Conspiracy JFK Forum Site

The Warren Commission claimed that the nick on the tie, and the slit in the shirt of JFK was caused by a bullet.



The FBI examined the margins of the bullet hole in the BACK, and found traces of copper, quite consistent with a bullet... but NO METAL WHATSOEVER on the front of the shirt & tie.



More interestingly, FBI Agent Frazier was deposed in a FOIA lawsuit brought by Weisberg, and admitted under oath that not only had FBI's expert on hair & fiber - SA Paul M. Stombaugh, examined the shirt & tie, BUT THAT HE HAD SUBMITTED A REPORT OF THAT EXAMINATION.



Nowhere to be found among the Warren Commission Report or it's 26 volumes.



And although Stombaugh was questioned by the Warren Commission - they somehow managed to forget to ask any questions related to Stombaugh's examination of JFK's shirt & tie.



Believers in this forum have NO explanation for these facts... none whatsoever.



Any believer spouting the SBT will need to explain these facts, or forever be known for their lack of character...



(As if they have ever demonstrated any!)



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Stombaugh-s-Missing-Report

Jeff Wrote:There is no reliable government supplied evidence for this murder.

Actually, there is...



The 6.5mm virtually round object in the AP X-ray that causes Warren Commission believers to shut their mouths and run ... is one good example.



Another is CE 748.



As Mark Lane pointed out:

Mark Lane Wrote:In preparation for his appearance before the Commission on April 23, 1964, Shaneyfelt photographed an FBI employee standing on the roof of the Justice Department building in Washington and holding the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. This picture was published as Commission Exhibit 748, but it cannot be said to have resolved the issue, for the FBI had removed the employee's head from the photograph before submitting it to the Commission. When the picture was offered in evidence to Commission counsel, this colloquy ensued:



Q. I see the head of the individual in the photograph is blacked out. Can you explain the reason for that?



Shaneyfelt: I blanked out the head because it was one of the employees of the FBI, and I felt it was desirable to blank out the head since it was not pertinent.



One can sympathize with the desire of police agents for anonymity and still wish that some non-secret individual might have been chosen to pose with the rifle, since nothing was more pertinent than a comparison of the nose and body shadows.



Shaneyfelt testified that he had prepared Commission Exhibit 748 in an attempt to depict 'the rifle held in approximately the same position' as in the controversial photograph. It would seem that he had an additional, if unmentioned, objective as well. The position of the feet of the FBI employee, his posture and the length and orientation of the shadow from his body suggest that Shaneyfelt sought to simulate all the conditions that existed when the disputed photograph was made. The fact that he left the FBI laboratory to prepare the photograph on the roof of the building appears to confirm the suspicion that he was aware of the non-conformity of the shadows and was trying to simulate them. The fact that the photograph was altered before it was submitted to the Commission would tend to indicate that the effort failed.



And thus the evidence came full cycle: a photograph doctored by the FBI was admitted in evidence ostensibly to demonstrate that another photograph, discovered by the Dallas police, was genuine.

So there IS government evidence that shows ... not what they wanted it to show - but that efforts were being made to frame a patsy. And believers can do nothing about these facts... they refuse to debate such topics... and then complain that critics won't engage in debate.



Quite funny, actually!



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Government-Supplied-Evidence

An ABSOLUTE REQUIREMENT for non-conspiracy is that the SBT is true. The SBT requires that a bullet went completely through JFK's body, ie; 'transit'.



The evidence suggests the opposite.



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)



As Wendy's used to say with their "Where's the beef?" advertising campaign... I'd like to quiz: "Where's the EVIDENCE?"



And demonstrating that they have none - watch for the dead silence following this post...



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Where-s-The-Evidence-For-The-SBT

Quote:Three years before the Kennedy assassination, Lee Harvey Oswald was being investigated by the CIA's Special Investigations Group (SIG), a branch of the agency's Counter-Intelligence (CI) division, headed by James Angleton between 1954 and 1974. This was confirmed in the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) questioning of Ann Egerter, a member of Angleton's staff who opened the CIA file on Lee Harvey Oswald (a "201 file" in US intel lingo) in December of 1960.



The kicker is that the CI/SIG division is only tasked with investigating current CIA agents who are potential security risks. Egerter said her office was known within the CIA as "the office that spied on spies." She further elaborated on SIG as the entity that undertook "investigations of agency employees where there was an indication of espionage."



Because CIA agents are forbidden to disclose the identity of any other agents, Oswald's true occupation could only be discerned through indirect questions directed at Egerter. One HSCA interviewer asked her what the purpose of the CI/SIG was within the agency. Through this line of questioning, it can be discerned that Lee Harvey Oswald was seen in 1960 as a security risk, making him easy to burn, for example, as a patsy in the Kennedy assassination.



Interviewer: "Please correct me if I'm wrong ... it seems that the purpose of CI/SIG was very limited and that limited purpose was to investigate agency employees who for some reason were under suspicion."



Egerter: "That is correct."



Interviewer: "When a 201 file is opened, does that mean that whoever opens the file has either an intelligence interest in the individual, or, if not an intelligence interest, he thinks that the individual may present a counterintelligence risk?"



Egerter: "Well, in general, I would say that would be correct."



Interviewer: "Would there be any other reason for opening up a file?"



Egerter: "No, I can't think of one."



(Taken from here.)

Absolutely devastating to the Warren Commission believers...



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Lee-Harvey-Oswald-Was-A-CIA-Asset--202

Patrick C Wrote:

Ben Holmes Wrote:You still haven't answered my question: If the doctors were wrong that the Harper's fragment was a piece of JFK's occipital bone, then which part of his head did it come from and why isn't the wound seen on any photos from Bethesda?

er...oh dear....the bone is a segment of the skull that is missing from the exit wound which is largely parietal (above the ear) "extending somewhat into the temporal and occipital areas". This wound is visible in the Zapruder film, but more importantly is apparent in the autopsy picture on the internet although these pictures are not especially clear.

Yet Patrick claims that Dr. Baden was correct when he stated "The head exit wound was not in the parietal-occipital area, as the Parkland doctors said."



As any intelligent reader can determine, these two statements by Patrick CONFLICT WITH EACH OTHER.



Either the wound existed in the occipital-parietal area, or it didn't.



And Patrick cannot answer this without retracting one or the other of his contradicting statements...



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Where-s-the-Wound-Patrick

David Von Pein quotes a lie:

Vincent Bugliosi Wrote:After forty-four long years, not one CREDIBLE word, not one syllable has ever surfaced about any conspiracy to kill Kennedy. .... The reason why not the slightest trace of a conspiracy has ever been uncovered, of course, is that no such conspiracy ever existed. - Pages 1441-1442 of "Reclaiming History: The Assassination Of President John F. Kennedy"

Of course, the multitude of witnesses who documented in just the first two days that they heard shots coming from the Grassy Knoll is far more than a "syllable".



Bugliosi was a liar... and David Von Pein is a liar too - for quoting this statement, and not pointing out that it's not true.



Why do believers keep lying?



Do they honestly think that people cannot search out the evidence for themselves, and SEE these lies?



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Not-One-Syllable

Over 50 years have gone by, and there's still no answers from the supporters of the Warren Commission.



The questions that supporters cannot answer are legion - yet the opposite isn't true at all. Patrick, Henry, Dale, David Von Pein, or any other believer - simply cannot come up with a question on this case that doesn't have a logical, credible, and acceptable answer.



I'm still waiting for the question on this case that I cannot answer...



Yet, if I had a nickel for every unanswered question just from Patrick alone - I'd be a much wealthier man.



This situation demonstrates that the evidence simply doesn't favor the Warren Commission supporter - yet they hang in there, desperately trying to change public opinion... and getting no-where.

In both the Tampa and Dallas assassination/attempt, the police were looking for a young man in his 20's, white with a slender build. In Dallas, that patsy turned out to be Lee Harvey Oswald...



But in the Tampa assassination attempt just four days earlier, and one that was never known by the Warren Commission, that description had a different name, it was Gilberto Policarpo Lopez.



Both were white males, twenty-three years old during most of 1963.



Both had returned to America in the summer of 1962 from a Communist country.



Both are said by various sources to have been assets or informants for some U.S. agency, and both were of interest to Naval Intelligence, who kept files on them.



In mid-1963, both men and their wives moved to another city and then became involved with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee.



In the summer of 1963, some of their associates saw them as being pro-Castro, while others saw them as being anti-Castro. Both were living in a city where there was much anti-Castro activity.



In the summer of 1963, both were involved in fist-fights over "pro-Castro" statements they made.



Though both appeared at times to be "pro-Castro," neither joined the Communist Party and neither regularly associated with local Communist Party members.



Both had a Russian connection in their background.



Both were living apart from their wives as a result of marital difficulties.



Both had crossed the border at Nuevo Laredo in the fall of 1963 and made a mysterious trip to Mexico City, both were under photographic surveillance by the CIA, both were trying to get to Cuba (Lopez made it, though)



Both went by car on one leg of their Mexico City trip. Neither was a very good driver and neither man owned a car.



In the fall of 1963, each had a job in the vicinity of JFK's route for one of his November motorcades.



The week of 11/22/63, both men were in Dallas.



Following the assassination, both men were investigated for involvement - of course, Lopez's name appears no-where in the WCR or 26 volumes.



Declassified documents indicate that both men were the subject of unusual US intelligence activity. Declassified CIA documents confirm that Lopez was on a secret "mission" for the US involving Cuba. Its a virtual certainty that LHO also fits into the same category, IMO.



For years after the assassination, government agencies tried to keep much of the material about both men classified, even from Congressional committees like the HSCA. Much still remains classified today, because both were involved in highly sensitive covert US operations in 1963.



Former Senator Schweiker, who served for eighteen months on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, and who chaired, along with Gary Hart, the Church Committee's subcommittee that looked into the JFK assassination (The first gave the Senator background information on intelligence, and the second gave the Senator specific, still classified information on the JFK assassination), stated: "all the fingerprints I found during my eighteen months on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence point to Oswald as being a product of, and interacting with, the intelligence community." Of course, believers would simply label the good Senator a "kook".



If more than just two blacks, in a southern racist city, had seen LHO during the assassination in the lunchroom, believers might be calling those who think that Gilberto Policarpo Lopez is innocent "kooks" right now.



Gilberto Policarpo Lopez... the other Lee Harvey Oswald.



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-The-OTHER-Lee-Harvey-Oswald

Anonymous Believer Wrote:The WCR is the only thing anyone needs to believe. It is the one and only truth. You guys seem to the think truth is like a smorgasbord in which you can pick and choose what you like. The reality is the truth offers you just one choice and since it's one you don't like, you choose to believe in fiction instead. I will admit it's more interesting doing it your way. You can believe just about anything you want to and you prove that every day.

ROTFLMAO!!!



This shows the true faith that believers have. The WCR is the only thing anyone needs to believe. It is the one and only truth. - everytime I think I'm conversing with real people who have intelligence, it's statements like this that slap me in the face...



The WCR is the only thing anyone needs to believe. It is the one and only truth. - these are the very same people who absolutely REFUSE to publicly admit that a tremendous amount of evidence in the JFK case directly conflicts with other evidence.



They certainly cannot admit that the Warren Commission provably lied ... as even one Warren Commission staffer admitted.



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Ultimate-Truth-Found-In-The-WCR

Anonymous WCR Supporter Wrote:For those who don't know or don't remember, Alice's Restaurant was Arlo Guthrie's iconic anti-war song from the 1960s that was later made into a movie starring Guthrie. The song begins by telling about a Thanksgiving dinner at Alice's home which was in an old church behind the restaurant. Since they had lots of room where the pews used to be, they decided they didn't need to take out the garbage for a long time. After the dinner, the guests decided to help Alice out by gathering up all that garbage and taking it to the dump only to discover it was closed on Thanksgiving. Not knowing what to do, they went driving along until they spotted a pile of garbage that had been dumped off the side of the road. They decided one big pile would be better than two little ones so rather than pick that one up they decided to dump their on top of it. The next day Sheriff Opie showed up and confronted Arlo.



He said, "Kid, we found your name on an envelope underneath a pile of garbage.".



Arlo replied, "Opie, I cannot tell a lie. I put that envelope underneath that pile of garbage".



This is how conspiracy hobbyists look at the forensic evidence of Oswald's guilt. Rather than accept the ramifications of all that evidence pointing at Oswald, they opt for the most ridiculous explanations. If they aren't claiming the evidence was planted, they are denying its significance. In essence they are accepting that Oswald put the envelope underneath the pile of garbage. Whatever they have to believe in order to maintain that he was innocent of the murder of JFK, the will opt for. It doesn't matter how many pieces of evidence they have to do that for, they will do it. The think that all that evidence could point in his direction and that he could still be innocent.

This is a silly analogy... because it would not be Oswald "putting the envelope under the garbage."



It was the conspirators, or at least those involved in the coverup, that framed Oswald. Oswald had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the failure of the banks to endorse the Money Order used to frame him.



Oswald had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the military orders during the autopsy that prevented dissection of the track of the bullet, or examination of JFK's clothing.



Oswald had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the intimidation of eyewitnesses by the FBI, CIA, and S.S.



Silly analogies like the one quoted above can only be posted in forums that don't critically examine the evidence.



via Forums - All Forums http://conspiracyjfkforum.com/Thread-Arlo-Guthrie-s-Conspiracy