New JFK Dallas film surfaces in Dallas

[Don Roberdeau]

It is truly amazing how we have the "bunched up" theory to explain the inconvenient location of bullet holes, the "magic bullet" theory to explain the total lack of damage on a missile that supposedly caused 7 wounds and the "neuromuscular jet effect" to explain the head shot's violation of the laws of physics. Yet the conspiracy theorists are the "wackos."

JFK was one of the most immaculately dressed politicians of modern times. His expensive clothes were personally tailored to fit his frame perfectly. It's an insult to the intelligence to think that he'd wear something in public that fit so poorly it could ride up 5-6 inches from his waving motion to the crowd. I guess that Dr. Boswell's mind was "bunched up" when he placed the back wound in the exact same spot as the holes in JFK's clothes on his original autopsy face sheet and Dr. Burkley's mind was also "bunched up" when he described the rear back wound as being in the exact same spot. That was some "bunching up!"

Good Day Don.... and the warrenatti-posnerian "magic-limbed-ricochet-tree" ....

NOT

Best Regards in Research. Honored to be yours in the pursuit of The Truth,

Don

Don Roberdeau

U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, "Big John," Plank Walker

Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly

ROSEMARY WILLIS 2nd Headsnap; Westward, Ultrafast, & Towards the "Grassy Knoll"

Dealey Plaza Professionally-surveyed Map Detailing Victims locations, Witnesses, Photographers, Suspected trajectories, Evidentiary artifacts, etc

4 Principles

T ogether

E veryone

A chieves

M ore

"We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans--born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our ancient heritage--and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home and around the world.

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

This much we pledge--and more."

---- President JOHN F. KENNEDY, Presidential inaugural address to the world

[Guest Eugene B. Connolly]

Deleted

Edited February 21, 2007 by Eugene B. Connolly

[Myra Bronstein]

It is truly amazing how we have the "bunched up" theory to explain the inconvenient location of bullet holes, the "magic bullet" theory to explain the total lack of damage on a missile that supposedly caused 7 wounds and the "neuromuscular jet effect" to explain the head shot's violation of the laws of physics. Yet the conspiracy theorists are the "wackos."

...

That is one of the best comments ever Don. I'd make it my sig line if President Kennedy wasn't so darn quotable.

[John Simkin]

Message from Gary Mack:

Reuters writer Ed Stoddard wondered how and why the Jefferies film might be studied by conspiracy "buffs," so I told him that some conspiracy "researchers" would look at how Kennedy's coat was bunched and whether that helped explain one of his wounds. I used the term "bunched" because that is the term most researchers have used over the years. Stoddard's paragraph is an accurate account, in my opinion. Here it is: "The president's coat is clearly if briefly seen bunched up on his back -- a detail that will be scrutinized by conspiracy theorists who see evidence of a plot in, among other things, the fact the bullet wounds on his jacket and body did not appear to match."

[Charles Drago]

It is truly amazing how we have the "bunched up" theory to explain the inconvenient location of bullet holes, the "magic bullet" theory to explain the total lack of damage on a missile that supposedly caused 7 wounds and the "neuromuscular jet effect" to explain the head shot's violation of the laws of physics. Yet the conspiracy theorists are the "wackos."

...

That is one of the best comments ever Don. I'd make it my sig line if President Kennedy wasn't so darn quotable.

Imagine ... In 1964, the official USG investigation of the assassination concludes that, based upon the available medical, eyewitness, earwitness, photographic, ballistic, and other forensic evidence, JFK was the victim of a conspiracy, likely domestic in origin.

Imagine ... At the same time, a small, vocal, impassioned group of self-styled "critics" appears and argues that one man -- LHO -- without assistance of any form or fashion, did it all. Their conclusion rests upon a theory that a single bullet caused seven separate wounds to the president and the Texas governor, a characterization of LHO as a "troubled loner" and "marksman" with "Communist leanings," and all the rest of the nutter nonsense.

How long would these critics' arguments have lasted in the public consciousness? How soon would they have been laughed off the planet?

It is the imprimatur of the parent state alone that preserves the lie.

And so our enemy is known.

[Myra Bronstein]

It is truly amazing how we have the "bunched up" theory to explain the inconvenient location of bullet holes, the "magic bullet" theory to explain the total lack of damage on a missile that supposedly caused 7 wounds and the "neuromuscular jet effect" to explain the head shot's violation of the laws of physics. Yet the conspiracy theorists are the "wackos."

...

That is one of the best comments ever Don. I'd make it my sig line if President Kennedy wasn't so darn quotable.

Imagine ... In 1964, the official USG investigation of the assassination concludes that, based upon the available medical, eyewitness, earwitness, photographic, ballistic, and other forensic evidence, JFK was the victim of a conspiracy, likely domestic in origin.

Imagine ... At the same time, a small, vocal, impassioned group of self-styled "critics" appears and argues that one man -- LHO -- without assistance of any form or fashion, did it all. Their conclusion rests upon a theory that a single bullet caused seven separate wounds to the president and the Texas governor, a characterization of LHO as a "troubled loner" and "marksman" with "Communist leanings," and all the rest of the nutter nonsense.

How long would these critics' arguments have lasted in the public consciousness? How soon would they have been laughed off the planet?

It is the imprimatur of the parent state alone that preserves the lie.

And so our enemy is known.

Ah, nicely done Charles. Just flip things around and the LNers sound psychotic. Of course in reality many of them are more strategic than psychotic.

[Jack White]

Hmmmmmmmm?

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

Single Bullet, Single Gunman

By GERALD POSNER

A never-before-seen home movie showing President John F.

Kennedy's motorcade just before his assassination

definitively resolves one of the case's enduring

controversies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/opinion/...l?th&emc=th

February 21, 2007

Op-Ed Contributor

Single Bullet, Single Gunman

By GERALD POSNER

THE ability to use advanced forensics and minuscule traces of DNA to

solve crimes, even cold cases decades old, has turned many Americans

into armchair sleuths seeking to “solve” the unexpected deaths of

people like Princess Diana and Anna Nicole Smith. But sometimes,

old-fashioned evidence is as useful in solving puzzles as anything

under a nuclear microscope.

Last weekend, a never-before-seen home movie was made public showing

President John F. Kennedy’s motorcade just before his assassination. An

amateur photographer, George Jefferies, took the footage and held onto

it for more than 40 years before casually mentioning it to his

son-in-law, who persuaded him to donate it to the Sixth Floor Museum in

Dallas. The silent 8-millimeter color film was of interest to most

people simply because it showed perhaps the clearest close-up of

Jacqueline Kennedy taken that morning.

But to assassination researchers, the footage definitively resolves one

of the case’s enduring controversies: that the bullet wound on

Kennedy’s back, as documented and photographed during the autopsy, did

not match up with the location of the bullet hole on the back of his

suit jacket and shirt. The discrepancy has given conspiracy theorists

fodder to argue that the autopsy photos had been retouched and the

report fabricated.

This is more than an academic debate among ballistics buffs. It is

critical because if the bullet did enter where shown on the autopsy

photos, the trajectory lines up correctly for the famous “single

bullet” theory ? the Warren Commission hypothesis that one bullet

inflicted wounds to both Kennedy and Gov. John Connally of Texas.

However, if the hole in the clothing was the accurate mark of where the

bullet entered, it would have been too low for a single bullet to have

inflicted all the wounds, and would provide evidence of a second

assassin.

For years, those of us who concluded that the single-bullet theory was

sound, still had to speculate that Kennedy’s suit had bunched up during

the ride, causing the hole to be lower in the fabric than one would

expect. Because the holes in the shirt and jacket align perfectly, if

the jacket was elevated when the shot struck, the shirt also had to

have been raised.

Some previously published photos taken at the pivotal moment showed

Kennedy’s jacket slightly pushed up, but nothing was definitive.

Meanwhile, conspiracy theorists have done everything to disprove that

the jacket was bunched. Some used grainy photos or film clips to

measure minute distances between Kennedy’s hairline and his shirt, what

they dubbed the “hair-to-in-shoot distance.”

The new film has finally resolved the issue. At the end of the clip, as

the camera focuses on the backs of the president and first lady,

Kennedy’s suit is significantly bunched up, with several layers creased

together. Only 90 seconds before Lee Harvey Oswald fired the first

shot, Kennedy’s suit jacket was precisely in the position to

misrepresent the bullet’s entry point.

While the film solves one mystery, it leaves another open: estimates

are that at least 150,000 people lined the Dallas motorcade route that

fateful day, so there must be many other films and photographs out

there that have never come to light. Those who have them should bear in

mind that even the most innocuous-seeming artifacts, like the Jefferies

tape, can sometimes put enduring controversies to rest. As Gary Mack,

the curator of the Sixth Floor Museum said the other day, “The bottom

line is, don’t throw anything away.”

Gerald Posner is the author of “Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the

Assassination of J.F.K.”

[David G. Healy]

Message from Gary Mack:

Reuters writer Ed Stoddard wondered how and why the Jefferies film might be studied by conspiracy "buffs," so I told him that some conspiracy "researchers" would look at how Kennedy's coat was bunched and whether that helped explain one of his wounds. I used the term "bunched" because that is the term most researchers have used over the years. Stoddard's paragraph is an accurate account, in my opinion. Here it is: "The president's coat is clearly if briefly seen bunched up on his back -- a detail that will be scrutinized by conspiracy theorists who see evidence of a plot in, among other things, the fact the bullet wounds on his jacket and body did not appear to match."

The film is irrelevant re matters occuring on Elm Street in DP on Nov 22nd 1963... (we and THEY know that)

Perhaps as ole Gerald Posner makes his rounds of talk shows on FOX, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC fielding all those powder-puffs questions he's sure to be asked, he'll be kind enough to quote Gary Mack eluding to your above.

I sure Posner no doubt will comment on how GREAT Jackie looks 60 seconds before her husband is shot to death with wounds in the back and head. Immediately after he states how Jeffries film supports the contention of the WCR...

Edited February 21, 2007 by David G. Healy

[Myra Bronstein]

Hmmmmmmmm?

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

Single Bullet, Single Gunman

By GERALD POSNER

A never-before-seen home movie showing President John F.

Kennedy's motorcade just before his assassination

definitively resolves one of the case's enduring

controversies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/opinion/...l?th&emc=th

February 21, 2007

Op-Ed Contributor

Single Bullet, Single Gunman

By GERALD POSNER

THE ability to use advanced forensics and minuscule traces of DNA to

solve crimes, even cold cases decades old, has turned many Americans

into armchair sleuths seeking to “solve” the unexpected deaths of

people like Princess Diana and Anna Nicole Smith. But sometimes,

old-fashioned evidence is as useful in solving puzzles as anything

under a nuclear microscope.

Last weekend, a never-before-seen home movie was made public showing

President John F. Kennedy’s motorcade just before his assassination. An

amateur photographer, George Jefferies, took the footage and held onto

it for more than 40 years before casually mentioning it to his

son-in-law, who persuaded him to donate it to the Sixth Floor Museum in

Dallas. The silent 8-millimeter color film was of interest to most

people simply because it showed perhaps the clearest close-up of

Jacqueline Kennedy taken that morning.

But to assassination researchers, the footage definitively resolves one

of the case’s enduring controversies: that the bullet wound on

Kennedy’s back, as documented and photographed during the autopsy, did

not match up with the location of the bullet hole on the back of his

suit jacket and shirt. The discrepancy has given conspiracy theorists

fodder to argue that the autopsy photos had been retouched and the

report fabricated.

This is more than an academic debate among ballistics buffs. It is

critical because if the bullet did enter where shown on the autopsy

photos, the trajectory lines up correctly for the famous “single

bullet” theory ? the Warren Commission hypothesis that one bullet

inflicted wounds to both Kennedy and Gov. John Connally of Texas.

However, if the hole in the clothing was the accurate mark of where the

bullet entered, it would have been too low for a single bullet to have

inflicted all the wounds, and would provide evidence of a second

assassin.

For years, those of us who concluded that the single-bullet theory was

sound, still had to speculate that Kennedy’s suit had bunched up during

the ride, causing the hole to be lower in the fabric than one would

expect. Because the holes in the shirt and jacket align perfectly, if

the jacket was elevated when the shot struck, the shirt also had to

have been raised.

Some previously published photos taken at the pivotal moment showed

Kennedy’s jacket slightly pushed up, but nothing was definitive.

Meanwhile, conspiracy theorists have done everything to disprove that

the jacket was bunched. Some used grainy photos or film clips to

measure minute distances between Kennedy’s hairline and his shirt, what

they dubbed the “hair-to-in-shoot distance.”

The new film has finally resolved the issue. At the end of the clip, as

the camera focuses on the backs of the president and first lady,

Kennedy’s suit is significantly bunched up, with several layers creased

together. Only 90 seconds before Lee Harvey Oswald fired the first

shot, Kennedy’s suit jacket was precisely in the position to

misrepresent the bullet’s entry point.

While the film solves one mystery, it leaves another open: estimates

are that at least 150,000 people lined the Dallas motorcade route that

fateful day, so there must be many other films and photographs out

there that have never come to light. Those who have them should bear in

mind that even the most innocuous-seeming artifacts, like the Jefferies

tape, can sometimes put enduring controversies to rest. As Gary Mack,

the curator of the Sixth Floor Museum said the other day, “The bottom

line is, don’t throw anything away.”

Gerald Posner is the author of “Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the

Assassination of J.F.K.”

Ah, they're on a roll. The NY Times--all the propaganda that fits they print. The paper of record for the CIA.

Poser sure was ready with that piece of... "Op-Ed.

But there is no doubt much more to come as always from our fine feathered mockingbird friends.

However I think in the days leading up to May 29 there will be an especially high number of bird droppings.

Note the framing in the opening paragraph:

"cold cases decades old, has turned many Americans into armchair sleuths seeking to “solve” the unexpected deaths of

people like Princess Diana and Anna Nicole Smith." So JFK assassination researchers are lumped in with readers of trashy tabloids obsessing on Anna Nicole Smith. And they sneer at researchers into Princess Diana's murcer while they're at it. That blurb has it all; it's pithy and mocking. Hmmm, mocking, bird--are those CIAers clever or what?

Frank Luntz, would be proud.

Frank Luntz may be the ghost-writer...

(Oh John, I need to check and see of Luntz is included in your propaganda page. If not, I think he should be.)

"Single Bullet, Single Gunman."

"definitively resolves"

"The new film has finally resolved the issue."

"Lee Harvey Oswald fired the first shot"

"Kennedy’s suit is significantly bunched up, with several layers creased together."

"Lee Harvey Oswald fired the first shot,"

"Kennedy’s suit jacket was precisely in the position to misrepresent the bullet’s entry point."

"the film solves one mystery"

CASE CLOSED!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nothing to see here move along.

(Oh, and if anyone finds more evidence, by all means turn it over to Gary Mack so that he can, you know, take care of it.)

[Jack White]

This immediately raises the question of "what agency" "handled" the new film

before it was made public, and was the "jacket bunched up" in the original

and what did Posner know and when did he know it?

Seems a little TOO ORCHESTRATED to me.

Jack

[James Richards]

Just a question regarding George Jefferies himself; does anyone know if he is the same George Jefferies who at the time of the assassination, was on the Executive Committee at Universal Life and Accident Insurance Co.?

James

Edited February 21, 2007 by James Richards

[Myra Bronstein]

This immediately raises the question of "what agency" "handled" the new film

before it was made public, and was the "jacket bunched up" in the original

and what did Posner know and when did he know it?

Seems a little TOO ORCHESTRATED to me.

Jack

A musical answer, aka...

The CIA Lullaby

(Ahem)

HUSH little babies, dont say a word

Poppy’s gonna buy you a mockingbird

And when that mockingbird does sing

Poppy’s gonna buy it diamond ring

But if the bird song just don’t fly

Poppy’s gonna try with another lie

So when that President gets killed

Luce is gonna publish Z-flam stills

The film will frame a Harvey goat

So you’ll believe what Warren wrote

But if you tend to disbelieve

There are more writers to deceive

Tho’ when the HSCA’s born

The party line will be transformed

If congress shows conspiracy

Then we’ll need a new patsy

The mafia will fill the bill

‘Cause we all know they’re born to kill

Ignore the fact they work for us

That’s not a point we want to stress

If “mob dunnit” seems absurd

Poppy’s gonna send more mockingbirds

They’ll fly full circle to proclaim

The Oswald tale still fits the frame

Then when that bird flock drops its load

You should think the Case is Closed

And if you really buy that bull

Then you’ll be the dumbest little babes in the world

(Thank you; thank you very much.)

Edited February 21, 2007 by Myra Bronstein

[William O'Neil]

Message from Gary Mack:

Reuters writer Ed Stoddard wondered how and why the Jefferies film might be studied by conspiracy "buffs," so I told him that some conspiracy "researchers" would look at how Kennedy's coat was bunched and whether that helped explain one of his wounds. I used the term "bunched" because that is the term most researchers have used over the years. Stoddard's paragraph is an accurate account, in my opinion. Here it is: "The president's coat is clearly if briefly seen bunched up on his back -- a detail that will be scrutinized by conspiracy theorists who see evidence of a plot in, among other things, the fact the bullet wounds on his jacket and body did not appear to match."

The film is irrelevant re matters occuring on Elm Street in DP on Nov 22nd 1963... (we and THEY know that)

Perhaps as ole Gerald Posner makes his rounds of talk shows on FOX, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC fielding all those powder-puffs questions he's sure to be asked, he'll be kind enough to quote Gary Mack eluding to your above.

I sure Posner no doubt will comment on how GREAT Jackie looks 60 seconds before her husband is shot to death with wounds in the back and head. Immediately after he states how Jeffries film supports the contention of the WCR...

Exactly!...Forget the jacket !... look at the wound on the body and where people who saw it, described it's location. Even S A Sibert says it was where the autopsy photo shows it, and apparently he was the first to spot it when the body was turned over, and it's why he doesn't accept the SBT (See William Laws intv. of James Sibert )

[Myra Bronstein]

Message from Gary Mack:

Reuters writer Ed Stoddard wondered how and why the Jefferies film might be studied by conspiracy "buffs," so I told him that some conspiracy "researchers" would look at how Kennedy's coat was bunched and whether that helped explain one of his wounds. I used the term "bunched" because that is the term most researchers have used over the years. Stoddard's paragraph is an accurate account, in my opinion. Here it is: "The president's coat is clearly if briefly seen bunched up on his back -- a detail that will be scrutinized by conspiracy theorists who see evidence of a plot in, among other things, the fact the bullet wounds on his jacket and body did not appear to match."

The film is irrelevant re matters occuring on Elm Street in DP on Nov 22nd 1963... (we and THEY know that)

Perhaps as ole Gerald Posner makes his rounds of talk shows on FOX, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC fielding all those powder-puffs questions he's sure to be asked, he'll be kind enough to quote Gary Mack eluding to your above.

I sure Posner no doubt will comment on how GREAT Jackie looks 60 seconds before her husband is shot to death with wounds in the back and head. Immediately after he states how Jeffries film supports the contention of the WCR...

Exactly!...Forget the jacket !... look at the wound on the body and where people who saw it, described it's location. Even S A Sibert says it was where the autopsy photo shows it, and apparently he was the first to spot it when the body was turned over, and it's why he doesn't accept the SBT (See William Laws intv. of James Sibert )

So who among us will write a letter to the NY Times that they may or may not publish under the pretense fair and balanced op-eding?

The same question applies to MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC etc--the whole propaganda parade.

Should the chores be divided up? Should we each do it?

[William O'Neil]

Message from Gary Mack:

Reuters writer Ed Stoddard wondered how and why the Jefferies film might be studied by conspiracy "buffs," so I told him that some conspiracy "researchers" would look at how Kennedy's coat was bunched and whether that helped explain one of his wounds. I used the term "bunched" because that is the term most researchers have used over the years. Stoddard's paragraph is an accurate account, in my opinion. Here it is: "The president's coat is clearly if briefly seen bunched up on his back -- a detail that will be scrutinized by conspiracy theorists who see evidence of a plot in, among other things, the fact the bullet wounds on his jacket and body did not appear to match."

The film is irrelevant re matters occuring on Elm Street in DP on Nov 22nd 1963... (we and THEY know that)

Perhaps as ole Gerald Posner makes his rounds of talk shows on FOX, MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC fielding all those powder-puffs questions he's sure to be asked, he'll be kind enough to quote Gary Mack eluding to your above.

I sure Posner no doubt will comment on how GREAT Jackie looks 60 seconds before her husband is shot to death with wounds in the back and head. Immediately after he states how Jeffries film supports the contention of the WCR...

Exactly!...Forget the jacket !... look at the wound on the body and where people who saw it, described it's location. Even S A Sibert says it was where the autopsy photo shows it, and apparently he was the first to spot it when the body was turned over, and it's why he doesn't accept the SBT (See William Laws intv. of James Sibert )

So who among us will write a letter to the NY Times that they may or may not publish under the pretense fair and balanced op-eding?

The same question applies to MSNBC, CNBC, ABC, CBS, NBC etc--the whole propaganda parade.

Should the chores be divided up? Should we each do it?

Screw em' Myra , they were never about fair and balanced to begin with, and they're not about to start now! They have staked out inflexable positions on this subject and will go down with that ship.