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

[HSienzant]

ah, I see what this is all about now.......trying to take the attention off you being the suspect.

I have some alibi witnesses. My entire fourth grade class on the east coast.

Manifesto does come up with some doozies, doesn't he?

Hank

 

[HSienzant]

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

Asked and we're waiting for you to answer. I've bolded the portion for you to answer.

It can't be the bullet that caused the visible explosion in frame 313. At 18 frames per second, the bullet that caused the damage is already about 50 feet away from JFK's head by frame 313.

The motion from the bullet impact is measured from frame 312 to 313. Anything after that is too late to be caused by the bullet that caused the damage visible in Z313. We can eliminate the bullet in question as the cause.

We covered all that previously. This is now the FOURTH time I've posted this, and you've ignored it each time:

Obey the laws of physics.

David Lifton went through all this with Nobel Prize-winning physicist Richard Feynman hoping to win a conspiracy convert.

Feynman patiently explained to Lifton the momentum is transferred at the moment of impact, not a tenth or an eighteenth of a second later. Or two eighteenths later.

Feynmann patiently explained to Lifton that the correct comparison for the transfer of momentum is between Zapruder frames 312 and 313 - the frame immediately before the bullet impact and the frame immediately after the bullet impact.

Feynmann patiently explained to Lifton that in that eighteenth of a second (the time between the two exposures of the camera) he saw the President's head move forward. That meant, to this Nobel Prize winning physicist, that the bullet came from behind and pushed the President's head forward.

Feynmann patiently explained to Lifton that whatever happened after that, after the bullet had already left the head (which it had done by frame Z313, which shows the immediate aftermath of the bullet strike) could not be caused by the bullet that struck JFK between frames 312 and 313.

All this is covered in great detail in David Lifton's book, BEST EVIDENCE.

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).

Which ones did you eliminate and why? Which one did you settle on and why?

Bonus points if you obey the laws of physics.

Hank

PS: All this is covered in detail in the thread. You would be caught up by now and not raising bogus questions if you had started reading it when you were advised to.

Hank

 

[Henri McPhee]

Of course it was a right wing conspiracy, but do you believe that Oswald in any way took part in it?

I just think there is more to the death of JFK than if Oswald fired the fatal shots. There have been a large number of mysterious deaths of people who could provide information, rather like the list of people dying who are connected to the Clintons. It has all been covered up in the mainstream media. It is discussed at this website:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v1n2/deaths.html

Well into the 1980s, witnesses and others were hesitant to come forward with information because of the stories of strange and sudden death which seemed visit anyone with information about the assassination.

 

[HSienzant]

I just think there is more to the death of JFK than if Oswald fired the fatal shots.

We've been through this. Respectfully, nobody cares what you think. It's all about "what does the evidence indicate?'

There have been a large number of mysterious deaths of people who could provide information...

No, there hasn't. This was covered the last time you popped in here, just yesterday. Repeating your claims don't make them more true.

It has all been covered up in the mainstream media.

Really? Including the books available at Amazon and elsewhere, like this one?
https://www.amazon.com/Hit-List-Dep...id=1526312476&sr=1-1&keywords=Hit+list+Belzer

It is discussed at this website:
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v1n2/deaths.html

A conspiracy addict site. Of course.

You will note the problems with the list didn't change any since my last review. The mayor of New Orleans (DeLesseps Morrison) is still on the list.

Why is his death mysterious? His plane crashed - I understand people sometimes die when that happens.

How is he linked to the JFK assassination? He isn't, except Oswald happened to live in his city in the summer of 1963. That's it.

Paul Mandel is on the list (listed erroneously as 'Paul Mandal" and indentified as "Life" writer who told of JFK turning to rear when shot in throat". Again, that's his only known connection to the case. To find one journalist who wrote about the case who died of cancer out of all the journalists who wrote about the case doesn't seem all that mysterious to me. So why is he on the list?

Well, if you're going to have a mysterious death list, it helps to have names on it. And the more, the better. Regardless of how tenuous their connection to the case is, or how not mysterious dying of cancer is.

That is stretching the connection and the mystery a bit, don't you think?

For balance, here's an different look at it:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/deaths.htm

I'd suggest you read it, but we both know you won't.

McAdams has numerous links to others research on individual cases. You might want to click on the links, but as they will dispel your suspicions, I doubt you ever will.

Hank

 

[CORed]

Not desperate. The question from day one have been: ”Was Oswald alone committing the assassination, or was he part of a conspiracy.”

As if his guilt was self evident. Well, it isn’t. Far from it. On the contrary, when looking at the so called evidence put forward it turns out that it is all fabricated or highly dubious = evidence of a cover up orchestrated from the highest level of the US Security State.

So, I believe Oswald when he shouts out that he is just a patsy. Innocent until proven guilty.

Show me the evidence.

Yes, Oswald's guilt is self evident. You have shown no evidence whatsoever that the evidence of Oswald's guilt is fabricated, and your efforts to show that it is dubious have been pathetically weak. If there was a conspiracy to kill Kennedy, it featured Oswald as the assassin. Though there is very little to no evidence of such a conspiracy, I don't think the possibility can be completely ruled out. However, 55 1/2 years later, it is extremely unlikely that such a conspiracy will ever be proven, if it existed. If there were shooters other than Oswald, it's a damn good thing for the conspirators (but not for Kennedy) that they had Oswald, as none of them managed to hit their target, or, for that matter leave any evidence whatsoever that they existed.

 

[Dave Rogers]

This was covered the last time you popped in here, just yesterday. Repeating your claims don't make them more true.

I see you're new to Henri.

Dave

 

[CORed]

Apart from the obvious ejecta caused by the trauma of a shot that hit him in the back of the head?
Apart from the obvious delay after first impact?
Other than there being no known weapon that would cause such a wound, dragging ejecta backwards towards the shooter?
Other than basic laws of Newtonian physics?

For anyone who has ever fired a rifle, it might be useful to point out that the momentum transferred to the target by the bullet is equal to the momentum transferred to the shooter by the recoil of the rifle. The bullet does much more damage, because it is small (low mass) and moving at high velocity, so can penetrate the body and do its damage. However, the bullet's ability to move the body that it hits is equivalent to the recoiling rifle's, i.e. not much. If you hold the rifle correctly (tight against your shoulder), you will get a sharp shove in the shoulder. If you hold it away from you body, it may bruise you. If you let it hit you in the face, it might give you a black eye or a bloody nose. What it won't do under any circumstances, is cause large movement of your body, the way you so often see it staged in movies and TV. It doesn't have that much energy, and neither does the bullet.

 

[CORed]

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.

Given that both of them have done a pretty good job of throwing themselves under the bus, I would guess that it won't take long at all.

 

[HSienzant]

I see you're new to Henri.

Dave

No. I first encountered him more than two years ago reposting his same arguments over and over on the Jeffrey MacDonald case here: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=249368

I was just a lurker at that thread until he made some claims about FBI lab scientist Paul Stombaugh I asked him to support with evidence here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=12292576&posted=1#post12292576

He couldn't support it except by resorting to claims from conspiracy addict sites.

Par for the course, of course, but it's good to point out to people who might be new to Henri to understand that his procedures don't change regardless of the forum or the discussion.

Hank

 

[CORed]

I didn’t request known nerve reflexes from goats, I requested such from humans, since JFK was, a human.

Do you have any?

How many people do you figure we need to shoot to get that?

 

[HSienzant]

For anyone who has ever fired a rifle, it might be useful to point out that the momentum transferred to the target by the bullet is equal to the momentum transferred to the shooter by the recoil of the rifle. The bullet does much more damage, because it is small (low mass) and moving at high velocity, so can penetrate the body and do its damage. However, the bullet's ability to move the body that it hits is equivalent to the recoiling rifle's, i.e. not much. If you hold the rifle correctly (tight against your shoulder), you will get a sharp shove in the shoulder. If you hold it away from you body, it may bruise you. If you let it hit you in the face, it might give you a black eye or a bloody nose. What it won't do under any circumstances, is cause large movement of your body, the way you so often see it staged in movies and TV. It doesn't have that much energy, and neither does the bullet.

It's been pointed out on this board before, but somehow conspiracy addicts always seem to miss the post and the point.

They go willfully blind for a short period of time anytime that's pointed out.

Hank

 

[CORed]

I just think there is more to the death of JFK than if Oswald fired the fatal shots. There have been a large number of mysterious deaths of people who could provide information, rather like the list of people dying who are connected to the Clintons. It has all been covered up in the mainstream media. It is discussed at this website:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v1n2/deaths.html

You actually find that sort of nonsense convincing, do you? List a bunch of people associated with a person or an event who have died, claim the deaths are suspicious (even accidents, suicides or natural causes, because evil people could have faked those) and there's your "evidence" of a conspiracy.

You know what Henri? Everybody dies. The Kennedy assassination happened 54 1/2 years ago. That's more than 2/3 of life expectancy, and I'd venture to guess none of the people on that list were newborns when it happened Of course a lot of people associated with it have died.

 

[Major Major]

That's what you're apparently attempting to do. Meanwhile, we're critiquing your critique, and you're failing - badly.

<snip>
We tried the judicial procedure way with you not too long ago. Don't you remember?

I cited the testimony from J.C.Day, William Waldman and Harry Holmes to establish the rifle found on the sixth floor was shipped to Oswald's PO box. I did it as if this was a court. After each witness, I turned the witness over to you, exactly as if you were the defense attorney, and said "Your witness", leaving each witness on the stand for you to cross examine them. I asked you repeatedly if you had any questions for those three men. You ignored the multiple requests to follow up.

You don't get to pretend that's a better way to get to the truth now when you had your opportunity to do exactly that and wouldn't go near it.

You had no questions for these men. The jury would hear their testimony, and then "no questions" from the defense counsel. They would conclude the evidence indicated Oswald's rifle was the one found in the Depository shortly after the shooting.

Juror Number Eight doesn't need to question the witnesses. He presents an alternative explanation for their testimony. Since he has an alternative explanation, he can say that their testimony doesn't prove anything about the guilt of The Kid . . . er LHO.

And because he has an alternative explanation for the items of evidence, there's reasonable doubt, and therefore NOT GUILTY.

The fact that you can't put the evidence together in any way that makes sense even after a lapse of 54 years without contradicting yourself and common sense is clear to everyone here. In this discussion group.

You're asking too much of Juror Number Eight. He just has alternative explanations for the items of evidence.

If the foreman had got tired of his excuses, and had the jury recalled to the courtroom to hear instructions on the matter, Juror Number Eight might have been in trouble for considering evidence that was not presented in court.

Our Juror Number Eight doesn't have to worry about that.

 

[manifesto]

How many people do you figure we need to shoot to get that?

Unfortunally, lots of humans find it proper to kill each other with firearms and have done so for more than half a millenia still counting.

No one, to my knowledge, have reacted like JFK did as caused by a nerve reflex from a bullet in the head or any other place in the body.

You know more than I do?

Show me.

 

[Major Major]

Well, if you're going to have a mysterious death list, it helps to have names on it. And the more, the better. Regardless of how tenuous their connection to the case is, or how not mysterious dying of cancer is.

That is stretching the connection and the mystery a bit, don't you think?

For balance, here's an different look at it:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/deaths.htm

I'd suggest you read it, but we both know you won't.

McAdams has numerous links to others research on individual cases. You might want to click on the links, but as they will dispel your suspicions, I doubt you ever will.

Hank

And you noticed who isn't on the Mysterious Death List.

Roger Craig, the man who seems to have been everywhere and seen everything questionable -- he isn't on it.

John Elrod, who somehow seems to have shared a cell with LHO in an empty cell block without being noticed, and to whom LHO spilled the beans (he said) -- he isn't on it.

Victoria Adams, the "Girl on the Stairs", who said that LHO didn't run down the stairs after the shooting -- she isn't on it.

Judyth Vary Baker, Oswald's girlfriend, fellow FBI co-worker, and fellow biological researcher -- she isn't on it.


The writers, from Mark Lane to James Douglas -- they aren't on it.

What is with these super powerful assassination conspirators and their stable of hitmen?

 

[traxy]

No one, to my knowledge, have reacted like JFK did as caused by a nerve reflex from a bullet in the head or any other place in the body.

How many of them were hurled backward by a 0.5-ounce bullet fired from ~100 yards away?

Roughly the same amount I'm guessing.

I provided you with statements of medical professionals and links to the actual medical explanation. This is no longer a matter of debate. JFKs reaction was perfectly consistent with an individual suffering major brain trauma.

 

[traxy]

No one, to my knowledge, have reacted like JFK did as caused by a nerve reflex from a bullet in the head or any other place in the body.

And more importantly, how much footage of gunshots to the head have you personally reviewed to be able to confidently make this determination?

 

[bknight]

Bare assertions. Citations needed.

look them up and you'll find what I asked for.

 

[MicahJava]

Here's what happens when a Carcano round enters slightly above the EOP at the angle of the Sniper's Nest:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYW08djFNmg&t=6m10s

Exits the face, not the top of the head.

 

[bknight]

I didn’t request known nerve reflexes from goats, I requested such from humans, since JFK was, a human.

Do you have any?

Do you have any other? Can't use JFK because that would be begging the question.