Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

    If you’d read my long post Fishy, you would know that Dr. McClelland admitted his error.

    Prediction based on history…….absolutely no valid response to this.
    Based on your lack of understanding of evidence and total disregard for eyewitness account ,and the jfk assassination as a whole, im not surprised you believe th W.C fabrication. Which over the years has been shown to be exactly that . But you'll believe what ever your told or shown .

    That photo is a fake which evidence will show ,but hey you'll ignore that too like you do everything else so far.
    'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Aethelwulf View Post

      Looks like the good ship conspiracy is on the rocks and sinking fast!
      Your kidding right?
      'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Aethelwulf View Post

        Looks like the good ship conspiracy is on the rocks and sinking fast!
        As I said in a earlier post Wulf, if they found film footage of Oswald shooting Kennedy someone would claim it was an impersonator. You can’t win……3 men on the 5th floor heard the shots overhead, heard sounds of three things hitting the floor, and concrete dust was dislodged (Williams was photographed still with concrete dust on his shirt) These three were closest to the snipers nest than anyone else by a country mile. As Fishy would say….mistaken, liars, idiots or non-existent? Liars….why would they? Idiots….no evidence of that. Non-existent….CT’s haven’t suggested it yet but give them time. Mistaken…..all three of them…..so close to the window?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

          Based on your lack of understanding of evidence and total disregard for eyewitness account ,and the jfk assassination as a whole, im not surprised you believe th W.C fabrication. Which over the years has been shown to be exactly that . But you'll believe what ever your told or shown .

          That photo is a fake which evidence will show ,but hey you'll ignore that too like you do everything else so far.
          Prediction correct as ever.

          No response on McClelland admitting that he was wrong.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

            If you’d read my long post Fishy, you would know that Dr. McClelland admitted his error.

            Prediction based on history…….absolutely no valid response to this.
            I try not to read your long post as you waffle on to much about nothing and whys and would have,s ,and curtain rods etc , but I'd be interested as to where Dr McClelland admitted he was wrong about the description he gave about jfk head wound the day he walked into trauma room 1 and saw a gaping big hole in the back of jfk head .?
            'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

            Comment


            • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

              Your kidding right?
              I think you and George have undergone something similar to radicalization. You spend so much time looking at and digesting conspiracy nonsense that you can't look at the thing objectively. You find all sorts on nonsense to back up your theories by simply regurgitating some rubbish that another conspiracy nut has dug up e.g. the gun photos, serial numbers etc. There are perfectly logical explanations for all of these points. I don't expect you to understand as it's pretty obvious the two of you are way too far gone to ever return to the real world.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                As I said in a earlier post Wulf, if they found film footage of Oswald shooting Kennedy someone would claim it was an impersonator. You can’t win……3 men on the 5th floor heard the shots overhead, heard sounds of three things hitting the floor, and concrete dust was dislodged (Williams was photographed still with concrete dust on his shirt) These three were closest to the snipers nest than anyone else by a country mile. As Fishy would say….mistaken, liars, idiots or non-existent? Liars….why would they? Idiots….no evidence of that. Non-existent….CT’s haven’t suggested it yet but give them time. Mistaken…..all three of them…..so close to the window?
                Just as many if not more gave evidence that the shot came from the front at the grassy knoll ,were they all liars , mistaken idiots ? So your point is mute . Try again
                'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                Comment


                • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                  Based on your lack of understanding of evidence and total disregard for eyewitness account ,and the jfk assassination as a whole, im not surprised you believe th W.C fabrication. Which over the years has been shown to be exactly that . But you'll believe what ever your told or shown .

                  That photo is a fake which evidence will show ,but hey you'll ignore that too like you do everything else so far.
                  Click image for larger version

Name:	8F8FB52A-C2F1-465E-9C4C-E848D05C5E45.jpg
Views:	190
Size:	39.1 KB
ID:	804879 Click image for larger version

Name:	51120012-B6C1-477F-BF23-491C27AE532A.jpg
Views:	180
Size:	49.4 KB
ID:	804880

                  Anyone see the back of his head exploding? No, but you can clearly see the flap of skin though. Looks like the Zapruder film was faked too. That’s probably not a real woman standing on the grass either.

                  Brilliant though I have to admit that in 1963, whatever the tech was like at the time, they managed in double quick time to find the corpse of another man with the same hair as Kennedy and with a gaping flap of skin on the side of his head. All they had to do was fire a bullet through from such as distance that it left no powder marks and of they went. And no one at the autopsy who wasn’t ‘in on it’ noticed.

                  Or perhaps they had CGI from UFO technology and did it that way.

                  Grow up.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Aethelwulf View Post

                    I think you and George have undergone something similar to radicalization. You spend so much time looking at and digesting conspiracy nonsense that you can't look at the thing objectively. You find all sorts on nonsense to back up your theories by simply regurgitating some rubbish that another conspiracy nut has dug up e.g. the gun photos, serial numbers etc. There are perfectly logical explanations for all of these points. I don't expect you to understand as it's pretty obvious the two of you are way too far gone to ever return to the real world.
                    Its the other way round I'm afraid, it is you and herlock who have fallen for that .wc nonsense. It was a masterpiece for the gullible it was designed to fool .

                    "R

                    Perfectly logical explanation!!!!!! Don't make me laugh .

                    ​​​​​​​Real world indeed.
                    'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

                      Click image for larger version  Name:	8F8FB52A-C2F1-465E-9C4C-E848D05C5E45.jpg Views:	0 Size:	39.1 KB ID:	804879 Click image for larger version  Name:	51120012-B6C1-477F-BF23-491C27AE532A.jpg Views:	0 Size:	49.4 KB ID:	804880

                      Anyone see the back of his head exploding? No, but you can clearly see the flap of skin though. Looks like the Zapruder film was faked too. That’s probably not a real woman standing on the grass either.

                      Brilliant though I have to admit that in 1963, whatever the tech was like at the time, they managed in double quick time to find the corpse of another man with the same hair as Kennedy and with a gaping flap of skin on the side of his head. All they had to do was fire a bullet through from such as distance that it left no powder marks and of they went. And no one at the autopsy who wasn’t ‘in on it’ noticed.

                      Or perhaps they had CGI from UFO technology and did it that way.

                      Grow up.
                      Try watchin the real footage from 1975 on a late night t.v show hosted by Geraldo revera ,its on YouTube .then comment of what you wrote.

                      Get the facts
                      'It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is. It doesn't matter how smart you are . If it doesn't agree with experiment, its wrong'' . Richard Feynman

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by cobalt View Post
                        Nowhere in HS’s contribution is any acknowledgment of two rather important facts concerning Oswald. The first is that Oswald had been an asset of the CIA which, shock horror, requires a fair bit of deception and lying. Given his nest egg of $170 dollars (if correct) I would suggest he was still on some sort of retainer for the agency. Secondly, the no-hoper Oswald in a series of dead end jobs was being impersonated in Mexico City a month prior to the assassination. Bugliosi and HS are at great pains to insist Oswald was indeed in Mexico City at this time, but even if we grant that possibility it still does not explain what purpose was being served by his being impersonated at the same time.

                        Caz suggested earlier that if innocent, Oswald was extremely unlucky. I would approach that from the opposite end and suggest that if Oswald was guilty, then he was astonishingly lucky in managing to assassinate JFK. When wandering around Mexico City allegedly threatening to shoot Kennedy, Oswald would not have been aware that the POTUS was about to visit Dallas. He could obviously have never guessed at that time that JFK was going to drive slowly past Oswald’s place of work. Everything was falling into place. His Carcano would have been nobody’s first choice as a sniper rifle, and there is no evidence Oswald had been practising with it, but for all that he managed to find a quiet spot on the 6th floor to assemble it (some have suggested with a small coin) and take aim. The fact the parade was 15 minutes late could not have been known to Oswald up in his eerie but that also was a stroke of good fortune.

                        Oswald was a fair shot we can assume, but even he must have been impressed by the accuracy of two of his shots: one dead centre in the back and a more difficult shot (given JFK had slumped) which struck JFK in the head, presumably causing near instant death. His luck continued for a while for after this monstrous act. Oswald was able to hide the rifle (why bother?) pop down to the lunch room for a cola and then walk out the front door of the TSBD to catch that well known method of escape for the assassin: a public transport bus. For whatever reasons, the Gods were with him that Dallas morning.

                        It makes far more sense to me that Oswald was in control of his own movements, and managed to kill the President because he was in sole charge of what was his own plan of action. I can't see how it would have succeeded if a number of shady conspirators had been setting him up for weeks beforehand without his knowledge, and then on the right day and at the right time, they don't even have to wind him up and let him go, because he does a fair impersonation of a lone gunman off his own bat, right down to covering his curtain tracks with rods - sorry, I meant covering his tracks with curtain rods - without the least need for anyone to pull his strings.

                        James Hanratty lied about where he was when the A6 murder was committed, and his DNA was on the victim's underwear and also the hanky found with the murder weapon, but apparently he wasn't guilty either, but the victim of a complex conspiracy involving everyone from his criminal friends and the police in 1961/2, to the DNA experts forty years later.

                        We all know that there have been victims of genuine miscarriages of justice, but conspiracy theorists, who see sinister forces behind the scenes everywhere they look, appear to have zero concern for the people they accuse with no proof, or whether their accusations can be justified. It can often look more like a general crusade against all the powers that be, than any genuine concern for the individuals they take it upon themselves to champion.

                        Love,

                        Caz
                        X
                        "Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious." Peter Ustinov


                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                          I try not to read your long post as you waffle on to much about nothing and whys and would have,s ,and curtain rods etc , but I'd be interested as to where Dr McClelland admitted he was wrong about the description he gave about jfk head wound the day he walked into trauma room 1 and saw a gaping big hole in the back of jfk head .?
                          This is the section. Nothing, and I mean absolutely nothing here is invented so don’t try the pathetic old conspiracist crap of trying to deflect or deny just because the name Bugliosi is mentioned. The emboldened bits are my additions.


                          I don’t think that anyone has ever suggested that Dr. McClelland lied, Bugliosi certainly didn’t even imply it, but it’s interesting to hear his ‘suggested’ explanation as to how the Zapruder film shows the back of Kennedy’s head to have been intact he said, and hold onto your hats for this cracker: “What the explanation for this is, I just don’t know, but what I believe happened is that the spray of brain matter and blood was like a bloodscreen, similar to a smokescreen, that precluded the view of the occipital area!”

                          Any person that makes this kind of suggestion, which amounts to an invisibility cloak, is in danger suffering irreparable damage to his reputation.

                          Can you believe it? You can see the occipital area in the Zapruder film so nothing is being hidden. There was no massive wound. McClelland was provably mistaken but CT’s hang on desperately to him. McClelland believes that Kennedy was shot from the Grassy Knoll but when asked why 17 pathologists, including Cyril Wecht, said that Kennedy was hit by 2 shots both from the rear, he said:” I’m not a pathologist and I’ve never conducted an autopsy…..I don’t know the answer to your question.”

                          Pretty feeble but a more feeble response follows.

                          He also made the claim that in the autopsy photograph someone deliberately closed up the wound flap. Then when asked why he’d written on a Parkland admission note at 4.45 pm that Kennedy had died:”from a gunshot wound to the left temple.” He weakly replied:” Yes, that was a mistake. I never saw any wound to the President’s left temple. Dr. Jenkins told me there was a wound there, though he later denied telling me this.” Conspiracy theorist Robert Groden, often quoted on the Forum, simply altered McClelland’s “left temple” to “right temple” in his book The Killing Of A President.

                          So at 4.45 McClelland himself put in writing that Kennedy had been struck in the left temple and not the back of his head.

                          Then, when Bugliosi phoned McClelland again for a further conversation he said:” since we hung up last night, I’ve had some second thoughts about the exact location of the exit wound……I have to say that the sketch I first drew for Josiah Thompson’s book a few years after the assassination was misleading. [ The very same drawing that was used by George in post #491, which I assume he’ll now gloss over?]

                          As almost predicted…..George didn’t gloss over it he completely ignored it.

                          Also, this gives us Josiah Thompson’s highly influential book basing its theories around a sketch that was admitted as ‘misleading’ by the man who drew it.


                          Since last night, I’ve been thinking that I placed the large hole in the President’s head farther back than it really was, maybe. It may have been a bit more forward.” When asked where he’d now place the wound he said:” Partially in the occipital region and partly in the right back part of the parietal bone.” This of course is entirely consistent with the Warren Report and the HSCA. But this non-pathologist still concludes that the large exit wound was not to the right frontal area as the 17 pathologists have proven that it was.​

                          McClelland, realising that he’d been talking out of his a**e and knew that he could keep holding this ridiculous position.

                          We also have to point out his colleague Dr. Carrico who also admitted that he and his colleagues at Parkland “absolutely” could have been mistaken.

                          ​​​​​​………

                          Im now expecting an absolutely world-beating classic of obfuscation and wriggling on your part.


                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

                            Try watchin the real footage from 1975 on a late night t.v show hosted by Geraldo revera ,its on YouTube .then comment of what you wrote.

                            Get the facts
                            I give up. There’s only one Zapruder Film Fishy.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post
                              Looks like the Zapruder film was faked too.
                              Funnily enough, I did see a declaration from someone that Zapruder (along with a dozen or more other witnesses) was an operative for the CIA. And they had proof. Along with names and pictures of two other gunmen in situ. It's just that nobody would believe them.
                              Seems like every other person in Dealey Plaza was either a shooter or a CIA agent.

                              Comment


                              • you cannot have a serious debate with a conspiracy theorist. They are just incapable.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X