News that I missed, courtesy of The Babylon Bee:
After decades in darkness, the Trump administration brought to light yesterday the “JFK Files”, 80,000 pages of documents pertaining to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. After combing through the evidence long into the night, the Bee has uncovered the following seven shocking revelations:
- Bert and Ernie really were just roommates: Didn’t see that coming.
- NFL refs really do cheat for the Kansas City Chiefs: We knew it.
- When the CIA was asked if they arranged JFK’s assassination, they said “nope”: Mind blown. Well, not literally.
- Captain Crunch is actually Commander Crunch, as his uniform does not have the 4 stripes granted to captains: This changes everything.
- A woodchuck could chuck 14 ounces of wood, provided it could chuck wood: They left no stone unturned.
- Fidel Castro fathered a son out of wedlock named Justin, whose whereabouts remain unknown to this day: Some mysteries remain.
- JFK is actually still alive and going by the name “Joe Biden”: It all makes sense now.
Go here to read the rest. Bee, you are part of the conspiracy! Admit it! The real assassin is:
All I can say to the Fudd Conspiracy is:
Oh myyyyyyy….
The real death knell of the conspiracy theories happened around 15 years ago, when National Geographic (?) aired their documentary. They managed to develop and digitize the entire 8mm film, i.e. the area around the sprocket holes, from a camera across the plaza from the famous Zimmermann. At any rate, it clearly showed that the third, devastating bullet came from the back and then exploded out the front. They did some other great investigating, too: the actual timing of the shots as opposed to the conjectural timing favored by conspiracists, etc.
Does anyone know the documentary I’m talking about? I haven’t seen it in years.
To Fr. J: The best evidence as to the direction of the shots comes from the earliest description of the wounding: by Clint Hill, who climbed aboard the limo, by Jackie Kennedy, and by the Dallas doctors. The most thorough description of the damage came from Dallas physician Dr. Robert McClelland before the Warren Commission, accompanied with a drawing. For an excellent eye-witness of the head shot, research Toni Foster’s account. The Zimmerman film which you cite should be the Zapruder film, and the whereabouts of that film in the hours after the assassination is the stuff of mystery. I shall leave it at that.
How much wood would a woodchuck
If a woodchuck could chuck wood ?
The Zimmerman film which you cite should be the Zapruder film, and the whereabouts of that film in the hours after the assassination is the stuff of mystery.
==
It’s not. Josiah Thompson, a Warren Commission critic, has provided for his readers a precise account of the chain of custody.
==
The ‘best evidence’ of the direction of the shorts is where the front-spatter and the back-spatter landed. The front spatter (high volume, coarse) landed on the Connollys. The backspatter (low volume, entirely liquid) landed on a motorcycle cop riding behind the limousine. Please note that if you fancy the neck wound was an entrance wound, you have to account for the trajectory; the back wound was higher than the neck wound, so the point of origin would have to be inside the limousine, as if you had a gremlin sitting at the Connolly’s feet firing at the President.
==
To Art Deco: The case is infinitely more complex than can be argued in these pages. Josiah Thompson has provided no such provenance of the film as this too is a much more complicated study than he imagined. To get a sense of this, may I recommend Douglas Horne’s 5 volume work Inside the ARRB. If you can get through all 5 volumes, you will see why Horne concludes that the assassination is like a 1000 piece puzzle: 500 pieces are legitimate, and 500 pieces are not–and for this reason, the puzzle defies solution, and the case will never be solved.
The Manhattan Contrarian is presenting a multi-part series of posts on the JFK case this week. Very interesting, worth the time to check it out.
Daniel,
Yes, the Zapruder film, not Zimmermann (I still had the infamous Zimmermann telegram on my mind, apparently).
The information provided by you and the others is interesting, but it doesn’t sound like the particular footage from the man more or less opposite Zapruder is widely known. I thought it was amazing that we could now see the initial impact at the back of the head and then the explosion from the front–“amazing” in the forensic sense; it’s still a horrible and evil act,of course.
Josiah Thompson has provided no such provenance of the film as this too is a much more complicated study than he imagined.
==
He most certainly has. No, it is not that complicated.
To get a sense of this, may I recommend Douglas Horne’s 5 volume work Inside the ARRB. If you can get through all 5 volumes, you will see why Horne concludes that the assassination is like a 1000 piece puzzle: 500 pieces are legitimate, and 500 pieces are not–and for this reason, the puzzle defies solution, and the case will never be solved.
==
The case is solved. You and he are in a mental labyrinth of your own construction.
“The case is solved. You and he are in a mental labyrinth of your own construction.” The witnesses I have cited speak for themselves; these are but the tip of a very large iceberg of witnesses whose testimony contradicts the official version. You are right about one thing: the case if a labyrinth, or better, a vortex threatening to swallow anyone attempting to resolve the contradictions in the evidence. I shall say no more
To Fr. J: While the extant Z-film purports to be a moment by moment account of the assassination, there are very strong reasons for believing that this is not so. This is not the forum where this can be discussed with the depth it deserves.
The witnesses I have cited speak for themselves; these are but the tip of a very large iceberg of witnesses whose testimony contradicts the official version. You are right about one thing: the case if a labyrinth, or better, a vortex threatening to swallow anyone attempting to resolve the contradictions in the evidence. I shall say no more
==
Sir, a guy took a rifle, fired off three shots, killed one man and wounded another. It’s not that complicated. Police forces investigate and resolve about 9,000 homicide cases a year in this country, about 70% of them committed with firearms. There were several oddities about this particular homicide case: (1) the perpetrator was not in the social circle of his victims, (2) the homicide occurred in front of hundreds of witnesses, and (3) the homicide was filmed.
==
The forensic evidence is a problem for you lot, because it indicates the two men were shot from behind and shot from a location at a higher elevation than the vehicle. There were a number of buildings within range. In one of them was found a rifle proximate to a 6th story window. The rifle in question was provably the property of an employee of the firm which occupied the building. He’d arrived that morning carrying an odd package, a package he told a member of his car pool consisted of ‘curtain rods’. He unaccountably left work after the assassination and, not too long after, took a handgun out of his coat and shot a Dallas police officer to death in front of a scrum of witnesses.
In my extensive research (arguably mostly with board games) I have to interject here and state emphatically that this is not as clear cut a case as y’all make it out to be (Art!!)
I hypothesize that the killer was no other than … Col. Mustard from the library with the lead pipe!!
Now, I know what you’re thinking … “CAG, you moron! He was SHOT, not bludgeoned!”
Indeed, he was shot … with LEAD bullets!!
Moreover, there were any number of libraries on that street from which the motorcade could be seen!
But the clincher is that several of his aides overheard Kennedy saying that he was worried that Mustard would kill him! … They shrugged this off, thinking he meant he had a mustard allergy, but was then later seen by several witnesses eating a Chicago dog with yellow mustard!
I’m not saying I cracked the case … yet, but clearly this theory can’t be dismissed out of hand.
To CAG: for a half-second, you had me going (In my extensive research…). Yes, extensive research is necessary…