Gil Jesus Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 (edited) The Warren Commission's conclusions are not the official final word on the Kennedy Assassination. Why then do you so passionately support them ? Edited April 8 by Gil Jesus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ege Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 Maybe, "Any port in a storm" ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Brown Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 9 hours ago, Gil Jesus said: The Warren Commission's conclusions are not the official final word on the Kennedy Assassination. Why then do you so passionately support them ? Perhaps you're completely unaware that the HSCA concluded that Kennedy was assassinated as part of a "probable" conspiracy and then recommended that the Department of Justice look into the matter further. The DOJ did just that and concluded that there was no evidence of any conspiracy. Learn the case, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gil Jesus Posted April 8 Author Share Posted April 8 21 minutes ago, Bill Brown said: Perhaps you're completely unaware that the HSCA concluded that Kennedy was assassinated as part of a "probable" conspiracy and then recommended that the Department of Justice look into the matter further. The DOJ did just that and concluded that there was no evidence of any conspiracy. Learn the case, please. Who said anything about the HSCA ? The question is why do you so passionately support the Warren Commission ? Answer the question, please. Now that you've brought it up, can we have a source for that DOJ investigation into the Kennedy assassination ? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Blackmon Posted April 8 Share Posted April 8 If there had been a real investigation by the DOJ everyone on this forum would know about it. Laughable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) 3 hours ago, Gil Jesus said: can we have a source for that DOJ investigation into the Kennedy assassination ? Edited April 9 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 4 hours ago, Bill Brown said: Perhaps you're completely unaware that the HSCA concluded that Kennedy was assassinated as part of a "probable" conspiracy and then recommended that the Department of Justice look into the matter further. The DOJ did just that and concluded that there was no evidence of any conspiracy. Learn the case, please. Is that what they said? I thought they just looked into the dictabelt, and thought that unworthy for re-opening the case. I am not aware of them performing any additional eyewitness interviews, or consulting with any medical experts, or anything like that. IOW, they didn't find any evidence for a conspiracy because they didn't re-investigate anything, even though, congress, who pays their bills, had declared their previous investigations to have been flawed. Is that right, Bill? Or is there a series of reports circa 1984 I should be looking at, that is, beyond the Ramsey report on the dictabelt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 51 minutes ago, David Von Pein said: Thanks, David. They closed the case without following up on any of the HSCA's leads regarding the mafia and anti-Castro Cubans. It should be noted, moreover, that this was the Reagan Administration--which had close ties to the anti-Castro Cuban community, and that Ronnie himself was courting the teamsters in hopes of gaining their political support. IOW, the political play for the Reagan Justice Dept. was to do as little as possible--which they did, and this even though Reagan himself had questioned the single-assassin solution and had once picked a conspiracy theorist as his VP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Ulrik Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 From Wikipedia: Quote In a memorandum written to the House Judiciary Committee in 1988 by Criminal Division Assistant Attorney General William F. Weld, the recommendations of the HSCA report were formally reviewed and a conclusion of active investigations was reported.[5] In light of investigative reports from the FBI's Technical Services Division and the National Academy of Sciences Committee determining that "reliable acoustic data do not support a conclusion that there was a second gunman" in the Kennedy assassination, and that all investigative leads known to the Justice Department for both assassinations had been "exhaustively pursued", the Department concluded "that no persuasive evidence can be identified to support the theory of a conspiracy in either the assassination of President Kennedy or the assassination of Dr. King."[5] The memorandum is item 14 below. Index of /Collection/Weisberg Subject Index Files/J Disk/Justice Department of/Justice Department of JFK-King Reinvestigation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 (edited) I think Pat left out a key point, revealed by Thompson. One of the prime movers behind knocking the acoustics evidence was Mr. Alvarez. Who was no expert in acoustics. Yet he was determined to move hell and high water to torpedo it. Sort of like his melon experiments with Paul Hoch. Edited April 9 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Crane Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 9 hours ago, Charles Blackmon said: If there had been a real investigation by the DOJ everyone on this forum would know about it. Laughable! Every bit of law enforcement,agencies or departments were LBJ's whipping boys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denise Hazelwood Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 23 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: One of the prime movers behind knocking the acoustics evidence was Mr. Alvarez. Who was no experts in acoustics. Yet he was determined to move hell and high water to torpedo it. Donald Thomas has an excellent study on the acoustics in his book Hear No Evil. The “hold everything secure” utterance, which I certainly can’t hear, has an alternative explanation other than “crosstalk,” especially given the presence of the “hum” in the evidence tape. (Gary Mack, in his earlier work, showed that automatic gain control or AGC, which was present in the evidence tape, was not a part of the DPD system, and Chris Scalley demonstrated that the dicta belt known to be in the Archives is not in fact the original one. Nevertheless, there was enough information on one of the recordings for the acoustical experts to find “impulse” patterns that matched what would be expected for gunshots and their echoes, even having been run through AGC.) Dr. Thomas noted that the microphone matches were sequential, and that the “double-bang” in the evidence tape matched the “double-bang” reported by witnesses. He calculated the odds against that being by chance (I.e., that the recording was NOT gunshots) as something like 10,000 to be against, IIRC. (Might have been even greater than that.) If one considers that the “bike with the Mike” was also the “Knoll Rider” (Douglas Jackson), then the extraneous noises (engine sounds) make a lot of sense. Acoustically, there were 7 impulses. The first and last ones were rejected as “false positives” because they didn’t match volumes or echo patterns of test shots from the TSBD or GK (a premature rejection, in my opinion, but not really part of the “assassination sequence—the first one was probably a warning shot from one of Johnson’s agents who were farther back on Houston Street and could see the rifle in the TSBD window, and the last one was probably from overzealous SS or DPD officer who was chasing a phantom shooter up the knoll and probably injured an innocent bystander, thus accounting for the pool of blood at the top of the stairs). That leaves 5 “suspect impulses” as part of the assassination sequence. The HSCA rejected one as a “false positive” because Oswald did not have time to recycle his weapon— which Thomas describes as an ad hoc (Latin for “bullshit”) reason (and they rejected the wrong impulse for that reason if it even was a reason). To all that, I add that the mic placement diagram is deliberately misleading. The man who drew it was not actually present during the acoustical tests and made it based on a description of “street features” that no one has access to for verification of accuracy. Thus the wrong person (McLain) was thought to be the one who had the “bike with the Mike,” when it was actually Jackson. In the Gallery record, the gunshot impulses occur right after someone (Chaney?) says, “all right, Jackson” (as Gary Mack notes in the record). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gil Jesus Posted April 9 Author Share Posted April 9 (edited) 11 hours ago, Charles Blackmon said: If there had been a real investigation by the DOJ everyone on this forum would know about it. Laughable! I don't think I'm going to get an answer to my original question. Not one Lone Nutter has answered it. They love it when the subject changes. It offers them an escape. Edited April 9 by Gil Jesus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddy Bainbridge Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 I am not am advocate for the Warren Commission but I think the answer is Credibility. No subsequent investigation has achieved the credibility of the Warren Report. I don't mean high credibility in the public eye, I mean sufficient credibility over competing sources of conclusions. The subsequent reviews are less well known, equivocal in conclusions and the press has failed us. The Warren Report is bad. The opposing views are piecemeal, kooky, and less credible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Zartman Posted April 9 Share Posted April 9 52 minutes ago, Eddy Bainbridge said: The Warren Report is bad. The opposing views are piecemeal, kooky, and less credible. JFK's head goes back and to the left, allegedly because of a shot from behind. What could be less credible than a violation of the basic laws of physics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now