• 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.
jargon buster said:
Robert, why do you still believe a shooter killed Kennedy with a shot from the grassy knoll?
All your evidence of an exit wound on the back right side of Kennedys head makes a shooter from the right an impossibility.
Click to expand...

Tell that to the Parkland Medical doctors.
 
Robert Prey said:
Hank, you really do need to get up to speed on this. Dulaney was one of 4 doctors selected by the Nova Program in 1988 to view the alleged autopsy photos. McAdams cited them and one of the posters here (pakeha)referred to that McAdams web site. I merely revealed what each of those doctors statements of the wounds were contemporaneous to Nov. 22, 1963 and in the process demolished the McAdams' brainwash.

For your reference: pakeha wrote:
Posts: 3,720http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/novadocs.htm
Were the doctors lying here, Robert?
Click to expand...


Not following how you think Dulaney is evidence of conspiracy, in either his earliest statement or his Nova one.

Hank
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
Tell that to the Parkland Medical doctors.
Click to expand...


The Parkland doctors saw a gunman on the knoll? Robert, really, you are stretching your evidence to the breaking point.

Did you ever post that map of Dealey Plaza showing the correct position of the limo, the position of the supposed grassy knoll assassin, and the correct position of JFK's head, and then try to draw a straight line through JFK's head to exit the back of the head after striking the temple (or was it the forehead?) I think you said the entry wound was in the forehead and even cited an image with an arrow pointing to the supposed entry wound in a autopsy photo you allege is faked (you really need to make up your mind about some of this stuff).

Hank
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
If you don't find the people who created and developed the original autopsy photos as "credible," then who would you find credible as to their authenticity?
Click to expand...


Robert, you don't get to cite somebody's 33-year-later recollection as evidence and use it to overturn the Zapruder film, the autopsy photographs, the x-rays, and the hard evidence like the rifle and the bullets and bullet fragments recovered from the limo and the hospital. If you think 33-year-later recollections are evidence, you don't understand what evidence is.

Hank
 
HSienzant said:
Another conspiracy myth you repeat here. Connally said he was hit by the second bullet. He had no way of knowing what happened with the first bullet, as he was facing forward at the time of the first shot. He said he was basing his *conclusion* that JFK was hit by the first shot on what his wife Nellie said.
Hank
Click to expand...

NO. That piece of misinformation is refuted in the Governors' own words. He heard a first shot, then he was hit, then came a 3rd shot. We know of at least one more shot making 4 and conspiracy. And you didn't know that from the 500 books you claim to have read?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3-lZNR_yAc
 
Hank wrote:

Robert, stop lying.

Here's number one:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php...postcount=4679

Comment: You really need to take another look at your model perp. I mean that shadow that he reflects of himself as opposed to the shadow that Oswald reflects. There is no twisting and turning in the Oswald pose, nor any dropping down of the rifle. It is not a valid replication. On the other hand, the one I offered is.
 
Robert Prey said:
Hank wrote:

Robert, stop lying.

Here's number one:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php...postcount=4679

Comment: You really need to take another look at your model perp. I mean that shadow that he reflects of himself as opposed to the shadow that Oswald reflects. There is no twisting and turning in the Oswald pose, nor any dropping down of the rifle. It is not a valid replication. On the other hand, the one I offered is.
Click to expand...

Robert doing what he does best. Lying.
 
HSienzant said:
I have limited myself here at the present time to the JFK assassination board, my main interest, so I can't speak to Robert's actions elsewhere. I do hope that, if nothing else, he is learning something about the Kennedy assassination here that the conspiracy books don't begin to tell him.

Hank
Click to expand...

So far I've learned he's a gold bug, thinks legal tender is funny money, is against pursuing energy alternatives and think the answer is to "drill baby, drill", is a holocaust denier and I believe I seen him on the 9/11 sub forum spouting truther rot (although I could be wrong at that, if so I apologize).

Real charmer, no?
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
Hank wrote:

Robert, stop lying.

Here's number one:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php...postcount=4679

Comment: You really need to take another look at your model perp. I mean that shadow that he reflects of himself as opposed to the shadow that Oswald reflects. There is no twisting and turning in the Oswald pose, nor any dropping down of the rifle. It is not a valid replication. On the other hand, the one I offered is.
Click to expand...

Comment: the one where the guy is twisting over to hold a broom handle the wrong way? The one that has the handle towards, not away from the body? Whose body hunches towards, not leans away from camera?

So no twisting or altering of the pose is allowed...EXCEPT TO BE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT?

Double standards.

For the record, there are two other images on this thread also replicating impossible shadows. The model work especially, as a controlled environment experiment, is very accurate.
 
I wrote
Robert, why do you still believe a shooter killed Kennedy with a shot from the grassy knoll?
All your evidence of an exit wound on the back right side of Kennedys head makes a shooter from the right an impossibility.
Click to expand...
Robert wrote
Tell that to the Parkland Medical doctors.
Click to expand...

Robert, the Parkland doctors de-bunk your grassy knoll shooter theory, they claim the wound was on the right, the only way an exit wound could be on the right is a shooter from the left, that or your banana bullet theory.
 
HSienzant said:
Asserted. Not proven. J.C.Day photographed those fingerprints on the afternoon of the assassination. They are there, and you can see them in the Warren Commission volumes of evidence.

Hank
Click to expand...

Mr. LATONA. "I could see faintly ridge formations there. However, examination disclosed to me that the formations, the ridge formations and characteristics, were insufficient for purposes of either effecting identification or a determination that the print was not identical with the prints of people. Accordingly, my opinion simply was that the latent prints which were there were of no value. Now, I did not stop there.
Mr. EISENBERG. Before we leave those prints, Mr. Latona, had those been developed by the powder method?
Mr. LATONA. Yes; they had.
Mr. EISENBERG. Was that a gray powder?
Mr. LATONA. I assumed that they used gray powder in order to give them what little contrast could be seen. And it took some highlighting and sidelighting with the use of a spotlight to actually make those things discernible at all. Representative FORD. As far as you are concerned.
Mr. LATONA. That's right.
Mr. DULLES. Is it likely or possible that those fingerprints could have been damaged or eroded in the passage from Texas to your hands?
Mr. LATONA. No, sir; I don't think so. In fact, I think we got the prints just like they were. There had, in addition to this rifle and that paper bag, which I received on the 23d--there had also been submitted to me some photographs which had been taken by the Dallas Police Department, at least alleged to have been taken by them, of these prints on this trigger guard which they developed. I examined the photographs very closely and I still could not determine any latent value in the photograph.
So then I took the rifle personally over to our photo laboratory. In the meantime, I had made arrangements to bring a photographer in especially for the purpose of photographing these latent prints for me, an experienced photographer--I called him in. I received this material in the Justice Building office of operations is in the Identification Division Building, which is at 2d and D Streets SW. So I made arrangements to immediately have a photographer come in and see if he could improve on the photographs that were taken by the Dallas Police Department.
Well, we spent, between the two of us, setting up the camera, looking at prints, highlighting, sidelighting, every type of lighting that we could conceivably think of, checking back and forth in the darkroom--we could not improve the condition of these latent prints. So, accordingly, the final conclusion was simply that the latent print on this gun was of no value, the fragments that were there."

-- Warren Ciommisssion Testimony
 
Last edited:
jargon buster said:
Robert, why do you still believe a shooter killed Kennedy with a shot from the grassy knoll?
All your evidence of an exit wound on the back right side of Kennedys head makes a shooter from the right an impossibility.
Click to expand...


From: "JFK Conspiracy of Silence" by Charles A. Crenshaw, M.D.

"Had I been allwoed to testify, I would have told them that there is no doubt in my mind that the bullet that killed President Kennedy was shot from the Grassy Knoll area...

The entire right hemisphere of his brain was missing...based on my experience with trauma to the head from gunshots, I knew that only a high velocity bullet from a rifle could dissect a cranium that way. Part of his brain, the cerebellum was dangling from the back of his head...

...From the damage I saw there was no doubt in my mind that the bullet had entered his head through the front, and as it surgically passed through his cranium the missle obliterated part of the temporal and all the parietal and occipital lobes before it lacerated the cerebellum...

The hundreds of trauma cases involving gunshots that I have seen and treated since 1963 further convince me that my conclusions about President Kennedy's wouinds were correct....The men on the Commission heard exactly what they wanted to hear, or what they were instructed to hear and then reported what they wanted to report or what they were instructed to report.... the Warren Report (is) a fable, a virtual insult to the intellilgence of the American People."
 
Tomtomkent said:
Your claims that evidence has been planted, altered, forged, etc have not been validated. Therefore the physical evidence still stands, and still invalidates any witness statement.
Click to expand...

The physical evidence, other than the worm food, you claim still stands is locked away in the cover-uppers closet. You don't get to trump 40 plus on the scene medical witnesses with photographs hidden away in a locked closet.
 
Mr. EISENBERG. Were you able to identify these prints?
Mr. LATONA. I--the ones I developed, I did identify.
Mr. EISENBERG. Whose prints did you find them to be?
Mr. LATONA. They were identified as a fingerprint and a palmprint of Lee Harvey Oswald.
Click to expand...

:eek:
 
Tomtomkent said:
Another mantra. Robert you may believe that, but as has been pointed out before, if you are citing evidence here, on a "critical thinkers" forum, to convince us, then you should beaware that there are shibboleths we tend to follow. Like not considering witness statements as evidence unless validated by physical evidence. You may be bored of hearing it, but is there any point to trying to argue us down to lower standards?
Click to expand...
(Edited for clarification)

And if that were followed in a court of law, there would be virtually no witnesses. Utter baloney.
 
is that the same Charles A. Crenshaw who thought the throat wound was an entry wound?

Crenshaw also treated Kennedy at Parkland Hospital. He later stated: "Two wounds were visible. There was a small, round opening in the front of the midline of the throat. This became the site of Dr. Malcolm Perry's tracheotomy incision. In the occipito-parietal region at the right rear of the head, there was an avulsive wound nearly as large as a fist.... I considered the throat wound to be an entrance wound and the large head wound to be an exit wound. Along with many of my Parkland colleagues, I believed at the time that President Kennedy had been hit twice from the front."
Click to expand...

mmmm..hit twice from the front and only two holes in total, one in the throat and one at the back of the head????
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom