Bang up job, folks...

[Cliff Varnell]

 

 

Belief in JFKA conspiracy peaked circa 2000 at 80%.  After 17 years it dropped to 61%.  I attribute the drop to Internet Parlor Game Players who’ve spent the last couple decades disputing the T3 back wound — the best evidence of conspiracy— in order to inflate the significance of their own research.

[Paul Brancato]

No way. I mean - yes, a lot of wasted space on the internet. But disputing the back wound? 

[Sandy Larsen]

The drop in conspiracy believers could be due to old people dying. People who experienced the assassination, and then the killing of Oswald.

 

[Joe Bauer]

The vast majority of people polled about this subject nowadays probably know maybe 5% of what we older Americans know about everything that was happening all around JFK and RFK before, during and after 11,22,1963.

Especially the immensity and depths of enmity of JFK/RFK hating forces.

Millions of Americans hated JFK for segregation reasons.

Millions hated him for his peace ideology. That damn commie! 

The wealthiest men on Earth ( Texas oil ) hated JFK because they felt he was a threat to their wealth and power.

Hot headed expatriated Cubans hated him.

Our own military including our own Chiefs of Staff hated JFK/RFK.

Our most violent covert action people hated JFK. 

Our secret agencies same thing.

LBJ himself hated JFK/RFK. Young people have no clue as to the incredible corruption of LBJ.

J. Edgar Hoover same thing.

And finally organized crime ( with their massive wealth, power and influence back in 1963 ) hated JFK and RFK. To murderous wishing degrees.

I believe all those other super powerful groups hated JFK to a murderous degrees as well.

I would say the JFK and RFK assassinations were born out of this entire massive matrix of JFK hate.  So deep and pervasive in our society at that time...JFK and RFK didn't stand a chance against them when they came together to achieve a common goal.

I think JFK underestimated the size and power of this combined evil threat and what they were truly capable of and willing to do.

JFK's and RFK's enemies played for keeps.

 

Edited September 22, 2023 by Joe Bauer

[Cliff Varnell]

2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

No way. I mean - yes, a lot of wasted space on the internet. But disputing the back wound? 

The key to promotion is simplicity and repetition.  “Our Side” has failed to match the simplicity of Oswald Acted Alone.

The bullet holes in the clothes are too low to associate with the throat wound.

When was that root fact discussed at a JFK conference?  1998?

In 1966 after Gaeton Fonzi gave Arlen Specter a nervous breakdown over the location of the bullet holes in JFK’s clothes, the template for proper promotion of the fact of conspiracy was set — the bullet holes in the clothes are too low for the SBT.

Then the November 25th ‘66 issue of LIFE Magazine had a cover story featuring John Connally analyzing the Zapruder film.

A Matter of Resonable Doubt

This is a monstrous Big Lie.  It is beyond reasonable doubt that the holes in the clothes are too low.

It was genius as propaganda.  Folks have been micro-analyzing the evidence for all the years since.

Play the JFKA Parlor Game — prove the fact of conspiracy for fun and prizes!!

I’ve taken an amazing amount of static over the last 26 years from ambitious “CTs” who flat out dispute the location of the back wound.

Why?

 Because the T3 back wound counterfeits the Parlor Game.

Edited September 21, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

The drop in conspiracy believers could be due to old people dying. People who experienced the assassination, and then the killing of Oswald.

 

Not according to the 2017 poll.  No significant variation according to age.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-one-thing-in-politics-most-americans-believe-in-jfk-conspiracies/

[Vince Palamara]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

 

 

Belief in JFKA conspiracy peaked circa 2000 at 80%.  After 17 years it dropped to 61%.  I attribute the drop to Internet Parlor Game Players who’ve spent the last couple decades disputing the T3 back wound — the best evidence of conspiracy— in order to inflate the significance of their own research.

I think there are two things at play here for the NON-RESEARCHER regular folk out there:

a) time has NOT been a friend (all the principal people who have passed on, going on 60 years later: fatigue has set in). 

b) We are unable to answer or prove who did it, while the other side can merely say "Oswald did it." THIS is why the inane/insane Greer-shot-Kennedy theory is so attractive to the uninformed public- it "answers" who did it for them.

We live in a sound bite world, now even more so thanks to social media and smart phones. People want succinct and quick answers. And again, fatigue and time are factors.

One more thing: during the height of Trump mania (2015-2019 or so), I saw during this time people actually attacking JFK's memory and saying things like "who cares? He was a scum Demorat [Democrat]." Luckily, the nutty QANON and the years since has stemmed the tide there and the vast majority of comments I see hold Kennedy in high esteem again as the public did in the pre-2015 era.

Lastly, people are more concerned about their finances and jobs than JFK; sad but true. Gone forever are the heady days of 1988-1998 when there were television programs galore (including Geraldo, A Current Affair, Maury Povich and even Jenny Jones with Mark Lane!) and the "JFK" movie delighted the regular folks out there. Also, Jackie, Teddy, JFK Jr. and a score of other principals were still with us and it was "only" 25-35 years later, the equivalent of what 1998 and 1988 are to us now.

That said, Dave Perry said it best: audiences were amazed at the "JFK" movie, but, as they marched out of the theater, they were saying "so who plays tomorrow in the NFL and what time does the game start?" Never underestimate the fickle interest of John Q. Citizen.

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Vince Palamara said:

We live in a sound bite world, now even more so thanks to social media and smart phones. People want succinct and quick answers.

And that’s exactly what Gaeton Fonzi and Vincent Salandria gave us — The Bullet Holes in the Clothes are Too Low.

It’s a collective failure.

[Vince Palamara]

Just now, Cliff Varnell said:

And that’s exactly what Gaeton Fonzi and Vincent Salandria gave us — The Bullet Holes in the Clothes are Too Low.

It’s a collective failure.

I most definitely see where you are coming from and I agree, but the non-researcher, John Q. Citizen out there just want to know "who killed Kennedy?" If you can't specify it with some very-easy-to-understand proof, they lose interest like ice on a hot stove.

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

 

 

Belief in JFKA conspiracy peaked circa 2000 at 80%.  After 17 years it dropped to 61%.  I attribute the drop to Internet Parlor Game Players who’ve spent the last couple decades disputing the T3 back wound — the best evidence of conspiracy— in order to inflate the significance of their own research.

Or maybe the youngin's don't know shirt from shinola, and think studying the JFK assassination is for old farts. (This poll and all polls like it need to be broken down by age and education level, IMO.)

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

Or maybe the youngin's don't know shirt from shinola, and think studying the JFK assassination is for old farts. (This poll and all polls like it need to be broken down by age and education level, IMO.)

It was.  There was no significant variation due to age.

[W. Niederhut]

39 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Not according to the 2017 poll.  No significant variation according to age.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-one-thing-in-politics-most-americans-believe-in-jfk-conspiracies/

This is a fascinating data Cliff.

I would draw people's attention to the rather surprising fact that MORE college graduates (48%) than non-graduates (33%) in this 2017 survey believed the LONE NUT theory!

How do we explain that strange fact?

Shouldn't college grads be BETTER informed?

I have a theory-- speaking from personal experience.

More college grads are likely to regularly read prestigious news sources-- e.g., New York Times, Washington Post, etc.-- which have been at the forefront of the Operation Mockingbird disinformation promoting the Warren Commission Report.

 

 

Edited September 21, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Vince Palamara said:

I most definitely see where you are coming from and I agree, but the non-researcher, John Q. Citizen out there just want to know "who killed Kennedy?" If you can't specify it with some very-easy-to-understand proof, they lose interest like ice on a hot stove.

This is a true story:

Ten years ago I pointed out to a millennial friend of mine that her generation didn't appear all that interested in the Kennedy assassination. 

"That's because they make it so boring," she said, and the subject dropped. 

A couple weeks later she asked me what I'd been up to and I said --"Giving people hell about the central question of the JFK assassination." This was in the late summer of 2013. 

"What is the central question of the JFK assassination?" 

"You don't want to know--" 

"No, tell me." 

"JFK was shot in the back, there was no exit wound and no bullet found in the autopsy; he was shot in the throat, no exit, no bullet found in the autopsy. The central question is --what happened to the bullets that caused the back and throat wounds?" 

She thought for a second, then said -- "But was it a real autopsy?" 

"A lot of problems with the autopsy, but that was the situation...Some people think the bullets were removed prior to the autopsy." 

"Or it was some government s—t that dissolved!" she said with an air of triumph. 

About a year later I told this story to another millennial friend of mine and when I got to the line "--some government dooky that dissolved--" she blurted:
"That's what I was gonna say!"

***

The Doctors' Scenario: JFK Hit with Government S—t that Dissolved

Two FBI men attended the JFK autopsy to take notes.  

From autopsy-attendee FBI SA Francis O'Neill's sworn affidavit for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, 1978: 

<quote on>

Some discussion did occur concerning the disintegration of the bullet. A general feeling existed that a soft-nosed bullet struck JFK. There was discussion concerning the back wound that the bullet could have been a "plastic" type or an "Ice" [sic] bullet, one which dissolves after contact. 

<quote off>


From autopsy-attendee FBI SA James Sibert's sworn affidavit for the HSCA:

<quote on>

The doctors also discussed a possible deflection of the bullet in the body caused by striking bone. Consideration was also given to a type of bullet which fragments completely....Following discussion among the doctors relating to the back injury, I left the autopsy room to call the FBI Laboratory and spoke with Agent Chuch [sic] Killion. I asked if he could furnish any information regarding a type of bullet that would almost completely fragmentize (sic). 

<quote off> 

With the body in front of them the autopsists speculated JFK was struck with a high tech round that wouldn't show up on x-ray or in the body: government s—t that dissolves. This makes persons of interest out of MKNAOMI.

 

Edited September 22, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Pat Speer]

4 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

It was.  There was no significant variation due to age.

Interesting. I have to admit I was immediately turned off by the graphic. It creates the illusion Garrison was responsible for swaying public opinion when Garrison followed on the heels of Weisberg, Lane and Epstein, numerous magazine articles, and even Life Magazine. In fact, it's a safe bet that Life's article on Connally, where he disputed the single-bullet theory, did more to sway public opinion towards conspiracy than Garrison ever did. 

[Pat Speer]

23 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

This is a fascinating data Cliff.

I would draw people's attention to the rather surprising fact that MORE college graduates (48%) than non-graduates (33%) in this 2017 survey believed the LONE NUT theory!

How do we explain that strange fact?

Shouldn't college grads be BETTER informed?

I have a theory-- speaking from personal experience.

More college grads are likely to regularly read prestigious news sources-- e.g., New York Times, Washington Post, etc.-- which have been at the forefront of the Operation Mockingbird disinformation promoting the Warren Commission Report.

 

 

It's not surprising actually. Studies have shown that college graduates have more faith in institutions than non-college grads. Because of a few isolated incidents, where students protested the Vietnam War, it was widely believed that students were the sector of the public most opposed to the Vietnam War. But this wasn't true. It was small town America, whose boys got sent off to fight. 

Posner, Buglioli, etc have convinced people they are rational, even when they are not, while men like Stone have convinced people they are irrational, even when they're not. I was somewhat gratified, however, when NBC went to Gary Aguilar for comment about Landis. I think that's a good sign. I think most people would side with Aguilar and Morley against Posner and his ilk any old day. 

Edited September 22, 2023 by Pat Speer