JFK a new twist

[Wickerman]

Hi Jon-Just saw this. I have to disagree with you here. Jackie was not behind JFK's head at the head shot. At Z-312,313.ect..she was just not in the line of fire of a shot from the right front. I'm talking from the overpass all the way east down the picket fence area.

Hi Robert.
Although any shot from the Knoll would be from the right, the angle was lower than Zapruder, who was standing up high on a cement pedastle.
If not Jackie's right face, then her shoulder (depending on the frame) and then the side of the car at her back were, I think, in the line of fire.

The explosion of brain matter that appears to come from Kennedy's right front is, I think, quite consistent with a shot from behind. A shot from the Knoll should have exhausted brain matter from the left rear, not the right front.
It is unfortunate that the medical evidence is so contradictory.

[Ally]

And, it was strongly believed at the time that this kind of weapon would have definitely expelled a great amount of gunshot residue when fired. It was fully expected that gunshot residue should be found on the cheek of the assassin. Oswalds cheek tested clean.

However, it must be pointed out that he went back to his lodging house after the assassination and could well have washed up there, even wiping his face with a dry towel would have succeeded in removing both the gunpowder from his cheek and hands from the assassination shot. The gunpowder residue was most likely from him shooting Tippit, not from his assassination of the president. GSR comes off fairly easily, it's not like it's embedded in the skin.

[Wickerman]

The gunpowder residue was most likely from him shooting Tippit, not from his assassination of the president.

Thats where I think he got it too. In fact this is what is claimed on the police report. That the evidence of nitrates on his right hand (exhibit #3) is consistent with that hand being used to fire a revolver.

GSR comes off fairly easily, it's not like it's embedded in the skin.

From what I've read they warm the paraffin so as to open up the pores of the skin because this is where residue can 'hide' even after being washed.

It must be admitted though, this paraffin test is not 100% reliable.

[Ally]

Sorry but the idea that spreading paraffin on your cheek will extract gunk in your pores is ludicrous. By that same token you could say if he'd washed his face with a warm towel it would have "opened his pores" and pulled out all the GSR. As a woman I've tried probably every facial, pore-suck product on the planet and it is not as easy as slapping on some wax and voila all the gunk comes out. This is assuming any actually WENT into his pores in the first place, which is pure speculation and not at all proven would have occurred. Do I believe he got GSR on him when he killed Kennedy, yes. But considering he went back to his lodgings, it's not beyond the realm of possibility to conclude he'd have wiped his face.

When you consider you are basically talking about a powder 1/10 the consistency of flour and you consider how easy it is to transfer or dust off flour, the lack of GSR says nothing at all really. Then you add in the time from his killing Kennedy to his being captured and tested and his movements, the GSR test is irrelevant.

[I'veBeenToMitreSquare]

Look, I'm not getting into this. I have debated it ALL for years with various LNs and they simply CANNOT see the wood for the trees.

However I would like to point out that even if you're the most vehement of Lee did it sorts, he never stood trial. Therefore he is innocent in the eyes of the law.

DO YOU READ ME? INNOCENT.

Therefore I'd appreciate it if the words alleged assassin could be used more often.

[I'veBeenToMitreSquare]

Like I said, I'm not getting involved but I think if you re-read my earlier post you will find that I never suggested anything of the " ignorant Americans with the reality problem" kind.

I do, however, have a problem with the alleged word "snuck". It's sneaked, I think you'll find. ;-)

[Sherlock Houses]

Look, I'm not getting into this. I have debated it ALL for years with various LNs and they simply CANNOT see the wood for the trees.

However I would like to point out that even if you're the most vehement of Lee did it sorts, he never stood trial. Therefore he is innocent in the eyes of the law.

DO YOU READ ME? INNOCENT.

Therefore I'd appreciate it if the words alleged assassin could be used more often.

You obviously aren't aware that the word "alleged" does not exist for the 20 odd % of Americans who believe the official Government fairytale that is the Warren Commission Report.

Conspiracies only occur throughout the rest of the world for this minority, never, heaven forbid, in the good old USA, the land of the free. It's reassuring for a Scotsman to know that three quarters of the American people are not gullible swallowers of this despicable official document. They do not allow themselves to get hoodwinked. They can smell a dirty big rat and can see through the lies and deceit that run rife throughout this book.

I wonder how many of Warren Commission Report apologists on here have taken the time and trouble to read and study this 1964 fairytale ?

Even Johnson came to believe that there had been a conspiracy to kill JFK.

America has been living a political lie these past 50 years.

[Ally]

Like I said, I'm not getting involved but I think if you re-read my earlier post you will find that I never suggested anything of the " ignorant Americans with the reality problem" kind.

No you just said saying Oswald acted alone was stupid and said that Americans are apparently dimwitted morons who can't make a logical deduction when faced with evidence and all of us are blind sheep who believe our country is infallible. So yeah, you didn't at all say anything like that.

I do, however, have a problem with the alleged word "snuck". It's sneaked, I think you'll find. ;-)

No, it's not. It's also not "lighted".


Whether he stood trial or not is irrelevant. An assassin is an assassin whether he stood trial or not. Same for a rapist, or a pedophile or a thief.

A guilty verdict on an innocent man doesn't make that man an assassin and an innocent verdict on a guilty man doesn't make them innocent.

And for someone who keeps saying they aren't going to get in to this, you certainly seem to be getting into it, quite a lot.

[robert newell]

Good Luck All...One last word from me..as has been said, no minds are changed on this subject in this type of give and take, and no one will really form an opinion from what they read here. It is obvious that the majority of lone nut opinions here do not know the depth of the evidence and the opinions they hold are from the fodder that is out there for public consumption. My President was killed and his murderers got away with it. Sorry if that doesn't rock your world....Robert

[Wickerman]

Sorry but the idea that spreading paraffin on your cheek will extract gunk in your pores is ludicrous.

Think of it like waxing...

"To perform the paraffin test, layers of warm liquid paraffin, inter-leaved with layers of gauze for reinforcement, are brushed or poured on the suspect's skin. The warm sticky paraffin opens the skin's pores and picks up any dirt and foreign material present at the surface. When the paraffin cools and hardens it forms a cast, which is taken off and processed with diphenylamine or diphenylbenzidine, chemicals which turn blue in the presence of nitrates. Since gunpowder residues contain nitrates, the theory behind the test. is that if a cast reacts positively, i.e., if blue dots appear, it provides evidence that the suspect recently fired a weapon."
Warren Commission.

But considering he went back to his lodgings, it's not beyond the realm of possibility to conclude he'd have wiped his face.

Apparently, he made a fleeting visit to his room to change a shirt, or at least he was there no more than 3-4 minutes, in an obvious hurry his landlady said.

Then you add in the time from his killing Kennedy to his being captured and tested and his movements, the GSR test is irrelevant.

The Commission admitted the test in general was flawed.

I don't doubt Oswald could have shot the president, its just not conclusive.

The evidence involving the snipers nest is also debatable, however, lets say for arguments sake Oswald brought the rifle to the TSBD, assembled it, constructed the boxes around the window, and left.
Because that is all the evidence at the site suggests.

This would mean that someone else entered the TSBD, came up to the 6th floor and took the shots, leaving just as elusively as he entered.
This was lunchtime, no-one was working, yet nobody claims to have seen a stranger in the book depository at that hour, on any floor, stairwell, or staircase.
That to me is an obvious flaw in the conspiracy theory.
Although, delivery drivers may have been coming and going and never given a second thought.

[Ally]

What I find really interesting is the "conspiracy nut" theorists keep making the claim that the "lone nut" people just don't know the evidence that's out there (in short, we're obviously stupid and uninformed and they are so much more knowledgeable) and yet, they also say over and over they can't be bothered to provide any of that evidence and they don't want to waste their time going into it. Interesting, that is.

[Ally]

Think of it like waxing...

I am aware of the process. And as I have said, the idea that it actually manages to remove things from the pores is speculative at best. Waxing works because there is a long hair for the wax to grab on to and you have let the hair grow long enough to allow the wax to have something substantial to grab on to. A minute bit of GSR is not going to be sufficient and that's if it's actually in the pores. It presumes that anything is actually in the pores and it presumes they are gathering material from the pores and not just what's on the surface of the skin. As I said, I've been waxed, had paraffin treatments, pore de-clogging strips and all the other crap that goes along with a typical "spa day" which I guarantee is a lot more rough than the police can do to a citizen. It is not that easy to declog a pore.

Apparently, he made a fleeting visit to his room to change a shirt, or at least he was there no more than 3-4 minutes, in an obvious hurry his landlady said.

And the mere act of pulling a shirt over his head would no doubt have been sufficient to remove any GSR. I believe his landlady actually claimed he was there for a "few minutes" but regardless. Three minutes is plenty of time to rub a towel over your face, change a shirt, and grab a jacket.

This would mean that someone else entered the TSBD, came up to the 6th floor and took the shots, leaving just as elusively as he entered.
This was lunchtime, no-one was working, yet nobody claims to have seen a stranger in the book depository at that hour, on any floor, stairwell, or staircase.
That to me is an obvious flaw in the conspiracy theory.

Yes it does kind of strain credibility. And still it would not explain precisely why he'd leave, go kill one police officer and then attempt to kill another when he was apprehended.

Unless of course one wants to really stretch credibility and claim that in addition to the mob and the CIA all being in on this elaborate conspiracy grunt cops of the flatfoot variety and random people on the streets in Dallas were all also recruited to join this vast conspiracy to frame up Oswald.

I mean my god, it's a good thing all 65 or so of the people who must be involved in this can keep a secret!

[I'veBeenToMitreSquare]

No you just said saying Oswald acted alone was stupid and said that Americans are apparently dimwitted morons who can't make a logical deduction when faced with evidence and all of us are blind sheep who believe our country is infallible. So yeah, you didn't at all say anything like that.



No, it's not. It's also not "lighted".


Whether he stood trial or not is irrelevant. An assassin is an assassin whether he stood trial or not. Same for a rapist, or a pedophile or a thief.

A guilty verdict on an innocent man doesn't make that man an assassin and an innocent verdict on a guilty man doesn't make them innocent.

And for someone who keeps saying they aren't going to get in to this, you certainly seem to be getting into it, quite a lot.

That's quite disingenuous of you to allege that I think Americans are "morons" or that I feel all Americans are "blind sheep" etc. My earlier post shows what I think of Americans for the most part. No nation's inhabitants should be stereotyped and I am somewhat miffed that you feel that that's what I did.

Erm, yes it IS sneaked btw. What your "lighted" comment refers to is beyond me I'm afraid. It certainly was in common use however in the 19th century, for example.

Oh and as for JFK, I'm out unless I'm provoked, at which point I reserve the right to defend any arguments I may have put forward.

[Wickerman]

Yes it does kind of strain credibility. And still it would not explain precisely why he'd leave, go kill one police officer and then attempt to kill another when he was apprehended.

The nonchalant way he claimed that he only left because there would be no more that day is telling in that no normal person is going to pretend to be so indifferent to an attack on the president.
Yes, he was involved to some extent.

Unless of course one wants to really stretch credibility and claim that in addition to the mob and the CIA all being in on this elaborate conspiracy grunt cops of the flatfoot variety and random people on the streets in Dallas were all also recruited to join this vast conspiracy to frame up Oswald.

The collusion between the Mafia and the CIA is well established in the attempt on Castro. In 1962 Johnny Roselli and Sam Giancana met with Allan Dulles, Director of the CIA over plans to take out Castro.
Since the sixties and after a number of CIA operatives had retired they wrote autobiographies declaring how elements of the CIA met with the Mob to plan strategies in political activities including assassinations.

Santos Trafficante appears to be the only one who outlived the turmoil. Carlos Marcello and Jimmy Hoffa both spoke of plans to assassinate Kennedy in the summer of 1962. All three were close friends and after the Warren Commission had concluded phone records surfaced which showed a flurry of phone calls from Ruby to Marcello, Trafficante & Hoffa in the weeks leading up to the assassination of Kennedy.

Even if Oswald was the trigger man, there is still no known motive from his point of view, but there still was conspiracy.

Carlos Marcello claimed in later years that Oswald had been hired to do the job by elements within the Mob at the behest of Marcello.
The suggestion was that Jimmy Hoffa had requested Marcello to bump off Kennedy. The request was carried by mob lawyer Frank Ragano.
After the assassination Frank Ragano was sent by Marcello with a message for Hoffa.
"When you see Jimmy (Hoffa), you tell him he owes me and he owes me big."

Sam Giancana, Johnny Roselli, Carlos Marcello and Jimmy Hoffa were all executed over circumstances coincidental with investigations of the Kennedy assassination.

[I'veBeenToMitreSquare]

You obviously aren't aware that the word "alleged" does not exist for the 20 odd % of Americans who believe the official Government fairytale that is the Warren Commission Report.

Conspiracies only occur throughout the rest of the world for this minority, never, heaven forbid, in the good old USA, the land of the free. It's reassuring for a Scotsman to know that three quarters of the American people are not gullible swallowers of this despicable official document. They do not allow themselves to get hoodwinked. They can smell a dirty big rat and can see through the lies and deceit that run rife throughout this book.

I wonder how many of Warren Commission Report apologists on here have taken the time and trouble to read and study this 1964 fairytale ?

Even Johnson came to believe that there had been a conspiracy to kill JFK.

America has been living a political lie these past 50 years.

Well quite, Sherlock.
I couldn't have put it better myself! There is so much evidence "out there" for those who care to look but sadly, there are too many people who simply do not care to look.

It's queer to my way of thinking how we in the conspiracy camp, are continually referred to as "kooks" or " conspiracy nuts" or whatever but they take apparent offence at anyone who says some Americans are gullible.

I have already stated that I won't get into the arguments here. I'm emotionally worn out with it all so to speak. The fight will go on though. Through Black Op Radio, Lisa Pease on Twitter and many more web sites etc.

One day, one day, everyone will know the truth. If not who pulled the triggers, the men behind it all will be known. One day.