• 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 assassination debate

I recommend the findings of douglas Horne, former senior military analyst of the Assassination Records Review Board that declassified many, many JFK documents. Here is a recent interview:

h ttp://jfk countercoup. blogspot.com/2009/11/doug-horne.html
 
Oliver said:
2 Days ago there was a documentary about the JFK assassination in German television. They mentioned something along the line that the Secret Service cleaned up the Limousine at the Hospital, thus destroying a lot of evidence. My question is: Who the **** ordered that clean up and for what downright stupid reason?
Click to expand...

My first thought was that they were in shock and going on autopilot..
 
Simplicissimus said:
@Gawdzilla:

"Simplicissimus, you know eyewitness testimony is the bottom of the food chain in a court, don't you? The man's statement above doesn't describe the person, and the lady already knew about LHO when she made that statement, and is thus a tainted witness."



Thus the eyewitnesses who identified Oswald as the Tippit murderer and Kennedy assassin should not be taken that seriously as "eyewitness testimony is the bottom of the food chain in a court". THOSE witnesses could also have been "tainted" by the "Oswald- did- it- alone"- mantra when they testified to the Warren Commission,
Click to expand...
See, you understand the concept. Good for you. I didn't qualify the above to just people on one side of the issue.
 
Myron Proudfoot said:
My first thought was that they were in shock and going on autopilot..
Click to expand...


You mean FBI, SS, the Presidents staff and especially the present Police forgot all about standard procedures how to secure a crime scene. :boggled:

Sure, that could have been the case, but there was enough professional personnel that could've stopped all the trashing of evidence. I wonder why that fact didn't catch much media attention - if any.
 
Oliver said:
You mean FBI, SS, the Presidents staff and especially the present Police forgot all about standard procedures how to secure a crime scene. :boggled:

Sure, that could have been the case, but there was enough professional personnel that could've stopped all the trashing of evidence. I wonder why that fact didn't catch much media attention - if any.
Click to expand...
You are posting this in 2009, and understand concepts like ballistics testing and DNA analysis. The assassination was in 1963, and this was the President of the United States and the Governor of Texas getting shot in a car. I can't imagine that 'securing a crime scene' was top priority, but I could be wrong.

All of these theories have been comprehensively debunked in this excellent book by Vincent Bugliosi. 1,600 pages and a CD with illustrations and end notes. The case is closed.
 
carlitos said:
You are posting this in 2009, and understand concepts like ballistics testing and DNA analysis. The assassination was in 1963, and this was the President of the United States and the Governor of Texas getting shot in a car. I can't imagine that 'securing a crime scene' was top priority, but I could be wrong.

All of these theories have been comprehensively debunked in this excellent book by Vincent Bugliosi. 1,600 pages and a CD with illustrations and end notes. The case is closed.
Click to expand...


Party pooper!!! :mad:



:p
 
The panic and pandemonium in the Secret Service operatives at Dallas was quite understandable, as this was a massive failure in their system.
The largest blunder was the removal of the body from Dallas.
A better and possibly less controversial autopsy by genuine autopsists instead of high ranked guest doctors would have been preferred, but due to the panic at the time, was hardly a consideration.
 
"All of these theories have been comprehensively debunked in this excellent book by Vincent Bugliosi. 1,600 pages and a CD with illustrations and end notes. The case is closed."

I cannot understand why people refer to Posner or Bugliosi. Posner´s ommissions and distortions have been meticously documented, for example:

ht tp://ww w.you tube.com/wa tch?v=6M9ff6FK-CM&translated=1



Here is a negative review of bugliosi´s book:
ww w.mary ferrell.org/mffweb/arch ive/viewer/sho w Doc.do?docId=145236
 
The Conspriacy Theorists Hate Posner and Bugliosi for showing them up. Big surprise there.
 
For the second time, you don't have to put a bunch of spaces, just post the address without the http and www. NO ONE is going to re-assemble that link.

Not to mention, regarding Bugliosi, how does one negative review of a book somewhere disprove the factual information in that book? That's quite a leap of logic, friend.
 
Why yell at the Secret Service about the limo, at any rate? It's clear that the local cops were a bit overwhelmed and neglected a few duties.

In 1963, the Service would not have been in charge of any investigation, nor the FBI. So far as I am aware, it wasn't until 1965 that it became a Federal crime to kill the President or Vice President.
 
Weren't the cops at the limo worried about souvenir seekers? "Oh cool! I got JFK's scalp!"
 
Simplicissimus said:
"I cannot understand why people refer to Posner or Bugliosi. Posner´s ommissions and distortions have been meticously documented, for example:

ht tp://ww w.you tube.com/wa tch?v=6M9ff6FK-CM&translated=1
Click to expand...


Argument by YouTube video, the bane of the information age.
 
Simplicissimus said:
Thus the eyewitnesses who identified Oswald as the Tippit murderer and Kennedy assassin should not be taken that seriously as "eyewitness testimony is the bottom of the food chain in a court". THOSE witnesses could also have been "tainted" by the "Oswald- did- it- alone"- mantra when they testified to the Warren Commission,
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right. Eyewitness testimony is the least valuable, but it's not nothing. In the case of the Tippit murder, there was plenty of hard evidence to convict Oswald with no eyewitnesses. The eyewitnesses in that situation are just for added interpretations of what we've already figured out happened.
 
Dear Corsair,

the posted clip is an excerpt from the 1993 PBS- documentary "Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?". Posner claims that Oswald and David Ferrie never met in the Civil Air Patrol . The documentary reveals a photography with BOTH oswald and Ferrie in CAP, and identified by two witnesses who were in the same unit. In this case, posner is telling ********, ignoring the findings of the House Select Committee on Assassinations
 
Never did have much interest in this conspiracy theory but I did read watch a clip that talked about the wound being inconsistent with the direction of firing that was officially accepted. From what I saw there was nothing strange about the wound, rather I found it consistent with what's I'd have expected from a fairly high calibur gun. On that basis I really don't see anything valid about the grassy knoll shooter issue.
 
According to chemical bullet analysis the Lone- Gunman- Theory is not that compelling:



Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 460
Joined: 10-January 06
From: Houston, Texas
Member No.: 4120




Livermore Scientists Reignite JFK Assassination Debate

August 21, 2006

KTVU TV

Oakland, California

LIVERMORE - It's been the subject of numerous arguments, books and a major Hollywood movie and now scientists at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory have turned up the heat again on just who assassinated President John F. Kennedy.

The researchers say metallurgical chemical "fingerprints" on the bullets that killed the president and wounded then Texas Governor John Connally may have been misinterpreted and that the government's crucial "single gunman theory" has been thrown into doubt.

"It basically shatters what some people call the best physical evidence around," chemist Pat Grant, director of the lab's highly respected Forensic Science Center told the San Jose Mercury News.

Grant and Lab metallurgist Erik Randich found that the chemical "fingerprints" used to identify which bullets the fragments came from were not quite the "smoking gun" as thought pointing to Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone gunman.

The FBI used five bullet fragments recovered from the limousine, Connally's body, the president's brain and from a stretcher for its initial tests using what is known as "neutron activation" analysis.

Those tests proved inconclusive, but later tests by chemist Vincent Guinn -- a renowned specialist in neutron activation -- on the bullet lead pointed directly at Oswald. Guinn said the fragments came from just two bullets -- both of which came from Oswald's Russian-manufactured rifle.

Randich said the Lawrence Livermore tests came to a different result.

"We don't know if there were two bullets," said Randich. "There could have been two bullets, but the lead composition data shows there could be anywhere from one to five bullets."

http://www.ktvu.com/news/9709821/detail.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom