Jump to content
The Education Forum

What's Worse -- T3 Denial or Holocaust Denial?


Cliff Varnell
 Share

Recommended Posts

The intellectual dishonesty of those who deny that JFK was shot in the back at the level of his 3rd Thoracic Vertebra is mind-numbing.

I had to visit Dachau to verify the Holocaust, but all one needs to verify the fact JFK was shot at T3 is wear a shirt and observe your shirt indent along your right shoulder-top as you casually raise your right arm and wave your hand.  The bullet holes in JFK's clothes are too low to associate with his throat wound.  Open and shut case.

So I'd have to say T3 denial is worse than Holocaust denial since it's so easy to debunk and so many JFK "experts" subscribe to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"Worse" is a problem word in you question Cliff. It's a non-critical term with wide ranging relativistic meaning. That kind of term is Donald Trump's specialty; he uses such meaningless terms and they can be adopted by anyone to fill-out their justification and penchant for hate and all his minions think they are in agreement about something.

Edited by Michael Clark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure why anyone would deny the obvious based on the available autopsy photo. The shot obviously did not hit anywhere near the neck so that negates this shot being caused by a through and through shot.

220px-Orientation.PNG

If you watch the Z film, as soon as he appears from the sign, he starts reaching up then you can see a sudden push on his back, bobbing his head back and then forward from this back shot.

As for the clothing and the hole, I'd be very worried if there was a hole or knick way out of whack from the autopsy wound but it's not - they are all pretty much in the same vicinity.

With such obvious evidence, is it any wonder Ford scribbled into the final WR manuscript that this show was in the "back of of the neck" to nullify a true back shot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Numerically and morally - I have to go with holocaust denial.  More witnesses also.

 

Anyone can witness the movement of their shirt when they imitate JFK's posture on Elm St.

There is only a lunatic fringe who deny the Holocaust, while T3 denial is virulent within the JFK Research Community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what Cliff is trying to point out is that Kennedy was shot in the back and that the wound has nothing to do with the SBT.

Many people don't believe he was shot in the back because they believe the loud sound that occurred at the intersection when Kennedy's limo made the turn was a back fire from a motorcycle. Now it seems many want us to forget about the loud noise. I see no mention of it in any of the threads or any JFK forum.

The extant Zap film shows Kennedy oblivious to the loud sound ... he waves and smiles throughout as the limo makes the turn. There are photos which show the crowd turning toward the intersection of Elm and Houston looking for the origin of the sound. Yet Kennedy doesn't flinch in response to the sound. It's as if someone wants to erase the sound too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to point out that the recent hyperbolic trend of comparing JFK/Oswald situations denial to holocaust denial may someday be seen to have done the research community no favors.

Let's not let the MSM pick up on this and run with it, hey?

Things are always dicey when I'm the voice of caution....

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David

The OP implies that both the Holocaust and a conspiracy to kill the president are true.

There is a mountain of evidence that prove they are true.

The big problem is that many in the research community do not believe in the evidence  of a conspiracy to kill the president. That has led to all kinds of weird theories.

Many here on this forum don't believe the Zap film was altered. Many here don't understand the blur analysis and thus don't believe in it. And the same goes for the acoustical analysis. If the evidence was understood many would know the CIA altered the Zapruder Film. Many would know beyond a reasonable doubt that there was more than three shots fired at Kennedy in Dealey Plaza.

The problem is ignorance on the part of many within the research community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, David Andrews said:

I have to point out that the recent hyperbolic trend of comparing JFK/Oswald situations denial to holocaust denial may someday be seen to have done the research community no favors.

Let's not let the MSM pick up on this and run with it, hey?

Things are always dicey when I'm the voice of caution....

A trend? I know of no such trend.

What would the MSM pick up -- other than their own denial JFK was shot in the back at T3?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, George Sawtelle said:

David

The OP implies that both the Holocaust and a conspiracy to kill the president are true.

There is a mountain of evidence that prove they are true.

The big problem is that many in the research community do not believe in the evidence  of a conspiracy to kill the president. That has led to all kinds of weird theories.

Many here on this forum don't believe the Zap film was altered. Many here don't understand the blur analysis and thus don't believe in it. And the same goes for the acoustical analysis. If the evidence was understood many would know the CIA altered the Zapruder Film. Many would know beyond a reasonable doubt that there was more than three shots fired at Kennedy in Dealey Plaza.

The problem is ignorance on the part of many within the research community.

The point is, the MSM line is anti-holocaust denier, and anti-JFK assassination conspiracy.  And the MSM don't play nice.

I'm out of this now.  Everybody carry on.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Cliff,

You've brought this topic up a number of times. Who are these CTers who believe the hole in the back was higher than T3? And why do they believe that?

 

 Dr. Cyril Wecht, Dr. David Mantik, Tink Thompson, Pat Speer, Martin Hay among others. 

Bill Kelly told me that if Wecht and Speer put the back wound at T1 that was good enough for him.

Black Op Radio did a series for the 50th anniversary called "50 Reasons for 50 Years" and not one of those reasons involved the actual physical evidence in the case.

Jim DiEugenio openly despises the clothing evidence and has bragged about ignoring it.

The JFK assassination is arguably the only murder case in history where the physical evidence is routinely ignored.Why?

Because the clothing evidence renders moot a lot of peoples' research.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

You're not the only guy who's compared denying a JFK conspiracy issue to holocaust denying lately.

I'm out.

Holocaust denial has not been successful in covering up the Holocaust.

T3 denial has been very successful in covering up the fact of conspiracy in the murder of JFK.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...