JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[Aethelwulf]

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

https://www.assassinationresearch.co...2dellarosa.pdf

Afraid not George. This is just a book review. Of a book. Books don't undergo rigourous peer review by qualified experts. The most it will have probably had is an editor's check for typos and readability for the target market (note the title of the book by the way). So this is in no way comparable to peer reviewed scientific analysis and review of e.g. JFK's movements and damage to his skull. Spreading fake news as usual

Read the final sentence of the penultimate paragraph of that book review - oh dear.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Theres a lot more than 8 he has dismissed .

You are welcome to add names and details to the list!

[Herlock Sholmes]

It’s not a treatise. It’s toilet paper stuck between 2 covers.

……

How is it that these genius conspirators placed a gunman to the front, knowing (in their version of the laws of physics) that the Presidents head would fly backwards, at a location where they couldn’t have failed to known that there would be cameras and movie cameras showing this. Why is it that CT’s expect us to believe in this massive, wide-ranging and complex plot but on the same hand we are supposed to accept acts of sheer idiocy on the part of the same plotter?

Another question (which like the first will get no response) is… if the Zapruder film was hoaxed (sorry but I can’t help at even considering the suggestion) to somehow ‘blank out’ the rear head room why didn’t they add a bit of trickery to eliminate or even just reduce Kennedy’s backward movement? Either they forgot (like they forgot to remove the Mauser and they forgot to leave 4 she’ll casings on the 6th floor and they forgot to ensure that corrupt staff were in place at Parkland) or they just hoped that no one would notice.

How can anyone claim to be reasonable when they just resort to ‘fake’ and ‘forgery’ to try and dismiss inconvenient evidence. The answer is that they have no answers only fantasies to prop up their obsession.

[GBinOz]

Attention all

Please do not quote anything from my post #1118. I checked for external links but forgot the hyperlinks. I have already apologised to Jon for the inconvenience, so no one else add to his load by quoting it in a reply. Thank you.

George

[Herlock Sholmes]

Mantik is a conspiracist loon who also supports the 9/11 conspiracy nonsense. 20 experts at the HSCA found no evidence of fakery.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Are we getting the message yet ?

Yes we have……that you have made zero meaningful input to this debate apart from babyish cheerleading. You’ve proven yourself so crippled by bias that you won’t read anything that’s not written by a conspiracy theorists. And……

Just to point out to posters who might mistakenly award a smidgeon of credibility to Fishy…..he’s the only person in the world that actually believes that the totally discredited Steven Knight/Joseph Sickert theory is true!

Yes….in 2023…someone actually still believes it. This says it all.

[Aethelwulf]

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.

Nice try putting in the qualifications. But this is just one person's subjective assessment from 30 years ago that hasn't been scrutinized. Note that Mantik says: If I had measured thousands of points I could have constructed a three dimensional topographic map of the X-rays. This is basically what has been done in the skull analysis paper I cited which creates a model of the skull from the known injuries. Unfortunetly it shows that your fairy on the grassy knoll didn't exist.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please see my replies below.

We have photographs which show us where the wounds were.



We do indeed:




















I gave details of eight witnesses, who estimated - in FBI agent Frazier's case MEASURED - the distance between the back wound and Kennedy's neckline to be between five and six inches.


The official photographs, reproduced above, confirm that they were right - the bullet hole being visible in the photograph of the shirt, and in a close-up of the photograph of the jacket.

Are you saying that BOTH those witnesses AND the official photographs reproduced above are wrong?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Please see my replies below.

Nothing there questions the so-called ‘official’ version. It’s been explained so many times over the years. You might want to keep obsessing but I don’t. The 2 shots were fired from behind….all else is fabrication and dishonesty.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I respectfully disagree that I have engaged in the personal insults, name calling and derogatory remarks of the type referred to in my post. I do not put the terms Conspiracy Theorist or Apologist into those categories.

Cheers, George

You’re a hypocrite. I suppose that these are forgeries? Just a few..

“No amount of evidence or eye witness testimony will persuade an apologist. They prefer to speculate, divert, deny and distort to prop up their theories.”

”Here we have an example of the distortions resorted to by apologists.”


“Any more fabricated evidence you would like to present.”


“Why do you persist in this subterfuge.”


“What an eloquent reply. Masterful in its introduction of facts to dispute the opponents debate. Who could fail to be convinced by this compelling argument? When you have nothing to say, say it verbosely.”


“I don't mistake your posts for facts.”


“I suppose I'll end up in hell for taking the mickey out of poor Herlock.”


“You're not really expecting a reply from the answer master.”


“Certainly not a master of wit and repartee, a master of denigration and repetition perhaps.”


“The ventriloquist Bugliosi has just acquired another.........what is it....I'll remember soon......oh yes.....vent figure.”


“Please try not to put to much pressure on that single brain cell.”


“Does that help is determining the waffle source of the "why woulds"?


“I stopped responding to him long ago, as I posted, and I barely even look at the repetitive interminable blatherskiting. Vitriolic posts filled with insults and character assassinations are no substitute for productive debate.”

…..

As I said before when I produced a list of some of Fishy’s contributions - one rule for you and Fishy and a different one for me.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Nothing there questions the so-called ‘official’ version. It’s been explained so many times over the years. You might want to keep obsessing but I don’t. The 2 shots were fired from behind….all else is fabrication and dishonesty.

I can't believe you have written that.

I have just cited the evidence of eight witnesses that the back wound was between five and six inches below the neckline.

I have also reproduced official photographs showing the bullet holes several inches below the neckline.

And your response is that none of that conflicts with the Warren Commission Report's finding that Kennedy was shot in the back of the neck.

Are you really saying that?

[FrankO]

Hi George,

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.

Okay, you wrote in an earlier post that it’s your conclusion that there were 2 head shots: a frangible projectile from the grassy knoll, entrance in right temple, exit right occipital. A second shot with a Full Metal Jacket military round from the rear a fraction of a second after the first head shot, entrance in exit wound from first shot, exit in hair above forehead as postulated by Humes.

Combining this with what you wrote above, we would have a small entry wound to the right temple and the blow-out wound as depicted by McLelland and no visible entry wound to the back of the head as the bullet entered the skull through the huge exit wound behind the right ear and a relatively small exit wound in hair above forehead.

If I got this right, then how would you explain the explosion of the president’s right temple as seen in the Zapruder film? Which of the two head shots is supposed to have caused that? Another question that remains would be: how could the first reaction of the president’s head to the 2 shots be a reaction to the second of those 2 shots? And where or how does Harper finding a piece of skull where he said he did fit in?

All the best,
Frank

[Herlock Sholmes]

I can't believe you have written that.

I have just cited the evidence of eight witnesses that the back wound was between five and six inches below the neckline.

I have also reproduced official photographs showing the bullet holes several inches below the neckline.

And your response is that none of that conflicts with the Warren Commission Report's finding that Kennedy was shot in the back of the neck.

Are you really saying that?

I’m not going to keep engaging with this kind of silliness.

We know where the shots came from.

We know who fired them.

We know where the bullets struck and where they exited.

Was anything forgery or faked. 100% not. Not a single, solitary chance. It’s the last resort of the wiles to scream fake. It simply indicates the absence of reason.

The case should be closed because there’s nothing left to talk about. It was solved in 1963 by the 100% trustworthy Warren Commission it was then confirmed by the HSCA. The subject is being kept going however by fantasists and downright liars who do it out of a desire to boost their own egos and to make money on the conspiracist bandwagon. This has been foisted on the public for years by a never ending parade of charlatans parading ever more bizarre theories and digging less and less believable witnesses.

Please don’t ask me anymore questions until you and the rest of the Conspiracy Clan actually start answering some.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

Please don’t ask me anymore questions until you and the rest of the Conspiracy Clan actually start answering some.

I am not asking you a new question, but I am waiting for you to answer the one simple question I have just asked you.

I'll repeat it.

I have just cited the evidence of eight witnesses that the back wound was between five and six inches below the neckline.

I have also reproduced official photographs showing the bullet holes several inches below the neckline.

And your response is that none of that conflicts with the Warren Commission Report's finding that Kennedy was shot in the back of the neck.

Are you really saying that?

[Aethelwulf]

Just to point out to posters who might mistakenly award a smidgeon of credibility to Fishy…..he’s the only person in the world that actually believes that the totally discredited Steven Knight/Joseph Sickert theory is true!

Yes….in 2023…someone actually still believes it. This says it all.

Tragic. I'll just add that from another thread GB's preferred solution to the Kelly ToD is that the woman in the room wasn't Kelly, just someone that looked exactly like her. Kelly came back, saw the scene in her room and then went outside for an extended period of vomiting. Kelly then pulled her socks up, went back into her room and got dressed in Kelly's clothes and walked off into the sunset.

Are we surprised he is up to his eyeballs in conspiracy nonsense and spreading misinformation about about fakery?