JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[FISHY1118]

Hi Herlock,

I’d ask you what you thought of Douglas Horne’s five volume ‘Inside the Assassination Records Review Board’ -over 2,000 pages- but it’s frighteningly obvious you haven’t read it. What about John Newman’s Oswald and the CIA (600+ pages) or his multi-volume series ‘The Assassination of President Kennedy’ (2,000+ pages).

Lone nutters don’t hold the record for the most elephantine books on the case, but they do hold the record for the largest charades.

JM

So i have to ask , i recalll you posted on this topic recently, where i think you even showed a photo of a very large collection of probably the most extensive library of jfk books ive seen anybody have .

From that, i would have to say you would have a very vast knowledge on the subject as one would expect reading such a vast amount of different theories thoses books contained .


Heres my point, am i right in saying, and i think one of your post even had your opinion Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill President Kennedyor Officer J.D Tippet ?

Question, are you still of that opinion ? if yes , are you satified to be labled a ''Conspiracy Nut'' like the rest of here by Herlock and Wulf ?

[Aethelwulf]

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john...he-magic-scalp

The fake Kennedy photo expose for exactly what it is... FAKE

Rather than just parroting existing conspiracy nonsense and crying fake like a baby, why not present the actual evidence that photo is fake. By that i mean evidence of the photo - is there something wrong with the image (colours/shadows/pixels etc). Or are you suggesting the photo is genuine but the subject is fake (fake body)? If it is the latter, take a day off Fishy.

The only piece of tampering I have seen in this whole thread is the so called dodgy serial number on the gun that has clearly been processed, cleaned up and overwritten in a new font in the modern versions (for a conspiracy TV audience). Of course you gullible mugs fell for it.

[FISHY1118]

Rather than just parroting existing conspiracy nonsense and crying fake like a baby, why not present the actual evidence that photo is fake. By that i mean evidence of the photo - is there something wrong with the image (colours/shadows/pixels etc). Or are you suggesting the photo is genuine but the subject is fake (fake body)? If it is the latter, take a day off Fishy.

The only piece of tampering I have seen in this whole thread is the so called dodgy serial number on the gun that has clearly been processed, cleaned up and overwritten in a new font in the modern versions (for a conspiracy TV audience). Of course you gullible mugs fell for it.

What are you blind wulf ? , read the article for yourself, im not doing your reading for you . You should take the year off .

I ve just as much right to post as you , just as you do when you Parrot the Warren Commission crap . Grow up and stop being a sook about the whole thing .

[Aethelwulf]

What are you blind wulf ? , read the article for yourself, im not doing your reading for you . You should take the year off .

I ve just as much right to post as you , just as you do when you Parrot the Warren Commission crap . Grow up and stop being a sook about the whole thing .

As I said I haven't read the WC. I'm using my own eyes, common sense and intelligence.

Good of you to confirm there is no physical evidence that the photo (the actual image) is fake. Cheers.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Most of HS' last points are covered under the Reichstag fire scenario. He has a weak understanding of how political power operates in any system, whether autocratic, oligarchic or self-styled democratic. Time to read Plato's 'Republic.'

Quite an interesting ex tempore news report.

https://youtu.be/9DSFKhaNqqU

Officer Bentley claims that Oswald had ID in the form of a library card, credit card and a driving licence. (He doesn’t state which name this was in: Oswald or Hidell.) So Lee Oswald had a credit card in 1963 working menial jobs? And he had a driving licence although he had never so far as we know passed a driving test? I seem to remember the library card became an issue at some time.
Officer McDonald admits the description of Oswald (for the alleged Tippt shooting) was ‘meagre.’ He also went to the balcony first before exploring the lower floor where Oswald was arrested. Why?

They were in Hidell’s name.

…..

The way that political power theoretically operates isn’t really relevant. We are talking about a specific event. Even if we think the worst of government and its agencies (and we certainly shouldn’t look at them in a naive way which doesn’t accept corruption, the distortion or hiding of truth and self-interest) we should still be duty bound to look at this specific event in a way that conspiracy theorists consistently show themselves as unwilling to do. At the likeliness.

The magnitude of the undertaking is obvious to all and the ramifications of this plot being uncovered and the conspirators being revealed would have been unthinkable for those involved. So again Cobalt, these people would have first established their goal - Kennedy’s death. Then, as any second rate bank robber would know, the fewer people in the know the better. Then, it’s always the aim to make a plan as simple as possible, the fewer aspects the less chance of disaster. Then, they would definitely want as few people as possible involved in the plan. People slip up and say things that they weren’t supposed, people get drunk and blab, people grow a conscience. They would also want to leave as little as possible to chance. There couldn’t have been more reliant on luck in this case as I’ve suggested elsewhere. The main one being the huge amounts of witnesses involved that were impossible to control so the police would have been left ‘herding cats’ trying to scoop up and silence or manipulate any witness that might have seen something that they shouldn’t have. They wouldn’t have had the time or manpower to prevent anyone from leaving Dealey Plaza - any one or more who might have had a camera in a pocket or a bag containing the crystal clear photograph of an empty 6th floor window or the perfect shot of a Grassy Knoll gunman.

Whatever thoughts on political history or theory we have to consider the event itself. We also have to consider how simple and more effective the alternative was. There’s rarely been an assassination that hasn’t been spun into a conspiracy of some kind but we have to address the question of how likely it would have been for multiple government agencies, various experts both civilian, military and medical were all ‘in on it.’ Especially given the ramifications of the plot being uncovered. You can only imagine, for example, the Russians climbing onto their high horse:” look at these so-called leaders of the free world; these people that denigrate communism; these people who accuse us of totalitarianism. They murder their own President.” Just not believable Cobalt.

[Herlock Sholmes]

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john...he-magic-scalp




The fake Kennedy photo expose for exactly what it is... FAKE



''Witnesses who saw JFK’s head up close after he was shot, describe damage that is quite different from what shows in certain autopsy photographs and x-rays. And the contrast between the two – the damage they describe, and the evidence on films is so radically different, many researchers suspect evidence tampering.

There are people who defend the authenticity of the evidence by “explaining” the problem with theories that may sound reasonable – but some of these people promote their work in the following ways: (a) they omit significant information that challenges their ideas; (b) they pad their work with irrelevant information – thus obscuring the paucity of proof of their main thesis; (c) they try to shape ambiguous language to mean only what they want it to mean; (d) they make amateurishly omniscient assertions… “This is irrefutable proof… There’s no other explanation… This has to mean…”; (e) they list people who presumably agree with them without showing the reader what exactly they had agreed with, and some of the people are in rest homes, or in graves, or otherwise are hard to reach.''

The perfect description of the Lone Gunman theorist we see on this topic .

You are now the Donald Trump of this Forum. Everything that you don’t want to be true you just squeal ‘fake, fake,’

You select the witnesses who saw the President for a few seconds as he passed in the car then pick out only the ones that believe that the back of his head blew out rather than the side.

Then you look at the Doctors, and guess what, you select the doctors (largely young men who normally wouldn’t have been called on) who had Kennedy for 22 minutes in a massively stressful time when their sole priority was to try and save his life and not to analyse wounds. Some of whom admitted that were wrong and another senior one who admitted the very real possibility of error.

But when it comes to the three pathologists whose actual job it was to ascertain the cause of death, who took yourself to do so, you resort to the typically childish conspiracy theorist yells of fake. Then the Zapruder film is a fake and the autopsy photos are fakes and the x-rays are faked and the 14 other pathologists who investigate it are also frauds.

It’s gullibility on an unbelievable level.

[Herlock Sholmes]

https://www.kennedysandking.com/john...he-magic-scalp




The fake Kennedy photo expose for exactly what it is... FAKE



''Witnesses who saw JFK’s head up close after he was shot, describe damage that is quite different from what shows in certain autopsy photographs and x-rays. And the contrast between the two – the damage they describe, and the evidence on films is so radically different, many researchers suspect evidence tampering.

There are people who defend the authenticity of the evidence by “explaining” the problem with theories that may sound reasonable – but some of these people promote their work in the following ways: (a) they omit significant information that challenges their ideas; (b) they pad their work with irrelevant information – thus obscuring the paucity of proof of their main thesis; (c) they try to shape ambiguous language to mean only what they want it to mean; (d) they make amateurishly omniscient assertions… “This is irrefutable proof… There’s no other explanation… This has to mean…”; (e) they list people who presumably agree with them without showing the reader what exactly they had agreed with, and some of the people are in rest homes, or in graves, or otherwise are hard to reach.''

The perfect description of the Lone Gunman theorist we see on this topic .

Can everyone please take note. Fishy early quoted Dr. McClelland. I told him that McClelland had changed his opinion. Fishy ask for the relevant info. I posted it, then I said this:

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.


And whaddya know chaps? I was absolutely right. Not a peep. Fishy does what Fishy always does when he’d proven wrong. He turns a blind eye and hopes that no one will notice him skulking away. Every time.

[GBinOz]

Hi George,

Are you trying to upstage the Viz character, Roger Irrelevant?

In your opinion, what was Oswald carrying that morning?

A] Nothing - and your lone witness was spot on.

B] A larger lunch than usual - and he polished off every last crumb before JFK was shot.

C] Curtain rods - as Oswald himself claimed, and he used them for sword-swallowing practice.

D] Something else

Who said Oswald was carrying a handbag, risking his street cred? No wonder he tried to claim it was curtain rods.

Love,

Caz
X

Hi Caz,

I'll give a genuine answer to your divisive questions.

E] I couldn't care less, except it wasn't a rifle.

I was making a point that it was equally as likely that you could fit a rifle in your handbag as it was that Oswald could have fitted a rifle in the bag the size of which two witnesses described. Perhaps I underestimated the size of your handbag?

[Herlock Sholmes]

So i have to ask , i recalll you posted on this topic recently, where i think you even showed a photo of a very large collection of probably the most extensive library of jfk books ive seen anybody have .

From that, i would have to say you would have a very vast knowledge on the subject as one would expect reading such a vast amount of different theories thoses books contained .


Heres my point, am i right in saying, and i think one of your post even had your opinion Lee Harvey Oswald did not kill President Kennedyor Officer J.D Tippet ?

Question, are you still of that opinion ? if yes , are you satified to be labled a ''Conspiracy Nut'' like the rest of here by Herlock and Wulf ?

Congratulations Fishy. You’ve just one this years “Weaselly Post of the Year.”

And of course Id like to ask, apart from the very obvious and massively pathetic attempt to get Wulf and I censured in some way, would you like me to go back through this thread and point out the derogatory comments that have been made about those that don’t accept the conspiracy fantasy? I think it would be pretty ‘revealing’ don’t you. I hold my hand up to making mocking comments about conspiracy theorists - it’s called honesty. Of course you only see fault in one side.

[Herlock Sholmes]

What are you blind wulf ? , read the article for yourself, im not doing your reading for you . You should take the year off .

I ve just as much right to post as you , just as you do when you Parrot the Warren Commission crap . Grow up and stop being a sook about the whole thing .

So you read one article….find that it concurs with your preconception…..you endorse it…….but you completely ignore or don’t even bother to read the evidence against it.

If you’d have posted that anonymously I’d still have known it was you.

[GBinOz]

Hi George.
I believe the suppliers for Klein had run out of the model shown in the advert used by Oswald, so substituted the M91/38 he received for the M91 TS illustrated in the ad. By April's edition, the ad had been updated to show this.

As has been noted, the quality of the backyard photos doesn't appear to be of sufficient quality for me to make out the details you observe. But I can see nothing inconsistent with the museum rifle in the photos.

Can you see how many rivets there are at the front of the stock?

Hi Joshua,

Impressive research. Can you provide a source for this information please?

[GBinOz]

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 .?

Hi Fishy,

I was reading an interview with Bugliosi on his book (https://historynewsnetwork.org/article/41490)
when I had a feeling of deja vu. Then I realised it contained large slabs that someone had cut and pasted and posted on this thread. Does that help is determining the waffle source of the "why woulds"?

Cheers, George

[GBinOz]

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

FISHY, have you been saying that there wasn't a sniper in the TSBD......no, I can't see any evidence of that. Then who was it that has been saying that there was only one sniper????

[Aethelwulf]

So you read one article….find that it concurs with your preconception…..you endorse it…….but you completely ignore or don’t even bother to read the evidence against it.

If you’d have posted that anonymously I’d still have known it was you.

That article Fishy was trying to hook us on is called.....The Magic Scalp! Shocker!

[GBinOz]

Hi George,

Indeed, the actual spray of brain, blood and bone fragments, ended up on the back of the limousine and even on motorcycle officers Martin and Hargis. Harvis never said the spray hit him at high velocity, but instead said that, as the limousine and himself were moving forward, he just drove through that spray and caught it on much of his body and face. Or words to that effect. This is also what you can see on (an enhanced and stabilized version of) the Zapruder film. A spray coming from the president’s head wound, going up and then moving to the back and left of the car, while the car, obviously, is still moving forward. A slight wind could have blown the spray in the direction of Hargis. The spray going up and then backwards doesn't say anything. Added to that that Dr. Humes & Co. concluded that the wound on the president's back of the head was an entry wound and that he found evidence of the exit wound on one of the skull fragments does the rest. The only odd thing remaining is how the fatal shot could have made Kennedy’s body go ‘back - and to the left’ if it was a shot from behind. But that's something we'll probably never know for a fact.

All the best,
Frank

Hi Frank,

It is a pleasure to see you here again. I know that however diametrically opposed may be our opinions that you will not resort to basing your debate on insults and ridicule.

I watched a video interview with Hargis and he stated that the debris hit him with such force that he thought he had been shot. I will try to provide a link, but it may take some time to relocate it. Martin received less of the debris field because he was partially screened by Hargis and the latter's motorcycle windscreen. The Harper skull fragment was found in the debris field some 50 feet away, as well as another fragment which was closer. I would submit that a slight wind would not produce this result.

Had an explosive projectile (not a military jacketed projectile) struck from the rear then, under your wind scenario, it could be expected that the debris field would also include the two motorcycle escorts on the right, but this was not the case. But the latest scientific analysis of the ZF synchronised with the audio file has raised an additional possibility. After the kill shot from the front right there is indicated an additional shot (0.7 seconds later). Hill and Moorman testified that there was a shot after the fatal shot. The ZF shows that after the explosive round that forced Kennedy's head back and to the left, there is a slight front movement of the President's head that could have been created by a non explosive military round that would leave holes rather than fragments. This is explained by Josiah Thompson here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8i-R3saBBs&ab_channel=ABC7NewsBayArea

Best regards, George