View Active Topics          Latest 100 Topics          View Your Posts          Switch to Mobile

JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Discuss Conspiracies and Cover Ups - e.g. 9/11 Truth, JFK Assassination, New World Order, Roswell, Moon Hoax, Secret Societies, etc. whatever conspiracy floats your boat.

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 28 Aug 2012, 04:08

NinjaPuppy wrote:
ProfWag wrote:Awe c'mon Ninja. I'd love to hear an opinion from someone old enough to remember that day as it played out... :o :shock: :P

Yeah, well I do remember watching TV during the breaking news and of course watching the funeral procession on TV but I sure wasn't at the scene when it happened.

Hope you know I was just teasing you... I didn't really think you were that much older than I...
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54






Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 28 Aug 2012, 04:17

ProfWag wrote:Based on the Zapruder film, Nix film, et.al., I simply have not been able to see where a second gunman from the front could have come from and the evidence simply supports all shots coming from the 6th Floor. The only place I could see for a front shot would have been over or under the overpass (in the middle of the road) and witnesses have not described a gunman from that area. Teague (I think his name was--the dude that got chipped on the cheek) would have seen someone from the front and he didn't--though he thinks the shooter could have come from the grassy knoll. I understand that to really support Horne's hypothesis, one would also have to believe that Zapruder's film was "touched up," yet Nix's tape and others all show exactly the same thing, hence, they all would have had to have been "touched up." I also understand that for Horne's idea to be correct in that the shot had to have come from the front (or even side), the exit wound would have been on the left side of his head but that does not appear to be the case in all the evidence I have seen. Also, for Horne's contention to be correct, there would have to be an entrance wound around the left side. I'm not aware of anything, anywhere, that describes this. Do you know of any?

Again, there are just far too many pieces of the puzzle that would have had to have fit PERFECTLY for there to have been more than one gunman that day. If someone wanted Kennedy dead, all they would have had to do was ask Lee to do it.

It's my contention that people just don't want to believe that our country could be shaken to the degree it was by a virtual nobody. Occam's Razor.


First, I want to offer a correction. David W. Mantik, not Philip Mantel: David W. Mantik, who
holds a Ph.D. in physics and well as an M.D. and is board certified
in radiation oncology and who has studied all the original materials.

Second, for the mere fact that there was a wound in the T-4 area of Kennedy's back means a shot was from behind. The shot did not enter higher up to fit the back through the neck exit wound. Yes, James Tague was hit by a fragment (bullet or curb) as he was standing near the triple underpass on Main street if memory serves as being correct. The angle for this to happen more than likely came from the Dal-Tex building or the Records building. The book depository (6th floor) more than likely was not the firing location due to it being to steep for a miss.

Third, I am unaware if Tague ever made a comment about what he heard or saw regarding the Grassy Knoll. Tague may have been hit before the head shot and might have been distracted?

Four, I cannot determine exactly the bulliet's trajectory (frontal head shot) based on Kennedy's head position. You posit a good question regarding the ballistics alignment. Though, in Horne's book a Bethesda doctor (I want to say McCllelen) made a trauma room observation that there was a bullet entry wound in Kennedy's anatomical left parietal area just past the hair line. I will have to check to make sure I am accurate as to who saw this.

Five, and here is what most Kennedy researchers have based their arguments on - The Zapruder Tape. Horne and the ARRB found out that much to their chagrin that the Zapruder tape has been altered dramatically. This was done in upstate New York at the Wilson Kodak plant known to intelligence insiders as the "Hawkeye Plant" or "Hawkeye Works." In other words, researchers cannot say for certain that what we have seen in the Zapruder Tape is what really happened. Key point, over 50 witnesses at Dealy saw the vehicle come to a STOP or NEAR STOP just at the point of impact. Think about that one! The official "government" line was the vehicle never traveled below 11.2 miles per hour. Again, guys. Horne's ARRB goes into the minutia on this. Yes, I am recalling most of my post from memory and need to offer this as fact checking may be required.

Six, agreed. The blowout seen by witnesses at Parkland, Secret Service, Bethesda (before autopsy), and others all describe the trauma to Kennedy in the back anatomical right (mainly occipital); roughly the size of a grapefruit. I have gone over and over the Zapruder Tape looking at Kennedy's head position in relation to the blowout. The Harper fragment and others were found to be left of the motorcade. Keep in mind, if the head shot came from the back then in high probability Nellie C., Greer, John C., and Kellerman should have been covered in blood and brain matter.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 28 Aug 2012, 04:20

NinjaPuppy wrote:
ProfWag wrote:I, too, apreciate the mature and cordial conversation and discussion on the topic, Misha. Wish more would get involved though..

Y'all seem to be having a great exchange here. If I were to add my commentary, it would throw off the mojo that's going on.


Jump in NinjaPuppy.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 28 Aug 2012, 04:46

Interesting comments concerning James Tague:

"After spotting the mark, Tague testifies that both he and Walthers "turned around and looked toward the School Book Depository...We said maybe this is where they (the shots) came from" (Testimony-Warren Commission, 553). Later in the questioning, Tague was asked if he had any idea from where the shots came when he heard them. Tague said "Yes; I thought they were coming from my left" He further specified by saying that his first impression was that the shots were coming from (as he explained) "the monument or whatever it was--" (which was the general area between the grassy knoll and the Book Depository where Abraham Zapruder was filming. Tague later explained that his assumption was based on the heightened activity in the area after the shooting (i.e. Clyde Haygood et. al. converging in that area toward the railroad tracks, etc.) When asked what he saw during the shooting, he said he saw no evidence of someone shooting from the railroad tracks. He claims that during the shooting to have "looked at the complete area to try to find out where the disturbance was" before ducking behind the abutment. This further clarifies what he was doing after the first shot, and before he ducked behind the abutment."
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/tague.htm
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 28 Aug 2012, 04:56

Thank God for James Tague. At roughly 12:30 AM EST the Bethesda doctors learned that an innocent bystander (Tague) was injured by a bullet fragment. This occurrence led the Bethesda doctors (Humes, specifically) to rewrite their original autopsy report and bring the bullet higher up in JFK's back to accommodate the THREE bullet "lone gunman" thesis. The first autopsy report was burned in Humes' fireplace either early that morning or during the day.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 28 Aug 2012, 21:27

Misha wrote: The first autopsy report was burned in Humes' fireplace either early that morning or during the day.

Misha,
You state as fact that the "first autopsy report" was burned, yet Humes' testified that it was acually his notes that he burned. Quite different documents. I know that Horne concluded that two separate examinations of the brain must have occured as a result of a disparity in Humes testimony. Do you believe that memory over a 30 year period is infallable? I'm not sure I can put very much weight on interviews taken 30 years apart. If there was some conspiracy, I would actually believe that the testimony would have been exactly the same over 30 years, but because there is a memory lapse, in my opinion, this actually supports that nothing unusual took place.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 29 Aug 2012, 01:25

Hi ProfWag,

I pasted from Inside the ARRB some clarifications. Again, I was going from memory and it is important to be accurate. Horne clarifies his position on Tague. The Bethesda Doctors did not know of Tague's injury at the time of the autopsy. However, Horne still refers to Hume's writing as a report:



RETHINKING the Question: "Why Was the First Draft of JFK's Autopsy Report Destroyed?"

June 13th, 2010

In Volume III of my book "Inside the Assassination Records Review Board," in Chapter 11, I wrote in the text on page 866, and summarized in a data table on page 872, that the proximate cause, or stimulus, for why the unsigned, draft version of the JFK autopsy report (reviewed on Saturday, 11/23/63 at Bethesda Naval Hospital by CDR Humes, CDR Boswell, and CAPT Canada) was abandoned, and subsequently destroyed by Humes in his fireplace on Sunday, 11/24/63, was the fact that James Tague's wounding on Main Street in Dealey Plaza (as a result of the ricochet of a bullet off of the Main Street curb) was evidence of a missed shot. BACKGROUND FOLLOWS: The three shot scenario---the conclusion that there was only one assassin, and that he was above and behind the limousine, and that he fired only three shots---was adopted by the Dallas police department and the U.S. government on Friday afternoon; Richard Lipsey, the Aide to General Wehle (Commandant of the Military District of Washington), recounted to the HSCA staff with great certainty that he heard the pathologists discussing a three-hit scenario---that is, three hits on JFK without any discussion of what had happened to Connally---in the autopsy morgue; and yet the version of the autopsy report entered into evidence by the Warren Commission (CE 387) concluded that there were only two hits on President Kennedy. Clearly, at least one change to the autopsy conclusions had taken place between the time Lipsey heard the pathologists discuss three hits on JFK, and the time CE 387 was entered into evidence during the testimony of James J. Humes before Arlen Specter in March of 1964.

At the time I drafted this chapter it seemed obvious to me that public knowledge of James Tague's wounding, and therefore of a missed shot which had struck the curb on Main Street, had forced Humes, et. al. to abandon the 3-shot, 3-hit scenario arrived at inside the Bethesda morgue in front of Richard Lipsey late Friday evening (after the FBI agents had departed at 11:00 PM).

It is now apparent, as a result of an astute question asked of me by a friend, that the James Tague wounding could NOT have been the proximate cause, or stimulus, for junking the first draft of the JFK autopsy report. WHY? Because as James Tague clearly stated in his own book, published in 2003, there was no widely available public mention of his wounding until newspaper journalist Jim Lehrer published the results of his interview with Tague in the Dallas Times-Herald on June 5, 1964. This was followed by an FBI interview and subsequent Warren Commission testimony. While it is true that Deputy Sheriff Buddy Walthers spoke to Tague about the wounding on the very afternoon of the assassination, and photographer Tom Dillard photographed the curb strike (and Tague himself) the afternoon of the assassination, there is no evidence that this information was publicly available on November 23rd, or that it was known within the confines of Bethesda Naval Hospital by Humes, Boswell, or Canada.

The error is mine and I am solely responsible for it.

However, IT REMAINS A FACT THAT THE 3-HIT SCENARIO SURELY RECORDED IN THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE JFK AUTOPSY REPORT ON SATURDAY (3 HITS ON JFK) WAS ABANDONED IN LESS THAN 24 HOURS, AND REPLACED WITH A 2-HIT SCENARIO THE VERY NEXT DAY (WHICH EXPLAINED THE WOUND SEEN IN THE THROAT AT PARKLAND HOSPITAL AS HAVING BEEN CAUSED BY A FRAGMENT FROM THE HEAD SHOT). [It is this version of the 2-hit scenario that apparently disappeared while in the custody of Robert F. Kennedy between April of 1965 and October of 1966.]

So if James Tague's wounding was not the stimulus that caused Humes to rewrite the autopsy report Saturday night and then burn the first draft in his fireplace Sunday morning, what was?

Actually, the answer is remarkably simple. The official conclusions of both the Secret Service and the FBI, although not yet published, had clearly already been reached late Friday night (after the two FBI agents left the morgue, having heard a 2-hit conclusion arrived at by Humes), namely: THAT PRESIDENT KENNEDY WAS HIT BY TWO SHOTS, AND GOVERNOR CONNALLY WAS HIT BY ONE SHOT. The official conclusions of both the Secret Service and the FBI were that 3 shots were fired by the assassin; the first and third shots hit President Kennedy; and the second shot hit Governor Connally. [And what is truly remarkable, in hindsight, is that in spite of the public's eventual knowledge, in the summer of 1964, of the missed shot that wounded James Tague, and the recognition of a missed shot by the Warren Commission in its late September 1964 report, neither the FBI nor the Secret Service ever changed their official positions that two shots hit JFK from behind, and one shot hit Connally from behind. Neither the Secret Service nor the FBI have ever publicly acknowledged a missed shot, even though the evidence for it is quite strong.] In summary, it was clearly the simple fact that Connally had been seriously wounded (and indeed, had almost died), that caused Navy officials to abandon the 3-hit scenario on JFK that the pathologists had inconveniently arrived at about 11:30 PM Friday night at Bethesda, in response to Humes' phone call with Dr. Perry shortly after 11:00 PM.

Before the FBI agents (Sibert and O'Neill) left the Bethesda morgue at 11:00 PM on November 22, 1963, they heard Dr. Humes soberly intone his conclusion that the pattern was clear, and that two shots and only two shots had struck JFK, and that both of his wounds (a high shoulder wound and a head shot) had been inflicted from behind. This information led to the conclusions of the Secret Service and the FBI reported above. But Humes then spoke to Dr. Perry in Dallas shortly after the FBI agents left the Bethesda morgue, and was confronted with the fact that the Dallas treating physicians had noted a bullet wound in JFK's throat. This fact caused the prosectors to change a 2-hit conclusion to a 3-hit conclusion, as witnessed by Richard Lipsey, and recounted to the HSCA staff, both orally and in a very precise diagram, in 1978. Lipsey obviously witnessed the revised conclusions reached AFTER the FBI agents left the morgue---conclusions reached based upon the new information from Dallas that President Kennedy had a bullet wound in the anterior neck. It is surely this late-Friday night conclusion that JFK was hit 3 times, that went into the first draft reviewed on Saturday, November 23, 1963 at Bethesda.

Obviously, after reviewing the first draft on Saturday, someone in authority over Humes at Bethesda---either CAPT Canada, or CAPT Stover, or RADM Galloway---said "Wait a minute! Connally was wounded too, wasn't he?" And because the U.S. government was already imprisoned in its evidentiary straightjacket of "one assassin, three shots," this necessitated that the number of hits on JFK was reduced back down to the two hits originally postulated by Humes in front of FBI agents Sibert and O'Neill, so that the third bullet could account for Connally's wounds. It is my belief that the next version of the autopsy report, the first signed version (which later went missing), explained the throat wound seen in Dallas as having been caused by a fragment from the head shot. (The remarks of Warren Commission Chief Counsel J. Lee Rankin, recorded in a then-Top Secret transcript of conversation by a court reporter at an Executive Session hearing in January, is the evidence for this conclusion.)

In short order---probably within a day or two after the first signed version was executed on Sunday, November 24th---the Zapruder film had revealed to anyone who looked at it that the throat wound could not have been caused by a fragment from the head shot, since the film showed JFK reacting with distress to a throat wound PRIOR TO the head shot. The Zapruder film was therefore clearly the cause for the abandonment of the FIRST SIGNED VERSION of the autopsy report, and its replacement with the SECOND SIGNED VERSION, no later than December 11th, 1963. But the Zapruder film had not yet been seen by those who abandoned the 3-hit scenario on Saturday afternoon, and replaced it with a 2-hit scenario that postulated the throat wound was caused by a fragment from the head shot.

Summing up here, it is still evident to me that the autopsy prosectors changed a 2-hit conclusion re: JFK to a 3-hit conclusion late Friday night (11/22/63), and then abandoned the 3-hits on JFK in favor of a modified 2-hit conclusion late on Saturday (11/23/63). The cause for this change was almost certainly NOT the knowledge that James Tague had been wounded, however; the cause was the simple necessity to account for Governor Connally's wounds.

To those who wish to more completely understand this change in thinking on my part, and the evolution of the autopsy report's conclusions during the hours and days following President Kennedy's assassination, I refer you to Chapter 11 of my book. END
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 29 Aug 2012, 02:10

That's a lot of material from Mr. Horne. Unfortunately, it is virtually ALL theory and misrepresentation of facts. He continues to refer to Hume's discarding a first autopsy when it was NOT a first autopsy at all. It was his notes that were discarded. That changes everything. I'll read through your post a couple more times however, to see if I'm missing something revolutuionary that I just haven't seen yet.

Please allow me to point out an error and fallacy in Mr. Horne's wording in hopes that you can see how his statements are conspiracy driving instead of reality driven.
I quote from your quote of Mr. Horne:

"...IT REMAINS A FACT THAT THE 3-HIT SCENARIO SURELY RECORDED IN THE FIRST DRAFT OF THE JFK AUTOPSY REPORT..."

Okay, here's the problem. No, it is not a "fact" if he doesn't have have the first draft of the autopsy report. He can't know what was written on something burned in a fireplace. Second, he is assuming or using his own thoughts when he is referring to what Hume had in his notes (again, they were notes, not a misrepresented "first draft.") This should be obvious to the reader when he uses the wording "...surely recorded..." Again, it can't be a fact when he's only assuming that something was jotted down. He doesn't know this and it cannot be a fact at all, yet he wants the reader to believe it was a fact.

Further, he uses phrases such as "obviously," "probably," and "almost certainly" to sway the opinion of the reader. If there are facts, then it would already be "obvious" to the reader and that statement wouldn't be needed.
Hopefully I wrote that appropriately enough for people to understand the point I'm trying to get across. The bottom line, his theory on the assassination is based on opinion rather than facts and I "obviously," "probably," and "almost certainly" won't pay over $100 to read it... :-)
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 29 Aug 2012, 06:45

Ok, ProWag. I am all for a good argument. But, I think you and I have a different philosophical opinion on evidence, preponderance of evidence, what is fact and what is fiction. The Warren Report is fiction. It is littered with omissions, distortions, strawman tactics and downright lies. What we have with Horne and the ARRB is the last "governmental" look at the assassination. If we cannot take Horne's and Gunn's testimony at face value weighed against all such proceeding panels: The Clark Panel, the Rockefeller Commission, The Pike & Church Hearings, and the House Select Committee on Assassinations then where does this discussion go? The ARRB broke it down and interviewed some of the participants in the coverup. Yes, Horne is the only one to produce an in depth look at of the JFK act. Why no others? I think the question you might ask yourself is why the ARRB's findings are not known to the public? Why hasn't the media puffed what the ARRB found in the four years it convened? In essence, the murder of JFK is hiding in plain sight. And most do not want to look or know where to look.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 29 Aug 2012, 21:01

Misha wrote:Ok, ProWag. I am all for a good argument. But, I think you and I have a different philosophical opinion on evidence, preponderance of evidence, what is fact and what is fiction. The Warren Report is fiction. It is littered with omissions, distortions, strawman tactics and downright lies. What we have with Horne and the ARRB is the last "governmental" look at the assassination. If we cannot take Horne's and Gunn's testimony at face value weighed against all such proceeding panels: The Clark Panel, the Rockefeller Commission, The Pike & Church Hearings, and the House Select Committee on Assassinations then where does this discussion go? The ARRB broke it down and interviewed some of the participants in the coverup. Yes, Horne is the only one to produce an in depth look at of the JFK act. Why no others? I think the question you might ask yourself is why the ARRB's findings are not known to the public? Why hasn't the media puffed what the ARRB found in the four years it convened? In essence, the murder of JFK is hiding in plain sight. And most do not want to look or know where to look.

I don't disagree that the Warren Report is littered with misinformation.
I think the reason that the ARRB is not as "famous," is that there was really no new evidence that came from it. The only conclusion they came up with that was different was the acoustical evidence which has since been shown to have not been accurate. Hence, both government investigations came up with virtually the same conclusion.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 30 Aug 2012, 08:46

ProfWag,

The ARRB never dealt with the acoustical evidence whatsoever. It may have been mentioned, but not part of what Horne and Gunn explored in the ARRB. However, there was nothing released under the ARRB regarding the acoustical evidence that I am aware of.

The ARRB's sole job was the collation of all materials from all the services (government, military, intelligence, etc.) mentioned in the previous posts regarding the JFK assassination. The only reason why individuals were subpoenaed and re-interviewed were for clarification purposes only. Here is where the public learns the details in the coverup. I did not want to get into this, however, let me give you a specific example: The JFK cranial x-rays - Dr. David Mantik, a radiation oncologist examined the original x-rays released under the ARRB and found out that they were forgeries. Through a new technique of examining the authenticity of x-rays (Densitometry) he determined the occipital and parietal area were many, many times thicker than what is possible in nature. No one in the National Security State apparatus dare confirm Mantik's findings. Again, the proverbial elephant in the living room. This is why one must read the totality of "Inside the ARRB" to understand the minutia. Yes, hard work....
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby ProfWag » 30 Aug 2012, 20:57

Misha wrote:ProfWag,

The ARRB never dealt with the acoustical evidence whatsoever. It may have been mentioned, but not part of what Horne and Gunn explored in the ARRB. However, there was nothing released under the ARRB regarding the acoustical evidence that I am aware of.

You're right. My bad. I was thinking of the House Select Committee's findings...
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3843
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 30 Aug 2012, 21:18

All good. Quite understandable trying to keep track of the JFK information.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Scepcop » 09 Oct 2012, 02:53

Explosive Jackie O tapes 'reveal how she believed Lyndon B Johnson killed JFK and had affair with movie star'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... death.html

Last words of Lee Harvey Oswald compiled.

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/LHO.html
“Devotion to the truth is the hallmark of morality; there is no greater, nobler, more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the responsibility of thinking.” - Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
User avatar
Scepcop
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3256
Joined: 16 May 2009, 07:29

Re: JFK Assassination Conspiracy

Postby Misha » 09 Oct 2012, 03:51

Scepcop wrote:Explosive Jackie O tapes 'reveal how she believed Lyndon B Johnson killed JFK and had affair with movie star'

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... death.html

Last words of Lee Harvey Oswald compiled.

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/LHO.html


Thanks, Scepcop. I have no doubts that LBJ was part and parcel to the assassination. However, he was a cog. Yes, a very important cog to the assassination. As I have stated before, the assassination of JFK was sanctioned by the "state."

A good example of the powers working the night before the assassination is the meeting at oil baron Clint Murchinson's home. Hoover, McCloy, Nixon, LBJ and others knew the machinery was moving to eliminate JFK. That machinery was already in place through the duplicity of LBJ, specifically.

Moreover, the "Operations 40" group (CIA & David Atlee Phillips) had gone to great lengths to implicate Oswald with the alleged Mexico trip. It was such a dismal failure by the CIA that the Warren Commission either ignored or underplayed this scenario in order to hide its duplicity. In fact, if this had come out in full during the commission it would have pointed right back to the CIA. Again, it is very important to understand that the CIA, military and State Department were not behind the assassination as a whole. What was behind the assassination with those aforementioned were "off-the-shelf" elements hidden with what we know today as SAPs (Special Access Programs). LBJ in no way could have pulled the assassination off without this integral design in place.
Misha
 
Posts: 438
Joined: 19 Aug 2012, 03:42

PreviousNext

Return to Conspiracies / Cover Ups

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 3 guests

cron