Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

JFK Assassination

245

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,669 ✭✭✭DMT


    Originally posted by DMT
    • The rifle wasn't tested to see if it was fired that day - no such exists to this day.
    Originally posted by oscarBravo
    No such what? [/B]
    That should read: "The rifle wasn't tested to see if it was fired that day - no such test exists to this day."
    Original post corrected.

    Originally posted by utility_
    No...this was NEVER the type of place that America was. A man who defected to the Soviets only to hook up with the KGB would be executed(at the least imprisoned for many years) on his return to America. NOT given welfare...Only American citizens get welfare.
    Give just one verifiable example where this had happened up to the time Oswald returned - are you actually researching your answers or are you just making this up as you go along?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 6,599 ✭✭✭ferdi


    this whole thing is getting old, let the man RIP


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,485 ✭✭✭sovtek


    Originally posted by shotamoose
    He was an American citizen. He wanted to renounce his citizenship but didn't go through with it. And he never got Soviet citizenship.

    From your link:

    ". He was one of about seven enlisted men and three officers who formed a "radar crew," engaged primarily in aircraft surveillance. This work probably gave him access to certain kinds of classified material, some of which, such as aircraft call signs and radio frequencies, was changed after his defection to Russia."

    "Almost exactly 1 year later, on September 13, 1960, Oswald was given an "undesirable discharge" from the Marine Corps Reserve, based on:

    reliable information which indicated that he had renounced his U. S. citizenship with the intentions of becoming a permanent citizen of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Further, that petitioner brought discredit to the Marine Corps through adverse newspaper publicity, which was generated by the foregoing action, and had thereby, in the opinion of his commanding officer, proved himself unfit for retention in the naval service. "

    Considering these two facts alone you would think that the CIA and FBI would be VERY concerned that a guy defected to Russia, possibly gave them classified information and then returned very soon after the Cuban "missle crisis". I would expect that he would be intensely interviewed by at least one member of these agencies if not several from both or more from the State Department.
    While someone suggesting that Oswald would be executed for what he did is gross exaggeration, especially since the only people executed for treason in the US were the Rosenbergs (unjustly IMHO). Oswald's actions were never even that severe.
    One would expect that he would not just come back to the US without being throughly checked out.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by sovtek

    Considering these two facts alone you would think that the CIA and FBI would be VERY concerned that a guy defected to Russia, possibly gave them classified information and then returned very soon after the Cuban "missle crisis". I would expect that he would be intensely interviewed by at least one member of these agencies if not several from both or more from the State Department.
    While someone suggesting that Oswald would be executed for what he did is gross exaggeration, especially since the only people executed for treason in the US were the Rosenbergs (unjustly IMHO). Oswald's actions were never even that severe.
    One would expect that he would not just come back to the US without being throughly checked out.

    Well, the classified stuff he might have leaked was changed after he left so that a leak wouldn't be damaging. Plus the authorities in the US might have surmised from his behaviour in the USSR that he was genuinely keen to leave, but that's impossible to guess either way at this distance.

    As for being checked out when he returned, he was. From that document again:
    On June 26, Oswald was interviewed by FBI agents in Fort Worth. One of the agents who interviewed him described him as tense and "drawn up"; he said that Oswald "exhibited an arrogant attitude ... and [was] inclined to be just a little insolent." Oswald declined to say why he had gone to Russia, saying that he refused to "relive the past." He said that he had not attempted to obtain Soviet citizenship, had not been approached by Soviet officials for information about his experiences in the Marines, and had not offered them such information. Marina's Soviet passport required her to notify the Soviet Embassy in Washington of her address in this country, and Oswald told the agents that he planned to contact the Embassy for this purpose within a few days. He promised to notify the FBI if he were contacted by Soviet agents "under suspicious circumstances or otherwise." Oswald told his brother about the interview, saying that it had been "just fine. "


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,485 ✭✭✭sovtek


    Originally posted by shotamoose
    Well, the classified stuff he might have leaked was changed after he left so that a leak wouldn't be damaging. Plus the authorities in the US might have surmised from his behaviour in the USSR that he was genuinely keen to leave, but that's impossible to guess either way at this distance.

    As for being checked out when he returned, he was. From that document again:

    He was merely "interviewed" on two occasions, not very thoroughly, when he could have possibly been arrested and charged for divulging classified information.
    I'm not saying that he was a CIA operative but it's a possibility. Merely that for the political climate I would have expected much more to be made and investigated than seem to have been. Put that with his mother beleiving him to have been "sent" to the Soviet Union.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,411 ✭✭✭shotamoose


    Originally posted by sovtek
    Put that with his mother beleiving him to have been "sent" to the Soviet Union.

    His mother was a bit mad, by all accounts ....

    Anyway, I'm not decided either way as to whether he was involved in a conspiracy or not. His treatment on his return seems to fit a pattern of people hardly noticing Oswald as he made his way through life - mostly he was treated as a nobody by those he met. This makes him perfect spy material, of course, but it could just as easily be that he really was a nobody in the eyes of the world, and shooting JFK in the head was the first thing in his life he ever got 'right'.

    I'd recommend Don de Lillo's 'Libra' as a good part-fictional treatment of Oswald, his context and ballooning conspiracy theories in general. It's a much less irritating experience than watching Oliver Stone's film.


  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭fergus o brien


    GuanYin wrote: »
    I think you ar etaking all your "facts" from the film JFK. Which while highlighting much of the evidence around the assassination, did tend to play it up a little.

    Also, Ruby died in prison of cancer. Hardly mysterious.
    i realise this thread is 7 years or so old but i thought i would bring it back for two reasons ,one to see if peoples thinking from 2003 regarding the assassination is the same or if perhaps certain information may have made them think again since 2003 ,second is because i would like to say that the movie jfk is not so inaccurate as some people believe yes it is dramatized in parts and certain characters are either fictious or composites of one or more people (what true movie is not when you think about it )but a large majority of the info in the movie is factual and the message in the movie that some thing is wrong with the whole official story is correct.


  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭fergus o brien


    DMT wrote: »
    I'm not saying it's impossible to take fingerprints from a corpse (that can be done with ink-pads) - I'm saying that's it's impossible for a corpse to *leave* fingerprints on an object because fingerprints are caused by perspiration. Therefore it is impossible to plant a palm print on a rifle using a body in a morgue - dead hands don't sweat and can't leave prints on things...
    the mortician said agents came and finger and palm printed oswald in the morgue ,he knows that because he had to clean the ink from the hands .
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2W_-ID8RMI&playnext=1&list=PL431C140C41DD2414&index=41


  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭fergus o brien


    DMT wrote: »
    The magic bullet theory has be proven by Dale Myers using computer animation to be a load of bull.


    What exactly about the autospy or the Warren commission was a sham?
    Missing evidence - Kennedy's brain was mostly destroyed by Robert Kennedy.


    The army were not stood down. Presidents regularly drove around in open-top cars. The reason why they don't today is because Kennedy was shot.


    It had already been stated that Oswald was a suspect in the killing of Kennedy for hours before he was charged.


    Oswald was shot dead by Jack Ruby. Ruby died of cancer. Nothing mysterious there.


    Most of those witnesses changed their stories on numerous occasions in the years after Kennedy's assasination.


    *cough*


    The two women actually walked down after Oswald.
    You'd to be extremely unfit to get out of breath walking only two flights of stairs in 90 seconds. I can do that in 30 seconds without being out of breath.


    He was a cop killer and 33 cars is a Jim Garrison/Oliver Stone exaggeration.


    The Navy didn't do the autopsy. Kennedy's brain was disposed off by Robert Kennedy.


    Because Johnson believed Russian involvement in Kennedy's killing.


    Because Johnson believed Russian involvement in Kennedy's killing.


    He didn't lead the investigation, he sat on the Warren Commission. He was chosen to sit as he was a former head of the CIA.



    It is is clear by definition that you shouldn't believe the BS and double-talk from Oliver Stone's film - a film that makes claims such as:
    • The rifle wasn't tested to see if it was fired that day - no such test exists to this day.
    • Palm prints could have been taken off Oswald in the morgue - it's physically impossible to get a fingerprints from a corpse as fingerprints are caused by perspiration.
    • Willie O'Keefe - he didn't exist (composite of 4 people).
    • Mr X - he didn't exist (composite of 2 people).
    • Garrisson saying Shaw will be charged with perjury - Garrisson wasn't present for either Shaw's cross-examination or the verdict.
    • Clay Shaw's gay orgy - straight from Stone's imagination.
    • Smoke on the grassy knoll - no rifle since the 19th century produces visible smoke.
    • Oswald was at best a medium shot - Oswald reached sharpshooting expertise in the marines
    • Three shots in 5.6 seconds - it was eight seconds.
    • Back and to the left - bodies can move back or forth when shots - the front of Kennedy's head was blown out by the bullet entering the rear of his and blowing the front out - that's why in the Zapruder film the blood splatters forward.
    Oliver Stone has a lot to answer for....

    "The magic bullet theory has be proven by Dale Myers using computer animation to be a load of bull."

    dale myers had to place connally seated in the jump seat 6 inches towards the left to make the magic bullet work, he has been proven incorrect in placing connally 6 inches inboard of jfk .
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XxJCoTdoPA8&feature=related

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJrH62TkCWE

    "What exactly about the autospy or the Warren commission was a sham?
    Missing evidence - Kennedy's brain was mostly destroyed by Robert Kennedy."

    the autopsy photos dont show the large gaping head wound at the rear of jfks head as described by the parklands staff and one of his morticians .
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Qc4fhaBoxI&feature=related

    thomas evan robinson one of jfks morticians

    Wounds:
    Large gaping hole in back of head.
    patched by placing piece of rubber.....over it.
    Thinks skull full of Plaster of Paris.
    Smaller wound in right temple.
    Crescent shped, flapped down (3")
    (approx 2) Small sharpnel wounds in face.
    Packed with wax.
    Wound in back (5 to six inches) below shoulder.
    To the right of the back bone.
    Adrenlin gland and brain removed.
    Other organs removed and then put back.
    No swelling or discoloration to face.
    (Died instantly)
    Dr. Berkley (family physician) came in an ask.....
    "How much longer???"
    He (Robinson) was told (funeral director)
    "Take your time."
    http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/EMBALMER.htm

    "The army were not stood down. Presidents regularly drove around in open-top cars. The reason why they don't today is because Kennedy was shot."

    "It had already been stated that Oswald was a suspect in the killing of Kennedy for hours before he was charged."

    fletcher prouty confirmed a stand down and that news papers in new zealand had a full biography and pictures of oswald indicating advance knowledge

    "Oswald was shot dead by Jack Ruby. Ruby died of cancer. Nothing mysterious there."

    indeed there may be no mystery with rubys death but there are problems surrounding oswalds death .

    "Most of those witnesses changed their stories on numerous occasions in the years after Kennedy's assasination."

    witnesses claimed they heard anything between 2 and 6 shots ,interestingly two of the closest people to the book depository and snipers nest howard brennan and amos euins said they heard only 2 shots.

    "The two women actually walked down after Oswald.
    You'd to be extremely unfit to get out of breath walking only two flights of stairs in 90 seconds. I can do that in 30 seconds without being out of breath."

    the sniper would have had to navigate a way around the numerous boxes of books and make their way to the oppossite end of the sixth floor and then run down 4 flights of stairs unseen by dougherty or anyone else . also at the same time roy truly and officer baker are on there way up the stairs ,the warren commisssion says oswald has just ran down from the sixth floor and gotten in to the second floor lunchroom a second or two before baker spots him however roy truly was running ahead of baker and had started on the stairs to the third floor and he did not see oswald at all which means oswald was already in the lunchroom and had got change and bought a coke and was drinking it when seen by baker .

    "He was a cop killer and 33 cars is a Jim Garrison/Oliver Stone exaggeration."

    there were a minimal of 15 police offers at the texas theatre ,oliver stones movie jfk only mentioned a fleet of police cars which would be accurate enough .also this seems a bit excessive for a man who reportedly did not pay a few cents for a ticket (but thats debateable as well).

    "The Navy didn't do the autopsy. Kennedy's brain was disposed off by Robert Kennedy."

    you need to check out bethesda .

    jfk is just a movie and oliver stone has always said he dramatized certain events and certain characters were either fictious or composites (this happens with any true movie ,but its a lot more accurate than certain people would care to admit.


  • Registered Users Posts: 669 ✭✭✭whatstherush


    i realise this thread is 7 years or so old but i thought i would bring it back for two reasons ,one to see if peoples thinking from 2003 regarding the assassination is the same or if perhaps certain information may have made them think again since 2003 ,second is because i would like to say that the movie jfk is not so inaccurate as some people believe yes it is dramatized in parts and certain characters are either fictious or composites of one or more people (what true movie is not when you think about it )but a large majority of the info in the movie is factual and the message in the movie that some thing is wrong with the whole official story is correct.

    If your interested in this, there is a great pictorial record in this post in US Politics
    The JFK Assassination - 47 Years On

    Don't think it was a conspiracy myself.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭fergus o brien


    have you researched it ,i pointed out a few things but an important thing and thats the fact that connally was proveably not sitting 6 inches inboard of jfk ,that makes the single bullet impossible and that means there was atleast a fourth shot which oswald did not/could not have fired . there is lots of testimony in the warren commission that states the wrist wound on connally could not have been caused by the magic bullet ,there is good reason for that its because its in near pristine condition and the fragments taken from the wrist and the large fragment left in connallys leg untill the day he died weighed to much to have come from the near pristine bullet .

    thanks for the link.


  • Registered Users Posts: 611 ✭✭✭Can'tseeme


    Whoever on this thread said Mr. X doesn't exist is wrong. His name is Fletcher Prouty. It's funny this thread has been brought up again, I'm reading Fletcher Prouty's book JFK, CIA and Veitnam atm. Interesting reading.




  • Moved from politics


  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭fergus o brien


    mr x is based on fletcher prouty but is to be fair a composite which is a mix of more than one person .thanks for your reply to this interesting topic.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23 symboybot


    the mortician said agents came and finger and palm printed oswald in the morgue ,he knows that because he had to clean the ink from the hands .
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2W_-ID8RMI&playnext=1&list=PL431C140C41DD2414&index=41

    Several persons have intimated that you cannot take fingerprints from a dead man's hand because fingerprints are actually composed of human sweat and "therefore" a dead person, who can't sweat, couldn't leave a fingerprint through manipulation of that persons hands on to an object. This is an extremely misleading and disingenuous statement.

    Here is a statement from wikipedia.org on what can cause or leave fingerprints: "When friction ridges come into contact with a surface that will take a print, material that is on the friction ridges such as perspiration, oil, grease, ink or blood, will be transferred to the surface."

    Thus perspiration is not the only coating of the fingertips that could leave a fingerprint. To use a dead persons hand to leave a print could be done by applying a light layer of any kind of oil or grease or a live person's sweat and thereby transfer a print to an object such as a rifle. If the Dallas police wanted to frame Oswald, they could first use an oil on his fingers to transfer a print to the rifle and then use ink to collect his prints from his dead hand (as reported above) and use the ink version to match the "oil version" on the rifle. In case anybody has forgotten, the initial examination of the MC rifle did not result in the finding of finger prints. It was several days later (after Oswald's assassination by Jack Ruby) that the police "re-examined" the rifle and suddenly found "Oswald's prints" on it. Very suspicious if you ask me. It is way too simplistic to categorically state that a fingerprint cannot be transferred to an object from a dead man, just because "the dead don't perspire". Also dead people can still have residual oils and perspiration that occurred prior to their death on their hands and fingers and if one was really trying to frame someone, a light coating of oil could be applied to a dead person's hands and fingers in order to create a print on an object after the person's death. Also if a corrupt police officer or fingerprint expert was intent on trying to frame a dead man, they wouldn't have to analyze what the material that left the print was (sweat, oil, or grease or for that matter somebody else's sweat - after all in 1963 they didn't have DNA tests which could prove who's sweat it was).


  • Registered Users Posts: 34,034 ✭✭✭✭The_Kew_Tour


    Anyone else think that David Ferrie was involved.

    Im not convinced Osweld was the lone gunman myself


  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭fergus o brien


    i believe he was involved but what the extent of his involvement was im not sure ,as far as i know he denied ever knowing oswald but oswald was in the civil air patrol with him .
    LHO16.jpg


  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭fergus o brien


    ferriebig.jpg
    FRONTLINE obtained this photograph from John B. Ciravolo, Jr., of New Orleans. Ciravolo was also a C.A.P. member in 1955 and says he was in the same unit with Oswald and was standing right in front of him in the photo. Ciravolo identified David Ferrie, while former C.A.P. cadet Tony Atzenhoffer, also of New Orleans, identified Oswald and Ferrie in the photograph, and Colin Hammer, who says he served with both men in the C.A.P., also identified both in the photograph.
    FRONTLINE located the photographer, Chuck Frances, who says he took the picture for the C.A.P. Francis also said that when he was interviewed by the FBI, he told them Oswald and Ferrie knew each other, but he did not tell them about the photograph. The executor of Ferrie's estate, as well as Ferrie's godson, also picked out Ferrie.
    After the Kennedy assassination, David Ferrie told investigators he never knew Lee Oswald. "I never heard David Ferrie mention Lee Harvey Oswald," said Layton Martens, a former C.A.P. Cadet and a close friend to Ferrie until Ferrie's death in 1967.
    But when FRONTLINE showed Martens the photograph, he identified Ferrie. "It does indicate the possibity of an associaton," said Martens, "but if and to what extent is another question. Of course we've all been photographed with people, and we could be presented with photographs later and asked, 'Well, do you know this person? Obviously, you must because you've been photographed with them.' Well no, it's just a photograph, and I don't know that person. It's just someone who happened to be in the picture."
    "As dramatic as the discovery of this photograph is after thirty years," says Michael Sullivan, FRONTLINE executive producer for special projects, "one should be cautious in ascribing its meaning. The photograph does give much support to the eyewitnesses who say they saw Ferrie and Oswald together in the C.A.P., and it makes Ferrie's denials that he ever knew Oswald less credible. But it does not prove that the two men were with each other in 1963, nor that they were involved in a conspiracy to kill the president."


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 115 ✭✭autonomy


    Kennedy wanted to remove troops from vietnam, disband the CIA, weaken the federal reserve! Reminds me of a modern day US republican not many people have a clue about.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,823 ✭✭✭WakeUp


    If you watch the video closely I think the video of the shooting clearly shows that the first bullet came from infront of the car as opposed to the back of it. Without being too graphic you can see parts of JFK's head spread out on the back of the car. I dont know how many shots were fired but in my opinion it is quite clear from the video footage that the first shot entered from the front. I dont know who shot him but to me there is no question at all that the first bullet comes from the front and not the back which obviously poses all sorts of questions.

    WARNING GRAPHIC FOOTAGE



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    WakeUp, this one has been well covered by the debunkers. There have been a good few ballistic tests carried out which show a similar reaction to this when he is shot from the angle that that is claimed by the official version of events.



    Also:



    This is one of the CTs where I'm pretty confident that we don't know the whole story, but for my money, this part of the official story seems to hold up.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 461 ✭✭Talk E


    WakeUp, this one has been well covered by the debunkers. There have been a good few ballistic tests carried out which show a similar reaction to this when he is shot from the angle that that is claimed by the official version of events.

    This is one of the CTs where I'm pretty confident that we don't know the whole story, but for my money, this part of the official story seems to hold up.


    Jackie may have been trying to retrieve a large chunk of head ? :pac:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 12,455 ✭✭✭✭Monty Burnz


    Talk E wrote: »
    Jackie may have been trying to retrieve a large chunk of head ? :pac:
    Well, I presume she was in a bit of shock...I always assumed she was trying to get out of there - it probably didn't seem like the safest or nicest place to be sitting just then... :eek:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 461 ✭✭Talk E


    There is a huge thread on the JFK assass here. 4,000+ replies, every conceivable piece of evidence. Will save some folk a lot of leg work.:)

    Enjoy

    http://scam.com/showthread.php?t=125038


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 461 ✭✭Talk E


    This is from the last page.

    I believe it shows the actual bullet enter the back of the head and leave the front.

    Not for the squeemish

    back-exit-slow_h_GIFSoupcom.gif

    Love this gif too haha

    troll_h_GIFSoupcom.gif


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Talk E wrote: »
    Jackie may have been trying to retrieve a large chunk of head ? :pac:
    Well, I presume she was in a bit of shock...I always assumed she was trying to get out of there - it probably didn't seem like the safest or nicest place to be sitting just then... :eek:
    It's funny how that incident has had more written words over the years ie ,was she trying to escape the limo or was she trying to retrive a piece of her husbands brian ? and yet it all happened in seconds but (to me anyway ) it's obiously somebody reacting in total shock and confusion of the moement , the way a child might put their hands up to deflect a slap but is not sure where it's coming from and in Jackies case , she's also subconciously reaching for that piece of brain matter .


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,838 ✭✭✭DapperGent


    DapperGent wrote: »
    I find it impossible to believe that Oswald was alone, whose patsy he was I really have no idea.

    If I had to guess I'd say the mob, Giancana was one crazy gangster who didn't get defied.

    From the later televised confrontations between Bobby Kennedy and Giancana I think that Bobby believed Giancana was behind it too. There was much more going on there than the little rottweiler's hatred of organised crime methinks.
    lol what a ****ing moron.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 23 symboybot


    WakeUp, this one has been well covered by the debunkers. There have been a good few ballistic tests carried out which show a similar reaction to this when he is shot from the angle that that is claimed by the official version of events.



    Also:



    This is one of the CTs where I'm pretty confident that we don't know the whole story, but for my money, this part of the official story seems to hold up.

    Sorry, these videos are not very convincing. First, 21 out of 22 medical witnesses at Parkland hospital saw a gaping hole of around four inches in diameter in the back of JFK’ s head, as did numerous witnesses at Dealey Plaza and at the autopsy at the Naval hospital at Bethesda. Some witnesses also saw a small entry wound in the right temple hairline as well as an entry wound in the throat. In addition, witnesses saw a hole in the limousine windshield that was concave on the inside surface and a small round hole on the outside, indicating a transiting bullet through the windshield from front to back. Other witnesses attest to witnessing the windshield being removed from the limousine, used as a model to create a replacement windshield which was then installed in place of the original and the original was then destroyed.

    Enough evidence exists that more than one shooter from more than one direction took more than three shots total, making the issue of whether one or more shots came from the sixth floor of the TSBD a moot point. If there were shots from more than one direction, then by definition there was a conspiracy.

    There is also extensively documented evidence that the Zapruder film was altered by a process called rotoscoping to paint on each frame of the film, obscuring the gaping hole in the back of the head, reported by so many witnesses. After rotoscoped changes the film is then copied to make the copy look like an original film. Further, witnesses at the CIA’s National Photographic Interpretation Center (NPIC) testified to receiving “the Zapruder film” from a highly classified CIA film lab at the Kodak main industrial facility in Rochester, New York on the weekend of the assassination. This lab had the equipment necessary to alter the original film (including rotoscoping – painting on the original film on a frame by frame basis) and then printing a frame by frame altered copy that would appear to be the original. When the original was first developed it was a double image 16 mm film that was then split in half to make a regular double length 8 mm film. When the film was returned to the NPIC from the secret CIA film lab in Rochester by Secret Service Agents it was, magically, once again a 16 mm un-split film that again had to be split for projection with an 8 mm projector, indicating that it was not the already split original film. The only reason to re-create a copy of the film would be to allow alterations of the film. Further evidence of film alteration is also presented with extensive documentation.

    There is extensive evidence presented of the altering of evidence, including not only the Zapruder film, but also JFK’s body, autopsy x-rays, autopsy photos, the windshield of the limousine, as well as destruction of murder site evidence (the cleaning of the interior of the limousine and subsequent removal and replacement of seats and upholstery in the limousine at the orders of LBJ).

    Further there is evidence of two other assassination set-ups, one in Chicago three weeks prior to November 22nd and one other in Miami one week prior to November 22nd. The attempt in Chicago was prevented by the cancellation of the President’s motorcade in that city after an informant by the name of “Lee” reported the plot. That hit attempt even included another “disenchanted former marine” who recently obtained a job in a building overlooking the motorcade route, who was set up to be the patsy, by the name Thomas Arthur Valley with four professional hit men with telescopic sights set up in adjacent buildings to do the real kill shots – just like in Dealey Plaza. The Secret Service was notified of the Chicago plot but did not forward the report to the Dallas Secret Service contingent. The evidence of the Chicago was then buried for nearly thirty years.

    Extensively documented evidence for all of this and more is included in three works recently published. The first is probably the best for understanding the over-view of who wanted JFK killed and why. It is “JFK and the Unspeakable – Why He Died and Why It Matters”, by James W. Douglas (pub 2008). This book is the results of numerous previously unreleased government documents released to the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) by all government agencies (under threat of subpoena) as mandated by the JFK Assassination Records Act of 1992. That act established the ARRB which finished up its work in the fall of 1998.

    The second work, “Inside the Assassination Records Review Board – The U.S. Government’s Final Attempt to Reconcile the Conflicting Medical Evidence in the Assassination of JFK” (pub 2010) by Douglas P. Horne – Chief Analyst for Military Records, Assassination Records Review Board. This five volume large-format soft-cover set has extensive document information including a 181 page chapter, entitled, “The Zapruder Film Mystery” which documents the evidence of alteration of the Zapruder film, as well as extensive re-interviews of the autopsy pathologists, numerous autopsy witnesses, and many of the Parkland Hospital medical witnesses, and evidence of alteration of the autopsy x-rays, photographs, and autopsy reports, plus extensive descriptions of the politics involved in the formation, reports of, and political limitations and obstructions of the ARRB process.

    These two works plus a third, “LBJ – The Mastermind of the JFK Assassination” by Phillip F. Nelson (pub 2010) which extensively documents LBJ’s history of corruption, blackmail, commie-baiting, and conspiracy to murder in 17 instances, including the murder of his own sister by his on-staff hit man, Malcolm Wallace. These three works, together, provide a compelling, extensively documented over-view of the assassination and the powers that be that accomplished it (including the FBI, the CIA, the Secret Service, military intelligence, the mafia, Texas “big oil” multi-millionaires, J. Edgar Hoover and LBJ). These works document the means, methods, connections, motives, and participants of the coup d’etat that changed America, the world, and history, for the worse.

    All three of these recently published works are available in paperback on amazon.com or amazon.ca. Reviews of all three are available on amazon.com. If you really want to understand what happened and be part of making sure this travesty can never happen again, you need to read these three works. It is well worth the time and effort. Your world will never be the same, but it is better to know the awful truth than continue in blind ignorance. Only be being an informed public, can we prevent this “crime of the century” from ever happening again. Nothing less than the survival of American democracy is at stake!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 461 ✭✭Talk E


    This gaping hole ? (mod might wanna put a warning on thread title)

    attachment.php?attachmentid=9573&stc=1&d=1264694428

    attachment.php?attachmentid=9575&stc=1&d=1264694519

    WallPaint305.jpg

    and this windscreen ?

    WallPaint294.jpg

    WallPaint266-1.jpg


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 153 ✭✭fergus o brien


    this is from jfk lancer regarding jackie kennedys testimony and jfks head wound .

    Warren Commission Suppressed Jackie's
    Testimony On JFK's Head Wound

    Court Reporter's Tape Shows
    Additional Description Withheld


    Dallas, TX -- August 5, 2001 -- JFK Lancer, an historical research firm reports that the Court Reporter's tape shows Jacqueline Kennedy's testimony before the Warren Commission had additional descriptions which were withheld.
    Mrs. Kennedy testified in a short private session held at her home in Washington, D.C., with Chief Justice Earl Warren, Commission General Council J. Lee Rankin, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, and a court reporter in attendance. Testimony of witnesses before the Warren Commission was made public in the fall of 1964. Jacqueline Kennedy's testimony was also released containing her description of her husbands wounds which read :

    "And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull and I remember it was flesh colored. I remember thinking he just looked as if he had a slight headache. And I just remember seeing that. No blood or anything."
    But a second section in which she described the wounds she saw carried only the notation: (Reference to Wounds Deleted).
    Although very few Americans actually read those transcripts, historians and researchers who did read them were outraged, and waged a legal battle to have the omitted testimony released. In the early 1970s, a court decision required the United States Government to disclose to the public the contents of the still classified section of Mrs. Kennedy's 1964 Warren Commission testimony. Her previously withheld statement read:

    " I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --- I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on."
    Releasing this previously withheld section gave researchers what was assumed to be Mrs. Kennedy's complete description of the President's head wounds. Researchers took for granted that the hand-typed transcript page released by the National Archives from the official records of the Warren Commission ended the matter.
    However, new analysis reveals that the original court tape actually reads:

    "... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top."
    Filmmaker Mark Sobel found the discrepancy while doing research for a forthcoming documentary on JFK. Sobel explained, "I was quite surprised to find that Mrs. Kennedy was not asked for more detail --- she had an opportunity to view the wounds longer and closer than any other person as they originally existed. Given the seemingly contradictory testimony by the doctors who treated the President at Parkland Hospital in Dallas just after the shooting and the Doctors who performed the autopsy at Bethesda many hours later, Mrs. Kennedy's testimony would appear critical."
    Sobel filed under the Freedom of Information Act to have the court reporter's original tape of Mrs. Kennedy's testimony unsealed, citing that the content had already been fully declassified by the courts and that it was in the best interest of the public for the accuracy of the existing transcript to be verified. Sobel explained, "As I compared the 1964 transcript to the original court reporter's paper tape, I reached a sentence officially transcribed by the Warren Commission as: "I could see a piece of his skull, and I remember that it was flesh colored"words on the original paper taped no longer matched up."
    Court Reporter Kathy Bradford of Bradford Court Reporting of Dallas, Texas, agreed. Bradford reviewed the transcript from the archives and certified Mrs. Kennedy's complete statement was not found in the Warren Commission's version..
    This extra description was almost certainly witheld from the Commissioners and Legal Staff as well, since these descriptions are missing in the typed transcript that is contained in the actual Warren Commission Records --- before it was finally released publicly in its entirety.
    Apprised of these new details, David Mantik, M.D., Ph.D. stated, "Given the lack of follow-up in Mrs. Kennedy's description to exactly what she saw, these details could have been valuable to the House Select Committee on Assassinations that reviewed the medical evidence." Mantik is one of the few doctors allowed to view President Kennedy's original autopsy materials in the National Archives.
    Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, seen in films and photos in Dealey Plaza climbing onto the rear of the limousine, stated in his Warren Commission testimony,
    "Between the time I originally grabbed the handhold and until I was up on the car, Mrs. Kennedy--the second noise that I heard had removed a portion of the President's head, and he had slumped noticeably to his left. Mrs. Kennedy had jumped up from the seat and was, it appeared to me, reaching for something coming off the right rear bumper of the car, the right rear tail, when she noticed that I was trying to climb on the car."
    Debra Conway of JFK Lancer, says that the court reporter's tape is now on their web site. Conway stated, "Mrs. Kennedy also describes this piece of skull to historian Theodore White in her famous 'Camelot' interview where she told him, 'I could see a piece of his skull coming off; it was flesh colored not white--' This is very similar to what she said to the Warren Commission."
    Conway went on to explain, "There were pieces of skull found in the street and in the limousine. The piece of skull described by Mrs. Kennedy could have been one of those later found in the street, the limousine, or an avulsed piece still attached to his head."
    Researcher Barb Junkkarinen, who specializes in the medical evidence of the Kennedy assassination and is the Director of the JFK Alliance for Open Archives organization, told JFK Lancer, "The real 'find' here is that two specific descriptions of the head wound by Mrs. Kennedy (that the skull piece was wedge shaped, and that it had little ridges at the top) are not included in what is supposed to be the full and complete transcript of her testimony."
    In his memoirs, Senator Arlen Specter, a Junior Council for the Warren Commission in 1964, suggests that the minimal testimony taken from Mrs. Kennedy was due to Earl Warren wishing to be protective of her, and that the handling of her testimony created some distress among other Commissioners and Legal Staff. However, in formerly Top Secret transcripts of the meetings of the seven Commissioners, Commissioner John J. McCloy repeatedly emphasized the importance of obtaining such testimony as quickly as possible "She's the best witness," he said "as to how those bullets struck her husband."
    Junkkarinen adds, "Why they would withhold an accurate description is open to debate, but the fact that they put out an altered transcript is telling. How many other transcripts may have fallen victim to the same shenanigans? This is a find that proves alteration of original evidence, and that is important.


Advertisement