Cont: JFK Conspiracy Theories VI: Lyndon Johnson's Revenge

[Tomtomkent]

Will we see the "real" wound identified on the x-rays this time?
Will we see that location identified on the autopsy photographs?

 

[Tomtomkent]

So, you are proposing the Alvarez ”jet-effect” as an explanation for the head violently being thrown back when a bullet hits it in the back?

Correct?

You seem to forget the fact that this violent thrust backward was successfully covered up from public view for 13 years when Rivera showed a copy of the Z-film for the first time in national TV?

Not a word on this violent backward thrust in the WC report. Only the head of the autopsy team, Hume, saying that the head wound was consistent with the report from Dan Rathers description of the content in the Zapruder film, that Kennedy was thrust forward with considerable force when hit by the fatal head bullet.

Not a word from TIME/LIFE who owned the Zapruder film up to the point in time directly after Rivera showed a pirate copy of it.

FBI who attempted to reorder the the still frames to make it look as if the movement was in opposite order.

TIME/LIFE lying to the public when stating that JFK is seen standing up in the limo, turning around just when a bullet from behind hit him in the throught, as an explaination for that all bullets was fired from behind by Oswald the Lone Nut assassin.

Allen Dulles who during a lecture to university students in California very angry stated that, no, JFK is NOT! being violently thrown backwards when hit by a bullet from behind. In spite of looking at the same still frames from the Zapruder film that the students did.

Why all this hiding and disinformation if the Zapruder film clearly shows a bullet from behind causing the head movements?

Explain.

What needs explaining?

There was no "hiding of disinformation" (and exactly what use IS disinformation if it is hidden?). There was no need to be insensitive enough to release footage of a murder victims brains being blown out to satisfy the ghoulish.

There is no "violent thrust" and JFK is not "thrown" back.
His head rocks back, under the force of the ejecta.
His body stops supporting itself.
He falls backwards.

Why do you *expect* there to be considerable discussion of it?

 

[smartcooky]

What needs explaining?

There was no "hiding of disinformation" (and exactly what use IS disinformation if it is hidden?). There was no need to be insensitive enough to release footage of a murder victims brains being blown out to satisfy the ghoulish

Particularly as JFK Junior was still pre-teen. It would have been unthinkable at that time to release any of this footage to the public, and any News organisation that did so would have been pilloried by the rest and made a pariah by the public! IMO, neither of these...... CTs understand or have any idea what things were like in the 1960's.

There is no "violent thrust" and JFK is not "thrown" back.
His head rocks back, under the force of the ejecta.
His body stops supporting itself.
He falls backwards.

THIS!

Why do you *expect* there to be considerable discussion of it?

Because he and his pal live in the fantasy world of CT Land

 

[Wolrab]

How long before either manifesto or MJ throw one another under the bus with their inconsistencies and incomparable stories? I predict they back each other for a bit, then either argue or ignore each other.

 

[Dave Rogers]

How long before either manifesto or MJ throw one another under the bus with their inconsistencies and incomparable stories? I predict they back each other for a bit, then either argue or ignore each other.

I don't think it works like that. If one conspiracy theorist claimed there were at least four shots fired and another that there were at most two, all they'd be able to see was that they agreed there weren't three.

Dave

 

[bknight]

You do not understand, do you? IF the x-ray photos is authentic, the autopsy has to be wrong. The autopsy is positioning the entrance wound at the EOP 4 cm to the right of the midline. The HSCA medical panel on the other hand is positioning the entrance on the midline ca 11 cm ABOVE the EOP in the so called cowlick area.

That is a lot of realestate!

At the bottom of the back of he head vs. at the top of the back of the head?

Explain how three senior pathologists could make such a mistake.

On top of that (no pun intended), there is a 6.5 millimeter metal fragment visible in the x-rays ca a cm below what is supposed to be the entrance wound in the cowlick area on the outside of the cranium. It shines like a lighting house in the x-ray photographs, so way wasn’t it observed by the x-ray technicians or the members of the autopsy team? They documented much smaller metal fragments, but not this one?

And, why are the autopsy doctors positioning the ca 4 cm broad streak of tiny metal fragments going from the EOP forward in the lower part of the right hemisphere vs. the x-rays showing the same streak in the top of the same hemisphere?

And, how could a very thin slize of the bullet get stuck on the outside of the entrance wound before it enters the cranium supposedly in one piece?

And, how is it AT ALL possible that a thin fragment could be neatly slized of the center of a bullet like slizing a carrot?

Or, is it the very obvious attempt to plant a slized of piece of a Carcano bullet to show its calliber (6.5 mm) and plant it on the cranium before faking the x-ray photos to make it look as if there is proof of said Carcano rifle was used in the killing of JFK = Oswald the Lone Assassin?

The autopsy vs. the x-ray photos? You can’t have both.

Pick one.

Bare assertions.

 

[manifesto]

What needs explaining?

There was no "hiding of disinformation" (and exactly what use IS disinformation if it is hidden?). There was no need to be insensitive enough to release footage of a murder victims brains being blown out to satisfy the ghoulish.

There is no "violent thrust" and JFK is not "thrown" back.
His head rocks back, under the force of the ejecta.
His body stops supporting itself.
He falls backwards.

Why do you *expect* there to be considerable discussion of it?

Why are you not responding to my post quote by quote? Do that and maybe we get somewhere.

 

[traxy]

Fore the sake of argument, WHAT is causing JFK’s heads violent thrust backwards, if not an incomming bullet from the front?

Either jet effect or a stiffening of his legs and trunk as his body goes into spasm from brain iniury, or both.

 

[manifesto]

Bare assertions.

What? Respond to my post quote by quote and explain why you find it ”bare assertions”.

Do it.

 

[bknight]

So, you are proposing the Alvarez ”jet-effect” as an explanation for the head violently being thrown back when a bullet hits it in the back?

Correct?

You seem to forget the fact that this violent thrust backward was successfully covered up from public view for 13 years when Rivera showed a copy of the Z-film for the first time in national TV?

Not a word on this violent backward thrust in the WC report. Only the head of the autopsy team, Hume, saying that the head wound was consistent with the report from Dan Rathers description of the content in the Zapruder film, that Kennedy was thrust forward with considerable force when hit by the fatal head bullet.

Not a word from TIME/LIFE who owned the Zapruder film up to the point in time directly after Rivera showed a pirate copy of it.

FBI who attempted to reorder the the still frames to make it look as if the movement was in opposite order.

TIME/LIFE lying to the public when stating that JFK is seen standing up in the limo, turning around just when a bullet from behind hit him in the throught, as an explaination for that all bullets was fired from behind by Oswald the Lone Nut assassin.

Allen Dulles who during a lecture to university students in California very angry stated that, no, JFK is NOT! being violently thrown backwards when hit by a bullet from behind. In spite of looking at the same still frames from the Zapruder film that the students did.

Why all this hiding and disinformation if the Zapruder film clearly shows a bullet from behind causing the head movements?

Explain.

Bare assertions.

 

[manifesto]

Either jet effect

Explain how this was/is possible.

or a stiffening of his legs and trunk as his body goes into spasm from brain iniury, or both.

A nerve reflex from trauma? Is that your suggestion? Do you know any known human nerve reflexes from head trauma that could cause JFK’s movments from Z313 forward?

Name it/them and describe their caracteristics and how these apply to the movements visible in the Z-film.

 

[bknight]

What? Respond to my post quote by quote and explain why you find it ”bare assertions”.

Do it.

You have not included one citation, therefore bare assertion.

 

[manifesto]

Bare assertions.

Keep repeting it adding an idiot smiley doesn’t make it more comprehensive. On the contrary.

Again. Respond to my post quote by quote and explain why you find it ”bare assertions”.

Don’t be shy. You can do it.

 

[manifesto]

You have not included one citation, therefore bare assertion.

Respond to my post quote by quote and state what additional information you feel you need in order to evaluate what I’m stating. Handwaiving lack of citations doesn’t cut it.

Specifics does.

 

[smartcooky]

Why are you not responding to my post quote by quote? Do that and maybe we get somewhere.

You don't make the rules here about the methodology others use to reply to you. I, for one, will respond (within the MA) exactly how I please, and there is not a thing you can do about it, and if I judge bknight correctly, he will agree with me on that!

 

[bknight]

Respond to my post quote by quote and state what additional information you feel you need in order to evaluate what I’m stating. Handwaiving lack of citations doesn’t cut it.

Specifics does.

You don't get to tell me how to respond. I have asked you multiple times to provide citations for many assertions, but you have hand waved them away or ignored them. Until you start associating assertions with citations, then all you have are bare assertions.

 

[HSienzant]

You do not understand, do you? IF the x-ray photos is authentic, the autopsy has to be wrong. The autopsy is positioning the entrance wound at the EOP 4 cm to the right of the midline.

And 'above'. You left out the part where they said 'slightly above' (with 'slightly' undefined).

The HSCA medical panel on the other hand is positioning the entrance on the midline ca 11 cm ABOVE the EOP in the so called cowlick area.

And 'to the right'. You left out that part. A cowlick can be anywhere on the head. Ask Micah Java. He was here for that part of the discussion.

That is a lot of realestate!

You're funny. Four inches on the head is a lot of real estate (worthy of an exclamation point, even), but a three inch movement of the head is only a minute amount. A trifling amount. Hardly worth mentioning:

Why is the minute movement forward evidence of a bullet from behind, while the violent thrust backwards is NOT evidence of a bullet from in front?

Bonus points if you wait at least three to four weeks before contradicting yourself.

Hank

 

[bknight]

You don't make the rules here about the methodology others use to reply to you. I, for one, will respond (within the MA) exactly how I please, and there is not a thing you can do about it, and if I judge bknight correctly, he will agree with me on that!

Indeed you would think he is a moderator.

 

[HSienzant]

So, you are proposing the Alvarez ”jet-effect” as an explanation for the head violently being thrown back when a bullet hits it in the back?

There are six explanations on the table. Which one do you favor and why?

Here they are again:
There are a lot of different reasons advanced for the backward movement which happens AFTER the bullet has left the head (and Z215 starts the backward movement, which is an eternity in terms of physics).
1. Jet Effect (proposed by Nobel Prize winning physicist Luis Alvarez)
2. Neuromuscular reaction (the brain being damaged causes the muscles to freeze up, and the back muscles being stronger than the stomach muscles, causes JFK to lurch backwards)
3. Back brace holds JFK upright, and he rebounds backward.
4. JFK's head is forced forward with his chin forced to his chest, and then the head rebounds and takes the body with it.
5. A second shot to the head (with a cover up concealing all evidence of it) forces JFK back.
6. A first shot to the head forces JFK backward (which ignores the laws of physics as explained by Nobel Prize winning physicist Richard Feynman AND a cover up concealing all evidence of it).

We can continue this conversation once we're on level ground.

Hank

 

[manifesto]

I don't think it works like that. If one conspiracy theorist claimed there were at least four shots fired and another that there were at most two, all they'd be able to see was that they agreed there weren't three.

Dave

Your ”think” shows conciderable lack of rigor. This is not a football game with teams competing in an arena. This is critique of US/Texas officialdom and their explanatications of the assassination of JFK.

I don’t need to present a comprehensive theory in order to point out errors and fabrications in another theory. It’s enough to point them out in order to refute said theory.

Lets say this ’logic’ would be the rule in judicial procedure. The accused suspect has to present the real guilty parties before being released. Lack of real evidence of his/her guilt be damned.

I know that the US has a considerable part of its population behind bars, mostly based on skin color, but with this procedure in place, the prison business would boom like a new Klondike.

No one gets released before the real culprits are found and convicted.

You would like to run with this?