Tink Thompson's Untrue Fact

[Richard Coleman]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/11/jfk-assassination-50-years_n_3259817.html?ref=topbar

Execrable article. Video clip shows Thompson beginning that he foisted a false fact upon the world back in 66 or 67. He doesn't actually say what it was however.

What was it?

[Thomas Graves]

Thanks, Lee.

I'll see if I can sign up for a freebie too. I actually have a lot of respect for Tink myself. I still think Six Seconds is a great book even if - thanks to the shoddy, incomplete autopsy - it is ultimately fruitless trying to figure out exactly how the assassination went down.

I don't mind his book so much. I just think some of his comments over the last few years are not entirely correct and some of his early interviews with key individuals were very poor to say the least as I have pointed out elsewhere.

His most recent hollow comments about the Umbrella Man were pretty shoddy. Has the Erroll Morris film been released yet?

Lee,

I agree. I was not impressed by his youtubed attempt to refute TUM's being a conspirator. Too emotion and not enough substance to persuade me to his viewpoint on this, I'm afraid.

--Tommy

[Richard Coleman]

Speaking of suspicious characters, have you ever noticed "hard hat man" as I call him in the Algtens photo? Here the shots have already started, one of the later car doors is open, I believe it was LBJ's car or his bodyguard, and this guy is standing with his feet planted, arms crossed, looking backward, AWAY from the President. I've always wondered who he was and what his story was.

As far as I know, nobody else in DP was wearing a hard hat that day.

[Thomas Graves]

This is one of the main problems that plagues this case.

Thompson went on camera last year and was adamant there was nothing conspiratorial about TUM. Unfortunately, he was the one who had framed the debate. Therefore, if you disagreed with him then you believed TUM was conspiratorial.

I happen to sit in the middle.

The fact remains that the most suspicious character who was stood in Dealey Plaza that afternoon was allowed to walk away without anybody speaking to him and no one in charge of the early investigation ever saw fit to find him and ask him what he was doing pumping an open umbrella up and down in the air at the very moment the President was shot.

Nor did they try to find and question the (IMHO) equally suspicious, radio-packin' Dark Complected Man who just happened to be standing near TUM, "waving" at JFK (with his arm suspiciously high in the air) and who, after the hit, just happened to sit down on the curb right next to TUM for a couple of minutes and (IMHO) can be seen talking into his antennaed "walkie talkie" radio while sitting there next to TUM. Isn't it interesting that neither of these guys hung around to volunteer any eye-witness information to the authorities? Nope, they like split, man, in opposite directions.

On the other hand, how long should it have taken the authorities to realize that it would be nice if these two guys were located and questioned? Did they try to find them or anyone else for that matter? I suppose it's reasonable to assume that photos or (non-Zapruder) films showing TUM and DCM would first have to be developed and printed and made available for the DPD, the SS, and/or the FBI to view, in order to spot them and be cognizant of their suspicious actions and/or their potential value as eye witnesses. So, how long did that take? A couple of days? A couple of weeks? a couple of years? Just wondering.

Also wondering if any of the motorcycle cops or guys in/on the Queen Mary/Halfback SS follow-up car noticed TUM or DCM just before or during the assassination...

--Tommy

Edited May 13, 2013 by Thomas Graves

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I was very alarmed last year when Thompson was celebrated for his Umbrella Man bit.

To me what stood out was that Thompson did not manage to sneak in one iota of pro-conspiracy argument into the clip. He knew that this piece would get way, way more coverage, given those involved. And then the NYT picked it up and used it to, without stating it, scoff at all pro-conspiracy viewpoints.

Thompson is not a dummy. He knows that his work on this movie would get Huge Corporate Media coverage. He can ride into Education Forum with his posse all he wants and proclaim that he still believes in Conspiracy. THAT DOES NOT MATTER SO LONG AS THE ONLY THING THAT REACHES MILLIONS--RATHER THAN A FEW HUNDRED HERE-- IS HIS STATURE AS A BAD BOY NOW GONE GOOD, I.E. posing for a film or article which he knows damn well will only reach a wide audience if it plays to the ear of our Court Media.

Unless Thompson gets some pro-conspiracy points before the same wide audience fast.... I am growing kind of suspicious here. I'm sure, given his reputation, he does not care what I think. But ultimately what this case is about is neither a former Yale professor or some middle ages social studies teacher. It is the legitimation (or just delegitimation ) of an outdated political model and political language that is forced on 310 million citizens a year-- and at a media and schoolin cost of tens of billions of dollars-- which only serves to obscure the realities of power for ourselves and any future generations that can survive this bad faith blather about elections and checks and balances.

That is what's at stake. That is the high cost of Thompson's de facto mea culpa limelight dancing.

Edited May 13, 2013 by Nathaniel Heidenheimer

[Paul Brancato]

Thank you Lee et al for posting this. I never really bought Thompson's argument about a forward movement in the head because of all the obvious brain matter flying to the rear. So it is good to see that he figured out where he had made a mistake. I agree with Nathaniel that the damage Thompson did is still with us, but its a step. I missed the Umbrella Man stuff, but stand by my conclusion that it was a symbolic act meant for posterity to read 'Traitor' for any future viewers of films of the event, and not a timing mechanism.

Edited May 13, 2013 by Paul Brancato

[Paul Brancato]

Unfortunately when I tried to share the link on FB it only played the first 2 minutes. Any solution?

[Len Colby]

I was very alarmed last year when Thompson was celebrated for his Umbrella Man bit.

To me what stood out was that Thompson did not manage to sneak in one iota of pro-conspiracy argument into the clip. He knew that this piece would get way, way more coverage, given those involved. And then the NYT picked it up and used it to, without stating it, scoff at all pro-conspiracy viewpoints.

Thompson is not a dummy. He knows that his work on this movie would get Huge Corporate Media coverage. He can ride into Education Forum with his posse all he wants and proclaim that he still believes in Conspiracy. THAT DOES NOT MATTER SO LONG AS THE ONLY THING THAT REACHES MILLIONS--RATHER THAN A FEW HUNDRED HERE-- IS HIS STATURE AS A BAD BOY NOW GONE GOOD, I.E. posing for a film or article which he knows damn well will only reach a wide audience if it plays to the ear of our Court Media.

Unless Thompson gets some pro-conspiracy points before the same wide audience fast.... I am growing kind of suspicious here. I'm sure, given his reputation, he does not care what I think. But ultimately what this case is about is neither a former Yale professor or some middle ages social studies teacher. It is the legitimation (or just delegitimation ) of an outdated political model and political language that is forced on 310 million citizens a year-- and at a media and schoolin cost of tens of billions of dollars-- which only serves to obscure the realities of power for ourselves and any future generations that can survive this bad faith blather about elections and checks and balances.

That is what's at stake. That is the high cost of Thompson's de facto mea culpa limelight dancing.

Mr. Hiedenheimer it seems sees a demon in every shadow.

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

Mr. Colby, it seems, sees a President in every other 1963 Brazilian governor.

Edited May 13, 2013 by Nathaniel Heidenheimer

[Allen Lowe]

to claim that Thompson has done damage to the conspiracy side, or that he is some kind of corporate whore, because he has a disagreement with some here, is really part of the whole problem, and helps further marginalize the pro-conpiracy side. 6 Seconds is a landmark book that stands up remarkably well 45 years later; Thompson is himself a brilliant and principled investigator who made a conscious decision, years ago, to get out of academia and face the real world. That in itself took guts. And to attack his motives just because you disagree with him is just nasty and un-called for (and you should read his book Gumshoe, btw; fascinating stuff).

and if you have some better evidence about Umbrella Man, let's hear it.

Edited May 13, 2013 by Allen Lowe

[David Josephs]

I started with the topic and expanded. A second shot to the head requires results which are seen and caused by that action. The amount of blood forward of JFK's seat has never been conclusively shown.

As a result... I fail to see the DALLAS results of a shot from the rear other than the shot to T3 in the back which, as I come to learn from Horne, left a bullet that was removed from JFK's right torso prior to the 8pm autopsy and was probably the result of the back shot... the throat bullet was also dug out prior to the 8pm autopsy and the SS/FBI ackowledged yet another bullet stuck behind JFK's right ear.

I hope you don't mind the tangents as I believe they add to the no rear shot to the head conclusion.

Cheers

DJ

No... JFK's head does not move forward in the Zfilm we get to look at. The top/front of his head seems to be reacting into the gunshot as is expected via physics.

1. First law: An object at rest remains at rest unless acted upon by a force. An object in motion remains in motion, and at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.
   JFK's head is moving at 2-8mph within a car moving at the same speed... unless the car stops or accelerates... OR JFK's head stops, accelerates or resists the motion of the car... it's movement should not change. (we FORCE our head to stop moving forward when we stop our cars)
   
2. Second law: The acceleration of a body is directly proportional to, and in the same direction as, the net force acting on the body, and inversely proportional to its mass. Thus, F = ma, where F is the net force acting on the object, m is the mass of the object and a is the acceleration of the object.
   A 160grain bullet moving at 1500fps will impart FORCE onto JFK's head at the moment of impact
   
3. Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to that of the first body.
   So at the moment of impact, the head will resist the bullet based on the FORCE it imparts... a bullet with more surface area at the front will impart more FORCE than one that has less surface area... if a pointed bullet tumbles and hits sideways, the force will be much greater than if the same pointed bullet hits with the pointed end first and slices thru the victim.
   
   The force we see on the Zfilm is a result of the particles and expansion of the bullet thru the head... this was no FMJ bullet designed to slice thru... this bullet exploded at impact and hurled it's lead thru JFK's head. The lion share coming out the right rear while leaving it's trail and betraying its origin extending from the right temple backward. Whether there was another bullet hit to the head is, imo, not determinable via the Zfilm or even the available forensic evidence... but from the brain sections that Burkley made sure no one would ever see or do on the original brain.

and since none of the other occupants of the limo are thrown toward the back of the car - it is not a result of Greer accelerating away...

If JFK's butt is in the seat corner and his upper torso is leaning forward in a back brace, the only movements for him are either:

1 - falling forward into the footwell or into Jackie's lap... (without a seatbelt and him supposedly hit from the rear in the middle of his head - he SHOULD have fallen forward) OR

2 - back toward the rear seat cushion

Given that is impossible for him to be hit in the head with a bullet and NOT move forward to meet it... how much FORWARD should be expected?

Back to Rule #3... If all that strikes JFK is the pointed end of a bullet and then its sides as it passes thru... the movement forward should be miniscule...

Problem being that he losses all control of his motor skills immediately... the car is moving or will be moving forward very soon.

Now... hang a plate from a string... hit it with a rubber ball.... the 3rd law still applies, but since the FORCE of the plate is not enough to overcome the force of the ball... the ball will indeed be slowed done and may even just drop to the ground... but the plate WILL move backward as there is nothing in addition to the Mass/Acceleration to stop it.

Same with JFK's head. Since most of the debris exits back and to the left.... the head travels in the direction of the shot once the inital 3rd law response is done and the FORCE of the bullet can now act on an object that has no resistence at all. The movement of the bullet thru the head pushes it back... the fact that JFK can no longer offer resistance to this force is why he falls AWAY from the bullet.... and is also the reason I believe, we do not see example of the gore thrown to the FRONT of the limo. If there had been a shot from behind we should see Nellie and JC covered in blood - as Hargis was.

Mr. HARGIS - Yes; when President Kennedy straightened back up in the car the bullet him in the head, the one that killed him and it seemed like his head exploded, and I was splattered with blood and brain, and kind of bloody water, It wasn't really blood. And at that time the Presidential car slowed down. I heard somebody say, "Get going," or "get going,"

The limo slowed at the time of the headshots... and the debris is blown back and to the left

Mr. HARGIS - Well, at the time it sounded like the shots were right next to me. There wasn't any way in the world I could tell where they were coming from, but at the time there was something in my head that said that they probably could have been coming from the railroad overpass, because I thought since I had got splattered, with blood--I was Just a little back and left of--Just a little bit back and left of Mrs. Kennedy, but I didn't know. I had a feeling that it might have been from the Texas Book Depository, and these two places was the primary place that could have been shot from.

Cause a shot from the NORTH EAST would of course cause the blood to splatter SOUTH EAST... huh?

Do you ever find it interesting that the images of the "MESS" left on and in the limo is confined to the rear seat and what little is seen on the rearview mirror, the sunshades, the windshield and the testimony of the occupants.

Do we ever see the mess on Nellie? Greer? Kellerman? back of the middle seats?

Mr. SPECTER - I hand you a subsequent exhibit of the Commission, No. 346, showing the interior view of the automobile and ask you if that depicts the automobile which you examined?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; however, it wasn't in this condition. It wasn't as clean as it is in Exhibit 346.
Mr. SPECTER - What was the condition with respect to cleanliness?
Mr. FRAZIER - There were blood and particles of flesh scattered all over the hood, the windshield, in the front seat and all over the rear floor rugs, the jump seats, and over the rear seat, and down both sides of the side rails or tops of the doors of the car.
Mr. SPECTER - Is that condition depicted by Commission Exhibits 352 and 353 to the extent that they show the interior of the automobile?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.

Looking at the photos of the limo at parkland - does anyone see this? Do we ever see Nellie's clothes?

Is there any image of the limo that can be used to substantiate what Frazier says he saw? As I have never seen one.

=================================

The description of the injury by Boswell states

"Falx loose from sagital sinus

from the

Coronal suture back"

and that the "Vomer crushed" and "Fracture thru floor" under the right eye.

Looking where the VOMER is and the floor of the right eye socket...

and the particle trail in the xrays...

Either there was more than one shot to JFK's head or JFK's skull and brain were subject to some pretty nasty rearranging between Elm street and Boswell's drawing.

DJ

[Craig Lamson]

No... JFK's head does not move forward in the Zfilm we get to look at.

Lots of empty words from davy jo.

Pictures tell a completely different story.

JFK's HEAD MOVES FORWARD.

In the opposite direction of the motion blur.

Davie Jo gets it wrong again.

Edited May 14, 2013 by Craig Lamson

[Robert Prudhomme]

I started with the topic and expanded. A second shot to the head requires results which are seen and caused by that action. The amount of blood forward of JFK's seat has never been conclusively shown.

As a result... I fail to see the DALLAS results of a shot from the rear other than the shot to T3 in the back which, as I come to learn from Horne, left a bullet that was removed from JFK's right torso prior to the 8pm autopsy and was probably the result of the back shot... the throat bullet was also dug out prior to the 8pm autopsy and the SS/FBI ackowledged yet another bullet stuck behind JFK's right ear.

I hope you don't mind the tangents as I believe they add to the no rear shot to the head conclusion.

Cheers

DJ

No... JFK's head does not move forward in the Zfilm we get to look at. The top/front of his head seems to be reacting into the gunshot as is expected via physics.

1. First law: An object at rest remains at rest unless acted upon by a force. An object in motion remains in motion, and at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by a force.

   JFK's head is moving at 2-8mph within a car moving at the same speed... unless the car stops or accelerates... OR JFK's head stops, accelerates or resists the motion of the car... it's movement should not change. (we FORCE our head to stop moving forward when we stop our cars)

2. Second law: The acceleration of a body is directly proportional to, and in the same direction as, the net force acting on the body, and inversely proportional to its mass. Thus, F = ma, where F is the net force acting on the object, m is the mass of the object and a is the acceleration of the object.

   A 160grain bullet moving at 1500fps will impart FORCE onto JFK's head at the moment of impact

3. Third law: When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction to that of the first body.

   So at the moment of impact, the head will resist the bullet based on the FORCE it imparts... a bullet with more surface area at the front will impart more FORCE than one that has less surface area... if a pointed bullet tumbles and hits sideways, the force will be much greater than if the same pointed bullet hits with the pointed end first and slices thru the victim.

   The force we see on the Zfilm is a result of the particles and expansion of the bullet thru the head... this was no FMJ bullet designed to slice thru... this bullet exploded at impact and hurled it's lead thru JFK's head. The lion share coming out the right rear while leaving it's trail and betraying its origin extending from the right temple backward. Whether there was another bullet hit to the head is, imo, not determinable via the Zfilm or even the available forensic evidence... but from the brain sections that Burkley made sure no one would ever see or do on the original brain.

and since none of the other occupants of the limo are thrown toward the back of the car - it is not a result of Greer accelerating away...

If JFK's butt is in the seat corner and his upper torso is leaning forward in a back brace, the only movements for him are either:

1 - falling forward into the footwell or into Jackie's lap... (without a seatbelt and him supposedly hit from the rear in the middle of his head - he SHOULD have fallen forward) OR

2 - back toward the rear seat cushion

Given that is impossible for him to be hit in the head with a bullet and NOT move forward to meet it... how much FORWARD should be expected?

Back to Rule #3... If all that strikes JFK is the pointed end of a bullet and then its sides as it passes thru... the movement forward should be miniscule...

Problem being that he losses all control of his motor skills immediately... the car is moving or will be moving forward very soon.

Now... hang a plate from a string... hit it with a rubber ball.... the 3rd law still applies, but since the FORCE of the plate is not enough to overcome the force of the ball... the ball will indeed be slowed done and may even just drop to the ground... but the plate WILL move backward as there is nothing in addition to the Mass/Acceleration to stop it.

Same with JFK's head. Since most of the debris exits back and to the left.... the head travels in the direction of the shot once the inital 3rd law response is done and the FORCE of the bullet can now act on an object that has no resistence at all. The movement of the bullet thru the head pushes it back... the fact that JFK can no longer offer resistance to this force is why he falls AWAY from the bullet.... and is also the reason I believe, we do not see example of the gore thrown to the FRONT of the limo. If there had been a shot from behind we should see Nellie and JC covered in blood - as Hargis was.

Mr. HARGIS - Yes; when President Kennedy straightened back up in the car the bullet him in the head, the one that killed him and it seemed like his head exploded, and I was splattered with blood and brain, and kind of bloody water, It wasn't really blood. And at that time the Presidential car slowed down. I heard somebody say, "Get going," or "get going,"

The limo slowed at the time of the headshots... and the debris is blown back and to the left

Mr. HARGIS - Well, at the time it sounded like the shots were right next to me. There wasn't any way in the world I could tell where they were coming from, but at the time there was something in my head that said that they probably could have been coming from the railroad overpass, because I thought since I had got splattered, with blood--I was Just a little back and left of--Just a little bit back and left of Mrs. Kennedy, but I didn't know. I had a feeling that it might have been from the Texas Book Depository, and these two places was the primary place that could have been shot from.

Cause a shot from the NORTH EAST would of course cause the blood to splatter SOUTH EAST... huh?

Do you ever find it interesting that the images of the "MESS" left on and in the limo is confined to the rear seat and what little is seen on the rearview mirror, the sunshades, the windshield and the testimony of the occupants.

Do we ever see the mess on Nellie? Greer? Kellerman? back of the middle seats?

Mr. SPECTER - I hand you a subsequent exhibit of the Commission, No. 346, showing the interior view of the automobile and ask you if that depicts the automobile which you examined?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; however, it wasn't in this condition. It wasn't as clean as it is in Exhibit 346.

Mr. SPECTER - What was the condition with respect to cleanliness?

Mr. FRAZIER - There were blood and particles of flesh scattered all over the hood, the windshield, in the front seat and all over the rear floor rugs, the jump seats, and over the rear seat, and down both sides of the side rails or tops of the doors of the car.

Mr. SPECTER - Is that condition depicted by Commission Exhibits 352 and 353 to the extent that they show the interior of the automobile?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.

Looking at the photos of the limo at parkland - does anyone see this? Do we ever see Nellie's clothes?

Is there any image of the limo that can be used to substantiate what Frazier says he saw? As I have never seen one.

=================================

The description of the injury by Boswell states

"Falx loose from sagital sinus

from the

Coronal suture back"

and that the "Vomer crushed" and "Fracture thru floor" under the right eye.

Looking where the VOMER is and the floor of the right eye socket...

and the particle trail in the xrays...

Either there was more than one shot to JFK's head or JFK's skull and brain were subject to some pretty nasty rearranging between Elm street and Boswell's drawing.

DJ

Mr. Josephs

Long time no see, my friend. As you are likely aware, I was permanently banned from the JFK Assassination Forum for repeatedly having the audacity to suggest that the Lone Nutters on that forum were likely in the employ of the CIA or some other government agency. I was considered such a threat to the Free World, every single post I ever made on that forum was disappeared along with me. Ho hum....

I would like to offer support for your analysis of the backwards motion of JFK following the fatal head shot. From my perspective, the actual recoil of JFK away from the impact of the bullet is very short and brief. The "back and to the left" motion we see following this brief recoil is, IMO, JFK's stiffly corseted torso falling over due to the force of gravity.

As I have mentioned before, I have a great deal of experience with rifles, most of it hunting deer. For many years, I have handloaded my own rifle cartridges. I have never shot an animal with a full metal jacket bullet, as this is illegal and inhumane, so I cannot speak for the results of impacting a living skull with an FMJ bullet. Most of my hunting has been done with soft tipped bullets. These will expand on impact and I have only witnessed slight backward recoil on deer struck in the head with them. However, I did experiment for a brief period with 110 grain .30 calibre hollow point bullets for a .308 calibre deer rifle. Once you've shot a deer in the head with a hollow point bullet, witnessed the results and examined the damage to the deer, the head shot at z312 of the Zapruder film makes far more sense.

Because hollow point bullets expand so much and so rapidly, they push far more matter ahead of them inside of a skull wound and slow down that much quicker, imparting almost all of their energy to the matter inside of the skull. The results are often explosive and, in some cases, the bullet does not even exit the skull.

The recoil action away from the impact with the bullet is far more exaggerated with hollow point bullets. I have literally seen one smaller deer lifted off of his front feet and propelled away from the impact point. This is what we are seeing in the film as JFK makes a sharp and short recoil away from the impact point, prior to falling to his left.

Needless to say, my experiment with hollow point bullets was short lived, as the results were somewhat obscene.

Edited May 14, 2013 by Robert Prudhomme

[Craig Lamson]

That is one of the most dishonest and manipulated gifs I have ever seen.

And anyone can see why.

Translated from jimbo speak:

"I can't even begin to refute this..."

Please explain oh all knowing jimbo.. Your explanation is sure to be the stuff of legends!

Now don't be shy jimbo....

Tell us why. Roflmao!

Better yet, make your own and actually prove your point instead of running your completely uninformed mouth.

Edited May 14, 2013 by Craig Lamson

[Robert Prudhomme]

That is one of the most dishonest and manipulated gifs I have ever seen.

And anyone can see why.

Translated from jimbo speak:

"I can't even begin to refute this..."

Please explain oh all knowing jimbo.. Your explanation is sure to be the stuff of legends!

Now don't be shy jimbo....

Tell us why. Roflmao!

Better yet, make your own and actually prove your point instead of running your completely uninformed mouth.

I see they will let almost anyone onto this forum......