• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Warren Commission agreed that an entry wound was situated anatomically next to the EOP as described by Humes and Finck to them. It was the Clark Panel and HSCA that came up with the "4-inch above the EOP theory" to reconcile the fact that an entry wound from a high-powered 6.5 round in that location could not have exited the top of the head and replicated the official film evidence.
Correct. And lets not forget the round 6.5 mm slize 1 cm below the brand new entrance wound. On the outside of the cranium. Shining like a lighthouse in the (new) x-rays. Not a word of this slize from the Bethesda medical personel.

It can’t be an artifact since it is visible from both angles. So what on earth is it?

Answer: Its fabricated by double exposing the x-ray-film with the fragment making it look like the fragment was actually inside the brain and providing proof of a 6.5 Mannlicker Carcano bullet entering the head at the (new) point of entrance.

More problems: In order to be a neat slize from the alleged Carcano-bullet, the bullet had to

1. split in two pieces before entering the scull

2. somehow (how?) had a nice and neat piece slized away from the middle of one of the parts of the split bullet and deposit the slize on the outside of the scull

3. come together in one piece again as if nothing had happened

4. enter the scull in a neat round hole

5. split in two again

6. exit the head and hit the window (both pieces?) and landing on the limo floor.

Another magic bullet? Two of them?
 
Correct. And lets not forget the round 6.5 mm slize 1 cm below the brand new entrance wound. On the outside of the cranium. Shining like a lighthouse in the (new) x-rays. Not a word of this slize from the Bethesda medical personel.

It can’t be an artifact since it is visible from both angles. So what on earth is it?

Answer: Its fabricated by double exposing the x-ray-film with the fragment making it look like the fragment was actually inside the brain and providing proof of a 6.5 Mannlicker Carcano bullet entering the head at the (new) point of entrance.

More problems: In order to be a neat slize from the alleged Carcano-bullet, the bullet had to

1. split in two pieces before entering the scull

2. somehow (how?) had a nice and neat piece slized away from the middle of one of the parts of the split bullet and deposit the slize on the outside of the scull

3. come together in one piece again as if nothing had happened

4. enter the scull in a neat round hole

5. split in two again

6. exit the head and hit the window (both pieces?) and landing on the limo floor.

Another magic bullet? Two of them?

This is all based off of one man's interpretation of the X-rays, and he was looking for a CT.

What did the others who looked at the same x-rays conclude?;)
 
Is 'slize' suppose to be slice or sliver or is it some sorta jargon?
 
...and the CIA masterminds just stuck one in an x-ray to prove what exactly?

I ask only because the 6.5x52mm round was moving a 2,700 feet per second.
A perfect slice of a 6.5 mm Carcano bullet before the bullet enters the scull? How on earth could this have happened? The bullet entered the scull in one piece.

Any idea?
 
Yes.

We've provided everything a prosecuting attorney would ask for when trying a murder case.

Were there witnesses that saw the shooter? Does our suspect match their description?

Yes, and yes. Multiple witnesses saw the gunman, Oswald fits the descriptions provided.

Can we place the suspect at the scene? Does he have an alibi during the shooting?

Yes we can definitively place him in the depository. Better than that, he was definitively at the sixth floor window within hours of his prints being lifted from boxes arranged around it. He had no verifiable alibi.

Did we recover the murder weapon? Can it be conclusively linked to the shooting?

Yes, a weapon was recovered from the same window we know Oswald was at. Yes, that weapon links to every recovered shell and fragment large enough to have rifling marks on it.

Can we link the suspect to the murder weapon?

Yes. Every available piece of evidence points to Oswald and only Oswald. The order form, the money order, the PO box, the Hiddell ID, the backyard photos, the statements of his wife, the statements of the Paines, all link Oswald AND ONLY Oswald to the rifle.

Can we come up with a plausible explanation for how the weapon got to the murder scene?

Yup. Paper bag, prints all over it, fibers inside it, "curtain rods" lie, Buell Fraser's statements, Linnie May Randall's statements, all paint a pretty plausible explanation for how the rifle got to the depository.

Did the suspect leave prints or other identifiable markings tying him to the crime?

Yup, palm print on the rifle, fingerprints on the rifle, fingerprints in the snipers nest window, fingerprints on the paper bag on the sixth floor, fibers in the paper bag, fibers in the butt of the gun, all point to Oswald.

Did the suspect show consciousness of guilt after the crime?

Yup. Fled the scene within 3 minutes, armed himself, shot a cop, snuck into a theater to get off the street, attacked other cops on the theater.

This is just scratching the surface. There is so much more than this, these are just the bullet points. You can attempt to pick holes at this, but you can't make any of it go away, and more importantly, you can't produce a shred of evidence implicating a different shooter.

Ah, there it is.

No it doesn’t. And no, no one could identify the shooter as Oswald.

No evidence.

He worked in the TSBD and he worked on a daily basis on the 6th floor lifting boxes around.

No evidence.

No, it was allegedly recovered from in between boxes at the other end of the 6th floor. And no, no one have identified Oswald in any window in connection to the shooting on Elm Street.

No evidence.

Does it? Provide the evidence. And if so, it doesn’t say that Oswald used it, does it.

No evidence.

Ordering a completely different model than that allegedly found in the TSBD. IF it is genuine, which is impossible to determine since there is no original document available.

Missing all the stamps from the banks who must have stamped it if genuine. Have a serial number that says it should have been used approximately 6 months after the date stamped on it. And, no original available.

In the name of Lee Harvey Oswald, yes. No access for an Alek Hidell = the package would have been returned to sender. No one remember Oswald collecting a big heavy package of any sort, and he was an almost daily visitor at the post office checking his mail. His box was under surveilance by the FBI but no report of a big Italian infantry rifle in his box. And, no original records available.

Yes, in his wallet, yes. Which one of them are we talking about? The one he left behind with all his money at his wifes place? The one seen in TV news from the Tippit murder scene, studied by police officers? The one the police found in his pocket when whisking him in the backseat of the police car after arresting him at the Texas Theater? All three of them? Two? One?

Why all these wallets everywhere?

1. Could be a frame up, pretending it was taken for other purposes.

2. Could be faked.

3. Could be Oswald playing tough guy borrowing the clothes and weapons from ’friends’.

Both the WC and the HSCA circulated internal memos complaining of Marina as a witness. She lied, forgot, gave contradicting testimony, changed her mind, etc, that it ”read like a nightmare” and that the only way to find out what is true and what is false is a cross examination. Needles to say, no such cross examination was arranged. Why all this lying? Well, she was a russian immigrant, mother of two small children and a widdow to the most hated man in the USA. In house arrest, guarded night and day by federal agents with an agenda. You play ball or ...

Oswalds ”baby sitters” after the white russian baron De Mohrenschildt had left for Tahiti with a fat government contract, yes. The Paines garage, which kept giving and giving.

So far, nothing of what you have mentioned links Oswald to the rifle and absolutely nothing that says he assassinated JFK. Nothing. On the contrary, most of it are evidence of framing him which in turn points to the framers as sharing the guilt of the real assassins. I believe Oswald when he shouts out: ”I’m just a patsy!”

Lol. No one saw Oswald with the alleged paper bag that day, or, any day ever. No traces inside of a broken down oiled rifle. Spotless. The Frazier siblings could not identify the alleged paper bag. It looked more like an ordinary brown grocery bag, not like the one in evidence. Too big and full of tape on it. No one knows who found it in the snipers nest or who picked it up before photographing it on the scene. Oswald did not have access to the machine from where the tape was pulled out and wetted before being used. And on and on ...

Easy to plant. The undertaker who took care of Oswalds dead body said in interviews that the FBI visited his workplace late at night and took Oswalds fingerprints, this in spite of those have been taken by the DPD before he got silenced by Jack Ruby. He had to clean his hands again, after they left.

Fibers of what?

Was it? Oswald testified that his lunchbag contained his, lunch. You are accusing him of lying? Why?

What statements? Do you know that Frazier nowadays are claiming that Oswald was completely innocent of the assassination?

What statements?

Does it? Why?

Fingerprints not visible when the rifle arrived at FBI forensic lab at the HQ in DC. Nothing. A week later there is?

Where? On the frame? On the glass? Where? He worked there.

Repeting ourselves are we?

Exeptionally easy to plant. Look at the totality of shadyness. Every item. Every chain. Every lack in procedure. It is everywhere you look. A classic sloppy frameup.

No. All of it points to a frame up of the patsy, Oswald.

No, he did not ”fled” the scene. He left work because he was told to call it the day since the president had been assassinated down the street. One of nearly two dussin employees who did so.

Did he? With the gun he couldn’t have bought according to the fabricated evidence?

Did he? Any witnesses actually seeing him kill Tippit?

You know that there are witnesses on record testifying that he already were at the Theater when Tippit got shot? You know that the list of all the ca 20 patrons in the Theater disappeared shortly after the arrest of Oswald?

There is at least four versions on record of how this ”attack” developed. Which one should I trust? Or should I trust the accused when stating that: ”A policeman hit me”, when asked of his black eye? Looks like self-defense to me? To you?

No it’s not. It is taking the ’evidence’ presented by the authorities at face value, without even scratching on the surface. Most of this has been known to the WC critics since their tome went public in october 1964. Parts of it has been uncovered at a later date, but known for years. It is all out in the open.

If this is the best you got, it’s pretty much time to go home and do something productive for a change, don’t you think? For your own sake?

Just did and more to that, I have shown you that all of it are evidence of a frame up of Oswald, the patsy. It is in the frame up you find the people who really assassinated JFK.

Correct. I do not know who did the actual shooting, but I do know who ordered it and covered it up.

It was a covert coup d’etat.

Juror Number Eight at work.

Just because you have an alternative explanation isn't enough. There has to be evidence for the alternative explanation. Just because the old lady might not have been wearing her glasses and so couldn't have seen the killing didn't mean that she didn't. Just because the neighbor who heard the argument and the crash of a body falling, and went out to see the Kid running out and went upstairs to see his father's body might not have seen the real killer leaving doesn't mean that he didn't see the real killer.

And your alternative explanations have been debunked over and over again, not only in this thread and its predecessors, but other places.

Oh, and to raise the question you gloss over; what is your proof that somehow LHO ended up in the Texas Theater with the pistol used to shoot Officer Tippit, which he tried to use to shoot another officer, but he did not shoot Tippit himself? Did he encounter a random stranger who gave him the pistol and said, "Hello stranger I've never met before, here's a present for you."?

:blackcat:
 
I wouldn’t trust anything McLain was saying he ”remembered”.

1. Memory fades as time goes by. Especially when it comes to details.

Later:

And, yes, McLain testified to the HSCA that his mike had a chronic tendency to get stuck all the time. And, he testified that he would probably have been on channel-1 during the motorcade.

Sworn testimony.

And here is the actual sworn testimony:

Mr. CORNWELL. So then, Mr. Chairman, again we might simply note that whatever the ultimate photographic interpretation is of the way that button is set, it may not be determinative, because it could have been changed at some point prior to the time the photograph was taken.
Did you, to your memory, have a stuck microphone on that day?
Mr. McLAIN. Not that I know of.
Mr. CORNWELL. Do you know whether or not it would have been possible for your microphone to have been stuck in the open position without your knowledge?
Mr. McLAIN. Yes, sir; it has been before.

Mr. CORNWELL. Do you have a distinct memory of what channel your radio was set on?
Mr. McLAIN. It's normally set on channel 1.
Mr. CORNWELL. And do you remember anything differently on that day?
Mr. McLAIN. No, sir.

Neither of the actual sworn testimony matches what you say. Is it because you don't believe anything he says that you make up what you think he should have said? Maybe you could find those quotes from him where he says what you claim?

This is also sworn testimony:

Mr. CORNWELL. Do you have a memory of hearing any shots while you were in Dealey Plaza?
Mr. McLAIN. I only remember hearing one.
Mr. CORNWELL. And approximately where were you when you heard that shot?
Mr. McLAIN. I was approximately halfway between Main and Elm Streets on Houston.
 
Juror Number Eight at work.

Just because you have an alternative explanation isn't enough. There has to be evidence for the alternative explanation. Just because the old lady might not have been wearing her glasses and so couldn't have seen the killing didn't mean that she didn't. Just because the neighbor who heard the argument and the crash of a body falling, and went out to see the Kid running out and went upstairs to see his father's body might not have seen the real killer leaving doesn't mean that he didn't see the real killer.

And your alternative explanations have been debunked over and over again, not only in this thread and its predecessors, but other places.

Oh, and to raise the question you gloss over; what is your proof that somehow LHO ended up in the Texas Theater with the pistol used to shoot Officer Tippit, which he tried to use to shoot another officer, but he did not shoot Tippit himself? Did he encounter a random stranger who gave him the pistol and said, "Hello stranger I've never met before, here's a present for you."?

:blackcat:
The pistol could have been ’introduced’ in the tumult at his arrest. If he had a pistol on him, it could easily have been switched after his arrest. Yes, this is not proven, but what IS proven is the faked paper trail of his alleged purchase of the alleged murder weapon.

Why fake the paper trail if he owned the pistol?
 
Why are you presuming that 15-year after-the-fact recollections are better than the radiographs and photographs taken on the night of the crime?

Or to quote your fellow CT-in-arms:


Not just in this case, but in any case? Do we discard the hard evidence simply because someone has a contrary recollection 15 years later? Or is this 'special logic' only to be applied when the suspect's initials are LHO and the victim's initials are JFK?

Let us know how you generally advise criminologists to proceed when investigating a crime. Collect the hard evidence, wait 15 years, collect the recollections, and then discard the hard evidence that conflicts with the recollections?

Is that really the best way to proceed, or only in this case?

Or not even in this case?

If the latter, why are you bothering to quote recollections from 15 years after the fact?

Hank

We know that the official evidence has the cerebellum and brainstem somewhat damaged, tissue slides were taken, and that the doctors said they believed that the damage was caused "by the bullet" and not something post-mortem. These tissue samples were known to exist prior to them being lost. There is further physical evidence for the EOP wound in the form of the lower neck tissue cavity and a possible bullet fragment in the mid-neck area on the x-rays. The open-cranium photographs also require extensive reconsideration.

But here is a top 10 list of documentary evidence for the EOP wound, no later than 1969, in chronological order:

1. the face sheet

2. the 2 AM 11/23/1963 FBI teletype

3. the Rydberg drawings

4. Humes WC testimony

5. Finck WC testimony

6. Kellerman WC testimony

7. Finck Blumberg Report

8. 2/10/1967 Finck letter stating that photographs of the surface of the entry in the skull were not present.

9. The line from Manchester's The Death of a President
"The last bullet has torn through John Kennedy’s cerebellum, the lower part of his brain"

10. Finck Clay Shaw testimony
 
Last edited:
Oh, another game of 'TELEPHONE' being cited as evidence?

Sorry, it's not.

What an unknown, unnamed woman from the audience claims McClain told her decades after the fact is not evidence. It's hearsay.

I know this. Everyone here knows this. Even you know this.

But when you got nothing, you got nothing to lose.

And you got nothing.

Hank
It is adding to all the rest of the reports of intimidation and manipulation of witnesses after the assassination. But, I agree, isolated it has very little value as evidence.

It is not isolated.
 
The pistol could have been ’introduced’ in the tumult at his arrest. If he had a pistol on him, it could easily have been switched after his arrest. Yes, this is not proven, but what IS proven is the faked paper trail of his alleged purchase of the alleged murder weapon.

Why fake the paper trail if he owned the pistol?

Multiple witnesses saw him pull the pistol genius. No one introduced anything...other than Oswald himself I suppose.

And if he had the pistol, which multiple independent witnesses attest to, then the paper trail tying him to it is all the way legitimate.
 
A perfect slice of a 6.5 mm Carcano bullet before the bullet enters the scull? How on earth could this have happened? The bullet entered the scull in one piece.

Any idea?

It's simple, the guy who thinks the x-ray is fake is wrong, and it likely seeing what he wants to see, as is par for the course in CT land.
 
Nope. LBJ wasn't dumb enough to initiate such a plan let alone orchestrate it. You only have to look at Vietnam to understand the man's ineptitude for strategy, detail, planning, and execution. He didn't benefit financially, and ended up dropping out of the 1968 race because he knew which way the wind was blowing.
He did not plan the execution of the assassination, but he was in on it and played a critical role in the cover up. The plotters knew he would be the most powerful man in USA (and the world) the very second JFK died. He used that power.

Nope. Hoover was a rabid anti-communist. His FBI continued to try to link Oswald to the Cubans AND the Mafia right up until his death. The National Archives records between 11/22/1963 and 12/1965 detail the Bureau's hunt for a co-conspirator(s) with demands from the director's office to shake down their CI's again and again looking for a connection to Cuba or the Soviets.

Documents from 1967 through 1972 show that the FBI ran down every lead that came in to their field offices across the country no matter if it was a mob CI, or some psychic.
Did he/they? Show me the evidence.

The facts do not support your allegation.
He knew that his time as the ”SOG” of the FBI was over the very second JFK was reelected. He hated RFK who was the first Attorney General who told him what to do. On a daily basis. He was a fanatical racist resenting JFK’s agenda of eradicating Jim Crow and provide equal opportunity to all Americans no matter the color of their skin. He resented RFK’s drive against Organized Crime, a non entity according to Hoover all the years up to the late 50ies when the Appalachian bust forced him to at least admit to its existence. He was best buddy an long time neighbor with LBJ helping him blackmailing his way to the vice precidency.

Dulles was not in the CIA at the time of the assassination.
He was litterally at ”the farm” the whole weekend of the assassination of JFK. He was still very much the godfather of the old boys network, meeting most of them at least on a weekly basis. Needles to say, he too hated JFK for getting fired after the Bay of Pigs, ending a brilliant career in disgrace.

Dulles didn't want to be on the Warren Commission, but took the position at RFK's personal request.
That is an old canard from the lying mouth of LBJ. As soon it became known that LBJ was setting up a white washing truth commission, Dulles was hanging at the doorstep lobbying for being accepted as one of its members. I’ll bet he really wanted to find JFK’s assassins ... and thank them.
 
It's simple, the guy who thinks the x-ray is fake is wrong, and it likely seeing what he wants to see, as is par for the course in CT land.
What? Is it a 6.5 mm bullet fragment 1 cm below the entrance wound on the outside of the scull? Yes or no?
 
We know that the official evidence has the cerebellum and brainstem somewhat damaged,

No, the brain stem was not damaged.

I will now post the link to Humes' 1996 ARRB deposition for the SIXTH TIME:

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=788&search=humes_deposition#relPageId=111&tab=page

On page 101 he begins discussion about the removal of the brain. READ IT.

From page 102 through 108 the brain is discussed in detail.

Page 109 the entrance wound is discussed in detail, he states that the wound is in the Occipital Bone.

Page 112 he discusses the exit wound.

But here is a top 10 list of documentary evidence for the EOP wound, no later than 1969, in chronological order:

1. the face sheet

The face sheet is not a forensic document. It is just to show - approximately - where the wounds are.

2. the 2 AM 11/23/1963 FBI teletype

Not a medical document, not written by a pathologist, and also not a legal document. It is meaningless beyond a brief update of the autopsy.

3. the Rydberg drawings

Don't show anything but a 6.5x52mm bullet wound.

4. Humes WC testimony

5. Finck WC testimony

Which says JFK was struck once in the head and once in the back.

6. Kellerman WC testimony

7. Finck Blumberg Report

And?

8. 2/10/1967 Finck letter stating that photographs of the surface of the entry in the skull were not present.

And yet they're listed by their number and present in the National Archives.

9. The line from Manchester's The Death of a President
"The last bullet has torn through John Kennedy’s cerebellum, the lower part of his brain"

This is the opposite of evidence.

10. Finck Clay Shaw testimony

Where the witness was lead.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom