Read the threads on JFK in this forum for those WARES. The evidence is overwhelming Oswald shot Kennedy. No credible evidence supports a conspiracy and before you ask credible evidence means evidence which is scientifically valid or objective. Objective just an example would include evidence admissible in a court room. Such evidence is admissible due to the simple fact that many so called forms of evidence prove nothing such as hearsay which is precisely what many conspiracy theorists rely on. My statement was accurate and you hate it
I just wanted to make sure this did not get buried. A senior Ford manager says he witnessed valuable evidence (the original windshied) from JFK's limousine) being destroyed. Oswald fired three shots, it's alleged. One shot missed everything and hit the curbing. One shot was the Magic Bullet and somehow passed through JFK and into Connelly where it harmlessly fell into his lap after passing through his wrist at the end of it's magical journey. The third shot, that rocked Kennedy's head backwards (following Newton's third law of motion) did not leave blood and other human tissue on the bullet (and hence, the windshield) as it passed through the windshield even though it had just smashed through the president's skull. Why not?
Actually the senior ford manager allegedly told this to someone else who repeated it which is second hand information and not credible. Especially since the windshiled was removed and was/used examined as evidence by the Warren Commission. Which even if he did see what someone else claims he said he saw he had no way of knowing it was the original windshield. The second bullet did not fall into his left at the end of a magical journey and no one ever claimed that it did. The second bullet traveled a normal ballistic path with nothing magical or abnormal about it's course. It traveled in a manner consistent with millions of other bullets passing through obstacles such as human bodies. The bullet holes even line up indicating no significant change of direction.. It did not end up in Connally's lap it lodged in his left leg a wound verified by the doctors who treated him. Incidentally they also verified his upper torsoe wound entered his back and exited his chest which is a little detail many ignore as it is inconsistent with conspiracies. The third shot rocked Kennedy's head forward a very short distance ( a few inches ) this is clearly visible in the Zapruder film and ignored by all. It is also consistent with the laws of physics as such a small object traveling at very high velocities ( a bullet ) would not tend to push or move a human head very far. The upper human body is desgined to defy the pull of gravity and is not quite so easily pushed around especially by an object traveling to fast it bursts through the skull. It was only after this that Kennedy moved back and to the left which was clearly caused by some other force AFTER the bullet had passed through. A combination of the jet effect, neorumuscular reaction, the springboard effect of his backbrace etc. The third bullet struck the skull traveling at very high velocity close to 2500fps such an object striking a skull at that speed should be expected to break apart. Which is why they found fragments of it which were chemically matched to Oswald's rifle barrel to the exclusion of any other rifle barrel. Unfortunately for you yes it was covered with blood and other biological matter. It was a fragment of this bullet which caused the damage to the windshield and to the trim above the windshield. If you are going to criticize the Warren Commission at least learn what they said and why. You do not even get the details of their report correct. In other words you are attempting to analyze what they never said which makes it very clear you have no evidence what so ever of a cover up or conspiracy. I am sure you have read some books and seen some films on these conspiracy theory I I have read many of them and seen many of the films. But I have looked at the other side as well and read their books and seen their films. The mark of an intelligent person however is to listen to and consider both sides of an argument before judging which is right or wrong. It is clear you have ignored the Warren Commission report. You have never read it and have no idea what they said and what evidence they have. Obviously this indicates a desire to believe one thing no matter what evidence disputes it. You really need to stop accusing others of having blind faith in government it is a lame attempt to claim you have better insight which you have proven you do not. Examining the evidence still leads to the logical conclusion that Oswald acted alone and no evidence proves otherwise.
The conversation was tape recorded (as already indicated) and it represents a knowledgeable, reputable source reporting that the original limousine windshield was destroyed. It's no wonder as he also reported a bullet hole in the windshield that clearly entered from the front of the car. Period. End of story. This would account for Kennedy's head being slammed backwards, in accordance with Newton's third law of motion, as the bullet impacted the skull from the front. LOL...no wonder the sight of Kennedy's head rocking slightly forward is "ignored by all". It never happened.
No it was CLAIMED that the conversation was tape recorded and the recording has yet to be heard. It represents no such thing as a knowledgable source since if the proven second hand information is accurate it only has a witness who saw A windshield removed and no way of knowing it was the original. He was not knowledgable to determine the path of a bullet through a windshiled but experts employed by the Warren Commission were knwoledgable about those matters and they did in fact examine the windshield. YEs his head rocked forward as is cleary visible in the zapruder film and this happened before the movement back that is absolutre fact which you are ignoring because it does not fit your conspiracy fiction. Many contradictions in your theory exist ruining it. The bullet hole in the windshield was nearly in front of the driver. Said bullet striking Kennedy in the head would have come from the left moving his head back and to the RIGHT. He moved back and to the left after the bullet had passed through which has been proven to have moved his head slightly forward. Another contradiction is that if that hole in front of the driver were made by an assassin firing at Kennedy it would have had to come from ground level at the triple underpass. No other possible position existed for such a shot to come from and many witnesses in that exact area FAILED to see any such shooter. The facts prove you dead wrong and even dishonest.
As an apologist for the Warren Commission you are absolutely horrible. Your denial does not erase the remarks of Ford executive George Whitaker Jr. as given to lawyer and professor of Criminal Justice, Doug Weldon. Furthermore his comments on the entrance bullet hole in the JFK limousine windshield are corroborated by other eye witnesses. http://www.lewrockwell.com/2012/06/...k-limousine-windshield-hiding-in-plain-sight/ More people than ever believe that the tale of Lee Harvey Oswald as the lone gunmen is a lie and it's clumsy apologists like you that just reinforce that opinion with your absurd denials and claims that can never be justified (not that you even try).
Stating facts is not apoligizing for anything at all typical mis direction trick people use when they have an agenda that they do not like criticized I stated facts and that is all and those facts ruin your conspiracy theory. I never apologized for the Warren Commission but unlike you I did read the WC report. You simply follow along alike a sheep believing whatever anyone tells you about the report without bothering to check it. I never denied anything. The specific remarks you refer to by George whitaker are second hand hearsay as such of course they are impossible to erase but also meaningless and not valid. His rumored remarks are not corroborated by anyone except in the general sense that there was a hole in the windsheld. Take the witness Stavis ellis your link cites. He only observed it in a very casual manner he did not examine it closely and he was no trained firearms expert or experienced investigator who could understand how to properyl analyze such evidence. In fact all of the witnesses cited fall into that same category. Casual witnesses who observed something and had no skill or lengthy observtion to make specific determinations such as what direction the bullet came from. A majority of people believing something or not believing something is irrelevant. Majority opinion does not determine truth. The evidence proves your claims are simply not true. But your personal attacks are proof that you know this and hate it so in a sense you admit I am right thank you for conceding.
Stop lying about this. The remarks were a first person account recorded electronically and transcribed by a lawyer and criminal justice professor. And who are you to claim otherwise? An internet nobody and apologist for the Warren Commission. This all absolutely your biased take on things. Again, all your own biased imagination. You have no idea whatsoever how much care was taken in observing the windshield. Stop lying! And how much of an expert do you have to be to know whether a hole in a windshield was an exit or entrance hole? And how many people do you think saw this entrance hole and reported it? PLENTY! http://jfkthefrontshot.blogspot.com/2013/06/the-entrance-hole-in-windshield.html
I did not lie I stated fact and you hate it. It is second hand hearsay and nothing more the recording has never been heard only alluded to and until it is the claim remains second hand hearsay. The word of anyone internet lawyer or nobody about what another person told them is hearsay. A claim that it was recorded is only valid if that recording is forth coming and open to review this one never has been. End of story and the claim is second hand hearsay. It is not my take on things it is fact. The few people you claimed corroborate his claim were only a few who had casual observation of the windshield and no expertise or training in examining such evidence to determine detailed fact. ' Once again that is fact not my take and you cannot produce one such corroborating witness who does not fit the above description. On the other hand the Warren Commission report members and the various experts they employed did have such expertise and a detailed examination of the windshiled and that trumps a casual observaton. No it is not my imagination Stavis only casually looked at it he stated that is all he did. Not my imagination BUT HIS OWN DESCRIPTION. He also was not an expert trained to examine bullet holes and again that is not my imagination but fact. You have to be more of an expert than they were. That is all. You lose again as always and no one need apoligize about the Warren Commision they had evidence you do not. I am educating you about them since you know nothing about the report having never read it.
Overwhelming? That is a conclusion unsupported by any facts. Is there even one single overwhelming fact? I don't think so. Name just one.
I never said overwhelming facts I said overwhelming evidence some of which are facts. It is supported by a mountain of facts. His rifle and no other found at the scene. His rifle and no other rifle fired at the scene. Expended shell casings with his prints. Boxes arranged in the snipers nest with his recent prints and no others. Recoverd bullets matched to his rifle and no other rifle at the scene. And no other recovered bullets. His shooting of Officer Tibbets proven by similar evidence. Medical autopsy evidence proving that the bullet wounds to Connally and Kennedy originated from above and behind the limo. ( the snipers nest ). The vast majority of eye and ear witnesses whose testimony is in synch with that evidence and only a few ear witnesses disputing it. That's just a taste of the facts there are many others. Unfortunately no such similar facts come close to supporting a conspiracy theory.
Oh, but I just asked you for just one of your "overwhelming" facts. But you instead cite a whole bunch of underwhelming non-facts. Your claim the the rifle found belonged to Oswald is not a fact but a conclusion. What fact proves that conclusion? There were no prints found on the shell casings. That is a non-fact. Prints on the boxes only prove that Oswald worked there. The recovered bullets did not match the alleged rifle to the exclusion of any other rifles. The killing of officer Tippet is irrelevant to the murder of the President. And the autopsy evidence did not prove that Connally was hit by a single magic bullet but till the day he died, Connally insisted he was hit by a separate bullet which if so, proves "conspiracy." The eye and ear witnesses were cherry picked by the commission.Those closest to the Limo insisted that fatal shot came from the vicinity of the grassy knoll. As for a facts supporting a conspiracy, in addition to Connally's separate bullet claim, there are 40 plus medical witnesses that viewed a large blow-out in the back of K's head indicating a probable shot from the front. In short, get your "facts" straight.
They are facts they are NOT non facts there is in fact no such thing. They are not underwhelming. The Rifle was irrefutably proven to be his by the documentation kept by those who sold it when he ordered it and it was mailed to him. He used it very often both at ranges and in dry fire excercises. He kept it wrapped in a blanket and fibers from that exact blanket were found on the paper bag he smuggled it in. His prints were on it and on the expended brass. You cannot get more factual than that. All of the supporting documentation is clearly detailed in the Warren Commission report which you have heard of and been told about but never read. The shell casings had his prints on it that is proven and you are simply WRONG. That evidence is in the Warren Commission report and it is exhaustively detailed. The recovered bullets were ballistically and chemically proven to have been fired from his rifle to the exclusion of any other rifle and you are WRONG about that one. the evidence is in the Warren Commission report which you clearly never read. The killing of tippet is not irrelevant. Oswald was the only person in Dallas to have killed an officer in an attempt to escape when identified as a suspect in the shooting of Kennedy. It is not proof he shot Kennedy but it is very incriminating. No one said anything about a magic bullet. The Autuposy proved that the entrance wounds were from above and behind as did the emergency room records from Connally's surgery. The magic bullet was a lie dreamed up by one conspiracy theorist or another and repeated by many. It never existed. Connally only claimed for a short time that he was struck by a seperate bullet he did not maintain that claim until he died as you state. He also clearly stated the truth which is that he was not in a position to tell which shot struck whom because he had no direct view of Kennedy. The eye and ear witnesses were not cherry picked at all by the Warren Commision they numbered over 180. It is strictly conspiracy theorists who wade through those witnesses cherry picking only those who disagree with the rest or who can be manipulated into changing their story. Only a few claimed the shot came from the knoll and they were not closest to the limosine they were randomly scatterred throughout the plaza. Most agreed it came from Oswald's position and their claim is supported by all available physical evidence not a speck of physical evidence supports the very few claiming a different shource for the shots. The 40 plus you refer to is a vast exaggeration most had no more than a casual glance at the front of his head and in fact a large blow out indicates no such thing as the autopsy proved. The bullet entered and exited like this: That is actually from the autopsy and is a fact again. An autopsy with in depth examination trumps any casual eyewitness in an emergency room. Emergency room doctors are trained to save lives they are not trained to examine wounds in close detail to determine exactly how they were inflicted. It is you who does not have his facts straight and the cause is very clear and very common. Like most fans of conspiracy theory you have heard many theories and believed one or more of them. But you never checked the other side of the argument. Unlike me and a few others you never picked up the Warren Commission report and fact checked what the conspiracy nuts tell you to see if they are accurate. For example the magic bullet. There is no such bullet or description of such a bullet or claim of such a bullet ANYWHERE to be found in the Warren Commission investigation. The bullet referred to as magical was in fact MUNDANE, ORDINARY and not the least bit unusual AN intelligent person will look at both sides of an argument or debate before deciding which one is correct you have only listened to one side.
Whoa, Nelli! You've got a whole lot of stuff there but still nearly all "conclusions" unsupported by fact. Except for that paper trail of the rifle. Let's begin with that. What the you and the WC presumes is that Lee Harvey Oswald, intending to make a name for himself by being a Presidential assassin, decides to get a rifle -- but not one he could simply purchase over the counter with no paper trail,, but one via mail order so that there would be a paper trail. Of course, it would be too obvious if he actually used his real name, so he uses a fake name -- Hydell-- but he must make sure that law enforcement is not too deceived by the fake name, so he makes sure he carries the very same ID the day of the assassination so that when he is arrested, they can trace the fake name to him. Make a lot of sense? Moreover, even if that was Oswald's rifle, that does not prove that he was the shooter. But all of the above does make a persuasive case for a set-up Patsy. I don't say that LHO did not take part in the event as one of the perps, but I doubt it. I only point out that there is not one piece of alleged "evidence" including ownership of the rifle, that is irrefutable. On the other hand, there remains a mountain of evidence for conspiracy, including the 40 plus medical witnesses who observed a large blow-out in the back of K's head. These witnesses include not just ER docs, but nurses, photographers, limo driver, autopsy techs, etc., etc., etc. As for the alleged prints found on the shells. That is also false. No prints were found. (Warren Commission Hearings, vol.4, pp.253, 25860).
Um no sir I stated facts not conclusions. You seem to be confused about the two. Oswald did not order the rifle by mail intending to make a name for himself by being a presidential assassin. That part is something you made up out of ignorance. He simply order a rifle because he wanted a rifle. Months later when he decided to try and kill the president he had the rifle already so it was a logical choice to use. We know this to be fact because he had the gun long before starting at the TSBD. The Secret Service and Dallas police settled on the route and released said route details to the press days before Kennedy's visit. Then and only then could Oswald have figured out that he had an opportunity to try and kill Kennedy. There fore it was only then that he decided to try. He used a mail order catalogue for his own reasons which are not abnormal. He was a low wage earner with a wife and a kid ( later two kids ) to feed. He had no car. Shopping for a gun at stores is easy with money and a car he had a very small amount of money and no car. It makes sense therefore that he ordered it for it's low price and convenience. There is no mystery to why he bought the gun or why he left a paper trail your unspoken hint that this was done because of some conspiracy is easily proven by FACTS to be false. Oswald used fake ID's for a long time before he planned to kill Kennedy. He did so while trying to infiltrate anti castro cubans in New Orleans for example ( which was unsuccesful ). He loved spy novels and played acted at being a spy ( his wife confirms this ). All of this is not a sign of conspiracy. Oswald's rifle with expended casings all of which have his prinbts. He was placed on the sixth floor by witnesses who went downstairs leaving him the last one on the sixth floor. It is fact with hard evidence that he recovered the rifle from Ruth Payn'es garage where he stored it and smuggled it into the building. Evidence and facts conclusively proves all of this and none refutes it. Least of all a lopy theory based on half truths about him being a Patsy. YEs you cannot refute any of these facts and evidence you have consistently failed to do so as has everyone else. The shell casings had prints on them that is absolute fact and you are wrong. None of the 40 witnesses you claimed had mopre than a casual glance at the FRONT of his head none were qualified autopsy doctors and a gaping hole proves nothing. Not one shred of evidence supports a conspiracy.
I provided you with the WC citation with testimony from Lt. Day that there were no prints found on those rifle shells. I provided it for your again with his exact words: "I processed these three hulls for fingerprints... did not find fingerprints." Lt. J.C. Day, WC Hearings Hearings, vol.4, pp.253, 25860). Look it up.
Soupnazi: "None of the 40 witnesses you claimed had mopre than a casual glance at the FRONT of his head none were qualified autopsy doctors and a gaping hole proves nothing." Oh, but that is simply not true. "As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described, to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral half, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted open." (Robert N. McClelland, Warren Commission Hearings, Volume VI, page 33
Of it absolutely is true. Dr. Mclelland was not a qualified pathologist and never permormed an autopsy. Dr. Mclellaan emergency room doctor who assisted in the tracheotomy performed on Kennedy. He never saw the back of Kennedy's head or body. He was busy working on the patient and therefore did nothing more than look at the head wound in a very casaul way. His testimony is irrelevant to the facts established by the autopsy. This is typical of conspiracy theorists who always start out with a conclusion which they try to make the evidence fit. The WC actually let the evidence lead them to the source.
Dr. McCelland merely described what he saw. It does not take a pathologist too view a head wound. A pathologist might try to interpret the cause of the wound but that does not impeach what an ER doctor viewed close-up for 15 minutes. All you can do is characterize Dr. M as a liar. And all the other medical witnesses as well. Fact is, no pathologist refuted anything that these 40 plus other witnesses witnessed. Dr. McCLELLAND - As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described, to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral haft, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted open. http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/mcclella.htm
YEs Mclelland described what he saw he did not state it was an exit wound and that is the issue. It does in fact take an autopsy to carefully examine wounds on a corpse determine how they were inflicted and from where. The autopsy clearly proved the entrance wounds came from above and behind. Mclelland'ds testimony is what does not refute that proven medical fact. A casual glance does not determine the minute details such as where the bullet entered. The autopsy did and no i did not call him a liar. HE clearly said he could closely examine the head wound but he sis not say he DID closely examine it because his attention was focused on the tracheotomy he was performing. This still counts only as a casual observation and is not proof of anything else BUT a casual observation. It is not evidence of a conspiracy it is not evidence of a second shooter and it is not in any way shape or form a contradiction to the proven FACT that all entrance wounds to both men came from behind and above.
The autopsy delivered an ambiguous narrative that does not refute anything that the other witnesses observed. All you have is that phony drawing (which is not a photograph) of the head wound. To impune the testimony of Dr. M, you do indeed imply he is either lying or delusional along with all of the other medical witnesses none of which uphold the veracity of that phony ida dox drawing. Nor did Dr. M only casually glance at the head wound. This was the President of the United States and Dr. M was inches away from the fatal wound -- (K's head blasted wide open) and starred at it for 15 minutes. I have 40 plus witnesses who can support and corroborate what Dr.M observed. How many do you have? Name one.
The drawing is not phony it was drawn by one of the autopsy pathologists. The autopsy report was not an ambiguous narrative it was a conclusion based on medical examination of the evidence. Once again Mclellend reported his observation which was not based on such an examination. His statement does not need to be reported beause he only stated a large bullet wound he did not determine such things as entry / exit points therefore his testimony is irrelevant to the conclusion of the autopsy which DID establish those facts. The rest of your witnesses are in the same category they in no way shape or form dispute what the autopsy discovered.
No. The drawing you uploaded was not done by an an autopsy pathologist. It was done by Ida Dox, a medical illustrator. Nor did the WC ever see this drawing, nor did the WC even see any of the autopsy photos. The Dox drawing was done for the HSCA. However, a similar drawing was done for the WC by Harold Rydberg who has since dis-avowed it as a fraud. Dr. McCellelland did indeed describe the large hole in the back of K's head as an exit wound in later interviews. Get your facts straight.
