Your comments on security - JFK was driving around in an open topped car (in defiance of his SS handlers as well), Ruby wasn't well protected etc...it's indicative of the time; simply put security wasn't taken as seriously in the 60s, so without a working knowledge of both the procedures but also the psychology of the police at the time (many people hated Oswald for what he'd done, including a few Dallas PD) etc - it's not enough just to say 'It looks dodgy' because many 'celebrity' arrests at the time allowed crowds of reporters and the public access to suspects/arrestees that would be seen as unacceptable from a security AND civil rights perspective today.
And you still seem unwilling to accept that Diana was involved in a car accident in a vehicle travelling at speed without wearing a seatbelt, and no matter how well made the car (and Mercedes are VERY well built, especially the 500 series), a quick glance at UK accident stats for rear seat passengers involved in high speed collisions without a belt make her death due to injury the most likely sequence of events.
The government aren't taking the piss when they tell people to use rear seatbelts - in the case of Diana, the ONLY person wearing a belt, her bodyguard, was also the only one to survive.
Your comments on security - JFK was driving around in an open topped car (in defiance of his SS handlers as well), Ruby wasn't well protected etc...it's indicative of the time; simply put security wasn't taken as seriously in the 60s, so without a working knowledge of both the procedures but also the psychology of the police at the time (many people hated Oswald for what he'd done, including a few Dallas PD) etc - it's not enough just to say 'It looks dodgy' because many 'celebrity' arrests at the time allowed crowds of reporters and the public access to suspects/arrestees that would be seen as unacceptable from a security AND civil rights perspective today.
And you still seem unwilling to accept that Diana was involved in a car accident in a vehicle travelling at speed without wearing a seatbelt, and no matter how well made the car (and Mercedes are VERY well built, especially the 500 series), a quick glance at UK accident stats for rear seat passengers involved in high speed collisions without a belt make her death due to injury the most likely sequence of events.
The government aren't taking the piss when they tell people to use rear seatbelts - in the case of Diana, the ONLY person wearing a belt, her bodyguard, was also the only one to survive.
gosub
~#
GarfieldLeChat said:
Interesting....Hammond wasn't originally supposed to do the Vampire run it was going to be James May. Not only did he survive a horrendous crash he may well have provided a lead as to the pernicious ego maniac behind EVERYTHING:
Jeremy Clarkson
(actually that explains a lot)
kyser_soze said:
It's not indicative of the time. The security for JFK was highly unusual, for him at the time. The security for Martin Luther King was highly unusual for him at the time - if you think James Earl Ray did that one, well you aren't in accord with King's family who attended his funeral. Anyone who looks at the Bobby Kennedy assassination and doesn't think Thane Eugene Caesar was the real culprit really does need their head examined. And the security for Diana was ridiculous too. I'm not saying she was killed because you can't die in a Mercedes.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
She was no longer a member of the royal family at that point, and quite honestly I don't think she should have had a taxpayer-funded permanent bodyguard full stop.
On the Kennedy thing - can you actually back up what you mean by 'highly unusual' by making some kind of comparison between doctrinal security procedures and what was actually in place? Or is it just opinion again? And again - Diana died because she wasn't wearing a seatbelt and was in a car that hit a wall at 70mph.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Hmm, just read that MLK thing...do you think that the King family would be happy if it emerged that he was shot by another African American, maybe someone from Nation of Islam or another of the other Black civil rights groups who were pissed off at MLK? I doubt it - what they want is someone to proove that JEH and the FBI and 'government' were behind it, because that provides a nice, easy target.
It's always the same - those who spend time shouting the loudest that they want 'the truth' to come out are usually those who already have a pretty strong idea of the 'truth' they want to see come out.
It's always the same - those who spend time shouting the loudest that they want 'the truth' to come out are usually those who already have a pretty strong idea of the 'truth' they want to see come out.
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
or for that matter mercedes benz the daughter the cars were named after...pk said:Quick, somebody dig up the body of Pierre Levegh!
Idris2002
canadian girlfriend
kyser_soze said:
Back home in Co. Mayo I was talking to a surgeon at the local hospital who told me of a case they'd had a few weeks before we met.
Four lads in a car crash - one walked away from it, one had to go to casualty, another was kept in overnight for observation.
The fourth, who was the only one not wearing a safety belt, was killed outright.
belboid
Exasperated, not angry.
This is, of course, a great exmple of what I was talking about earlier.Jazzz said:
I think there are a hell of a lot of reasonable doubts around the King case. But I'm also sure that 99% of people coming across this here would dismiss it because it is coming from an eejit who will promote any conspiracy 'theory' no matter how ridiculous or vile it is.
Like I said, conspiracy theorists are the governments best friend.
Who pays you Jazzz? CIA, MI5, mossad???
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
jebus...belboid said:
Jazzz said:
can you back up this strange assertion?
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Umm...that's about MLK, not JFK! And even that site and the links out from it lead to more questions than actual answers - for example
So the 12 person jury actually found beyond reasonable doubt - and on the words of a single confessor who had a stated aim of wanting 'to do right by God' and whom denied that he knew the plot was to kill King? Forgive me if I'm a more than a little sceptical here...
But the obvious question...
Who were his fellow co-conspiritors, and why weren't they named, subpeonad and/or charged?
So the 12 person jury actually found beyond reasonable doubt - and on the words of a single confessor who had a stated aim of wanting 'to do right by God' and whom denied that he knew the plot was to kill King? Forgive me if I'm a more than a little sceptical here...
But the obvious question...
Who were his fellow co-conspiritors, and why weren't they named, subpeonad and/or charged?
If someone killed a close relative of mine, I would want the real culprit to be put in jail for it, and I wouldn't want to accuse someone else. I doubt you really mean to take the line that the King family are liars over this Kyser, especially before having a look at the case.kyser_soze said:
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
yeah he can afford to cos jebus savesbelboid said:
coat thrown in gutter...
Oh sorry I thought we were on MLK. I don't know much about this case, in fact I only just saw it but it wasn't a criminal trial, it was civil. But yes, it would seem that the only time a jury ruled as to who killed MLK it found JER entirely innocent.kyser_soze said:
Bob_the_lost
Elsewhere
Nah, obviously london Met.belboid said:
GarfieldLeChat
fucking awesome but wrong
to my knowledge he's never shot some one accused them of beign a terorist then accused them of being an illigal immigrant then accused them of being in the wrong place at the wrong time...Bob_the_lost said:
Great, well once we've established the principle that people can be executed with the assistance of government agencies, and the truth covered up, and an entirely innocent man framed for it, that's a start, isn't it?belboid said:
This is another interesting link on the James Earl Ray question.
Of course you are not being serious with your last line.
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
I'm not saying that they are - what I'm saying is that Dexter King is coming from the 'Guilty until proven innocent' angle which is a hallmark of someone who doesn't want 'the truth' unless it matches what they have already convinced themselves is 'the truth'.
I do agree with you that Ray was most likely a patsy for the shooting - but that doesn't instantly mean that all the rest of it is true. He had just as many enemies in the Civil Rights movement as he did in industry and government, especially when he started to advocate redistribution of wealth (his falling out with the NAACP is well documented) because many in the CR movement felt, rightly, that the support of white liberal America would dry up pretty quickly if he continued to talk about Watts-style riots around the US, taxing the rich by 50% and so on.
That aside, like most of the 60s pantheon of 'heroes' MLK, like JFK and Bobby, was not the Saint that he is portrayed as - from the affiars he conducted behind his wife's back while preaching family through to the huge splits in the CR movement he caused - and the King family is just as protective of his Sainthood as the Kennedy's used to be until the point the revelations about JFK turned into a flood of priapic, dopamine injection fuelled shagathons and an irrational hatred of Cuba.
Similar threads
