JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

In # 1407, you call facts cited by me imaginings and then you again accuse me of being a liar.

You do not deserve to receive replies to your questions.

[Herlock Sholmes]

I will not shut up.

We are not talking about something theoretical or hypothetical.

There is, unfortunately, a long history of people being shot in the head.

Many of such shootings are on film and there are many eyewitnesses to such shootings.

You cannot produce any film or witness recollection of a person who had been shot from behind being thrown backwards.

If anyone should shut up, it is you - not I.

PHYSICS

[Herlock Sholmes]

In # 1407, you call facts cited by me imaginings and then you again accuse me of being a liar.

You do not deserve to receive replies to your questions.

Exactly the same tactic employed by George, Fishy and Cobalt when faced with questions that you simply have no answer too.

I rest my case for the evening.

[cobalt]

I think all we conspiracy theorists should acknowledge the founding father of our religion. Not Mark Lane. Not even Jim Garrison. But J. Edgar Hoover himself.

For his was the first recorded allusion to a conspiracy, late in the evening of 22^nd November, when he contacted recently inducted LBJ. Hoover had what he referred to as ‘a problem.’ Recorded intercepts and photographs relating to Oswald had been flown up from Mexico City- but after listening and viewing them Hoover and his agents could confirm they were not of Oswald. Hoover would have sensed the danger immediately: if there was some sort of conspiracy before the assassination involving Oswald then it was very likely linked to the assassination itself. Given that Oswald was on (or supposed to be on) the FBI’s radar then Hoover’s own position could become very difficult. Johnson had a problem too. Whether the fake Oswald was working for pro-Castro groups or blackening Oswald’s name on behalf of anti-Castro groups, evidence of a conspiracy could force his hand politically. So the genesis of the LGT began with that telephone call.

Hoover, the man who had identified the origins of a conspiracy, was put in charge of disproving one existed. His FBI took over the investigation and a very curious investigation it became: it started from the assumption that Oswald was the lone gunman and traced the evidence back from there. Unsurprisingly it reached the conclusion that Oswald was the lone gunman and presented this to the Warren Commission which, with a few hesitations, rubber stamped the FBI investigation.

Most of the evidence that points to Oswald’s guilt comes from the FBI investigation and has to be viewed accordingly.

[PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR 1]

if there was some sort of conspiracy before the assassination involving Oswald then it was very likely linked to the assassination itself.

You mean a conspiracy to frame Oswald?

[Fiver]

Regarding the 1967 CBS documentary, Josiah Thompson devotes an entire section of his book to it.
The marksmen were allowed ample time to practice, they did not have defective sights, and "Of the thirty-seven firing runs only ten (27 percent) were fired in 5.6 seconds or less. On these runs the marksmen made anywhere from zero to three hits-- their average was 1.3 hits for every 3 shots fired. Taking into account all the runs fired in less than 7.5 seconds, the average was 1.2 hits for every three shots fired."
Oswald supposedly got two hits between 4.8 and 5.6 seconds.

This made-for-television experiment cannot be said to have duplicated what Oswald was accused to have done.

JM

The 1967 CBS experiment is not perfect, but it was the best test that I am a aware of, since it used a moving target following the path of JFK's limo, the shooters were firing from the same height as the sixth floor of the book depository and they used a Carcano rifle.

We do not know how skilled of marksmen the volunteers were. According to CBS, few were familiar with the Carcano and some had never used any bolt action rifle. Working the action of a bolt action rifle smoothly and rapidly takes practice, but we do not know how much practice the volunteers were given.

Based on the WC, the time between the throat shot and the head shot was between 4.8 and 5.6 seconds. But the volunteers weren't trying to get 2 shots off in that time, they were trying to get off 3 shots.

The WC estimated 2.6 seconds to cycle the Carcano. Using that estimate would leave a shooter 2.2 to 3.0 seconds after cycling the weapon to fire the shot that hit JFK's head.

In the 1970s, the House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that it was possible to cycle the weapon in only 1.66 seconds if using the iron sights. That would have allowed 3.1 to 3.9 seconds to aim a second shot.

[GBinOz]

I'm combining two of my posts that were lost over the past weekend...


Hi George,

Let me stop you right there. According to Myers and his recreation Connally was turned to his right in the equivalent of frame 223/224. This is also what we see in the ZP itself: Connally’s chest and face are directed at Zapruder’s camera (his face a little bit more to his right). In frame 224 we see something happening to the lapel of Connally’s jacket. In 225 the president appears with his initial reaction to being hit, Connally has lowered his right shoulder and in the following frames he flips his hat in front of him. And he’s still holding on to his hat at frame 278, just before his hand disappears from view. In fact, I’ve read that Connally’s wife stated that he even held on to his hat until he was put on a stretcher after arriving at the Hospital.

However, let’s assume for a moment that Connally and the president weren’t hit by the same bullet. How would that have worked? What direction would the bullet striking Connally have come from? From which building, which floor, which window - or would it have been the roof?

Looking at the Zapruder film, on frame 236 we can just see Connally’s right hand still holding the hat, while he’s clearly lowered his right shoulder from frame 224 onwards. This means that his right hand is about level with his shoulder and it stays there for a number of frames. Furthermore, on this same frame we see that the president has raised both his elbows to above his shoulders and he keeps them there for a number of frames.

So, how, at that point or somewhat later, would a bullet enter close to Connally’s right armpit from behind, then exit about 1 inch below his right nipple, then enter the ‘back side’ of his wrist and exit on the ‘palm side’ and then continue to his left thigh? Wouldn’t an entry wound close to Connally’s right armpit from behind possibly be blocked by one of the president’s arms? Wouldn’t we, in fact, need another sort of magic bullet to first possibly go around the president’s arms, then travel in a rather downward trajectory from the armpit to below the nipple, then go upward again to enter the upper side of the wrist, then go downward again to exit on the palm side of it and then enter the left thigh?

I’m curious how you see this? And what evidence do you have to back up this view?

The best,
Frank

Hi Frank,

I appreciate that you are persuaded by the Myers animation, and you are aware that I have doubts, not of Myers depiction of the Connolly wounds, but the proposal that the projectile passed through Kennedy beforehand. I note that there are sites devoted to debunking Myers
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.assa...m/pZGP7wjTBnoJ
but, as in the supposed debunking of the CIA document, they turn out to be just other forums with members just expressing opinions as is being done here.

My first reason for doubt is that Humes stated that the wound terminated in Kennedy's body. The second is that the animation adjusted the evidence to fit a result.


The incredible thing about Arlen Specter demonstrating his theory is that the actual bullet entry according the the autopsy is shown on back.

You spoke about the frame that shows a movement in the lapel. Why couldn't this have simply been a gust of wind. Many have commented that they can detect a reaction by Connolly in frames in the ZF 230's. Firstly, Kennedy has been hit long before then, but perhaps that was a throat wound from the front. What I keep in mind when I am watching Connolly in the ZF is that he stated that he turned to the right to see the president, but could not see him. He said that he was hit as he was turning back to the left, which would put him in a similar position to that which Myers proposed, but when he was turning back towards the front. What I see when I watch is, that after Connolly is supposedly reacting, he is seen to continue turning to the right with no signs of distress. IMO the shot that hit Connolly occurs at around frames 285-290. This later hit would have been after Kennedy has slumped to his left, which is why Connolly didn't see him.

What evidence do I have to back up this view?
1. Connolly's statements, other than the interview in the hospital bed when he stated that he first turned to the left, which is not shown in the ZF.
2. The evidence of my eyes watching the ZF a great many times with a single purpose in mind for each viewing. YMMV.

You ask where I think the shot came from. How could I know that, other than to say from the rear. As Connolly was turning back towards the front the angles were changing by the millisecond. There were gun men theorised to be on the roof of the Records building, in the Dal-Tex building, at the western end of the TSBD, on the second floor of the TSDB, and of course on the 6th floor of the TSBD at the eastern end.

When the assassination is researched it quickly becomes evident that for every opinion, presentation of evidence or scientific analysis there is an equally vigorous application of the opposite arguments. We all have to make up our own minds. For my part I find the relatively recent work by David Mantik to be somewhat persuasive:
https://www.fff.org/freedom-in-motio...s-head-wounds/

You have said that your currently embracing the Lone Gunman theory. How sure are you that the gunman was Oswald? Do you allow for the possibility that he was a Patsy?

Best regards, George

[Fiver]

Do you think any of them would certify that a person shot from behind falls backwards?

Kennedy fell sideways, not backwards. The Zapruder film clearly shows JFK's head snap forward, then backwards as a spray of material exits the front of his head.

I have provided a scientist that concluded "the observed motions of President Kennedy in the film are physically consistent with a high-speed projectile impact from the rear of the motorcade, these resulting from an instantaneous forward impulse force, followed by delayed rearward recoil and neuromuscular forces."

People that are standing fall downwards when shot. They are not flung backwards by the force of bullets - that only happens in Hollywood.

As is shown by some tests done by Mythbusters.

[Fiver]

You have said that your currently embracing the Lone Gunman theory. How sure are you that the gunman was Oswald? Do you allow for the possibility that he was a Patsy?

The best patsy is a dead one. Oswald was taken alive in spite of pulling a gun on the police.

Would an innocent man show absolutely no interest in why Officer Baker pointed a gun at him on the second floor of the Book Depository?

Would an innocent man leave the Book Depository before finding out what was going on?

Would an innocent man give the taxi driver a false address and walk the last few blocks to where he lived?

Would an innocent man kill officer Tippett?

Would an innocent man throw away the jacket he was seen wearing when he left home?

Would an innocent man try to shoot Officer McDonald at the theater?

[Fiver]

This is an ongoing problem with the conspiracy theorists which they are absolutely blind to Caz. On one hand they present us with sophisticated almost omnipotent plotters who can control witnesses (like ‘forcing’ Frazier and Randles to lie about Oswald mentioning curtain rods, and Marina and Ruth Paine about saying that Oswald had a rifle in the garage) they can forge handwriting (Oswald’s note in Russian, the rifle and revolver orders, the writing on the back of the Neely Street photo) they can fake photographs, x-rays and the Zapruder film and then convince an unknown but huge amount of people to play their part in a treasonous murder plot, and yet these same geniuses are also complete and utter dimwits.

You're forgetting that these plotters also had to arrange the murder of Officer Tippet, which is completely unnecessary to their plot to kill JFK. And manipulate Oswald into going to the theater and trying to murder officer McDonald.

[Fiver]

There's a crazy theory, apparently debunked, that while Oswald was indeed attempting to assassinate Kennedy, the fatal shot was 'friendly fire' from a Secret Service agent traveling directly behind the presidential car; the theory goes that the agent had been issued a new and unfamiliar firearm that week, and embarrassed by this mishap, the government hushed it up.

I casually ran this past a friend of mine who has studied the case in far, far greater detail than I ever have, and he dismissed it at once. Maybe some here have heard about it. I don't endorse it--I just never heard about it until recently.

The odds seem a little...remote.

The Altgens photo disproves that theory.

The theory says that Secret Service agent George Hickey, who was riding in the Secret Service follow-up car directly behind the presidential limousine. The theory alleges that after the first two shots were fired the motorcade sped up while Hickey was attempting to respond to Oswald's shots and he lost his balance and accidentally pulled the trigger of his AR-15 and the shot fatally hit JFK.

The Altgens photo shows that Agent Hickey was already standing and facing backwards towards the Book Depository when JFK was hit in the throat. If he had accidentally fired the AR-15 when the follow-up car accelerated, it would have stuck something behind the follow-up car.

[Fiver]

Hi cobalt,

Another close proximity witness was Charles Brehm who was standing with his five year old son next to Jean Hill and Mary Moorman about fifteen to twenty feet from the President. He said he heard one shot after the headshot. Jean Hill said she heard a total of 4 or five shots.

Cheers, George

Charles Brehm also said:

"The people were running helter-skelter here and there. They were running up to the top of that hill it seemed to me in an almost sheep-like fashion following somebody running up those steps. There was a policeman who ran up those steps also. Apparently people thought he was chasing something, which he certainly wasn’t. There were no shots from that area, but some of the people followed him anyway."

"I was telling them that there were rifle shots and that they came from up in the corner of the School Book Depository or up in the corner of the building across from it."

"With the traffic in and out of the Book Depository, I can understand easily, without even being critical of anybody, how Oswald could have walked out of there. I was up there in a matter of minutes after the assassination and people were moving in and out of there."

"That night, when I finally got to the club I was going to, people asked me how in the world Connally could have gotten hurt. Within hours after the knowledge was given to me that Connally was also wounded, I said the only thing that I could think of was that a bullet that went through the President had also obviously hit Connally because there were only three shots fired: one went wild and two hit the President. The question then was how could it have happened? At that time, it was very easy for me to open up my shirt and show the bullet wound in what was the solar plexus, to come over here and show the exit wound where it passed through my body and came out between my ribs; then the second part of the bullet, the damage, because the bullet was softened and out of shape, tore my arm apart. One bullet did that to me! Any questions that night about what a single bullet can do, my God, I was living proof of it that day! "

"Since I have a history of using firearms, people have asked me what my opinion was regarding the ability to fire those shots. I have no doubt in my mind that almost anybody who had basic training like I had in the Ranger battalions would have no difficulty at all. And especially the fellow was in the Marines, who are ordinarily cracker jack people with firearms, would have no problem at all. And I understand that he had a full sling which actually melds the rifle to your body. You become one so that your re-aiming is not necessary. You have the rifle in your arms in the same position. So there’s no doubt in my mind that he could have gotten off those shots."

"People have mentioned seeing puffs of smoke at the time of the assassination. I saw none whatsoever."

"But there’s no question in my mind that there were three shots from one source, the Texas School Book Depository, and nothing else from any of the other buildings. There were no shots from sewers, no shots from the grassy knoll. There were no people hiding around with silencers, which in itself is laughable, because why should this person have a silencer and that person not have a silencer? And if there were nine people, as somebody advocates, why eight people with silencers shooting and only one without one. No, I feel comfortable with myself. I was very uncomfortable until the Warren Report came out because I stood by myself on November 22^nd, that night. I came up with the original thought of the single bullet. I said at that time that there were three bullets, and they all came from the same place."

Jean Hill did say that she heard 4 to 6 shots. She also said provably false things and has contradicted herself.

[FISHY1118]

Hi Frank,

I appreciate that you are persuaded by the Myers animation, and you are aware that I have doubts, not of Myers depiction of the Connolly wounds, but the proposal that the projectile passed through Kennedy beforehand. I note that there are sites devoted to debunking Myers
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.assa...m/pZGP7wjTBnoJ
but, as in the supposed debunking of the CIA document, they turn out to be just other forums with members just expressing opinions as is being done here.

My first reason for doubt is that Humes stated that the wound terminated in Kennedy's body. The second is that the animation adjusted the evidence to fit a result.


The incredible thing about Arlen Specter demonstrating his theory is that the actual bullet entry according the the autopsy is shown on back.

You spoke about the frame that shows a movement in the lapel. Why couldn't this have simply been a gust of wind. Many have commented that they can detect a reaction by Connolly in frames in the ZF 230's. Firstly, Kennedy has been hit long before then, but perhaps that was a throat wound from the front. What I keep in mind when I am watching Connolly in the ZF is that he stated that he turned to the right to see the president, but could not see him. He said that he was hit as he was turning back to the left, which would put him in a similar position to that which Myers proposed, but when he was turning back towards the front. What I see when I watch is, that after Connolly is supposedly reacting, he is seen to continue turning to the right with no signs of distress. IMO the shot that hit Connolly occurs at around frames 285-290. This later hit would have been after Kennedy has slumped to his left, which is why Connolly didn't see him.

What evidence do I have to back up this view?
1. Connolly's statements, other than the interview in the hospital bed when he stated that he first turned to the left, which is not shown in the ZF.
2. The evidence of my eyes watching the ZF a great many times with a single purpose in mind for each viewing. YMMV.

You ask where I think the shot came from. How could I know that, other than to say from the rear. As Connolly was turning back towards the front the angles were changing by the millisecond. There were gun men theorised to be on the roof of the Records building, in the Dal-Tex building, at the western end of the TSBD, on the second floor of the TSDB, and of course on the 6th floor of the TSBD at the eastern end.

When the assassination is researched it quickly becomes evident that for every opinion, presentation of evidence or scientific analysis there is an equally vigorous application of the opposite arguments. We all have to make up our own minds. For my part I find the relatively recent work by David Mantik to be somewhat persuasive:
https://www.fff.org/freedom-in-motio...s-head-wounds/

You have said that your currently embracing the Lone Gunman theory. How sure are you that the gunman was Oswald? Do you allow for the possibility that he was a Patsy?




















Best regards, George

''I note that there are sites devoted to debunking Myers

but, as in the supposed debunking of the CIA document, they turn out to be just other forums with members just expressing opinions as is being done here.''





Good point George , i notices one of the links for that forum has this guy on it . One of his post claims its a fake C.I.A document ,His next post is below


.

I wonder how many hours he will have to wait for a response from you know who ,?






Jim Hargrove

• 
• Members
• • 3.6k
• Gender:Male

Posted October 4, 2019
How 'bout some REAL evidence that "Oswald" was CIA? I've been working on this list for several years.

20 Facts Indicating the Oswald Project Was Run by the CIA

1. CIA accountant James Wilcott testified that he made payments to an encrypted account for “Oswald or the Oswald Project.” Contemporaneous HSCA notes indicate Wilcott told staffers, but wasn't allowed to say in Executive session, that the cryptonym for the CIA's "Oswald Project" was RX-ZIM.

2. A 1978 CIA memo indicates that a CIA operations officer “had run an agent into the USSR, that man having met a Russian girl and eventually marrying her,” a case very similar to Oswald’s and clearly indicating that the Agency ran a “false defector” program in the 1950s.

3. Robert Webster and LHO "defected" a few months apart in 1959, both tried to "defect" on a Saturday, both possessed "sensitive" information of possible value to the Russians, both were befriended by Marina Prusakova, and both returned to the United States in the spring of 1962.

4. Richard Sprague, Richard Schweiker, and CIA agents Donald Norton and Joseph Newbrough all said LHO was associated with the CIA.

5. CIA employee Donald Deneslya said he read reports of a CIA "contact" who had worked at a radio factory in Minsk and returned to the US with a Russian wife and child.

6. Kenneth Porter, employee of CIA-connected Collins Radio, left his family to marry (and probably monitor) Marina Oswald after LHO’s death.

7. George Joannides, case officer and paymaster for DRE (which LHO had attempted to infiltrate) was put in charge of lying to the HSCA and never told them of his relationship to DRE.

8. For his achievements, Joannides was given a medal by the CIA.

9. FBI took Oswald off the watch list at the same time a CIA cable gave him a clean bill of political health, weeks after Oswald’s New Orleans arrest and less than two months before the assassination.

10. Oswald’s lengthy “Lives of Russian Workers” essay reads like a pretty good intelligence report.

11. Oswald’s possessions were searched for microdots.

12. Oswald owned an expensive Minox spy camera, which the FBI tried to make disappear.

13. Even the official cover story of the radar operator near American U-2 planes defecting to Russia, saying he would give away all his secrets, and returning home without penalty smells like a spy story.

14. CIA's Richard Case Nagell clearly knew about the plot to assassinate JFK and LHO’s relation to it, and he said that the CIA and the FBI ignored his warnings.

15. LHO always seemed poor as a church mouse, until it was time to go “on assignment.” For his Russian adventure, we’re to believe he saved all the money he needed for first class European hotels and private tour guides in Moscow from the non-convertible USMC script he saved. In the summer of 1963, he once again seemed to have enough money to travel abroad to Communist nations.

16. To this day, the CIA claims it never interacted with Oswald, that it didn’t even bother debriefing him after the “defection.” What utter bs….

17. After he “defected” to the Soviet Union in 1959, bragging to U.S. embassy personnel in Moscow that he would tell the Russians everything he knew about U.S. military secrets, he returns to the U.S. without punishment and is then in 1963 given the OK to travel to Cuba and the Soviet Union again!

18. Allen Dulles, the CIA director fired by JFK, and the Warren Commission clearly wanted the truth hidden from the public to protect sources and methods of intelligence agencies such as the CIA. Earl Warren said, “Full disclosure was not possible for reasons of national security.”

19. CIA's Ann Egerter, who worked for J.J. Angleton's Counterintelligence Special Interest Group (CI/SIG), opened a "201" file on Oswald on December 9, 1960. Egerter testified to the HSCA: "We were charged with the investigation of Agency personnel....” When asked if the purpose was to "investigate Agency employees," she answered, "That is correct." When asked, "Would there be any other reason for opening up a file?" she answered, "No, I can't think of one."

20. President Kennedy and the CIA clearly were at war with each other in the weeks immediately before his assassination, as evidenced by Arthur Krock's in

[Herlock Sholmes]

My first reason for doubt is that Humes stated that the wound terminated in Kennedy's body. The second is that the animation adjusted the evidence to fit a result.

The first is easily explained. He didn’t just state it….he stated that due to the tracheostomy he had no way of knowing where the bullet had gone until he spoke to the Doctor at Parkland. The second is your opinion.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The best patsy is a dead one. Oswald was taken alive in spite of pulling a gun on the police.

Would an innocent man show absolutely no interest in why Officer Baker pointed a gun at him on the second floor of the Book Depository?

Would an innocent man leave the Book Depository before finding out what was going on?

Would an innocent man give the taxi driver a false address and walk the last few blocks to where he lived?

Would an innocent man kill officer Tippett?

Would an innocent man throw away the jacket he was seen wearing when he left home?

Would an innocent man try to shoot Officer McDonald at the theater?

The answer is ‘no’ to all of those questions Fiver. I’ll answer it because Conspiracy Theorists only ask questions…..they don’t answer them.