Only 12% of witnesses think the shots came from the Knoll, and none of them saw a shooter, just thought they heard.
Maybe 12% constitutes a majority where you're from, but not in real life.
Suorce?
When I was a CT-idiot low self-esteem played a part in my willingness to embrace stupidity over rational thinking. It is the one thing common to all CTists.
Edited by kmortis:
Removed to comply with Rule 12 & Rule 0
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Man, that's an oldie but goody. Do you know Melancholy Baby?
Triangulation makes no sense since it requires three shooters, and there was only one.
I suppose you have evidence for only one shooter? Show me.
Whenever you man-up and go to Dallas the first thing you will notice is that there is NO SHOT from the picket fence to the middle lane of Elm Street until until the instant of the head shot.
Well, that’s enough isn’t it?
Zero time to draw a bead. Second, the view from the Grassy Knoll was obstructed by the crowd standing on the sidewalk, and the shooter would have had to thread the bullet between the heads of the spectators to make the shot.
I know a lot of great shooter, none of them are that good.
The driver slowed to allow Clint Black to catch up.
The driver has ONE task. Speeding the limo away at the first sign of any danger. Greer slows down, beginning with the first shot and keep slowing down while looking back at the wounded president ... until he see his head explode, THEN he accellerate the limo away from the turkey shoot.
Then he lied to the Warren Commission, stating that he never looked at JFK and that he sped away as soon as he heard a rifle shot.
Greer was an Irish protestant, JFK an Irish catholic. Centuries of hatred between the two ethnic groups.
The original assigned driver in the Dallas motorcade died in a ”heart attack” on asignment in Camp David some weeks before JFK’s parade in the City. No known health problems, no autopsy, rushed burial without telling the president that one of his life guards suddenly died on duty.
In comes Greer.
The TSBD was behind them. The picket fence was to their right.
A little bit behind. He was busy looking at JFK’s exploding head in his camera.
Then there's the problem of a "professional hitman" setting up less than ten feet from witnesses. A lesser known fact is that Marilyn Sitzman, Zapruder's secretary who held his legs to steady him, said that there was a young African-American couple seated on a bench between them and the fence. She remembers them because they had small lunch sack and were drinking Coke, and after the last shot she remembers hear "a crash of glass" from where they had thrown their Coke bottles, and ran to the back.
Why would terrified people run in the direction of a shooter?
Sitzman says that the sound of breaking glass was louder than any of the three shots, and maintained until her death that no shots came from the Knoll.
That is ONE witness explicitly stating that no shots came from the knoll. One vs. ca fifty. You do the math.
Yes, the plaza is a notorious echo chamber, and this has been documented with the latest technology.
Have they performed tests with blindfolded subjects pointing out the source from rifle shots around Deleay Plaza?
Again, 12% is not a majority. It's a dream number for the amount of alcohol in beer, but it's not a majority.
Again, source?
And yet you and other CTist disregard eye witness testimony you disagree with.
No, I do not. Again, every witness and testimony has to be evaluated on its own merits.
The evaluation comes when testimony is compared to the physical evidence, ballistic evidence, and the forensic evidence (which all points back to Oswald).
Ca 50 witnesses observed JFK’s headwounds up close, doctors and nurses from three different hospitals, agents from two federal agencies, and almost everyone are saying they saw a BIG GAPING WOUND in the right back of the head. Against this you have a couple of x-rays and a couple of autopsy photos very easy to fake.
Mass psychosis vs. a couple of manipulated photographs?
Bullets...I'm talking BULLETS, not studies.
Yes, and what is your argument from your ballistics?
How do you know? When one of the three autopsy doctors, Pierre Finck, was on the stand in Garrisons trial against CIA’s Clay Shaw he stated that when they tried to probe the entrance wound further in, they got orders from ”a general or admiral” not to probe it further.
So, how do you know? Clairvoyance?
4 cm is how far one of them probed with a finger. Should be pointed out that even had they probed deeper it would have been inconclusive, at least that's what Humes has stated.
It doesn’t matter, they did not probe the wound, ergo no established path through the body.
Why, do you think, were they ordered not to probe the wound further?
It's there in the X-rays, and photos of the throat wound show abrasion collars which are distinct to exit wounds.
Are there? Show me.
Which is to be expected from a fracturing 6.5x52mm round.
Maybe so, but the problem is that the x-rays show an entrance wound on the other side of the back of the head, in the cowlick area on the midline, 4cm to the left and 11cm above where the autopsy doctors in Bethesda placed it. Also, the trail of very small metal fragments now was in the uppger part of the right brain, when according to same autopsy doctors it was in the lower part of said right bran.
That is a lot of realestate?
Nope. Never happened. Do you know the assassination is on film? No massive hole in the back of the head is visible.
Nothing is visible. It is shadowed and nothing of the right back of the head is visible. Some see a black patch as if put there artificially. I’m not sure myself.
Easy call to make. I go with the men who performed the autopsy. They laid hands on the man, they cut the man open, they sawed open his skull.
They too observered a big gaping wound at the right back of the head.
Those other 50 surgeons? Surgeons are not Pathologists. It takes 11 additional years of medical school to become one, and Pathologists exist because surgeons are not good at determining the cause of death. They're good at fixing people, but once they're dead they cannot be counted on to make medical determinations outside of their chosen medical specialty (I don't want a cardiac surgeon working on my testicles for good reason).
Brain surgeons that doesn’t see the difference between gray cerebrum and pink cerebellum ozing out from a big gaping wound in the back of the head?
Are you kidding me?
So it doesn't matter what 50 surgeons think, only what the three pathologists concluded in writing. Most pathologists who have reviewed the files in the National Archives agree with the original findings.
The HSCA medical panel reviewed the x-rays and the autopsy photos and came to the conclusion that there were no big gaping wound in them. I child can see that, btw. They also came to the conclusion that the entrance wound was on the midline in the cowlick are at the top of the back of the head.
Funny, (see above) cause the three pathologists identified the entrance wound positioned in the lower part at the back of the head, 4cm to the right of the midline on the EOP. 11cm beneath the entrance wound described by the HSCA medical panel!? On the EOP furtherst down at the back of the head.
The same three pathologists also said that they first saw half of the entrance wound (round bullet whole) in the EOP and therefore did not see it until fragments from the limo and elswhere was flawn in and they fitted some of the pieces together. There is no trace of a wound with fragmented pieces of cranium in the back of the head in the x-rays or the photos.
The three forensic pathologists in the Methodist Hospital that analyzed the so called ”Harper fragment” found in the grass on the south side of Elm Street on the Dealey Plaza the day after the assassination, concluded that:
1. It was a fresh 5 x 7 cm bone fragment ca a day old.
2. It was from occipital bone (back of the head).
3. They wrote their report, photographed the fragment and gave it to the FBI who allegedly brought it to the pathologists in Bethesda, never to be seen again.
The HSCA medical panel made the conclusion after studying the photos of the fragment that it was from the top af the head, parietal bone, not occipital.
Why? Well, they asked the leaders of the HSCA if the witnesses at Bethesda confirmed what was in the x-rays and photos and got the answer that, yes, they did. So, if the x-rays and photos were the real deal it HAD to be of parietal bone at the top right side of the head, because that is the only region with that type of wound visible in the x-rays.
Ca 20 years later, when all the HSCA records got publicized by ARRB, the documents showed that someone had lied to its medical panel, that almost none in the staff at Bethesda had unambigously confirmed the content in said x-rays and photo’s. No one has to this day revealed WHO it was that lied to the panel.
Oups?
The HSCA medical panel also got assured that the autopsy photographs had been autheticated coming from the camera used at the Bethesda autopsy. Same thing here, they were lied to. The alleged camera could not have been the one used to take said photographs. Same thing here, no guilty culprit has stepped forward.
Oups?
And who cares what FBI and Secert Service Agents think they saw?
The Secret Service agents in the White House detail are trained to save the presidents life in case of an attack. To keep him alive until medical expertise can take charge. They know a BIG GAPING wound in the back of the head when they see it.
The FBI sent two agents to Bethesda in order to observe and take accurate notes of the autopsy in the murder of the century. They had to have some traning otherwise they (Tibert & O’Neil) had not been picked by HQ for the job.
You'll have to look in the Warren Commission. The match was made by ballistics experts, and confirmed again during the HSCA.
State your source and exactly where I can find it. Quote and argue.
Otherwise it is impossible to know exactly what you are trying to say.
Oh, so you've viewed it under a microscope like the FBI did? If not then you have no case.
Source. Quote. Where I can find it.
They needed a test pool of 600 people, they did not have that.
No, they need a sufficient number in order to make a statistical assessment. If no one mistake the source a rifle shot for an echoe of same shot it’s pretty much a slam dunk.
Of the actual witnesses to the assassination interviewed, 44% had no clue where the shots came from,
Were they asked?
28% thought the shots came from the TSBD,
Source?
12% thought they came from the Grassy Knoll,
Source?
and 2% felt that the shots came from different places.
Source?
44 + 28 + 12 + 2 = 86 = 14% went missing?
And yet you have not proved Oswald's innocence.
Luckily I do not need to, it is you who have to prove/show he was guilty.
So far I’m far from impressed.
Let me know if you need any sources, but be specific, it is a lot of material.
