WC-FBI Suppressed NAA Evidence that Oswald Did NOT Fire a Rifle on 11/22/63

[Tim Nickerson]

The Weisberg-released documents show that FBI expert Cortlandt Cunningham lied through his teeth about the paraffin tests in his WC testimony. Yet, WC apologists still cite Cunningham’s testimony to justify their rejection of the negative paraffin results on Oswald’s cheek cast.

I, Charles L. Killion, Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, do hereby state that I have reviewed the testimonies of Robert A. Frazier on March 31 and May 13, 1964, and testimonies of Cortlandt Cunningham on March 11 and April 1, 1964, ,before the President's Commission on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and I agree with the conclusions stated therein.
I do hereby state that I conducted independent examinations of the items which were the subject of Mr. Cunningham's and Mr. Frazier's testimonies and that on the basis of these independent examinations, I reached the same conclusions reached by Mr. Frazier and Mr. Cunningham.

Signed this 31st day of July 1964, at Washington, D.C .
(S) Charles L. Killion,
CHARLES L, KILLION.
https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/killion.htm



Oswald tested negative for nitrates on his face because his Carcano rifle did not deposit nitrate residue on the cheek when fired.

[John Mytton]

Oh, boy. All the reaching and straining and special pleading from you folks is a sight to behold!

So the alleged murder weapon, a Mannlicher-Carcano, discharged GSR vastly differently than the Mannlicher-Carcano in the Oak Ridge test!

Like the other sane members have rightfully told you, we aren't discussing two identical rifles fresh from the factory but decades old surplus military weapons with an unknown history. Hahaha!

BTW, it's deliciously ironic that your latest ploy is to equate "Oswald did it" members with extreme 9/11, Moon landing and Flat Earther conspiracy theorists, who all commonly believe that photographic evidence was faked, reputable experts lied and instead rely on specific outlier "experts" who specialize in completely different fields. Take a good look in the mirror Griffith because you are a carbon copy of those extreme freaks.
It's almost as if you have a vested interest in being a tinfoil hat wearing Loon? Hmmm?



JohnM

[Royell Storing]

Seven marksmen fired a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. They did not fire Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle.

Stop being so ridiculous.

   Why no mention/testing of a Mauser? You know why.

[Tim Nickerson]

   Why no mention/testing of a Mauser? You know why.

I truly don't know why. Educate me.

[Michael T. Griffith]

Like the other sane members have rightfully told you, we aren't discussing two identical rifles fresh from the factory but decades old surplus military weapons with an unknown history. Hahaha!

So you're doubling down on your desperate argument that the sixth-floor Mannlicher-Carcano discharged GSR vastly differently than the Carcano used in the Oak Ridge test. I ask again, Why do you suppose that not even the FBI floated that silly argument? And why do you suppose the FBI fought so doggedly to avoid releasing the raw data from the Oak Ridge tests? You keep ducking these questions.

You still haven't read Pat Speer's exhaustive chapter on the Oak Ridge test and Oswald's paraffin cast, have you?

"The other sane members"? Yeah, uh-huh. You mean the tiny band of SBT true believers who still peddle a theory of the shooting that is rejected by 2/3 to 3/4 of the Western world, according to every poll taken in the last 20 years.

BTW, it's deliciously ironic that your latest ploy is to equate "Oswald did it" members with extreme 9/11, Moon landing and Flat Earther conspiracy theorists,

Well, actually, no. I said that SBT believers remind me of people who believe in 9/11 Truther claims, fake Moon-landing claims, and flat-Earth claims. Not all WC apologists insist the SBT is an "established fact."

who all commonly believe that photographic evidence was faked,

As if criminals in other cases have never faked and altered evidence! Plus, most of you guys believe that the HSCA acoustical experts, along with Blakey and Cornwell, faked the acoustical evidence. Most of you believe that Dr. David Mantik, a respected radiation oncologist and physicist who has published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, faked his optical-density measurements of the JFK skull x-rays. Most of you believe that Dr. Michael Chesser, a board-certified neurologist with over 20 years of experience, faked his optical-density measurements of the JFK skull x-rays in order to support Dr. Mantik's allegedly fake OD measurements.

reputable experts lied and instead rely on specific outlier "experts" who specialize in completely different fields.

LOL! This is just comical. For years, your side's leading expert on the shooting (Lattimer) was a urologist! When the HSCA's acoustical evidence came along, your side relied on a rigged panel that did not even include a single acoustical expert, while the HSCA experts were acoustical experts who had been recommended by the Acoustical Society of America!

Was Dr. Joseph Dolce, the Army's chief wound ballistics expert, the guy who supervised the WC's wound ballistics tests--was he an "outlier expert"? Dolce said the SBT was fantasy.

Was Dr. Milton Helpern, one of the world's leading forensic pathologists, an "outlier expert"? Helpern said the SBT was bogus.

How about Dr. Robert Kirschner, one of the ARRB's forensic experts? Was he an "outlier expert"? Kirschner concluded the SBT was "very dubious."

How about Dr. Douglas Ubelaker, another one of the ARRB's forensic experts and a forensic anthropologist at the Smithsonian Institution? Is he an "outlier expert"? He told the ARRB that the damage seen in the autopsy photos indicates that a bullet struck the skull from the front or right front.

And on and on we could go.

Take a good look in the mirror Griffith because you are a carbon copy of those extreme freaks. It's almost as if you have a vested interest in being a tinfoil hat wearing Loon? Hmmm? JohnM

Yet I'm not the one who's peddling a version of JFK's death that 2/3 to 3/4 of the Western world rejects. You are.

You and other SBT believers here are the ones who act like tinfoil hatters. Just look at how you folks have reacted to the most sophisticated, detailed SBT trajectory analysis ever done, an analysis done by a leading forensic engineering and digital reconstruction firm that has worked on other high-profile cases. I refer, of course, to the Knott Laboratory SBT analysis.

It is downright comical to see you folks summarily dismissing the Knott Lab SBT analysis and even accusing Knott's experts of being dishonest, incompetent, clownish, etc., etc. You've reacted to the Knott Lab SBT study the same way that Flat Earthers react to satellite photos of the Earth, the same way 9/11 Truthers react to the scientific studies that destroy their lunacy, and the same way that Moon landing deniers act when confronted with the mountain of evidence that proves we landed on the Moon.

You've also exhibited a Flat Earther, Moon-landing denier mentality in response to Dr. Mantik's historic scientific findings on the autopsy skull x-rays, even though a number of other experts have endorsed them, including Dr. Robert Livingston, Dr. Arthur Haas, and Dr. Michael Chesser. 

Or, just look at how you guys keep dancing around the fact that the tie had no hole in it, that no metallic traces were found around the shirt slits, and that there was no fabric missing from the shirt slits. These facts mean game over for the SBT to any rational, objective person. 

[Jack Nessan]

So you're doubling down on your desperate argument that the sixth-floor Mannlicher-Carcano discharged GSR vastly differently than the Carcano used in the Oak Ridge test. I ask again, Why do you suppose that not even the FBI floated that silly argument? And why do you suppose the FBI fought so doggedly to avoid releasing the raw data from the Oak Ridge tests? You keep ducking these questions.

You still haven't read Pat Speer's exhaustive chapter on the Oak Ridge test and Oswald's paraffin cast, have you?

"The other sane members"? Yeah, uh-huh. You mean the tiny band of SBT true believers who still peddle a theory of the shooting that is rejected by 2/3 to 3/4 of the Western world, according to every poll taken in the last 20 years.

Well, actually, no. I said that SBT believers remind me of people who believe in 9/11 Truther claims, fake Moon-landing claims, and flat-Earth claims. Not all WC apologists insist the SBT is an "established fact."

As if criminals in other cases have never faked and altered evidence! Plus, most of you guys believe that the HSCA acoustical experts, along with Blakey and Cornwell, faked the acoustical evidence. Most of you believe that Dr. David Mantik, a respected radiation oncologist and physicist who has published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, faked his optical-density measurements of the JFK skull x-rays. Most of you believe that Dr. Michael Chesser, a board-certified neurologist with over 20 years of experience, faked his optical-density measurements of the JFK skull x-rays in order to support Dr. Mantik's allegedly fake OD measurements.

LOL! This is just comical. For years, your side's leading expert on the shooting (Lattimer) was a urologist! When the HSCA's acoustical evidence came along, your side relied on a rigged panel that did not even include a single acoustical expert, while the HSCA experts were acoustical experts who had been recommended by the Acoustical Society of America!

Was Dr. Joseph Dolce, the Army's chief wound ballistics expert, the guy who supervised the WC's wound ballistics tests--was he an "outlier expert"? Dolce said the SBT was fantasy.

Was Dr. Milton Helpern, one of the world's leading forensic pathologists, an "outlier expert"? Helpern said the SBT was bogus.

How about Dr. Robert Kirschner, one of the ARRB's forensic experts? Was he an "outlier expert"? Kirschner concluded the SBT was "very dubious."

How about Dr. Douglas Ubelaker, another one of the ARRB's forensic experts and a forensic anthropologist at the Smithsonian Institution? Is he an "outlier expert"? He told the ARRB that the damage seen in the autopsy photos indicates that a bullet struck the skull from the front or right front.

And on and on we could go.

Yet I'm not the one who's peddling a version of JFK's death that 2/3 to 3/4 of the Western world rejects. You are.

You and other SBT believers here are the ones who act like tinfoil hatters. Just look at how you folks have reacted to the most sophisticated, detailed SBT trajectory analysis ever done, an analysis done by a leading forensic engineering and digital reconstruction firm that has worked on other high-profile cases. I refer, of course, to the Knott Laboratory SBT analysis.

It is downright comical to see you folks summarily dismissing the Knott Lab SBT analysis and even accusing Knott's experts of being dishonest, incompetent, clownish, etc., etc. You've reacted to the Knott Lab SBT study the same way that Flat Earthers react to satellite photos of the Earth, the same way 9/11 Truthers react to the scientific studies that destroy their lunacy, and the same way that Moon landing deniers act when confronted with the mountain of evidence that proves we landed on the Moon.

You've also exhibited a Flat Earther, Moon-landing denier mentality in response to Dr. Mantik's historic scientific findings on the autopsy skull x-rays, even though a number of other experts have endorsed them, including Dr. Robert Livingston, Dr. Arthur Haas, and Dr. Michael Chesser. 

Or, just look at how you guys keep dancing around the fact that the tie had no hole in it, that no metallic traces were found around the shirt slits, and that there was no fabric missing from the shirt slits. These facts mean game over for the SBT to any rational, objective person.

Well, actually, no. I said that SBT believers remind me of people who believe in 9/11 Truther claims, fake Moon-landing claims, and flat-Earth claims. Not all WC apologists insist the SBT is an "established fact.

Speaking of Flat Earthers and etc. These gems are more along the lines of the moon is made of cheese.

Who possibly could doubt you? Shots from all directions and silencers too. Nice thinking.

MG----” The right-frontal snow storm seen on the JFK skull x-rays is a clear indication that a high-velocity frangible bullet struck JFK in the right front (just beyond the hairline).”

MG---” This is not to mention that we have known for years now that the back wound had no exit point.”

MG---” Yet, when he learned the facts of the matter, he still refused to acknowledge the evidence of a right-frontal shot”.....”I devote an entire chapter to the evidence of a right-frontal shot in my 2023 book A Comforting Lie: The Myth that a Lone Gunman Killed President Kennedy.”

MG---” A lower-floor window of the TSBD is a possibility, but I think that a more likely lower firing position was a first-floor or second-floor window of the Dal-Tex Building. Some witnesses believed shots came from that building, and recall that a Mafia man was arrested as he was leaving the building because he appeared to be acting suspiciously. The Dallas police soon released him.
 
It makes complete sense to assume that one of the gunmen, perhaps two, used a silencer.”

[Steve M. Galbraith]

Well, actually, no. I said that SBT believers remind me of people who believe in 9/11 Truther claims, fake Moon-landing claims, and flat-Earth claims. Not all WC apologists insist the SBT is an "established fact.

Speaking of Flat Earthers and etc. These gems are more along the lines of the moon is made of cheese.

Who possibly could doubt you? Shots from all directions and silencers too. Nice thinking.

MG----” The right-frontal snow storm seen on the JFK skull x-rays is a clear indication that a high-velocity frangible bullet struck JFK in the right front (just beyond the hairline).”

MG---” This is not to mention that we have known for years now that the back wound had no exit point.”

MG---” Yet, when he learned the facts of the matter, he still refused to acknowledge the evidence of a right-frontal shot”.....”I devote an entire chapter to the evidence of a right-frontal shot in my 2023 book A Comforting Lie: The Myth that a Lone Gunman Killed President Kennedy.”

MG---” A lower-floor window of the TSBD is a possibility, but I think that a more likely lower firing position was a first-floor or second-floor window of the Dal-Tex Building. Some witnesses believed shots came from that building, and recall that a Mafia man was arrested as he was leaving the building because he appeared to be acting suspiciously. The Dallas police soon released him.
 
It makes complete sense to assume that one of the gunmen, perhaps two, used a silencer.”

Here's my favorite (it's a long list): He says it's a myth that Oswald shot JFK but he also says this: "Now that we know the OAS used a gun-camera, the possibility that the Babushka Lady was using such a weapon as well cannot be dismissed out of hand."

Yes, because the OAS used a gun camera that is additional evidence of the possibility that Babushka Lady used one. What the one has to do with other is...well, it's conspiracy world, it doesn't have to be logical. Babushka Lady? Camera gun?

So he dismisses the idea that Oswald was a gunman - it's a myth - but he cannot dismiss the possibility that the Babushka Lady shot JFK. And oh yeah, Babushka Lady was really June (and Jerri; she had two covers) Cobb a "CIA agent". Cobb was, from what I've read, a CIA informant not an agent. But again, in conspiracy world it doesn't matter.

It's remarkable how he holds the evidence against Oswald to this absurd degree and then turns around and believes that Babushka Lady possibly shot JFK. With a camera gun?

Here are the links if you want to read this craziness:
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31443-jeff-sundbergs-research-on-gun-cameras-babushka-lady-and-mary-haversticks-book/

And, of course, he says Sirhan was "hypno programmed" to shoot RFK. Yes he was. And yes he said that.

[Jack Nessan]

Here's my favorite (it's a long list): He says it's a myth that Oswald shot JFK but he also says this: "Now that we know the OAS used a gun-camera, the possibility that the Babushka Lady was using such a weapon as well cannot be dismissed out of hand."

Yes, because the OAS used a gun camera that is additional evidence of the possibility that Babushka Lady used one. What the one has to do with other is...well, it's conspiracy world, it doesn't have to be logical. Babushka Lady? Camera gun?

So he dismisses the idea that Oswald was a gunman - it's a myth - but he cannot dismiss the possibility that the Babushka Lady shot JFK. And oh yeah, Babushka Lady was really June (and Jerri; she had two covers) Cobb a "CIA agent". Cobb was, from what I've read, a CIA informant not an agent. But again, in conspiracy world it doesn't matter.

It's remarkable how he holds the evidence against Oswald to this absurd degree and then turns around and believes that Babushka Lady possibly shot JFK. With a camera gun?

Here are the links if you want to read this craziness:
https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31443-jeff-sundbergs-research-on-gun-cameras-babushka-lady-and-mary-haversticks-book/

And, of course, he says Sirhan was "hypno programmed" to shoot RFK. Yes he was. And yes he said that.

WOW, I had no idea as to have far removed from reality he has become. Unbelievable.