JFK Assassination Forum

Since the evidence against Oswald is rock solid, CT's like Griffith are reduced to claiming the Mountain of Evidence is faked, manipulated or is simply misrepresented but as I will amply demonstrate his/their claims are just amateur observations and nonsense.

No boxes were moved in the time between Powell and Dillard taking their respective photos and is just a matter of differing perspective. In fact can any CT give a legitimate reason for moving any boxes in the minutes following the assassination and especially when many eyes in Dealey Plaza were fixated on these windows?



There was no hole in the windscreen of Kennedy's Limo as can be seen in the corresponding glass crack in the same position in Altgens photo and the later official photo which shows no hole.





Many stereoscopic photos were taken of Kennedy's injuries so as to give a better 3D representation of these injuries and as a by-product these stereoscopic images by definition rule out any manipulation because any attempt at simultaneous fakery would literally "stick out" on a different plane. These genuine impossible to alter back of head photos show no exit wound.



The "red spot" bullet entrance was also photographed twice and when the skin was stretched with differing tautness between the two photos, the back of head entrance wound can be seen to slightly open and close, thus proving the red spot was not merely a pool of blood.



Kennedy's neck exit wound was located directly behind his tie knot. This is important because CT's are constantly trying to manipulate the neck wound position to further their anti-SBF BS.



The backyard photos have been proven 7 ways to Sunday but still there is CT's amateurish analysis like the square chin which was simply a product of overhead lighting and the subsequent shadow.



Some time later a back yard photo was discovered IIRC at the Dallas Police Headquarters with a cut-out and the CT's say this is proof that it was one of the templates for the backyard photos but the cut-out photo obviously was taken many months later because of the significant plant growth to Oswald's left.
But as we know the genuine backyard photos were taken just after Oswald ordered and received his rifle and just before the Walker assassination attempt. BTW how likely is it that someone had the foresight to take at least three empty photos of the backyard at Neely street eight months before the assassination and then later have at least three differing heads of Oswald which individually magically match the lighting and shadows of the Neely street backyard photos?



The following ballistics study shows that a shot from behind, high and above shows a close correlation between the expelled matter and resulting exit wound seen in the Zapruder film and this recreation.



These Dealey Plaza eyewitnesses who were interviewed within hours, simply described what they saw and their descriptions closely match the Zapruder film which in turn are further proof that the autopsy photos and X-Rays are genuine.



It only happened one way!



Further proof that this Autopsy photo is genuine is that the scalp flap and ragged edge is an exact match of Moorman's photo which was taken a split second after.



The Moorman photo was on the UPI network on Saturday and was on the front page of newspapers on Sunday.





Real life isn't a Hollywood movie with exaggerated physics but as can be seen when a FMJ bullet is fired into a head and as is graphically demonstrated in the following footage, a relatively lightweight penetrating bullet lacks the kinetic energy to throw anybody anywhere. These brave soldiers simply fall straight down, they don't even fall forward and in fact they move back towards the shooters.



The first eyewitnesses who ran towards the Knoll didn't run up the steps! The first eyewitnesses ran right past the fence and supposed smoke and were just following Haygood who ran up to the railway overpass.





And where did the majority of the "steps crowd" come from? It appears that the majority came from across the Plaza and simply sheep-like were just mindlessly following the flock.





For every claim of conspiracy in the JFKA, there is a always a simple, logical and/or scientific level of refutation, so CT's like Griffith "shotgun" their braindead claims in an attempt to overwhelm the reader.
It's easy to make a single sentence conspiracy claim like Kennedy's head moves back and to the left due to a bullet like a Hollywood movie but researching scientific principles such as momentum, inelastic/elastic collisions, kinetic energy, physiology and researching WW2 films of FMJ strikes takes time which most lay people couldn't be bothered with.
And another example is saying everyone ran immediately to the steps of the grassy knoll because of the Bell film but when did this happen, who was in this crowd and did they know from where the gunshot sounds originated, but again researching the chronological order based on photos and testimony takes time.

So in conclusion dear reader don't take the CT's claims as gospel, but use your brain and do a little research and ask yourself do their claims make sense because they usually don't, for instance why have your "lone nut" high and behind yet still have another assassin in front, how does that make sense or why use different types of bullets when your "lone nut" is exclusively using full metal jacket bullets?

JohnM

Nosenko's father was a relatively important and honored official in the Soviet Government, Ivan Nosenko. He was awarded three Orders of Lenin, the highest civilian award the Soviets gave out and after his death his funeral was attended by top Soviet officials including Khrushchev. In fact, Khrushchev was one of the honor guards at the funeral.

Question: Why would the KGB send the son of this relatively famous (for the Soviets) person to the US? That's incredibly embarrassing for them. Kalugin said the KGB didn't use fake defectors because it made the Soviet Union look bad and because they would lose control of the person after he left. Send a nobody not the son of a war hero.

Doesn't mean it didn't happen but it's something to add to the evidence that Nosenko was legitimate.

LP--

John Newman is a pretty serious researcher, and he seems to give credence to Bagley, and does Malcolm Blunt.

Newman goes even further, positing that Bruce Solie was a KGB mole.

Nosenko's narrative about the KGB having no stake in LHO is a bit glib. And the timing was perfect.

Gus Russo seems to have his head screwed on tight.

I keep an open mind on this one.

As for threatening to murder JFK, down in MC LHO seemed prone to outbursts, and was ardently seeking passage to Cuba. In a moment of anger, perhaps LHO uttered threats.

Then I would say, as I used to say to Sandy Larsen when he insisted he had proved some bombshell to a level of legal and/or medical certainty: Don't waste your time with me and the other 20 putzes who hang out here. Take your bombshell to some reputable, peer-reviewed professional journal and see if they bite. Or interest some halfway reputable researcher/author who might have an "in" with such a journal. As I have learned when I've wasted my time on a significant piece of work, these threads vanish into the mist in a matter of days. If you think you really have something, put it in a publishable format and see if it convinces someone more significant than three of the 20 local putzes.

    You are unaware of those that only "look in" to this Forum and prefer to not participate. When he was still with us, Gary Mack chose going this route. There is much going on backstage that you are not aware of.
    You think I'm unorthodox? I prefer to think of myself as Vinny Gambini and I am about to call Mona Lisa Vito to the stand via my NEW Image Evidence. Case Closed! (again).

                                   ....................................  NEW Image Evidence COMING SOON  ...........................................................

Then I would say, as I used to say to Sandy Larsen when he insisted he had proved some bombshell to a level of legal and/or medical certainty: Don't waste your time with me and the other 20 putzes who hang out here. Take your bombshell to some reputable, peer-reviewed professional journal and see if they bite. Or interest some halfway reputable researcher/author who might have an "in" with such a journal. As I have learned when I've wasted my time on a significant piece of work, these threads vanish into the mist in a matter of days. If you think you really have something, put it in a publishable format and see if it convinces someone more significant than three of the 20 local putzes.