The Mystery of the Constant Flow of JFK Disinformation

Wooden palisade fence at the Dealey Plaza, Dallas, TX. Photo credit: Gorik / Wikimedia (CC BY-SA 2.0)

For more than half a century, the combined American thought establishment (media, publishing, film, academia, and the like) have been cranking out a steady stream of books, articles, films, plays and more that present a completely false picture of what the assassination of John F. Kennedy was about — including who was behind it, and why.

No mention of the tremendous animus massed against John and Robert Kennedy from every quarter, including but hardly limited to Wall Street, the oil industry, the steel industry, the armaments industry, big publishers, the Pentagon, the CIA, the Mob, the John Birchers. They all hated John and Robert Kennedy and wanted them out. They said it to each other, and virtually spat it in the brothers’ faces. Ruthless men, men who found violence a necessary tool of success.

Yet, who killed John F. Kennedy? We are told that it was one angry, unstable man. Forget that the evidence — massively documented in hundreds of books, government papers and more — is that Oswald was nothing like the way he was portrayed, but instead, a focused, deliberate individual with a history that almost certainly involved participation with American intelligence.

One can debate that forever, though the assembled evidence is that it was not Oswald at all who wanted Kennedy dead, not Oswald who shot him. More important, however, is the evidence, everywhere, of a coverup — from hanky-panky in the autopsy room to a shockingly premature termination of any efforts to seriously investigate. Was the coverup itself not proof of more going on? Of course it was.

***

If this were Stalinist Russia or 1984, we could understand who was behind this giant hoax perpetrated against the people. But this is the Land of the Free. How is it that a Big Lie of such magnitude could roll along, unflinchingly, after half a century? Yet, let’s consider the tremendous output of this well-oiled machine, and ask ourselves: How does this work?

Though polls have shown varying majorities of the public (sometimes more than 80 percent) disbelieving the “lone nut” story over the years, and though the House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that Kennedy’s death was the result of a probable conspiracy, the establishment continues to produce and approve, with a few controversial and flawed exceptions, narratives that support the “Oswald done it” school.

It would seem there are more people who believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny than who believe Oswald did it alone. Nevertheless, the propaganda keeps coming. The entire establishment spectrum, from “liberals” to arch-conservatives, has continually backed the Warren Commission’s discredited version. For example, liberal TV host Chris Matthews of MSNBC has repeatedly promoted the Lone Nut angle on his own show, on other shows, Access Hollywood, for example, and in interviews, such as this one with the Los Angeles Times.

Below we begin with only a few choice examples to demonstrate the chicanery involved in selling the Lone Nut theory. The first is about the manipulating and cropping of an interview by CBS to make a witness appear to say something he did not. The second demonstrates a deceptive presentation of Kennedy’s posture in a computer simulation by Emmy-Award winner Dale Myers, to promote the single-bullet theory. The third is about a high tech show that made the gory head shot appear to support the official line.

1

Vintage BS from CBS

The first big special promoting the government-approved narrative was the 1967 CBS four-part documentary series The Warren Report, which had been labeled “independent.” In fact, it was full of tricks.

According to Robert Hennelly and Jerry Policoff, the series was “secretly reviewed and seemingly altered by former Warren Commission member John Jay McCloy, through a ‘Dad says’ memo written by his daughter Ellen McCloy, the administrative assistant of CBS News president Richard Salant; within that same CBS series, the testimony of Orville Nix — an amateur filmmaker who captured the ‘grassy knoll’ angle on tape — was tailored to fit the requirements of CBS’s Warren Commission slant.

Here’s how they pulled off that particular trick, as reported by his granddaughter, Gayle Nix Jackson: With the cameras rolling, Nix had been asked where he thought the shots came from, and he pointed to the grassy knoll area. Someone immediately yelled “Cut! Cut!” Then he was asked — with the camera off — Where did we tell you the shots came from? And — with the cameras rolling again — he indicated the Depository Building, where Oswald allegedly fired from a window. End result: when asked where the shots came from — Nix appears to answer by indicating the Depository Building — although that is not what he said at all.

To this day, most of the TV specials, articles, and books on the assassination are trying to refute the same fatal problems in the official narrative, sometimes using the same old tricks. More recently, with increasing sophistication and technology, they have found new ways to sell the same defective product.

(Note: CBS was founded by William S. Paley who, during World War II, was a colonel in the Psychological Warfare branch of the Office of War Information – so it is not surprising that he was mentioned by Carl Bernstein in his 1977 Rolling Stone article as being very helpful to the CIA. And here’s another interesting connection: as readers of Family of Secrets may know, Prescott Bush, who was on the CBS Board of Directors, was also a partner at Brown Brothers Harriman — an investment bank that played a major role in expanding Paley’s network.)

Dale Myers’s Hard Sell, Soft Science

One of the new techniques for peddling the false narrative is computer animation and, presumably, Dale K. Myers is a master at it. He won an Emmy for his computer animated recreation of the assassination featured in the ABC News 2003 television special, Peter Jennings Reporting: The Kennedy Assassination — Beyond Conspiracy.

Let’s take a look at one of Myers’s tricks to solve a major problem with the single bullet theory — the problem of the vertical path of the bullet: It is supposed to have gone through JFK’s back, out his throat, into Governor Connally’s back, out the front of his chest, through his wrist, and into part of his thigh.

The problem starts with the location of the back wound. Because the entrance in the back is too low compared with the alleged exit in the throat, the bullet would have to travel upward, and would therefore not be able to finish the journey through Connally. Not a problem for Myers:

One Picture Is Worth a Thousand Words

2

Myers turns Kennedy into a hunchback — effectively raising the back wound up, and the throat wound down. But this is how Kennedy actually looked, just seconds before the shooting began:

3

Photo Credit: James Towner

And now, please compare Myers’s distorted image with reality:

4

LEFT: Dale Myers’s portrayal of Kennedy’s posture. RIGHT: reality (a frame from a film taken by James Towner). The nearly horizontal white line going across the photo of Kennedy on the right is the top of the limousine window. By coincidence, it seems to follow the hypothetical path from the wound in Kennedy’s back to the wound in his throat.

In Myers’s grotesque rendition, Kennedy’s head is thrust forward, out from the hump on his back, like a turtle. The back of his jacket stands out like a shelf. Much of his throat area is in shadow, but if you look closely, you will see that the distance from chin to collar is about twice as great as it is in reality.This, in effect, lowers the throat wound. (Note: Years ago, these juxtaposed images and observations were originally posted on the CTKA website by WhoWhatWhy senior editor, Milicent Cranor.)

The above is just one example of many that appeared in the Peter Jennings special. It was a misleading come-on, because if we went “Beyond Conspiracy” ABC News style, we ended up right back where we started, with the government version — thanks to Dale Myers.

Splat Power and the Head Shot

In 2008, the Discovery Channel presented a graphics-heavy special called Inside the Target Car. Typical of the show was the fraudulent way in which they “proved” JFK was hit in the head by only one bullet. As noted by Milicent Cranor, they stacked the deck by using a simulated skull that, despite claims to the contrary, was not nearly as hard as a real one, a “skull” that would easily explode and break apart.

We know this is the case because of the condition of the bullet afterwards: it remained intact. Had it perforated a real head, which is much harder, the bullet would have fragmented. But would a real head show as much damage as that seen in Kennedy’s autopsy photos — if struck by only one jacketed bullet?

Other TV Specials

PBS, National Geographic, the Discovery Channel, the History Channel, the Military Channel, the Smithsonian, Reelz, and of course Fox News — all continue to do their part, right into the present, selling the same old same old. And the website Mediaite.com introduces its list of this year’s JFK specials with the words “According to four government investigations, Lee Harvey Oswald was the sniper who assassinated the president.”

Books, Films, Plays

In 2007, the famous prosecutor, Vincent Bugliosi, produced a six-pound volume — Reclaiming History, for which Bugliosi reportedly received a million dollars. And Dale Myers contributed a large hunk of it. Here, he was just as deceptive with words as he is with images. (Fox brought Bugliosi on Bill O’Reilly’s program, where the host lobbed softballs at him. Note: Critiques of the Bugliosi book can be found here.)

In 2011, the novelist Stephen King came out with his 11/22/63, in which he imagined a man time-traveling and stopping Oswald — who is of course a “troubled loner.” King’s book is now being made into a movie starring James Franco.

As a young reporter, Bill O’Reilly had presented evidence of conspiracy. But by 2012, as a major celebrity being paid vast sums, he had shifted to the Lone Nutter camp, and produced his huge bestseller, Killing Kennedy.

In 2013, for the 50th anniversary of the assassination, the publisher William Morrow brought out End of Days, from the author James Swanson, who, like O’Reilly, also wrote about Lincoln’s assassination. Swanson was rumored to have been paid a million dollars for his Lone Nutter explication. The book was praised by former Newsweek editor Jon Meacham, who in 2015 would come out with his own whitewash, an “authorized biography” of George H.W. Bush, which, among other things, left out Bush’s intriguing connection to the events of 11/22/63. It would be one of many examples of those carrying forward the establishment’s desired narrative by helping each other maintain the official story.

Also in 2013, Tom Hanks came out with the film Parkland, based on the writings of Bugliosi and Myers.

And in 2013, former New York Times reporter Philip Shenon published A Cruel and Shocking Act, which, according to NPR, “explores what keeps these conspiracy theories alive.”

This year, a play opened in Chicago that presents a “conspiracy theory” of a sort that has been a second-favorite with the establishment: the Mob did it. The favorable linked review is from Epoch Times, an anti-China enterprise suspected of being backed by the US government.

***

Some of the counter-factual material promulgated about JFK’s assassination masquerades as non-fiction, while the rest is presented as artful imagining. But even the latter raises the question: Isn’t the outcome of such artful imagining to influence how people think about events? In the end, “nonfiction” that is fiction, and fiction that is a distortion of reality, both contribute to keeping the public in the dark.

To be sure, there may be elements in the government whose job is to “keep people calm” through efforts to perpetuate reassuring fairy tales. But there are others who sense the desires of dominant interests and wittingly or unwittingly kowtow to them. From this kind of accommodation is fashioned professional success and personal riches. It is a deal with the devil, apparently one without adverse consequences — except for those of us who would prefer the truth to comforting lies.

Related frontpage panorama photo credit: Poster for magician Kellar (c1894) Adapted by WhoWhatWhy from Strobridge Lith. Co. / Library of Congress.and Strobridge Lith. Co. / Library of Congress.

Where else do you see journalism of this quality and value?

Please help us do more. Make a tax-deductible contribution now.

Our Comment Policy

Keep it civilized, keep it relevant, keep it clear, keep it short. Please do not post links or promotional material. We reserve the right to edit and to delete comments where necessary.

print

93 responses to “The Mystery of the Constant Flow of JFK Disinformation”

  1. Paul Dell says:

    After so many years of misinformation, lies and ignorance, I’m of the mind that perhaps it is time for us to change our approach. What passes as government has suborned virtually all media and effectively dictated their response to any questions about JFK, RFK & MLK. The public has generally lost interest in truths of a past in which they didn’t live.
    I believe we should redirect our dialogue to emphasize the obvious coup which occurred in 1963 and use the assassinations as a proof.

    • bedleysmutler says:

      Paul: absolutely on the mark.

    • Paul Dell says:

      Thanks! But to whom do we present such proofs? Therein lies the rub! We could assemble all of those in public service who might listen into a small conference room. Virtually everyone else would opt for screaming “Homeland Security”!!! People are convinced we’re insane, confused or both.
      I haven’t even gotten started about 9/11 yet!
      We, the people, of the United States of America…have sunk to depths well below those of 1963…

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      Please don’t try to link the “Truther” movement vis-a-vis the WTC and Pentagon attacks to the JFK assassination and subsequent coverups, they require separate treatment even if there are some recurring, shared patterns simply due to both being cataclysmic events involving the U.S. government.

  2. Richard says:

    It’s all about “Space Aliens”.

    When I was a kid I spent a couple of summers as a musical performer on midway and grandstand shows. During my breaks a couple of the young “carnies”, who had become my friends, would take me around and show me how the various games of “skill” and “chance” were rigged to fleece the local “marks”. In the case of games of chance, the technique most often employed, one way or the other, was distraction.

    During the 50’s and 60’s, when the CIA and Air Force were testing advanced, secret aircraft the distraction used, when these aircraft were seen, was simply “outer space/alien technology versus official denial – no spaceships here!”. A whole industry emerged related to the cover up of Space Alien visitors and their tech. Little, if anything, was raised about the possibilty of the UFOs being highly sophisticated – and outrageously expensive – espionage and weapons systems.

    Personally, I have come to believe that Oswald was indeed a lone sniper. All of the multitude of conspiracy theories (multiple shooters, Mafia hit, etc.) are primarily “Space Alien” type distractions. But distracting from what? That interests me a lot. What is that I’m not supposed to be paying attention to? Perhaps such questions as who/what Oswald actually was, or how he came to find his way to such a perfectly set up killing zone (conveniently located at his workplace)?

    It may be that the possible parallels between the Secret Planes/Space Alien distractions and Kennedy Assassination Conspiracy distractions could be useful in identifying active, behind-the-scenes participants in Oswald’s circumstances and actions. However, it should be noted that during my midway schooling it was pointed out to me that the metal levers used to operate the thrill rides were not fastened in place, and were easily removable. These would be used to deal with any “marks” who decided to become “wise guys” and call out the carny deceptions . . .

    • GAguilar says:

      The defenders of the govt’s crumbling case for two “lone nuts” (Oswald and Jack Ruby) have always cheered when skeptics of J. Edgar Hoover’s conclusion that Oswald acted alone and Ruby wasn’t mobbed up are dismissed as members of tin foil hat brigade. It’s of interest that in the New York Times, former Washington Post journalist Jefferson Morley, one-time BBC correspondent Anthony Summers, Norman Mailer, and recently published author David Talbot (“Devil’s Chessboard”) wrote:

      “The following people to one degree or another suspected that President Kennedy was killed as a result of a conspiracy, and said so either publicly or privately: Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon; Attorney General Robert Kennedy; John Kennedy’s widow, Jackie; his special advisor dealing with Cuba at the United Nations, William Attwood; FBI director J. Edgar Hoover [!]; Senators Richard Russell (a Warren Commission member), and Richard Schweiker and Gary Hart (both of the Senate Intelligence Committee), seven of the eight congressmen on the House Assassinations Committee and its chief counsel, G. Robert Blakey; the Kennedy associates Joe Dolan, Fred Dutton, Richard Goodwin, Pete Hamill, Frank Mankiewicz, Larry O’Brien, Kenneth O’Donnell and Walter Sheridan; the Secret Service agent Roy Kellerman, who rode with the president in the limousine; the presidential physician, Dr. George Burkley; Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago; Frank Sinatra; and ‘60 Minutes’ producer Don Hewitt.” [*] One could assemble a list of thoughtful and well-known skeptics that is several times as long as this one.

    • Jim Hougan says:

      The list of thoughtful and distinguished people who suspect that JFK was the victim of a conspiracy is long, indeed, but including Bobby Kennedy and Walter Sheridan on such a list is misleading. A former NSA investigator and FBI agent, Sheridan was the in-house Kennedy spook who posed as a journalist and went to New Orleans with NBC press credentials. There, he did everything he could to discredit and impede Jim Garrison’s investigation.

      Bobby himself was on the record as “standing by the Warren Commission.” In a letter to Earl Warren, written in August, 1964, he gave nothing less than his imprimatur to the Commission’s Report, declaring that he was aware of “no credible evidence to support the allegations that the assassination of President Kennedy was caused by a domestic or foreign conspiracy.” End of story. Bury Oswald, Ruby and the truth.

      It may be that both men secretly harbored doubts – or even knowledge of – a conspiracy. But if that is so, then what they did, what they said, and who they were would seem to place them among the founders of the cover-up.

      Kennedy apologists imagine that Bobby intended to undertake a new investigation of the assassination – once he was elected president. But there is little or no evidence of that. It seems to have been wishful thinking that was intended to explain away what might otherwise appear to have been expedience, cowardice or culpability. He was, after all, one of the most powerful political figures in the country: at once the Attorney General of the United States and head of a dynastic and beloved family. He had an entire generation on his side, and he betrayed it.

    • GAguilar says:

      Jim,

      I agree wholeheartedly with you about Walter Sheridan.

      But in the wake of David Talbot’s book “Brothers,” it seems pretty clear that Bobby Kennedy was convinced there’d been a conspiracy in his brother’s death. On the 50th anniversary of the assassination, the Boston Globe published an article entitled, “Robert F. Kennedy saw conspiracy in JFK’s assassination”

      And Talbot himself (in the Chicago Sun Times) laid out the case for Bobby being a skeptic.

      Bobby knew that he couldn’t really get to the bottom of his brother’s murder without the powers of the Presidency. How right he was!

    • Jim Hougan says:

      I’m not sure that we disagree. I think it’s likely that Bobby realized his brother was the victim of a conspiracy. But he chose – for whatever reason – not to help with its unraveling. As for Sheridan’s mission to New Orleans, we’re both of the opinion that he went there, under cover of “journalism,” to wreck the Garrison investigation. And yet, he was the Kennedys’ in-house spook and a key player on Bobby’s “Get Hoffa” squad. The question then becomes: why did Bobby want to destroy the Garrison investigation?

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      You would have to show that RFK had definitive control of Sheridan, and certainly it’s possible that after a certain point in 1968, RFK wasn’t only paying attention to the Garrison investigation, prior to being killed by someone other than Sirhan Bishara Sirhan on June 5 in a pantry of the Hotel Ambassador, Los Angeles.

    • cityspeak says:

      Allow me to enlighten you on what RFK really thought about his brother’s assassination:
      Article by Jamie Stengle (AP), 11 Jan 2013 – RFK(Jr) interview with Charlie Rose.

      ‘Rose asked if he believed his father, the U.S. attorney general at the time of his brother’s death, felt “some sense of guilt because he thought there might have been a link between his very aggressive efforts against organized crime.”
      Kennedy replied: “I think that’s true. He talked about that. He publicly supported the Warren Commission report but privately he was dismissive of it.” ‘

      ‘He said his father, later elected U.S. senator in New York, was “fairly convinced” that others were involved.’

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      Sirhan didn’t shoot the bullets that killed RFK, by the way.

    • Be interesting to know just how many investigative journalists have had contact with those ‘metal levers’.

    • bedleysmutler says:

      Richard: Your remarks are largely indistinguishable from the traditional ‘limited hangout’ used so well by intelligence propagandists. You say, “Personally, I have come to believe that Oswald was indeed a lone sniper. All of the multitude of conspiracy theories (multiple shooters, Mafia hit, etc.) are primarily “Space Alien” type distractions.” I would proffer this: in this instance, the delusional fantasy that Oswald was the lone assassin is the “space-alien type distraction.”

    • winston smith says:

      exactly.

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      Years before I went to law school, I had access to one of the libraries (Drake University) with the complete Warren Commission volumes, which must be studied in some depth to see how flimsy the supposed case was and remains against “lone sniper Oswald.” Your belief just floats untethered to any evidence, and your entertaining anecdotes don’t bear on the history of the JFK-Tippit-Oswald triple murders or the subsequent investigations at all, do they?

  3. Russ, curious if you have any thoughts as to why Roger Stone has thrown his hat in the JFK/Bush family ring. Aside from his desire to find a truth, of course.

  4. VoxFox says:

    Liars always lie. The CIA was founded, enhanced and misled by generations of liars.

    • Robert Macfarlane says:

      You seem to use the term “generations of liars” in a derogatory sense. The CIA operates a enormous team of spies around the world. By their very nature, they do not operate openly truthfully. Would you feel better if the spies didn’t hide behind secrecy and intrigue and maybe hung a sign around their neck “look at me! I’m a spy.”

    • VoxFox says:

      It’s the leadership of our Secret Government that are the persistent liars, particularly when they lie to the American people that is the problem.
      You seem comfortable in a world of liars – are you in government (or their largest division: the military)?

    • Robert Macfarlane says:

      I’m not “in” government, I live in the real world. If communication is less than 100% accurate, I’m going to roll with it. Because I’m educated, I feel comfortable filtering incoming communication. I’m confident other people can do the same.

  5. montag2 says:

    Certainly, some of the WC proponents think the commission’s conclusions are the truth (and what reason would the government have to lie to us?), and some others will support the commission’s findings because of the belief that the nation could not survive the truth, that elements of the government plotted against a sitting President, and yet, about four-fifths of the people don’t believe the government’s story, and haven’t for damned near fifty years. Why? Because it’s just not difficult to see that the Warren Commission’s mandate wasn’t to extract the truth from the evidence, it was to promote an approved version of events–something that the notes of the first meeting of the commissioners made very clear–and by using evidence which would have made the job easier for Oswald’s defense attorneys had he survived.

    And that may be why the skepticism persists to this day, something as simple as Oswald being silenced before he could even be arraigned. That raw fact doesn’t sit well with everything else the government–and the naysayers–have said to date. That one irreducible truth may outweigh all the BS thrown at us over the years.

    • oatwillie says:

      A thought to ponder… At the time, this wasn’t a Federal crime(!) and Texas does have a law against murder and Oswald would have come to trial in Dallas (probably). The chain of evidence was broken and Texas law was ignored making most evidence dismissable (autopsy must be made by Texas medical examiner), that the accused passed a paraffin test, ( Oswalds left hand only had gunshot residue, not on his cheek). Even the accusations of his murder of Patrolman Tippet were full of holes ( was he left handed?) as witnesses told of pressure and threats made against them. Shell casings that wouldn’t fit his revolver, etc. Chances are, if Oswald lived and he had had a fair trial, he would have walked!

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      Key eyewitness to the Tippit murder Helen C. Markham was described by Warren Commission attorney Joseph Ball as a “complete crackpot” and yet the Warren Commission summary report relies on her testimony, among much other very weak evidence against Oswald. Attorney Mark Lane was asked by Oswald’s mother to defend her son’s interests in the process, but that never happened.

    • cedarsagecatrina says:

      Rather like the 9/11 Commission in that respect …..

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      Also, books like Rush to Judgment by Mark Lane began exposing the Warren Commission fables and distortions as early as 1966. Accessories after the Fact by Sylvia Meagher was another book that showed how flimsy, and even phony, the “evidence” was against Oswald as the “Krazy Kid” who killed JFK and was silenced two days later by “nightclub owner” Jack Ruby while in police custody.

  6. artemis6 says:

    I noticed JFK and the unspeakable is not mentioned…. what do you think of that book…..?

    • russbaker says:

      Excellent book, one of the best of the books that carefully document the tremendous forces arrayed against Kennedy at the time of his death. This article is about the disinformation campaign, however.

    • artemis6 says:

      I agree, and I am greatful for this article explaining the process of the disinformation that has followed the deed itself.

    • Robert_Morrow says:

      Huge flaw with JFK and the Unspeakable. Does not understand the critical role of Lyndon Johnson in the JFK assassination.

  7. Gil G says:

    Still trying to trot out tired old conspiracy theories. The JFK conspiracy is like the Moon landing hoax – if it were true the Soviet Union would have held it up for the world to see.

    “Look at those capitalist pigs they can’t win the space race so they fake it in a studio!”

    “Look at these capitalist pigs they shoot their own leaders and blame it on some guy when they want to change their regime!”

    • Green Crow says:

      And I suppose you believe that 47 story steel structured buildings collapse into their own footprint in 6.5 seconds!

    • Gil G says:

      Yes, yes I do. Gravity’s a bitch.

    • william beeby says:

      Post-Cuban missile crisis it is perfectly possible they made a secret deal with the Soviets to keep quiet . When Kennedy was shot they , the Soviets , knew it was being pinned on them in some quarters so just wanted to weeknight out of it, which has proved to be correct: I mean if they didn’t do why should they know who did ? They had no idea the same as all of us now regarding 9/ 11 .

    • slobotnvich says:

      Well spake. Conspiracy theorists are invariably long on imagination but woefully lacking in technical knowledge – of anything. Not surprisingly, many of them are also passionate UFO believers. I’m a legitimate ballistics expert and have hunted on several continents, been through two tours in Vietnam and been wounded myself a couple of times. The shot that Oswald made was dead-easy at a target moving directly away (relative motion – none), he was firing from a rest, was a trained Marine marksman at a time when the Marines still really taught their people how to shoot, and at ranges up to 500 yards, had a rifle equipped with a 4X scope, and was shooting from a rest. It would have been a miracle had Oswald missed Kennedy’s head. I could have made that shot ten times out of ten with an old Winchester Model 94 .30-30 with iron sights.

    • Conrad says:

      Most people get their history education from TV anchor people. Big mistake. The JFK assassination was a coup. The result is what you have today.

    • Gil G says:

      Because coup d’état is not a crime in the U.S., right?

    • cedarsagecatrina says:

      Didn’t seem to be in 2000 .

    • Trouble is, the head shot came from the front. I’d think you would be wanting to get at the bottom of this farce. But I guess you either love war and guns and killing, or you’re a troll. Either way you need help. JFK was murdered by the powers that were in it for the money not for peace. Nobody makes money when there’s peace in the world. Crazy eh?

    • 25YearNavyVeteran says:

      SLOBOTNVICH -You’re long on wind, short on research…The best sniper in the world couldn’t make the shot. Your drivel is null and void. Carlos Hathcock: “Let me tell you what we did at Quantico. We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don’t know how many times we tried it, but we couldn’t duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did.
      Now if I couldn’t do it, how could a non-qual on the range do it?”

    • oatwillie says:

      Slobotnvich is wrong about this. Was he even a sniper? One wonders…Nix, whose filming of the shot was stolen by the FBI or other criminals repeatedly tried to tell investigators that the shot came from the grassy knoll area, but was never believed. There is a photo of another bullet being dug out of the grass on the side of the street. An FBI agent put it in his pocket and walked away. It was never accounted for. Another bullet strike was observed on the curbside. This was discounted. Another bullet strike was observed on the rim of the windshield of the limo and another through the glass of the same (a photo exists of this). Lucky Lyndon , the day after on the 23rd, had the limo driven to Ford (?) and repainted black and the interior stripped. It is unknown if any photos exist of its original condition. Evidence trampering on the grand scale.

    • cityspeak says:

      One of my favorite “evidence tampering stories of the JFK assassination” was the dry cleaning of Governor John Connally’s suit. You can not hear this whopper without realizing the deep manipulations involved in covering any and all traces of one of the greatest crimes committed against American democracy.

    • cedarsagecatrina says:

      “The Devil’s Chessboard : Allen Dulles , the CIA and the Shadow Government” by David Talbot – essential reading for a global understanding of this event (and many others) . I think it will become a classic and a real game-changer .

    • Mike Crane says:

      There were also reports that a bullet hit the Stemmons freeway sign & that an additional bullet hole was found in the floor pan of the limo when it was stripped.

    • Robert Macfarlane says:

      Your claim that Oswald was a “trained Marine marksman” is much too generous in describing LHO’s true skills. It took Lee several attempts to pass the Marksmanship test, and when he did pass, it was by only 1 point. Keep in mind that the scope on the rifle was not adjusted to fit the rifle. Had the shooter actually used the scope, he would have been guaranteed a miss.

    • oatwillie says:

      Then you, above all people should know that when firing on a downward trajectory , the bullet rises, and unless compensated for will miss the target. The distances involved in the final shot from the 6th floor window (with a dicey unzeroed in scope) are formidable. I discussed this with the author of “A Sniper Looks at Daily Plaza”. He said he couldn’t guarantee any accuracy with even top equipment for this shot and I, a deer hunter have had this demonstrated to my disgust just once. Shoot at the heart and have the bullet fly right
      over the deer. I abandoned my 30-30 and now use a .243 and shoot from the ground which gives a flatter trajectory.

      Actually, it would have been the shot of the century if Oswald had hit the target!

    • oatwillie says:

      As an addendum, read what a Parkland Hospital doctor has to say about the wounds he saw. He was very experienced in treating gunshot wounds and has finally spoken about he saw in his book, “Conspiracy of Silence”. Head shot and throat entrance wound. In the autopsy, the track of the throat wound was not tracked.

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      That’s Dr. Charles Crenshaw, and it’s a very revealing book.

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      Yes, the beat-up condition of the supposed assassination rifle has been left out of the “lone-nut-killed-two-days-later-while-in-police-custody-by-another-lone-nut” narratives, among a host of other problematic evidence.

    • oller says:

      Sir, you are a typical apologist that is set up to serve as soon as some respected investigator like Peter Dale Scott is active. You are just confirming his thesis: it seem still to be important to suppress the truth in this case. But no wonder: there is a blood line all the way from Dealy Plaza 1963 to Washington DC 2015.
      As being a lawyer; my foremost interest has always been the evidence in the case. The most telling is the medical evidence. As pointed out above the Single Bullet Theory is an anomaly. The bullet that hit Kennedy in the back would have to be travelling upwards or at least horizontal to be able to exit in the throat. Funny enough; by making his obvious falsifications; Dale Myers, with the help of Peter Jenning´s soothing voice, contributes to the obvious cover-up. This animation was the one that opened my eyes for the false SBT. Those very pictures where Kennedy becomes a hunchback, a turtle and a giraffe at the same time are just too much. Interestingly enough; when you turn over to Dale Myers own home page you see something different. His own pictures show that the points of entry and of exit are level !
      Concerning the head shot: we have at least two dozens of professionals who in their line of duty, in different capacities, independently from one another; have testified – several of them to the Warren Commission – that there was a large gaping wound in the back of Kennedy´s head. The first person who saw it was Clint Hill and the last ones the embalmers who put Kennedy back into the coffin after the autopsy. Thereby it is proved that at least one shot came from the front.

    • oatwillie says:

      In Texas , the chain of evidence must not be broken. The fact that custody of Kennedy’s body was taken from the Texas medical examiner and the Texas Justice of the Peace for Dallas County at gunpoint, broke the chain of evidence. A federal crime had not been committed but a Texas crime of murder had, and Texas law demanded the autopsy be made in the State of Texas and probably in Dallas County. The accused passed a paraffin test in as much as no gunpowder was found on his face, only on his left hand. The evidence for Tippit’s murder is problematical also, in as much as shell casings were wrong for the accused’s pistol and the casings were not initialed showing chain of custody. Nobody can put that rifle in the accused’s hands and there were no fingerprints found on the rifle. Oswald probably would have walked, had he come to trial.

    • oatwillie says:

      Another piece of evidence never mentioned was that funeral home technician who embalmed Kennedy’s body found very small pieces of glass in his face. There was a photo not seen by Warren Commission showing bullet hole in the Linclon limo’s windshield.

    • Susan Wilde says:

      Never read that, oatwillie, about glass in JFK’s face, nor there being such a photo. Can you, please, help with a reference(s)?

    • oatwillie says:

      What’s better, is take a look at The Men Who Killed Kennedy series 7. The windshield evidence is covered well.
      The History Channel censored it and didn’t broadcast no. 7 in that series.

    • Mike Crane says:

      It came from embalmer Thomas Robinson who in a report called it shrapnel.When they were embalming the fluid came out of his face,so he plugged the small holes with wax.

    • oatwillie says:

      For discussion of windshield evidence, see ‘The men who killed Kennedy’, no. 7 in series. The history channel omitted this when showing the series.

    • james warren says:

      “I’m afraid you overlooked one item, Mr. Bond….”

      There are many professional snipers who disagree with you.

    • aporter0509 says:

      You should really study all of the evidence and eye witness testimony before using such a simplistic argument. Saying the shot could be done ignores all of the medical, ballistic, sonal, and video evidence as well as the deliberate coverup of the event.

    • David Horace says:

      So, because someone (or you) could’ve done something, they did.

    • So, what are you saying? Oswald lone shooter? If so you don’t know guns, especially this one. Read and learn:://

      Not only was the Warren Commission unable to demonstrate that Oswald had committed the crime alone, but two important pieces of evidence showed that he had almost certainly not played any part in the shooting:

      the poor physical condition of the rifle

      and the absence of gunpowder residues on Oswald’s cheeks.

      The Condition of the Sixth–Floor Rifle

      The experts from the US Army and the FBI who had tested the rifle discovered that it was actually not usable in its original state:

      Shims had to be applied to the telescopic sight before the rifle could be aimed.1

      Even after the telescopic sight had been repaired, it proved unreliable and inaccurate.2

      The condition of both the bolt and the trigger pull meant that the rifle could not be aimed accurately.3

      The rifle discovered on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository could not have caused any of the wounds to Kennedy, Connally or Tague, except by accident.

      Oswald’s Paraffin Test

      A few hours after the assassination, Oswald underwent a test that was routinely carried out on those suspected of having fired a gun. Liquid paraffin wax was spread on his hands and his right cheek. When hardened, the paraffin wax would extract from deep in the pores of his skin any fine residues given off by the firing of a gun, even if he had washed his skin in the meantime.

      Barium and antimony, which are found in gunpowder residues, are also found in several common substances such as printing ink, which Oswald certainly had handled on the morning of the assassination. The presence of these substances is not sufficient evidence of having fired a gun, but their absence is sufficient evidence of having not fired a gun.

      In other words:

      Firing a gun would deposit barium and antimony on parts of the skin close to the gun.

      If barium and antimony were found on Oswald’s skin, they may have been deposited by the firing of a gun. But they may instead have been deposited by other means: for example, the handling of books.

      If barium and antimony were not found on Oswald’s skin, he almost certainly did not fire a gun.

      Three Tests Proved Oswald’s Innocence

      Test 1: Spectrographic Analysis

      Oswald’s paraffin casts were subjected to two analyses. Spectrographic analysis, the method normally used by the police, showed evidence of barium and antimony on Oswald’s hands, but not on his cheek.4

      Test 2: Neutron Activation Analysis on Oswald

      Spectrographic analysis was considered sufficiently reliable for criminal investigations, but in this case a more incisive test was also used. Neutron activation analysis, which is capable of identifying the presence of substances in quantities much too small to be captured by spectrographic analysis, also showed no incriminating quantities of residues on Oswald’s cheek.5The result was reported in an internal Warren Commission memo: “At best, the analysis shows that Oswald may have fired a pistol, although this is by no means certain. … There is no basis for concluding that he also fired a rifle.”6

      Test 3: Controlled Neutron Activation Analysis

      In order to check the validity of the neutron activation analysis of Oswald’s paraffin casts, a controlled test was made. Seven marksmen fired a rifle of the same type as that found on the sixth floor. The standard paraffin test was administered, and the paraffin casts were subjected to neutron activation analysis. All seven subjects showed substantial amounts of barium and antimony on their hands and, more importantly, on their cheeks.7

      The absence of significant quantities of residues on Oswald’s cheek meant that he almost certainly had not fired a rifle that day.

      Oswald’s Involvement in the Assassination

      Although Lee Oswald was strongly associated with the rifle and bullet shells that were discovered on the sixth floor of theTSBD, it is extremely unlikely that he fired that rifle on the day of the assassination. The only realistic conclusion is that the evidence was planted, and that he had been framed.

    • Susan Wilde says:

      Good summation William, but one thing (in case you have not read nor heard it). Almost 10 years ago the F.B.I. officially, publicly invalidated the future use of Neutron Activation Analysis with regards to the chemical composition of bullet lead.

    • cedarsagecatrina says:

      “Conspiracy theory” was a term coined by the CIA to discredit critics of the Warren Commission Report , and it has been used as a thought-stopper ever since .

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      You need to first place Oswald on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting, instead of where he actually was according to the most credible evidence and timeline. Good luck!

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      Also: since the throat wound was an entrance wound, how was JFK shot from the back in the front? And since Oswald can’t even be tied to the alleged assassination weapon or placed on the sixth floor when the shots were fired, what’s the point of blathering on about his supposed marksmanship?

    • Robert_Morrow says:

      LYNDON JOHNSON HAD A MURDEROUS ATTITUDE TOWARDS ROBERT KENNEDY – “I’ll cut his throat if it’s the last thing I do.”

      Robert Caro describes the LBJ-RFK relationship post
      1960 Democratic convention, where RFK had moved heaven and earth attempting to keep LBJ off the 1960 Democratic ticket. Caro:

      John Connally, who during long days of conversation with this author was willing to answer almost any question put to him, no matter how delicate the topic, wouldn’t answer when asked what Johnson said about Robert Kennedy. When the author pressed him, he
      finally said flatly: “I am not going to tell you what he said about
      him.” During the months after the convention, when Johnson was closeted alone back in Texas with an old ally he would sometimes be asked about Robert Kennedy. He would reply with a gesture. Raising
      his big right hand, he would draw the side of it across the neck in a slowing, slitting movement. Sometimes that gesture would be his only reply; sometimes, as during a meeting with Ed Clark in Austin, he would say, as his hand moved across his neck, “I’ll cut his throat if it’s the last thing I do.” [Robert Caro, “The Passage of Power,” p. 140]

  8. 1941-Pearl Harbor,

    1950-N Korea,

    1964Gulf of Tonkin, Viet Nam,

    1979 – Cold War (CIA proxy war in Afghanistan)

    1980 – Cold War (CIA proxy war in Afghanistan)

    1981 – Cold War (CIA proxy war in Afghanistan and Nicaragua), First Gulf of Sidra Incident

    1982 – Cold War (CIA proxy war in Afghanistan and Nicaragua), Conflict in Lebanon

    1983 – Cold War (Invasion of Grenada, CIA proxy war in Afghanistan and Nicaragua), Conflict in Lebanon

    1984 – Cold War (CIA proxy war in Afghanistan and Nicaragua), Conflict in Persian Gulf

    1985 – Cold War (CIA proxy war in Afghanistan and Nicaragua)

    1986 – Cold War (CIA proxy war in Afghanistan and Nicaragua)

    1987 – Conflict in Persian Gulf

    1988 – Conflict in Persian Gulf, U.S. occupation of Panama

    1989 – Second Gulf of Sidra Incident, U.S. occupation of Panama, Conflict in Philippines

    1990 – First Gulf War, U.S. occupation of Panama

    1991 – First Gulf War

    1992 – Conflict in Iraq

    1993 – Conflict in Iraq

    1994 – Conflict in Iraq, U.S. invades Haiti

    1995 – Conflict in Iraq, U.S. invades Haiti, NATO bombing of Bosnia and Herzegovina

    1996 – Conflict in Iraq

    1997 – No major war

    1998 – Bombing of Iraq, Missile strikes against Afghanistan and Sudan

    1999 – Kosovo War

    2000 – No major war

    2001– 9/11

    2001 – War on Terror in Afghanistan

    2002 – War on Terror in Afghanistan and Yemen

    2003 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, and Iraq

    2004 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

    2005 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

    2006 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

    2007 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen

    2008 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

    2009 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

    2010 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, and Yemen

    2011 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Somalia, and Yemen; Conflict in Libya (Libyan Civil War)

    In most of these wars, the U.S. was on the offense. Danios admits that some of the wars were defensive. However, Danios also leaves out covert CIA operations and other acts which could be considered war.

    Let’s update what’s happened since 2011:

    2012 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria and Yemen

    2013 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria and Yemen

    2014 – War on Terror in Afghanistan, Iraq, Somalia, Syria and Yemen; Civil War in Ukraine

    2015 – War on Terror in Somalia, Somalia, Syria and Yemen; Civil War in Ukraine

    So we can add 4 more years of war. That means that for 222 out of 239 years – or 93% of the time – America has been at war. (We can quibble with the exact numbers, but the high percentage of time that America has been at war is clear and unmistakable.)

    Indeed, most of the military operations launched since World War II have been launched by the U.S.

    And American military spending dwarfs the rest of the world put together.

    No wonder polls show that the world believes America is the number 1 threat to peace.

    I wonder how many of these ‘actions’ were started because of a ‘conspiracy’?

    Let’s be honest! America Has Been At War 93% of the Time – 222 Out of 239 Years – Since 1776

    It’s big business and if you try and say anything to stop it, you die, or disappear, or your labeled as a conspiracy nut. America is the #-1 terrorist country in the world. I think it’s time to change this terrible fact and start looking at peace as the answer for all mankind. Think about it. Wouldn’t your grandchildren be a lot happier?

    • artemis6 says:

      They do not let the citizens of the US vote on foreign policy…. we would have voted no many a time.

    • saperetic says:

      It is the globalists who have been at war, and not just 93% of the time. It’s been 100% of the time. America has been a vassal of the globalists since 1783. You don’t sign a treaty of any kind if you demand and intend to establish absolute sovereignty only to have your capitol burned down 30 years later for not obeying the treaty, regardless of what the globalists’ basic skills/common core textbooks say. America is not a sovereign nation. It is not of the people. It is not by the people. It is not for the people. “It” doesn’t exist. America is a farce run as a corporation. The only thing that exists is plutocratic hegemony. We are all to blame for accepting it if we have realized it and do nothing about it to inform others.

  9. Fred762 says:

    One of the most telling things was an interview given years ago by (retired)ER doc from Parkland..who said:
    A.” we did a tracheotomy through the entrance wound in his neck and ..
    B. he had another entrance wound in his LEFT temple area..and the right side of the back of his head was ..missing..”

    Docs in ERs know entrance wounds vs exit wounds btw. IMHO if you watch a slomo of the Zapruder film you can see the neck shot wh JFK then grabs at with both hands, then a puff of smoke from the front, and see his head blown backwards.

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      Yes — and they were very familiar with gunshot victims, it isn’t as if this was their first rodeo.

  10. RobertM says:

    “The Mystery of the Constant Flow of JFK Disinformation”

    A.K.A.: BS!

    • james warren says:

      Citizens in a new global culture have no use for single-phrase, boorish simplistic replies to facts, evidence and data from an actual historical event.

    • RobertM says:

      Exactly! It’s simplistic… LBJ had him killed, PERIOD!

    • james warren says:

      You may very well be right.

      I think sometimes those of us who are still wrestling with November, 1963 are like kids lying on their backs looking at the clouds in the sky and making our own animal shapes out of what we see. Likewise, I see the assassination clues as some sort of Byzantine puzzle that reveal a lot of truthful scenarios–sort of like “Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon” deal.

      Everyone looks at the assassination and sees something both different and plausible or truthful. There are so many connections between different people and events that we can use many different keys to open the lock.

    • Susan Wilde says:

      BINGO !

      Most persons are aware that JFK was seriously considering dropping LBJ from his 1964 presidential ticket, AND, that all 4 federal, on-going, criminal investigations that had been focused or co-focused on LBJ prior to Dallas, completely vanished sooner or later after JFK was eliminated in the LBJ-Connally Texas. (did you know that Connally was the manager of LBJ’s political campaigns?)

  11. Gil G says:

    Oh so the comments section is reserved for conspiracy theorists I see.

  12. Arjan Hut says:

    Good article.

    Either the magic bullet did what the Warren Commission claimed it did (the single bullet theory) and then moved out of governor Connelly’s thigh, ending up nearly pristine and completely clean on an unrelated stretcher … or there was more than one shooter.

    It is that simple.

    • Susan Wilde says:

      A few years ago, it came out publicly in a radio interview that Sam Kinney, the Secret Service driver of the followup car 15′ behind JFK, admitted to his best friend + next door neighbor that while Kinney was cleaning out the limousine at Parkland Hospital (a.k.a. destroying forensic evidence? ), he found the “magic” bullet, and it was Kinney who transferred it into the hospital where it was soon found (as you say) on a stretcher gurney that was not related to either JFK or Connally.

  13. Robert Macfarlane says:

    Re: “Splat Power and the Head Shot”. Your claim is false concerning the bullet used in the “head shot” of the President. The bullet did not remain intact. It broke into a thousand pieces because it was a “fragmenting” bullet. This is why JFK’s brain was hidden from further investigation. The brain matter contained leftover metal particles that would show up in an x-ray. Without a bullet, the Warren Commish could not determine what direction the shot came from.

    • oatwillie says:

      From a military bullet, no less!

    • Susan Wilde says:

      Robert, there are X-Ray’s available online (purportedly of JFK post-assassination), that do show small metal bullet particles in a path through that X-Ray’d head.

  14. Qanni Katifa says:

    There are growing numbers of earthlings that prefer truth to comforting lies! Just bring it on and hope the censors don’t delete it.

  15. Elderly R. Staff says:

    “apparently one without adverse consequences…” In a sense isn’t this sort of no cause and effect view of the world the very reason the lone nut thing keeps going? If you had said the U. S. is double-doomed because of the officials not crucifying proponents of lonenut upside down on the White House lawn then I guarantee the lonenut would end instantly. Double doom still comes because of the first assertion of lonenut. Cause and effect is inexorable. Given the arrival in Syria (uninvited) of Chemical Weapons troopers from Kentucky I’d say it won’t be long delayed. Have a nice day.

  16. saperetic says:

    What caused a still conscious JFK to lunge or seize up suddenly is that JFK reacts to being shot in the back of the head, not the throat!

    • Susan Wilde says:

      Ahhhhhhh, “sap”, after one Zapruder frame, about 2″ forward movement of his head between Zapruder frames 312 and 313, his head and his entire upper torso, arms and hands are superfast propelled left and back. Transfer of momentum: In the head shot instance, transfer of momentum by a 2000 foot-per-second, or faster, bullet.

    • saperetic says:

      I was referring to frames 227-231.

  17. Susan Wilde says:

    Ms. Cranor is 100% incorrect on her (transparently-biased) point against Fox News when she incorrectly stated that it is, as a whole, part of the lame-stream media that tries to promote the “lone nut” theory. In the recent 10 years there have been, at least, two Fox News- produced documentaries that have thoroughly questioned and debunked key segments of the “lone nut” theories. (Yes, Bill O’Reilly has flip-flopped since his pre-Fox News days, and a few years ago he wrote another best-selling book that 99% promoted the “lone nut” theory. However, he is just a small part of the Fox News that Cranor, incorrectly, lumped-together with the other lame-stream media that still try to get you and I to swallow the “lone nut” theories.)

  18. Susan Wilde says:

    Additionally, Ms. Cranor, hypocritically, liberally attempted to pull a shanigan of her own in her article when she shows the Dale Myers CAD-cartoon of JFK next to the 11-22-63 Jim Towner photo of JFK captured seconds before the shots. As evidenced by the limousine’s partially rolled-up chromed horizontal window frame (that was next to Nellie Connally) seen in the Jim Towner photo crop that Ms. Cranor supplied, in the Towner-Cranor version the partially rolled-up window’s chromed horizontal frame is tilted higher in front of JFK in the Towner-Cranor-supplied version, but, IN REALITY AND IN THE REAL JIM TOWNER PHOTO, that horizontal window frame is nearly perfectly horizontally flat and parallel to the street.

  19. Susan Wilde says:

    There are 2 key things (among the many) that prove there was a conspiracy:

    #1, JFK first reacts to his first being hit at Zapruder frame 203 to 206 (just before he is hidden for 1-second by the roadway sign), when he snapped his head from facing hard/right to left/forward a superfast 85 degrees in less than one-sixth of a second and his waving hand superfast flipped-over almost 180 degrees, AT AN ELM STREET POINT MEASURED BY THE WARREN COMMISSION (itself) WHEN A LARGE TREE AND ITS BRANCHES AND LEAVES STILL HID JFK FROM THE TARGETING VIEW OF anyone IN THE, SUPPOSED, “lone nut” snipers lair.

    #2, the current Warren Commission-apologists shooting scenario claims a shot at/shortly after Zapruder frames 166 (when the large tree started to hide JFK they think the “lone nut” fired INTO the tree he knew was there!), then, the “magic bullet” was fired and hit at Zapruder frames 223/224 (even though JFK first reacts superfast at Z-203-206, AND, even though the Parkland Hospital employee who found the “magic” bullet testified that he found it on a stretcher that was NOT JFK’s nor Connally’s!), then a “lone nut”, 265′, moving away rightward head shot that hit at Z-312/313. UNFORTUNATELY for the commission-apologists the Warren Commission admitted in its report that over 83% (“five to one”, as Warren Commission commissioner & the fired-by-JFK former-CIA Director Allen Dulles documented for the record) of the Dealey Plaza witnesses (it choose to hear from) who testified they could hear 3 or MORE shots stated that the last 2 shots they could hear were bunched much CLOSER together than the first 2 shots they could hear. In the commission-apologists, current, en vogue, revised-again theory their 166-223-313 shots sequence has the last 2 shots 158% FURTHER APART than what the real witnesses told the commission.

    There is much more, but that is a really good start.

  20. Unfortunately if you tell the truth in America, you’re either a ‘nutter’, ‘tin foil hat wearer’, ‘conspiracy nut’, ‘agent against the Country’, ‘whistle blower’, etc. It’s absurd to believe the ‘official account’ of anything these days, but the JFK and RFK murders were just that; murders! Release the files that are due out in 2017, which in itself is totally ridiculous. Same with the surveillance cameras at the Pentagon on 9/11. America is like looking at an organized crime film where the bad guy’s do whatever they want, and never have a problem with the “Justice System’. Corruption personified! It’s bad enough too go to a foreign country and kill their ‘President’, but to do the same thing inside your own country and get away with it for 52 some years is beyond barbaric. But that’s just the way it is in America!

  21. vmf216 says:

    That response was a neurologic reaction of the bullet passing near his spinal column.
    The third shot struck him from behind in the head shown in Z-313.

    • saperetic says:

      Head to YouTube and search for “JFK shot three times in the head” and start at 0:55 into the video. The narrator shows VISUAL EVIDENCE from the Zapruder film that JFK was hit in the back of the head at frames 228-229. You can SEE blood splatter as a result of the bullet impact.

      (DISCLAIMER: I do not espouse the other claims in this video, as they are highly dubious. But the first shot to the back of JFK’s head at frames 228-229 is clear as day.)

      But please ignore the real evidence debunking JFK’s reaction being a result of a neurologic reaction; what medical research leads you to that conclusion?

    • vmf216 says:

      Totally contrary to everything available, films, medical testimonies, autopsy, etc., etc. Speculate all you want, but it’s just that, speculation.
      Tell a story often enough doesn’t make it truth.
      From Dr. Robert Artwohl:

      2. JFK’s reaction to the neck wound was, for all intents and
      purposes, instantaneous to the hit at Z-223/224. As the bullet passed
      through his neck, the pressure cavity caused an immediate and wide
      spread stimulation of all the nerves in the immediate vicinity, that
      is of the brachial plexus, the large groups of nerves that emerge from
      C5 – T1. These are the nerves that supply motor function to the arms.
      Neural impulses of large nerves travel quite rapidly, up to 130
      meters per second. The nerves supplying motor function to shoulder
      and arm muscles carrying neural impulses at around 80 meters (or 3,120
      inches) per second. It would take an impulse originating in the right brachial plexus
      about 0.003 to 0.004 seconds (about 5% of the time span of one Z
      frame) to reach the right biceps muscle about 8 -10 inches away. The
      average muscle can reach a full state of contraction against no load
      as fast as 1/20th of a second, or a little faster than one Z frame.
      Thus, despite the arguments of many pseudo-experts (like McCarthy),
      not only could JFK have reacted within one or two Z frames of being
      shot, he would be EXPECTED to react within one frame, based on the
      anatomy and ballistics of his injury.
      When one watches JFK react, it is apparent that the right side
      reacts just before before the left side. This is further proof that
      the bullet passed through the right side of his neck, since the right
      sided structures were stimulated first.
      It should be immediately apparent that the neurophysiology exhibited
      by JFK in the Z-film supports, the upper location of the back wound.
      And several others…..

    • vmf216 says:

      You said:
      ” I’ve referred DIRECTLY to the visual evidence and disavowed Blevins’ own rabbit hole speculations deriving from that evidence.”.
      If that’s not calling Blevins’ analysis bogus, I don’t know what is.
      But, you use Blevins’ conclusion that a bullet hit JFK at Z-227-228.
      Very confusing.

      Your neurobiology is excellent. I was in the Neurobiology Dept. at Stanford for 35 years in basic research studying how nerves communicate with each other, muscles, etc. It does indeed take a very short time for a nerve impulse to reach nearby muscles when traumatically stimulated, but keep in mind that between Z-223-224 and Z-227-228 represents only about 0.27 seconds.
      It does take longer for muscles to move in reaction to nerve stimulus, so from the beginning of reacting (say Z-223), to full reaction (say Z-228) in about 1/4 second is not unreasonable (mass, momentum, etc).
      Just to ask, how long does it take for the leg to fully respond/extend reacting to a patellar reflex? Still, I see no visual evidence of a head shot in Z-227-228 and your time study is not convincing that the back/neck shot isn’t what JFK is reacting to, differentiating from your proposed head shot.
      And, autopsy results do not back up a claim of any additional shots to the head.

      JFK seems to be responding to trauma as early as Z-225 that continues for several seconds. This seems to be a reasonable reaction.
      If you suggest that there is any “blood splatter” in Z-228 or after, we see some yellow-orange background just behind the limousine, even more evident behind JFK’s head and the motorcycle tire. Whether this coloration is actual grass or film artifact is difficult to say. More time or research might reveal the color’s origin.

    • saperetic says:

      ” I’ve referred DIRECTLY to the visual evidence and disavowed Blevins’ own rabbit hole speculations deriving from that evidence.”.
      If that’s not calling Blevins’ analysis bogus, I don’t know what is.
      But, you use Blevins’ conclusion that a bullet hit JFK at Z-227-228.
      Very confusing.”

      It’s only confusing if you are new to trying to be a success at conflating, which you have no need to do here to make your point but have no other foundation to make your claims, so you go the fallacious route. You did notice where Blevins went from the factual (what you could actually see) to the speculative (what he believes happened in other sequences)? I disagree with his speculation. There’s nothing out of line or confusing about that unless you are approaching every little thing I say with a dishonest motive to conflate due to the lack of your own legitimate provenance of a neurological reaction

      If you really are in the field, you’d know THAT WASN’T AN AUTOPSY. Did you participate in the examination of JFK’s wounds? It seems like you are the only one here speculating.

    • vmf216 says:

      Basic research studying neuromuscular transmission using electron tomography at a resolution of 2-3nm has nothing to do with autopsies, even on the frogs or mice we used.
      The autopsy done on JFK was definitely an autopsy. Not the most ideal –
      Walter Reed facilities were probably a better choice, but that choice was given to Ms. Kennedy and her wishes were honored.

      I’m still looking for your physical evidence of a head shot in Z-228.
      Can you enlighten?

    • saperetic says:

      Good lord are you visually deaf? Look at the freaking film sequence. Can you share your “physical evidence” other than your self-proclaimed “Stanford-neurobiology dept”-based speculative quackery?

    • vmf216 says:

      I have looked extensively at the film sequence. I see nothing to which you refer.
      My neurobiology knowledge compliment to you had nothing to do with the discussion, only that I have knowledge of the nerve velocities and reactions to which you referred. However, your neurobiology acumen is not evidence of a head shot at Z-228.
      Still waiting.

    • saperetic says:

      “still waiting”

      My “neurobiology acumen” was never part of any explanation I made FOR JFK’s head shot reaction at Z228-229 – the visual evidence of blood spatter was. If you claim to not be able to see it and/or see that as evidence, that is your prerogative to claim said astigmatism.

    • vmf216 says:

      For the head shot you insist on at Z-228, etc., where did the bullet go?

    • saperetic says:

      Clearly it went into his head. For someone who was claiming I was “speculating” about what I could undoubtedly see, do you really want to speculate on where the bullet “went” after it entered his head that can not be seen? Not all bullets exit. I don’t know what happened to the bullet after Z313 or thereafter.

    • vmf216 says:

      If the bullet you “saw” hit JFK in Z-228 or so, then the bullet must have gone somewhere afterward. It can’t just disappear–THAT would be a “magic bullet”, indeed.
      The autopsy performed a full body x-ray of JFK because they couldn’t find the bullet that hit him in the back. They found no bullet. After speaking to Parkland Hospital doctors, they learned the tracheotomy insertion obliterated most of the exit wound in the throat.
      Either the Z-228 “bullet” exited or stayed in JFK’s body. Neither happened. That’s because there was NO bullet. You are seeing something in Z-228+ that isn’t a bullet strike, cavitation, blood spray, or anything relating to that.
      You don’t know what happened to the Z-313 bullet? Quite amazing, since documentation is extensive and readily available.

      Your dismissing the alleged Z-228 bullet’s final location is poor research methodology.
      No bullet or fragments, no bullet in the first place.

    • vmf216 says:

      No, Parkland doctors did NOT agree about the throat wound being an entry wound. Kemp Clark called Malcolm Perry into the emergency room because he was a neurosurgeon. At the news conference, He describes neck wound, “below the Adam’s Apple””
      “There was an entrance wound in the neck”.
      Then he qualified his first statement,
      The bullet, “It appeared to be coming at him”….
      and
      “The wound appeared to be an entrance wound in the front of the throat;…”
      Then he said, “”Neither Dr. Clark nor I know how many bullets there were or where they came from”
      Clark made the tracheotomy incision before Perry or others came into the room, so they had no knowledge of the original wound. McClelland, in his fanciful book, describes the wound in JFK’s neck, but he wasn’t in the room until after the tracheotomy was performed.
      Which autopsy? There was only one. If you think there was more than one, please link to the autopsy report.

    • Richard Turnbull says:

      Man you really need to do some research….

    • saperetic says:

      I am being block from replying directly to vmf216, so will try to post here to his/her response including Artwohl’s whopper of an explanation:

      As you can see from FILM, the least impeachable evidence, JFK’s lunge forward was not a direct result of 223-224. It did not occur until 228-229, long after the claimed time by the “doctor” for this alleged neurological reaction. JFK’s arms allegedly reacting involuntarily were already doing so before the sudden head seize at 228-229. More importantly, you are ignoring the VISUAL EVIDENCE showing JFK being wounded in the back of the head at the time of the reaction in question at frames 228-229. That isn’t speculation, no matter how many times you repeat that it is – It is VISUAL FACT preserved in video format.

      Reposting deliberately obfuscating information is not doing your own research; that information was not based on an effort that was (never) made to dissect the wounds nor to trace the wounds’ paths to be able to determine if JFK experienced a neurological effect as a result of any of the wounds’ causes as to whether or not there was a real impact affecting his nervous system. All citizens should require that you (and your government) actually PROVE your claim.

    • vmf216 says:

      Here are conclusions from HSCA panel regarding the sequence of events prior to the 3rd, fatal shot. These directly contradict your comments.

      The first reaction by any of the limousine occupants to a severe external stimulus begins to occur in the vicinity of Zapruder frames 162-167.* At this time, Connally is looking to his left, when his head begins a rapid, sudden motion to the right. In quantitative terms, he turns his head approximately 60 (deg) to his right in one-ninth of a second (a rate equivalent to a 540 (deg) rotation per second). He pauses momentarily and then executes a further 30 (deg) turn to his right, within an eighteenth of a second (again, a rate equivalent to a 540(deg )rotation per second). This initial rapid motion, in which Connally has apparently turned Iris head to look behind him, is accompanied during the next approximately 20 frames by a more gradual 60(deg) shift to the right of his upper torso. Although it is apparent that none of the limousine occupants has been shot at the time that Connally initiates this movement, the Panel considers these actions to be particularly significant because they were consistent with his Warren Commission testimony that he turned in response to having heard the first shot and was struck almost immediately afterwards.

      During the period of Connally’s initial rapid movement, however, no one else shows a comparable reaction. The President does not appear to react to anything unusual prior to Zapruder frame 190. The Panel observed, however, that at approximately this time, a young girl who had been running across the grass, beyond the far curb of the street where the limousine was traveling, suddenly began to stop and turn sharply to her right, looking up the street in a direction behind the limousine.

      At approximately Zapruder frame 200, Kennedy’s movements suddenly freeze; his right hand abruptly stops in the midst of a waving motion and his head moves rapidly from right to his left in the direction of his wife. Based on these movements, it appears that by the time the President goes behind the sign at frame 207 he is evidencing some kind of reaction to a severe external stimulus. By the time he emerges from behind the sign at Zapruder frame 225, the President makes a clutching motion with his hands toward his neck, indicating clearly that he has been shot.

      Connally’s movements as he emerges from behind the sign at Zapruder frames 222-224 also indicate that he is reacting to a severe external stimulus. He appears to be frowning. and there is a distinct stiffening of his shoulders and upper trunk. Then there is a radical change in his facial expression. and rapid changes begin to occur in the orientation of his head.

      In the subsequent frames, Kennedy and Connelly appear to show simultaneous, reaction-type movements. There is less than a three-frame (0.16 second) delay in their movements.

    • saperetic says:

      You are relying on the HSCA’s inadequate whitewashed conclusions that are still heavily reliant on the Warren Omission instead of doing your own research about the issues in the film I am talking about that were ignored during the WC, HSCA, and ARRB studies. That is the real contradiction.

    • vmf216 says:

      I see nothing in the Z-frames that contradict the HSCA assessment.
      Nothing you present is convincing enough to disprove their or other’s findings.

    • saperetic says:

      Then you are willfully blind. I’ve offered actual visual evidence that obliterate everything that someone else said that you espouse without having researched for yourself. The impact to the back of JFK’s head is clear in the video evidence, but you’d rather take the HSCA’s word for it; their “findings” aren’t findings at all – they are speculations that people like you blindly adopt because it effects a hint of a change in the government’s “official” story.

      Why would Blakey seal records from until 2017 and 2039?

      Do you understand the concept of a limited hangout and how that is exactly what the WC, HSCA, ARRB were?

    • vmf216 says:

      Blevin’s video is ludicrous. Maybe that’s why comments have been disabled? Just asking.
      First, Blevins proposes that the first head shot happened just after the back/throat shot. He points to the bullet “impact” point in frame Z-228. Huh? There is no visible evidence of an impact point. Then, he says in frame Z-229 there is blood splatter. This is nonsense because a blood splatter would NOT move backward, but forward as in Z-313. But Blevins absurdly states that Ms. Kennedy SAW the bullet coming and moved out of the way so she wouldn’t get hit. Blevins continues with the nonsense by stating that Z-313 shows where a bullet hit the right front side of JFK’s head. If true, that would mean that there would be damage to the left REAR of the head.
      His analysis of the autopsy photos is equally ludicrous. He simply points to dark spots in the photo and concludes they are bullet holes. No one else saw them during the autopsy, but Blevins does in these still photos.
      Give us all a break. This isn’t evidence, this is just story telling with nothing to back up the story.
      Next?

    • saperetic says:

      You’re willingly ignoring my disclaimer that I find most all the rest of Blevins’ claims dubious with the exception of what I am focusing on in this instance. Blevins is no more an autopsist than you are a forensic savant.

      I am focused on one central point: the wound to the back of JFK’s head at 228-229. Do you see anything at the sequence? It’s a bloodspatter pattern called BACKspatter in forensic investigations which happens when certain body masses are penetrated a certain way by projectiles moving at 1500+ FPS. The blood moving forward at and after Z313 is also (a much larger) backspatter result of CAVITATION. You need to do your homework.

    • vmf216 says:

      OK, I’m trying to follow along here. Where do you get the idea that there is a wound in the back of the head at Z-228-229? Blevin’s is absolutely unconvincing on that point. Is there another cross-reference you can point to that can validate your theory?
      Your theory of “cavitation” does not apply to projectiles moving at
      2000+fps. All the force is directed forward, not backward.
      Do YOUR homework.

    • saperetic says:

      Backspatter is not only a matter of force, but a combined result of the breach of the fluids’ containing features. Those “forces” you mentioned have a seemingly inverted impact on the FLUIDS whose more solid “container” is breached forcefully by a fast projectile. Fluids contained in a pressurized structure like the skull FIRST appear to discharge in the direction of the breach the higher the speed of the cause of the breach is. Do you understand how that works, now?

      “Since the brain is encased by the closed and inflexible structure of the skull, breaking the skull open is the only way temporary cavity pressure can be relieved. The fractured skull may, or may not, remain intact. If the scalp tears from the force of the temporary cavitation, bone fragments may be ejected from the skull. In this event, blood and tissue will forcefully exit from the opening created by the missing bone fragment. If a portion of the scalp adheres to the dislodged bone fragment, a bone avulsion is produced (p 96, Enemy of Truth)”

    • vmf216 says:

      OK, where is the “cavitation” in the back/neck shot?
      And where is the ballistics evidence (different bullet fragments),
      forensic evidence (autopsy, etc) and why did 17 forensic agree that two shots were fired from the rear that hit JFK. These were analyses done over several years, not in just one study. It must be that these and hundreds of other witnesses, experts, analyses are part of the conspiracy.
      Right?

    • saperetic says:

      Your words, not mine. LOL. You are a piece of work.

      BTW, cavitation can be anywhere from a few millimeters to a few inches.

      As for the “And where is the ballistics evidence (different bullet fragments), forensic evidence (autopsy, etc) and why did 17 forensic agree that two shots were fired from the rear that hit JFK. These were analyses done over several years, not in just one study. It must be that these and hundreds of other witnesses, experts, analyses are part of the conspiracy.”

      Argumentum ad populum does not prove anything. Built and refined by your multitude, a lie believed by everybody is not the truth. You’re reconstructing the republic of “official” science that is built on fallacy that the common “experts say” bromide is used to validate anytime some BS study is done.

    • vmf216 says:

      Your “logic” is unconvincing, especially alluding to hundreds
      involved in a so-called conspiracy.
      Try again. But try using facts this time, not speculations.

    • saperetic says:

      LOL oh youuuu. Again with your specious use of “speculation”. I guess you can’t help it. It’s almost as effective in shutting down thinking as “conspiracy theory”.

      But again, I haven’t speculated – I’ve referred DIRECTLY to the visual evidence and disavowed Blevins’ own rabbit hole speculations deriving from that evidence. If you have evidence that JFK’s reaction at frames 228-229 are a true neurological reaction to being wounded at or prior to frames 223-224, feel free to offer verifiable facts supporting that claim, as you have failed to do so and have already impeached that claim with your initial response.

    • vmf216 says:

      If you aren’t using Blevin’s speculations, where do you see anything in the Zapruder film that indicates a head shot at Z-228-229. All I see are JFK’s reactions to the neck/throat shot sometime just before or just after disappearing behind the Stemmons Freeway sign. There is no evidence of a head shot at frame 228-229. If there is evidence, show us all. If you can’t show evidence, it’s strictly speculation on your part.
      First you refer to Blevin’s Z-film analysis, then say it’s bogus. It seems that you reject all information contrary to your own beliefs, so there is no sense in attempting more references (and there are many). You reject Dr. Artwohl’s explanation, you reject HSCA’s conclusions, so you say YOU are the only authority with any valid information.
      Sorry, no one here buys it.

  22. JayGoldenBeach says:

    Paragraph 11: Correct name is Gayle Nix Jackson.
    Just FYI. Excellent article! Cheers.

  23. Patrick Blasz says:

    All a fiction. Does the government lie? You bet it does and with increasing frequency especial during the BHO administration. If you have any doubts that there was a conspiracy, listen to the bone chilling tape of LBJ and JEH discussing who would sit on the Warren Commission.