JFK Assassination 40th Anniversary Thread - Page 3

(I don't know if we can keep this going for another ten days)!

No, I do not have any physical evidence on me. If I once had some, I am sure that the feds would have picked it up long ago.

I want to go to the marker pen on reports first. I won't argue that some witnesses that are still alive elected to have their name blackened out. They would all have to be witnesses if there wasn't any conspiracy, but outside of that, what else would be blackened out? The date and the time? The original route? Where the Pope was on that day?

Now assume for a minute that you are gathering materials for the Warren Commission Report. You come across something that just doesn't fit in. You take it to your boss, (who has a higher calling) - and he looks at it and says, "No, this guy is a crackpot. This is just all screwed up." Breaks out the Zippo. All gone! There is nothing to stop him from doing that after you are gone, of course.

Again, I don't know what was in the CT books, and I am sure that some of them were based upon previous books too, that is only natural. You just do some additional research on another author's chapter and do it again.

I brought up that medical page because it mentioned that some of the papers had been 'corrected'. Yep, I bet they were. Someone explained to them how they had to look, though, just to make sure that it got to the WC correctly.

It is easy to state that I knew this is true because it might be in the WC book, and goes back to everyone involved to have told the absolute truth. If authors can make stuff up, why can't the WC witnesses?

It is like the report on Ruby being really upset. Can you swear that information is correct? Ok, stop.

(Space for a pause)

Let's turn this around, just for kicks. Let's say that Ruby was involved, and was set up to be the hitman for LHO. Let's say that he already knew that he had cancer and was going to die anyway.

Ok, so Ruby is part of this. After it happens he pretends to get really pissed, and starts screaming and yelling about what a jerk LHO is in the nightclub, and then shoots him.

(Witness) Yes sir mister fed, Jack was really mad. I've never seen him so mad. I almost can't blame him. I'm pretty mad myself.

The witness told the truth. It is gospel.

Oh, and they talked to Ruby later, in the hospital. Why would he fess up and tell them that xxx was involved?

Ok, maybe I have seen too many spy flicks, but if there was a conspiracy, what makes anyone think that our government knows the whole truth?

Glenn

To those who think that Jack Ruby was "helped" into the DPD basement by evil conspirators, take a look at the video clip of an interview with James Leavelle on THIS WEBPAGE. It's quite interesting, and illuminating. (I'd heard most of Leavelle's story before; but some of these details I had not heard, which [for me] cement the story of how Ruby gained access to the DPD basement area.)

The other clips on that page are interesting as well. (You'll have to "register" to view the videos. But it's free, and just takes a minute.)

Eric,

Given your level of knowledge regarding the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and your willingness to make short work of the possibility that other theories might have some substance, I wonder if you would do me the service of answering the following questions for my own enlightenment:

1.) Do you concur with the Warren Commission's findings that JFK was hit at the base of the back of his neck by a bullet that traversed his neck, exiting the throat at the level of his tie, without hitting any bony structure?

2.)Do you concur with the Warren Commission's finding that JFK was hit in the back of his head by a bullet fired from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository as its diagrams display?

3.) Do you also concur with the Warren Commission's findings that these bullets were fired by a sole assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, using a high powered rifle, later identified as a 6.5mm Italian Mannlicher-Carcano?

I thank you for your time.

Chris

Eric, you have gotten way too excited about this, and I am going to have to assume that you were on the WC. Since you cannot keep this discussion civil, I am gracefully bowing out. Enjoy.

Glenn

Please, everyone, let's loosen the collars a bit.

Eric Paddon wrote

I was looking for answers in the 'yes' and 'no' variety but no matter...

In the matter of the first shot that is alleged by the Warren Report to have hit Kennedy in the base of the back of his neck, traversing upward through his neck and exiting the front of his throat near the tie without hitting any bony structure, it has been found that this is an anatomical impossibility, as this bullet would have to impact bony structures in order to traverse this path. David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., holds a Ph.D. in physics and is also board-certified in radiation oncology. He has studied X-rays of the President's chest and performed a simple experiment. Taking the specific locations specified by the House Select Committee of Assassinations for the point of entry at the base of the back of the neck and the point of exit at the throat, he has drawn a line to represent the trajectory that any bullet would have to have taken from the point of entry to the point of exit. ANY such trajectory would intersect cervical vertebrae. A CAT scan demonstrating Mantik's experiment has been published in a splendid study of some of the most basic evidence of the case. The conclusion is that no single bullet could have accounted for both of these wounds unless cervical vertebrae were intersected. Since we know that no such damage occurred, we know that these wounds are caused by two separate bullets, and since no other wounds are found on JFK, these separate wounds must BOTH be entrance wounds. How do you account for this?

In the matter of the findings in regards to the high powered rifle that was identified as the murder weapon (6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano) and fired by one Lee Harvey Oswald, The death certificates, The Warren Report, articles in the Journal of the AMA, and other sources state that the president was killed by wounds inflicted by high-velocity missiles from a high-powered rifle later identified as the 6.5mm Carcano. The findings are based on facts that the level of extensive damage sustained by the President’s skull and brain could ONLY have been the result of high-velocity missiles. The problem is that the Mannlicher-Carcano is not a high-powered weapon. At a muzzle velocity of 2,000 feet per second it classifies as a low to medium velocity weapon. Indeed the Mannlicher-Carcano is not a rifle at all. It is a carbine. The major trauma that the President endured had to have been inflicted by one or more high-velocity weapons. This level of trauma sustained could not have been caused from Oswald’s Carcano. How do you account for this?

The ammunition that Oswald is alleged to have used was standard full-metal jacketed military ammunition, one round of which was found on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital. This kind of ammunition conforms to Geneva Convention Standards for humane conduct of warfare. It is not intended to maim. It does not explode. It generally remains in one piece. The lateral cranial X-ray of the President's head, however, displays a pattern of debris as effects of the impact of an exploding bullet, which could not have been caused by the ammunition that Oswald was found to have used, thereby exonerating him. Also, the axis of metallic debris shown in these X-rays is inconsistent with a shot from behind but consistent with a shot that entered the area of the right temple. How do you account for this?

The official autopsy report was contradicted by more than 40 eyewitness reports and was inconsistent with HSCA diagrams and photographs. These 40 eyewitnesses included spectators in Dealey Plaza, physicians and nurses at Parkland Hospital, Navy medical technicians and FBI agents at Bethesda Naval Hospital, who report a massive blow-out to the back of the head. These eyewitness reports are rejected on the basis of the X-rays, which have been fabricated in at least two different ways. Through the employment of optical densitometry studies, the lateral cranial X-rays has been fabricated by imposing a patch over a massive defect to the back of the head, which corresponds to the eyewitness reports describing "the heel" shot. In effecting this deception, the perpetrators used material that was much too dense to be normal skull material and by looking closely at the X-ray anyone can see this for themselves. This enabled Dr. Mantik to discover what had been done. It turns out, that although not common knowledge at the time, instructions that could be followed to create composites were available in contemporary radiology publications. He was able to replicate the results in a radiology darkroom using these techniques. How do you account for this?

There is extensive additional evidence in regards to the autopsy photographs having been tampered with, altered, created, or destroyed. Eyewitness reports from John Stringer, THE OFFICIAL AUTOPSY PHOTOGRAPHER, show that the photographs of the brain shown in the official set ARE NOT those that he took at the time; from Robert Knudsen, White House photographer, who has reported having in his possession--at one and the same time--photographs that displayed a major blow-out of the President's head and others that did not; and from Saundra Spencer, who processed the photographs, who explains that she knows that they are not one in the same because they do not have the same physical markings as other photographs she processed using the same film, some of which she still possesses. So what we have are those people that took part in the photography for the autopsy claiming that parts of the photographic record have been altered, created, or destroyed. How do you account for this?

There are other interesting observations to note throughout the life span of that single day that call various individuals actions into question. The motorcade route was changed at the last minute and yet the assassination occurred on the very part that had been changed. Secret Service policies (that are always adhered to for every other instance of Presidential travel in the history of its existence) for the protection of the President were massively violated during the motorcade in Dallas. A photograph exists demonstrating a Secret Service Agent with a bucket and sponge washing brains and blood from the limousine at Parkland Hospital as it sat parked at the ambulance ramp. This is astonishing to say the least. This is the single most crucial piece of evidence in the entire event, a rolling crime scene on wheels, and it was promptly neutralized before Kennedy was even pronounced dead. Oswald's description in connection with the murder of patrolman Tippit was broadcast over Dallas police radio at 12:43p.m., yet Tippit was not shot until 1:06p.m. How do you account for any of this?

Again, I thank you for your time, and I look forward to hearing from you on the matter.

Chris

I find it somewhat interesting, Chris, that all of your inquiries in your post (#69) come directly from the mouth of James Fetzer. Most of it copied directly from his articles.

The same Mr. Fetzer who just recently published this utter nonsense, which is a
480-page mess claiming that the Zapruder Film has been altered and is a complete hoax.

Most of Fetzer's ridiculous claims in this book have been shown, one by one, to be false and based on shoddy research.

This webpage (plus others on that site on the subject of Mr. Fetzer's works) gives a good example of how preposterous Fetzer's assertions of a Z-Film alteration really are.

Has anyone seen the new DVD version of this video (by Robert J. Groden)? ......



It's a worthy 50-minute program, which presents all the available assassination films on one program, including the rarely-seen first few seconds of the Zapruder Film, which shows three bystanders on an iron bench to the left of Zapruder's pedestal perch. (I believe two of these three persons are "The Hesters", who can also be seen in the "Wiegman Film" just after the assassination.)

Of course Groden couldn't resist spouting conspiracy several times during the running of the many films shown on the DVD. One particular moment which Groden says "proves conspiracy" had me laughing intently. .....

Upon blowing up the "Charles Bronson Film" many, many times over, Groden claims that we can see "movement in three different windows on the sixth floor of the TSBD". The only problem is (as I view it) is that this exact same type of "movement" seen in the windows can ALSO be observed as occurring on THE BRICK WALL of the Depository.

This "movement" is obviously nothing more than grain and artifacts, being produced by Bronson's moving of the camera one block away. Plus the added artifacts and deterioration that you're always going to get from blowing up an already-grainy picture many times its original size.

If anybody has this DVD I mentioned ("JFK: Assassination Files"), I'd be most interested in your take on Groden's assessments of this "movement in 3 windows" based on this grainy blow-up of the Bronson Film (Chapter 11 on the DVD).

Despite the silly claims of conspiracy every few minutes, that DVD is worth having if you're a JFK buff, because of the filmed record therein (and the clarity of those films shown).

What I find interesting, David, is that rather than attempt to respond to the questions I have laid out, you choose to attack a source (Fetzer) in several of the questions' credibility in regards to a subject that has not even been mentioned in my post. Not everything that I posted came from the mouth of Fetzer, I also have Bertrand Russel, Mantik, and others to thank in the construction of my post. Since I haven't even mentioned the Z-film theory that Fetzer laid out (the subject of your ENTIRE reply), I find it odd that instead of discrediting him by making short work of the items that I posted, you decide to attack him in regards to a theory of his that I have not mentioned in the post at all and is unrelated. I would think that if those individuals that I site are so easily discredited, you would have no problem picking my post apart, yet this is something you have decided not to do.

This is a common tactic for Warren Commision apologists. Rather than address the discussion head on by answering to direct questions, you circle around from another side and attack sources of the questions from other angles in an attempt to discredit everything related (and unrelated) in one motion, thereby hoping to discredit all related questions and statements by proxy. This way you feel you needn't answer the originl questions. Hell, if you want to play by those rules, you Warren Commission fellas wouldn't have a leg to stand on!

How about addressing the highly valid questions that I laid out in post #69 instead of attacking a source? I also think that his Z-film claims are ambitious and possibly innaccurate, but what does that have to do with the questions that I have laid out? Just because someone MAY be wrong in one aspect of his findings does not make everything that comes from him automaically innaccurate, otherwise we all would have been discredited for life from grade school.

Please, answer the questions, or don't answer them, but resorting to cheap character assassination tactics does not aide you in your attempt to remove the light from the post that I have made. Those questions are still staring you in the face. All you need to do is knock them over, one by one.

Chris

Yes, you have a point here. However, upon examining some of the impossible passages he's trying to sell to the public in his recent "Z Film Hoax" volume, it truly makes me wonder about his overall credentials regarding any other aspect of his JFK research. It's akin to the "crying wolf" syndrome if you ask me. (But your point is received.)

Regarding your first inquiry (in Post 69), about the single bullet not being able to traverse JFK without hitting bone...I'll admit, I'm not up to speed totally on this medical aspect you (or Fetzer, or whoever) brings up. All I can really say to counter the argument would be to stress to you that absolutely no bullets or fragments from any other rifle OTHER than Oswald's 6.5 M.-C. have ever been produced or proven to have been fired on 11/22. None. So...IF Mantik's studies are correct, then I guess we've now got yet one or two OTHER "magic bullets" flying around Dealey Plaza. Bullets that magically disappear, OR that magically change into 6.5 MC ammunition. I'm strictly going by the available evidence here. NO OTHER weapons other than a Carcano are known to have been utilized in DP. (And the idea of ALL the non-Oswald bullet traces being completely obliterated from the scene within minutes of the shooting is a far more preposterous notion than anything the Warren boys came up with.)

Your second point (regarding the velocity of LHO's weapon not being of a high enough velocity to cause the head wound) can be countered with the same argument as above. .... NO OTHER bullets/fragments other than 6.5 fragments were recovered. The physical evidence supports a head shot fired from behind and WITH OSWALD'S CARCANO. That weapon WAS indeed a powerful enough weapon.

Regarding this misinformation......
Somebody's mixed up here. Oswald's description WAS indeed announced by the DPD over the police radio at just about that time, but certainly NOT in connection with Tippit's killing. The description at that point was in connection with Howard Brennan's account of what the assassin looked like just after the JFK murder.

HOW can anybody claim the DPD put out an APB on Oswald for killing Tippit at 12:43 when no officer had been slain until 1:15 PM? That's nutty.

Are you saying that the DPD knew IN ADVANCE that Tippit was going to be gunned down? Surely no one has this crazy notion.

I appreciate your assisstance in helping this discussion change gears. I will be out of town for the next couple of days, but will be back in to clarify a few things that you mention.

Until then...

Chris

Bingo!
Exactly!
Precisely!

If we're to buy ANY of the "Oswald Was Set Up" bunk, we must necessaily be gullible enough to truly believe that these evil conspirators had the gonads to think that, after the completion of the crime (performed in front of hundreds of
witnesses! ----> A fact which points irresistibly AWAY from the idea of any plot in the first place), they would actually be able to completely and irrevocably remove every single scrap of evidence other than that which pointed toward Oswald firing from behind!!

Does anyone (besides myself and Eric P.) see how utterly preposterous the above plan is just on the face of it??!!

Not to mention the added snafu the conspirators will encounter after the event when all the films & photos are developed by the many photogs snapping pictures of the scene. (Or were these guys so stupid as to not realize that one or more, if not dozens, of Dealey Plaza witnesses would have cameras and be recording the event on film, thereby showing something they might not want to be shown?) *snicker*

HOW could this massive "clean up"/"cover up" possibly have been accomplished, WITHOUT the aid of so many other people that we KNOW for certain were NOT part of such shenanigans? --> Such as all of the Parkland doctors and nurses; the ambulance driver, Aubrey Rike; most, if not ALL, of the Dallas police officers involved on 11/22; Wesley Frazier; Ruth Paine (and husband); plus many others, including (probably) even Marina Oswald herself!

As I said in a previous post:
ALL ballistic evidence was traced back to being consistent with the weapon owned by Lee H. Oswald. The probability of this occurring IF there were multiple guns firing at the motorcade is probably so low to be considered virtually impossible.

I ask myself .... IF the CIA, FBI, The Mob, LBJ, or the San Diego Zoo wanted to rub out JFK, WHY would they do it in such an immensely-complicated manner, in full view of so many people (and cameras!)??

Why not just poison him somehow (as we evidently tried to do once to Fidel Castro). Or simply murder him in the West Wing itself?

Silly, you say? But why is it any sillier than all the conspiracy theories we've been getting since 1963?

I would think that the mindset of such low-life pieces of filth who would even entertain the idea of rubbing out the President would be: We're above the law, no matter what we do; and no matter how or where this assassination goes down, we'll never be blamed for it.

Why would these people (who apparently have "plausible deniability" anyway) be the slightest bit concerned WHO the killing is ultimately blamed on? They wouldn't have cared. The #1 objective would be, for whatever warped reason, to make sure the job was done and Kennedy killed. Which is another of the various reasons why, to me, this massive conspiracy involving musical caskets, faked backyard photos, head-altering surgery to hide wounds, and all the rest just doesn't hold water.
A "hit" -- such as many people firmly believe -- would (I think) have been done in a much "quieter" manner, with ZERO witnesses.

For those that might give a hoot.....

Some interesting JFK assassination-related items (video & audio clips) can
be found HERE.

Did anyone watch the incredibly-laughable and exceedingly-dry and boring three add-on parts to the History Channel series, "The Men Who Killed Kennedy"?

I find it hard to believe a first-rate outfit like A&E would even be a party to such pure speculation and foolishness.

The most laughable portion would have to be the program entitled "The Love Affair".

Judyth Vary-Baker wants us to believe that she (a 19-year-old college student) was placed into an enormously-important plan to knock off Castro. And that SHE was the one who "taught" Oswald many of the technical aspects of her cancer research work; and that Oswald actually helped in preparing the "cancer injections" before they were given to some unsuspecting prisoners (this after the plot to kill Castro fell through).

WHY would Oswald, who is far from being an M.D. or even a "scientist assistant" of any kind, be trusted with this important assignment?

And, for that matter, entrusting such stuff to this 19-year-old college kid is ridiculous as well. Surely, other more qualified cancer-research scientists were available to be "bought" and corrupted (for enough cash incentive of course).

Judyth's multiple crying jags were hilarious as well...complete with the obligatory, "Can we stop the cameras here....I can't go on...".

And we also have to wonder why, after a supposed plot to kill an important world leader (Fidel Castro) fell through--utilizing the vast experience of this teenaged kid--why, then, all of a sudden there seems to be an overnight about-face...and Kennedy all of a sudden is the one these conspirators want dead--instead of Castro. Pffttt!!

Even if Mrs. Vary-Baker DID know Oswald (in some capacity), that fact alone hardly "proves" anything with regards to the JFK assassination.

And the fact she makes Oswald out to be some kind of Saint....that part makes me sick! "Lee wanted to SAVE the President!". Geez....

Yeah...but obviously Lee didn't want to "save" the President ENOUGH to alert any authorities to the plan before 11/22. Or enough to NOT bring his rifle with him to work that morning.

I once had torrid affairs with Earlene Roberts, Jean Hill, and Ruth Paine .... can I now get my own TV documentary next year??

Programs like "The Love Affair" make me want to vomit!

I'm wondering how Oswald got up there in the 6th floor with a rifle. Isn't it standard practice for the Secret Service to sweep any buildings nearby and shouldn't the SS have been able to clearly spot Oswald up in that building?

Also, was there a security force on the ground in Dallas? Was it common for the President to drive in a convertible? Did he do it before?

As for the motorcade route, if I'm understanding Eric correctly, you are forced to make a right hand turn even though the road goes straight through? Was it one way?

My mouth was open as I watched how ready these people were to implicate Lyndon Johnson in the murder. "He gained from the JFK murder, therefore he must have been involved". Truly astounding. And it was also astounding to hear Johnson (the same Johnson who pushed for the Civil Rights Act, Voting Rights Act, The War on Poverty, etc. etc.) described as a "right wing" figure, apparently for the sole reason that he was from Texas.

You are so very correct, Robert. It was LBJ who actually pushed through the bills JFK wanted passed so badly, including the Civil Rights Act. Johnson, essentially, put the finishing touches on the Kennedy Administration. The New Frontier became the Great Society. And this makes the man a murdering fascist?

Has anyone seen the new 2003 film, "The Commission"? All about the Warren boys of 1963-1964, starring Ed Asner as Will Fritz, Martin Landau as Richard Russell, and Henry "Laugh-In" Gibson as Chief Jesse Curry. Martin Sheen also pops up as Deputy Attorney General Katzenbach. Someone named Alan Charof plays Earl Warren. .......

http://imdb.com/title/tt0310906/

Any reviews?

My fiancee' and I watched a bit of the History Channel last night and it was rather interesting. It appeared to be a British documentary (the announcer had a British accent, assumption on my part) that was made some time in the 1980s.

They were going with the multiple gunman theory and thought that the final shot came from the front. They interviewed doctors who were at the hospital and they stated that there was a large exit wound in the back of his head.

Yes, I know of the many doctor accounts regarding a wound at the BACK of the head (the RIGHT-rear of the head that is).

But one thing I just have never been able to reconcile in my own mind....is why the Zapruder Film does not show this massive rear-of-the-head damage immediately after Frame 313 (the moment of impact)??

Now I know films and photos (especially grainy and semi-blurry motion pictures) can be deceiving....but I challenge anyone to look multiple times at the Z-Film and say they definitely can see a REAR defect in the skull based on the head shot.

I see damage to the front-right of JFK's head, and none to the rear, which is consistent with a bullet entering from the rear and exploding out the front [exit] wound. What do you see? ..... Zapruder Film -- Fatal Shot.

But .... Let's just assume there WAS a frontal head shot from the "Grassy Knoll". Why, then didn't this fatal front shot exit out the left-rear portion of Kennedy's skull? For, if there was a shot from the right-front, then it stands to reason that this bullet should have exploded out the opposite side (meaning: the Left-Rear of JFK's head). NO witnesses saw a deficit in the left-rear area of the President's head. How come...IF a shooter was firing from JFK's right-front?





I have no explanation for all the doctors claiming to see a large rear head wound. But the Zapruder Film doesn't seem to validate these claims. (And I don't subscribe to the theory that the Z-Film has been altered. There's NO evidence that ANY of the copies of the film have been tampered with at any time.)

I just saw this topic and thought to mention something. Just very recently (few weeks ago) CANAL + showed a French documentary on the JFK assassination with much ado. It’s done by a French journalist who has been leaving for 4 years in Dallas. They claimed that all the people talking in front of the camera are there for the first time.

Here is the basic outline as I remember and I don’t remember the names, maybe I will look at the video again later.

1-They say that a second shooter has been identified and he has left a finger print in the book depository. They give his name and I don’t remember.
2-They say that it’s all connected to LBJ. The second shooter is connected to LBJ. There is a living Texas businessman (that worked with a friend or lawyer of LBJ) that has come forward and has written a book and says how many people were killed by them and that particular hit-man.
3-They say that a guy was called on the day of shooting (people who makeup the dead, I don’t know how do you call it) and they speculate that the front wound of JFK was repaired not to emphasis that there was a shot from the front and that’s why you don’t see a big wound on the autopsy pictures.

That’s kind of all I remember now. I’m sure all this information with the name of the second shooter is available somewhere on the net in English. Remember that I’m just reporting what I saw on TV!

I find it harder to believe the lone nut theory than a vast conspiracy. The evidence is not worth anything since it was either tainted or lost. The various character assassinations of key people to keep the truth hidden is another indication that there is much more going on. The fact of getting off 3 shots from that bolt action is incomprehensible to me, sorry. THe Magic Bullet? Don't buy it. If some of the physical evidence was still around to be examined, I might be convinced. I just can't trust anything or anyone involved in the investigation or the Warren Commission. Even documents that were unearthed are redacted and less than forthcoming.

If somehow I could believe that Harvey pulled the trigger alone, made a remarkable set of shots with the bolt action, I still believe their was a conspiracy. Its all pretty obvious.

Flame on, brothers!

You should try and catch a re-run of the shows that were on the Discovery Channel last night.
But you'll trust the conspiracy mongers who have spent the last 40 years making a living off the Kennedy assasination?
OK, forget what I said about catching the re-run.

They seem to be just trying to get to the truth and encountering roadblock after roadblock. Why are the documents redacted? Why is the brain missing?