Conspiracy JFK Forum Site

update: I received this from David Mantik this morning...

--David















A Coup in Camelot Award-Winning JFK Assassination Documentary Available on November 4, 2016 on iTunes and Other Digital Platforms

Quote:October 31, 2016 -- Los Angeles, CA -- A Coup in Camelot the award-winning documentary on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy will be available on November 4, 2016 on iTunes, Amazon Video Direct, Google Play and Vimeo OnDemand.



On November 4th, the DVD and Blu-ray can be purchased exclusively on the film’s website at http://acoupincamelot.com/.



Narrated by Emmy award-winning actor Peter Coyote, directed/produced by Stephen Goetsch and written/produced by Art Van Kampen, A Coup in Camelot is a powerful examination of compelling new research, exclusive interviews and critical analysis by the top medical, forensic and research experts in the country.



“November 22, 2016 marks the 53rd anniversary of the assassination of the country’s 35th president,” said Stephen Goetsch, director/producer. “We are pleased to offer audiences this unbiased and impassioned addition to the historical record of this tragic event.”



Five decades later crucial questions remain about President Kennedy’s assassination. The film provides extensive evidence of botched Secret Service protocols, Zapruder film analysis with 6k digital scans, shocking medical evidence revelations, and expert Oswald analysis, to uncover the dramatic tale of A Coup In Camelot.



The following JFK assassination experts who appear in the film are available for interviews:



· Douglas Horne – Assassination Records Review Board, Author

· Vince Palamara – Secret Service Expert, Author

· Sherry Fiester – Forensics Expert, Author

. Dr. David Mantik - Radiologist

· Dick Russell – Oswald Expert, Author



· Barry Ernest – Oswald Expert, Author

· Jerry Dealey – Historian, Author



For the film experts’ biographies visit: http://acoupincamelot.com/bios.html



To view the trailer visit: http://acoupincamelot.com/trailer.html



For complete information on A Coup in Camelot visit: http://acoupincamelot.com/



Press Contact:

Susan Kaplan

susanlkaplan@sbcglobal.net

via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-UPDATE-10-31-16-A-Coup-in-Camelot

Quote:Based on the official evidence in the John F. Kennedy murder case, all of the following things are true:



1.) President John F. Kennedy and Texas Governor John B. Connally were shot by rifle bullets in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on Friday, November 22, 1963.



2.) Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (Serial Number C2766) was located inside a building which overlooked the assassination site (the Texas School Book Depository) when JFK and JBC were being wounded by gunfire.



3.) A nearly-whole bullet (Warren Commission Exhibit #399) was found inside the hospital where JFK and JBC were taken after the shooting. And CE399 was found in a location within the hospital where President Kennedy was never located prior to the bullet being found by Darrell Tomlinson. (Nor was JFK's stretcher ever in the area of the hospital where Tomlinson discovered the bullet.)



4.) Bullet CE399 was positively fired from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle.



5.) Bullet CE399, based on the above points in total, HAD to have been inside Governor Connally's body on 11/22/63.



6.) A man who looked like Lee Harvey Oswald was seen firing a rifle at the President's limousine from a southeast corner window on the 6th Floor of the Book Depository Building. No other gunmen were seen firing any weapons in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd.



7.) No bullets (or large bullet fragments) were found in the upper back or neck of John Kennedy's body. And no significant damage was found inside these areas of JFK's body either.



8.) No bullets (or large bullet fragments) were found inside the body of Governor Connally after the shooting. The only bullet, anywhere, that can possibly be connected with Connally's wounds is Bullet CE399.



9.) Given the point in time when both JFK and JBC were first hit by rifle fire (based on the Abraham Zapruder Film), and given the known location of Governor Connally's back (entrance) wound, and also taking into account the individual points made above -- Bullet CE399 had no choice but to have gone through the body of President Kennedy prior to entering the back of John B. Connally.

David Von Pein doesn't like to defend his claims against critical review in public, so he posts them on a website where no-one can refute him. Patrick has claimed to be willing to defend these claims, so it's worthwhile to refute each claim to see just how truthful Patrick will be...



I predict in advance that Patrick will decide that this isn't worthwhile trying to defend...



So, one by one:

Quote:1.) President John F. Kennedy and Texas Governor John B. Connally were shot by rifle bullets in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on Friday, November 22, 1963.

Indeed, probably the only thing that I will agree with, based on the evidence and logic. The possibility of accurate pistol fire over the distances involved would be astronomically small... It's interesting to note that of DVP's nine points, this is the only one that is logical and reasonable.

Quote:2.) Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (Serial Number C2766) was located inside a building which overlooked the assassination site (the Texas School Book Depository) when JFK and JBC were being wounded by gunfire.

Nope. Mere speculation that isn't supported by the evidence. DVP made a desperate attempt to refute the fact that there are no bank endorsements on the alleged money order that was presumed to have been used to pay for the rifle. Yet he failed miserably in that attempt. If Oswald didn't pay for the rifle - then the only other logical way to account for the known evidence IS THAT HE WAS FRAMED WITH FALSIFIED EVIDENCE.



There's truly no other credible explanation for that money order.



And until that money order can be explained in terms of the Warren Commission's theory, then it's simply dishonest to claim that the rifle belonged to Oswald.



And if the rifle cannot be connected to Oswald - then 99% of the case simply dissolves...



I've demonstrated quite conclusively in my posts on Bugliosi's 53 bits of evidence that there simply isn't the evidence that believers are wont to believe. So this attempt to merely presume what needs to be shown is a common tactic among believers.

Quote:3.) A nearly-whole bullet (Warren Commission Exhibit #399) was found inside the hospital where JFK and JBC were taken after the shooting. And CE399 was found in a location within the hospital where President Kennedy was never located prior to the bullet being found by Darrell Tomlinson. (Nor was JFK's stretcher ever in the area of the hospital where Tomlinson discovered the bullet.)

Once again, we are looking at a wee bit of dishonesty on DVP's part. There was no chain of custody on this bullet that could have stood up in court, and DVP is well aware of that fact. It doesn't matter WHERE CE399 was found... if there's no valid chain of custody, then it's simply inadmissible evidence. DVP is also undoubtedly aware of the threatening phone call that Tomlinson described... and yet has no explanation for... Once again, the facts fit a frameup quite nicely - and is a very ill fit indeed for the Warren Commission's theory.

Quote:4.) Bullet CE399 was positively fired from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle.

Nope. CE399 has been established with valid testimony to have been fired from the Mannlicher Carcano, C2766 - that's ALL THAT CAN BE LEGITIMATELY AND HONESTLY STATED. DVP wishes to go beyond what the evidence shows in order to defend the Warren Commission's theory.



I predict that Patrick will absolutely REFUSE to refute my statement here... and defend DVP's quite misleading assertion.

Quote:5.) Bullet CE399, based on the above points in total, HAD to have been inside Governor Connally's body on 11/22/63.

Again... nope.



There's been no evidence presented to show that CE399 was even fired on 11/22/63. Indeed, the weight of the testimony tends to indicate that this was part of a frameup, rather than legitimate evidence.



As well, DVP certainly knows that the ballistics tests conducted on behalf of the Warren Commission was completely unable to duplicate the pristine nature of CE399. At a velocity low enough to retain the bullet's shape - no bones will be broken... and at a velocity high enough to break bone, the bullet is also severely deformed.

Quote:6.) A man who looked like Lee Harvey Oswald was seen firing a rifle at the President's limousine from a southeast corner window on the 6th Floor of the Book Depository Building. No other gunmen were seen firing any weapons in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd.

Nope... indeed, Brennan; whom everyone will agree got the best look at the assassin, ABSOLUTELY REFUSED TO IDENTIFY HIM AS LEE HARVEY OSWALD in lineups conducted that day. As well, all of the witnesses described the assassin's clothing as different from Oswald's. The nonsense about no other gunmen being seen firing a weapon is sheer nonsense... and disguises the fact that DVP knows that other rifles were seen that day close to, or in Dealey Plaza.



This same argument can be used to show that Nicole Brown is really still alive, since no-one saw anyone using a knife on June 12, 1994. It's a nonsensical argument that can only be used by the faithful to help other believers.

Quote:7.) No bullets (or large bullet fragments) were found in the upper back or neck of John Kennedy's body. And no significant damage was found inside these areas of JFK's body either.

Simply untrue. DVP knows quite well that the prosectors WERE FORBIDDEN from dissecting the track of the wound - so there's simply no cause for him to assert that no "significant damage" was not found there - they never looked.



Indeed, it's rather silly for DVP to claim that a bullet went through a body, yet no "significant damage" attended that transit. Surely he's trying to make some other point, because his statement as is - is simply nonsense.



Presumably, DVP is trying to account for the nearly pristine nature of CE399 - yet avoiding the real place that severe damage would accrue - Connally's wrist.

Quote:8.) No bullets (or large bullet fragments) were found inside the body of Governor Connally after the shooting. The only bullet, anywhere, that can possibly be connected with Connally's wounds is Bullet CE399.

Untrue. DVP is well aware of the disappearing bullet fragments found in Connally's wrist. Nor is it true that CE399 is the only bullet that can be connected to Connally's wounds... the attending doctor testified that up to THREE bullets could have caused Connally's wounds.



And since the limo was immediately hustled out of Dallas, and never searched by impartial investigators - there's no telling what might have been found in the way of bullets or bullet fragments.



Indeed, Secret Service Agent Kinney claims that he found CE399 in the limo. And since Patrick is fond of statements made decades later - he can't refute this on any logical grounds.

Quote:9.) Given the point in time when both JFK and JBC were first hit by rifle fire (based on the Abraham Zapruder Film), and given the known location of Governor Connally's back (entrance) wound, and also taking into account the individual points made above -- Bullet CE399 had no choice but to have gone through the body of President Kennedy prior to entering the back of John B. Connally.

Nope. The Zapruder film does NOT show that JFK and JBC were hit by the same bullet. It quite clearly shows Connally reacting several seconds LATER than JFK. DVP knows this - and glosses over it.



Nor is it true that a bullet striking Connally had to have gone through JFK first. This is a quite misleading lie. It presumes 'facts' not shown to be true, and simply presumes that the Warren Commission's theory of the shooting sequence is correct.



Yet the evidence doesn't support this - and DVP knows quite well that it doesn't. Indeed, for many years, believers used to argue a "delayed reaction" on the part of Connally for the express purpose of explaining the extant Zapruder film. They no longer make that argument, deciding that they can move a presumed "reaction" on the part of Connally to a point earlier than the Warren Commission did.



Also note that DVP has repeatedly asserted a role for CE399 that he cannot demonstrate using the evidence. There's a reason that the United States Judicial system requires a chain of custody for evidence.

---

So in conclusion - what we see here is speculation piled on speculation, and presumptions given the status of evidence.



It's worth noting the evidence... I say again, the EVIDENCE that the theory of a single bullet transiting and striking both JFK & Connally is far more credible ... and rather completely avoided by Patrick (and all other believers, for that matter). Here it is again:



1. The depth of the wound.

2. The location of the wound.

3. The missing interior chest photo.

4. The original description of the throat wound.

5. The original autopsy describing a different explanation for the throat wound. (Rankin)

6. The size of the wound in comparison to it's supposed "exit".

7. The complete lack of any metal found on the front of the shirt & tie.

8. The missing report & testimony of Stombaugh.

9. The earliest attempts to explain the frontal shot (Life Magazine, Mandel's article)



It would be truly amusing to see if DVP could address my 9 points the way I've so easily dismissed his 9 points... we already know that Patrick cannot.



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-The-SBT-by-David-Von-Pein-Refuted

(11) Howard Brennan saw Lee Harvey Oswald fire the third shot that killed the President.



This is an outright lie on Bugliosi's part. Bugliosi knows quite well that Howard Brennen refused to identify Oswald, and indeed, described an assassin that CANNOT match Oswald.



It's true that months later, Brennan claimed that he really HAD identified Oswald, but was afraid for his family that other conspirators would harm them if he identified Oswald - but this really makes no sense... because Brennan made the effort to come forward. He also described the assassin wearing light colored clothing - Oswald, of course, wore dark clothing.



It's more reasonable to accept that Brennan was pressured in the intervening months to identify Oswald.



And Warren Commission Believers would have you accept that Brennan could accurately identify a face, yet completely miss the COLOR of the clothing.



Once again, we have the presumption of guilt over-riding the actual facts.



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Vincent-Bugliosi-s-53-Reasons-11-Refuted

(10) Oswald's pretense with a co-worker that he didn't know JFK's route



Sheer speculation on Bugliosi's part. Before you can label this a 'pretense', you must show that Oswald knew for a fact that JFK would be passing in front of the building. Bugliosi has been unable to do this.



This is another example of presuming guilt, then taking any action or speech to 'prove' that guilt.



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Vincent-Bugliosi-s-53-Reasons-10-Refuted

Another typically amusing non-response by The Coward, Henry Sienzant, in relation to the Henry Marshall murder:





https://www.amazon.com/forum/history/ref...EGQD4NZJ7E





This is the third time everyone's favorite disinformationalist absolutely refused to address the topic of Henry Marshall's "suicide", and how it relates to Estes and Mac Wallace and its subsequent cover-up. This reminds me a lot of the example of the Alyea photo, and the believers' refusal to acknowledge there are two weapons. Denial is eternal.



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-The-Two-Henrys

(9) For the first time ever, Oswald didn't read the paper in the TSBD domino room.



You have to go to the endnotes to find out where Bugliosi pulled this "fact" from... here's the relevant testimony:

Quote:Mr. BELIN. Did you see him reading the newspaper?

Mr. GIVENS. No; not that day. I did--he generally sit in there every morning. He would come to work and sit in there and read the paper, the next day paper, like if the day was Tuesday, he would read Monday's paper in the morning when he would come to work, but he didn't that morning because he didn't go in the domino room that morning. I didn't see him in the domino room that morning.

Now, Bugliosi wants us to believe that because Givens didn't recall Oswald reading a newspaper on a specific day 5 months earlier – that he was guilty of murder.



But we KNOW FROM THE TESTIMONY that he was eating lunch. Bugliosi wants to imply that Oswald was busy constructing the 'snipers lair' – but he dare not assert it, because he KNOWS that there's testimony putting Oswald downstairs eating lunch.



But let's look at a statement from the FBI report of Griffin & Odum, from 11/23/63: "On the morning of November 22, 1963, GIVENS observed LEE reading a newspaper in the domino room where the employees eat lunch about 11:50 A.M."



Givens testifies that he saw Oswald at 11:55 on the 6th floor, and never saw him again... technically true, he'd earlier reported seeing Oswald 5 minutes EARLIER reading the paper.



I daresay that there were quite a few employees at that building that never saw Oswald reading a newpaper that day... but not seeing Oswald after 11:55 – and claiming therefore that he wasn't reading a newspaper, is something only a Warren Commission Believer can accept.



And another excellent example of presuming guilt, then taking any action or speech to 'prove' that guilt.



P.S. It's also a very good barometer of honesty that you'll never find a believer willing to publicly state that Bugliosi was wrong here... let alone that he was clearly off his rocker for this particular attempt...



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Vincent-Bugliosi-s-53-Reasons-9-Refuted

Patrick has repeatedly claimed that Malcolm Kilduff got his information about JFK's wounds from Dr. Perry... despite the fact that WHEN HE DESCRIBED THOSE WOUNDS, he also said who he got the information from.



Here it is again, at the 2:39 mark:











Despite the fact that Patrick has seen this video many times - he's still willing to lie about it.



Why the lies, Patrick???



What do you think it gains you?



Why is it so impossible for either you or Henry Sienzant to publicly state that Kilduff got his information from Dr. Burkley???



And if you'll lie about something so easily checked, how can anyone trust anything you say on things that are more difficult to validate?



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Patrick-Collins-Blatantly-Lies

(8) On arrival at the TSBD, Oswald walked faster and ahead of Frazier for the first time ever.



Silly! Since when does "walking fast" have anything at all to do with indicting someone??? Sometimes Bugliosi really stretches to try to find something to 'prove' Oswald's guilt, this is a good example of his tendency to do this.



Again we see the theme of presuming guilt on Oswald's part, then pretending that everything he did and said shows that guilt. Since when does "walking fast" show guilt of anything at all???

Quote:Mr. BALL - Did you usually walk up there together.

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; we did.

Mr. BALL - Is this the first time that he had ever walked ahead of you?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; he did.

I'll leave it to the reader to analyze this testimony... because if I pointed out the obvious, Patrick wouldn't be able to refute it anyway...



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Vincent-Bugliosi-s-53-Reasons-8-Refuted

(7) Frazier noticed that for the first time on a return trip from Irving, Oswald brought no lunch.



Most statements from Frazier can be credibly debated... he was a suspect in the case, and had his rifle confiscated, and was ran through a lie detector test that night. (CE 2003 pg. 183) Oswald said he ate lunch, and others saw him eating lunch.



So where did the lunch come from?



Frazier was certainly in a quandary – he couldn't claim he saw Oswald with a paper bag (that was too short to have a rifle), and a SECOND paper bag containing his lunch. A choice had to be made.



But we KNOW that Oswald ate lunch. Now, he could conceivably have purchased it, but as Frazier admits, Oswald ALWAYS brought his lunch – at least to his knowledge:

Quote:Mr. BALL - Do you remember whether or not when Oswald came back with you on any Monday morning or any weekend did he pack his lunch?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; he did.

Mr. BALL - He did?

Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir. When he rode with me, I say he always brought lunch except that one day on November 22 he didn't bring his lunch that day.

Here's a perfect example of where Warren Commission Believers – faced with competing 'facts' – will always choose the one that supports their theory. We know that Oswald ate lunch, we know he is known to have regularly BROUGHT his lunch... but you need the rifle to come into the building somehow (despite the fact that there were a couple of rifles in the building just a few days earlier... not very difficult to bring rifles in!) - so you had to co-opt Oswald's lunch bag to serve as a rifle case.



Now, the obvious question – where did Oswald get his lunch – can be reasonably answered, perhaps he bought it from the 10 am catering service... but here we have speculation instead of evidence.



And speculation isn't evidence of ANYONE'S guilt.



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Vincent-Bugliosi-s-53-Reasons-7-Refuted

I've predicted it many times before, and have almost always been proven correct... when a believer is caught in a particularly outrageous lie, they simply disappear from forum posting for days or weeks...



Patrick was caught lying about where Malcolm Kilduff stated he'd gotten the wound location information - claiming it was Dr. Perry when he's quite well aware that it was Dr. Burkley.



This is the sort of lie that simply doesn't make any sense...



But Patrick has indeed simply disappeared...



Too bad we can't have an HONEST debate about the evidence.



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-What-Happens-When-A-Believer-Is-Caught-Lying