We talk a lot about the case, examine it in detail, but.... just a man and his words. The actors are all dead, Nicolleti, Giancana, LHO, Ruby, Rosselli, etc...
I listen the DVD and read the book. I think the man tell the truth, but no absolute proof...
What should be the proof ?
a) a unknowned photo showing James Files firing ?
b) a unknowned witness who saw him firing ?
c) a lie detector test taked by James File ?
d) Nicolletti's diary describing the day and the implication of Files ?
e) anything else ???
by the way, c) and d) are available.... why James Files don't take the polygraph detector and don't give the diary ?
THE proof
-
Bruce Patrick Brychek
- Posts: 1306
- Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:23 pm
Reply To Mr. Francois Bertrand:
Dear Mr. Francois Bertrand,
I have just read your post. You state that you read the book, and watched
the DVD, both about Files On JFK. Then you should know that Jimmy's Interview was Professionally Analyzed by a Computer Voice Stress Analyzer Test, which is far more accurate that a polygraph, and it conclusively proved his involvement, knowledge, and the accuracy of information that he stated.
Why should Jimmy take a polygraph, and why should he give up Nicoletti's Diary ? How does it benefit him ? If you are not convinved, why should he
care ? You can convince some of the people all of the time. You can convince all of the people some of the time. But you can not convince all of the people all of the time.
Do you think that Jimmy should care at all who, or how many people believe him ? And if so, Why ? Please explain.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Please note that I am asking very specific, very pointed questions, but I am not attacking you personally. Thank You for understanding that.
Respectfully,
Bruce Patrtick Brychek.
I have just read your post. You state that you read the book, and watched
the DVD, both about Files On JFK. Then you should know that Jimmy's Interview was Professionally Analyzed by a Computer Voice Stress Analyzer Test, which is far more accurate that a polygraph, and it conclusively proved his involvement, knowledge, and the accuracy of information that he stated.
Why should Jimmy take a polygraph, and why should he give up Nicoletti's Diary ? How does it benefit him ? If you are not convinved, why should he
care ? You can convince some of the people all of the time. You can convince all of the people some of the time. But you can not convince all of the people all of the time.
Do you think that Jimmy should care at all who, or how many people believe him ? And if so, Why ? Please explain.
You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink.
Please note that I am asking very specific, very pointed questions, but I am not attacking you personally. Thank You for understanding that.
Respectfully,
Bruce Patrtick Brychek.
-
francois bertrand
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:23 pm
dear Mr Bruce Patrick Brychek,
you said: "Computer Voice Stress Analyzer Test, which is far more accurate that a polygraph"
so i search the net.... some conclusions from:
http://www.polygraph.org/voicestress.htm
Conclusion: "Validity of the analysis for practical lie detection is questionable"
Conclusion: Accuracy was not significantly greater than chance for the CVSA.
Conclusion: Validity of voice stress measures was poor.
Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception using the CVSA as a voice stress device.
Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception.
Conclusion: Voice stress did not detect deception greater than chance.
Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception for voice analysis.
Respectfully,
François
you said: "Computer Voice Stress Analyzer Test, which is far more accurate that a polygraph"
so i search the net.... some conclusions from:
http://www.polygraph.org/voicestress.htm
Conclusion: "Validity of the analysis for practical lie detection is questionable"
Conclusion: Accuracy was not significantly greater than chance for the CVSA.
Conclusion: Validity of voice stress measures was poor.
Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception using the CVSA as a voice stress device.
Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception.
Conclusion: Voice stress did not detect deception greater than chance.
Conclusion: Chance-level detection of deception for voice analysis.
Respectfully,
François
-
Bruce Patrick Brychek
- Posts: 1306
- Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:23 pm
Response To Mr. Francois Bertrand:
Dear Mr. Francois Bertrand,
Thank You for your Reply, although we could not differ more.
You site some quotes. By the nature of my background, I have used polygraphs and Computer Voice Stress Analyzers for years. CVSA'S can be used live or real time, over the phone, and on lengthy recordings. Their overall accuracy, if used by an experienced expert falls above 95 %.
If they don't work, why must every law enforcement officials and govenment agents have to pass a series of these tests as an absolute prerequisite to employment ? And can face, in some cases, criminal charges for failing these tests ?
In addition, I have known Jimmy Files since the 1960's, and I am very well aware of almost everything that he has said, and done. But I am not perfect. I am aware of almost every fact surrounding the test.
I sought to give you my insight. You give me quotes. I offered you some of my first hand knowledge, experience, and insight, and I get nowhere. This is why Jimmy and I have moved on to other things.
Besides, you failed to answer even one of my questions. Further, you could not be more wrong about the actors all being dead. Several are alive as of today.........................................................................
I am only on this website to support my Very Trusted Friend, Mr. Wim Dankbaar, and his support of my Best Friend, Jimmy Files. Additionally,
Nick Whalen, bob, and a few others, you know who you are that I have communicated with in the past, and am sorry that I can not recall at a moments notice.
Respectfully,
Bruce Patrick Brychek.
Thank You for your Reply, although we could not differ more.
You site some quotes. By the nature of my background, I have used polygraphs and Computer Voice Stress Analyzers for years. CVSA'S can be used live or real time, over the phone, and on lengthy recordings. Their overall accuracy, if used by an experienced expert falls above 95 %.
If they don't work, why must every law enforcement officials and govenment agents have to pass a series of these tests as an absolute prerequisite to employment ? And can face, in some cases, criminal charges for failing these tests ?
In addition, I have known Jimmy Files since the 1960's, and I am very well aware of almost everything that he has said, and done. But I am not perfect. I am aware of almost every fact surrounding the test.
I sought to give you my insight. You give me quotes. I offered you some of my first hand knowledge, experience, and insight, and I get nowhere. This is why Jimmy and I have moved on to other things.
Besides, you failed to answer even one of my questions. Further, you could not be more wrong about the actors all being dead. Several are alive as of today.........................................................................
I am only on this website to support my Very Trusted Friend, Mr. Wim Dankbaar, and his support of my Best Friend, Jimmy Files. Additionally,
Nick Whalen, bob, and a few others, you know who you are that I have communicated with in the past, and am sorry that I can not recall at a moments notice.
Respectfully,
Bruce Patrick Brychek.
-
francois bertrand
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:23 pm
Dear Mr Bruce Patrick Brychek,
i apologize if my last post hurt you in someway. This was certainly not my goal. I took the time to read all your posts, so i know you're in security and investigations, and, more important, you are a very close friend of Mr Files since many many years. As you suggest, i read article on flocco.com (link Bush Sr to Dallas); very interesting. I learn that you are writting book... is it a book about Mr Files ? For the cvsa, i was aware of that but
this was new to me, so i search the net for more information on that. All search lead me to conclude the cvsa was not very good (as the link i provided in my last post). This was one side. You provided an another side when you said cvsa is very accurate... so i'm confused. Can you provided a link so i can have a clear picture of that ?
very respectfully,
François Bertrand
i apologize if my last post hurt you in someway. This was certainly not my goal. I took the time to read all your posts, so i know you're in security and investigations, and, more important, you are a very close friend of Mr Files since many many years. As you suggest, i read article on flocco.com (link Bush Sr to Dallas); very interesting. I learn that you are writting book... is it a book about Mr Files ? For the cvsa, i was aware of that but
this was new to me, so i search the net for more information on that. All search lead me to conclude the cvsa was not very good (as the link i provided in my last post). This was one side. You provided an another side when you said cvsa is very accurate... so i'm confused. Can you provided a link so i can have a clear picture of that ?
very respectfully,
François Bertrand
-
Bruce Patrick Brychek
- Posts: 1306
- Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:23 pm
Response To Mr. Francois Bertrand:
Dear Mr. Francois Bertrand,
Thank you for your kind Response. You are truly a gentleman. I rattled off my previous Response in some haste, not stopping to think that I have highly technical knowledge that few posess, or have access to as I do.
The CIA and FBI have been using polygraphs, and Computer Voice Stress Analyzers longer than I can remember. Like Eye Retina Scanners have also been used by both for Top Secret Matters for years.
Francois, I realize now that you are probably not American, and English is not your first language. I should have slowed down, and been better in my Response to you, and for that I truly apologize. I was involved in some very serious matters, and now realize that I could have written to you much better than I did, and I am sorry for that.
The reports that I have are very highly confidential from USA Law Enforcement and/or Government Agencies, and I am not permitted to circulate. However, if I can make this anology, what is in print by the government is that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK. Obviously, we on the JFK Forum disagree.
What the government allows out on their "Secret Projects" or "Toy Projects" as they are sometimes called, does not disclose anything close to the "Real Truth," just like The JFK Assassination. Therefore, there are no Public Friendly sites in America to see what the government, or law enforcement is really doing, and/or using that I think would answer this question.
Francois, while I realize that I have not fuly answered your question, at least I hope that I have provided a "better, or more complete answer."
Respectfully,
Bruce Patrick Brychek.
Thank you for your kind Response. You are truly a gentleman. I rattled off my previous Response in some haste, not stopping to think that I have highly technical knowledge that few posess, or have access to as I do.
The CIA and FBI have been using polygraphs, and Computer Voice Stress Analyzers longer than I can remember. Like Eye Retina Scanners have also been used by both for Top Secret Matters for years.
Francois, I realize now that you are probably not American, and English is not your first language. I should have slowed down, and been better in my Response to you, and for that I truly apologize. I was involved in some very serious matters, and now realize that I could have written to you much better than I did, and I am sorry for that.
The reports that I have are very highly confidential from USA Law Enforcement and/or Government Agencies, and I am not permitted to circulate. However, if I can make this anology, what is in print by the government is that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK. Obviously, we on the JFK Forum disagree.
What the government allows out on their "Secret Projects" or "Toy Projects" as they are sometimes called, does not disclose anything close to the "Real Truth," just like The JFK Assassination. Therefore, there are no Public Friendly sites in America to see what the government, or law enforcement is really doing, and/or using that I think would answer this question.
Francois, while I realize that I have not fuly answered your question, at least I hope that I have provided a "better, or more complete answer."
Respectfully,
Bruce Patrick Brychek.
-
francois bertrand
- Posts: 93
- Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:23 pm
-
Kyler Cobain
- Posts: 9
- Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2019 8:23 pm
speaking of proof, I have a question
I was wondering what anyone might think of quote. I'll tell you more about it when you respond. I removed some of the harsh language, but I didn't alter anything else. Quoting:
Oswald defected to the USSR and I don’t know if that was a CIA ploy or if he did it out of some kind of whacked-out Marxist conscience. Regardless, the CIA was using *him*, whether he knew it or not. They were trying real f____g hard to kill Castro. And JFK was playing right along with it. They had already tried a bunch of times with hare-brained schemes that didn’t work. In their minds it hadn’t worked before because they couldn’t get a professional, American trained assassin close enough to him to bide his time and hit him at his leisure. They needed a ‘boot on the ground’, as we say, in Cuba to do that.
So they came up with this ingenious idea. If they could double some left-wing nutjob that Cuba trusted, at least enough to give him a visa, they could get him in. They would do it in Mexico City. The only requirement would be that this person’s photo couldn’t be widely disseminated and the double would need to at least resemble him to some degree of verbal approximation. Now, this idea was originally hatched for all sorts of sensitive things - killing Castro sensitive things - and they started doing it as early as 1960. It was only later that they hatched the idea of sending an assassin as a double. Anyway, the person that they doubled over and over was Oswald - nutjob Lee Harvey Oswald, your huckleberry. In blistering originality they called it the Oswald project. Pretty slick. So, right around the summer of 1963 JFK started getting kinda pissed with the CIA because they were supposed to stop all those anti-Castro training camps, as per JFK’s agreement with Kruschev after the Cuban missile crisis. So JFK got Hoover to start turning rocks over and busting heads and finding these ‘training camps’.
But, the FBI enlisted the *real* Oswald to help them find the ‘camps’. Yea, I know. Why did Hoover pick *that* guy. Well, like I said, Oswald had ‘ties’ to the CIA through several of Oswald’s associates. These associates of Oswald’s were unilaterally established by the CIA bearing promises of being the great double-agent Oswald had always wanted to be, but never telling him that their contact with him was nothing more than an attempt to keep track of him and what he was up to so that their doubles didn’t screw up; like, you know, showing up at the same place at the same, claiming bogus facts were true that could be easily looked up, showing his face on the evening news. That kind of thing. In fact, Oswald was a nuisance and the other assets didn’t like him being around. But, they played along. They created a bogus story to explain why he had to “keep a low profile, make no wavesâ€
Oswald defected to the USSR and I don’t know if that was a CIA ploy or if he did it out of some kind of whacked-out Marxist conscience. Regardless, the CIA was using *him*, whether he knew it or not. They were trying real f____g hard to kill Castro. And JFK was playing right along with it. They had already tried a bunch of times with hare-brained schemes that didn’t work. In their minds it hadn’t worked before because they couldn’t get a professional, American trained assassin close enough to him to bide his time and hit him at his leisure. They needed a ‘boot on the ground’, as we say, in Cuba to do that.
So they came up with this ingenious idea. If they could double some left-wing nutjob that Cuba trusted, at least enough to give him a visa, they could get him in. They would do it in Mexico City. The only requirement would be that this person’s photo couldn’t be widely disseminated and the double would need to at least resemble him to some degree of verbal approximation. Now, this idea was originally hatched for all sorts of sensitive things - killing Castro sensitive things - and they started doing it as early as 1960. It was only later that they hatched the idea of sending an assassin as a double. Anyway, the person that they doubled over and over was Oswald - nutjob Lee Harvey Oswald, your huckleberry. In blistering originality they called it the Oswald project. Pretty slick. So, right around the summer of 1963 JFK started getting kinda pissed with the CIA because they were supposed to stop all those anti-Castro training camps, as per JFK’s agreement with Kruschev after the Cuban missile crisis. So JFK got Hoover to start turning rocks over and busting heads and finding these ‘training camps’.
But, the FBI enlisted the *real* Oswald to help them find the ‘camps’. Yea, I know. Why did Hoover pick *that* guy. Well, like I said, Oswald had ‘ties’ to the CIA through several of Oswald’s associates. These associates of Oswald’s were unilaterally established by the CIA bearing promises of being the great double-agent Oswald had always wanted to be, but never telling him that their contact with him was nothing more than an attempt to keep track of him and what he was up to so that their doubles didn’t screw up; like, you know, showing up at the same place at the same, claiming bogus facts were true that could be easily looked up, showing his face on the evening news. That kind of thing. In fact, Oswald was a nuisance and the other assets didn’t like him being around. But, they played along. They created a bogus story to explain why he had to “keep a low profile, make no wavesâ€