nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

JFK Files

GM228

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/921716470140325889

So Trump will open up the JFK files (how nice of him as they were legally to be declassified next week anyway), is it a diversion and would anything in them really surprise us do we think?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Dohnjoe

Whiplash85 wrote: »

With regards to the last part of your question. Names and dates etc. It was probably planned at a party in Clint Murchinsons house in which LBJ was at.

Thanks for the answer, let's start very simple

1. Who pulled the trigger(s) (names), how many were there, where exactly did (names) fire from, what weapons did they use, and how many shots total - and substantiated evidence for each part of this

As someone who's also into history am not too big into subjective "probably" this and "I guess" that

Charmeleon

To plan a hit on a president in a moving car in front of hundreds or thousands is ridiculous. Only a desperate outsider with delusions of grandeur like Oswald would take the risk. If it was a professional hit they could do it at a turn when the car is practically stopped, or better yet during a speech or presentation when he is stationary. Any plot would have a single chance to get it right. But here we are with three shots from a bargain bin rifle from a building with dozens of witnesses inside and hundreds outside.

Cheerful Spring

Are Am Eye wrote: »

No they didn't record it as any kind of wound. And they were later confused by the entry wound in his back which they thought then had neither a corresponding exit wound or a slug embedded in his body.
The point being they were focused on trying to save him and made a balls of any kind of assessment of his wounds.
This means they're input on this subject such that it is must be cautiously understood in the wider context.

You need to stop saying things that we know are clearly untrue., you only confusing this debate with nonsense. We have doctor statements and video.

This Doctor Malcolm Perry on video describing the wounds the president had.

Are Am Eye

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You need to stop saying things that we know are clearly untrue., you only confusing this debate with nonsense. We have doctor statements and video.

This Doctor Malcolm Perry on video describing the wounds the president had.

Doctor Perry's words here correspond with my post. What exactly is it that "we know" is untrue??

Cheerful Spring

Are Am Eye wrote: »

Doctor Perry's words here correspond with my post. What exactly is it that "we know" is untrue??

No they didn't record it as any kind of wound. What ( 100 per cent wrong)

Are Am Eye

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

No they didn't record it as any kind of wound. What ( 100 per cent wrong)

Indeed. They could find no corresponding exit wound for the entry wound in his upper back. Which shows that from a forensic reconstruction point of view they weren't at the races. Subsequently we know that the wound they couldn't find was in fact obscured by their own tracheotomy.
The overall point to take from this is that they weren't exactly on the ball.
The job of these men was to save his life. Not to conduct an autopsy.
There was a slim to no chance of actually saving his life. In any event they did everything right in that respect in their job. They were not however in the mindset of solving a crime. And nor should they have been.

The Nal

We're discussing quotes here from 1963. As the poster above said, initial reactions based on saving him that turned out to be wrong, a lot of them admitted as incorrect assumptions by the people who said them. This has been refuted for decades. As has the HSCA "4th shot".

This is basic stuff. Theres a Jim Garrison buzz around here.

Dohnjoe wrote: »

As someone who's also into history am not too big into subjective "probably" this and "I guess" that

Thats all you're going to get. Cheerful Spring has been posting why it wasn't Oswald yet not one bit of evidence to back it up aside from the odd quote mine taken wildly out of context. Literally not one post has any substance to it.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Meaningless video when we have the original autopsy drawings.

So you didn't even watch it then.

Autopsy drawings?! :rolleyes:

We have photos! How is this an exit wound? Someone wouldve had to be shooting from the seat in front and below him. Amd theres never been an exit wound this clean in the history of gunshot wounds.

Whiplash85 wrote: »

If you ever have the chance to go to Dallas like I did firstly get to a steakhouse in Forthworth but if you have time visit the grassy knoll, Dallas Tek building and 6th floor museum (for a bit of background)

Went there specifically to see the plaza, the museum, Oak Cliff etc. Fascinating, fascinating place. Been studying the assassination for 20 years so have visualised it a lot. Was exactly the same as I imaged apart from how close the fence is to the road.

Theres no way someone fired a shot from the fence on the knoll over those peoples heads from 15 feet away and weren't noticed. Literally not a hope. Guy on the steps here said the shots came from the TSBD, despite a high powered rifle going off 15 feet from his head.

Never mind the fact that theres no one behind the fence in the Moorman photo taken as JFK was hit with the headshot. Wheres the shooter?! Clear daylight between the fence and the trees. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

tomwaterford

Charmeleon wrote: »

To plan a hit on a president in a moving car in front of hundreds or thousands is ridiculous. Only a desperate outsider with delusions of grandeur like Oswald would take the risk. If it was a professional hit they could do it at a turn when the car is practically stopped, or better yet during a speech or presentation when he is stationary. Any plot would have a single chance to get it right. But here we are with three shots from a bargain bin rifle from a building with dozens of witnesses inside and hundreds outside.

No more common sense :pac:

What everyone is saying now is there was multiple shooters,raining bullets down on the moving car at the same time and they all got away unseen from a crowded city centre??

Sometimes the simplist answer is true...a.redneck beat the system and killed the president?(motive remains unknown)

....I've not seen 1 bit of actual physical evidence to support any another theory....no witnesses no bullet casings,no nathing

The Nal

tomwaterford wrote: »

Sometimes the simplist answer is true...a.redneck beat the system and killed the president?(motive remains unknown)

His motive was to impress Castro and enter Cuba as a hero.

Real shame Ruby clipped him. Would've been an incredible trial.

tomwaterford wrote: »

....I've not seen 1 bit of actual physical evidence to support any another theory....no witnesses no bullet casings,no nathing

Thats because there is none. The most investigated crime in human history over the course of 54 years and .... nothing.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal
You still have not given me or anyone a good valid, solid reason, to doubt Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig revelation? He said they found a ‘German Mauser 'rifle hidden behind the boxes and was not a Carcano rifle they found? You also have to ignore the press media and tv confirmed this originally too and broadcast-ed it live ‘the Dallas police had found a ‘German Mauser’ rifle at the scene. The story only got changed later on. There was no evidence linking Oswald to having owed or bought a German Mauser rifle, so they had to link Oswald the lone nut to a Carcano. So Enlighten me why you so convinced Roger Craig was wrong?

Grainy Photo. So you have x ray vision you can see people standing behind fences?

The Are Am Eye
Problem we face is we don’t know if the throat wound was an entry wound? We also don’t know if the back wound was the entry point for the bullet Oswald fired. We do know the physicians at the JFK autopsy could not find an exit hole for the back wound. We also know they did not check the throat wound for an exit hole.

What we do know and this can be verified as true, the Warren Commission moved the position of the back wound, to be closer to the neckline. They had to change the position of the back wound for their magic bullet theory to work. Having refused to consider Kennedy and Connolly was shot multiple times from the front, back and rear of the motorcade. Kennedy could have got hit in the throat and back by bullets fired from different guns. The Warren Commission changing the back wound position ( to be more precise!) only goes to show the magic bullet theory was bogus from the start and the Warren Commission lied to the American public and the world.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The Nal
You still have not given me or anyone a good valid, solid reason, to doubt Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig revelation? He said they found a ‘German Mauser 'rifle hidden behind the boxes and was not a Carcano rifle they found?

That was contradicted by all other officers who were there.

Heres a picture of them pulling out the Carcano.

And heres another one.

How is that a Mauser?!

And heres an interview where he says he doesn't know foreign rifles.

Press: Did you handle that rifle?
Craig: Yes, I did. I couldn't give its name because I don't know foreign rifles, I know it was foreign made, and you loaded it downward into a built-in clip. The ID man took it and ejected one live round from it. The scope was facing north, the bolt facing upwards and the trigger south.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

What we do know and this can be verified as true, the Warren Commission moved the position of the back wound, to be closer to the neckline. They had to change the position of the back wound for their magic bullet theory to work. Having refused to consider Kennedy and Connolly was shot multiple times from the front, back and rear of the motorcade. Kennedy could have got hit in the throat and back by bullets fired from different guns. The Warren Commission changing the back wound position ( to be more precise!) only goes to show the magic bullet theory was bogus from the start and the Warren Commission lied to the American public and the world.

The back wound issue arises from JFK jacket. However we now know that it was bunched up from the way he was sitting.

Did you not look at the picture I posted above? Thats where the bullet went in. In black and white.

And stop reading Jim Garrison theories. Its a black hole. Even Mark Lane thought he was an idiot. And Mark Lane was an idiot himself.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

That was contradicted by all other officers who were there.

Heres a picture of them pulling out the Carcano

And heres another one.

And heres an interview where he says he doesn't know foreign rifles.

Press: Did you handle that rifle?
Craig: Yes, I did. I couldn't give its name because I don't know foreign rifles, I know it was foreign made, and you loaded it downward into a built-in clip. The ID man took it and ejected one live round from it. The scope was facing north, the bolt facing upwards and the trigger south.

False and surprised you did not see the flaw! The Media, Press, Radio and TV all announced the Dallas Police had found a German Mauser Rifle. If the police found a Carcano at the scene this would be the gun they would have said was found.

Roger Craig also said along the barrel of the gun it had a identifying stamp German Mauser. It be hard to mistake the gun type seeing this don't you think?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

The back wound issue arises from JFK jacket. However we now know that it was bunched up from the way he was sitting.

Did you not look at the picture I posted above? Thats where the bullet went in. In black and white.

And stop reading Jim Garrison theories. Its a black hole. Even Mark Lane thought he was an idiot. And Mark Lane was an idiot himself.

Don't be silly. It all come out in 1997 the Warren Commission deliberately changed the back wound placement. Why would you need to change it if you're convinced the bullet hit the back, exited the throat, and hit Connolly, chest, wrist and thigh? Maybe do research before calling Mark Lane an idiot.

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

False and surprised you did not see the flaw! The Media, Press, Radio and TV all announced the Dallas Police had found a German Mauser Rifle. If the police found a Carcano at the scene this would be the gun they would have said was found.

Roger Craig also said along the barrel of the gun it had a identifying stamp German Mauser. It be hard to mistake the gun type seeing this don't you think?

well they must have been real experts to confidently confirm it as a german mauser rifle considering they were made in several countries. the standard rifle used by the us army from 1903 to the start of ww2 was a mauser rifle. you severely overestimate the skills of the police to identify something beyond "rifle".

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

False and surprised you did not see the flaw! The Media, Press, Radio and TV all announced the Dallas Police had found a German Mauser Rifle. If the police found a Carcano at the scene this would be the gun they would have said was found.

Roger Craig also said along the barrel of the gun it had a identifying stamp German Mauser. It be hard to mistake the gun type seeing this don't you think?

If you throw out all other statements and believe him its odd yeah. How do you explain the shells found? They were from a different gun, the carcano. So they somehow swapped out the gun but left the shells?

You're cherry picking.

I can do that. Heres Gene Boone. The guy who actually found the gun. No one has ever said that the gun they found looked different to the carcano, apart from Craig. But theres always one.

Craig described it as a Mauser because he heard Seymour Weitzman say it was a Mauser.

Heres Seymour Weitzman saying how he was mistaken. He had only just glanced at it.

These are all Mark Lane theories which have been debunked about 40 years ago.

ohnonotgmail

The Nal wrote: »

If you throw out all other statements and believe him its odd yeah. How do you explain the shells found? They were from a different gun, the carcano. So they somehow swapped out the gun but left the shells?

You're cherry picking.

I can do that. Heres Gene Boone. The guy who actually found the gun. No one has ever said that the gun they found looked different to the carcano, apart from Craig. But theres always one.

Craig described it as a Mauser because he heard Seymour Weitzman say it was a Mauser.

Heres Seymour Weitzman saying how he was mistaken. He had only just glanced at it.

These are all Mark Lane theories which have been debunked about 40 years ago.

wait now, cheerful spring said it was a german mauser. did he just make that detail up?

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Don't be silly. It all come out in 1997 the Warren Commission deliberately changed the back wound placement. Why would you need to change it if you're convinced the bullet hit the back, exited the throat, and hit Connolly, chest, wrist and thigh? Maybe do research before calling Mark Lane an idiot.

I've been studying the assassination for 20 years.

Forget about the Warren Commission. Forget about Mark Lane. Although do read about how his nutty conspiracy theories helped cause the Jonestown massacre.

Do your own research. Theres pictures and videos you can look at. Such as the picture I posted that you keep ignoring because it doesn't suit you're agenda.

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well they must have been real experts to confidently confirm it as a german mauser rifle considering they were made in several countries. the standard rifle used by the us army from 1903 to the start of ww2 was a mauser rifle. you severely overestimate the skills of the police to identify something beyond "rifle".

Indeed. Typical conspiracy nut. Throw enough at a wall hoping it'll stick. An initial 30 second conversation between people who weren't experts is being used 54 years later as proof of a conspiracy.

Cheerful Spring

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

wait now, cheerful spring said it was a german mauser. did he just make that detail up?

Did you even watch the videos you post? Seymour Weitzman says on video he identified it as a German Mauser. He was asked then when you last see the rifle . Well it was taken from the Lab and i was told it was a Carcano Italian made rifle, so i must have made a mistake identifying it?.

So no Seymour statement actually backs up Roger Craig story of finding a German Mauser rifle. Roger Craig said the rifle he saw had a identifying stamp along the barrel of the gun marked German Mauser! Are Italian Carcano rifles stamped with German Mauser Identifying/stamp markers?

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Did you even watch the videos you post? Seymour Weitzman says on video he identified it as a German Mauser. He was asked then when you last see the rifle . Well it was taken from the Lab and i was told it was a Carcano Italian made rifle, so i must have made a mistake identifying it?.

So no Seymour statement actually backs up Roger Craig story of finding a German Mauser rifle. Roger Craig said the rifle he saw had a identifying stamp along the barrel of the gun marked German Mauser! Are Italian Carcano rifles stamped with German Mauser Identifying/stamp markers?

well he must have been some expert then to identify it on sight as a german mauser. what exactly are his qualifications for this?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

I've been studying the assassination for 20 years.

Forget about the Warren Commission. Forget about Mark Lane. Although do read about how his nutty conspiracy theories helped cause the Jonestown massacre.

Do your own research. Theres pictures and videos you can look at. Such as the picture I posted that you keep ignoring because it doesn't suit you're agenda.

.

Well you have not researched enough. It established beyond all doubt the Warren Commission changed the position of the original back would. We have artist drawings of the autopsy, that show the difference. The government withheld x rays so we never find out the real truth how many wounds Kennedy had.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Well you have not researched enough. It established beyond all doubt the Warren Commission changed the position of the original back would. We have artist drawings of the autopsy, that show the difference. The government withheld x rays so we never find out the real truth how many wounds Kennedy had.

No it has not.

Read this

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ford.htm

Cheerful Spring

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

well he must have been some expert then to identify it on sight as a german mauser. what exactly are his qualifications for this?

It easy to mistake the make of the gun, and yes i would believe it he just mixed his guns. Only Roger Craig said the along the barrel of the gun, it had a stamp a identifier marked German Mauser. If this is true they found a German Mauser. So someone is lying and covering up!

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It easy to mistake the make of the gun, and yes i would believe it he just mixed his guns. Only Roger Craig said the along the barrel of the gun, it had a stamp a identifier marked German Mauser. If this is true they found a German Mauser. So someone is lying and covering up!

no mauser type rifles have german mauser stamped on the barrel. so craig is lying.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

No it has not.

Read this

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ford.htm

I have read it nonsense. We have the rendering, drawings of the autopsy signed off by Kennedy Chief Doctor ( so we know the drawings are not fake) and we have Kennedy clothing so we know the exact location of the back wound. Ford who got caught out in 1997, over 30 years later. And he admits they changed the back wound to be more precise. If the back wound was not more precise the magic bullet theory would fall apart. Read the note he send he clearly outlines he was worried about the first draft of the magic bullet theory. He said we need to change the position.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

It easy to mistake the make of the gun, and yes i would believe it he just mixed his guns. Only Roger Craig said the along the barrel of the gun, it had a stamp a identifier marked German Mauser. If this is true they found a German Mauser. So someone is lying and covering up!

Craig, as the only person who says he saw that, years after I might add, is not reliable. He changed his story later to say that they found the Mauser on the roof.

Theres news footage of them holding the Carcano up in the TSBD. Although I'm sure you'll claim this was "re-shot" with the Carcano.

How many people do you actually think are in on this conspiracy? Oswald, all the Dallas cops, Marina, Ruth Paine, Ruby, President Ford, all of the Warren Commission, most eye witnesses to the assassination and the Tippet killing, the mob.......

Sounds to me like you've just read Rush to Judgement and flicked through Crossfire and taken it as gospel.

Ill say it again - you haven't produced one piece of credible evidence in all of your posts.

P.S Your're still ignoring the photo of Kennedys back wound in favour of a drawing which isn't accurate and isn't to scale.

Cheerful Spring

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

no mauser type rifles have german mauser stamped on the barrel. so craig is lying.

False. 7.65 Mauser the gun Craig said he saw.

A firearms forum even has photographs showing identifying markers along the barrel.

https://www.thefirearmsforum.com/threads/7-65-mauser-marking.170943/

ohnonotgmail

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

False. 7.65 Mauser the gun Craig said he saw.

A firearms forum even has photographs showing identifying markers along the barrel.

https://www.thefirearmsforum.com/threads/7-65-mauser-marking.170943/

you said he saw "german mauser" stamped on the barrel. that link doesnt show "german mauser" stamped on the barrel.

Cheerful Spring

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

you said he saw "german mauser" stamped on the barrel. that link doesnt show "german mauser" stamped on the barrel.

Go to specsavers then it says Mauser.

Cortina_MK_IV

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Go to specsavers then it says Mauser.

You said German Mauser.