According to Conspiracy Theory, there would have been no reason for the killers to leave a Mauser Rifle on the 6th floor, when Oswald, according to the FBI had ordered a 6.5 Italian Carcano, with Scope, from the February, 1963 issue of American Rifleman. This video does not make any sense as a conspiracy tool. If this poor individual is as stupid as he is portrayed here, there is small wonder that his testimony would not have been considered credible even by 1963 standards.
I came of age in the Departments of the mid-1970's, I noted that my Senior Officers were still glued to the 1950's. However, I do believe that more would have been learned and enduring questions settled if the Official Autopsy had been performed, as was required by law, in Dallas. The Gum-shoes of the Secret Service were not far beyond DPD in wrestling the body out of Parkland and cleaning the fu*kin' Limo with a rag and a bucket. Time caught up with the cops that day. We have suffered for it.
No person who has followed this case for very long can come up with any other conclusion than the fact that Chief Curry and his department were in way over their head on 11/22/1963. That the investigation into the murder of the President was essentially bungled in Dallas is a fact accepted by most of us on both sides of the picket fence. It's like the idiot seen searching for evidence with a cigarette hanging out of his gob. They investigated a 1963 crime scene using 1943 methodology. Gum-shoes.
When those who challenge the Official Version of events, stoop to disinformation as presented in this outrageously inept and misleading upload, their original cause is all the more weakened and humilitated. This little country bozo got 15 minutes of fame for calling an elephant a chicken. Indications are that he and Deputy Constable Seymore "Whoever" would not know the goddamned muzzle end of a Carcano (or a Mauser) from a Rat's Ass. DPD was inept? Yes. Did Oswald do it? Yes. . . Jimmy
While I do not want my Government selling me a bill of goods that is not the truth, by the same token, I will not accept some cheap sensationalism sold to the ignorance of the American people as the truth by those who would do little more than prove their own point (namely conspiracy) with such an outrageous LIE as this You Tube upload implies. I don't care what some fat-ass DPD's finest called it. He is ignorant still. The rifle in the film IS a Carcano. I assume the film is evidence. . .Jimmy
To soften up on the man interviewed, he may have heard someone say, "thats a Mauser". But I can assure any individual on this forum who wants to know the truth, that the rifle depicted in this film footage of the crime scene is a Turni 6.5 Italian Carcano with an inexpensive (mail order of the time) scope attached. The rifle's profile and characteristics are unique to the Carcano beyond any question or shadow of a doubt. Pro-Conspiracy or not, this is NOT a Mauser. It is ludicrous otherwise.
I am so sorry to interject here again, but the fact remains. While this film is playing, this idiot is calling this rifle a Mauser, and saying that it is stamped 7.5 Mauser. The rifle in this video is beyond any shadow doubt, a 6.5 Italian Carcano. The barrel, grooves in the stock, the Mannlicher action, the bolt, are conclusively Carcano. Perhaps those who match his testimony to the video do him a disservice, but otherwise he is indisputably a LIAR. The characteristics of the rifle do NOT lie.
I hate that this eyewitness is such and incredible LIAR, but the gun in this video without question is a WWII Italian Carcano 6.5. As with most Conspiracy Lunatic Theories, after nearly 50 years, there is not ONE shred of physical evidence, photographic, ballistic, or medical to indicate that anyone other than Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated the President and he did it alone.THAT IS THE FACT THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE. There is NO Santa Claus and Lee Harvey Oswald Killed the President. Tough huh?
@BlueWolfe38 "I hate that this eyewitness is such and incredible LIAR"
if youve read posner and bugliosi (and i bet you have ) you would know about liars . its noticeable how you and your ilk have to maintain that people like me are lunatics who will believe any fairytale in order for the ridiculous warren commission fiction like the single bullet theory to be more plausable . like i said on another thread dispense with the BS .
@fobrien1 I despise Posner, I don't even consider the argument of "Case Closed". It will likely never be closed. I do have my own mind, friend (you seem like a logical and rational person) and I have kept this case close to my heart since the day that it occurred. (that makes me pretty old now, huh?) I have ordered the Bugliosi book, but I will read it with an open mind. Check out the David von Pein sites, you will enjoy his collection whether agreeable or not. . . . Jimmy
well i guess we arent so different ,i dont despise posner personally but i despise everything he stands for which is represented in his work particularly case closed . i could start posting all the errors /omitions/distortions /fabrications and downright lies in case closed on here starting now and id probably still be here posting them many hours later .i appreciate you have your own mind and i can appreciate that you come across as a very intelligent -------
@BlueWolfe38 person .in relation to bugliosi all tho he is nowhere near as decietfull as posner he is without any doubt decietfull ,ive pointed out to people on youtube various comments and claims by bugliosi that are in error / completely inaccurate and even some claims that are tantamount to outright lies .one such lie is that at the time of the shots oswald claimed he ate with junior jarmin ( as bugliosi says in the hopes of creating an alibi ) -----------------------------------
@BlueWolfe38 its an easy provable fact that oswald said no such thing , i say to you that which i say to all read the book and double/treble check every claim he makes with the official records for accuracy .and i ask the question why would these men feel so compelled to lie 48 years after the tragic events of dallas . as for von pien i have viewed a lot of videos he uploads actuall footage of the time which is priceless ,however having read his work ---------------------------------
@BlueWolfe38 read his posts on various forums and even having replied to his comments on forums i find him as distastefull and decietfull as posner and bugliosi .i even posted a bit of his work on a forum where he detailed some 20 reasons why oswald was guilty (a forum page long ),i took 3 pages on the forum pointing out the numerous omitions /distortions and fabrications in it and i tried to give as short a reply as possible .so with all respect ill pass on a return to von piens site .
@fobrien1 I did not have such a bad experience with him. He seems sincere and knowledgable. He did indeed shoot a couple of my ideas down very quickly. But, overall I enjoy his site for the wealth of material, whether or not you agree with him. I have some ideas about where one needs to start, or perhaps start over, with this case. I try to eliminate speculation and start with we know. Do you believe the guy in this video? I am sorry, but there is no way that I ever could. Why does he lie ???
its very noticable how 1239jer has decided that all our concerns are completely irrelevant having offered not one iota of contrary evidence ,its just believe me and not these crazy people . not to mention to say fobrien said x y and z which he never said ,the truth is easy to establish but to do it you have to do what 1239jer doesnt want you to do ,which is research . research the case and double/trible /quadruple check all facts ,then you will trully know if you should believe me or 1239jer .
@fobrien1 Do not concern yourself with arguing or debating with completely ignorant people who's only achievement is to ignore fact and turn a blind eye to anything the other than what the government tells them. Anyone who looks into the JFK assassination including what eye witnesses said and how it was corroborated from various sources and the way in which the official investigation was conducted will know beyond any doubt that there was a cover up of what happened.
@UNIQUE1982 i agree with you that debating such people as 1239jer is futile ,i dont do it in the hopes of trying to change their minds that would be a waste of time i do it so the evidence gets posted and people who are just starting to research the case can see all the evidence and testimony which the likes of 1239jer dont want them to see .unlike LNs like 1239jer i dont say believe me trust me i tell people to check what i say to see if its true, thanks for your reply its appreciated .
In the end the fact that the camera AND LENS could not be located is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. That's because the NEGATIVES show no sign of manipulation. Besides, even though we have Oswald's camera, that doesn't eliminate the possibility that "conspirators" would have simply reused the SAME camera to make fake photos. Your utter desperation to go on and on on a completely irrelevant issue shows you have no case in terms of the autopsy images. Case closed.
@1239jer I see you've been "debating" with fobrien1. You've probably already figured this out but fobrien1 and UNIQUE1982 are the same person. He has a history or creating scores of different identities posting slanted and misleading comments.
There ARE issues where eyewitness testimony has to be weighed - such as the number of shots, what happened when Oswald shot Tippit, etc. But on the wounds to Kennedy, this debate was answered in 1978 when the fundamental questions were answered unequivocally. Were the autopsy images authentic? YES. Did they depict Kennedy? YES. Were the images or wounds altered? NO. Did they corroborate the original autopsy conclusions? YES, save for the precise entry point of the head wound. END OF STORY.
Which is why o-brien etc CHANGE THE SUBJECT when the photos and x-rays are brought up. "The HSCA lied about what the witnesses said!" IRRELEVANT as this doesn't change the reality of what those images show. "They couldn't find the camera!" IRRELEVANT as the negatives show no manipulation as stereo image fakery is virtually impossible. "String said different things!" Doesn't matter what he says. NOTHING he says can change the physical reality in those photos and x-rays.
This is what o'brein and others don't get. There was a reality what happened Nov 22 1963. Whether the HSCA misprepesented want some people said is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT as the conclusions as to the nature of the wounds was based on the AUTOPSY report and the photographs and the x-rays.
The rhetorical question is always asked: how could so many others be wrong? It's an interesting question, but we know they ARE wrong because the photos and x-rays are irrefutable.
In the end, it really doesn't matter what the witnesses said otherwise, as the photos and x-rays are irrefutable. And they match what we see in the Zapruder film, not incidentally. In the end, you can line up 1,000 people who say "rear exit wound" but that can't change the reality of what we see in the images and x-rays.
No more than if 99 per cent believe Elvis is alive that that means he IS alive. Nope, he's still dead.
And, as I said, multiple witnesses DID say "side exit wound."
What Stringer said over the years about the photos is IRRELEVANT once we establish they are authentic. Not knowing the camera they were taken in is also IRRELEVANT as the images can be authenticated EVEN IF THEY WERE PHOTOS OF PHOTOS. The multiple stereo pairs are IMPOSSIBLE to fake. That's not an "opinion," it is a fact. The same goes with who is in the images. ALL the forensic techniques examining images and x-rays conclude one thing: The person in the images is JFK.
In any court case, there are contradicting evidence. In this case, there is a lot. However, you are asking us to simply ignore and dismiss those whose actual job was to closely examine and describe the wounds, and accept as gospel the statements from those who DID NOT. Indeed, NONE of those witnesses were pathologists. Further, and most damning, you have YET to offer ANY concrete reason to doubt the photos and x-rays.
Finally, we KNOW the images are of JFK as multiple comparisons were made of the person to known images of JFK, and all facial features, which in combimation are unique, MATCH. As do the x-rays to known images of JFK made during his life. Everything matches. Further, and to the point, ALL the forensic pathologists agree - ONE bullet entry to the rear. Side exit wound. This evidence is iron-clad and irrefutable. And none of the bullshit arguments from o'brien changes that reality.
We know this because the negatives were examined. Even if we are missing the camera (a non-issue), we KNOW the negatives are authentic as Stringer took many photos in pairs. Stereoscopic images are nearly impossible to forge, let alone the numerous ones made that day.
Further, the x-rays match what the photos show. How could the x-rays be forged? It's never explained. That's because it can't be done without detection.
Indeed, he has YET to explain why we should embrace those 40 or so and ignore those 15 or so who said otherwise.
The bottom line, though, it matters ZERO if the HSCA "lied" about what the other Bethesda witnesses said, it matters ZERO what Springer said over the years, IF THE PHOTOS ARE AUTHENTIC. Which is what Obrien doesn't get, indeed he skirts this entire fundamental issue.
Simply put, the autopsy photos and x-rays have been examined. They ARE authentic. Period.
So, what do we believe? Some 40 witnesses who claimed a rear exit wound, over some 15 or so who said a side wound? The problem with this rather sterile debate is the total inability of obrien to honestly address some of the evidence which negates his views. I've expolained how many could have been wrong or mistaken; he has yet to seriously address how the pathologists or the photos/xrays could be wrong.
Bottom line here is the photographs and film clearly show a Carcano. That's the end of the story. It doesn't matter what's on the report if the photos say otherwise. In your whacky world, of course, witness statements are undeniable truths while physical evidence are lies. It's one thing to take a stance. It's quite another thing to pretend the physical evidence does not exist, as you do, let alone account for it. That's why it's hard to take you very seriously.
@1239jer I definitely heard references to a Lee Henry Oswald and a Lee Harold Oswald during the newscasts. clearly there were three shooters, all Oswalds. They probably cloned him in Russia.
Fobrien - your denial of reality is something to behold. You have YET to offer ANY plausible explanation as to how the witness statements can be reconciled with the autopsy photos. And now you try to pretend the news footage of the recovery of the Carcano doesn't exist. The insults come when after at least THIRTY requests to address these fundamental issues all you lamely say is Stringer once denied to Lifton those were the photos. How can we take you seriously?
@1239jer exactly when did i deny that there was film of a rifle ? it seems to be that LNs make quite a habit of attributing claims to people that they never made . i said there is film that hasnt been seen by any of us such as alyeas filming of fritz holding the shells (which fritz denied ,but sadly for him mooney saw him do it ) and i said there were reconstruction photos taken on friday and the monday after which can be easily mistaken for the genuine photos .
@1239jer your hold an opinion that the autopsy photos refute all witneses (thats your opinion and your entitled to it ) but i disagree , some 30 to 40 credible and trained witnesses (who you instantly dismissed )saw a wound on the right rear of jfks head . we know as fact the HSCA lied in saying all autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses ,presumably a person who can dismiss 30 to 40 witnesses hasnt a problem with with the HSCA lying ? -----------------------------
@fobrien1 "we know as fact the HSCA lied in saying all autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses ,presumably a person who can dismiss 30 to 40 witnesses hasnt a problem with with the HSCA lying ?" There you go again. Are you capable of stating an argument without a complete LIE? If you read the HSCA you realize that the writer conflated the unanimous MEDICAL opinion at Bethesda with ALL the witnesses. It's an ERROR, not a LIE. AND YOU KNOW THIS. Yet you continually LIE about this.
@1239jer "we know as fact the HSCA lied in saying all autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses ,presumably a person who can dismiss 30 to 40 witnesses hasnt a problem with with the HSCA lying ?" There you go again. Are you capable of stating an argument without a complete LIE? If you read the HSCA you realize that the writer conflated the unanimous MEDICAL opinion at Bethesda with ALL the witnesses. It's an ERROR, not a LIE. AND YOU KNOW THIS. Yet you continually LIE about this.
@1239jer the hsca had multiple testimonies which stated jfk had a wound on the right rear of his head from autopsy witnesses or witnesses after the fact ,and the hsca said all 26 autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses the hsca knew that statment was untrue so they lied . you say im a liar but what have i said thats untrue ?, you know i posted the very words of the witnesses the words that prove the hsca lied . and all you have is the hsca were in error please.
@fobrien1 "he hsca said all 26 autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses the hsca knew that statment was untrue so they lied "
If you read the HSCA report, you realize that they first say "all" at Bethesda, in reference to those doing the actual autopsy. THEN, in repeating this "all" claim (which was true), it conflates to including everyone in the room (which is not true). This amounts to confusion on the part of the writer, not a "lie." You have NO basis to call it a "lie."
@1239jer "Critics of the Warren Commission's medical evidence findings have found (sic) on the observations recorded by the Parkland Hospital doctors. They believe it is unlikely that trained medical personnel could be so consistently in error regarding the nature of the wound, even though their recollections were not based on careful examinations of the wounds...." ----------------------------------------------
@fobrien1 "They believe it is unlikely that trained medical personnel could be so consistently in error..."
1. AGAIN, not all the witnesses said the wound was in the rear of the head.
2. NONE of the "trained medical personnel" were pathologists. So? Well, they'd not be fooled by mistaking crenelated cerebral material for cerebrum tissue, for one.
3. Many of those witnesses, upon reflection, realized they had misinterpreted what they were looking at.
@1239jer "1. AGAIN, not all the witnesses said the wound was in the rear of the head."
no but a large majority.
2. NONE of the "trained medical personnel" were pathologists. So? Well, they'd not be fooled by mistaking crenelated cerebral material for cerebrum tissue, for one.
so these " trained medical personnel" wouldnt be able to tell the difference between the right rear of the head and the temple area of the head ? .
@fobrien1 "so these " trained medical personnel" wouldnt be able to tell the difference between the right rear of the head and the temple area of the head ?"
The right rear of the head was on the operating table. How could all these witnesses see a wound when JFK was lying on his back?
Me: "1. AGAIN, not all the witnesses said the wound was in the rear of the head." You: "no but a large majority." So, if most believe Elvis is alive, does he pop to life?
@1239jer "3. Many of those witnesses, upon reflection, realized they had misinterpreted what they were looking at."
sure they did , they honestly thought they must be wrong because they were told all the autopsy witnesses contradicted them and then when shown photos of an intact rear of head they said ok must have got that wrong .but we know all autopsy witnesses did not contradict them and the now apparently missing autopsy camera cant be linked to the photos .
@fobrien1 "sure they did , they honestly thought they must be wrong because they were told all the autopsy witnesses contradicted them" Many in fact realized WHY they were wrong as they misidentified crenelated brain tissue for cerebellum tissue. AND, when it was pointed out that wounds were described which were on the BACK of the head when JFK was lying down and this wound was not visible, some MOVED THE WOUND FORWARD.
@1239jer "In disagreement with the observations of the Parkland doctors are the 26 people present at the autopsy. All of those interviewed who attended the autopsy corroborated the general location of the wounds as depicted in the photographs; none had differing accounts...it appears more probable that the observations of the Parkland doctors are incorrect." The statement is supported by reference to " 'staff interviews' with persons present at the autopsy."
@fobrien1 "Rather than contradicting Parkland witnesses that there was a rear defect in JFK's skull, Bethesda corroborated them."
In the end, this is a complete red herring issue anyway. Even if we accept that the HSCA "lied," the conclusions were not based on the others in the room, it was based on the autoposy surgeons.
@1239jer Recently released documents reveal for the first time that the HSCA misrepresented both the WC statements of the Bethesda witnesses, as well as its own "staff interviews" on the location of JFK's skull defect. Rather than contradicting Parkland witnesses that there was a rear defect in JFK's skull, Bethesda corroborated them.
@1239jer Bethesda witnesses not only described a rear defect to HSCA, they also drew diagrams that overwhelmingly showed a defect at the rear, or right rear of JFK's skull. By falsely representing the data, including its own, HSCA writers inaccurately portrayed Bethesda witnesses as contesting the observations of Parkland witnesses whom, in fact, they supported .
@fobrien1 "By falsely representing the data, including its own, HSCA writers inaccurately portrayed Bethesda witnesses as contesting the observations of Parkland witnesses whom, in fact, they supported ."
There is NO evidence that the HSCA deliberately misled when they stated all contested Parkland. The passages first describe the MEDICAL personnel in unanimity. Then, the text states "all" - this sounds more like confusion on the part of the editor.
@fobrien1 your hold an opinion that the autopsy photos refute all witneses (thats your opinion and your entitled to it ) but i disagree , some 30 to 40 credible and trained witnesses (who you instantly dismissed )"
The photos are irrefutable. Multiple witnesses reported EXACTLY what the photos show. True, more said otherwise. But you have yet to make a credible case to explain away the autopsy photos and x-rays. I don't blame you for avoiding the issue. Because you CAN'T explain it away.
@1239jer further to that the HSCA were less than truthfull when saying the autopsy photos were authenticated ,the autopsy camera would be required to authenticate the photos and the HSCA told us it was lost however the HSCA again were less than truthfull as they indeed had a camera however which couldnt be matched to the photos .of course you will dismiss all this with your normal finesse . finally on stringer he was very clear in saying -------------------------
@fobrien1 You don't need a camera to authenticate an image. The fact that you seem to believe this tells us a lot. The negatives were all available, they were judged to be authentic unretouched images, and the person in the images were Kennedy. Save for the images of the brain which could not be authenticated as there was no reference to rule out a substitution, the images show a clear story. No rear exit wound, a rear entry, side exit. And, sorry, this evidence trumps witness evidence.
@1239jer you understand your opinion is just your opinion not evidence , perhaps you would care to offer evidence for a change .if not your wasting my time so to use your words "back to sleep".
@fobrien1 "you understand your opinion is just your opinion not evidence" The photographic evidence is iron-clad. Which is why you completely avoid addressing it. I don't blame you, as you have no case if the photos are accurate. Not finding the autopsy camera is IRRELEVANT if we can a) prove the images are not faked and b) prove the person in them is JFK. And we can do both. Therefore, what anyone says about the autopsy, like Stringer, is also IRRELEVANT as we know the pics are real
@1239jer “Because the Department of Defense was unable to locate the camera and lens that were used to take these [autopsy] photographs, the [photographic] panel was unable to engage in an analysis similar to the one undertaken with the Oswald backyard pictures that was designed to determine whether a particular camera in issue had been used to take the photographs that were the subject of inquiry."
(more lies whats missing here is that they indeed locate a camera)-------------------
@fobrien1 "(more lies whats missing here is that they indeed locate a camera)" There you go again fobrien. The DOD received a camera and a 135 mm lens. What did the HSCA say? "unable to locate the camera and lens that were used to take these [autopsy] photographs." Clearly, you know nothing about photography. a 135 mm would NOT be used. There is NO WAY a 135 mm lens would have been used.
@1239jer there really are no leghts that these LNs will noot stoop to ,as can be seen on this thread 1239jer has done little but attack and insult and falsely accuse me of lies and misinfo in an attempt to discredit me and this is the LN M O this is how they operate . the truth is not on the agenda for these people in fact the opposite , the true agenda is to stop the truth coming out and the means used to do this are attacks and false accuasations =========
@1239jer of lies and disinfo ,and if that fails they revert to the old reliable the insults calling you childish names like crazy kook (in the hope of making people believe your a crazy again its only discrediting tactics ) which is mild in comparison to the insults and names hurled by LNs on jfk forums .for example one of the most prominent LNs john mcadams having lost a debate resorted to falsely accusing the person he lost the debate to of being a peadophile . no more needs to be said .
@1239jer lastly i made no comments on photography i merely quoted and quoted the hsca them selves , the lens used or not used has no bearing on the fact that the DOD sent a camera (the hsca lied and said they had no camera ,fact) the hsca indeed got a camera from the DOD which they found could not be matched to the photos (fact ) thats why they lied and said the camera couldnt be found .these are facts which people can find online if they care to look .
@1239jer It turns out that in fact the DoD had found the camera. The DoD wrote the HSCA that the Naval Hospital only had one camera of this type in its possession and that,“the only [camera] in use at the National Naval Medical Center in 1963”[319] had already been sent to the HSCA for study.The HSCA, however, wasn’t pleased with the camera the Defense Department had sent.----------------------------------------------------------------------------
@1239jer In a letter asking the Secretary of Defense to look for another one, HSCA chief counsel Robert Blakey explained the problem:
“[O]ur photographic experts have determined that this camera, or at least the particular lens and shutter attached to it, could not have been used to take [JFK’s] autopsy pictures.”
(so we see more lies ,they had a camera it seemed that couldnt have taken the autopsy photos so they lied and said the DOD was unable to find the autopsy camera)
@fobrien1 "“[O]ur photographic experts have determined that this camera, or at least the particular lens and shutter attached to it, could not have been used to take [JFK’s] autopsy pictures.”
(so we see more lies ,they had a camera it seemed that couldnt have taken the autopsy photos so they lied and said the DOD was unable to find the autopsy camera)"
Migod, obrien, how dense are you? They said quite clearly THE PARTICULAR LENS AND SHUTTER"!!!!
@1239jer "Migod, obrien, how dense are you? They said quite clearly THE PARTICULAR LENS AND SHUTTER"!!!!"
no blakey said
"(O]ur photographic experts have determined that THIS camera, OR ATLEAST the particular lens and shutter attached to it, could not have been used to take [JFK’s] autopsy pictures.”
but carry on your insults by all means all this does is show the people reading what your true agenda is which is nothing to do with the truth .
@1239jer that there was a wound in the back of the head ,he was asked various questions to clarify the area where the wound was and iit was the right rear of the head , but he later denied saying this and its absolutely no surprise that you who dismisses 30 to 40 credible and trained witnesses and have no problem with the HSCA lying that you would accept his later denial while dismissing his earlier claims . that tells all those reading all they need to know about you .
@fobrien1 Stringer said various things. Why is he "telling the truth" when he says "rear exit wound" and he, and all the other witnesses "liars" when they say they didn't see an exit wound? We only wish we had your wisdom to know who is telling the truth and who is lying.
@1239jer yes but unlike LNs i used what he said at the time not any changes he made at a later date .who are the people who didnt see a hole in the right rear that you say im calling liars ? unless you refer to the 3 pathologists in which case i never called any of them a liar i said 30 to 40 people contradict them . people get the truth from me whether the accept it or not is up to them .
@fobrien1 The basic issue you are avoiding is this: ON WHAT BASIS DO WE ACCEPT SOME WITNESS TESTIMONY OVER OTHER WITNESS TESTIMONY. I spelled out how and why many witnesses were likely wrong in seeing a rear wound (I never called them "liars"); you, however, avoid addressing the photographs and the fact that those who actually examined the wounds (NONE of your witnesses did that) ALL agree with the WC conclusion. IOW, you have stated no basis to not believe them. Other than others say otherwise
There is a document - (it is shown in one of Mark Lane's documentaries - I don't know the details but I have seen it) that was signed by both Robert Craig and someone else (Dallas P.D I think) that asserts that a MAUSER was recovered from the 6th floor. Craig clearly recalls that 'MAUSER' was on the side of the rifle.
Even if Craig is a liar or mistaken he wasn't the only person to assert that a Mauser was recovered.
Hi Ambassador - Sorry, you are wrong. The rifle was a Carcano, not a Mauser, despite Craig's claim. How do we know this? Because before the rifle was taken from where it was placed, it was photographed. Those photos show a Carcano. Further, the recovery of the rifle was filmed. That film has been analyzed and it shows the identical rifle which the WC said killed JFK. Craig couldn't admit he was wrong, even though the physical evidence proves it. That's human nature.
@TheAmbassador11 No, one rifle was found. Some, like Robert Groden, claimed another rifle was found, based on films such as the one by Charles Mentesena. But this film shows a SHOTGUN, a Remington 870, used by the Dallas police. Further, Craig NEVER claimed that the rifle which was filmed being recovered was a different rifle than the one he saw. This is what we call "human nature." He was wrong - provably so - and would never admit it. But the photos and films can't be "wrong."
@1239jer seymore weitzman was signing reports as late as 24/11/63 saying it was a mauser ,he said he only glanced at the rifle for a second yet he gives a very detailed description of it down to how rough the wood was . there is film and photos we havent seen and some photos we have seen are recreation photos from that evening or monday .alyea filmed fritz pick up the shells in the snipers nest this film is yet to be seen and for good reason .
@1239jer i see your debating prowess and your research skills are as strong as ever ,are you not even aware of the fact that weitzman signed reports as late as 24/11/63 stating it was a mauser or that he gave a very detailed description of the rifle he says he only saw at a glance or that reconstruction photos were taken on the friday 22/11/63 and the following monday .if so where is alyeas fim showing fritz illiegaly handling the shells ? .
@1239jer "The film and photos are from the recovery. They show a Carano. Period. Back to sleep, CTer."
i guess its typical that you only offer insults and all you can try and do is make your comment about me as opposed to the evidence ( a typical LN ploy ) if you cant discredit the evidence try and discredit the person giving the evidence .
The problem with 'badgeman' is based on the apparent size of the head and upper body he would only be about two and a half feet tall close to the retaining wall -- or if he were normal size (five and a half feet to 6ft) he would have to be way back in the parking lot and stood on a tall step ladder
Roger Craig (in this video) was murdered in 1975 because he wouldn't lie about what he had seen. There is documentary proof (signed) that what was found was a Mauser. When 'they' realised the mistake, the Mauser was switched for a MC 6.5mm and in my opinion the palm print added by the FBI by pressing the MC rifle against the palm of Oswald's corpse. The strap on the 'recovered' MC rifle was not the same as the strap in the photo of Oswald holding the rifle. They are two DIFFERENT guns.
@funkmasterjee The only "documentary proof" is the fact that Craig claimed he saw a Mauser. But the film and photos of the rifle in situ CLEARLY show it to be a Carcano. The fact CT's still claim it was a Mauser shows how silly and in denial these people are. Because to believe otherwise requires the Dallas Police to be part of a conspiracy to switch the rifle AND the newsman to be part of the conspiracy too as he would have had to shoot a re-staged recovery, something Craig never said occured
@funkmasterjee i dont think there was any switching of rifles there were probably 2 rifles , one needs to research the times the shells and rifle were found . according to testimony the rifle was found about 6 minutes after the shells were found ,we were told the rifle was found at about 1.16pm about the same time an officer came up to the 6th floor and told fritz an officer was shot in oakcliff . is that accurate well luke mooney found the snipers nest mooney said -----------------------------
@funkmasterjee he found the snipers nest at about 1.00pm and that time is corroberated ,will; fritz was at the trade mart he went from there to parklands and he said he arrived at the book depository at about 12.58 ,mooney said upon finding the snipers nest he leaned out the window and saw fritz arrive so mooneys time of 1.00pm for the finding of the shells is accurate and corroberated . now if the rifle is found 5 to 6 minutes later that makes the time the rifle is found -----------------
@funkmasterjee at 1.05 or 1.06pm . roger craig said the rifle was found about 1.06 and he made a note of this because this was the same time the officer told fritz that an officer was shot in oakcliff ,but we were told the rifle wasnt found for atleast 10 minutes more at about 1.16pm . now in order to dismiss the rifle (or a rifle ) being found a 1.06pm we have to dismiss mooney who is unwittingly corroberated by fritz .
@kenny2894spd You're going to shoot the President of the United States - so you take a bottle of Soda and some chicken wings up to the sniper's nest as a snack ? As casual as that ? ......I very much doubt if Oswald ate or drank any of it .....planted as extra proof someone had been in that loaction
@funkmasterjee Or an experienced psychopath killer might have brought his lunch. Only an experienced killer would be cool enough to pick up his shells and arrange them on the sill. The scene was either staged or left by one very cold psycho. That is not Oswald. Oswald was a total patsy. He was a low level CIA operative who was set up placed in the TSBD and then killed all by CIA.
@cunnidvd Some people say that LHO was a "low level" operative. I believe he was a very "high level" operative due to the fact that he was quite possibly used to inflitrate an organization that may have been responsible to JFK's murder. If he was sent to Russia under the guise of defection and thought to have given them secrets on how to take down the U-2 plane, thought to have taken a shot at General Walker, he should be considered high level. All were "fronts" to build his "commie" persona.
@cunnidvd Supposedly "Operation Mongoose" was an organization that was set up to kill Fidel Castro. LHO may have infiltrated this group. RFK found out about it. They were operating without the Kennedys' knowledge even though it has been said that the Kennedy's were trying to assassinate Castro. RFK decided to run the organization from his office. The Kennedys' were "looking the other way" when they turned their weapons on JFK. They underestimated how dangerous they were to them. See TMTKK series
@cunnidvd The Kennedys were lured into a false sense of security in that they thought that just because RFK was running the group from his office, they would never do harm to JFK. Of course, they knew that many people/organizations wanted JFK dead but they did not suspect the very people that RFK was "over". The idea was really to kill F.Castro and JFK. A couple of people close to Castro lost their nerve but JFK's security was lax and they knew they could get him.
@funkmasterjee there are witnesses who saw more than one man on the 6th floor one man was arnold rowland ,but i think the photo you mention is showing jarmin/norman/williams on the 5th floor directly below the snipers nest window . also what can be seen in the moormon photo is perhaps debatable but gary mack believes badgeman is there as well as hard hat man .
hey comein6in3rd or whatever your name is? Before you go ragging on me you better get your facts in order bud! Don't fucking tell me that I should be sterilized unless you want to meet me and try to do it yourself? The truth is the truth man are you saying that all the people that saw with thier own eyes that did not know each other but repeat the same story of the murder to the police,fbi,cia etc were conspiring to make a conspiriacy come together? You need to listen to how stupid you sound!
No! That is NOT what the officer actually said. What he said was "Hey Bob, what's that you got in your TROUSERS?"
The Dallas Police Force was 80% gay. David Ferrie was gay. So was Clay Shaw. Even J Edgar Hoover was a faggot. Everybody connected with this was queer. The freaking sniper's nest was in the Texas Schoolbook SUPPOSITORY for christ sake.
Kennedy was murdered by gays because he was the straightest man on earth.
The famous zapruder film was a hoax, made to alter the true event - it's been proven that the kennedy's vehicle came to a complete stop - he was shot - and they took off again. The secret service was deeply involved with the ritual murder.
@slewofdamascus The car did not stop. No one proved it did. You can't prove something that never happened. Ritual murder? Do you even know what "ritual" means? Educate yourself on the real facts before you waste our time with your asinine beliefs.
@Com6in3d Obviously I have educated myself to a higher degree than you have on this matter, the zapruder film was put out to hide the true events, which has been proven by a thorough investigation of the materials by men of high esteem. Their findings are here on youtube for everyone to decide for themselves. I suggest you examine the evidence.
@slewofdamascus LMFAO...You are saying that you have educated yourself to the JFK murder BY WATCHING YOUTUBE VIDEOS! You are just too stupid for words.
@superchitownhustler with name like yours I wouldn't go around throwing stones, but if you could actually analyze a sentence, I said nothing of the kind, but let's suppose I did say it - how stupid do you have to be to discount something out of hand just because it's on youtube? There are many fine works on youtube and the one I referred to was a videotaped presentation of a 30day seminar on the zapruder film, a seminar conducted by universiy proferssors using their own research findings.
@slewofdamascus Actually, the name is a homage to a local legend dragstrip hot rod racer circa 1970....so there's that. On top then is the fact that God himself could hold a seminar stating that the zapruder film was faked and he would be as wrong as the clowns you referenced. Good night conspriacy boy, enjoy your "education".
@superchitownhustler why? because it's impossible that the conspirators could have manipulated the film? not only is not impossible it's precisely what they did, the evidence is overwhelming that the film was a manufactured propoganda piece designed to forever keep hidden the true events of that day. It's the government's conspiracy that should draw people's derision, but there will always be a large segment of brainwashed people who believe everything they see on television. sorry 4u.
@slewofdamascus You are a gullible person, you believe in fairy tales. It's ok. Do what you want. I just hate that so much time, money and resources have been wasted on the rediculous idea that anyone other than Oswald killed JFK. It is utter madness. The case is so damn simple, yet people like you just don't get it.
@superchitownhustler you're such a stupid fuckin assface, ya know that? i fuckin hate people like you... you're either a dumbfuck who actually believes LHO acted alone, you don't want to believe the truth that it was a conspiracy or you're just a stupid faggot who knows that it was an elaborate conspiracy and cover up but you deliberately comment on videos to spread misinformation & mislead people who are actually seeking the truth. fuck off... anyone who still thinks LHO did this is an idiot.
@ChicagoCubs1060 Hey asswipe...Do you suck your father's cock with that mouth? You sound like a whiny latent homosexual. Accept the obvious. If LHO was still alive, you would stick your cock in his ass!
@superchitownhustler I hate to say it but the Zapruder film was tampered with espescially with the frame speed see that way they can remove data from the film by splicing and re splicing the film til what they want removed or hidden is completed! I've read witness reports that JFK actually stood up in the car after the 1st shot that hit him in the back and then sat back down to catch another one in the throat then two more to the head 1 from the rear and 1 from the font at almost the exact time
@BluegrassRules1973 I don't know where you got your "factiods", but none of what you wrote to me is true. You have a right to believe anything you want, but don't try to tell me what you think happened actually happened. There was only one killer in Dealy Plaza that day and that killer was Oswald. People who believe in a conspiracy today with all the new technology just can't see the forest for the trees. Try reading "Case Closed" by Gerard Ponser. It will free your mind.
@superchitownhustler "Try reading "Case Closed" by Gerard Ponser. It will free your mind." case closed is rife with distortions and omissions which amount to deciet i often wonder if posner as any concept of the truth , from your use of the word " factoid" i would hazard a guess that your a mcadams fan also .try checking the testimony and info in case closed with the actuall testimony /affidavits/fbi reports etc and you will see what i mean .
@fobrien1 You're right about Mcadams and I respect your approach and agree there are some criticisms of Posner that are valid. However, there isn't anything with enough substance to change my opinion. I used to believe it HAD to be a conspriacy. After 48 years something would have come out that proves one of the seemingly millions of assassination senarios. Nothing has. Oswald did the job IMO. I'm done with it.
@superchitownhustler well with respect if your reading the likes of case closed which as i say is rife with distortion and omissions you wont see anything that would change your mind ,one has to ask why posner would engage in those practices if the case is open and shut .i couldnt disagree with you more that nothing has come out in 48 years ,why not try expanding your research beyond mcadams /posner what have you got to lose .
@fobrien1 I'm not searching for answers. I don't have any questions. The questions I once had have been answered to my satisfaction. I've considered the other side and rejected it To me it is a simple case and had Oswald lived, he would have been convicted and executed within 18-24 months. It's a shame that Ruby killed Oswald but that doesn't mean Oswald was part of a conspiracy. It just means that Oswald had bad luck. He killed the world's most powerful man and gets no credit.
@superchitownhustler i know your not searching for answers because you got them from posner ,what i said was if you have so much faith and belief that mr posner has told the truth what have you got to lose by doing a little research and reading on the contents of mr posners book case closed . mcadams tactics are even worse than posner ,mcadams lost a debate badly and preceeded to post all over the net that the person in question was a paedophile .
@fobrien1 I never said it was Ponser/Mcadams that swayed me. It wasn't. Reviewing the facts for nearly 40 years convinced me that all the evidence points only to Oswald. I tell people to read Posner because he sums it all up so well. If you don't think Posner is credible, what about Bugliosi? He reaches the exact same conclusions that Posner does. Is he a liar and manipulator too? I understand you wanting it to be a conspiracy, and not letting go, but I believe it was only LHO.
@superchitownhustler why do you assume "i want it to be a conspiracy" do i also want to believe elvis is alive ? ,what i want is the truth no matter what the truth reveals . i ask again if posner /mcadams and even bugliosi to name only 3 believe they have an open and shut case and oswald is the only guilty party why do they feel the need to distort testimony and omit evidence (some in its entirety) why not just give people the truth and let them decide for themselves ? .
@superchitownhustler the hsca came to pretty much the same conclussions as the wc but that doesnt mean they came to the correct conclussion . the hsca were aware that parklands staff had said jfk had a rear head wound and that some of the autopsy witnesses said likewise but instead of telling the truth they said the autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands staff (they did not ) and the hsca knew it and so they sealed the evidence of their lies till 2028 .
@slewofdamascus People underestimate the magnitude of JFK's murder. They don't understand that there are elements that have such "intelligence" capabilities that they are able to cover all their bases. Yes, the Z-film was manipulated.
@TheAmbassador11 They do underestimate it, I agree. That brazen, brutal act set the tone for everything that came after. Freedom and virtuousness (in high American places) all but died that day of the unspoken coup de tat.
@Com6in3d how come morons like you can NEVER refute anything with facts, but have to resort to childish name-calling? I don't, personally, care, because your sad pathetic words typed in anonymity don't mean jack to me, but it certainly proves how little, if any, research or education you rely upon to feed your belief-system.
@slewofdamascus Why should I bother to educate you with the facts. You conspriacy nuts ignore the facts and focus on the rediculous "factiods" that you all make up. The JFK case is very simple. Read case closed by posner with an open mind and you won't have to be a retarded anymore. Make no mistake, anyone who believes someone other than Oswald shot JFK is a retard.
"anyone who believes someone other than Oswald shot JFK is a retard. "
I don't believe LHO pulled any triggers on Nov 22. Not for JFK. Not for Tippit. I do believe he was in on the conspiracy however. Retard? My IQ is 162. What's yours pal?
@Com6in3d jfks limo slowed to the point that it all most came to a full stop there is plenty of testimony that proves that , it was brief perhaps only a second or two untill the driver put his foot down .watch the z film you will see clint hill climb onto the rear of the limo (then the driver puts his foot down ) causing hill to struggle to hang on .
@fobrien1 The Nix and Muchmore films also capture the third shot. Like the Z-film the two films show exactly the same thing. The car does not stop. The driver had taken his eyes off the road briefly to see where the first two shots had come from. The car slowed a bit, but never stopped. Please, there simply was no conspiracy. You can't prove something that never happened. This is a very simple case. Why can't people just let this go? It was Oswald and only Oswald.
@Com6in3d why dont you guys read comments before replying ,i didnt say the limo stopped nor am i arguing that it did . to deny the limo slowed down is to deny the evidence ,if there is no conspiracy in this very simple case why are you here wasting your time debating it ?.
@fobrien1 I never denied that the limo slowed down. It did, but it wasn't planned, nor was it a part of any "conspriacy". I'm not debating, you are. I'm 100% sure it was Oswald and only Oswald. Peace out yo.
@Com6in3d i never said the the limo slowing all most to a stop was planned or part of a conspiracy nor do i belive that . if you dont call whats in your comments debating what is it ? . you seem to have great confidence in posner and case closed but it seems you dont want to debate why ? why not post some of posners "factoids" and we can discuss how accurate or inaccurate they are .
@fobrien1 Correct; the case is not simple. They grabbed LHO and made their investigation fit him, much like a foundary worker beating hot metal to fit something that would not fit ordinarily.
He could have easily dropped two hand grenades into the limo, or close enough to do some real damage. Plus, he could have simply leaned out the window with a .45 and pumped lead as kennedy passed right below him.
THEY waited until the car was in the kill zone of triangulated fire. The car came to a near full stop for the final head shot. This equals conspiracy. No question.
If the shells found are 6.5 and the rifle found uses 7.65 then somebody planted the wrong gun in the room.The photo of Oswald holding a 6.5 Carcano used as evidence in the Warren Commission proves it was a setup and a conspiracy.
So many mysteries surrounding this murder. The reason there is so many loose ends is because the accused was killed before he could ever defend himself in a court of law. It would have been a disaster for those responsible if he had been brought to trial. He would have eventually implicated some important and powerful people. That couldn't be chanced. The murder of LHO ended the case very quickly before a trusting American public even had time to think it through.
@deweycheethamandhowe Craig made all of the shit up for money. Any educated assassin buff knows this. He was a total phony and alchol and drug abuser. He was an embarrassment to his family. Ask them , they will tell you.
After watching this all I have to say is... so what? A couple guys drive off. This is bizarre, unusual? What, is this some assassin? I can imagine the conversation - "after I shoot him, I'll stand on the street , just pick me up there." Makes little sense to me. The Mauser? The rifle was photographed and filmed as it was recovered. It was a Carcano, and the images prove it. "7.65 Mauser" on it? The recovery was filmed. It was a Carcano, period. Unless Carcanos have that on it, he was wrong!
@1239jer The rifle had Mauser stamped on it and was identified by Seymour.W. R.Criag was a witness. Why are you discounting the fact that the rifle was there? I understand that Seymour W. said years later that he did not see the rifle...I wonder why? Of course, he changed what he oringinally said.
As a small addition to my lengthy comments below, it's quite possible that the individual that the officer in this video saw getting into the car on the grassy knoll was James Files. Don't bother responding to this comment asking who James Files is. Read my last 10 comments posted hear just a few minutes ago.
Policeman Roger Craig did tell the Truth and paid the Highest price for it. A VERY Brave and Heroic American Patriot who suffered greatly. A full account of his testimony can be found in Mark Lane's 'TWO MEN IN DALLAS'.
We will never know exactly what happened!!! JFK was killed for a reason whether it was the government or whether it was a lone gunman who just wanted him dead
@shermnduke Have you seen pictures of where the rifle was "hidden" it was behind one box but not completely hidden at all. instead of putting in between the boxes it was put behind one box and the front and back of it was visible from the front. WTF kind of hiding is that? Answer: something that would be easy to find but would draw the picture of someone trying to hide it.....
and then of course the shells were not policed....
Who knows what was going through LHO's head. He may have been thinking too much and hesitated till the president made the turn. Oswald did it. No one else.
Best part is when he says 'I-tal-lin'....
Look we all know the gov. killed Kennedy, we've been living in a Nazi shit state ever since.
Eidelmania 2 weeks ago
According to Conspiracy Theory, there would have been no reason for the killers to leave a Mauser Rifle on the 6th floor, when Oswald, according to the FBI had ordered a 6.5 Italian Carcano, with Scope, from the February, 1963 issue of American Rifleman. This video does not make any sense as a conspiracy tool. If this poor individual is as stupid as he is portrayed here, there is small wonder that his testimony would not have been considered credible even by 1963 standards.
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
I came of age in the Departments of the mid-1970's, I noted that my Senior Officers were still glued to the 1950's. However, I do believe that more would have been learned and enduring questions settled if the Official Autopsy had been performed, as was required by law, in Dallas. The Gum-shoes of the Secret Service were not far beyond DPD in wrestling the body out of Parkland and cleaning the fu*kin' Limo with a rag and a bucket. Time caught up with the cops that day. We have suffered for it.
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
No person who has followed this case for very long can come up with any other conclusion than the fact that Chief Curry and his department were in way over their head on 11/22/1963. That the investigation into the murder of the President was essentially bungled in Dallas is a fact accepted by most of us on both sides of the picket fence. It's like the idiot seen searching for evidence with a cigarette hanging out of his gob. They investigated a 1963 crime scene using 1943 methodology. Gum-shoes.
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
When those who challenge the Official Version of events, stoop to disinformation as presented in this outrageously inept and misleading upload, their original cause is all the more weakened and humilitated. This little country bozo got 15 minutes of fame for calling an elephant a chicken. Indications are that he and Deputy Constable Seymore "Whoever" would not know the goddamned muzzle end of a Carcano (or a Mauser) from a Rat's Ass. DPD was inept? Yes. Did Oswald do it? Yes. . . Jimmy
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
While I do not want my Government selling me a bill of goods that is not the truth, by the same token, I will not accept some cheap sensationalism sold to the ignorance of the American people as the truth by those who would do little more than prove their own point (namely conspiracy) with such an outrageous LIE as this You Tube upload implies. I don't care what some fat-ass DPD's finest called it. He is ignorant still. The rifle in the film IS a Carcano. I assume the film is evidence. . .Jimmy
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
To soften up on the man interviewed, he may have heard someone say, "thats a Mauser". But I can assure any individual on this forum who wants to know the truth, that the rifle depicted in this film footage of the crime scene is a Turni 6.5 Italian Carcano with an inexpensive (mail order of the time) scope attached. The rifle's profile and characteristics are unique to the Carcano beyond any question or shadow of a doubt. Pro-Conspiracy or not, this is NOT a Mauser. It is ludicrous otherwise.
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
I am so sorry to interject here again, but the fact remains. While this film is playing, this idiot is calling this rifle a Mauser, and saying that it is stamped 7.5 Mauser. The rifle in this video is beyond any shadow doubt, a 6.5 Italian Carcano. The barrel, grooves in the stock, the Mannlicher action, the bolt, are conclusively Carcano. Perhaps those who match his testimony to the video do him a disservice, but otherwise he is indisputably a LIAR. The characteristics of the rifle do NOT lie.
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
TheMissedShot.8m.com is the whole key to a 2nd shooter.
lucky44124 1 month ago
I hate that this eyewitness is such and incredible LIAR, but the gun in this video without question is a WWII Italian Carcano 6.5. As with most Conspiracy Lunatic Theories, after nearly 50 years, there is not ONE shred of physical evidence, photographic, ballistic, or medical to indicate that anyone other than Lee Harvey Oswald assassinated the President and he did it alone.THAT IS THE FACT THAT HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE. There is NO Santa Claus and Lee Harvey Oswald Killed the President. Tough huh?
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
@BlueWolfe38 "I hate that this eyewitness is such and incredible LIAR"
if youve read posner and bugliosi (and i bet you have ) you would know about liars . its noticeable how you and your ilk have to maintain that people like me are lunatics who will believe any fairytale in order for the ridiculous warren commission fiction like the single bullet theory to be more plausable . like i said on another thread dispense with the BS .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 I despise Posner, I don't even consider the argument of "Case Closed". It will likely never be closed. I do have my own mind, friend (you seem like a logical and rational person) and I have kept this case close to my heart since the day that it occurred. (that makes me pretty old now, huh?) I have ordered the Bugliosi book, but I will read it with an open mind. Check out the David von Pein sites, you will enjoy his collection whether agreeable or not. . . . Jimmy
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
@BlueWolfe38 "I despise Posner"
well i guess we arent so different ,i dont despise posner personally but i despise everything he stands for which is represented in his work particularly case closed . i could start posting all the errors /omitions/distortions /fabrications and downright lies in case closed on here starting now and id probably still be here posting them many hours later .i appreciate you have your own mind and i can appreciate that you come across as a very intelligent -------
fobrien1 1 month ago
@BlueWolfe38 person .in relation to bugliosi all tho he is nowhere near as decietfull as posner he is without any doubt decietfull ,ive pointed out to people on youtube various comments and claims by bugliosi that are in error / completely inaccurate and even some claims that are tantamount to outright lies .one such lie is that at the time of the shots oswald claimed he ate with junior jarmin ( as bugliosi says in the hopes of creating an alibi ) -----------------------------------
fobrien1 1 month ago
@BlueWolfe38 its an easy provable fact that oswald said no such thing , i say to you that which i say to all read the book and double/treble check every claim he makes with the official records for accuracy .and i ask the question why would these men feel so compelled to lie 48 years after the tragic events of dallas . as for von pien i have viewed a lot of videos he uploads actuall footage of the time which is priceless ,however having read his work ---------------------------------
fobrien1 1 month ago
@BlueWolfe38 read his posts on various forums and even having replied to his comments on forums i find him as distastefull and decietfull as posner and bugliosi .i even posted a bit of his work on a forum where he detailed some 20 reasons why oswald was guilty (a forum page long ),i took 3 pages on the forum pointing out the numerous omitions /distortions and fabrications in it and i tried to give as short a reply as possible .so with all respect ill pass on a return to von piens site .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 I did not have such a bad experience with him. He seems sincere and knowledgable. He did indeed shoot a couple of my ideas down very quickly. But, overall I enjoy his site for the wealth of material, whether or not you agree with him. I have some ideas about where one needs to start, or perhaps start over, with this case. I try to eliminate speculation and start with we know. Do you believe the guy in this video? I am sorry, but there is no way that I ever could. Why does he lie ???
BlueWolfe38 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@BlueWolfe38 "Do you believe the guy in this video? I am sorry, but there is no way that I ever could. Why does he lie ???"
perhaps you could give your reasons for saying he is a liar .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1
fobrien1 1 month ago
its very noticable how 1239jer has decided that all our concerns are completely irrelevant having offered not one iota of contrary evidence ,its just believe me and not these crazy people . not to mention to say fobrien said x y and z which he never said ,the truth is easy to establish but to do it you have to do what 1239jer doesnt want you to do ,which is research . research the case and double/trible /quadruple check all facts ,then you will trully know if you should believe me or 1239jer .
fobrien1 2 months ago 4
@fobrien1 Do not concern yourself with arguing or debating with completely ignorant people who's only achievement is to ignore fact and turn a blind eye to anything the other than what the government tells them. Anyone who looks into the JFK assassination including what eye witnesses said and how it was corroborated from various sources and the way in which the official investigation was conducted will know beyond any doubt that there was a cover up of what happened.
UNIQUE1982 2 months ago 8
@UNIQUE1982 i agree with you that debating such people as 1239jer is futile ,i dont do it in the hopes of trying to change their minds that would be a waste of time i do it so the evidence gets posted and people who are just starting to research the case can see all the evidence and testimony which the likes of 1239jer dont want them to see .unlike LNs like 1239jer i dont say believe me trust me i tell people to check what i say to see if its true, thanks for your reply its appreciated .
fobrien1 2 months ago 2
In the end the fact that the camera AND LENS could not be located is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. That's because the NEGATIVES show no sign of manipulation. Besides, even though we have Oswald's camera, that doesn't eliminate the possibility that "conspirators" would have simply reused the SAME camera to make fake photos. Your utter desperation to go on and on on a completely irrelevant issue shows you have no case in terms of the autopsy images. Case closed.
1239jer 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1239jer I see you've been "debating" with fobrien1. You've probably already figured this out but fobrien1 and UNIQUE1982 are the same person. He has a history or creating scores of different identities posting slanted and misleading comments.
LoneNutter1 1 month ago
There ARE issues where eyewitness testimony has to be weighed - such as the number of shots, what happened when Oswald shot Tippit, etc. But on the wounds to Kennedy, this debate was answered in 1978 when the fundamental questions were answered unequivocally. Were the autopsy images authentic? YES. Did they depict Kennedy? YES. Were the images or wounds altered? NO. Did they corroborate the original autopsy conclusions? YES, save for the precise entry point of the head wound. END OF STORY.
1239jer 2 months ago
Which is why o-brien etc CHANGE THE SUBJECT when the photos and x-rays are brought up. "The HSCA lied about what the witnesses said!" IRRELEVANT as this doesn't change the reality of what those images show. "They couldn't find the camera!" IRRELEVANT as the negatives show no manipulation as stereo image fakery is virtually impossible. "String said different things!" Doesn't matter what he says. NOTHING he says can change the physical reality in those photos and x-rays.
1239jer 2 months ago
This is what o'brein and others don't get. There was a reality what happened Nov 22 1963. Whether the HSCA misprepesented want some people said is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT as the conclusions as to the nature of the wounds was based on the AUTOPSY report and the photographs and the x-rays.
The rhetorical question is always asked: how could so many others be wrong? It's an interesting question, but we know they ARE wrong because the photos and x-rays are irrefutable.
1239jer 2 months ago
In the end, it really doesn't matter what the witnesses said otherwise, as the photos and x-rays are irrefutable. And they match what we see in the Zapruder film, not incidentally. In the end, you can line up 1,000 people who say "rear exit wound" but that can't change the reality of what we see in the images and x-rays.
No more than if 99 per cent believe Elvis is alive that that means he IS alive. Nope, he's still dead.
And, as I said, multiple witnesses DID say "side exit wound."
1239jer 2 months ago
What Stringer said over the years about the photos is IRRELEVANT once we establish they are authentic. Not knowing the camera they were taken in is also IRRELEVANT as the images can be authenticated EVEN IF THEY WERE PHOTOS OF PHOTOS. The multiple stereo pairs are IMPOSSIBLE to fake. That's not an "opinion," it is a fact. The same goes with who is in the images. ALL the forensic techniques examining images and x-rays conclude one thing: The person in the images is JFK.
1239jer 2 months ago
In any court case, there are contradicting evidence. In this case, there is a lot. However, you are asking us to simply ignore and dismiss those whose actual job was to closely examine and describe the wounds, and accept as gospel the statements from those who DID NOT. Indeed, NONE of those witnesses were pathologists. Further, and most damning, you have YET to offer ANY concrete reason to doubt the photos and x-rays.
1239jer 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
Arthur Schopenhauer
German philosopher (1788 - 1860)
fobrien1 2 months ago
Finally, we KNOW the images are of JFK as multiple comparisons were made of the person to known images of JFK, and all facial features, which in combimation are unique, MATCH. As do the x-rays to known images of JFK made during his life. Everything matches. Further, and to the point, ALL the forensic pathologists agree - ONE bullet entry to the rear. Side exit wound. This evidence is iron-clad and irrefutable. And none of the bullshit arguments from o'brien changes that reality.
1239jer 2 months ago
We know this because the negatives were examined. Even if we are missing the camera (a non-issue), we KNOW the negatives are authentic as Stringer took many photos in pairs. Stereoscopic images are nearly impossible to forge, let alone the numerous ones made that day.
Further, the x-rays match what the photos show. How could the x-rays be forged? It's never explained. That's because it can't be done without detection.
1239jer 2 months ago
Indeed, he has YET to explain why we should embrace those 40 or so and ignore those 15 or so who said otherwise.
The bottom line, though, it matters ZERO if the HSCA "lied" about what the other Bethesda witnesses said, it matters ZERO what Springer said over the years, IF THE PHOTOS ARE AUTHENTIC. Which is what Obrien doesn't get, indeed he skirts this entire fundamental issue.
Simply put, the autopsy photos and x-rays have been examined. They ARE authentic. Period.
1239jer 2 months ago
So, what do we believe? Some 40 witnesses who claimed a rear exit wound, over some 15 or so who said a side wound? The problem with this rather sterile debate is the total inability of obrien to honestly address some of the evidence which negates his views. I've expolained how many could have been wrong or mistaken; he has yet to seriously address how the pathologists or the photos/xrays could be wrong.
1239jer 2 months ago
Bottom line here is the photographs and film clearly show a Carcano. That's the end of the story. It doesn't matter what's on the report if the photos say otherwise. In your whacky world, of course, witness statements are undeniable truths while physical evidence are lies. It's one thing to take a stance. It's quite another thing to pretend the physical evidence does not exist, as you do, let alone account for it. That's why it's hard to take you very seriously.
1239jer 3 months ago
@1239jer I definitely heard references to a Lee Henry Oswald and a Lee Harold Oswald during the newscasts. clearly there were three shooters, all Oswalds. They probably cloned him in Russia.
andrelebaron 2 months ago
Fobrien - your denial of reality is something to behold. You have YET to offer ANY plausible explanation as to how the witness statements can be reconciled with the autopsy photos. And now you try to pretend the news footage of the recovery of the Carcano doesn't exist. The insults come when after at least THIRTY requests to address these fundamental issues all you lamely say is Stringer once denied to Lifton those were the photos. How can we take you seriously?
1239jer 3 months ago
@1239jer exactly when did i deny that there was film of a rifle ? it seems to be that LNs make quite a habit of attributing claims to people that they never made . i said there is film that hasnt been seen by any of us such as alyeas filming of fritz holding the shells (which fritz denied ,but sadly for him mooney saw him do it ) and i said there were reconstruction photos taken on friday and the monday after which can be easily mistaken for the genuine photos .
fobrien1 2 months ago
@1239jer your hold an opinion that the autopsy photos refute all witneses (thats your opinion and your entitled to it ) but i disagree , some 30 to 40 credible and trained witnesses (who you instantly dismissed )saw a wound on the right rear of jfks head . we know as fact the HSCA lied in saying all autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses ,presumably a person who can dismiss 30 to 40 witnesses hasnt a problem with with the HSCA lying ? -----------------------------
fobrien1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fobrien1 "we know as fact the HSCA lied in saying all autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses ,presumably a person who can dismiss 30 to 40 witnesses hasnt a problem with with the HSCA lying ?" There you go again. Are you capable of stating an argument without a complete LIE? If you read the HSCA you realize that the writer conflated the unanimous MEDICAL opinion at Bethesda with ALL the witnesses. It's an ERROR, not a LIE. AND YOU KNOW THIS. Yet you continually LIE about this.
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer "we know as fact the HSCA lied in saying all autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses ,presumably a person who can dismiss 30 to 40 witnesses hasnt a problem with with the HSCA lying ?" There you go again. Are you capable of stating an argument without a complete LIE? If you read the HSCA you realize that the writer conflated the unanimous MEDICAL opinion at Bethesda with ALL the witnesses. It's an ERROR, not a LIE. AND YOU KNOW THIS. Yet you continually LIE about this.
fobrien1 2 months ago
@1239jer the hsca had multiple testimonies which stated jfk had a wound on the right rear of his head from autopsy witnesses or witnesses after the fact ,and the hsca said all 26 autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses the hsca knew that statment was untrue so they lied . you say im a liar but what have i said thats untrue ?, you know i posted the very words of the witnesses the words that prove the hsca lied . and all you have is the hsca were in error please.
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 "he hsca said all 26 autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands witnesses the hsca knew that statment was untrue so they lied "
If you read the HSCA report, you realize that they first say "all" at Bethesda, in reference to those doing the actual autopsy. THEN, in repeating this "all" claim (which was true), it conflates to including everyone in the room (which is not true). This amounts to confusion on the part of the writer, not a "lie." You have NO basis to call it a "lie."
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer "Critics of the Warren Commission's medical evidence findings have found (sic) on the observations recorded by the Parkland Hospital doctors. They believe it is unlikely that trained medical personnel could be so consistently in error regarding the nature of the wound, even though their recollections were not based on careful examinations of the wounds...." ----------------------------------------------
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 "They believe it is unlikely that trained medical personnel could be so consistently in error..."
1. AGAIN, not all the witnesses said the wound was in the rear of the head.
2. NONE of the "trained medical personnel" were pathologists. So? Well, they'd not be fooled by mistaking crenelated cerebral material for cerebrum tissue, for one.
3. Many of those witnesses, upon reflection, realized they had misinterpreted what they were looking at.
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer "1. AGAIN, not all the witnesses said the wound was in the rear of the head."
no but a large majority.
2. NONE of the "trained medical personnel" were pathologists. So? Well, they'd not be fooled by mistaking crenelated cerebral material for cerebrum tissue, for one.
so these " trained medical personnel" wouldnt be able to tell the difference between the right rear of the head and the temple area of the head ? .
fobrien1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fobrien1 "so these " trained medical personnel" wouldnt be able to tell the difference between the right rear of the head and the temple area of the head ?"
The right rear of the head was on the operating table. How could all these witnesses see a wound when JFK was lying on his back?
Me: "1. AGAIN, not all the witnesses said the wound was in the rear of the head." You: "no but a large majority." So, if most believe Elvis is alive, does he pop to life?
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer "3. Many of those witnesses, upon reflection, realized they had misinterpreted what they were looking at."
sure they did , they honestly thought they must be wrong because they were told all the autopsy witnesses contradicted them and then when shown photos of an intact rear of head they said ok must have got that wrong .but we know all autopsy witnesses did not contradict them and the now apparently missing autopsy camera cant be linked to the photos .
fobrien1 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@fobrien1 "sure they did , they honestly thought they must be wrong because they were told all the autopsy witnesses contradicted them" Many in fact realized WHY they were wrong as they misidentified crenelated brain tissue for cerebellum tissue. AND, when it was pointed out that wounds were described which were on the BACK of the head when JFK was lying down and this wound was not visible, some MOVED THE WOUND FORWARD.
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer "In disagreement with the observations of the Parkland doctors are the 26 people present at the autopsy. All of those interviewed who attended the autopsy corroborated the general location of the wounds as depicted in the photographs; none had differing accounts...it appears more probable that the observations of the Parkland doctors are incorrect." The statement is supported by reference to " 'staff interviews' with persons present at the autopsy."
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 "Rather than contradicting Parkland witnesses that there was a rear defect in JFK's skull, Bethesda corroborated them."
In the end, this is a complete red herring issue anyway. Even if we accept that the HSCA "lied," the conclusions were not based on the others in the room, it was based on the autoposy surgeons.
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer Recently released documents reveal for the first time that the HSCA misrepresented both the WC statements of the Bethesda witnesses, as well as its own "staff interviews" on the location of JFK's skull defect. Rather than contradicting Parkland witnesses that there was a rear defect in JFK's skull, Bethesda corroborated them.
fobrien1 2 months ago
@1239jer Bethesda witnesses not only described a rear defect to HSCA, they also drew diagrams that overwhelmingly showed a defect at the rear, or right rear of JFK's skull. By falsely representing the data, including its own, HSCA writers inaccurately portrayed Bethesda witnesses as contesting the observations of Parkland witnesses whom, in fact, they supported .
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 "By falsely representing the data, including its own, HSCA writers inaccurately portrayed Bethesda witnesses as contesting the observations of Parkland witnesses whom, in fact, they supported ."
There is NO evidence that the HSCA deliberately misled when they stated all contested Parkland. The passages first describe the MEDICAL personnel in unanimity. Then, the text states "all" - this sounds more like confusion on the part of the editor.
1239jer 2 months ago
@fobrien1 your hold an opinion that the autopsy photos refute all witneses (thats your opinion and your entitled to it ) but i disagree , some 30 to 40 credible and trained witnesses (who you instantly dismissed )"
The photos are irrefutable. Multiple witnesses reported EXACTLY what the photos show. True, more said otherwise. But you have yet to make a credible case to explain away the autopsy photos and x-rays. I don't blame you for avoiding the issue. Because you CAN'T explain it away.
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer further to that the HSCA were less than truthfull when saying the autopsy photos were authenticated ,the autopsy camera would be required to authenticate the photos and the HSCA told us it was lost however the HSCA again were less than truthfull as they indeed had a camera however which couldnt be matched to the photos .of course you will dismiss all this with your normal finesse . finally on stringer he was very clear in saying -------------------------
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 You don't need a camera to authenticate an image. The fact that you seem to believe this tells us a lot. The negatives were all available, they were judged to be authentic unretouched images, and the person in the images were Kennedy. Save for the images of the brain which could not be authenticated as there was no reference to rule out a substitution, the images show a clear story. No rear exit wound, a rear entry, side exit. And, sorry, this evidence trumps witness evidence.
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer you understand your opinion is just your opinion not evidence , perhaps you would care to offer evidence for a change .if not your wasting my time so to use your words "back to sleep".
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 "you understand your opinion is just your opinion not evidence" The photographic evidence is iron-clad. Which is why you completely avoid addressing it. I don't blame you, as you have no case if the photos are accurate. Not finding the autopsy camera is IRRELEVANT if we can a) prove the images are not faked and b) prove the person in them is JFK. And we can do both. Therefore, what anyone says about the autopsy, like Stringer, is also IRRELEVANT as we know the pics are real
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer “Because the Department of Defense was unable to locate the camera and lens that were used to take these [autopsy] photographs, the [photographic] panel was unable to engage in an analysis similar to the one undertaken with the Oswald backyard pictures that was designed to determine whether a particular camera in issue had been used to take the photographs that were the subject of inquiry."
(more lies whats missing here is that they indeed locate a camera)-------------------
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 "(more lies whats missing here is that they indeed locate a camera)" There you go again fobrien. The DOD received a camera and a 135 mm lens. What did the HSCA say? "unable to locate the camera and lens that were used to take these [autopsy] photographs." Clearly, you know nothing about photography. a 135 mm would NOT be used. There is NO WAY a 135 mm lens would have been used.
Will your misleading bullshit never end?
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer there really are no leghts that these LNs will noot stoop to ,as can be seen on this thread 1239jer has done little but attack and insult and falsely accuse me of lies and misinfo in an attempt to discredit me and this is the LN M O this is how they operate . the truth is not on the agenda for these people in fact the opposite , the true agenda is to stop the truth coming out and the means used to do this are attacks and false accuasations =========
fobrien1 2 months ago
@1239jer of lies and disinfo ,and if that fails they revert to the old reliable the insults calling you childish names like crazy kook (in the hope of making people believe your a crazy again its only discrediting tactics ) which is mild in comparison to the insults and names hurled by LNs on jfk forums .for example one of the most prominent LNs john mcadams having lost a debate resorted to falsely accusing the person he lost the debate to of being a peadophile . no more needs to be said .
fobrien1 2 months ago
@1239jer lastly i made no comments on photography i merely quoted and quoted the hsca them selves , the lens used or not used has no bearing on the fact that the DOD sent a camera (the hsca lied and said they had no camera ,fact) the hsca indeed got a camera from the DOD which they found could not be matched to the photos (fact ) thats why they lied and said the camera couldnt be found .these are facts which people can find online if they care to look .
fobrien1 2 months ago
@1239jer It turns out that in fact the DoD had found the camera. The DoD wrote the HSCA that the Naval Hospital only had one camera of this type in its possession and that,“the only [camera] in use at the National Naval Medical Center in 1963”[319] had already been sent to the HSCA for study.The HSCA, however, wasn’t pleased with the camera the Defense Department had sent.----------------------------------------------------------------------------
fobrien1 2 months ago
@1239jer In a letter asking the Secretary of Defense to look for another one, HSCA chief counsel Robert Blakey explained the problem:
“[O]ur photographic experts have determined that this camera, or at least the particular lens and shutter attached to it, could not have been used to take [JFK’s] autopsy pictures.”
(so we see more lies ,they had a camera it seemed that couldnt have taken the autopsy photos so they lied and said the DOD was unable to find the autopsy camera)
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 "“[O]ur photographic experts have determined that this camera, or at least the particular lens and shutter attached to it, could not have been used to take [JFK’s] autopsy pictures.”
(so we see more lies ,they had a camera it seemed that couldnt have taken the autopsy photos so they lied and said the DOD was unable to find the autopsy camera)"
Migod, obrien, how dense are you? They said quite clearly THE PARTICULAR LENS AND SHUTTER"!!!!
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer "Migod, obrien, how dense are you? They said quite clearly THE PARTICULAR LENS AND SHUTTER"!!!!"
no blakey said
"(O]ur photographic experts have determined that THIS camera, OR ATLEAST the particular lens and shutter attached to it, could not have been used to take [JFK’s] autopsy pictures.”
but carry on your insults by all means all this does is show the people reading what your true agenda is which is nothing to do with the truth .
fobrien1 2 months ago
@1239jer that there was a wound in the back of the head ,he was asked various questions to clarify the area where the wound was and iit was the right rear of the head , but he later denied saying this and its absolutely no surprise that you who dismisses 30 to 40 credible and trained witnesses and have no problem with the HSCA lying that you would accept his later denial while dismissing his earlier claims . that tells all those reading all they need to know about you .
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 Stringer said various things. Why is he "telling the truth" when he says "rear exit wound" and he, and all the other witnesses "liars" when they say they didn't see an exit wound? We only wish we had your wisdom to know who is telling the truth and who is lying.
1239jer 2 months ago
@1239jer yes but unlike LNs i used what he said at the time not any changes he made at a later date .who are the people who didnt see a hole in the right rear that you say im calling liars ? unless you refer to the 3 pathologists in which case i never called any of them a liar i said 30 to 40 people contradict them . people get the truth from me whether the accept it or not is up to them .
fobrien1 2 months ago
@fobrien1 The basic issue you are avoiding is this: ON WHAT BASIS DO WE ACCEPT SOME WITNESS TESTIMONY OVER OTHER WITNESS TESTIMONY. I spelled out how and why many witnesses were likely wrong in seeing a rear wound (I never called them "liars"); you, however, avoid addressing the photographs and the fact that those who actually examined the wounds (NONE of your witnesses did that) ALL agree with the WC conclusion. IOW, you have stated no basis to not believe them. Other than others say otherwise
1239jer 2 months ago
There is a document - (it is shown in one of Mark Lane's documentaries - I don't know the details but I have seen it) that was signed by both Robert Craig and someone else (Dallas P.D I think) that asserts that a MAUSER was recovered from the 6th floor. Craig clearly recalls that 'MAUSER' was on the side of the rifle.
Even if Craig is a liar or mistaken he wasn't the only person to assert that a Mauser was recovered.
funkmasterjee 3 months ago
Hi Ambassador - Sorry, you are wrong. The rifle was a Carcano, not a Mauser, despite Craig's claim. How do we know this? Because before the rifle was taken from where it was placed, it was photographed. Those photos show a Carcano. Further, the recovery of the rifle was filmed. That film has been analyzed and it shows the identical rifle which the WC said killed JFK. Craig couldn't admit he was wrong, even though the physical evidence proves it. That's human nature.
1239jer 3 months ago
@1239jer Weren't there two rifles found?
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
@TheAmbassador11 No, one rifle was found. Some, like Robert Groden, claimed another rifle was found, based on films such as the one by Charles Mentesena. But this film shows a SHOTGUN, a Remington 870, used by the Dallas police. Further, Craig NEVER claimed that the rifle which was filmed being recovered was a different rifle than the one he saw. This is what we call "human nature." He was wrong - provably so - and would never admit it. But the photos and films can't be "wrong."
1239jer 3 months ago
@1239jer seymore weitzman was signing reports as late as 24/11/63 saying it was a mauser ,he said he only glanced at the rifle for a second yet he gives a very detailed description of it down to how rough the wood was . there is film and photos we havent seen and some photos we have seen are recreation photos from that evening or monday .alyea filmed fritz pick up the shells in the snipers nest this film is yet to be seen and for good reason .
fobrien1 3 months ago
@fobrien1 The film and photos are from the recovery. They show a Carano. Period. Back to sleep, CTer.
1239jer 3 months ago
@1239jer i see your debating prowess and your research skills are as strong as ever ,are you not even aware of the fact that weitzman signed reports as late as 24/11/63 stating it was a mauser or that he gave a very detailed description of the rifle he says he only saw at a glance or that reconstruction photos were taken on the friday 22/11/63 and the following monday .if so where is alyeas fim showing fritz illiegaly handling the shells ? .
fobrien1 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@1239jer "The film and photos are from the recovery. They show a Carano. Period. Back to sleep, CTer."
i guess its typical that you only offer insults and all you can try and do is make your comment about me as opposed to the evidence ( a typical LN ploy ) if you cant discredit the evidence try and discredit the person giving the evidence .
fobrien1 3 months ago
The problem with 'badgeman' is based on the apparent size of the head and upper body he would only be about two and a half feet tall close to the retaining wall -- or if he were normal size (five and a half feet to 6ft) he would have to be way back in the parking lot and stood on a tall step ladder
funkmasterjee 4 months ago
Roger Craig (in this video) was murdered in 1975 because he wouldn't lie about what he had seen. There is documentary proof (signed) that what was found was a Mauser. When 'they' realised the mistake, the Mauser was switched for a MC 6.5mm and in my opinion the palm print added by the FBI by pressing the MC rifle against the palm of Oswald's corpse. The strap on the 'recovered' MC rifle was not the same as the strap in the photo of Oswald holding the rifle. They are two DIFFERENT guns.
funkmasterjee 4 months ago
@funkmasterjee The only "documentary proof" is the fact that Craig claimed he saw a Mauser. But the film and photos of the rifle in situ CLEARLY show it to be a Carcano. The fact CT's still claim it was a Mauser shows how silly and in denial these people are. Because to believe otherwise requires the Dallas Police to be part of a conspiracy to switch the rifle AND the newsman to be part of the conspiracy too as he would have had to shoot a re-staged recovery, something Craig never said occured
1239jer 3 months ago
@funkmasterjee i dont think there was any switching of rifles there were probably 2 rifles , one needs to research the times the shells and rifle were found . according to testimony the rifle was found about 6 minutes after the shells were found ,we were told the rifle was found at about 1.16pm about the same time an officer came up to the 6th floor and told fritz an officer was shot in oakcliff . is that accurate well luke mooney found the snipers nest mooney said -----------------------------
fobrien1 2 months ago
@funkmasterjee he found the snipers nest at about 1.00pm and that time is corroberated ,will; fritz was at the trade mart he went from there to parklands and he said he arrived at the book depository at about 12.58 ,mooney said upon finding the snipers nest he leaned out the window and saw fritz arrive so mooneys time of 1.00pm for the finding of the shells is accurate and corroberated . now if the rifle is found 5 to 6 minutes later that makes the time the rifle is found -----------------
fobrien1 2 months ago
@funkmasterjee at 1.05 or 1.06pm . roger craig said the rifle was found about 1.06 and he made a note of this because this was the same time the officer told fritz that an officer was shot in oakcliff ,but we were told the rifle wasnt found for atleast 10 minutes more at about 1.16pm . now in order to dismiss the rifle (or a rifle ) being found a 1.06pm we have to dismiss mooney who is unwittingly corroberated by fritz .
fobrien1 2 months ago
do a dna test on soda bottle and chicken bones
kenny2894spd 4 months ago
@kenny2894spd You're going to shoot the President of the United States - so you take a bottle of Soda and some chicken wings up to the sniper's nest as a snack ? As casual as that ? ......I very much doubt if Oswald ate or drank any of it .....planted as extra proof someone had been in that loaction
funkmasterjee 4 months ago
@funkmasterjee the pepsi and chicken was left there by williams oswald had nothing to do with it he hadnt been sitting there eating and drinking .
fobrien1 4 months ago
@funkmasterjee Or an experienced psychopath killer might have brought his lunch. Only an experienced killer would be cool enough to pick up his shells and arrange them on the sill. The scene was either staged or left by one very cold psycho. That is not Oswald. Oswald was a total patsy. He was a low level CIA operative who was set up placed in the TSBD and then killed all by CIA.
cunnidvd 3 months ago
@cunnidvd Some people say that LHO was a "low level" operative. I believe he was a very "high level" operative due to the fact that he was quite possibly used to inflitrate an organization that may have been responsible to JFK's murder. If he was sent to Russia under the guise of defection and thought to have given them secrets on how to take down the U-2 plane, thought to have taken a shot at General Walker, he should be considered high level. All were "fronts" to build his "commie" persona.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
@TheAmbassador11 Interesting. Good points. What organization do you think killed JFK?
cunnidvd 3 months ago
@cunnidvd Supposedly "Operation Mongoose" was an organization that was set up to kill Fidel Castro. LHO may have infiltrated this group. RFK found out about it. They were operating without the Kennedys' knowledge even though it has been said that the Kennedy's were trying to assassinate Castro. RFK decided to run the organization from his office. The Kennedys' were "looking the other way" when they turned their weapons on JFK. They underestimated how dangerous they were to them. See TMTKK series
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
@cunnidvd The Kennedys were lured into a false sense of security in that they thought that just because RFK was running the group from his office, they would never do harm to JFK. Of course, they knew that many people/organizations wanted JFK dead but they did not suspect the very people that RFK was "over". The idea was really to kill F.Castro and JFK. A couple of people close to Castro lost their nerve but JFK's security was lax and they knew they could get him.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
@TheAmbassador11 OK I know understand you.
cunnidvd 3 months ago
Proof of conspiracy -
Signed documentary testimony that a MAUSER rifle had been recovered.
Photographic evidence (and eye witnesses) of more than one person on the 6th floor at time of shooting
Photo evidence (Moorman photo) of a sniper (or spotter) behind and to the right of Zapruder
Gunsmoke from the knoll seen by multiple witnesses
Oswald seen on 2nd floor not out of breath 90 seconds after the shots
Ed Hoffman saw a rifle being passed from shooter to accomplice behind picket fence
funkmasterjee 4 months ago
@funkmasterjee there are witnesses who saw more than one man on the 6th floor one man was arnold rowland ,but i think the photo you mention is showing jarmin/norman/williams on the 5th floor directly below the snipers nest window . also what can be seen in the moormon photo is perhaps debatable but gary mack believes badgeman is there as well as hard hat man .
fobrien1 4 months ago
hey comein6in3rd or whatever your name is? Before you go ragging on me you better get your facts in order bud! Don't fucking tell me that I should be sterilized unless you want to meet me and try to do it yourself? The truth is the truth man are you saying that all the people that saw with thier own eyes that did not know each other but repeat the same story of the murder to the police,fbi,cia etc were conspiring to make a conspiriacy come together? You need to listen to how stupid you sound!
BluegrassRules1973 5 months ago
"It looks like a Mauser".
No! That is NOT what the officer actually said. What he said was "Hey Bob, what's that you got in your TROUSERS?"
The Dallas Police Force was 80% gay. David Ferrie was gay. So was Clay Shaw. Even J Edgar Hoover was a faggot. Everybody connected with this was queer. The freaking sniper's nest was in the Texas Schoolbook SUPPOSITORY for christ sake.
Kennedy was murdered by gays because he was the straightest man on earth.
LiquorWreckedEmGood 5 months ago
The famous zapruder film was a hoax, made to alter the true event - it's been proven that the kennedy's vehicle came to a complete stop - he was shot - and they took off again. The secret service was deeply involved with the ritual murder.
slewofdamascus 5 months ago
@slewofdamascus The car did not stop. No one proved it did. You can't prove something that never happened. Ritual murder? Do you even know what "ritual" means? Educate yourself on the real facts before you waste our time with your asinine beliefs.
Com6in3d 5 months ago
@Com6in3d Obviously I have educated myself to a higher degree than you have on this matter, the zapruder film was put out to hide the true events, which has been proven by a thorough investigation of the materials by men of high esteem. Their findings are here on youtube for everyone to decide for themselves. I suggest you examine the evidence.
slewofdamascus 5 months ago
@slewofdamascus LMFAO...You are saying that you have educated yourself to the JFK murder BY WATCHING YOUTUBE VIDEOS! You are just too stupid for words.
superchitownhustler 5 months ago
@superchitownhustler with name like yours I wouldn't go around throwing stones, but if you could actually analyze a sentence, I said nothing of the kind, but let's suppose I did say it - how stupid do you have to be to discount something out of hand just because it's on youtube? There are many fine works on youtube and the one I referred to was a videotaped presentation of a 30day seminar on the zapruder film, a seminar conducted by universiy proferssors using their own research findings.
slewofdamascus 5 months ago
@slewofdamascus Actually, the name is a homage to a local legend dragstrip hot rod racer circa 1970....so there's that. On top then is the fact that God himself could hold a seminar stating that the zapruder film was faked and he would be as wrong as the clowns you referenced. Good night conspriacy boy, enjoy your "education".
superchitownhustler 5 months ago
@superchitownhustler why? because it's impossible that the conspirators could have manipulated the film? not only is not impossible it's precisely what they did, the evidence is overwhelming that the film was a manufactured propoganda piece designed to forever keep hidden the true events of that day. It's the government's conspiracy that should draw people's derision, but there will always be a large segment of brainwashed people who believe everything they see on television. sorry 4u.
slewofdamascus 5 months ago
@slewofdamascus You are a gullible person, you believe in fairy tales. It's ok. Do what you want. I just hate that so much time, money and resources have been wasted on the rediculous idea that anyone other than Oswald killed JFK. It is utter madness. The case is so damn simple, yet people like you just don't get it.
superchitownhustler 5 months ago
@superchitownhustler you're such a stupid fuckin assface, ya know that? i fuckin hate people like you... you're either a dumbfuck who actually believes LHO acted alone, you don't want to believe the truth that it was a conspiracy or you're just a stupid faggot who knows that it was an elaborate conspiracy and cover up but you deliberately comment on videos to spread misinformation & mislead people who are actually seeking the truth. fuck off... anyone who still thinks LHO did this is an idiot.
ChicagoCubs1060 5 months ago
@ChicagoCubs1060 Well, the fact that you are a Cubs fan speaks volumes about you. LMFAO at you!
superchitownhustler 5 months ago
@ChicagoCubs1060 Hey asswipe...Do you suck your father's cock with that mouth? You sound like a whiny latent homosexual. Accept the obvious. If LHO was still alive, you would stick your cock in his ass!
Com6in3d 5 months ago
@superchitownhustler I hate to say it but the Zapruder film was tampered with espescially with the frame speed see that way they can remove data from the film by splicing and re splicing the film til what they want removed or hidden is completed! I've read witness reports that JFK actually stood up in the car after the 1st shot that hit him in the back and then sat back down to catch another one in the throat then two more to the head 1 from the rear and 1 from the font at almost the exact time
BluegrassRules1973 5 months ago
@BluegrassRules1973 I don't know where you got your "factiods", but none of what you wrote to me is true. You have a right to believe anything you want, but don't try to tell me what you think happened actually happened. There was only one killer in Dealy Plaza that day and that killer was Oswald. People who believe in a conspiracy today with all the new technology just can't see the forest for the trees. Try reading "Case Closed" by Gerard Ponser. It will free your mind.
superchitownhustler 5 months ago
@superchitownhustler "Try reading "Case Closed" by Gerard Ponser. It will free your mind." case closed is rife with distortions and omissions which amount to deciet i often wonder if posner as any concept of the truth , from your use of the word " factoid" i would hazard a guess that your a mcadams fan also .try checking the testimony and info in case closed with the actuall testimony /affidavits/fbi reports etc and you will see what i mean .
fobrien1 5 months ago
@fobrien1 You're right about Mcadams and I respect your approach and agree there are some criticisms of Posner that are valid. However, there isn't anything with enough substance to change my opinion. I used to believe it HAD to be a conspriacy. After 48 years something would have come out that proves one of the seemingly millions of assassination senarios. Nothing has. Oswald did the job IMO. I'm done with it.
superchitownhustler 5 months ago
@superchitownhustler well with respect if your reading the likes of case closed which as i say is rife with distortion and omissions you wont see anything that would change your mind ,one has to ask why posner would engage in those practices if the case is open and shut .i couldnt disagree with you more that nothing has come out in 48 years ,why not try expanding your research beyond mcadams /posner what have you got to lose .
fobrien1 5 months ago
@fobrien1 I'm not searching for answers. I don't have any questions. The questions I once had have been answered to my satisfaction. I've considered the other side and rejected it To me it is a simple case and had Oswald lived, he would have been convicted and executed within 18-24 months. It's a shame that Ruby killed Oswald but that doesn't mean Oswald was part of a conspiracy. It just means that Oswald had bad luck. He killed the world's most powerful man and gets no credit.
superchitownhustler 5 months ago
@superchitownhustler i know your not searching for answers because you got them from posner ,what i said was if you have so much faith and belief that mr posner has told the truth what have you got to lose by doing a little research and reading on the contents of mr posners book case closed . mcadams tactics are even worse than posner ,mcadams lost a debate badly and preceeded to post all over the net that the person in question was a paedophile .
fobrien1 5 months ago
@fobrien1 I never said it was Ponser/Mcadams that swayed me. It wasn't. Reviewing the facts for nearly 40 years convinced me that all the evidence points only to Oswald. I tell people to read Posner because he sums it all up so well. If you don't think Posner is credible, what about Bugliosi? He reaches the exact same conclusions that Posner does. Is he a liar and manipulator too? I understand you wanting it to be a conspiracy, and not letting go, but I believe it was only LHO.
superchitownhustler 5 months ago
@superchitownhustler why do you assume "i want it to be a conspiracy" do i also want to believe elvis is alive ? ,what i want is the truth no matter what the truth reveals . i ask again if posner /mcadams and even bugliosi to name only 3 believe they have an open and shut case and oswald is the only guilty party why do they feel the need to distort testimony and omit evidence (some in its entirety) why not just give people the truth and let them decide for themselves ? .
fobrien1 5 months ago
@fobrien1 Posner, McAdams and Bugliosi ALL KNOW FULL WELL that LHO was framed.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
@superchitownhustler the hsca came to pretty much the same conclussions as the wc but that doesnt mean they came to the correct conclussion . the hsca were aware that parklands staff had said jfk had a rear head wound and that some of the autopsy witnesses said likewise but instead of telling the truth they said the autopsy witnesses contradicted the parklands staff (they did not ) and the hsca knew it and so they sealed the evidence of their lies till 2028 .
fobrien1 5 months ago
@superchitownhustler Credit? He didn't do it.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
@slewofdamascus People underestimate the magnitude of JFK's murder. They don't understand that there are elements that have such "intelligence" capabilities that they are able to cover all their bases. Yes, the Z-film was manipulated.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
@TheAmbassador11 They do underestimate it, I agree. That brazen, brutal act set the tone for everything that came after. Freedom and virtuousness (in high American places) all but died that day of the unspoken coup de tat.
slewofdamascus 3 months ago
@slewofdamascus You must be retarted. Please have yourself sterilized
Com6in3d 5 months ago
@Com6in3d how come morons like you can NEVER refute anything with facts, but have to resort to childish name-calling? I don't, personally, care, because your sad pathetic words typed in anonymity don't mean jack to me, but it certainly proves how little, if any, research or education you rely upon to feed your belief-system.
slewofdamascus 5 months ago
@slewofdamascus Why should I bother to educate you with the facts. You conspriacy nuts ignore the facts and focus on the rediculous "factiods" that you all make up. The JFK case is very simple. Read case closed by posner with an open mind and you won't have to be a retarded anymore. Make no mistake, anyone who believes someone other than Oswald shot JFK is a retard.
Com6in3d 5 months ago
@Com6in3d
"anyone who believes someone other than Oswald shot JFK is a retard. "
I don't believe LHO pulled any triggers on Nov 22. Not for JFK. Not for Tippit. I do believe he was in on the conspiracy however. Retard? My IQ is 162. What's yours pal?
LiquorWreckedEmGood 5 months ago
@LiquorWreckedEmGood You have an IQ of 162? lmao...Like a conspiracy in the JFK murder, that number exists only in your dreams.
Com6in3d 5 months ago
@LiquorWreckedEmGood My IQ is not what yours is but I agree with you about LHO. He was framed.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
@Com6in3d jfks limo slowed to the point that it all most came to a full stop there is plenty of testimony that proves that , it was brief perhaps only a second or two untill the driver put his foot down .watch the z film you will see clint hill climb onto the rear of the limo (then the driver puts his foot down ) causing hill to struggle to hang on .
fobrien1 5 months ago
@fobrien1 The Nix and Muchmore films also capture the third shot. Like the Z-film the two films show exactly the same thing. The car does not stop. The driver had taken his eyes off the road briefly to see where the first two shots had come from. The car slowed a bit, but never stopped. Please, there simply was no conspiracy. You can't prove something that never happened. This is a very simple case. Why can't people just let this go? It was Oswald and only Oswald.
Com6in3d 5 months ago
@Com6in3d why dont you guys read comments before replying ,i didnt say the limo stopped nor am i arguing that it did . to deny the limo slowed down is to deny the evidence ,if there is no conspiracy in this very simple case why are you here wasting your time debating it ?.
fobrien1 5 months ago
@fobrien1 I never denied that the limo slowed down. It did, but it wasn't planned, nor was it a part of any "conspriacy". I'm not debating, you are. I'm 100% sure it was Oswald and only Oswald. Peace out yo.
Com6in3d 5 months ago
@Com6in3d i never said the the limo slowing all most to a stop was planned or part of a conspiracy nor do i belive that . if you dont call whats in your comments debating what is it ? . you seem to have great confidence in posner and case closed but it seems you dont want to debate why ? why not post some of posners "factoids" and we can discuss how accurate or inaccurate they are .
fobrien1 5 months ago
@fobrien1 Correct; the case is not simple. They grabbed LHO and made their investigation fit him, much like a foundary worker beating hot metal to fit something that would not fit ordinarily.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
@Com6in3d It was not Oswald but you are entitled to your opinion, of course.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
Chicken bones and Soda Pop bottle.
Well, where are they for DNA.
michaelpilot1000 5 months ago
Comment removed
deweycheethamandhowe 5 months ago
@deweycheethamandhowe Obviously Oswald would not have let himself be seen! HE WAS ABOUT TO KILL JFK, you moron!
Com6in3d 5 months ago
Comment removed
deweycheethamandhowe 5 months ago
always wondered why oswald didn't simply DROP a couple of hand grenades into the limo as it passed beneath his window.
LiquorWreckedEmGood 6 months ago
Comment removed
deweycheethamandhowe 5 months ago
@deweycheethamandhowe
He could have easily dropped two hand grenades into the limo, or close enough to do some real damage. Plus, he could have simply leaned out the window with a .45 and pumped lead as kennedy passed right below him.
THEY waited until the car was in the kill zone of triangulated fire. The car came to a near full stop for the final head shot. This equals conspiracy. No question.
LiquorWreckedEmGood 5 months ago
Comment removed
deweycheethamandhowe 5 months ago
If the shells found are 6.5 and the rifle found uses 7.65 then somebody planted the wrong gun in the room.The photo of Oswald holding a 6.5 Carcano used as evidence in the Warren Commission proves it was a setup and a conspiracy.
ludicman1 7 months ago
@ludicman1 Yes, the wrong rifle was planted. I'll bet the Mauser was not tested for ballistics.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
So many mysteries surrounding this murder. The reason there is so many loose ends is because the accused was killed before he could ever defend himself in a court of law. It would have been a disaster for those responsible if he had been brought to trial. He would have eventually implicated some important and powerful people. That couldn't be chanced. The murder of LHO ended the case very quickly before a trusting American public even had time to think it through.
univibe23 7 months ago 2
@univibe23 Why didn't Ruby talk then? Why was it okay for Ruby to know the "secrets" but not LHO? You conspriacy nuts crack me up. LMFAO.....
Com6in3d 5 months ago
@Com6in3d Well actually Ruby did talk. He implicated (the then) President Johnson.
univibe23 5 months ago
@univibe23 LMFAO....
superchitownhustler 5 months ago
@univibe23 LHO held a lot of secrets. He was set up to take the fall and to be killed. He was caught in the middle.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
Comment removed
deweycheethamandhowe 7 months ago
@deweycheethamandhowe Craig made all of the shit up for money. Any educated assassin buff knows this. He was a total phony and alchol and drug abuser. He was an embarrassment to his family. Ask them , they will tell you.
Com6in3d 5 months ago
After watching this all I have to say is... so what? A couple guys drive off. This is bizarre, unusual? What, is this some assassin? I can imagine the conversation - "after I shoot him, I'll stand on the street , just pick me up there." Makes little sense to me. The Mauser? The rifle was photographed and filmed as it was recovered. It was a Carcano, and the images prove it. "7.65 Mauser" on it? The recovery was filmed. It was a Carcano, period. Unless Carcanos have that on it, he was wrong!
1239jer 8 months ago
@1239jer The rifle had Mauser stamped on it and was identified by Seymour.W. R.Criag was a witness. Why are you discounting the fact that the rifle was there? I understand that Seymour W. said years later that he did not see the rifle...I wonder why? Of course, he changed what he oringinally said.
TheAmbassador11 3 months ago
As a small addition to my lengthy comments below, it's quite possible that the individual that the officer in this video saw getting into the car on the grassy knoll was James Files. Don't bother responding to this comment asking who James Files is. Read my last 10 comments posted hear just a few minutes ago.
mrfester42 8 months ago
Policeman Roger Craig did tell the Truth and paid the Highest price for it. A VERY Brave and Heroic American Patriot who suffered greatly. A full account of his testimony can be found in Mark Lane's 'TWO MEN IN DALLAS'.
docshrinker 8 months ago
wait a tick -- something doesn't add up here!
getbonus 9 months ago
@getbonus True something DOESN"T add up here BUT, there are so many things that don't add up here that they can't be counted.
mrfester42 8 months ago
We will never know exactly what happened!!! JFK was killed for a reason whether it was the government or whether it was a lone gunman who just wanted him dead
member99887 10 months ago
Why hide the rifle and not the shell casing unless it was from another shooter.
No fingerprints were found on the "patsy" weapon until after Oswald's death.
shermnduke 10 months ago
@shermnduke Have you seen pictures of where the rifle was "hidden" it was behind one box but not completely hidden at all. instead of putting in between the boxes it was put behind one box and the front and back of it was visible from the front. WTF kind of hiding is that? Answer: something that would be easy to find but would draw the picture of someone trying to hide it.....
and then of course the shells were not policed....
bestdayz11 10 months ago
Who knows what was going through LHO's head. He may have been thinking too much and hesitated till the president made the turn. Oswald did it. No one else.
Com6in3d 10 months ago