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

[HSienzant]

1. The HSCA said the entry wound and exit wound were 5 inches apart.

2. The HSCA said that both holes in the skull could be seen at the same time on the open-cranium photographs.

3. The cranium is empty in the open-cranium photographs.

But... but... but... I guess that's why you're avoiding the clear meaning of this line from the autopsy report:

Now tell us what this quote means:

"INCISIONS: The scalp wounds are extended in the coronal plane to examine the cranial content"

Any idea?

All the best,

Hank

 

[jeffas69]

Stop playing silly games. Explain in clear and concise prose what you are trying to convey.

I already did that twice. I can not force you to get it.

I do however, understand why you would pretend to not get it.

 

[HSienzant]

You mean ”guilty until proven innocent”? No, I wonder who would be harmed by a disclosure of his tax records.

Oswald is dead since 54 years, so whom are we protecting?

Your suspicions are not evidence. I am pointing out you are once again begging the question, and presuming what you need to prove. Cite the applicable U.S. law on tax returns.

I'm going to bet you don't have a clue what it is.

Hank

 

[manifesto]

Have you found any yet?

Loads of it. Point is, the Dealey Plaza witness testimonies alone gives as strong or stronger support to a shot/s from in front/knoll, as to a shot/s from behind/TSBD.

Agree?

 

[manifesto]

I already did that twice. I can not force you to get it.

I do however, understand why you would pretend to not get it.

No, you haven’t explained what you believe you are alluding to.

Explain. Or not. Your choice.

 

[manifesto]

Your suspicions are not evidence. I am pointing out you are once again begging the question, and presuming what you need to prove. Cite the applicable U.S. law on tax returns.

I'm going to bet you don't have a clue what it is.

Hank

Cite the relevant text and explain why this prevent his tax returns from being included in the mandate given in The JFK Records Act.

 

[jeffas69]

Are you suggesting that no shooter could have been shooting, except Oswald, if their names are not known?

Really?

The picture suggests that the article inside suggests that two names are given. I would also not want to click on a national enquirer link to find those names. Asking who was named in the article seems perfectly reasonable to me. Some of your responses in here suggest willful ignorance.

 

[jeffas69]

No, you haven’t explained what you believe you are alluding to.

Explain. Or not. Your choice.

Post #3515 and 3521.

 

[manifesto]

The picture suggests that the article inside suggests that two names are given. I would also not want to click on a national enquirer link to find those names. Asking who was named in the article seems perfectly reasonable to me. Some of your responses in here suggest willful ignorance.

Sorry, I didn’t see that. No, I wouldn’t click on a link to N E, me neither.

 

[HSienzant]

Is this another instance where the rules are different for Oswald than for everyone else?

You mean ”guilty until proven innocent”? No, I wonder who would be harmed by a disclosure of his tax records.

Oswald is dead since 54 years, so whom are we protecting?

It appears you want Oswald treated differently than everyone else.

https://www.sapling.com/7844386/tax-returns-public-record
Tax returns are not public record; they are private. Tax returns contain confidential information that is not readily available to the public. With the increasing number of online tax filing services, some information is being used and sold publicly, but that is not advocated by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Unless there is a legal reason to disclose information on a tax return, the information is not available for public access.


https://www.lawguru.com/legal-quest...x-returns-public-record-considered-701314696/
Re: Are tax returns public record?
Tax returns are not public records. They are actually protected by law and in many cases (for instance, under federal law) it is a crime to disclose tax return information for any reason other than specific and limited exceptions.

 

[smartcooky]

Decerebrate reflexes are always delayed.

Wrong.

They can, and often do occur within human reaction time, about 0.3 seconds.... that's less than two Zapruder frames.

Perhaps you are thinking of "decorticate posture", which is almost always delayed, but not the same thing as decerebrate response.

The head movement back in the Z-film is instant when the bullet hit the head.

Wrong again.

The head moves slightly forward first, due to the impact of the bullet imparting its considerable energy, some time after Z312 and before Z313.

That said, even if not delayed, it can’t explain JFK’s movements from Z312/13 forward.

Wrong again.

JFK's head movements from Z313 onward back are adequately explained by a combination of;

a. The explosion caused by the pressure cavity created when the fragmenting bullet (which carries a considerable amount of kinetic energy) causes the top right side of his brain case to shatter.... all that kinetic energy has to go somewhere, it cannot just disappear into nothing. Its like a small stick of gelignite going off in his head.

b. decerebrate response due to his suffering of the severe brain trauma caused by what happened in a. above.

 

[manifesto]

Post #3515 and 3521.

Ok, you wrote:

You made a tiny step in the right direction allowing "as strong as" there but I am afgraid you will have to go further.

Go further? How? Why?

Their testimony is weaker according to your own theory. The next step is for you to acknowledge this at the very least. Not only do they have to have been fooled about the direction according to your theory, most of them have to be have been fooled about the number of shots.

I’m talking of two of the witnesses standing at the Houston-Elm intersection testifying that they heard shots in the direction of the triple underpass.

The ”knoll” is alligned with the triple underpass if you are standing at the intersection. That is, it is the same direction. Knoll = triple underpass, if standing at the intersection = shot from in front.

Yes, their testimony is weaker for the ”knoll” but it doesn’t exclude it since the direction is the same from where they where standing.

Ok?

 

[manifesto]

Wrong.

They can, and often do occur within human reaction time, about 0.3 seconds.... that's less than two Zapruder frames.

Source?

Perhaps you are thinking of "decorticate posture", which is almost always delayed, but not the same thing as decerebrate response.

No, I’m refering to ’decerebrate reflexes.’

Wrong again.

The head moves slightly forward first, due to the impact of the bullet imparting its considerable energy, some time after Z312 and before Z313.

How do you know this? There are no visible signs of a bullet hitting the head until Z313.

Wrong again.

JFK's head movements from Z313 onward back are adequately explained by a combination of;

a. The explosion caused by the pressure cavity created when the fragmenting bullet (which carries a considerable amount of kinetic energy) causes the top right side of his brain case to shatter.... all that kinetic energy has to go somewhere, it cannot just disappear into nothing. Its like a small stick of gelignite going off in his head.

Yes, the kinetic energy usually transforms to heat and/or momentum transfered to the object it travels through, but you are saying it ”explodes” and that this ”explosion” are like pushing the head away from the exit whole/wound?

Or are you describing a jet recoil effect?

b. decerebrate response due to his suffering of the severe brain trauma caused by what happened in a. above.

Well, it depends on the minimum delay of the reflex vs. the point in time the bullet hits the head, doesn’t it?

 

[HSienzant]

Ok, you wrote:
Go further? How? Why?

I’m talking of two of the witnesses standing at the Houston-Elm intersection testifying that they heard shots in the direction of the triple underpass.

The ”knoll” is alligned with the triple underpass if you are standing at the intersection. That is, it is the same direction. Knoll = triple underpass, if standing at the intersection = shot from in front.

Yes, their testimony is weaker for the ”knoll” but it doesn’t exclude it since the direction is the same from where they where standing.

Ok?

It's weaker in two senses from your argument for five shots from multiple locations:

1. They didn't hear five shots, that is, according to you, they were wrong about the number of shots. Both Davis and Kounas said three shots. No matter how you spin it, they had to be wrong about the number in your scenario, but not in mine (mine is three shots from the TSBD).

2. They were wrong about the locations. You claim multiple locations for the five shots, they both named one location, the "viaduct". You can spin it how how you want, but they were also wrong about the supposed multiple locations.

There are also a number of other reasons to believe these two witnesses who named the viaduct didn't hear shots from the knoll:

3. Since the face of the overpass is a flat reflecting surface perfect for echoes, and since I've already cited the testimony of Lee Bowers about how sounds from the Depository sound like they are coming from the overpass, it's understandable how these women would confuse the sounds of three shots coming from the TSBD as coming from the 'viaduct'.

4. You previously argued the knoll was not the overpass and that if witnesses meant the overpass, they would have named the overpass. Presented then with two witnesses who named the overpass, you retreated from that argument and claimed it was close enough for them to mean the knoll. Why then isn't the witnesses who said ''railroad tracks' close enough to mean the overpass?

5. You claimed the 'triple overpass' was well-known name for the conjunction of the three roads (Commerce, Main, and Elm). I cited the statements of three people (Campbell, Davis, and Kounas) who referred to that as 'the viaduct', establishing your claim about how well-known this name of this local structure was false. Your argument was that if people meant the overpass, they would have said that, because the name was well-known. Apparently not as well-known as you'd like us to believe.

6. There is eyewitness testimony of a gunman in the Depository from at least ten people who came forward the day of the assassination, there is no eyewitness who saw a gunman behind the knoll who came forward that day.

7. There is hard evidence of a rifle recovered in the Depository.

8. There is hard evidence ballistically traceable to that weapon: three shells recovered in the window, two large fragments recovered from the limo, and a nearly whole bullet recovered from Parkland.

9. There is NO hard evidence of any shots from the knoll. No weapon. No shells. No fragments. No bullets.

10. The autopsy reveals the President was struck twice, and only twice, both times from behind.

11. There is no evidence in the autopsy of a bullet hitting the President (or anywhere else) being fired from the knoll.

Hank

 

[manifesto]

It appears you want Oswald treated differently than everyone else.

https://www.sapling.com/7844386/tax-returns-public-record
Tax returns are not public record; they are private. Tax returns contain confidential information that is not readily available to the public. With the increasing number of online tax filing services, some information is being used and sold publicly, but that is not advocated by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Unless there is a legal reason to disclose information on a tax return, the information is not available for public access.


https://www.lawguru.com/legal-quest...x-returns-public-record-considered-701314696/
Re: Are tax returns public record?
Tax returns are not public records. They are actually protected by law and in many cases (for instance, under federal law) it is a crime to disclose tax return information for any reason other than specific and limited exceptions.

As I said:

Cite the relevant text and explain why this prevent his tax returns from being included in the mandate given in The JFK Records Act.

 

[Elagabalus]

Are you suggesting that no shooter could have been shooting, except Oswald, if their names are not known?

Really?

No, I'm making a joke at the NE's expense. The fr. page says that they named gunmen #2 &#3.

 

[RoboTimbo]

As I said, if witness testimony are evidence of shot/s from behind/TSBD, the same have to be the case with shot/s from the front/knoll.

In fact, the strength of witness tesitimony from in front/knoll is even stronger than that from behind/TSBD.

LOL. Wouldn't it be cool if there were actual evidence for shots from the front?

 

[HSienzant]

The head moves slightly forward first, due to the impact of the bullet imparting its considerable energy, some time after Z312 and before Z313.

How do you know this? There are no visible signs of a bullet hitting the head until Z313.

Right.

And *that's* how we know this. You just answered your own question!

Z312 shows no bullet impact, and no bullet damage. So the bullet has not yet hit the head. In Z313 we see the bullet damage and the result of the bullet impact, so the bullet has already passed completely through the head and is somewhere off in the distance. The bullet impact is over with by Z313 and the momentum from the bullet has already been transferred to the head. Any motion you see after 313 is not from the bullet impact. It's already too late.

So we measure from frame Z312 to Z313 to see what impact the bullet had on the head movement. Turns out it pushed it forward about three inches.

And this was asked and answered numerous times in the past.

In fact, I pointed this out to you earlier today.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12302950&postcount=3519

Pretend some more you're asking questions that still need answering. They have already been answered. You're just repeating the question because you don't like the answer. But it won't change based on your likes or dislikes. Physics is like that.

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

 

[manifesto]

It's weaker in two senses from your argument for five shots from multiple locations:

1. They didn't hear five shots, that is, according to you, they were wrong about the number of shots. Both Davis and Kounas said three shots. No matter how you spin it, they had to be wrong about the number.

It is not spin to argue that shot/s from in front/knoll has as much or more witness support as shot/s from behind/TSBD.

It is a stament based on recorded facts.

2. They were wrong about the locations. You claim multiple locations for the five shots, they both named one location, the "viaduct". You can spin it how how you want, but they were also wrong about the supposed multiple locations.

I agree on the precise location not being the knoll, but I propose that it doesn’t exclude the knoll and certainly not from in front.

There are also a number of other reasons to believe the witnesses didn't hear shots from the knoll:

3. Since the face of the overpass is a flat reflecting surface perfect for echoes, and since I've already cited the testimony of Lee Bowers about how sounds from the Depository sound like they are coming from the overpass, it's understandable how these women would confuse the sounds of three shots coming from the TSBD as coming from the 'viaduct'.

The echo-argument goes both ways. If the underpass had a hard reflecting surface, that certainly goes for the TSBD.

4. You previously argued the knoll was not the overpass and that if witnesses meant the overpass, they would have named the overpass. Presented with two witnesses who named the overpass, you retreated from that argument.

My argument is that if he heard shots from the triple underpass he certainly would have said so and not ”the railway tracks”, since the triple underpass is a well defined structure and a well known landmark in Dallas.

I do not claim that Davis and Kounas ’really meant’ the knoll when saying the viaduct. I’m saying it was in the same direction and therefore doesn’t exclude the knoll from being the precise location.

But I agree, Davis and Kounas should be removed from the ”knoll” category.

5, There is eyewitness testimony of a gunman in the Depository from at least ten people who came forward the day of the assassination, there is no eyewitness who saw a gunman behind the knoll who came forward that day.

Name them.

6. There is hard evidence of a rifle recovered in the Depository.

A Mauser turning Carcano turning murder weapon, yes.

7. There is hard evidence ballistically traceable to that weapon:

Name it.

three shells recovered in the window,

Two shells turned three in line turned scattered turned two chain of custodies turned three signed by ”DAY” turned none signed by any known handler, yes.

two large fragments recovered from the limo,

Maybe, maybe not.

and a nearly whole bullet recovered from Parkland.

Nearly? What parts were missing? A bit flattened at the base but otherwise, pristine. No chain of custody.

8. There is NO hard evidence of any shots from the knoll.

Wrong. There is a DPD dictabelt recording of channel-1 and five rifle shots of which one is from the picket fence on the knoll within a square yard.

P = 1/100 000 for this being random noice or static.

And, absense of (hard) evidence is not evidence of absense.

9. The autopsy reveals the President was struck twice, and only twice, both times from behind.

No.

10. There is no evidence in the autopsy of a bullet hitting the President (or anywhere else) being fired from the knoll.

Hank

My contention is that the autopsy was controlled not by the pathologists but by high military brass for reasons of ”National Security”.

1. The autopsy report is deliberatly vague.

2. The autopsy doctors later testified to wounds not compatible with the official story of two shots from behind.

3. Almost everyone who observered the head wounds close up testified to a big gaping wound in the right back of the head. Doctors, nurses, forensic pathologists, forensic photographers, FBI agents and Secret Sevice Agents, from three hospitals and two federal police agencies.

A big gaping wound in the right back of the head.

Not visible in the x-rays or the autopsy photographs.

Ask Occam.

 

[jeffas69]

Ok, you wrote:
Go further? How? Why?


I’m talking of two of the witnesses standing at the Houston-Elm intersection testifying that they heard shots in the direction of the triple underpass.

The ”knoll” is alligned with the triple underpass if you are standing at the intersection. That is, it is the same direction. Knoll = triple underpass, if standing at the intersection = shot from in front.

Yes, their testimony is weaker for the ”knoll” but it doesn’t exclude it since the direction is the same from where they where standing.

Ok?

You skipped something. Go back to 3515 and read it. See if you can catch my drift. Hank responded in the very next post showing that he understood me perfectly. Go ahead and read that one as well while you are there.