Keyvan Shahrdar

Keven, you have been BRAINWASHED and the only person to blame is yourself. BTW - The only reason I become unresponsive to your posts is because they are way too long and filled with lies and gibberish and I just don't want to spend the time to have a discussion with a habitual agent of misinformation. Why have you been brainwashed? I know you are smart. You are a lawyer after all. Why did you let yourself get brainwashed this way? What am I thinking, you researched all this information yourself, your probably purchased books about the JFK assassination from authors whose sole intent is to make money from you. These authors will write anything to make a buck and you have decided of your own free will to get brainwashed with their hogwash. All you have to do is look at the medical evidence, the Zapruder film, and the Nix film, the Marie Muchmore film, and the Mary Moorman photo. Look at the x-rays, they were taken before JFK got cut up by the pathologists. But you wont, because you are BRAINWASHED and all you have are these long posts full of conjecture from wayward authors.

You should have a conversation with it. I can see how watching it is difficult because the factual evidence in it contradicts everything you have been brainwashed and duped to believe by these wayward authors.

So Sandy, I would love to hear the discussion that you have with the Nix film study.

Sandy and Keven, I know you guys are bright intellectuals, I find it hard to believe that you guys choose to believe anything that anyone writes as fact. I am a math and logic person, that is with what I deal with every day running a silicon valley technology company. Nothing you guys say match up with what you see in film, autopsy photographs and x-rays. In the same breath both of you discount the film, autopsy photographs, and x-rays as fake and then use them to try to make a point of where the fragment came from or where the shots came from. Come on! There is nothing you can post to make me believe these narratives over the facts shown in the film, autopsy photographs, and x-rays. There is nothing you can say that could make me question the authenticity of them. Look at the junk spewed by Mantik, the x-rays are fake but they show where the shots came from. This is ridiculous at best. This keystone cops scenarios that you guys are spewing reminds me of the wrap up smear by Nancy Pelosi. This is what those authors are doing in the JFK assassination community.

You'd be disbarred out of law regurgitating your long disjointed narratives of a mantra...

I appreciate your call for direct evidence amidst the sea of narratives surrounding the JFK assassination. It's clear that you value a narrative over succinctness and factual clarity. Let's address your points with the existing evidence and without diving too deep into interpretative narratives: Harper Fragment: It's just a fragment. Dr. Mantik and others have interpreted its origin based on its composition and location found, but without comprehensive and incontrovertible proof, we must remain open to different interpretations. X-Rays: The claim about the x-rays being altered stems from analyses like those by Dr. Mantik, who pointed out inconsistencies in their optical density and structure. However, these are professional interpretations of the evidence, not indisputable facts. The authenticity of the x-rays is supported by the majority of forensic experts. Zapruder Film: This film is one of the most scrutinized pieces of evidence. Claims of alteration come from discrepancies observed by researchers. However, no concrete proof has surfaced that definitively proves the film was altered. This film, alongside others like the Nix film and the Moorman photo, has been validated by multiple investigations to have no alterations that impact the understanding of the sequence of events. Your narratives need an emphasis on sticking to the facts is crucial, and so is recognizing that some aspects of this case involve interpretation of evidence, where different experts might disagree. While we may not convince each other of a different viewpoint, it's important to discuss these matters respectfully and consider all evidence critically, whether it supports or challenges our views.

Sorry Keven! You can say what ever you want but: Narrative is Narrative, Gibberish is Gibberish, and Fact is Fact.

I know that Mantik's book completely destroys your long lengthy narratives, that by the way, I will never read. It is all gibberish to me. Read the book title in Amazon, I know you will be in disbelieve, but try to accept fact, it won't hurt you any. Facts over narrative, always! https://www.amazon.com/Assassination-President-John-Kennedy-Headshots/dp/B0CXLN1PX1/ref=sr_1_1?crid=OSSD8OIODJU3&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.kEFknrS7GKRmvDrwf88iSMPrN9dDnphPzgrJOVcyh0GLPv14r8SXEmIEIZ0pjn5wB_j5S8Lzs9s-JN4mZUuvmlyi85nI_tjZ8FDAvvNwriyeKqsMsT2ybVCh-EaFLGVaaCoUrM25WnDxu-UO1yxZgKqfQHZ87zpwipNP4RWRRtSmuYasfJ-KfqiW9ZWBXcw4RJotmsUjDeHk7t6fe7tUw-eYnUp-ctNbNW8MsowOv54.Gh72b770Lqx4iphdqp_qmriOCED8jcflpXP_6WdHBus&dib_tag=se&keywords=book+mantik&qid=1713567986&sprefix=book+mantik%2Caps%2C95&sr=8-1

David W. Mantik's Earlier Beliefs: Frontal Shots: Mantik strongly argued that forensic evidence supported shots to JFK's head from the front. This was primarily based on his detailed analysis of the Zapruder film and autopsy records. X-ray Manipulation: He believed that the X-rays of JFK's head were altered to support the single-gunman theory. Mantik suggested that inconsistencies in the optical densities indicated manipulation, aimed at obscuring evidence of frontal shots. Beliefs in "The Final Analysis": Multiple Headshots: In his 2024 book, co-authored with Jerome Corsi, Mantik presents forensic evidence that JFK was hit by two headshots from the right front and one from the rear, indicating multiple shooters. Forensic Collaboration: This new book includes collaborative forensic analysis, likely integrating more modern techniques or reevaluated evidence to support claims of shots from multiple directions.

@Keven Hofeling I guess you can't reference Mantik on your lengthy narratives any more. Mantik seems to have seen the light of day and started to write factual data. I am so sorry for you loss of citation.

I agree, since I like reading your posts Kevin, the shorter they are the better. But I would not expect short posts from a lawyer!

You are awesome! You just created a narrative for a narrative. You are a good lawyer! But the basic tenet holds true: fact takes precedence over narrative. Sorry, Kevin!

Documentary Evidence (Fact) vs. Testimonial Evidence (Narrative) Tangible, unaltered representation of a fact (e.g., The Nix Film) versus testimonial evidence fraught with biases, perceptions, and memory issues (e.g., accounts from wayward doctors and people with a narrative). Who wins? The Nix Film! All the narrative in the world that is posted does not beat fact! Sorry Kevin!

Narrative never trumps fact!

FWIW - Fight the battle, never give up!