JFK Assassination Forum

OK, but it is being used precisely like racism because of the underlying myth of the Jews as "Christ killers." Otherwise, the visceral hatred of the Jews is inexplicable. People don't just adopt antisemitic attitudes out of thin air. There is no comparable racist-like hatred of Egyptians or other cultures because they weren't "Christ killers." As I stated, that myth has now snowballed where people who care little or nothing about Jesus are antisemitic and really can't tell you why. (As an historical document, the Bible is not a fairy tale; it holds up well insofar as it describes the history of the periods in which it was written.)

Translation: You have no clue how to explain the evidence I've presented, and you've run out of flimsy dodges and specious arguments.

Your howler that a 4-inch difference in the rear head entry wound's location is no big deal and does not matter will go down as one of the all-time gaffes in this forum. Not even the worst WC apologists have been so clueless and silly as to make that laughable argument. Did you just not study basic geometry in high school?

Quote

If is no big deal because it does nothing to negate the finding that JFK was shot in the back of the head by Oswald. That is a mortal lock. The fact that one group of medical examiners or another misplaced the point of entry does nothing to invalidate that conclusion.

You don't seem to have any interest in who shot JFK. Your whole game seems to be how many anomalies you can spot in the evidence as if these anomalies point to a different conclusion than the one the WC gave us. They don't.

Quote

Running closely behind your 4-inches-make-no-difference howler is your latest attempt to duck the implications of the drastic contradiction between the brain photos and the skull x-rays regarding the amount of missing brain. Your "explanation" in your reply was that "somebody made a mistake about how much brain was blown away"! "Somebody"?!

Somebody like you. I have no explanation for the goofy conclusions you arrive at.

Quote

The fact that the x-rays show about 2/3 of the right brain to be missing has been confirmed by multiple sets of OD measurements, and has been noted by Dr. Fred Hodges, Dr. James Humes, Dr. David Mantik, Dr. Gary Aguilar, Dr. John Lattimer, and Dr. Michael Chesser, not to mention that we know that bits of JFK's brain were blown or fell onto 16 surfaces during the shooting, not counting the "large chunk of brain" that Jackie brought to the Parkland ER and handed to Dr. Jenkins. Yet, we both know that every single expert who has examined the brain photos has said they show only a tiny amount of missing brain tissue, with Dr. Baden specifying the amount of missing tissue as "less than 1-2 percent" of the brain.

Explain how this discrepancy invalidates the conclusion that Oswald shot JFK.

Quote

So either the brain photos are fraudulent or the skull x-rays are severely wrong; the numerous people who saw bits of JFK's brain blown onto 16 surfaces were all "mistaken"; Dr. Jenkins was just dreaming when he said Jackie brought a large piece of brain into the ER and handed it to him; and Tom Robinson (autopsy mortician), James Sibert (FBI agent at autopsy), Frances O'Neil (FBI agent at autopsy), and Floyd Riebe (assistant photographer at autopsy) were all "mistaken" in reporting that about 1/3 to 1/2 of the brain was missing.

Neither the photos nor the x-rays are fraudulent. At best, you have identified there is disagreement among those who have looked at that evidence as to what it shows. That doesn't make the evidence fraudulent. It means somebody misinterpreted what they saw. That doesn't change the fact that Oswald shot JFK.

Quote

Finally, I notice you declined to deal with Dr. Chesser's two articles that show that the skull x-rays contain evidence that JFK's head was also hit in the right front. I thought you would be anxious to read Dr. Chesser's articles since you adamantly declared there is "zero forensic or medical evidence of any other shot from any other location." Alas, this is just another case of your habit of making sweeping assertions on an issue without having done a modicum of serious research on the subject.

Did Dr. Chesser see the medical evidence. All the medical examiners I am aware of who have seen the medical evidence found no medical evidence of a second shot to the head. Cyril Wecht believed that but not because of any medical evidence he saw. He concluded that from the Z-film. When he presented that hypothesis at the mock trail in the 1980s, Vincent Bugliosi destroyed him on cross examination and made him looks silly.

Quote

BTW, Dr. Mantik presents even more evidence of a  head shot from the front in his 2024 book The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: The Final Analysis: Forensic Analysis of the JFK Autopsy X-Rays. You can find some of that evidence in his online paper "JFK Assassination Paradoxes: A Primer for Beginners," https://themantikview.org/pdf/JFK_Assassination_Paradoxes.pdf. (Of course, I know you'll never read anything that disagrees with you. I'm citing these sources for the benefit of interested readers who might be reading this thread.)

Where does Mantik say that shot was fired from because there is no location from in front of he limo that is the least bit plausible.

An important point that I did not include in the OP is the fact that the autopsy evidence shows two separate, disconnected wound paths in the brain, i.e., the subcortical and cortical damage to JFK's brain. There is no wound path or fragment trail between these two wound paths—in other words, these are two separate, unconnected wound paths. The cortical damage is near the very top of the skull; it is close to the high fragment trail and is on the outer (or cortical) surface of the brain. The subcortical wound path is nearly 2 inches below the cortical damage and spans the length of the brain from front to back. The first expert to note these two separate wound paths was Dr. Joseph Riley, a neuroscientist who specialized in neuroanatomy.

British researcher Martin Hay has said the following on this issue:

We've known when Connally was hit for over 60 years now. He was hit at Z234. We know this from Connally himself. After viewing the Zapruder film in slow motion several times, he told the WC he wasn't hit before Z230. In 1966, LIFE magazine allowed him to study a high-quality print of the Zapruder film under high magnification. After doing so for some time, Connally reached two key conclusions:

1. He was certain he was not hit before Z229.

2. He identified Z234 as the moment of impact.

Connally had valid reasons for selecting Z234 as the moment of impact. Starting in Z238 his right shoulder rapidly collapses, his cheeks puff, and a pained expression appears on his face. The right-shoulder collapse matches Connally's earliest descriptions of the bullet's impact: he said the impact felt like someone hit him powerfully in the back with their first.

A Z234 hit makes perfect sense with what we see in the Zapruder film. It makes total sense that a bullet that hit Connally in the back would only take four Zapruder frames--4/18ths of a second or 218.4 milliseconds--to drive his right shoulder downward. 218.4 milliseconds is in the range of the speed of an eye blink. Eye-blink speed ranges between 100 and 400 milliseconds.

Similarly, the forced expulsion of air from Connally's lungs would have been quite rapid and forceful, quickly causing his cheeks to puff, just as we see in the Zapruder film virtually simultaneously with his right-shoulder drop. The cheeks start to puff just a frame or two after the right shoulder starts to drop.

Also, the shattering of 4 inches of rib bone alone was extremely painful and would have quickly caused a pained expression to appear on Connally's face. Forensic science tells us that when people experience a sharp pain, it only takes 150-300 milliseconds to react with a pained facial expression.

Jim Moore, one of the most honest WC defenders around, concludes that Connally was hit at Z236 and he basis this partly on the rapid collapse of Connally's right shoulder starting in Z238 (Conspiracy of One, pp. 198-199, see also p. 159, where he says that Connally's right shoulder "drops dramatically").

Obviously, these reactions make no sense in a Z224-hit scenario. It most would not have taken Connally's right shoulder 14 frames to begin to be driven downward, nor would it have taken 14 frames for Connally to react with a pained facial expression and for his cheeks to puff.

It is worth noting that Dr. Robert Shaw, Connally's chest surgeon, studied the Zapruder film and concluded the bullet struck the Governor at Z236, "give or take 1 or 2 frames, and that Dr. Charles Gregory, Connally's wrist surgeon, opined that the hit occurred between Z234 and Z238.

But, of course, WC defenders here cannot accept the fact that Connally was not hit before Z229 because it destroys any version of their untenable Z220-224 SBT.

This is silly. There was no forensic, photographic, and ballistics evidence that disproved the suicide explanation in the George Reeves case, whereas there is plenty of such evidence in the JFK case.