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 FISHY1118 View Post




    Enjoying the show George and Cobalt , just sitting back with the popcorn watching you again and again make a mockery of the warren commission findings .

    Of course i all but gave up on the topic when Herlock called everyone who saw Kennedys head explode a liar or an idiot . How crazy is that.?

    Oh and that fake autopsy head pic of jfk .... just pure gold .





    About as crazy as the proven liars who are reduced to screaming fake and forgery when they have no propers answers.

    You keep forgetting to post that scientific evidence that the Zapruder film and the autopsy film and x-rays were fakes Fishy. I’m sure that it’s just a lapse of memory on your part and have that information ready to post any time now.
    Regards

    Sir Herlock Sholmes.

    “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Aethelwulf View Post
      Fair play, my mistake with the ZP film number. I should have read more closely and not done what the CTs do.

      However, look at the photo below (Wiki). Now this isn't from the ZP film so not sure what frame it equates to, but judging by the attitude of everyone in the shot, nothing dramatic has happened.


      Two points:
      1. The idea that the position of the hole in JFK's jacket is anomalous does not stack up. Quite clearly in this shot, his jacket has ridden up his back slightly, which would account for the position of the hole. In contrast, look at Connaly's shirt - nice and flat
      2. The rounded posture of JFK's shoulders is clearly evident and the position of the entry wound and exit wound can easily be made sense of. In fact, there is really little difference in his posture here and frame 256 in the paper I cited. The exit wound in his throat is entirely consistent with entry below the neckline. In fact, and as before, it is the only alignment that really makes sense. In contrast, look at his wife's posture and Connally's. That being said, If Connally had been hit below his neckline, an exit in his throat wouldn't look out of place.
      So we still have the issue with the recording of the injuries I mentioned before and the postural issue is still there. Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if the latter was linked to his long history back issues and that rather painful sounding corset he was wearing.

      Click image for larger version Name:	Robert_Croft_photo_showing_JFK's_car_on_Elm_Street.jpg Views:	0 Size:	282.0 KB ID:	805369
      Look at that black lady in a blue dress near to Connally’s head. Isn’t she pointing a gun?

      Add her to the list Wulf….this plot is bigger than we first though.

      Another good post btw.

      Regards

      Sir Herlock Sholmes.

      “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

      Comment


      • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post

        Theres a lot more than 8 he has dismissed .
        Many of who were close to certifiable. Just the kind of witnesses conspiracy theorists love…proven liars.
        Regards

        Sir Herlock Sholmes.

        “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

        Comment


        • Two points for the conspiracy clan….

          1. How, whilst claiming to be fair and reasonable and in the light of what we know, can you continue to use Dr. McClelland as a witness. It’s simply staggering. If he’d have appeared in court he’d have been shredded and then laughed out. No wonder he didn’t appear at the London Trial (which George keeps mentioning whilst ‘forgetting’ to mention the verdict - Oswald guilty) I’m not bothered about accusations of repetition but conspiracy theorists repeatedly duck the issue.

          At 4.45 on the afternoon of the assassination Supermac writes that Kennedy’s head wound was on the left side - so on completely the wrong side of the head!!

          Then he changes to ‘the back of the head.’ Making his famous drawing (which George still uses despite it being the equivalent of quoting the Hitler Diaries)

          Then he admits that the drawing was misleading and that the head wound was round to the side.

          Then he changes again to the rear.

          This is the kind of clown that conspiracy theorists trot out.
          Regards

          Sir Herlock Sholmes.

          “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

          Comment


          • No response from Fishy or George on this one I see (hardly unexpected)

            We know that the President was taken to Bethesda for the autopsy (decided by the family I believe because at least one other hospital was suggested) Parkland was different, it was the only choice so any conspirators would of course have known this. So……

            How and why did our brilliant plotters manage (in advance) to gather together a team of 3 corrupt pathologists plus corrupt photograph forgers and x-ray fakers (at a hospital that they couldn’t have been certain was going to be the President’s destination) and yet at Parkland (where they knew for absolute certain that the President would be taken) they either forgot or didn’t bother? What would have been the point in having an autopsy report saying one thing whilst at the same time having uncorrupted Parkland Doctors, nurses and technicians (far more in quantity than at Bethesda) running around telling the world that the autopsy findings were bogus?

            Answer, they blatantly wouldn’t have done. A child could see it’s a preposterous suggestion.​
            Regards

            Sir Herlock Sholmes.

            “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Herlock Sholmes View Post

              Look at that black lady in a blue dress near to Connally’s head. Isn’t she pointing a gun?

              Add her to the list Wulf….this plot is bigger than we first though.

              Another good post btw.
              Ha ha didn't spot her. Gotta be honest though, I'm a bit gutted I didn't check properly thus giving GB the chance to embarrass me. I have been goading him though so can't complain too much!

              The main point is still important though. There is simply nothing odd about the relative positions of those wounds. Same as all the other proofs we've been offered.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by cobalt View Post
                216 Assassination Witnesses
                Thought that the shots came from the Grassy Knoll - 52
                Thought that the shots came from the TSBD - 48
                Thought that the shots came from Knoll & TSBD - 5
                Thought that the shots came from Elsewhere - 4
                Couldn’t tell where they came from – 37

                Not Asked - 70
                Conclusion: Totally Inconclusive


                I would interpret that differently. Of the 109 people who offered an opinion almost half thought the shots came from the Grassy Knoll. About the same number thought they came from the TSBD which is less than you would expect. After all the crowds were much denser around the TSBD so the number of witnesses available to identify shots from nearby was greater than for the spectators thinned out around the Grassy Knoll.

                How do you know that there were more around the TSBD? I’d say that there were more actually in Dealey Plaza. In any investigation these results, as viewed purely in numbers, would be considered inconclusive.

                Besides, none of this data undermines the case for conspiracy one jot: if you believe that shots were fired from both the TSBD AND the Grassy Knoll then 96% of the witnesses are correct. Some heard the TSBD shots, others heard the Grassy Knoll shots and a handful such as Sam Holland heard both sets of shots.

                I think you’ve made an error there Cobalt. The case for both locations simultaneously is weakest. Only 5 out of 216.

                Holland was on the overpass so less likely to be confused by what Bugliosi described as the Dealey Plaza ‘echo chamber.’ He maintained that the head shot to Kennedy sounded different to the previous two and its impact as seen on the Zapruder film (which Holland had not seen when interviewed) strongly suggests it was a different type of bullet entirely.
                So why is Holland a good witness from the overpass? Three witness who must trump all others in terms of location are Williams, Norman and Jarman on the 5th floor directly below and a very few feet from Oswald; both of whom were in open windows. Those three were 100% certain that the shots came from directly above them. We don’t really need other witness. Those three seal the deal.
                Last edited by Herlock Sholmes; 03-06-2023, 10:50 AM.
                Regards

                Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Aethelwulf View Post

                  Ha ha didn't spot her. Gotta be honest though, I'm a bit gutted I didn't check properly thus giving GB the chance to embarrass me. I have been goading him though so can't complain too much!

                  The main point is still important though. There is simply nothing odd about the relative positions of those wounds. Same as all the other proofs we've been offered.
                  We all make mistakes Wulf. The difference is owning up to them. Which you did. A rare thing in the company of conspiracy theorists when all you get is avoidance or babyish comments like Fishy’s and the hypocrisy of George.

                  Note that I made a long detailed post on George’s witnesses..no response, even though he seeks to use fantasists like Hofmann, Oliver, O’Conner and McClelland to prop up the conspiracy case. Then my question of “why no government stooges at Parkland?” Zilch.
                  Regards

                  Sir Herlock Sholmes.

                  “A house of delusions is cheap to build but draughty to live in.”

                  Comment


                  • Are we getting the message yet ?
                    Attached Files
                    '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

                      We all make mistakes Wulf. The difference is owning up to them. Which you did. A rare thing in the company of conspiracy theorists when all you get is avoidance or babyish comments like Fishy’s and the hypocrisy of George.

                      Note that I made a long detailed post on George’s witnesses..no response, even though he seeks to use fantasists like Hofmann, Oliver, O’Conner and McClelland to prop up the conspiracy case. Then my question of “why no government stooges at Parkland?” Zilch.
                      I'd say all your posts have been clear and logical but it is a waste of time because we never get any answers from that lot. Just more of the same avoidance and denial and continued posting of conspiracy nonsense that isn't their own work. I'd say there aren't any matters that haven't been cleared up. Gives the CTs something to do I suppose.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by FrankO View Post
                        Hi George,

                        I, indeed, see it differently. In the Moorman photo, we, as spectators, can see some two thirds of the back of the head, the president’s left ear being covered by Jacky Kennedy’s elbow. Hargis was, perhaps, some 3 meters closer to the president than Moorman was. If there had been a large blow out wound in the area indicated by McLelland’s drawing, then I think Hargis would have seen it, just as he himself stated. And Hill is clearly indicating the side of his head and not the back of it.

                        What the Moorman photo also shows is that a straight line from the grassy knoll to, approximately, the right temple of the president’s head would not go through a part of the skull behind the right ear; it would rather go through a part of the skull behind the left ear. In other words, if a bullet entered close to the right temple in a straight line from the knoll and exited behind the right ear as per McLelland’s drawing, then it deviated at least some 60 degrees.


                        First of all, it wasn’t found some 50 feet away, but only 25. Then, Billy Harper never actually said he found it in a location that was ‘behind’ the limousine right after the president’s head exploded. He just said he found it ‘south’ of the spot where the president was fatally wounded, which would just mean to the left side of the car. And he indicated the spot where he found it, which was actually in front of the presidential car beside the road, not behind. See here: "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on the Harper Fragment (onthetrailofdelusion.com).

                        However, supposing for a moment that it did end up behind and to the left of the car, it would beg the question: what happened to the bullet? It exited, but where did it go? Why didn’t it leave any marks on the car, the trunk from which Jacky tried to recover a piece of her husband’s skull, the following car, Hargis’s motor or windscreen, people in the line of fire behind the presidential limousine?


                        Okay, so you’re saying that they touched up to conceal the gaping hole on the back of the president’s head and left the one on the front/top right? Even that leaves a question unanswered. Why was the first reaction of the 2 head shots a reaction to the second shot (a short jerk forward), if the first shot was a shot from the knoll?


                        If we, however use the still itself we get a trajectory that isn’t rising, but, in fact, going down, entering some 10 cm above the external occipital protuberance and exiting in the temple area on the right of the head. The drawing doesn’t agree with the findings of Dr. Humes & Co.

                        Click image for larger version  Name:	dataurl613629.jpg Views:	0 Size:	35.7 KB ID:	805372


                        I don’t believe that they decided it was concealed by missing bone fragments. At least one of the 3 skull fragments later brought in contained evidence of the exit of what must have been the larger part of the bullet. And the largest ‘radius’ of that large wound was about 13 cm, not 17. And I don’t understand your last phrase here: didn’t Humes & Co. conclude a small entrance wound and a large exit wound?


                        Okay, so would it be correct to say that you believe the exit wounds of both shots obliterated the entrance wounds? Possible I guess, but, for now, a bit too convenient.

                        All the best,
                        Frank
                        Hi Frank,

                        It does seem that we see things differently. The Moorman photo, I believe was taken a moment before impact.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	GN-1a.jpg
Views:	235
Size:	108.7 KB
ID:	805388

                        Humes and Boswell diagrams are here:

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	Skull-5.jpg
Views:	234
Size:	96.0 KB
ID:	805389

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	Skull-6.jpg
Views:	241
Size:	74.0 KB
ID:	805390

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	Skull-7.jpg
Views:	228
Size:	34.8 KB
ID:	805391

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	Skull-8.jpg
Views:	235
Size:	50.8 KB
ID:	805392

                        My approximation is shown in green.

                        Click image for larger version

Name:	Head_shots-4.jpg
Views:	229
Size:	16.0 KB
ID:	805393

                        You ask "However, supposing for a moment that it did end up behind and to the left of the car, it would beg the question: what happened to the bullet?"

                        When a frangible projectile releases it's energy on the target it fragments into tiny pieces, so no one was going to pick it up like the magic bullet. A frangible projectile from the rear would have left a small entry and blown the President's face away. A full metal jacketed projectile from the rear would leave a small entry and a larger exit, but nothing like the exit of a frangible projectile. If there were only one head shot, and it came from the rear, the entry and exit damage patterns are reversed.

                        The president's autopsy should have been conducted by a team of the top pathologists in the country. I appreciate that the Kennedy family decided the where and who, and I feel sympathy for Humes, Boswell and Finke. They were just out of their depth.

                        David Mantik: One of the most amazing and serious oversights was the pathologists' failure to coronally section the brain. The brain was examined nearly two weeks later, thus giving Humes ample time to review standard protocols for this. With this much time to prepare, ignorance can hardly be the explanation. Is it conceivable that Humes would have undertaken such a momentous task without reviewing in detail standard protocols, especially since, by his own admission, he was not experienced in gunshot autopsies?

                        On one occasion Humes stated that the shot to the head came from above and on another he claimed that the anatomic data could not answer this question. The critics naturally wonder how the evidence could possibly have changed during this interval, or if Humes' memory were defective, how it could fail him on such a major question....

                        Dr. Michael Baden, who chaired the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel, described the autopsy as "woefully inadequate" and noted that neither Humes nor Finck had ever done an autopsy involving a gunshot before! Although Finck was the designated expert, he had only sat in an office and reviewed records of US military personnel who had died of gunshot wounds. In view of the judgment required to reconstruct the reported two skull wounds, the pathologists' lack of actual experience with gunshot wounds seems germane.


                        Best regards, George
                        The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

                        ​Disagreeing doesn't have to be disagreeable - Jeff Hamm

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by FISHY1118 View Post
                          Are we getting the message yet ?
                          Sorry if this has been addressed but how do conspiracy theorists address the general direction of the bullets that struck both JFK and Connolly? Even the conspiracy theorists, I think, tend to agree that the shots entered and exited either back to front, or front to back. The bullets all seem to come from the same general direction(either from behind or from in front). If there was a shooter on the grassy knoll he appears to have missed absolutely everything.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by jason_c View Post

                            Sorry if this has been addressed but how do conspiracy theorists address the general direction of the bullets that struck both JFK and Connolly? Even the conspiracy theorists, I think, tend to agree that the shots entered and exited either back to front, or front to back. The bullets all seem to come from the same general direction(either from behind or from in front). If there was a shooter on the grassy knoll he appears to have missed absolutely everything.
                            Hi JC,

                            For the head shot, there is some recent peer reviewed analysis published in Forensic Science International (pre-print version can be downloaded here: https://engrxiv.org/index.php/engrxi...rint/view/1579). It is open access so have posted the abstract below which should be ok. Note that they analysed a range of sites for the shooter. The only one that could produce the known injuries was from the the rear. The grassy knoll was analysed and ruled out. Shots from that direction would have damaged the forehead area - if you read from section 5.1 there is an analysis of each site with skull damage and bullet damage reconstructions comapred to x rays and other evidence.

                            Almost 60 years after the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963 the majority of Americans are still reluctant to believe the official reports of commissions from 1964 and again in 1976 that determined the direction of the shot resulting in the fatal head injury. Long-withheld, confidential government files released in 2017 reignited the controversy. The present investigation computationally simulated projectile-skull impacts from the direction specified in official reports and from three other directions. Detailed geometric models of the human head and ammunition, as well as known parameters from the assassination site served as the supportive base for analysis. Constitutive mathematical models for the impact of projectile material with skull tissues at supersonic speed were employed to analyze bone and bullet fragmentation mechanics. Simulated fracture characteristics of the bone and the bullet were compared with photographic and X-ray evidence. The most likely origin of the fatal shot was determined based on the degree of corresponding deformation and fragmentation between simulation and documented evidence. Computational corroboration could be established as physically consistent with high-speed impact from the rear, as established by the official commissions. Simulations of three other speculative shot origins did not correspond to the documented evidence.​

                            Comment


                            • For those still interested scientific debate, there is an interesting treatise on the Zapruder film here:

                              The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

                              ​Disagreeing doesn't have to be disagreeable - Jeff Hamm

                              Comment


                              • David Mantik, statement (10th November, 1993)

                                Just before Halloween this year, I visited the National Archives on four separate days to examine the autopsy X-rays and photographs. While there I used a technique called optical densitometry - to study the X-rays. This technique has been available for many years but has never been applied to the JFK autopsy X-rays. It measures the transmission of ordinary light through selected points of the X-ray film. If I had measured thousands of points I could have constructed a three dimensional topographic map of the X-rays. The higher points on this map would represent the blackest areas of the X-ray film and would correspond to areas in the body where the most X-rays had passed through to strike the film. In a way, therefore, the information contained in the X-ray film is converted from two dimensions into three dimensions and is that much richer in detail. The range of peaks and valleys on such a topographic map would be expected to fall within a well defined range for a normal human skull. Any values which lie outside of this range - and especially those which lie unnaturally far outside - would not be consistent with ordinary skulls and would raise questions of authenticity...

                                I discovered... new evidence that the autopsy X-rays of President John F. Kennedy have been altered, that there were two shots which struck the head, and that the magic bullet is anatomically impossible.
                                ​****************

                                David W. Mantik, MD, Ph.D., is a board certified radiation oncologist who previously served on the tenure-track physics faculty at U. Michigan. He received his PhD in physics from U. Wisconsin, his MD from Michigan, completed a post-doctoral fellowship at Stanford, and held a Junior Faculty Clinical Fellowship at USC. He has visited the National Archives on nine separate occasions and has written extensively about the JFK medical evidence, particularly the autopsy images.
                                The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

                                ​Disagreeing doesn't have to be disagreeable - Jeff Hamm

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X