Reopening of the JFK Forum

[David Andrews]

Great news, much appreciated.

[Pamela Brown]

After many appeals from serious researchers I have decided to reopen the JFK Forum. I will once again try to make it a place where members can rationally discuss the evidence. This time rule (iv) will be rigorously applied:

Thank you John. Your efforts to move research forward and courage under fire are much appreciated from my standpoint.

It seems to me that the bickering amongst CTs about each other, rather than choosing to debate only the issues, comes as a direct result of what I call the WCR mindset. We as CTs have all been sandbagged by it. The WCR set their thesis, that LHO acted alone, as the 'correct' and 'American' position on the assassination. Anyone who dissents is at once labeled a dangerous loonie, more or less, and possibly even <gasp> a "Communist". This position originated at the time of the publication of the WCR and continues to this day. The corrollary to it is that "none of the CTs agree on anything, whereas the LNTs agree that LHO acted alone". That is, of course, false, but that doesn't seem to be taken into account by the LNTs.

So, rather than encouraging the public to research the assassination and report to the rest of the citizens what they have found, much less to debate the issues in a positive and constructive environment (with no ad homs), the CTs are left without the tools to move forward. The result is that they tend to turn on each other. This works very well from the WCR mindset point of view. It is this bickering and disrespect that is supposed to have destroyed the CT movement by now.

It is a miracle that that has not happened. Perhaps there is hope...

[Evan Burton]

Correct Pam. As an outsider, I see groups of peoples who should be together simply fighting amongst one another. Instead of people agreeing that it was not LHO but the exact method is not clear, they bicker amongst one another about how this all happened.

I don't know what happened but if it was a government conspiracy, they must be loving the way the JFK people are splintered.

[David G. Healy]

Correct Pam. As an outsider, I see groups of peoples who should be together simply fighting amongst one another. Instead of people agreeing that it was not LHO but the exact method is not clear, they bicker amongst one another about how this all happened.

I don't know what happened but if it was a government conspiracy, they must be loving the way the JFK people are splintered.

IF? o' yee foreigners of little faith... LMAO!

[Pamela Brown]

Correct Pam. As an outsider, I see groups of peoples who should be together simply fighting amongst one another. Instead of people agreeing that it was not LHO but the exact method is not clear, they bicker amongst one another about how this all happened.

I don't know what happened but if it was a government conspiracy, they must be loving the way the JFK people are splintered.

As we move forward to the 50th and beyond I sincerely hope all of us who steadfastly dissent from the WCR will find a new process with which to move forward. It would include a mandate of respect and the debate would be about the weighing of evidence on different issues and not the person.

I hope in my upcoming NID presentation to add a bit of clarity to that process. The limo is a highly controversial area of research. It is an ideal environment for suggesting a return to sanity. Ironically, I will be pointing out new information that, while it points to conspiracy also, to some extent, may even challenge positions that I have maintained. And that's the point -- to keep an open mind, to agree to disagree when necessary, and keep looking ahead.

Only by working together can we come to a general agreement as to what seems to carry the most weight in terms of demonstrating the conspiracy and ongoing coverup of the assassination. Otherwise, we just fall prey to the aspect of the WCR mindset that claims the WC defenders all 'agree' on everything (they don't) and the CTs can't even get along...

[David G. Healy]

Correct Pam. As an outsider, I see groups of peoples who should be together simply fighting amongst one another. Instead of people agreeing that it was not LHO but the exact method is not clear, they bicker amongst one another about how this all happened.

I don't know what happened but if it was a government conspiracy, they must be loving the way the JFK people are splintered.

... we just fall prey to the aspect of the WCR mindset that claims the WC defenders all 'agree' on everything (they don't) and the CTs can't even get along...

That in my humble opinion is nonsense. There is enough evidence right this second to prove, conspiracy murdered JFK. And we did it with overblown egos and stepped on many toes. Who cares what lone nut trolls think (they are stuck with the Warren Commission Report and, with NO- read Z-E-R-O debate, wiggle room), ya think a courtroom-judge-jury would care what bottom feeders think? It's pure case evidence. A conspiracy to murder the president is there, right now!

Lone Nuts (aka Warren Commission Report) and their supporters have an agenda that being fractionalize the debate, ANY debate... nit-pick minutiae, debate lies... Facts being what they are, there is NO need for debate, dedicated researchers who have come down on the side of conspiracy, not only understand it, but KNOW it.

We could get rid of 5 internet forums today and it won't change a damn thing, with the exception of a few, bent out of shape lone nut egos and more than just a few CT ego's, of course.

This case medical evidence alone blows the entire case, and the WCR and its supporters right out of the water.

... so cross your projects 't's' and dot your 'i's', who knows, we might just make a wee-footnote in history.

[Bill Charleston]

It is this bickering and disrespect that is supposed to have destroyed the CT movement by now.

It is a miracle that that has not happened. Perhaps there is hope...

It is now time to move this from CT (Conspiracy Theory) to CF (Conspiracy Fact)

[Pamela Brown]

That in my humble opinion is nonsense. There is enough evidence right this second to prove, conspiracy murdered JFK.

With all due respect, is your opinion the point? Or is demonstrating the truth so convincingly by working together that the WC defenders pack up shop and go home what we are working toward?

[Bill Charleston]

That in my humble opinion is nonsense. There is enough evidence right this second to prove, conspiracy murdered JFK.

With all due respect, is your opinion the point? Or is demonstrating the truth so convincingly by working together that the WC defenders pack up shop and go home what we are working toward?

David's point may be that anyone who has looked at the available information believes that there is sufficient evidence to show that the SBT (Single Bullet Theory) did not happen. For example, when you look at the pictures of the back of JFK's shirt and jacket, there is no way the bullet went up to exit JFK's neck and then down to hit Connally in the back. There are many things that appear to show the lone gunman theory is not correct. The discussions have been reduced to the SBT is correct with the counter argument is that no it is not. It is analogous to two kids yelling yes it is, no it isn't.

To move the argument forward, it is going to be necessary to show what actually happened during the shooting. Do you have any idea what happened if the SBT is not correct?

[Guest Robert Morrow]

Forget the bullet hole. Look at all that blood on JFK's shirt. It is "back and to the left" as though there were a large hole on the back of JFK's head with blood dripping out of it. Make that a large blow out wound hole on the back of JFK's head.

[Pamela Brown]

That in my humble opinion is nonsense. There is enough evidence right this second to prove, conspiracy murdered JFK.

With all due respect, is your opinion the point? Or is demonstrating the truth so convincingly by working together that the WC defenders pack up shop and go home what we are working toward?

David's point may be that anyone who has looked at the available information believes that there is sufficient evidence to show that the SBT (Single Bullet Theory) did not happen. For example, when you look at the pictures of the back of JFK's shirt and jacket, there is no way the bullet went up to exit JFK's neck and then down to hit Connally in the back. There are many things that appear to show the lone gunman theory is not correct. The discussions have been reduced to the SBT is correct with the counter argument is that no it is not. It is analogous to two kids yelling yes it is, no it isn't.

To move the argument forward, it is going to be necessary to show what actually happened during the shooting. Do you have any idea what happened if the SBT is not correct?

There is no need to be concerned at all. There is no "SBT". There are merely different scenarios that the LNTs have tried to play a shell game with.

I discuss this in my article "The Pretty Pig's Saturday Night"'

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2372&hl=pretty+pig%27s+saturday+night

[Bill Charleston]

Forget the bullet hole. Look at all that blood on JFK's shirt. It is "back and to the left" as though there were a large hole on the back of JFK's head with blood dripping out of it. Make that a large blow out wound hole on the back of JFK's head.

The point is Robert that anyone can find a large number of reasons to believe the Single Bullet Theory is not a theory at all, it is a lie.

So my question to you, what did happen? I agree with many that a room full of doctors at Parkland saw a massive wound in the right back of JFK's head about 5 inches in diameter. I can find no credible motive for over a dozen doctors at Parkland to unite to tell lie a about a large hole in the right rear of JFK's head. But I can believe that some in a corrupt government could have motivation to forge evidence to hide the truth.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs5f4I5hK-c

Below is some of Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman's Warren Commission testimony. Kellerman agrees with the doctors at Parkland, that there was a large wound in the right rear of JFK's head. Kellerman adds the observation that he saw an entrance wound in the hairline just forward of JFK's right ear about the size of the end of his little finger.

Any reasonable person would conclude that:

1. Connecting the small entrance wound seen by Roy Kellerman just forward of JFK's ear to the massive exit wound in the right rear of JFK's head means he was shot in the head at around frame Z313 from the right front of the limousine.

2. The US government supplied evidence that contradicts the Parkland doctor's observations and Roy Kellerman's observation. Therefore it is likely the US Government forged evidence.

3. The Zapruder film does not show this massive wound in the right rear of JFK's head. The film was bought by LIFE magazine and was locked up for years. Considering the witnesses' observations means the Zapruder film was also altered to hide the truth.

What we have is a significant number of credible witnesses who say there was a shot fired from the right front of JFK AND we have government supplied evidence that contradicts that. Therefore to continue on, everything the US Government held as evidence must be examined carefully and considered likely fraudulent unless it can be proven otherwise.

A zillion witnesses who say the same thing does not prove anything but any reasonable person would conclude at this point that a shot was probably fired from the right front of JFK.

THE MILLIONS $ question: How can it proven that a shot was fired from the right front?

SOME OF ROY KELLERMAN'S WARREN COMMISSION TESTIMONY

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

Mr. KELLERMAN. Fine.

Mr. SPECTER. But for the sequence at the moment, as it relates to your conclusions on the shots which you have already testified about--

Mr. KELLERMAN. OK.

Mr. SPECTER. I would like to develop your understanding and your observations of the four wounds on President Kennedy.

Mr. KELLERMAN. OK. This all transpired in the morgue of the Naval Hospital in Bethesda, sir. He had a large wound this size.

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating a circle with your finger of the diameter of 5 inches; would that be approximately correct?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, circular; yes, on this part of the head.

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the rear portion of the head.

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. More to the right side of the head?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Right. This was removed.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say, "This was removed," what do you mean by this?

Mr. KELLERMAN. The skull part was removed.

Mr. SPECTER. All right.

Representative FORD. Above the ear and back?

Mr. KELLERMAN. To the left of the ear, sir, and a little high; yes. About right in here.

Mr. SPECTER. When you say "removed," by that do you mean that it was absent when you saw him, or taken off by the doctor?

Mr. KELLERMAN. It was absent when I saw him.

Mr. SPECTER. Fine. Proceed.

Mr. KELLERMAN. Entry into this man's head was right below that wound, right here.

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the bottom of the hairline immediately to the right of the ear about the lower third of the ear?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Right. But it was in the hairline, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. In his hairline?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. Near the end of his hairline?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Yes, sir.

Mr. SPECTER. What was the size of that aperture?

Mr. KELLERMAN. The little finger.

Mr. SPECTER. Indicating the diameter of the little finger.

Mr. KELLERMAN. Right.

+-Mr. SPECTER. Now, what was the position of that opening with respect to the portion of the skull which you have described as being removed or absent?

Mr. KELLERMAN. Well, I am going to have to describe it similar to this. Let's say part of your skull is removed here; this is below.

Mr. SPECTER. You have described a distance of approximately an inch and a half, 2 inches, below.

Mr. KELLERMAN. That is correct; about that, sir.

[David G. Healy]

That in my humble opinion is nonsense. There is enough evidence right this second to prove, conspiracy murdered JFK.

With all due respect, is your opinion the point? Or is demonstrating the truth so convincingly by working together that the WC defenders pack up shop and go home what we are working toward?

David's point may be that anyone who has looked at the available information believes that there is sufficient evidence to show that the SBT (Single Bullet Theory) did not happen. For example, when you look at the pictures of the back of JFK's shirt and jacket, there is no way the bullet went up to exit JFK's neck and then down to hit Connally in the back. There are many things that appear to show the lone gunman theory is not correct. The discussions have been reduced to the SBT is correct with the counter argument is that no it is not. It is analogous to two kids yelling yes it is, no it isn't.

To move the argument forward, it is going to be necessary to show what actually happened during the shooting. Do you have any idea what happened if the SBT is not correct?

There is no need to be concerned at all. There is no "SBT". There are merely different scenarios that the LNTs have tried to play a shell game with.

I discuss this in my article "The Pretty Pig's Saturday Night"'

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2372&hl=pretty+pig%27s+saturday+night

correct, NO SBT.... 2 shooters from the rear hits on (JFK and JC) -- 2 shooters from the front (insurance)-1 hit possibly 2 (JFK in the head). End of story, hence CONSPIRACY.

Anything other than a SBT, aka LHO did it all by his lonesome, would lead to conspiracy and that, would lead to upheaval, possibly anarchy. I believe Earl Warren knew that and chose the easier, softer way out!

[Bill Charleston]

That in my humble opinion is nonsense. There is enough evidence right this second to prove, conspiracy murdered JFK.

With all due respect, is your opinion the point? Or is demonstrating the truth so convincingly by working together that the WC defenders pack up shop and go home what we are working toward?

David's point may be that anyone who has looked at the available information believes that there is sufficient evidence to show that the SBT (Single Bullet Theory) did not happen. For example, when you look at the pictures of the back of JFK's shirt and jacket, there is no way the bullet went up to exit JFK's neck and then down to hit Connally in the back. There are many things that appear to show the lone gunman theory is not correct. The discussions have been reduced to the SBT is correct with the counter argument is that no it is not. It is analogous to two kids yelling yes it is, no it isn't.

To move the argument forward, it is going to be necessary to show what actually happened during the shooting. Do you have any idea what happened if the SBT is not correct?

There is no need to be concerned at all. There is no "SBT". There are merely different scenarios that the LNTs have tried to play a shell game with.

I discuss this in my article "The Pretty Pig's Saturday Night"'

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=2372&hl=pretty+pig%27s+saturday+night

correct, NO SBT.... 2 shooters from the rear hits on (JFK and JC) -- 2 shooters from the front (insurance)-1 hit possibly 2 (JFK in the head). End of story, hence CONSPIRACY.

Anything other than a SBT, aka LHO did it all by his lonesome, would lead to conspiracy and that, would lead to upheaval, possibly anarchy. I believe Earl Warren knew that and chose the easier, softer way out!

The SBT has a pedigree that is seemingly zillions of pages long, what is your basis? 2 shooters form the rear and 2 shooters from the front? When did each of those shots happen? is that scenario just a guess? An educated guess? A WAG or a SWAG?

If you're going to win the argument SBT vs. something else, you have to find some proof to support the something else.

[David Von Pein]

If you're going to win the argument SBT vs. something else, you have to find some proof to support the something else.

Indeed.

And then there's the "missing bullets" problem that no conspiracy theorist ever wants to talk about.

Is it truly "reasonable" to toss the Single-Bullet Theory into the trash can while at the same time embracing a theory that has JFK and Connally being hit by THREE separate bullets (as nearly all CTers believe, since those CTers insist that JFK's throat wound was an entry wound)? And then BOTH bullets that entered (but never exited) JFK just....vanished? Silly.

Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com

[End Off-Topic Post.]

Edited August 18, 2013 by David Von Pein