• 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.

JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
Robert Prey said:
This has been answered already. The Best Evidence is the head wound as witnessed first hand by the medical personnel at Parkland and others such as on the scene Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, namely a large blow-out in the back of the head indicating a shot from the right front and thus a conspiracy.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/526994ebe72478f327.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Why did they not notice features clearly visible in the uncropped photo?
Why was this wound not visible when JFK left the plaza?
 
Robert Prey said:
Nor is there any photographic evidence to support the counter-claim -- that of an intact back of the head except for a small entry wound.
Click to expand...

I really don't want to call you a liar so can we modify that statement to say that there is no photographic evidence that you will accept that shows the back of JFK's intact except for a small entry wound?

This means of course that you must discount the autopsy photos (except for that cropped picture you keep posting) and the Z film both of which invalidate your shot from the Grassy Knoll theory.

Are you ready now to except David Lifton's alteration theory that the conspirators "blacked out" the back of the JFK's head to conceal an exit wound that was visible in the Z film? Every version of the Z film shows the back of the president's head intact so it must have been altered in this way if your theory is correct.
 
Last edited:
Walter Ego said:
I really don't want to call you a liar so can we modify that statement to say that there is no photographic evidence that you will accept that shows the back of JFK's intact except for a small entry wound?

This means of course that you must discount the autopsy photos (except for that cropped picture you keep posting) and the Z film both of which invalidate your shot from the Grassy Knoll theory.

Are you ready now to except David Lifton's alteration theory that the conspirators "blacked out" the back of the JFK's head to conceal an exit wound that was visible in the Z film? Every version of the Z film shows the back of the president's head intact so it must have been altered in this way if your theory is correct.
Click to expand...

The back of the head photo is fake. Andi it's not just Lifton's opinion that it's fake. Not only is that pic inconsistent with some 40 witnesses at both Parkland and Bethesda, but it is also inconsistent with the official autopsy report.
 
Tomtomkent said:
So rather than answering the question you decide if they are reliable based on if they agree with you or not?

Hmm. If only there was some way to test the accuracy of subjective memories. To compare them to some source of material evidence rather than adopt an attitude of "enough people sayit must be true".

You can tell me to grow a spine and indulge in childish bravado all you like. But the answer will remain "unsupported by material evidence"
Click to expand...

And your "material" evidence is what?????
 
Noztradamus said:
There's a Secret Secret service? The CTs are going to have a field day with that information :D
Click to expand...
.
Well, yeah!
They have their crullers and lattes catered by a special firm, cleared to be free of enemy influences.
Polygraphs required, and they have to pass the secretaries test.
 
Robert Prey said:
It certainly was visible to Agent Clint Hill who was just inches from it.
Click to expand...

And yet invisible to film? Managaing to fail to appear on the Z film or polaroid? By the way, which piece of the Hill testemony you quoted described the wound? ETA: That means a page number and line number from the WC itself, not a secondary source.
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
And your "material" evidence is what?????
Click to expand...

Firstly, if you intend to tell others to grow a spine, acknowledge the evidence. Then conisder if more than one question mark is recquired per sentence.

Now, to answer you question:
1) The body. It is thre single best piece of evidence we have.And it matches the autopsy.
2) The autopsy records itself. Measured data collected and verified is material evidence.
3) The photographic record: Where as witness statements are liable to be fallible and are by their nature subjective, we have an objective record of the events. That you are dishonest or greatly flawed in your interpretation of them is of no consequence to anybody else.
4) As discussed previously a totality of evidence tying Oswald to the scene of the crime and the murder weapon.

Those are three pieces of evidence that always take presidence over witness statements.

Even the photo you yourself post, in a heavily cropped form is counter to the claims. Disregard the lack of rear exit wound in any photograph or frame of film taken while JFK was in the Plaza, including those taken AFTER all three shots were fired. At the very LEAST your Parkland statements have neglected to mention a priority wound with a direct baring on the questions asked during the WC. One that is verified in each piece of material evidence, that conflicts directly with the claims.
 
Robert Prey said:
"Marina Oswald said that by the time she met him in March, 1961 he spoke the language well enough so that at first she thought he was from one of the Baltic areas of her country". P. 257, Warren Report
Click to expand...

My version of the Warren Report doesn't say that. It says that when Marina met Oswald, "she thought he was from one of the Russian-speaking Baltic countries because he spoke with an accent." (p. 626 New York Times edition)

In one of her interviews with Posner, Maria said she did not know Oswald was an American when she first met him and thought he might be from the Baltic because "they speak with accents" and "they don't speak Russian very well, they have different nationalities than the Russians." (Posner: pp. 64-65)

Even after living in Russia for a few years Oswald's language skills were still poor as he recorded himself in his diary. If he went to a U.S. language school for intelligence agents (as you claimed in your valentine to Oswald), he was a lousy student. All the available evidence indicates that, to the contrary, Oswald's Russian was self-taught.
 
The dangers of secondary sources is revelealed. Take note please Robert. Here is the version Robert posted:

http://www.jfklancer.com/CHill.html

Here is a different transcript of the same interview:
http://home.pages.at/jfk05/statement/testimony.pdf

Here is a secition on the Lancer page:

Mr. SPECTER. Where did you find that portion of the President's head?

Mr. HILL. It was found in the street. It was turned in, I believe, by a medical student or somebody in Dallas...I simply just pushed and she moved--somewhat voluntarily -- right back into the same seat she was in. The President -- when she had attempted to get out onto the trunk of the car, his body apparently did not move too much, because when she got back into the car he was at that time, when I got on top of the car, face up in her lap... At the time of the shooting, when I got into the rear of the car, she said, "My God, they have shot his head off." Between there and the hospital she just said, "Jack, Jack, what have they done to you," and sobbed...I heard Special Agent Kellerman say on the radio, "To the nearest hospital, quick."....He said, "We have been hit."...I had my legs -- I had my body above the rear seat, and my legs hooked down into the rear seat, one foot outside the car...

The right rear portion of his head was missing. It was lying in the rear seat of the car. His brain was exposed. There was blood and bits of brain all over the entire rear portion of the car. Mrs. Kennedy was completely covered with blood. There was so much blood you could not tell if there had been any other wound or not, except for the one large gaping wound in the right rear portion of the head...
Click to expand...


See if you can spot the minor differences from the full transcript. I can't find any mention of a massive exit wound on the back of JFKs head. Not only that, but in the Lancer page, which has the text about the rear portion of his head missing there is a photo of Hill on the car, after the shots, as it speeds away. No sign of blood or brains "all over" it.

How odd.
 
Robert Prey said:
The back of the head photo is fake. Andi it's not just Lifton's opinion that it's fake. Not only is that pic inconsistent with some 40 witnesses at both Parkland and Bethesda, but it is also inconsistent with the official autopsy report.
Click to expand...

I wasn't asking you about a "back of the head photo." I was asking you if Lifton's theory that the exit wound on the back of JFK's head in the Zapruder film which should have been visable if your shot from the front theory is correct was "blacked out" as Lifton claimed.

It's a simple question so let me restate if for you.

Do you believe the Z film was altered to remove the visual evidence of a rear exit wound on JFK's head?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom