The Assassination of JFK

[LunarRay]

Getting emotional?

What about the Holocaust did that happen? I'm just trying to get an understanding how many of these conspiracy theories you buy into.

The only one I've ever spent anytime reading about is 911... just because I find the truthers to be utterly insulting. As for JFK, I haven't done much reading... I've seen one or two history channel specials... and frankly I just don't care that much. We will NEVER be able to 100% say for sure what happened. JFK at least I believe it was possible that someone else did the shooting.. unlikely though.

I'm too busy worrying about real life things that matter though. It is fun to poke you in the eye every once in the while though.

Don't you think JFK, 911, Gulf of Tonkin, Remember the Maine, Pearl Harbor, RFK, MLK, and etc. are real life things?

Using your example of the Holocaust the analogy would be not did it happen but, rather, who did it. It is reasonably clear about the who perhaps not so clear about how many... maybe many more died during that period or maybe the motive was not as stated over and over...

The JFK issue is somewhat like Lincoln. In Lincoln's case we learn that JW Booth did it.. but (as I recall) Eight people were tried and convicted for the crime and hung, I think.
I think sitting in Johnson's Library is a draft of the document Johnson signed reversing Kennedy's that called for the withdrawing of 'advisors' from VN. I forget the numbers atm... I do recall #11111 though which is another issue... The point is that it is dated November 21, 1963. Now this I've not confirmed directly but rely on Jim Marrs statement that he has a copy in his files..

 

[Loyalist]

I don't know of any good reason to believe in magic bullets, but that's as fitting of a description of the single bullet theory in the official story as anything.

Whoa! What? And you accuse me of not rightly reviewing the evidence. I thought that this stuff was supposed to be old hat to you? Well, then highlight for me where the magic was used to enable the single bullet to hit both Kennedy and Connally.

​

 

[Loyalist]

Don't you think JFK, 911, Gulf of Tonkin, Remember the Maine, Pearl Harbor, RFK, MLK, and etc. are real life things?

Using your example of the Holocaust the analogy would be not did it happen but, rather, who did it. It is reasonably clear about the who perhaps not so clear about how many... maybe many more died during that period or maybe the motive was not as stated over and over...

The JFK issue is somewhat like Lincoln. In Lincoln's case we learn that JW Booth did it.. but (as I recall) Eight people were tried and convicted for the crime and hung, I think.
I think sitting in Johnson's Library is a draft of the document Johnson signed reversing Kennedy's that called for the withdrawing of 'advisors' from VN. I forget the numbers atm... I do recall #11111 though which is another issue... The point is that it is dated November 21, 1963. Now this I've not confirmed directly but rely on Jim Marrs statement that he has a copy in his files..

You are missing his point. There are many who claim that the holocaust never happened. They argue that the evidence for it was fabricated. That is the modus operandi of the FBI conspiracists and the 9/11 truthers. That is, to deny or ignore all of the real evidence and to make up their own to satisfy their own delusions or hate.

 

[LunarRay]

You are missing his point. There are many who claim that the holocaust never happened. They argue that the evidence for it was fabricated. That is the modus operandi of the FBI conspiracists and the 9/11 truthers. That is, to deny or ignore all of the real evidence and to make up their own to satisfy their own delusions or hate.

Oh... well, me thinks there is a connection because, for instance, in 911 a NIST spokesman said "... why look for what you already know is not there ..." when asked did NIST look for explosive residue... likewise, why look for evidence against the holocaust when there are so many folks and their kids and grandkids who testify to the reality...
JFK etc. is in that logical folder, I think. In JFK we've conflicts in evidence that are material in the view of many professional as well as simple folks.
As an example of my simple approach to applied research versus theoretical research consider the following:
There were more than one 'movie' camera in operation during the few seconds in Dealy Plaza. And more than a few 'still' cameras. What are the odds that on both a movie camera footage and a still camera shot that could show the first shot (firecracker sound) hit the road adjacent to the moving presidential limo were 'destroyed' while in FBI custody? The rest of the film was fine from both cameras. It seems important to me because I think a shooter was in another building using a silenced long weapon and that can do a few things to a round. It can alter the zero and also cause it to tumble which is interesting considering the wound to Connaly was from (imo) a round that was in tumble.
Additionally, I am somewhat familiar with involuntary movement due to gunshot sounds... the film from the movie cameras if looked at carefully can show this occur by a blurring at the point of a shot being heard. Only problem with that is that the pristine unaltered videos are not easy to be qualified. At least by me...

 

[Loyalist]

There were more than one 'movie' camera in operation during the few seconds in Dealy Plaza. And more than a few 'still' cameras. What are the odds that on both a movie camera footage and a still camera shot that could show the first shot (firecracker sound) hit the road adjacent to the moving presidential limo were 'destroyed' while in FBI custody? The rest of the film was fine from both cameras.

How do you know that a movie camera and a still camera caught the first shot hitting the road adjacent to the limo? Did you see the footage or picture? If not then how can you be so sure that they ever existed in the first place?

 

[Craig234]

The JFK issue is somewhat like Lincoln. In Lincoln's case we learn that JW Booth did it.. but (as I recall) Eight people were tried and convicted for the crime and hung, I think.
I think sitting in Johnson's Library is a draft of the document Johnson signed reversing Kennedy's that called for the withdrawing of 'advisors' from VN. I forget the numbers atm... I do recall #11111 though which is another issue... The point is that it is dated November 21, 1963. Now this I've not confirmed directly but rely on Jim Marrs statement that he has a copy in his files..

A few comments on the JFK and Vietnam issue.

- JFK was one of our most, if not out most, pro-peace president in history - albeit one who was supportive a very large/powerful military as part of his approach.

(My editorial: I'm not sure he appreciated the danger of the huge military in the hands of some others, but he was fighting a cold war with nuclear war at stake).

- JFK was bombarded by military, and even his own staff, pushing for war in Vietnam. He held them off.

- JFK liked to delay choices, and he did so with Vietnam. He could go to war or not. He had not committed himself either way.

- JFK was preparing for the war option in case it was his choice IMO.

- Most people I think knew JFK best thought he was unlikely to have gone to war. His own Secretary of Defense who was the leading figure and if anything would have a bias to say JFK would have gone to war, Robert McNamara, said later he thought JFK probably would not have. JFK's friend Senate Majority Leader Mike Mansfield, William Manchester wrote, was sent on a trip to Vietnam for better feedback than he was getting from official channels - state and pentagon - and Mansfield told him he had to get out, and JFK told him that he planned to do so, but after the 1964 election. The best books on the topic, analyzing the available information, conclude JFK was unlikely to have gone to war.

- But while JFK's resistance to war in Vietnam was well known by the Pentagon and CIA, his plans to do so later were not known one way or the other.

- The NSAM's paint a slight picture of JFK laying the groundwork for Vietnam withdrawal, and he did remove 1,000 of the 16,000 advisors in October, 1963 as a symbolic gesture/message (whether it was more for the American people or the Diem regime isn't quite clear), but it wasn't a black and white 'LBJ overturned the plan to withdraw'.

- LBJ was more hawkish on Vietname than JFK, but even he saw it as a quagmire he had no idea how the US would get out of - before he went in. He'd gone over on another trip for JFK and gotten very close to Diem, as I said before calling him "the Winston Churchill of Southeast Asia" and my impression is he was furious when the US dropped support and he was assassinated.

IMO, Vietnam was not the strongest motive for the assassination - other than as part of the radical right-wing element who had it on a long list against JFK.

You can imagine a group of intelligence people, in the business of assassination, who saw JFK as someone who was betraying the US seeking peace with the USSR, refused to follow through on the Bay of Pigs, was a reckless drug-taking sex addict in the White House out of control and a menace to the interests of the nation - even as he again and again did not support our traditional right-wing dictators, such as his dropping of support for some European allies' colonial policies. They watched as Kennedy stopped US nuclear missile atmospheric testing, for example, and as he ordered an end to the assassination attempts against Castro. Motive? sure.

 

[kylebisme]

Paul K. O'Connor

Ah, yeah, I'd heard mention of those stories before, but didn't know what name to connect it to, so I thank you for that. Anyway, it seems the Warren Commission didn't even interview him, and apparently the HSCA did but I'm unable to find the transcript, just various mentions of such comments from him elsewhere. Anyway, did you know that the HSCA came across evidence that two different brains seem to have been claimed as Kennedy's? It's documented here.

As for the the Daltex building, Bamacre posted a good set of videos about that here.

Well, then highlight for me where the magic was used to enable the single bullet to hit both Kennedy and Connally.

Putting the neck wound through the knot in Kennedy's tie rather than above it where one preforms a tracheotomy is an obvious example of "magic" in that silly animation. Again, if you're ever interested in reviewing the evidence which refutes the official story, this collection of essays would be good place to start.

 

[Craig234]

What are the odds that on both a movie camera footage and a still camera shot that could show the first shot (firecracker sound) hit the road adjacent to the moving presidential limo were 'destroyed' while in FBI custody?

Low IMO. Anyone who had shot them would have spoken out about it; the other pictures and films are inventoried by investigators.

 

[kylebisme]

LunarRay wasn't speaking in hypotheticals, but rather referring what happened, two such damaged films are shown here. Also, the Zapruder film has some frames missing, but I'm sure you can come up with a perfectly pleasant explanation for all of that.

 

[Loyalist]

Putting the neck wound through the knot in Kennedy's tie rather than above it where one preforms a tracheotomy is an obvious example of "magic" in that silly animation..

The neck wound shot isn't shown passing through the knot in Kennedy's tie. It's shown passing just above it, where it actually nicked the upper left side of it. So, I ask again, highlight for me where the magic was used to enable the single bullet to hit both Kennedy and Connally.

 

[Loyalist]

LunarRay wasn't speaking in hypotheticals, but rather referring what happened, two such damaged films are shown here. Also, Zapruder film has some frames missing, but I'm sure you can come up with a perfectly pleasant explanation for all of that.

I'll view the video tomorrow. but I would like to know how you know that those films had actually contained the aforementioned scenes and how you know that they were destroyed while in FBI custody?

 

[kylebisme]

I'd like you to acknowledge the fact that the red line in this image is going straight through the knot of the tie:

As for your questions on the films, get back to me after you watch the video. I'd like to see you try to answer your questions on your own.

 

[Loyalist]

I'd like you to acknowledge the fact that the red line in this image is going straight through the knot of the tie:

I can not and I will not. Because to do so would be to lie. Your cropped image is quite blurry but you can still make out the knot just below the line. The following image makes it much more obvious.

The upside down triangular shape of the knot can clearly be seen below the red line. The animator obviously made it brown in order that it might be better seen.

As for your questions on the films, get back to me after you watch the video. I'd like to see you try to answer your questions on your own.

The video does absolutely nothing to answer my questions. If anything it highlights them and the fact that they are unanswered. "How do you know that those films had actually contained the aforementioned scenes and how do you know that they were destroyed while in FBI custody?"

The narrator states that "Tina Towner said that no one in her family knew when or how those frames were destroyed". He then goes on to make the assumptions that the frames were not destroyed while in the Towner family possession therefore they must have been destroyed while in possession of the FBI. Those are both unsupportable, since Tina Towner did not say that the frames weren't destroyed while in her or family's possession. She didn't know when or how they were destroyed. Meaning that they could have very well been unknowingly damaged by someone in the family, and the damage went unnoticed for a time.

The narrator then shows a still photo of the limo at a great distance and then asserts that since the original was damaged the true scene was knowingly obscured from view forever. That is outright laughable. He then goes on to state that it appears that the photo was damaged by the FBI. He doesn't explain how he came to that conclusion.

So, I ask again: How do you know that those films had actually contained the aforementioned scenes and how do you know that they were destroyed while in FBI custody?

Also, highlight for me where the magic was used to enable the single bullet to hit both Kennedy and Connally.

 

[kylebisme]

I can not and I will not.

Well then, the "magic" obviously has more of a grasp on you than I could ever reasonably hope to dispel.

 

[LunarRay]

How do you know that a movie camera and a still camera caught the first shot hitting the road adjacent to the limo? Did you see the footage or picture? If not then how can you be so sure that they ever existed in the first place?

By logical deduction.... hehehehehehehhehehe why else would the FBI ruin two separate views of the same event?

Now then... by inference look at Kennedy's hand ball up as the car makes that turn... and the testimony of a sound heard as the car made that turn.. not a loud sound but like one of the firecracker ones. I think this was from the couple standing on the corner on Main? (can't recall that street name)

Amazing how the FBI managed to mess up them shots... don't cha think.. or do you think it is simply a co-inky-dink..

 

[LunarRay]

A few comments on the JFK and Vietnam issue.
/snip

I think I hold the same view of JFK and of the players around him. I also think RFK had a strong influence on him and further think his (RFK) dislike for Johnson would have ended with Johnson in jail... along with a few of Johnson's buddies...

 

[LunarRay]

Ah, yeah, I'd heard mention of those stories before, but didn't know what name to connect it to, so I thank you for that. Anyway, it seems the Warren Commission didn't even interview him, and apparently the HSCA did but I'm unable to find the transcript, just various mentions of such comments from him elsewhere. Anyway, did you know that the HSCA came across evidence that two different brains seem to have been claimed as Kennedy's? It's documented here.

As for the the Daltex building, Bamacre posted a good set of videos about that here.


Putting the neck wound through the knot in Kennedy's tie rather than above it where one preforms a tracheotomy is an obvious example of "magic" in that silly animation. Again, if you're ever interested in reviewing the evidence which refutes the official story, this collection of essays would be good place to start.

I didn't know about the two brain scenario... thanks..

I sorta did the analysis on the DalTex building after listening to some fellow talk about that building and behind a fire escape... I triangulated a better position that answered the hit to Kennedy and Connally from the third floor.. on the right. But, although it satisfied me I guess others still stick with the second floor... That, however has a vertical angle that don't quite fit... I like the my version.

Thanks for the links

 

[LunarRay]

Low IMO. Anyone who had shot them would have spoken out about it; the other pictures and films are inventoried by investigators.

They did speak out. The undeveloped films were taken by the 'authorities' and returned as they were. They captured the parade and all but the same view had 'burn' marks on them. And it is at that point Kennedy balls his fist as if something stung him...
I know that is stretching it... but it is odd to me cuz independent of knowing about the film/picture existing I'd wondered about what made him ball his fist like that... then grasp his other hand in an odd manner... look at a video of before they made the complete turn on to Elm.

 

[LunarRay]

I think it possible that Arlen Specter got it right... but right only if you take the magic out of the bullet trajectory.
Look for your self at a direct line from the 3rd floor of the DalTex building - window on the right - at a point where it lines up with the limo and Kennedy and Connally... the angle is right to hit Kennedy in the back out the neck and into Connally's back at the right armpit area... least that is what I see.
Having said that... Looking at the famous video I can't reconcile Connally's holding of that hat in what had to be a shattered and cut nerve that enables opposition of the thumb... unless... a few frames are missing...

 

[kylebisme]

the DalTex building... I triangulated a better position that answered the hit to Kennedy and Connally from the third floor.. on the right.

And sure enough there seems to be a chunk of glass removed from that window in this photo, perfect for sniping, enhanced here:

Also, "Oswald's window" can be seen just barely ajar moments before the shooting in Robert Hughes's film, which I was unable to find a high resolution still from, but found a decent quality video here.

I think it possible that Arlen Specter got it right... but right only if you take the magic out of the bullet trajectory.

That, and the condition of the alleged bullet is quite dubious too.

 

[LunarRay]

That, and the condition of the alleged bullet is quite dubious too.

IF one accepts that the bullet they argue is the one that did the wounds I'd agree... Connally said the bullet that fell out of his leg was picked up by the nurse who later gave to 'authorities'. Too many bullets flitting about... anyhow, That is the one that hit Kennedy's back and Connally's back etc. Or... there were two separate bullets involved. That 399 bullet didn't do diddly... IT was a plant imo.

In any event, imo there is but one place that lines up for both Kennedy and Connelly to have sustained the wounds from one bullet. Well, that is if you don't contort Connally toward the center and alter the vertical angle and defy Newton's laws...

BTW, I recall they found a bad guy on the 3rd floor as well... of the DalTex bldg... his name escapes me but memory tells me he was a shooter for the mafia... assuming there is or was such a thing. J Edgar Hoover said there was not... and we know he'd not lie.

 

[JSt0rm]

WTF is happening in here? and Why should I care?

that is all...

 

[al981]

"Side", "lateral" and "temporal". You failed to address those.

I did address them, and you chose to ignore / distort what the doctors were really describing, as pointed out by their drawings and hand motions of a large wound in the back of the head. Why you continue to lie and distort facts to support your position can only be answered by you And say, why is it those doctors kept mentioning "cerebellum"?
http://www.paulseaton.com/jfk/boh/parkland_boh/parkland_wound.htm Please state where the cerebellum is located, loyalist.

Just as I suspected. He was expounding on something that was outside his area of expertise.

If what he is saying about the photographs he examined in the national archives are incorrect, then it should be easy for others to refute him. Like I stated previously, I have not read much into it yet.

McClelland, according to his own testimony, couldn't have gotten a clear view of the back of Kennedy's head.

We went over this already. McClelland had a "partial" view of the back of the head, and you responded with the following quote after I posted a jpeg clearly showing that a partial view of the back of the head still allowed the doctors to see the area you're questioning:

LOL! You're joking,right?

Funny, your only response to the jpeg was "LOL". You can't even admit the picture clearly shows the occipital region is at the very least, "partially" visible. Go ahead, let's see if you can man up and admit what is clearly visible to everyone else. Here it is one more time

Then again, you can't even man up and admit the "red line" in post 237 & 238 really is going through the knot of the tie hahahaha.


Also, Kylebisme made a good point which you continue to dodge:

"They could only see part of the wound, because he was laying on his back and the wound was on the back right of his head. Again, if the wound were in either of the two locations the official story has claimed, they would've had an unobstructed view of it."

So, why didn't the overwhelming majority of these dallas medical personnel see the wound where the official story claims it was? They had an unobstructed view!

"A defect in the right occipital-parietal area".
What Does "Occipital" Mean?

Again, we went over this: The doctors are clear with what they meant: a large wound contradicting the autopsy photos as evidenced by their drawings and hand motions in the NOVA documentary.

 

[xj0hnx]

Those videos show objects which are near optimal for getting them to fall back in the direction they were shot from, a light outer shell filled heavy liquid, and a bare-bone skull, both sitting loose on platforms, quite unlike a human head attached to a living body.

Exactly what I thought when I saw it. The shot is fired from forward and above, transferring the energy out the back and down, this energy pushes the exploding lower rear shell down, which pushes the object forward. A head, sitting atop a spine is going to do exactly what Kennedy's head did when shot from the front, move back, and then come forward. The single "magic" bullet theory is so ridiculous it isn't even funny.

 

[kylebisme]

Actually, the magic bullet is supposedly what caused the other seven wounds in Kennedy and Connolly other than Kennedy's head wound, and ridiculous to expect at least from the angle of Oswald's alleged location, or from the alleged bullet. But yeah, the suggestion that a shot from behind caused Kennedy's head to blast backwards is flatly absurd, and comparisons with wildly dissimilar objects sitting loose on platforms does nothing to change that.