JFK Assassination Forum

I see the "face" that you want to see as Lamb Chop. Compare that "face" with the actual Lamb Chop. There is simply no resemblance. This is just pareidolia. I would refer you to the Face On Mars, which by God did look like a face until it was proven to actually look nothing like a face. I would refer you to my bedroom paneling, where I sometimes amuse myself by finding faces in the knots and ridges. Do you seriously think that if there HAD been a Lamb Chop in the limousine it would not have been duly noted and preserved? Give it up, willya?

"Pareidolia strikes deep, into your heart it will creep" - Buffalo Springfield, or maybe not

      Please do the research. The Correct lyrics to "For What It's Worth" are, "PARANOIA strikes deep. Into your LIFE it will creep".
      I do recognize your attempted, "Imitation being the highest form of flattery". Problem is, you currently do Not have the mandatory: (1) JFK Assassination Chops, and, (2) Pop Culture Chops, to pull off the mixing of these 2.

Your problem is you assume there were conspirators. Don't you think it would make more sense to establish that first.

Yet another kneejerk response that suggests you don't read posts with any care before flooding the forum with your responses. You exemplify in spades what I've characterized as the LNer who feels obligated to defend the LN narrative with such zeal that you seem irritated and offended that anyone would dare to think differently or expose the narrative to closer scrutiny. This is exactly what internet atheists do - they are offended and angry that anyone would believe in a deity. What do they - and you - care?

My "problem" - Do I have a "problem"?

If you read with any care and comprehension, you would know that I do not "assume there were conspirators." Over the years, including my time here, I must have accumulated at least 2000 posts making clear that I believe the LN narrative or something very close to it is the most plausible explanation. But it's not my religion.

Others, including some very smart and thorough researchers, disagree. I'm willing to entertain their views and play around with conspiracy scenarios of my own. It's an entertaining thought experiment: If I were organizing a conspiracy that included Oswald in the TSBD as either a participant or patsy, how would it have worked? Can I articulate one that makes any sense? If so, is there any evidence to support it?

Without a willingness to do this, the JFKA is, it seems to me, rather dull and boring. I have said that those LNers who feel compelled to defend the narrative with almost religious zeal, and who become offended and irritated by anyone who doesn't share their zeal, are a bigger mystery to me than the most fanatical CTer.

The hallmark of a true CT crank is ...

Oh, wait, I already said that earlier this morning.

The fact that Jackie was wearing white gloves obviously enhances the paradeiolic illusion.

Anyone who continues to humor this man is badly in need of a new hobby.

If you think any of your claims are helping to solve the JFKA, you are only fooling yourself. The case was solved. A long time ago. All your efforts and those of all the CTs combined can't create a different reality. The assassination happened only one way. LHO snuck his cheap war surplus rifle into work, waited in a secluded spot in the TSBD for JFK to arrive, and when JFK's limo made the turn onto Elm St., Oswald opened fire. He missed his first shot, hit JFK in the back with the second, and blew JFK's brains out with the 3rd and final shot. It isn't any more complicated than that. Never was. Never will be.

   So, just SHOW Me this "getaway" car being already parked alongside the Island on the Wiegman Film. This car is 17.5 FEET LONG and stands almost 5 FEET TALL. This car is Longer and Taller than a Civil War Cannon. Objects of this immense size do not just disappear. Yet, I am consistently being told, "it's there, but you just can't see it". People use this excuse with respect to Gordon Arnold not being on any JFK Assassination Images, and they are immediately branded "Kook", "Nut Job", etc. This is exactly where you guys Now are. You have now joined hands and are singing "Kum Ba Yah" with those that support Gordon Arnold.   

The Trask image shows Jackie was holding white flowers.



These video frames confirms Jackie holding the white flowers as she and John are welcomed into the Limo.




Here's John and Jackie entering the Limo through John's side and we can see no one on the other side with a departing gift of a horrifying disembodied Lamb Chop puppets head. BTW why would anyone give the First Lady a cheap knockoff Lamb Chop head which doesn't even include the arms or legs or even a torso?
We also can see Jackie's right hand isn't holding anything and her left arm is cradling two bunches of flowers, so where was she hiding Lamb Chop, stuffed in her jacket?
Then after Jackie sits down she looks down to where we just saw where the white flowers would be, and "gee willikers" she is then seen holding the white flowers with her right hand which effectively rules out a Lamb Chop Groupie running up and placing the gruesome Puppet head into Jackie's accessible left hand.
All events from multiple camera angles follow a logical narrative and there is no need for a Houdini like "watch me pull a rabbit Lamb Chop out of my hat"



And finally here's the frame where there is apparently Lamb Chop's face and we can see within the red box the two flowers highlighted above from when Jackie is entering the Limo, and the left "eyebrow" in the yellow box is simply the space between two flowers.





JohnM

  Hey John - How are you doing?   

                  "...horrifying, disembodied Lamb Chop puppets head"?  It's a Lamb Chop SOCK PUPPET. A Sock Puppet does Not have a body.

                  So, we have "White" flowers and Black flowers on a B/W Film? What other COLORS would you expect to see? And if you look closely at these White Flowers, their color is not much different than Jackie's BRIGHT PINK outfit. Cornerstoning  your argument on "COLOR", when your posted images/still frames were filmed in B/W, is self defeating. What you are attempting to do is akin to describing the color of the "Cactus Rose" on the "The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance" (1962).