Jump to content
The Education Forum

New JFK Dallas film surfaces in Dallas


Recommended Posts

I suppose that many of you have "speculated" as have I, regarding the "timing" of this NEW FIND.

I take this to be a media sneak preview of what Mr. Bugliosi will no doubt "heavily" weigh on, in his 1600 page forthcoming book, which shall prove to all, the validity of the Warren Report; except possibly for its few insignificant and honest errors.

It has begun ! We will be led down those same worn out paths, the purpose of which is to further ensnare the research community in those very time consuming re re re-discussions.

Since the only seeming "evidentiary" value of this film seems to be once again "coat bunching".....I cannot fail to wholeheartedly believe that a major point in Bugliosi's work will have to do with this so called "bunching". Many more thousands of pages and millions of words and hours will be wasted on a

"not even new TANGENT" that can absolutely prove nothing other than it can waste more time. Time is the conspiracy's greatest ally, and the wasting of researchers time on insignificant matters, is their time proven method. Why will it not work again? We continue to make the exact same mistakes and bewilderingly wonder why we come up with the same answers.

According to Jim Marrs this "insignificant" matter of the holes in the clothes

is the single most important piece of evidence in the case.

Gaeton Fonzi has also endorsed the holes in the clothes as key to

demolishing the Lone Nut theory (THE LAST INVESTIGATION.)

Ditto Noel Twyman in BLOODY TREASON.

Meanwhile, Gerald Posner claims that the Jefferies film on Main St.

shows the jacket in the precise location required to reconcile the

holes in the clothes with the SBT in-shoot 3 inches higher.

Note the jacket rode over the top of the shirt collar.

http://video.jfk.org/George_Jefferies_film.wmv

But the Towner film images on Elm St. -- taken within 5 seconds of the

shooting -- clearly show the shirt collar at the back of JFK's neck.

http://www.jfk-online.com/Towner.mpg

Jacket up on Main St.

Jacket down on Elm St.

Ergo, the jacket dropped in Dealey Plaza, the SBT thus stands debunked.

What could be more simple, obvious, un-debatable?

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

According to Jim Marrs this "insignificant" matter of the holes in the clothes

is the single most important piece of evidence in the case.

Gaeton Fonzi has also endorsed the holes in the clothes as key to

demolishing the Lone Nut theory (THE LAST INVESTIGATION.)

Ditto Noel Twyman in BLOODY TREASON.

From Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher, Bobbs-Merrill 1967, p 142:

The holes in the President's coat and shirt are also powerful evidence of a wound well below the neckline. The holes are about 5.5 inches below the top of the collar, while the wound is supposedly about 5.5 inches below the tip of the mastoid process. The discrepancy is substantial. Yet Dr. Humes testified that the holes and the wound "conform quite well." He conceded that they gave the appearance "when viewed separately....as being somewhat lower," and proceeded to belabor a hypothesis that the discrepancy resulted from the fact that "the President was extremely well-developed, an extremely well-developed muscular young man with a very well-developed set of muscles....I believe this would have a tendency to push the portions of the coat which shows the defects somewhat higher on the back of the President than on a man of less muscular development." (2H 365)

This explanation is singularly unconvincing and guaranteed to stir the wrath of Mr. Kennedy's tailor. The President's coat fit him with elegance, as photographs show. Governor Connally is also a large, well-developed, well-muscled man, but his wounds and the holes in his clothing correspond almost exactly. Was his tailor more gifted than Kennedy's?

The Warren Commission may accept Hume's implausible speculations but it does not dispose of reports by eyewitnesses that the wound was four or six inches below the neck. Nor is it understandable that the Commission has failed to mention the discrepancy between the alleged location of the wound and the holes in the clothing in its Report.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Accessories After the Fact by Sylvia Meagher, Bobbs-Merrill 1967, p 142:

The holes in the President's coat and shirt are also powerful evidence of a wound well below the neckline. The holes are about 5.5 inches below the top of the collar, while the wound is supposedly about 5.5 inches below the tip of the mastoid process. The discrepancy is substantial. Yet Dr. Humes testified that the holes and the wound "conform quite well." He conceded that they gave the appearance "when viewed separately....as being somewhat lower," and proceeded to belabor a hypothesis that the discrepancy resulted from the fact that "the President was extremely well-developed, an extremely well-developed muscular young man with a very well-developed set of muscles....I believe this would have a tendency to push the portions of the coat which shows the defects somewhat higher on the back of the President than on a man of less muscular development." (2H 365)

This explanation is singularly unconvincing and guaranteed to stir the wrath of Mr. Kennedy's tailor. The President's coat fit him with elegance, as photographs show. Governor Connally is also a large, well-developed, well-muscled man, but his wounds and the holes in his clothing correspond almost exactly. Was his tailor more gifted than Kennedy's?

The Warren Commission may accept Hume's implausible speculations but it does not dispose of reports by eyewitnesses that the wound was four or six inches below the neck. Nor is it understandable that the Commission has failed to mention the discrepancy between the alleged location of the wound and the holes in the clothing in its Report.....

Thank you, Michael.

It should also be noted that Robert Groden in The Killing of a President

referred to the bullet hole in the shirt as "uncontested" evidence of

conspiracy.

The early researchers got it right.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

...

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

Assassination of J.F.K.”

...

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.

...

Warm up your sneer Gerald.

"Mohamed al-Fayed brands British royals Diana's "murderers" By Anna Tomforde

dpa German Press Agency

Published: Friday March 2, 2007

By Anna Tomforde

London- Harrods-owner Mohamed al-Fayed Friday described

Britain's royal family as "gangsters and murderers" after winning a

major legal victory in his campaign for a public investigation into

the death of his late son, Dodi, with Princess Diana, in Paris in

August 1997.

In a move described as "sensational" by commentators, three High

Court judges in London ruled that an official British inquest into

the death of the couple should be heard by a jury of 12 men and women

chosen from the public.

They overturned an earlier decision by Judge Elizabeth Butler-

Sloss, the deputy royal coroner, that she should sit without a jury

during proceedings expected to start in May.

...

Al-Fayed, who owns the Harrods luxury department store and also

the Ritz Hotel in Paris, from where Dodi and Diana set out before

their fatal journey, has always maintained that the couple were

killed by British "state agents" because Diana was expecting a

"Muslim child" from his son.

...

"Diana was the people's princess. The people must be allowed to

hear all the evidence and then, and only then, decide how she died,

why she died and who ordered her murder," said al-Fayed Friday.

...

The decision is seen as a blow to the royal family who had hoped

that the conspiracy theories would die down following a British

police report that the crash was a "tragic accident."..."

http://rawstory.com/news/dpa/Mohamed_al_Fa...y_03022007.html

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...