JFK Assassination Documents to be released this year

[GBinOz]

And I notice that absolutely true to form neither yourself, George and Fishy have answered any of the points that I have made. It’s just ask, ask, ask, with you lot, but you’re utterly clueless when you’re requested to provide answers. Especially meaningful ones.

What state of semi-consciousness do you need to achieve to imagine that I have ask, ask, asked you anything, or that I am in any way obliged to reply to your repetitive ramblings? You either ignore answers or just repeat your opinions along with strings of invectives. Not clever or humorous sarcasm directed at ideas, just gratuitous personal attacks. PI, cobalt and Fishy are showing remarkable perseverance in putting up with your sandbox bully tantrums.
"fanciful theorising, the manipulation of evidence, flat out lies and waffle?" - four of your specialties.

[DJA]

How would you describe the colour of Oswald's hair?

Balding

[Fiver]

I have read that surveyors acting on behalf of the Warren Commission estimated the downwards trajectory from the sixth floor window at 18 degrees.

If Hume was right that the downwards angle of the wound was 45-60 degrees, then obviously Oswald could not have fired that shot.

So you're saying God shot JFK?

The Conspiracy goes higher than I thought!

The wounds which, according to the Warren Commission Report, were caused by a single bullet, were in reality caused by at least three bullets: the one which hit Kennedy in his back and did not exit, the one which hit Kennedy's throat from the front and did not exit, and at least one shot which hit Connally - which, as Connally and his wife acknowledged, was a separate bullet.

Your theory requires multiple magic bullets.

A bullet fired downwards at a 45 angle, apparently by God, that magically disappears after hitting JFK in the back.

A bullet that fired from the front, apparently from an invisible gun used by a Secret Service Agent in the front seat, that hits JFK in the throat and magically disappears.

A bullet that hits Connally in the back, apparently fired by JFK using another invisible gun.

A bullet fired from the front that hits JFK, turns sharply left inside his head, and magically disappears.

And we haven't even dealt with Connally's wrist and thigh wounds.

[jason_c]

I think that's wrong.

It is reported that JFK had just as big a file on Hoover, for example, as Hoover had on him.

Ok, is it Hoover himself who is now behind the assassination? The reason I ask as the assassination is usually attributed to 'disgruntled elements' in the intelligence agencies. The assassination and cover-up now seems to include head of the FBI and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court.

[GBinOz]

I have read that surveyors acting on behalf of the Warren Commission estimated the downwards trajectory from the sixth floor window at 18 degrees.

If Hume was right that the downwards angle of the wound was 45-60 degrees, then obviously Oswald could not have fired that shot.

But in order to have the trajectory of the shot to the back, the wound to Kennedy's back, and the wound to the front of Kennedy's throat lined up, they had to raise the back wound by about five inches, a fact noted by FBI agent Sibert, who viewed the autopsy.

Our friends here have got the back wound to line up with the throat wound by hunching up Kennedy's back, but that is impossible because no-one can contort his back in such a way as to cause a particular spot on it to be five inches higher than it would be if he were sitting normally!

The only logical conclusion is that the bullet that entered Kennedy's back would, had it exited Kennedy's body, have exited his lower abdomen or thereabouts, but the autopsy indicated that the bullet did not exit Kennedy's body because it did not penetrate far enough to do so.

The throat wound must, therefore, have been a wound of entrance, and that was the unanimous opinion of the large number of doctors who viewed the throat wound prior to the tracheotomy being performed.

Their opinion is the best medical evidence because they were the only doctors who saw the wound in its original condition.

The wounds which, according to the Warren Commission Report, were caused by a single bullet, were in reality caused by at least three bullets: the one which hit Kennedy in his back and did not exit, the one which hit Kennedy's throat from the front and did not exit, and at least one shot which hit Connally - which, as Connally and his wife acknowledged, was a separate bullet.

In addition, many witnesses, including five who testified to the Warren Commission, including two Secret Servicemen, mentioned a double shot - at the end of the series of shots - which must have been two shots to the head.

That makes a total of at least six shots.

Hi PI,

I think you're on the money. IMO, since Humes was measuring the downward angle of the wound rather than of the projectile, he would have been measuring from Kennedy's back. This would translate to 30-45 degrees from the horizontal. Still to much for the sniper's nest, but there were roof tops that were higher.

Something that is overlooked is the high possibility that suppressed (silenced) weapons were also being used.

The throat wound was a entrance wound, having passed first through the windscreen. It was observed as being 3-5mm diameter, which would be consistent with a .22 calibre projectile. I once owned a French made Unique semi-auto rifle which came from the factory threaded for a silencer. Using .22 subsonic rimfire ammunition with a silencer the only sound was the operation of the auto-loading mechanism. The rifle shot excellent groups out to 100 yards.

There were .22 centrefire rifles available in the 1960's, the .222 and the legendary 220 Swift (4000 fps), which could be loaded down for use with a silencer and frangible projectiles.

There was a 30.06 case found on the roof of the Records building (and/or the Dal-Tex) during maintenance years after the assassination. The M1 .30 calibre carbine and the Springfield 30.06 both featured silenced models. Projectiles could be fired through a different calibre rifle, such as the Carcano 6.5, into wadding and then reloaded and fired through the silenced 30.06 using a sabot. The projectile would retain the rifling characteristics of the original rifle, and appear to have been fired only through the original rifle.

There was a 45 calibre projectile found in the grass near the manhole cover. The De Lisle carbine was manufactured with an integrated suppressor in 45 calibre. Using subsonic ammunition it was one of the quietest rifles ever made.

Cheers, George

[Herlock Sholmes]

How would you describe the colour of Oswald's hair?

It looks like darkish brown.

[Herlock Sholmes]

What state of semi-consciousness do you need to achieve to imagine that I have ask, ask, asked you anything, or that I am in any way obliged to reply to your repetitive ramblings? You either ignore answers or just repeat your opinions along with strings of invectives. Not clever or humorous sarcasm directed at ideas, just gratuitous personal attacks. PI, cobalt and Fishy are showing remarkable perseverance in putting up with your sandbox bully tantrums.
"fanciful theorising, the manipulation of evidence, flat out lies and waffle?" - four of your specialties.

Since this thread began I’ve been bombarded by question after question and I’ve tried to answer all of them but when I’ve made points and asked questions you and your pals have ignored them. All it takes is for anyone to read back over the thread.

You keep making these babyish comments about my post which couldn’t illustrate better what an utter hypocrite you George. A completely false person. I went through the posts noting checking mine, yours and Fishy’s posts recording any mocking, insulting or sarcastic comments. I had the most (which unlike you I’ve had the honesty of admitting to) Fishy had slightly fewer and you had slightly fewer than him. So we all made those comments. But one perfectly legitimate way of looking at it is that, as I was on the opposite side to you and Fishy, I received more from you two than I gave out. These are facts. And yet you persist in trying to portray a false version of events (something that you appear to be experts in)

Ill repeat George. You are a completely proven hypocrite who uses fake outrage as a tactic to avoid responding to questions that you have no answer for.

[Aethelwulf]

What state of semi-consciousness do you need to achieve to imagine that I have ask, ask, asked you anything, or that I am in any way obliged to reply to your repetitive ramblings? You either ignore answers or just repeat your opinions along with strings of invectives. Not clever or humorous sarcasm directed at ideas, just gratuitous personal attacks. PI, cobalt and Fishy are showing remarkable perseverance in putting up with your sandbox bully tantrums.
"fanciful theorising, the manipulation of evidence, flat out lies and waffle?" - four of your specialties.

St Two Face

[Herlock Sholmes]

There was no bullet hole in the windscreen.

https://jfkforensics.weebly.com/glass-analysis.html

[Herlock Sholmes]

St Two Face

Amazing isn’t it. Does he think that his and Fishy’s posts are somehow invisible to everyone?

[Aethelwulf]

There was no bullet hole in the windscreen.

https://jfkforensics.weebly.com/glass-analysis.html

Where does he get this nonsense from!

I wanted to get your opinion on PI repeatably stating that JFK was shot 5 inches below the neckline, down his back somewhere. Have a look at the autopsy photo here (https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_6.htm). We can see that JFK was shot about an inch below his shoulder line (scaling from what I guess is a 12 inch ruler).

Neckline is a rather subjective term, and very variable if talking about clothing necklines. In anatomical terms it can be referred to as where the neck muscles join the base of the skull. Of relevance to this case I think is that you can develop necklines (or moon lines).

Looking at the autopsy photo, where to you think those five inches might have been measured from? As CTs want to believe, it wasn't measured from his shoulder line as there is no wound there. But hang on, what about the X marks the shot photo? Some moron has seen '5 inches below neckline' and then put a x where they think the wound should be - there isn't a wound there, so the photo is fake obviously.

[Herlock Sholmes]

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol7/html/HSCA_Vol7_0025a.htm

This shows the lengths that the HSCA went to in arriving at their unanimous conclusion that the autopsy photos and x-rays had not been doctored in an way. A let’s remember…..this wasn’t set up as an ‘apologist’ investigation. Indeed they were going to conclude ‘Oswald alone’ until they heard the dictabelt recordings which led them to concede the possibility of a second gunman. So it wasn’t a biased investigation. Of course we know now that the dictabelt recordings are useless and prove nothing but the HSCA was entirely open to the possibility of conspiracy.

What could be stronger proof that the photos and x-rays categorically hadn’t been doctored. And if they hadn’t been goctored then Humes, Boswell and Fincks conclusions were entirely correct. As even Cyril Wecht had to confirm. It’s unpalatable and unacceptable to conspiracy theorists of course but facts are facts. The two shots provably came from the rear. And we know where from because of the other evidence.

This really should have been case closed long ago if it weren’t for untrustworthy people like Mark Lane and Jim Garrison and the increasingly deranged ‘piling on’ of wilder and wilder conspiracy theories. 68 assassins, 13 bullets, Rorschach ink blot figures, looney witnesses like Oliver, Hill, Hofmann, Crenshaw etc. Even a normal, respectable guy like Phil Willis……he claimed to see the back of Kennedy’s head was blown out but when he was first asked he said that he couldn’t see Kennedy! Gordon Arnold is another, an honest sounding former military man who is in tears in the video The Men Who Killed Kennedy because he was so close to the GK assassin (I believe that he even said that Secret Service men took his camera?) could any witness be more convincing? Problem? Yes, when examine the film footage taken from the other side of Dealey Plaza showing the area where Arnold said that he was standing….there’s no one there! Filter out the liars and the mistaken and there’s nothing left.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Where does he get this nonsense from!

I wanted to get your opinion on PI repeatably stating that JFK was shot 5 inches below the neckline, down his back somewhere. Have a look at the autopsy photo here (https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/How5Investigations/How5InvestigationsGotItWrong_6.htm). We can see that JFK was shot about an inch below his shoulder line (scaling from what I guess is a 12 inch ruler).

Neckline is a rather subjective term, and very variable if talking about clothing necklines. In anatomical terms it can be referred to as where the neck muscles join the base of the skull. Of relevance to this case I think is that you can develop necklines (or moon lines).

Looking at the autopsy photo, where to you think those five inches might have been measured from? As CTs want to believe, it wasn't measured from his shoulder line as there is no wound there. But hang on, what about the X marks the shot photo? Some moron has seen '5 inches below neckline' and then put a x where they think the wound should be - there isn't a wound there, so the photo is fake obviously.

You’re absolutely right Wulf. They see what they want to see. Humes himself said that the diagram was just an aide-de-Mémoire and that they were always intending to use the photographs as the accurate record.

[Aethelwulf]

You’re absolutely right Wulf. They see what they want to see. Humes himself said that the diagram was just an aide-de-Mémoire and that they were always intending to use the photographs as the accurate record.

Yes, GB and PI seem to struggle with the idea of rough approximations and scale for the bodies on which the injuries have been drawn. Some of them look like martians, or perhaps someone that has grown up in ruins of Chernobyl.

Still waiting for PI to identify the sky scraper JFK was shot from to get 45-60 degrees.

[Herlock Sholmes]

Yes, GB and PI seem to struggle with the idea of rough approximations and scale for the bodies on which the injuries have been drawn. Some of them look like martians, or perhaps someone that has grown up in ruins of Chernobyl.

Still waiting for PI to identify the sky scraper JFK was shot from to get 45-60 degrees.

You’ve probably already looked at this site Wulf but it’s well worth it unless you’re a CT of course.

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/