Who Killed John F. Kennedy?

[billymiller]

Specter told Dr. Jones that some eyewitnesses saw the shooter from the front. I wonder who that could be?


In the Introduction, on page xiii, the author writes: "Late in this project, I came upon a startling revelation in Dr. Ron Jones's oral history. After taking his Warren Commission deposition at Parkland, chief counsel Arlen Specter told Jones,

"We have people who would testify that they saw somebody shoot the president from the front. But we don't want to interview them, and I don't want you to say anything about that, either." www.amazon.com/We-Were-There-Revelations-Attended-ebook/dp/B00E258JTS/ref=cm_cr_pr_orig_subj

[billymiller]

How did a bullet enter the rear and blow out the rear? Boswell confirmed this fiction in 1996.

[billymiller]

www.amazon.com/We-Were-There-Revelations-Attended-ebook/dp/B00E258JTS/ref=cm_cr_pr_orig_subj

It's little pieces of truth like this that make the internet so awesome. It is only logical that many people would have been willing say they saw the driver shoot jfk. This is one of the most obvious facts exposing government evil that has been found thus far. Imagining a world with more truth thrashing such as this is much less a dream than ever before. It's a real possibility if the willingness can extend significantly outward. Somebody refers to a specific person and the front excludes the grassy snow job. Greer provided an ironic photo a billion times over if the image was taken after the assassination?

In the Introduction, on page xiii, the author writes: "Late in this project, I came upon a startling revelation in Dr. Ron Jones's oral history. After taking his Warren Commission deposition at Parkland, chief counsel Arlen Specter told Ronald Coy Jones, www.google.com/search?q=ronald+coy+jones&biw=1536&bih=703&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=BS1NVOeeEISayQTUyYKADw&ved=0CC0QsAQ#imgdii=_

"We have people who would testify that they saw somebody shoot the president from the front. But we don't want to interview them, and I don't want you to say anything about that, either."

Nothing of value here December 28, 2013

By Alexander J. Marciniszyn

Format:Hardcover

In the Introduction, on page xiii, the author writes: "Late in this project, I came upon a startling revelation in Dr. Ron Jones's oral history. After taking his Warren Commission deposition at Parkland, chief counsel Arlen Specter told Jones, 'We have people who would testify that they saw somebody shoot the president from the front. But we don't want to interview them, and I don't want you to say anything about that, either.'" Not much of a revelation to anyone who's studied the Kennedy assassination in depth. This author just throws up his hands in a "what is history and what is real or not?" kind of way at the end.

Get a copy of Trauma Room One by Dr. Charles Crenshaw. Steer clear of this one.

[billymiller]

The driver shot jfk with a handgun, likely a 38 revolver fired from 6-8 feet in front of the President. The violent thrashing backwards was caused by the close range shot. That is McClelland's drawing of the exit wound.

John F. Kennedy Assassination Homepage :: Warren Commission :: Hearings :: Volume VI :: Page 38

This interview leaves no doubt about the right rear being blasted out and Greer's close range shot with a high velocity handgun. This silly interviewer quickly changes the subject after cerebellum falling out is brought to light.

Dr. Mcclelland. I think even then you could make the statement that this wound could have resulted from this type bullet fired through this particular mass of soft tissue, losing that much velocity before it exited from the body. Where you would expect to see this really great hole that is left behind would be, for instance, from a very high velocity missile fired at close range with a heavy caliber bullet, such as a .45 pistol fired at close range, which would make a small entrance hole, relatively, and particularly if it entered some portion of the anatomy such as the head, where there was a sudden change in density from the brain to the skull cavity, as it entered. As it left the body, it would still have a great deal of force behind it and would blow up a large segment of tissue as it exited.

But I don't think the bullet of this nature fired from that distance and going through this large area of homogenous soft tissue would necessarily make the usual kind of exit wound like I just described, with a close range high velocity heavy caliber bullet. This is why it would be difficult to say with certainty as has been implied in some newspaper articles that quoted me, that you could tell for sure that this was an entrance or an exit wound. I think this was blown up a good deal.

Testimony Of Dr. Robert Nelson Mcclelland

THE EXIT WOUND EXTENDED TO THE BOTTOM OF THE OCCIPITAL BONE. The force of the bullet pushed up the top of the head, but the bullet exited the right rear, as has been factual for many decades. That is McCLELLAND'S drawing of the rear blow-out. www.google.com/search?q=dr+mcclelland+drawing&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=cNuEU43THY6ZyATPiIKQBw&ved=0CCgQsAQ&biw=1536&bih=748

Mr. SPECTER - Before proceeding to describe what you did in connection with the tracheostomy, will you more fully describe your observation with respect to the head wound?

Dr. McCLELLAND - As I took the position at the head of the table that I have already described, to help out with the tracheotomy, I was in such a position that I could very closely examine the head wound, and I noted that the right posterior portion of the skull had been extremely blasted. It had been shattered, apparently, by the force of the shot so that the parietal bone was protruded up through the scalp and seemed to be fractured almost along its right posterior half, as well as some of the occipital bone being fractured in its lateral haft, and this sprung open the bones that I mentioned in such a way that you could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding which was occurring mainly from the large venous channels in the skull which had been blasted open.

[billymiller]

Was JFK the only human with bright red blood, or was the Zapruder film altered in idiotic ways?

[jfkthequeen]

Hey donny got your back g

[agentnineoh]

Recent documentary refers to a gunman below a sewer grate,..firing UP!,..grate on schoolbook depository side ,..
Part of a song i wrote(Sapruder Blues)

(Emaj)- Got that Sapruder camera's eye scene- (G#maj) in my head,..ooh verse 2 What Eeisenhower saaid could ,diid come true
(Amaj)- Back and to the left frame (F#maj)- three thirteen,..oooh Kennedy didnt wanna pay interest to the Fed too
(Emaj)-One magic bullet in a (Bmaj7)-three bullet scheme (chorus)One magic bullet...etc
don't (Amaj)-flyy soo pristine dont (Bmaj7) fly so true
got that (Emaj) blue,got that (Bmaj7) blue
got that (Amaj) blue-u-u-u-ue (Emaj)

[billymiller]

The Smell of Gunsmoke at Street Level educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=19251&st=0

In addition to the eyewitnesses and ear witnesses, there were also nose witnesses to the murder.

Those who smelled gunpowder at the scene of the shooting helped to pinpoint the source of the shots. Placed on a map (Fig. 3-7), they were within the path of the motorcade or near Elm St. The motorcade headed west down Elm St. into a modest breeze.

Motorcycle escort officer Billy J. Martin, riding one half car length from the left rear fender of the Presidential limousine, recalled, "You could smell the gunpowder…you knew he wasn't far away. When you're that close you can smell the powder burning, why you - you've got to be pretty close to them…you could smell the gunpowder…right there in the street."

“Nose” witnesses

Senator Ralph W. Yarborough rode in the second car behind the limousine. He smelled gunpowder in the street and said it clung to the car throughout the race to Parkland Hospital.

Two cars behind Yarborough was the Cabell car. Mrs. Cabell said that she "…was acutely aware of the odor of gunpowder." She added that Congressman Ray Roberts, seated next to her, had mentioned it also.

According to Tom C. Dillard, two cars behind the Cabell car, he "…very definitely smelled gunpowder when the cars moved up at the corner of Elm and Houston Streets."

Vergie Rackley stood in front of the depository building. "She recalled that after the second shot she smelled gunsmoke…"

At the time of the shots, patrolman Joe M. Smith moved from the intersection of Elm and Houston Streets toward the triple underpass. When interviewed at that time, he stated that he smelled gunpowder near the underpass.

Patrolman Earle V. Brown, stationed 100 yards west of the underpass, stated that he heard the shots and then smelled gunpowder as the car sped beneath him.

A police officer who was on the sixth floor of the depository shortly after the shooting failed to smell any gunpowder there.

One newspaper summed it up: "…seconds later the cavalcade was gone. The area still reeked with the smell of gunpowder." Shots from the sixth floor of the depository building would have caused no gunpowder smell in the street. Murder from Within: Lyndon Johnson's Plot Against President Kennedy: Fred T. Newcomb: 9781463422424: Amazon.com: Books

[billymiller]

PressTV - New studies: ?Conspiracy theorists? sane; government dupes crazy, hostile

Recent studies by psychologists and social scientists in the US and UK suggest that contrary to mainstream media stereotypes, those labeled “conspiracy theorists” appear to be saner than those who accept the official versions of contested events.

Quote:
Jul 12, 2013

The most recent study was published on July 8th by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent (UK). Entitled “What about Building 7? A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories,” the study compared “conspiracist” (pro-conspiracy theory) and “conventionalist” (anti-conspiracy) comments at news websites.

The authors were surprised to discover that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventionalist ones: “Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist.” In other words, among people who comment on news articles, those who disbelieve government accounts of such events as 9/11 and the JFK assassination outnumber believers by more than two to one. That means it is the pro-conspiracy commenters who are expressing what is now the conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters are becoming a small, beleaguered minority.

Perhaps because their supposedly mainstream views no longer represent the majority, the anti-conspiracy commenters often displayed anger and hostility: “The research… showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals.”

Additionally, it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well. According to them, their own theory of 9/11 - a conspiracy theory holding that 19 Arabs, none of whom could fly planes with any proficiency, pulled off the crime of the century under the direction of a guy on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan - was indisputably true. The so-called conspiracists, on the other hand, did not pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11: “For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account.”

In short, the new study by Wood and Douglas suggests that the negative stereotype of the conspiracy theorist - a hostile fanatic wedded to the truth of his own fringe theory - accurately describes the people who defend the official account of 9/11, not those who dispute it.

Additionally, the study found that so-called conspiracists discuss historical context (such as viewing the JFK assassination as a precedent for 9/11) more than anti-conspiracists. It also found that the so-called conspiracists to not like to be called “conspiracists” or “conspiracy theorists.”

Both of these findings are amplified in the new book Conspiracy Theory in America by political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, published earlier this year by the University of Texas Press. Professor deHaven-Smith explains why people don’t like being called “conspiracy theorists”: The term was invented and put into wide circulation by the CIA to smear and defame people questioning the JFK assassination! “The CIA’s campaign to popularize the term ‘conspiracy theory’ and make conspiracy belief a target of ridicule and hostility must be credited, unfortunately, with being one of the most successful propaganda initiatives of all time.”

In other words, people who use the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” as an insult are doing so as the result of a well-documented, undisputed, historically-real conspiracy by the CIA to cover up the JFK assassination. That campaign, by the way, was completely illegal, and the CIA officers involved were criminals; the CIA is barred from all domestic activities, yet routinely breaks the law to conduct domestic operations ranging from propaganda to assassinations.

DeHaven-Smith also explains why those who doubt official explanations of high crimes are eager to discuss historical context. He points out that a very large number of conspiracy claims have turned out to be true, and that there appear to be strong relationships between many as-yet-unsolved “state crimes against democracy.” An obvious example is the link between the JFK and RFK assassinations, which both paved the way for presidencies that continued the Vietnam War. According to DeHaven-Smith, we should always discuss the “Kennedy assassinations” in the plural, because the two killings appear to have been aspects of the same larger crime.

Psychologist Laurie Manwell of the University of Guelph agrees that the CIA-designed “conspiracy theory” label impedes cognitive function. She points out, in an article published in American Behavioral Scientist (2010), that anti-conspiracy people are unable to think clearly about such apparent state crimes against democracy as 9/11 due to their inability to process information that conflicts with pre-existing belief.

In the same issue of ABS, University of Buffalo professor Steven Hoffman adds that anti-conspiracy people are typically prey to strong “confirmation bias” - that is, they seek out information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs, while using irrational mechanisms (such as the “conspiracy theory” label) to avoid conflicting information.

The extreme irrationality of those who attack “conspiracy theories” has been ably exposed by Communications professors Ginna Husting and Martin Orr of Boise State University. In a 2007 peer-reviewed article entitled “Dangerous Machinery: ‘Conspiracy Theorist’ as a Transpersonal Strategy of Exclusion,” they wrote:

Quote:
“If I call you a conspiracy theorist, it matters little whether you have actually claimed that a conspiracy exists or whether you have simply raised an issue that I would rather avoid… By labeling you, I strategically exclude you from the sphere where public speech, debate, and conflict occur.”
But now, thanks to the internet, people who doubt official stories are no longer excluded from public conversation; the CIA’s 44-year-old campaign to stifle debate using the “conspiracy theory” smear is nearly worn-out. In academic studies, as in comments on news articles, pro-conspiracy voices are now more numerous - and more rational - than anti-conspiracy ones.

[billymiller]

"The right side of his face was up. I could see his eyes were fixed. I could see into the skull, there was a hole in the skull. And you could see that part of the brain was gone. It wasn't even there."

[bud64]

Case revealed in full!! ...... brilliantly presented revealing documentary that exposes the lengths that these psychos and their interconnecting web will go to!!.....validates what we are bravely told by Donald ....highly recommended viewing!!!

[billymiller]

Of course Linda Willis understood a rear entry was impossible. Dr. McClelland pointed to the exact area the bullet really entered. The driver who fired the fatal shot pointed to this exact area when questioned by Arlen Specter. The specks of lead Greer was referring to were behind the right eye, the bullet's actual entry point. i889.photobucket.com/albums/ac98/77forever/Gifs/flap_zps834f3ddb.jpg

"The particular headshot must have come from another direction besides behind him because the back of his head blew off, and it doesn't make sense to be hit from the rear and still have your face intact. So he must've been hit from another position, ya know possibly, ya know in the front or over to the side, I, I really don't know where, but the back of his head blew off." Great quotes from eyewitnesses. Linda Willis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia






Phillip Willis - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Willis stated in a 1979 interview: "There's no doubt in our mind the final shot that blew his head off did not come from the depository. His head blew up like a halo. The brains and matter went to the left and the rear."

Mr. Specter.
Did you just mention, Mr. Greer, a hole in the President's head in addition to the large area of the skull which was shot away?
Mr. Greer.
No. I had just seen that, you know, the head was damaged in all this part of it but I believe looking at the X-rays, I looked at the X-rays when they were taken in the autopsy room, and the person who does that type work showed us the trace of it because there would be little specks of lead where the bullet had come from here and it came to the--they showed where it didn't come on through. It came to a sinus cavity or something they said, over the eye.

Mr. Specter.
Indicating the right eye. (Greer pointed over his right eye)
Mr. Greer.
I may be wrong.
Mr. Specter.
You don't know which eye?
Mr. Greer.
I don't know which eye, I may be wrong. But they showed us the trace of it coming through but there were very little small specks on the X-rays that these professionals knew what course that the bullet had taken, the lead.
Mr. Specter.
Would you describe in very general terms what injury you observed as to the President's head during the course of the autopsy?

Mr. Greer.
I would--to the best of my recollection it was in this part of the head right here.
Mr. Specter.
Upper right?
Mr. Greer.
Upper right side.
Mr. Specter.
Upper right side, going toward the rear. And what was the condition of the skull at that point?

Mr. Greer.
The skull was completely--this part was completely gone.

[billymiller]

The back of his head was blown off. Penn and idiot had jfk's face wiped out. Real evidence must always be ignored to push a false conclusion.

[bud64]

[billymiller]

The Governor of Texas, John Connally looked directly at jfk's real assassin immediately after the fatal headshot. The driver and ss agent (William Greer) fired that shot into the President's right forehead with the resulting bullet exiting the right rear. This case was proven and closed over four years ago. He kind of lifts his head up and pauses before hitting the floor.

Connally saw the fatal shot and quickly corrected himself, but his reaction when looking at Greer proves he slipped up. Watch him hit the floor in horror once he realized Greer shot JFK. The Governor, logically starting turning toward the driver because he was braking before he shot the President.

jfk-assassination.com/warren/wch/vol4/page136.php

Obviously, at least the major wound that I took in the shoulder through the chest couldn't have been anything but the second shot. Obviously, it couldn't have been the third, because when the third shot was fired I was in a reclining position, and heard it, saw it and the effects of it, rather--I didn't see it, I saw the effects of it--so it obviously could not have been the third, and couldn't have been the first, in my judgment.



jfk-assassination.com/warren/wch/vol4/page133.php

So I merely doubled up, and then turned to my right again and began to--I just sat there, and Mrs. Connally pulled me over to her lap. She was sitting, of course, on the jump seat, so I reclined with my head in her lap, conscious all the time, and with my eyes open; and then, of course, the third shot sounded, and I heard the shot very clearly. I heard it hit him. I heard the shot hit something, and I assumed again--it never entered my mind that it ever hit anybody but the President. I heard it hit. It was a very loud noise, just that audible, very clear.

GREER FIRED RIGHT OVER CONNALLY'S HEAD and when he realized Greer fired it, he hit the floor, terrified. WATCH THE GOVERNOR.