-
Posts
1,743 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Michael Griffith
-
-
1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:
Michael,
I've wondered what Ukraine could do to disincentivize Russia's illegally and immorally attacking Ukrainian civilians and civilian sites. I've thought that they could attack strategic (non-civilian) sites in Russia with fighter jets and long-range missiles on a tit-for-tat basis. Problem is, America and NATO would not allow this for fear of escalation of the war outside of Ukraine.
So I found what you wrote -- quoted above -- interesting. When you say Ukraine could hit Russian Naval ships, are you speaking of ones already in the war zone (in the Black Sea and Sea of Azov)? Or do you mean those outside the war zone or even docked in Russia?
I was only talking about hitting Russian ships that are in the war zone, not ships that are docked or operating farther away.
We could give Ukraine long-range missiles with the stipulation that they could not be fired at targets farther than XXX miles away. I'd certainly hope we would at least allow them to hit Russian missile sites that fire missiles at Ukraine, and also hit rear bases, rear staging areas, and transportation nodes and lines within 150 miles of Ukraine's border.
I am thrilled that Biden is finally authorizing the transfer of fighter jets to Ukraine. News reports say we are now training Ukrainian pilots to fly those jets. Assuming we give Ukraine a decent amount of fighter jets, and assuming we train the pilots adequately, the jets will make a huge difference by enabling Ukraine to take meaningful offensive actions.
-
Can you give us the Cliffs Notes version?
-
11 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:
First the October Surprise and now Wuhan.
Those conspiracy people are tin foiled hat types? No, they are as Oliver Stone said on Rogan, Truth Seekers.
Matt Taibbi writes: "This is a major story, contradicting early official explanations pointing to zoonotic cross-species “spillover” at the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market in Wuhan, colloquially known as the Wuhan wet market. The mystery bat or pangolin suspected of transmitting the disease to humans at that market was never found. The Public story for the first time asserts the source of contamination: a Wuhan Institute scientist fell ill after exposure to a virus engineered at his place of work."
This is the tip of the iceberg. Fox News and Newsmax TV have been carrying some great reports about the Chinese scientist who defected because she realized what the Chinese government wanted her to do with the Corona virus.
And, not to be partisan, but surely no one believes that the current occupant of the White House is going to do anything about this stuff.
-
And let's not forget that Jackie told the WC that she was trying to hold JFK's hair and skull on "from the back" of his head, that "from the back" she could see where she needed to hold hair and skull on:
I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing -- I suppose there must have been. But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on.... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top. And then he sort of did this [indicating], put his hand to his forehead and fell in my lap. (5 H 180, deleted testimony released later)
She is clearly describing a defect in the back of the head, a defect at which she was trying to hold hair and skull in place. No wonder the WC deleted this segment from the published transcript. Jackie described the same back-of-head wound that Clint Hill observed up close for several minutes on the way to Parkland Hospital.
-
13 hours ago, Ken Davies said:
JFK does not reach for his throat. He raises both clenched hands ( like fists) to an area near the front of his throat. Was this a reflex action, or perhaps a taught response to protect himself from a forward shot.
There is no touching, squeezing, or cradling of his throat. His hands go up. Why , why are the fingers clenched?
Nellie Connally, who got a close look at JFK's reaction, said he was grabbing at his throat ("he had both hands at his neck," "clutch his neck with both hands"). This was no "reflex action." That myth was debunked years ago. When you reach for an area where you're feeling pain, you may not actually touch the area, or only touch it briefly and then pull away slightly. JFK is definitely reaching for his throat, because he has just been shot in the throat.
The back shot comes quite visibly in Z226, when he is suddenly jolted forward and his hands and elbows are flung upward and forward. Though studiously ignored by WC apologists, this is one of the most obvious, visible reactions in the entire Zapruder film.
In Z221, Jackie is already looking intently at JFK, obviously because she has realized something is wrong with him. You can see JFK's right hand in front of his mouth in Z206. So obviously, JFK's reaction began well before Z224 and Jackie noticed it and began staring at JFK well before Z224, just as the HSCA PEP noted.
-
46 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:
Joan Baez Starts Protest On Repression by Hanoi
https://www.nytimes.com/1979/05/30/archives/joan-baez-starts-protest-on-repression-by-hanoi.html
Joan Baez was the rare exception. As I have said several times, there were a few, a precious few, anti-war liberals who condemned North Vietnam's reign of terror after Saigon fell. Also, notice the date on that article: 1979. That was four years after the brutal subjugation had begun. Still, kudos to Joan Baez for speaking out in 1979. Better late than never.
-
8 hours ago, John Cotter said:
William,
So you believe a Ukrainian view of the proxy war against Russia is objective.
Thanks for further illustrating your one-eyed perversity, otherwise known as shadow projection.
____________________
The perversity is your peddling of disgraceful Russian propaganda.
The "proxy war against Russia"??? That is a truly sick joke. Ukraine did nothing to provoke Putin's aggression. Ukraine is a liberal democracy. It is none of Putin's business if Ukraine wants to join a defensive alliance or to join the European Union.
You remind me of the people in the so-called "anti-war movement" during the Vietnam War. They whitewashed North Vietnam, one of the most brutal and repressive regimes on Earth, and demonized the anti-communist regime of South Vietnam. And when the Hanoi regime finally won, thanks in no small part to the American anti-war movement, those same protestors who had railed against every real and imagined human rights violation in South Vietnam suddenly fell silent when the Hanoi regime executed tens of thousands of South Vietnamese and sent hundreds of thousands of others to concentration camps, where the death rate was at least 5%. The so-called "anti-war protestors" said not a peep about these horrific crimes.
-
1 hour ago, Micah Mileto said:
I think the lapel flap is the real deal!
The lapel flip is meaningless. The lapel flip occurs nowhere near the exit wound in Connally's chest. The lapel flip was caused by the wind that was gusting intermittently in Dealey Plaza.
If one assumes that Connally was hit at Z224, one needs to explain why Connally shoulder does not get slammed downward until Z238.
If one assumes that the Z224 shot hit JFK first, one needs to explain what in the world caused JFK to freeze his waving motion, snap his head to the left, begin to bring his hands up to his throat. One also needs to explain how in the world JFK's left hand is clearly reaching for his throat in Z224.
The alleged Z224 SBT shot is sheer silliness.
There is a shot at Z224, but it's the second shot to hit JFK--it's the one that knocks him visibly forward and causes his hands and elbows to be flung upward and forward starting in Z226.
-
1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:
Mr Griffith - since you are so sure that Vietnam was winnable, how do you propose Ukraine wins this war?
The surest and quickest way for Ukraine to defeat Putin's criminal invasion would be for us to give Ukraine ample fighter jets and bombers, which would enable them to take the offensive in a decisive way. I give Biden full credit for finally agreeing to give Ukraine fighter jets. It's about time. This should have been done many months ago.
Even without bombers, the fighter jets, assuming Biden provides an adequate number, will enable Ukraine to take the war to the Russians in their rear assembly and supply areas, and to attack Russian naval ships that are prowling off Ukraine's coast, something that Ukraine cannot now do very effectively.
Another step that would help Ukraine win the war would be to give them long-range missiles so they could hit Russian naval ships and retaliate for all the vicious Russian missile attacks on civilian areas.
But just look at the magnificent job that Ukraine has done fighting off the invasion with just the weapons that Biden and NATO have been willing to give them. It is a testament to the spirit of the Ukrainian people.
I have a deep interest in Putin's criminal invasion because I have dear friends in Ukraine, one of whom is like a daughter to me and my wife. We had a Ukrainian exchange student for a school year in 2018, and we visited Ukraine to meet her family in 2019. Her father, who is in his forties, is voluntarily serving in the Ukrainian army. She and her mother, sister, and grandmother have had to spend time in bomb shelters. At times we have lost contact with them because they had no cell service and no Internet access. It infuriates me just to think about it.
-
On 6/12/2023 at 2:31 PM, Gerry Down said:
I don't think the bullet could have yawed much in the short distance it travelled through JFKs neck.
But the standard tale offered by WC apologists for years is that the bullet that hit Connally was yawing. If the bullet was not yawing before it allegedly exited JFK's throat, what would have caused it to suddenly start yawing before it supposedly hit Connally in the back?
Of course, no bullet traveled through JFK's neck. We now know that the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about a bullet exiting the throat. This explains why there was no hole through the tie knot and no nick on either edge of tie knot. This explains why the shirt slits had no copper traces around them and no fabric missing from them. This explains why the slits exhibit signs of having been cut by a scalpel. This explains why the damage behind the throat wound was larger than the wound itself, indicating that a projectile entered the throat, not exited it. This explains why the slits look nothing like an exit defect made by a bullet. This explains why the FBI lab initially said nothing about a bullet exiting the slits but said the slits could have been made by a fragment. This explains why Dr. Carrico specified that the throat wound was above the collar. And on and on we could go.
Also, the back wound was well below the neck, as we know from the hard physical evidence of the rear clothing holes. Moreover, before he realized it was a problem and expunged it from the autopsy report, Humes stated that the back wound had a sharply downward angle. But, Humes did not realize that Sibert and O'Neill had dutifully recorded his observation and included it in their report on the autopsy; nor did he realize that this observation was included in the FBI's summary report on the assassination.
JFK starts to react to the throat shot in Z200. This is why he reaches for his throat. Then, while he's still grabbing at his throat, he is visibly knocked forward by the back shot starting in Z226. These things are obvious to anyone not committed to denying reality.
Connally, of course, shows no signs of having been hit until Z238, when his right shoulder is suddenly knocked downward and his cheeks puff. In perfect agreement with the Zapruder film, Connally himself chose Z234 as the moment of impact, which explains why his right shoulder was slammed downward less than 1/4-second later (or just 218 milliseconds later).
-
1 hour ago, Paul Rigby said:
The Duran's interview this morning with guest Jeffrey Sachs on JFK:
This video is a bunch of far-left, pro-communist propaganda. Sachs is a hardcore radical leftist who thinks America is the Great Satan of the planet. He was part of the so-called "anti-war movement" during the Vietnam War. He calls the U.S. bombing of Cambodia "completely reckless and illegal." I should have him talk with some of my Cambodian friends, one of whom attends the same church with me. They could set him straight about who the bad guys were in Cambodia. I notice he says nothing about the brutal reign of terror that his North Vietnamese Communist buddies imposed on the South Vietnamese after Saigon fell.
JFK would spin in his grave to be associated with such an anti-American radical as Sachs.
-
It's interesting that initially even Humes said the SBT was impossible given the medical evidence. And Nurse Bell was adamant that more fragments were recovered from Connally's wrist than could have come from CE 399.
The Zapruder film, even in its extant condition, makes it clear that Connally's wrist was wounded many frames after Connally was shot through the chest.
-
8 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:
@Michael Griffith It is beyond absurd that david von pein would quote Lattimer- a urologist- for support. Shaw was an experienced surgeon at a hospital with an extraordinary number of gunshot wounds. He knew what entry wounds looked like and particularly the kind of wound that a tumbling bullet makes.
There is an interesting backstory on Lattimer and he was one of the misguided "false patriots" who felt they were defending America's honor by goose-stepping for the Warren Commission.
Yes, quite a few WC defenders believed it was their patriotic duty to uphold the lone-gunman theory. They viewed any criticism of the WC as an attack on our form of government. They viewed any suggestion that JFK was killed by a domestic conspiracy as a far-left attempt to shield the Soviets from blame and to whitewash Oswald's Marxism and pro-communist activities. Many contemporary WC apologists share these views.
Anyway, Lattimer's blunders on JFK's head wounds were as bad as his gaffes on the SBT.
-
On 6/11/2023 at 12:14 PM, Sandy Larsen said:
You seriously doubt many facts, Pat.
Though I believe I saw the Aguilar message in a Mantik e-mail list I was once on. I'd forgotten about that list and just happened to see it when sorting my mail today.
Well, that's nice. But that doesn't mean that Aguilar agrees with you. Just like it doesn't mean that Aguilar agrees with Mantik because he's on his e-mail list.
That Aguilar hasn't confronted you directly on where the gaping hole was located doesn't mean he agrees with you. It just means he's a gentleman.
It doesn't bother (or surprise) me that you don't believe my anecdote. But you should definitely believe what Gary himself says in the videos Michael pointed out. Though I doubt you will. You will find a way to spin what he says into agreeing with your beliefs.
I think Pat is once again misrepresenting Aguilar's views. When Aguilar was interviewed for the 2022 documentary JFK Revisited, he said the following about the Harper Fragment:
Dr. Gary Aguilar: It was found in a position that the FBI said was to the left and rear of where Jack Kennedy was when he was assassinated. It was then taken in by this medical student into his professors and they looked at it and they said it looked like it was occipital bone, which is back here.
The whole point of the documentary's segment on the Harper Fragment is that the fragment was occipital bone, and the segment includes Aguilar's above-quoted statement. And, again, this documentary was released just last year, 2022.
-
On 6/12/2023 at 12:27 PM, Roger Odisio said:I ask that you restore to this site my original post so that people who agree with my original point, and those who disagree, may have the chance to respond. I count 5 posters who thought the thread was relevant before Niederhut's intervention. That was in the first day or two. Perhaps there are more.
In this case, Niederhut happens to be right.
Your thread whitewashed Putin's brutal, unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. Even worse, your thread argued that Biden has not sought peace in Ukraine, and that JFK would have pursued a more "peaceful" policy in response to Putin's vicious assault on Ukraine.
-
Notice that no WC apologist has explained how a yawing bullet, even one passing through a magically shored-up neck, could have created such a small (3-5 mm), neat, and punched-in throat wound. The edges of the wound were punched inward, not outward. Most important, the wound was very small, no more than 5 mm in diameter. A yawing bullet could not have produced such a small wound.
-
On 6/10/2023 at 2:10 AM, Benjamin Cole said:
DAVID VON PEIN SAID (From his blog, no edits):
The topic of the size of the entry wound in John Connally's back and whether or not the bullet was tumbling as it entered Connally is, indeed, interesting. Dr. John Lattimer's tests clearly indicate that a Carcano/Western Cartridge bullet that has passed through a simulated JFK neck will nearly always tumble before reaching the Connally target and, hence, result in a larger-sized entry hole in the Connally target:
Quoting Dr. Lattimer:
"Five cardboard skins simulating Connally were placed the same distance from Kennedy's neck as Connally was seated in the automobile in front of the President. The Carcano bullets that made the holes in these targets had passed through a simulation of Kennedy's neck, striking only soft tissues. Five of the six bullets tumbled end over end after leaving the neck and struck Connally's skin traveling almost sideways. .... These results confirmed our previous observations that these bullets almost always tumbled after passing through a neck.
[...]
An oval hole in our simulated back of Connally was caused by our test bullet that had first passed through a simulation of Kennedy's neck, causing that bullet to wobble and start to tumble end over end. Connally's wound of entry was elongated, like the one in the center of [the test] target. The punctate round hole, with black margins, of the type that always occurred when our test bullets struck the Connally target without hitting something else first, can be seen to the right of Connally's outline in the photograph [via Figure 106 on Page 265 of "Kennedy And Lincoln"]. These bullets never wobbled or tumbled spontaneously; they were stable in their flight to the target UNLESS THEY HIT SOMETHING ELSE FIRST [DVP's emphasis], such as Kennedy's neck, whereupon they turned almost completely sideways." -- John K. Lattimer; Pages 237 and 265 of "Kennedy And Lincoln" (c.1980)https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/search?q=tumbling
-------------Here is a photo of the bullet hole in the rear of John Connally's shirt, after some amount of cloth has been removed for testingThe archivists listed the bullet hole listed at 3/8th by 3/8ths inch, while the Western Cartridge ammo round is more than a quarter inch in diameter and about 1 1/4 inches long.
This indisputable bullet hole indicates only a shot from a non-tumbling bullet entered JBC's back.
Yet according to DVP and Lattimer, the bullet that passed though JFK's throat was almost inevitably tumbling when it left his throat.
Meaning, according to DVP and Lattimer, that the bullet that passed through JFK could not be the one that struck JBC.
That's according to Lattimer and DVP. JBC was not struck by the bullet that passed through JFK.
I agree.
As I've mentioned, I've never been able to get a plausible, sensible answer from WC apologists about how a tumbling bullet could have created the small (3-5 mm), neat, punched-in wound in JFK's throat seen by the Parkland doctors and nurses.
Connally's back wound was the same length as JFK's rear head entry wound, yet no one suggests that JFK's head was hit by a tumbling bullet. Connally's wound was 1.5 x 0.8 cm. The wound was 1.5 cm long because the bullet struck at an angle, not because it was tumbling.
The single-bullet theory collapses for so many reasons it's hard to count all of them.
-
Just a quick note about the debunked claim that JFK was not really grabbing at his throat but was exhibiting a Thorburn reaction and was in the Thorburn position. Rather than reinvent the wheel, here is a good refutation of this claim:
Dr. Lattimer and the Great Thorburn Hoax
Is it not amazing that you have people here arguing that the guy who actually experienced the shot and felt the powerful punch to his back "could not tell when he was hit" when he studied high-quality blowups of the Zapruder film? I mean, he made a full recovery and was fully lucid and sharp when he testified before the WC and when he spent hours studying the Zapruder film for Life magazine.
To believe the SBT, you have to pretend not to see JFK's and Jackie's reactions that start in Z200, not to mention the other evidence of a shot at/just before Z190, and you have to pretend to see Connally "grimacing" in the very frames that Connally specified he was not grimacing.
You must also ignore the fact that Nellie Connally corroborated her husband's WC testimony when she testified before the WC. Both were certain that JFK was hit before Connally was hit, and Nellie specified that she heard a disturbing sound, turned to look at JFK, saw him grabbing at his throat and exhibiting a blank look--all this before she heard the shot that hit her husband.
And the Zapruder confirms that JFK was clearly hit well before Connally's right shoulder starts to drop dramatically and his cheeks start to puff at Z238.
-
3 hours ago, Pat Speer said:
You really need to read my "Stuck in the Middle with You" chapter, which details Mantik's journey.
What you don't seem to realize is that there is pretty much.a cult surrounding Mantik, that support him because they find his findings sexy and provocative. But most of his findings are nonsense. I've shown this over and over over the years.
As fart as prominent people supporting Mantik's findings...Your argument from authority falls flat. (I know David well enough to know that he would agree with me on this.) To be clear, a number of people find his OD readings interesting. But Mantik proposes a right frontal entrance and an exit involving the left back of the head, neither of which was observed at Parkland or Bethesda. And this is in addition to a tangential wound at the top of the head, and an EOP entrance from behind. (I forget at the moment just where he thinks this bullet exited.) In any event, he has long proposed not two head shots, but three.
I have talked with Wecht and Aguilar and neither of them subscribe to this. They are both on Team Thompson last I checked in that they both suspect a tangential wound at the top of the head, and a second bullet from behind that exited though the open skull. Wecht has told me, moreover, that he has a friendship with Mantik and supports his writings, but that one should not take from this that he agrees with all of Mantik's findings.
P.S. Here is Doug Horne pointing out the location for his and Mantik's phantom wounds. Note that it is built upon--no surprise--Mantik's clearly incorrect orientation for the Mystery Photo.
I've read that chapter. It contains a number of errors and misrepresentations, just as your replies have.
If Wecht feels that way, it is mighty strange that he wrote such a positive review of Mantik's new book just last year.
As for Aguilar, humm, I think you are either misrepresenting Aguilar or have misunderstood him. Go look at the video he posted in 2021, wherein he argues for the right-rear head wound, questions the veracity of the autopsy photos, and argues for a right-frontal shot. When interviewed by Robbie Robertson less than a year ago, on video, Aguilar argued that the brains were switched, that the 1500-gram brain weight is absurd, that there was a right-rear exit wound, that there was a shot from the right front, etc., etc.
Mantik's OD measurements are a bit more than just "interesting." They were proof-read by Dr. Arthur Haas, a former chief of medical physics at Kodak, and have been confirmed by Dr. Chesser, who did his own OD measurements on the skull x-rays. It is incredible that you do not accept this hard scientific evidence.
There is a reason that you are the darling, favorite conspiracy theorist among WC apologists. They love to quote you. Look how often they cite you just in this forum. Over and over again, you accept their premises and dubious evidence and then offer a convoluted alternative interpretation that favors conspiracy. When I first joined this forum, I did not understand why so many of our fellow WC critics hold a negative view of your research. Now i do.
-
Just behold the embarrassing, ridiculous, and disingenuous reaching that WC apologists are doing in this thread. It is a sight to behold. It would be comical if the subject were not a serious one.
Given that someone has cited Pat Speer's analysis of Nellie Connally's testimony, I think we should look at some of Speer has said on the matter:
-
Bugliosi then has Nellie Connally, "startled by the loud frightening noise that emanates from somewhere to her right," turn to look in this direction. He stops it right there, and in the process, leaves something out. A big something. Her Warren Commission testimony, which Bugliosi cites, reads: "I heard a noise…I turned over my right shoulder and looked back, and saw the President as he had both hands at his neck" (4H146-149). In subsequent interviews, Mrs. Connally would repeatedly assert that Kennedy was hit by this first shot. Why, if Bugliosi trusts her testimony that her husband yelled out "Oh, no, no, no!" just before he was shot--when she wasn't even focusing on her husband at the time--does he refuse to believe she saw Kennedy reacting to a shot when she claimed to be looking right at him?
-
On page 481, Bugliosi finally gets around to offering his reasons for rejecting Nellie Connally's consistent claim that she saw Kennedy, sitting but 3 feet away from her, react to the first shot. In one of the most bizarre and deceptive arguments in a book filled with bizarre and deceptive arguments, he asserts that we know Nellie Connally was confused because "In her Warren Commission testimony, she testified that immediately after hearing the first shot, she 'looked back and saw the president as he had both hands at his neck.' We know from the Zapruder film, of course, that Kennedy showed no visible reaction to the first shot around Z160, so we know Mrs. Connally was wrong." Well, I'll be. Talk of your circular reasoning. Bugliosi claims we know a shot was fired at frame 160 of the Zapruder film, in large part because Governor Connally testified to turning to his right just after the first shot. As President Kennedy was clearly not hit at this time, however, Bugliosi proposes that this first shot must have missed. This makes Governor Connally and his fervent belief that the first shot hit Kennedy an obstacle. No problem, says Bugliosi, Governor Connally was a gunshot wound victim, and his recollections of the moments just before and after he was shot are an understandable blur. Never mind that this undercuts the value of Connally's testimony, the very testimony upon which Bugliosi's first shot miss theory has been built. Besides, says Bugliosi, "Governor Connally's conclusion that the president was hit by the first shot is based solely, it seems, on the recollection of his wife, Nellie." And why can't we trust Nellie's recollection? Because her recollection conflicts with the first shot's being fired at frame 160, a precise time divined by Bugliosi from her "confused" husband's testimony! Apparently, we are to disregard the statements and testimony of any witness whose statements and testimony conflict with Bugliosi's proposed first shot miss, an event so far unsupported by the full statements and testimony of every witness he's provided.
-
But if that wasn't bad enough, on page 481 Bugliosi offers us a second reason to distrust Nellie Connally's assertion that the first shot struck the President. His second reason is that "She also said that after the first shot, she recalls her husband exclaiming, 'Oh, no, no, no.' But he testified, 'When I was hit' (which he said was by the second shot) is when 'I said 'Oh, no, no, no.'" Umm, wow. Did Bugliosi really forget that he'd previously argued that she was right when she said her husband yelled out "Oh, no, no, no!" after the first shot, and that he'd used her statement, at that time, to discredit her husband? He can't have it both ways. He can't say her husband is wrong because she disagrees with him and then turn around and say we can't trust her because he disagrees with her. (LINK)
-
-
8 hours ago, David Von Pein said:
Plus.....Connally, at Z225, is clearly also reacting in different ways to having just been hit by a bullet --- his mouth opens, a discernible grimace comes across his face (IMO), his eyes close, his shoulders jerk upward in a reflex action (a very typical "startle" type of response), and there's also the lapel/tie movement at Z224/225. The clip below ends at Z225....
Really?! Is it not very odd that Connally himself, the man who actually experienced the wounding, said just the opposite? After carefully studying high-quality blowups of the Zapruder film for Life magazine, he said he was certain he was not hit before he began to turn leftward, which he starts to do no later than Z224. Connally told Life,
"You can see my leftward movement clearly," Connally told Life as he studied these frames. "I had turned to the right when the limousine was behind the sign. Now I'm turning back again. I know that I made that turn to the left before I was hit. You can see the grimace in the President's face. You cannot see it in mine. There is no question about It. I haven't been hit yet." (LINK)
Connally chose Z234 as the moment of impact, which dovetails perfectly with the dramatic collapse of his shoulder and the puffing of his cheeks starting in Z238.
14 hours ago, Gerry Down said:Connally could not tell when he was hit. He made a mistake. As far as I know, no one ever confronted him with z224 lapel movement.
Mrs Connally also made a mistake. On Pat Speers website he lists out Nellies testimonies over the years. She said that jfk was hit, then connally started yelling no no, and THEN connally was hit. Yes you read that right, nellie thought connally yelled no no BEFORE he was hit.
More "mistakes"! Oh, this is rich. So Connally, the guy who actually felt the bullet hit him, could not tell when he was hit! Not even after studying high-quality enlargements of the Zapruder film! Well, no one can stop you from making such a silly claim. Again, you will see whatever you need to see, even if it is clearly not there.
The Z224 lapel flip had nothing to do with a shot. It was caused by the wind that was gusting in the plaza. Moreover, the lapel was nowhere near the point where the bullet exited anyway.
The only thing that Nellie Connally was ever unclear about was exactly when she heard her husband yell "no, no, no." In her WC and HSCA testimonies, she was consistent on every other key aspect, especially about the fact that the governor was not hit until after she had turned to look at JFK, saw him grabbing his throat, and saw a blank look on his face. The Zapruder film undeniably confirms her account that her husband was not hit until after JFK had begun to react to his first wound, if a person is willing to admit what is plainly visible.
Again, if Connally was hit at Z224-225, why is his shoulder not slammed downward until Z238? How can he still be holding his hat if his radius bone has been shattered?
Yes, of course you guys cannot accept the HSCA PEP's finding that JFK starts to react to his first wound in Z200, because that blows the SBT to pieces. Yet, the PEP was clearly and obviously correct, as anyone who studies the Zapruder film can see--again, as long as they are willing to admit what is plainly visible. BTW, the Z186-190 shot matches the timing of Willis 5 perfectly, as the PEP correctly noted.
The PEP realized that JFK began to bring his hands toward his throat before he went behind the freeway sign. In Z205-206, JFK's right hand is already near and in front of his throat). This is why Jackie suddenly turned her head to the right to look at JFK starting at around Z202, and why she is intently looking at him when she reemerges from behind the freeway sign at Z221.
When JFK reemerges from behind the freeway sign in Z224, his left hand is at the level of his throat. Clearly, he had begun grabbing his throat with both hands before this point. Yet, you guys say that he was not wounded until Z224! No human could whip his left hand up to his throat in fewer than 54 milliseconds (one Z frame equals 54.6 milliseconds).
-
12 hours ago, Pat Speer said:
I could go on for days...
12 hours ago, Pat Speer said:I don't want to get into it, but the list you cite is largely meaningless. Some of them like Mantik and think his research is interesting, but have separated themselves from many if not most of his conclusions. . . .
Dr. Wecht and Dr. Chesser endorsed Dr. Mantik's new book late last year, so clearly they have not "separated themselves from many if not most of his conclusions." I know that Doug Horne certainly has not done so. As of mid-2021, Dr. Aguilar was still arguing that the autopsy photos do not accurately picture JFK's large head wound and was questioning their authenticity.
P.S. You still haven't addressed any of these points...
1. Does the white patch cover Mantik's location for the Harper fragment? If not, why did most everyone citing Mantik's research claim it did prior to my pointing out that it did not?
Mantik also adjusted his placement of the Harper Fragment after he saw the x-ray of the fragment that John Hunt discovered at the National Archives. I notice you did not address any of the points he made about what that x-ray shows.
The white patch covers a small part of the right-rear wound described by 40-plus witnesses, but, granted, it does not cover the entire wound. This does not change the fact that OD measurements prove that the white patch is a manmade artifact.
2. Does Mantik's orientation for the mystery photo depict a large hole on the LEFT side of the skull? And, if so, why is it okay for him to pretend his orientation is in keeping with eyewitnesses who saw no such hole?
You are once again misrepresenting Mantik's views. I just reviewed his illustrations in his section on F8 (the mystery photo), i.e., Figures 7A and 7B. They do not depict a "large hole on the left side of the skull." None of his other diagrams of the skull depict such a wound either.
3. Does Mantik's orientation for the large triangular fragment necessitate a large hole on the front of the head, separate from a hole on the back of the head? And, if so, why didn't the Parkland witnesses notice such a thing?
4. Seeing as the bulk of the witnesses saw one and only one large hole on the head, doesn't it make a lot more sense to assume the large triangular fragment derived from this hole, as opposed to pretending there was a large hole that nobody saw?
These questions suggest that you have not actually bothered to read his book. You do not seem to understand his analysis of the large head wound. He deals with the triangular fragment in considerable detail and shows that its placement supports his analysis of the large head wound. If you have read his book, I am baffled how you could ask these questions.
Oh my. I have a ton of material on the Harper fragment on my website. Much of what Mantik has written has been a response to what I've written, in an attempt to prop up his ridiculous conclusion the Harper fragment is occipital bone.
You are once again putting yourself in a small minority among conspiracy theorists. Dr. Chesser, Dr. Wecht, Dr. Henkelmann, Doug Horne, Wallace Milan, and Greg Burnham contend that Mantik has established that the Harper Fragment is occipital bone. Dr. Aguilar still believes it is occipital bone. The three pathologists who actually handled the fragment said it was occipital bone--and when Dr. Cairns was interviewed by the HSCA, he reaffirmed the occipital placement, as did Dr. Noteboom when he was interviewed in 1992. Dr. Jeff Sundberg believes that Mantik is correct about the Harper Fragment and thinks highly of Mantik's research in general; Sundberg wrote a glowing review of Mantik's book John F. Kennedy's Head Wounds: A Final Synthesis — and a New Analysis of the Harper Fragment.
-
16 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:
Connally says he turned to the left before he was hit? This is what we see in the Robert Croft photo which is z160.
It seems Connally is mixing up his turn to the left at z160 with some leftward turn after z224 which is confusing his reconstruction of the assassination sequence.
This is ridiculous and disingenuous. You are saying that Connally could not tell when he was hit, even though he was the one who experienced the hit. You are also saying that Mrs. Connally was semi-delusional, since she clearly and emphatically recalled that her husband was not hit until after she had turned to look at JFK, saw him grabbing his throat, and saw a blank look on his face.
Yes, Connally snapped his head to the left at around Z160. But, as I know you know, Connally was talking about the sequence that starts as he and JFK emerge from behind the freeway sign. As Connally reemerges from behind the sign, he has started to turn his head to the left, just as he described. And, just as he also described, he is clearly not hit until several frames after he has started this leftward turn. Again, Connally himself, the guy who actually experienced the wounding, said he was hit at Z234, which dovetails perfectly with his right shoulder collapse and cheek puffing starting at Z238.
Since the HSCA PEP established that JFK began to react to his first bullet wound at Z200, which is what the Zapruder film clearly shows, pray tell, what slammed Connally's right shoulder downward and made his cheeks puff in Z238-243?
-
29 minutes ago, Mark Ulrik said:
The stretcher bullet (Q1) and limo fragments (Q2+3) were ballistically matched to the TSBD rifle (K1) identified as a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (a slight misnomer for the Carcano rifle) whereas the TSBD cartridges and cases (Q6+7+8) were easily identified by their headstamp as having been manufactured by the Western Cartridge Co.
This stuff is decades behind the information curve. The stretcher bullet now in evidence does not resemble the description of the bullet that was originally found. And, NAA testing actually proved that the fragments could have come from any number of FMJ bullets, not just WCC bullets.
Out of the Darkness and into the Light
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Wow. Well. I hope you're right.