The JFK Assassination: Author Gerald Posner
Vložit
- čas přidán 10. 05. 2024
- JFK Assassination author and investigative journalist Gerald Posner talks with Nick Owens whose acclaimed book Case Closed might be the final word on the event.
→ Subscribe czcams.com/users/HindsightHi...
Get in touch with Gerald at www.posner.com, www.justthefacts.media/, and / geraldposner if you have information about the case to share.
Produced by: Logan Lepper
Shoutouts: @PosnerFlix @trishaposner @geraldposner @trishaposner @theauthenticexposure @authenticexposurestudio
******
Introduction - 00:00
Why Write This Book? - 01:52
Prior To This Process, What Did You Believe? - 06:49
Researchers Get Stuck in Dealey Plaza - 09:03
The Warren Commission - 15:19
New Evidence - 20:39
Presidential Motorcade - 43:44
Acoustical Evidence - 46:17
The Katzenbach Memo - 50:15
Presidential Limo at Parkland - 56:55
Jim Garrison - 1:01:22
Oswald's Flight - 1:10:46
Texas Theatre - 1:14:45
Why Did Jack Ruby Kill Oswald? - 1:20:26
Classified Kennedy Files - 1:25:53
What Questions Remain? - 1:30:10
ChatGPT on Kennedy Assassination - 1:32:01
Any Weakness in Case Closed? - 1:34:09
#history #jfkassassination #jfk
Most people that swear some force group or governmental entity were responsible other than LHO are entitled to their opinions. However most of these folks while they criticize the WC, never read any of the volumes.
Thank you for the comment, Frank. I certainly agree that before one forms an intelligent opinion about a matter of dispute, they have to hear both sides of the story. Like the old West Virginia Mountaineer said, “No matter how thin I make my pancakes, they always have two sides.”
@@HindsightHistoryVince Bugliosi used to say that 😅
@@andycummings-music Yes, one of my favorite quotes from him.
You're right about that...but Oswald is an interesting guy.
Military man turns hardcore Marxist.Defects to USSR arrives fluent in Russian.
Comes back no problem.
Now he's rabid anti Cuban communist.
On and on crazy things happening.
And assassinated himself at 24. Its a lot.
In the 70s, the US Congress also did not believe the WC report and ordered a new investigation.
A conspiracy theorist goes to heaven and asks God "Who killed JFK?" God answers "Oswald." The theorist turns away thinking "Wow, this conspiracy is bigger than I thought."
Lmao .
Yes!
So fucking true
Very funny!...I will use that one on my thick-headed brother-in-law, who embraces any and all theories of conspiracy!
A time traveler from the future appears in Deally Plaza on November 22, 1963. He encounters a group of three men, one is CIA, one is FBI, and one is Secret Service. He asked the three men, is this before or after the JFK assassination? All three answered simultaneously, BEFORE!
Ironically, Posner uses James Wilkes Booth as an example of a lone gunman changing history. Guess he forgot Booth was part of a conspiracy.
..This should be the top comment
Denying conspiracies is an involuntary bodily function for Posner. He didn't forget. That or he's a half-assed historian. Maybe both.
@@Ekrindul Silly comment.
Good point! However, to be fair JWB was a lone gunman who carried out a history changing event on his own. Most Kennedy conspiracies involve multiple gunmen
@@dilznick101 ...JWB was part of a conspiracy , thats the whole point of the excellent original comment..his co conspirators were Samuel Arnold, George Atzerodt, David Herold, Michael O'Laughlen, Lewis Powell and also John and Mary Surratt .
this is great for people who don't read and can't think. we need comfort.....
You need to read...try using your brain.
@@curbozerboomer1773 Ouch!!! but thanks for the support:)
So everyone who doesn't think like you is illiterate and unable to think for themselves. Just a bit narcistic don't ya think? Maybe you should read his book.
I would suggest watching Lemino's video on the Texas Book Depository. It convinced me that Oswald acted alone after almost 30 years of believing in the conspiracy theories.
Posner touches on the missteps of the authorities. What he could further say is the real conspiracy was these same agencies and officials were humiliated and embarrassed on how they and their agencies could have easily prevented this but mistakes were made but for understandable reasons. Embarrasment, shame, reputations, politics and world view muddied the waters of this history shifting event.
Lol that comment was so funny 😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣. They didn't prevent it because they manufactured it. From the shooters to Oswald to the cover up.
Clearly you have a view of someone hat refuses to believe in evidence. You really think dozens and dozens of politicians, police, and regular people would all act in accordance with no reward, no slip ups, no leks, for almost 60 years? Clearly you do not understand politics. I bet yo ualso believe Princess Diana was killed by the royals, and 911 was an inside job. @@user-ny6lo9vv8x
Agree the ball was dropped beforehand mainly by the FbI with James Hosty not believing Oswald could be dangerous..
This man is part of the conspiracy 50 years on shame on him.
Posner makes up good 'excuses', but he's working for the deep state son. He's a fraud who tries to make the ridiculous Warren theory seem palatable.
The Parkland physicians and Nurse Bell ALL described _in detail_ the hole in the back of the head. The official government controlled autopsy photos do not show this damage.
"The Parkland physicians and Nurse Bell ALL described in detail the hole in the back of the head."
That is incorrect. Not "all" as in 100 percent of the Parkland doctors and nurses said that. There were several who made no mention of it at all. You also seem to be ignoring at least one of the Parkland doctors, Adolph Giesecke, who said that he saw that parts of JFK's skull were missing as far forward as just above his browline, which is precisely what is shown in both the anterior and lateral x-rays of his head. You are also omitting the fact that JFK's thick hair and scalp were never pulled back at Parkland, nor were any x-rays taken at Parkland, and that thus the Parkland doctors and nurses, at least for the most part had no possible way of knowing whether the hole in the rear of JFK's head represented the majority of the damage to his skull or only a minority of the damage.
"The official government controlled autopsy photos do not show this damage."
Neither does the Zapruder film, and this is photographic evidence of what JFK's head looked like immediately after being struck by the bullet, before anyone at Parkland saw his head for the first time after the shooting and long before the autopsy photos were taken. Instead, the Zapruder film shows that by far the most obvious exit damage was in the front half of his head, with those big, horrible flaps of scalp and bone hanging down in front of his right ear from the upper right front of his head. And I don't buy the claim that some have made that those flaps were "added" to the film later. Nearly all of the closest witnesses on JFK's right, including Emmett Hudson, Bill Newman, Gayle Newman, Marilyn Sitzman, and Zapruder himself. All of them said they saw the right side of his head explode, not the rear, and they also saw the damage to his head before any of the Parkland doctors and nurses saw it. Zapruder on live television only two hours after the assassination, before he or anyone else had yet seen the film for the first time ever, placed his right hand on the right side of his own head in front of his right ear to demonstrate which part of JFK's head he saw explode open.
@@Caeruleo
I appreciate your detailed response.
"JFK Assassination hole in back of head 0001" is the name of the short and concise video from which my conclusions were drawn. It is pretty difficult to dispute.
There is no mention from any of the interviewees about damage to the top or the side of the head.
You are correct about the absence of this in the Zfilm. What does appear is an oddly blacked out area - visible in high resolution scans from a dup negative obtained from the archives. This according to Doug Horne of the ARRB.
@@Caeruleo You wasted all that time writing this. The official Autopsy Photos are fake. The Photographer was asked under oath if the official photos are the ones you took. No I don't use that brand of film. Opps.
@@Caeruleo I said: "The Parkland physicians and Nurse Bell ALL described in detail the hole in the back of the head."
You said: *_"That is incorrect. Not "all" as in 100 percent of the Parkland doctors and nurses said that. There were several who made no mention of it at all."_*
As per the video I recommended, Dr. Robert McClelland saw this wound. Nurse Audrey Bell did. As did the _majority_ of those who worked on the President for over a half hour. These are people who know how to describe wounds and pinpoint their locations. That is what they do, day in and day out.
What will it take for you to concede that there WAS a large gaping hole in the right rear of Kennedy's head? If you were to do so you would then, I would hope, begin to wonder why there are no pictures of this in the official government held records.
@@432b86ed ""JFK Assassination hole in back of head 0001" is the name of the short and concise video from which my conclusions were drawn."
Watching that now, and I've already caught, only 26 seconds into the video, a blatant error made by James Chaney, who said that "President Kennedy looked back over his left shoulder." Nowhere in the Zapruder film does JFK come anywhere even remotely close to looking back over his left shoulder, or for that matter over his right shoulder either. I have just posted a comment to that video in which I point out that very thing. I also said:
"Afterward we hear various news commentators claiming that JFK was "struck in the right temple" and similar wording. Of course it is not uncommon for early conclusions, early reports, and early speculations to simply be mistaken. It was also reported on television that day that there was a rumor that a Secret Service agent was killed in Dealey Plaza that day, and that quite obviously turned out to be mistaken. Also, two of the Parkland doctors, Kemp Clark and Malcolm Perry (the latter of whom is shown speaking at 1:26) said in the press conference that afternoon that they thought that one possibility was that JFK was struck by only one bullet, period, which might have entered his throat, turned upward, and then exited out of his head. Yet that turned out to be quite obviously incorrect too. Interesting that this video makes no mention of those obvious mistakes in the early conclusions, early reports, and early speculations."
"It is pretty difficult to dispute."
You mean difficult to dispute if you study only the evidence presented in that video and ignore the majority of the evidence, a great deal of which is not mentioned in that video.
"There is no mention from any of the interviewees about damage to the top or the side of the head."
There is no mention from any of *those* interviewees in those *particular* excerpts from their interviews about damage to the top or side of the head, quite obviously because whoever made the video was extremely selective regarding which portions of which interviews they included in the film. A tremendously larger number of people who saw JFK's head after he was shot gave statements of various types regarding the damage to his head that they saw than the tiny minority of the witnesses shown in that one single video. You give the appearance that you have never come anywhere close to studying all of the statements made by all of these witnesses. Just at Parkland alone there were at least 25 people who saw the damage to JFK's head at some point. That one video shows only nine of them, barely more than one-third. What about what all the other Parkland witnesses said? Interesting that the video doesn't bother to mention Dr. Adolph Giesecke, who said that he saw that parts of JFK's skull were missing as far forward as just above his browline, which is precisely what both the anterior and lateral x-rays from Bethesda show. And what about all the witnesses who saw the damage to JFK's head *before* they reached the hospital, including those who saw the damage to his head immediately after it was struck by the bullet, such as Emmett Hudson, Jackie Kennedy, Bill Newman, Gayle Newman, Marilyn Sitzman, and Abraham Zapruder? Except for Jackie, all of those witnesses I just named unanimously said that they saw the right side of JFK's head explode, not the rear. On live television only two hours after the assassination, before he or anyone else had yet seen the developed film for the first time ever, Zapruder said, "And then I heard another shot or two - I couldn't say whether it was one or two, and I saw his head practically open up, all blood and everything, and I kept on shooting." And at the same time he is speaking these words, we see him place his right hand on the right side of his own head in front of his right ear to demonstrate where he saw JFK's head explode, which is precisely the part of JFK's head where we see those big, horrible flaps of bone and scalp suddenly appear after the bullet strike. Perhaps you should go watch that clip also; it's been here on CZcams for years.
And what did Jackie say? She was the closest witness to JFK at the moment he was struck in the head, and after she climbed back into the back seat from her brief foray out onto the trunk, she had his head in her lap all the way to the hospital. And she said to Theodore White only one week after the assassination, "I kept holding the top of his head down, trying to keep the brains in." She said the top, not the rear.
Naturally the big, horrible flaps of scalp and bone in front of his right ear weren't especially noticeable at Parkland, because Jackie closed them up on the way to the hospital in a desperate attempt to hold his head together. Thus at the hospital the more forward damage to his skull was mostly hidden by his thick hair and scalp. Nevertheless, the more forward damage to his skull was not entirely missed at Parkland, as I have discussed above.
"You are correct about the absence of this in the Zfilm. What does appear is an oddly blacked out area - visible in high resolution scans from a dup negative obtained from the archives. This according to Doug Horne of the ARRB."
Pfft. Douglas Horne is one of the most unreliable and biased researchers I have ever come across in this case. He claimed that the big, horrible flaps of scalp and bone in front of JFK's right ear were added to the film later. He completely ignored nearly all of the closest witnesses on JFK's right, five of whom I named above, saying that they did indeed see considerable damage on the right side of JFK's head, not the rear. He also made the provably false claim that "approximately fifty witnesses" said the limousine came to a complete stop, when in actual fact, of the *sixty* closest witnesses to the limo at the instant of the head shot (which includes the five surviving people in the limo) only a small minority said the limo came to a complete stop. A much larger number merely said the limo slowed down, or else made no mention of it at all.
"I said: "The Parkland physicians and Nurse Bell ALL described in detail the hole in the back of the head." You said: "That is incorrect. Not "all" as in 100 percent of the Parkland doctors and nurses said that. There were several who made no mention of it at all." As per the video I recommended, Dr. Robert McClelland saw this wound. Nurse Audrey Bell did. As did the majority of those who worked on the President for over a half hour."
What I was disputing was that at first you said "ALL" (even typing the word in all caps) as in 100 percent of the doctors and nurses described in detail the hole in the back of the head. That earlier statement of yours is provably wrong, as you now seem to be admitting. And you have only named a tiny, tiny minority of the Parkland doctors and nurses, and as I've already said above, that video only shows and quotes nine of them, nowhere near the majority. I first read the complete, unabridged testimonies of all the Parkland doctors and nurses in 2002 and by now I am quite familiar with what they said, and also with what they didn't say. I would suggest you do the same rather than relying entirely, or almost entirely, on extremely selective excerpts of what they said in CZcams videos. They said a lot of things that I found to be eye-openers when I first read them, and a lot of things they said have rarely been mentioned by authors of books about the assassination and makers of videos about the assassination, including what I said above Giesecke above.
"These are people who know how to describe wounds and pinpoint their locations. That is what they do, day in and day out. What will it take for you to concede that there WAS a large gaping hole in the right rear of Kennedy's head?"
Ah, I think I see the problem now. You seem to have mistakenly thought that I believe that there was no hole in the back of his head. You have misunderstood me. In fact I very much believe that hole was there, just as some, but not all, of the Parkland doctors and nurses described it. I came to believe it more than two decades ago when I first read the complete, unabridged testimonies of those doctors and nurses, and I have many times since ridiculed people who have made the absurd claim that all these doctors and nurses were "simply mistaken." I simply do not believe that the hole in the back of his head was necessarily the "exit" for the bullet, since the majority of the evidence indicates that there was more damage to the front half of his skull than to the rear half. The area of greatest damage is usually the area of exit in ballistics.
"If you were to do so you would then, I would hope, begin to wonder why there are no pictures of this in the official government held records."
I have indeed wondered that, long ago, and finally in 2011 (more than a decade ago) some other researchers helped me to explore that very issue in detail. The photographic evidence from the autopsy as a whole is woefully inadequate. There should have been a much larger number of full color photographs taken of his head from a larger number of angles and taken at a larger number of points in the autopsy, early, middle, and late. Sadly, the only photos clearly showing the back of his head appear to be from late in the autopsy. There also should have been several full color photos of the inside of his skull after the brain was removed taken from various distances and various angles. That one black and white photo, often called "F8," is pitifully inadequate for several reasons.
The National Lampoon editor has more info than anyone on the planet ... America's Untold Stories connects all dots... No matter where they go.
Yes I love that podcast.
There is a reason why 75% of the American people don't believe in the Warren Reports conclusion that there was only one shooter. LBJ sealed the millions of pages of government files pertaining to Oswald for 75 years later. The KGB in an internal report identified LBJ as involved in the assassination. In 1979 the House Select Committee on Assassinations having new information and investigative technology concluded that there was a second gunman and thus a conspiracy. This is the reason Gerald Posner doesn't mention the 1979 H.US.C conclusion. The Warren Report is the Establishment's story and there sticking to it.
@@mike7099 "The KGB in an internal report identified LBJ as involved in the assassination."
Please quote that report verbatim here, or at least in English translation, along with the original primary source of the translation. I have been studying this assassination for 35 years and I do not recall any KGB document which claims anything even remotely similar to that. Are you sure the document doesn't merely state a suspicion that he might have been involved, without actually producing any real proof that he was involved?
"In 1979 the House Select Committee on Assassinations having new information and investigative technology concluded that there was a second gunman and thus a conspiracy. This is the reason Gerald Posner doesn't mention the 1979 H.US.C conclusion."
You are making a gigantic, glaring omission. The HSCA was just about to issue a final conclusion that there was only one gunman when, almost at the end of their hearings, they were presented with what turned out later to be a severely flawed acoustical study of the DPD dictabelt recording in which it was claimed that the sounds of four gunshots were preserved on the recording, and that the third of the four shots was determined to have come from the grassy knoll. The HSCA did not have time to properly compare this acoustic study to other evidence to determine its validity, so in haste they revised their conclusion to say that there were probably two gunmen. Within the first years after the conclusion was issued in 1979, however, the original acoustic study was widely disputed. Today the dictabelt is far too controversial to be reasonably considered to be a bonafide audio recording of the gunfire. Among the most fatal flaws of the original study is the relative timing of the shots, in which they placed the shot that hit Connally an absolute minimum of six seconds before the fatal head shot to JFK, which is not supported by any photographic evidence or by Connally's own testimony of when he was hit. Six seconds before the head shot is, quite obviously, far too early. There are other severe problems with the claims of the original acoustic study as well.
you either are lying on purpose or you are ignorant
Amazing video series … I just came across them. I saw this guy Posner speak in Long Island when he book came out. We had a nice mini debate back and forth , during the Q&A
Oswald never was in Mexico City.
The CIA lied.
(How shocking)
He was ID'd by people on the bus.
He was ID'd by hotel and embassy staff.
He signed hotel registers, VISA applications, etc.
@@aaronz7056 that's been proven false.
@@TipToe67 Yes, of course it has. LOL
Why did the back of JFKs head end up on the trunk of the limousine. How come you can see the kill shot hit him in the right side of his forehead?
"Why did the back of JFKs head end up on the trunk of the limousine."
Oh, you didn't know that a large percentage of the material from his head also landed in front of him? You didn't know that all four people sitting in front of JFK, John Connally, Nellie Connally, William Greer, and Roy Kellerman, were showered with blood and pieces of his brain? You didn't know that material from his head landed all over the inside of the car, and on the windshield, and on the hood of the car? John Connally said that as soon as the fatal shot struck JFK in the head, "Immediately I could see on my clothes, my clothing, I could see on the interior of the car which, as I recall, was a pale blue, brain tissue, which I immediately recognized, and I recall very well, on my trousers there was one chunk of brain tissue as big as almost my thumb, thumbnail, and again I did not see the President at any time either after the first, second, or third shots, but I assumed always that it was he who was hit and no one else." Nellie Connally said the same thing. Roy Kellerman said that when the final shot was fired he saw flesh from JFK's head fly between him and the driver, William Greer. And the back of Greer's jacket was soaked with JFK's blood. And Robert Frazier said that he saw bloody material from JFK's head on the windshield and on the hood.
Interesting that you only mention material from his head landing on the trunk, as if it landed "only" behind him and nowhere else, but don't bother to be fair and *also* mention that plenty of material from his head also exited forward and landed far forward of him. To mention one but not the other is misleading, to put it mildly, and counts as spreading misinformation about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
Shame on you.
"How come you can see the kill shot hit him in the right side of his forehead?"
I don't see any such thing. Instead I see the kill shot *exiting* the upper right front of his head. You didn't know that a bullet typically causes greater damage at the point of exit than at the point of entrance? The entrance is usually small and round, with a diameter only slightly more than the diameter of the bullet. The exit, however, can be far larger? You think those big, horrible flaps of bone and scalp hanging down in front of his right ear from the upper right front of his head represent the *entrance* of the bullet??
Sheesh.
Because you yourself have brain damage, from all that LSD.
Why was Oswald immediately a suspect? Why was an all point bulletin issued for a guy matching Oswald’s description?
I asked the same question.
Set up
Because he was the only employee of the TSBD that was missing, that’s why!!
Because the shooter was seen in the window of the TSBD building and Oswald fit the description.
Patsy
Posner got a couple of technical things wrong, regarding Oswald's fleeing the scene....He actually took a BUS first, even getting a transfer from the driver...after the bus being caught in a traffic jam, he then exits the bus, and flags down a CAB, that took him to within a few blocks of his rooming house...also, after shooting officer Tippit, he was only followed a short distance by someone, who turned back...then Oswald chose to hide in an alcove of a shoe store!..The manager, named Johnny Brewer, notice Oswald, looking stressed, and not facing the busy street, that had some police cars moving by. Brewer then followed Oswald down the street, where the Texas Theater was located...Brewer saw that Oswald sneaked into the theater, when the ticket woman was distracted by the street scene going on. Brewer was definitely the responsible citizen, who, while inside the shoe store, had heard the brief description of Oswald being put out over the radio. While Posner got these details wrong, I do not really know, but it is not critical to what he is telling us.
Posner knows all this. And yes, it’s in his book.
He left these details out for brevity and to keep the interview moving. They all are in his book and I’m quite sure he knows them by heart. He’s a phenomenal researcher and writer. This interview was conducted extremely well, btw.
Texas Theater general manager saw Oswald in the theater long before Tippit was shot. So did movie goer Jack Davis. Therefore, Oswald could not have killed Tippit. Yet, the WC never called on these two witnesses. Read the deposition by Warren Commission counsel David W. Belin. He never established a "timeline" for when Brewer saw Oswald enter the theater. Ticket Clerk Julia Postal was also deposed. WC counsel Joseph A. Ball never established a "timeline" with Postal's account of Oswald entering the theater. Furthermore, if she placed a call to the Dallas Police Department, where is the phone log? For Pete's Sake! Isn't all of this evidence crucial to the case?
Like the WC posner ignores evidence, he cherry picks
"Like the WC posner ignores evidence, he cherry picks"
Indeed, just like almost every author who has ever written a book about the JFK assassination, including the ones who support the idea of conspiracy. They too are at least as guilty of cherry picking the evidence as Posner.
My 2 cents worth - I have two main problems with the Warren Commission:
1. Hoover did state that (I'm paraphrasing) the commission should find that Oswald was the only shooter. If this isn't "confirmation bias", it will do until the real thing comes along.
2. If Oswald really was just a "lone nut", I see NO reason to keep any part of this crime secret let alone "classifying" it as "top secret".
I really enjoyed Case Closed. Below is the best video I've ever seen on recreating the "magic bullet" shot.
czcams.com/video/PZRUNYZY71g/video.html
You make two very valid points, but then you say you enjoyed Case Closed? Posner misstates facts throughout an interview I saw concerning his book. He said JFK was struck in the "high neck area" from behind. That one statement alone tells me all I need to know about his book. I viewed the link you provided concerning the recreation of the magic bullet theory. Visit the link again and read my comment. I dissected the video into a series of errors. It does more to destroy the magic bullet theory than support it.
Qswald was witnessed exiting from the rear of School Book Depository, within 10 min. after the assassination
A time traveler goes back to try and save Kennedy. When he arrives in the past he sees a CIA agent. He asks the agent "Is today November 22nd 1963?" The CIA agent says "Yes" The time traveler then asks, "Before or after the Kennedy assassination?" The CIA agent says, "Before".😮
Cool story. Try to lose the Hollywood mindset. This was real life. The cia didn’t do it.
That’s pretty good.. lol..
You do realize the person who killed Tippit discarded his jacket, after killing him.. Which is interesting, because Oswald discarded his jacket, then tried to kill cops when he resisted arrest.. lol..
What a coincidence.. lol..
I thought it was the mob? Or General Walker? Or the anti Castro Cubans?
@@denroy3
It was the boogeyman.. And it alternates.. LBJ, Ruth Paine, the CIA, mafia, Texas Oil men, JD Tippit, Ted Callaway… And on and on..
@@jacobjones5269 good god! you conspiracy nuts are just unashamed of your lies, or just don’t care about facts. Is it because you guys get away with your lies to people who don’t know any better? Oswald was not wearing a jacket when he was arrested. That’s an absolute lie. The jacket found was his because the eyewitness saw him wearing it when he shot tippit then suddenly he’s arrested without one and Marina said it was his. If I was a conspiracy theorist I would stay away from Tippit and only argue jfk, you’ll have a better chance because there is no question he killed Tippit. Tons of evidence and even more eyewitness, about 12, thats a lot of people you’re gonna have to explain away. Oh yeah, stay away from general Walker too, there’s no question he shot at Walker a few months prior. You’re in a very deep hole with a lot of excuses needed and evidence you’ll have to explain away. Or you could just go with your common sense and objective reasoning and lose the kooky conspiracies.
a head shot from behind does not go backwards , nor does body parts go backwards, on to the trunk.
Only the robots who trust our government disagree with such a logical statement.
"a head shot from behind does not go backwards , nor does body parts go backwards, on to the trunk."
Oh, you didn't know that it has still never been proven that any part of JFK's brain or skull landed on the trunk? Jackie Kennedy and Clint Hill never said that they saw any piece of JFK's head on the trunk. And you didn't know that all four people sitting in front of JFK, John Connally, Nellie Connally, William Greer, and Roy Kellerman, most definitely *did* say that they were showered with blood and pieces of JFK's brain? John Connally said that after he was hit by the second shot, he heard the third shot, and, "Immediately I could see on my clothes, my clothing, I could see on the interior of the car which, as I recall, was a pale blue, brain tissue, which I immediately recognized, and I recall very well, on my trousers there was one chunk of brain tissue as big as almost my thumb, thumbnail, and again I did not see the President at any time either after the first, second, or third shots, but I assumed always that it was he who was hit and no one else."
Interesting that you only mention an unconfirmed claim that body parts landed on the trunk, but make no mention of the *confirmed* claim of body parts landing on the people sitting in front of JFK, and all over the inside of the car.
Yup...they did.
Read the book. Then Bugliosi's book. And the Warren report. Also analysis of the Zapruder film. Your info is twenty years out-of-date.
Ballistics do not have a “date”. The Warren report excluded the film .
WHO is being fooled ?
Which wrist of Connally think this chap is confused as he points as if it was the Governors LEFT- How much bone was destroyed - ribs large radius bone smashed - view the x-rays. I think this chappy is a Mr Warren Report bunny. What about the 1.6 seconds in between Kennedy and Connally being hit by the same bullet. Even Connally statements say I was not hit by the same bullet and so does the Zupuder film. The bullet needed a rest between the the men. Magic!
Connally went into shock immediately and was placed under sedation at the hospital. He didn't wake up until the next day. It's possible that his recollection is not totally accurate. He was also a huge egotist - even for a politician - and possibly he wanted his own bullet
The Zapruder film endorses the single bullet theory. It shows that at the same moment the President puts his hands to his throat, Connally's cheeks puff out, the lapel of his jacket flaps out and his hat - in his left hand - flips to the side
Within 1-2 frames of Kennedy getting hit, Connally's lapel pops out, his hat flips up and his expression violently contorts between frames from the blow. One bullet.
The bullet Didn't hang 1.6 seconds between JFK and Connolly. You made that up. You're a Dishonest broker.
Kennedy wasn’t sitting directly behind Connolly. He was sitting close to - or directly against - the side of the car, while Connolly was sitting a bit farther to the inside, to the left of Kennedy.
@@Vgy926 Connally was also seated lower and turned sharply to his right, the victims' wounds all lining up on a perfect trajectory. In addition, the view of the entry wound on Connally's back would have been completely blocked by Kennedy's body, the bullet has to have gone through him first.
Yes, flattened on one side. Like you put it into a vise.
We look forward to you explaining how the people planting bogus bullet at the hospital within one hour of the shooting knew a bullet needed planting at all or that he wasn't simply planting one bullet too many into evidence and blowing the whole plot.
@@aaronz7056 The people who planted the bullet at the hospital were Imaginary. 😂
Katzenback said they had to quash the foreign rumors circulating because If they didn't they woukd assume they agreed with the rumors.
Spot on @Randy Harris. If one reads everything Katzenbach said, it is clear his one poorly constructed sentence--only poorly constructed because it lends itself to twisting by clever lawyers--does not mean we must pull the wool over people's eyes and make them believe that Oswald is the assassin but that it's clear to all of us looking at all the evidence that Oswald is the assassin and we want the public to understand that. Why was he saying this? Because as soon as Kennedy was shot conspiracy theories were spreading like wildfire. I think the first poll taken after the assassination found only 29% of Americans believed Oswald was the lone assassin.
My opinion on all this is very much what Bugliosi says on pages 366-67 of "Reclaiming History." The only criticism I have after re-reading those two pages is Bugliosi using the tautology "true facts." By definition, if it's a fact it is true.
What I've noticed about most conspiracy theorists is they focus minor inconsistencies or things that are not fully explained or they lift things out of context while ignoring the overwhelming mass of evidence. Defense attorneys are great at doing this, e.g. the trial of O.J. Simpson.
Anyone else catch Posner’s description of his reaction to Stone’s JFK? Compare and contrast that with his presentation of himself as an objective observer/researcher into the assassination (Case Closed came out in ‘93). He lifts a veil there - this guy is establishment to the core.
He merely told the truth...Stone wanted people to have renewed interest in the assassination, so he threw most all, very generalized conspiracy theories against the wall, so to speak, in order to tweak the interest of the American people in this horrible event. Posner was correct, in saying that it was just a Hollywood fantasy production.
Why not have a 4 year old interview Posner, it would have been the same interview 😂
Three points:
1) While some conspiracy theorists may doubt the autopsy evidence, one has only to look at the Zapruder film: the large wound of exit is (all too clearly) on the right side of the head, not the rear.
2) I suspect that what has been held back, among the Government documents, are CIA records which show that they knew from electronic surveillance what Oswald said in the Cuban embassy - possibly expressing a thought about killing Kennedy - but failed to either watch Oswald when he returned to the US or pass the information to the FBI. This would have been supremely embarrassing to the CIA. At the very least, the CIA would not have wanted the public and foreign governments to find out about their diplomatic surveillance activities. The US government is not sitting on evidence that the CIA was behind the assassination.
3) Part of the reason that the majority of the public believes in a conspiracy is that non-conspiracy authors, like Gerald Posner, were only published 30 years after the fact; while the conspiracy theorists published almost immediately after the Warren Report. Of course, in their defence, new wound ballistic evidence was only available much later. One wonders what would have been the effect if books like "Case Closed" were published in the '60s...
Feel free to believe every word of the warren report, and totally trust the authors.
@@AMC2283 Have you read the Warren Report? All 26 volumes? It is the single biggest homicide investigation in history with hundreds of investigators and researchers participating. Over 2000 people were interviewed. Have you read Bugliosi's book? He quotes several assistant council attorneys that were dying to find a conspiracy. Burt Griffin said, "“None of us knew each other before we went to work there, and we were all determined to find a conspiracy,” he said. “If anybody was going to try and cover it up, we would have walked out. I’ve even said to people, if I could have found a conspiracy, I would have been the senator of Ohio instead of John Glenn.”
one fact that blows you essay away. the zapruder fild has been doctored. aka tampered with. simple as that
@@user-ny6lo9vv8x Really? All three copies made that day? The two copies made the next day? The second generation copies?They were able to get to all of them and edit them the exact same way? LIFE took the original, Zapruder kept one. The Feds took one. The family of Zapruder donated their copy to the 6th floor museum years later. The perpetrators got the edits synched up with the other video from that day?
@@user-ny6lo9vv8x Not a fact at all! Three copies were made that day. The original was sold to Life. Zapruder kept one which was, years later given to the 6th floor museum. The feds got the others. Two more copies were made the next day. Life made copies of their original. There were a few 2nd generation copies as well. How did the conspirators get to all copies and edit them exactly the same way? And how did they get the other video from that day to line up with the newly edited version?
it is very interesting how sound waves travel in a place with buildings all around. I was walking down a small street and started hearing a loud engine rumbling, seeming to come from a building ahead of me on the right. It had a large open door and I thought there must be a machine running in there. I kept walking and once I got past a building on my left, suddenly I saw and heard the source of the sound; a powerful motorcycle ahead on my left. The building on my left had been blocking the sound from reaching my ears directly, and I could have sworn the source of the sound was on my right.
I was walking down the street and heard the sound of a big truck, seemingly in front of me; there was no truck in front of me and I turned around and it was behind me.
This is like when Lee Bowers, who worked in the railyard tower for 10 years, talked about the time when work was being done on the exterior of the TSBD. He said he couldn't tell if the sounds were coming from the TSBD or the triple underpass / knoll area - because of reverberations.
It's extremely easy to see why people were not sure if the shots came from the underpass/knoll or from the TSBD.
Maybe that's why almost everyone in Dealey Plaza that day thought the shots might have come from one area or the other - not both. Which area has the evidence of a shooter? the TSBD.
Exactly. The ballistics evidence and autopsy are far more reliable. And they show zero evidence of shots inflicted from the front.
You mean the Lee Bowers who mysteriously died in a single car accident? Lee Bowers died in the same way another JFK witness was severely injured and lived on for a few more years who was then shot in the chest, Deputy Roger Craig. He came around the sharp corner and 2 men had the road blocked forcing him to fly off the edge of a cliff.
@@code3responsevideos872 what was mysterious about his accident? We only have evidence of Oswald shooting Kennedy with no sign of any help. Why would there be people running around killing off people who were in Dealy Plaza? It's just ridiculous, isn't it? Didn't Craig shoot himself?
@@code3responsevideos872 this is silly. How do some witnesses supporting the conspiracy narrative live a long life? And marginal witnesses supporting the official view, or perhaps neutral to it, die shortly before their time?
Actually Posner is exaggerating about being able to recreate the SB over and over if you watch beyond the magic bullet thy came close but the bullet was more damaged
And came out JFK's chest. Way below the throat.
@@peggylavelle581 Peggy stop the misinformation it absolutely didn't.
@@randyharris3175 Man you know better. You commented on that CZcams site. @ 1.16.36 the red line passes through JFK's chest.
@@peggylavelle581 The HSCA determined where the bullet entered the President with drawings etc best experts in the world.
@@randyharris3175 I'm not let you off that easy. You brought up that bad documentary. The angle has never worked . You probably believe Myers lies also.
IF we stay in Dealy Plaza, would that include Connelly saying he was not hit by the same bullet as Kennedy?
Connelly was wrong 🤷♂️
He said he wasn't hit by the 1st shot, but rather by the second. he was right; the 1st missed completely.
Connelly is just another person with unreliable self induced bias. The whole issue conspiracy people is they ignore proven facts and obsess over tniy inconsitencies from word of mouth witnesses.
I often think the Kennedy Assassination proves Nietzsche's assertion that there are no facts only interpretations. The interviewer touched on this when he declared we were hard-wired biologically to seek out patterns, and when you subject any complicated event to minute analysis you can find many random details to support a theory you wish to propagate.
yes but posner does this also
@@randallanthony1794 Oh I agree. I've never read Posner's book and have no opinion on it. There's a whole cottage industry built up around JFK's assassination. People seem to find in it what they want to find.
@@JeffRebornNow And so does Posner it’s just Warren commission stuff and they refused to see it. There’s so much evidence out there they prove otherwise the two wallets in there were two unless the police Leiden and switched him and took him to the camp at mader saying, and then took it back and he couldn’t possible but I doubt it and then there’s a set up Mexico City that October that has him there at the Cuban in Russian embassy and doesn’t approve assassinations cruise. Somethings going on funny it was all the information in the early 90s that come out about the Oswald Molly intelligence people knew who he was and he went through for their their ways to check him and he wasn’t watching. They said they had no interest they’re lying but you’re right a lot of people do this cottage industry that’s way with everything with this guy is too. He’s a piece of shit and he’s a liar. Posner is no good he’s a Fraud he’s an official an official Fraud.
@@JeffRebornNowwell the Dallas Police found Oswald's rifle and the FBI found the bullet fragments in the car that matched it.
People can interpret whatever they want but facts don't lie.
Yes you guys are so right, there are no facts and just interpretations, and that’s why I’m a flat earther…. Gravity is also this totally subjective thing …..
"In 2010, Posner was the chief investigative reporter at The Daily Beast. Following the revelation that a number of Posner's stories for the Beast contained portions plagiarized from articles in other publications, Posner resigned from the Beast." (Wikipedia)
witnesses who read his book say he has them saying stuff which they never discussed with him.
@@TheHeavensFellen
Witnesses who read his book ?
Like who ?
Ya’ll are determined to believe it was a conspiracy. Bless your misguided thinking.
@@patrickmitchell4134 You are funny, I like that.
@@TheMrSuge I don't recall, just web search for it.
If you listen to the recording from the cop who had his recorder on ,recording the gun fire. There is a shot followed by two very fast shots the gun that was found on the 6th floor was not able to take rapid shot . It was bolt action. You had to resite your target look up the way this rifle fired. There were a team of shooters.
The 8mm films were optically altered by the FBI. The footage has been edited to remove key frames of evidence. The grassy knoll is darkened & splice marks are visible.
You are living in the land of falsehood. There is no audio recording of the assassination. Your statement is complete nonsense. If you are referring to the dictabelt recording that was used by the HSCA to form a conspiracy theory, please be aware of the following facts. 1. It has been proven beyond all doubt that the recording corresponds to a time AFTER the shooting took place. 2. There are no discernible sounds on the recording that resemble gunfire or any other explosive sound. The acoustic “experts” who put forth the theory referred to “acoustic spikes” on the recording.
People should also look into LHO's mother Marguerite. If anyone had a very strange mother, it was LHO. Now she could be the makings of a film. MO, what a show.
As a young teenager, I would get interested in this particular event. I was only 3 when he was killed and therefore have absolutely no memory of Kennedy or the assassination. All the books I read were mainly about the 4 days and not some analysis. So I had no reason to think there was any conspiracy being Oswald was the only name that came up. I saw the movie "Executive Action" and thought it was certainly thought-provoking (I was 13 when the film came out), but the movie made very clear it was just simply a movie and they didn't even know if this conspiracy even existed - they just suggested it could have happened. But it did nothing for me to think Oswald wasn't involved. Then the Zapruder film gets shown to the public. We see his head snap backward. Okay, NOW it made me think there could have been someone else firing on the president. And I keep thinking there HAD to be more than one person. But then came 1988 and the Nova episode "Who Shot President Kennedy", which made clear that the case was so hopelessly botched up, we were never really going to know for sure what happened. But I still held on to more than one gunman - but my source was the only book that NOVA mentioned on the subject which was "Six Seconds in Dallas", and my goodness, even Vincent Bugliosi admitted the book was impressive. But NOW we skip to now. Well, forensics have come so far, and therefore I'm leaning towards just one gunman - and it was Oswald. We can go on way longer arguing about it, but I will only say this, and this is a FACT. The FACT is that Oswald is the only one in the Depository building that fled - everybody else was accounted for. He's some unwitting patsy? I don't think so. So yes, I went from just Oswald, to conspiracy, and back to Oswald. And ain't it amazing that these intense arguments happen over a murder which also happens to be the most photographed murder of all time - and we STILL can't come to an irrefutable conclusion? UGH!!!! I guess we'll never know until we go down that tunnel of light.
Thank you for sharing your journey on the case. Vincent Bugliosi famously said, "With any project in life, we know that if we work long and hard enough, we're going to reach the bottom of the pile. But I'm here to tell you there is no bottom to the pile in the Kennedy assassination. Right now, there's probably a hundred people out there working full-time, looking at some document from National Archives for inconsistency, discrepancy, contradiction, some little hint of a conspiracy. So there's no bottom to the pile."
If it helps you be a little more certain of what happened, I am absolutely 1,000% certain it was Oswald alone. Any conspiracy theory would have required dozens if not hundreds of people - and ultimately, would any mastermind approve of such a messy widespread plan? No. Any conspiracy would have been less than 10 people with 1 shooter with a silencer and 1 shot. There may have been conspiracies brewing, but zero of them occured that day in Dallas. Conspiracy theorists will keep chasing their tails until the end of time - I used to be one for decades, but not anymore... it is so blatantly obvious Oswald did it, alone.
His head first goes forward, but snaps back due to Kennedy's back harness.
@@mariussielcken his head goes forward at the moment of impact, the blood and brain all goes forward... but all conspiracy people see is the snapback. This case really is open and shut to anyone if you actually look at the evidence. The handwriting on the order forms, Hidell being listed on the PO Box, the ID of Alek Hidell found in Oswalds wallet with his picture on it, the package he brought to work, Oswald worked that floor that day AND placed himself on the 6th floor during questioning, the dact the bullets found in the limo match that of his rifle to the exclusion of all others on the planet, he leaves in less than 4 minutes, 12 people ID him as the shooter of Tippit, Marina said he shot at Walker... I don't give 2 fucks what conspiracists say you cannot get away from these damning facts. Oswald did it, case closed, end of story, the end.
@@mariussielcken LMFAO....yea, ok...are you sure it wasn't a tracker beam from the US Enterprise pulling his head back???
Probably the best interview of Posner I’ve ever seen. Well done.
Very kind of you! Thank you for watching.
I saw a deal where they came across the fact that every time there was a shot fired, Abraham Zaprutor "Jumped " to Being startled by the report of the weapon being fired ( because he wasn't a hunter or anything like that) the sound of a gunshot startled him Physically!
Yes, and interestingly his secrerary mrs Sitzmann said,
if there had been someone behind us firing a rifle, we would have jumped 10 feet
in the air!
Connolly, too, was startled by the sound of the first shot (which hit nobody). The driver of the limo was startled; he stopped the car. Kennedy is seen in the Zapruder film ceasing waving to the crowd as soon as the first shot is heard.
@@brianarbenz1329 "The driver of the limo was startled; he stopped the car."
You mean he slowed down the car. It is a myth that the car stopped completely.
@@Caeruleo You are right. I wasn't being precise there.
You are basing this statement after watching a movie. You have no believable grounds to back this up. The problem with people that declare there was a conspiracy is just too ludicrous to address. The majority of people who think there was a conspiracy only came to that conclusion after watching the Oliver Stone movie. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but don't go watch King Kong and then come back and tell me there is such a thing as 50 foot apes.
No one has asked the most important question of all! Nick, what's with the ascot?
Great question. I felt like channeling my inner Cary Grant for the interview.
Oliver Stone did get the date right!
Movie or documentary.
@@peggylavelle581 In both he got the date right - not much else. Also I’m surprised Stone hasn’t been called out more for whitewashing Jim Garrison’s homophobia towards Clay Shaw.
@@brendanbrown3100 Gay or not , he had an intelligence background..
@@peggylavelle581 So what? Clay Shaw was part time DCS contact like 150000 other Americans. Where they all in on the conspiracy too?
Posner says Oswald had no particular hatred for Kennedy. Perhaps. But I wonder what he discussed with the diplomats in the Cuban embassy in Mexico City. I wonder if they might have told Oswald about the US-sponsored plots to kill Castro. If they did, that may have caused Oswald to think of Kennedy as a political enemy.
I wouldn't call Oswald a loser. He was a young man who had already done more in life than many young man in this day and age. He was a marine, lived in Russia and came back, had a wife and kid etc. There's an interview with him in which I found him quite articulated for his age.
Those aren't accomplishments. That was him drifting from one failure to the next.
Oswald had been in the marines and been to Russia, but as a person he wasn’t fulfilled, he wasn’t happy with American politics and thought Marxism was his answer and he wasn’t happy in Russia, he was antisocial, he was angry and didn’t make friends and continually hit his wife Marina, wanted to leave his mark in history and ultimately was a failure. I believe part of his damaged personality was caused by his mother who said her children were a burden and she put them into care at a young age.
@@davidmoss4280 LMFAO, Lee Oswald was not a "Maxrist", name one Marxist he knew or associated with? its just silly , his job was to play the Marixt and be a Castro sympathizer...Jesus he worked for Guy Bannister at 544 Camp street and Bannister was a former FBI man and a John Bircher. Recent document releases prove the FBI was doing an infiltration operation on the Fair Play For Cuba commity, of which Lee Oswald was the only member of the New Orleans branch and wrote the NY office telling them of a scuffle he had while handing out flyers...a week before it happened! in this day and age, how can you keep regurgitating hooey from the 1960s ?????
A young man , so patriotic that he leaves school to join the USMC at 17. (the USMC is an elite unit and slackers who just want a job or to get away from their mothers, don't join or don't last...thats what the coast guard is for...lol). He does so well on his aptitude and intelligence tests that he is sent to the "elite" trade in the radar tech section. There among the best and the brightest of new USMC recruits he finishes at the top of his class (7th out of a class of 50). He is sent to various bases and gets to "see the world' . He is given exemplary ratings by his COs for his fine work as a radar Tec. And despite his busy schedule , on his own initiative, he completes his high school equivalency and teaches himself Russian...yea what a failure?? He goes on the adventure of a life time to Russia, is very popular, makes a lifetime friend of Earnst Titovits (who was exchanging letters with Lee right until Lee's death in 63) and marries the extremely beautiful woman Marina...what a looser??. Returns to the USA and fathers 2 children in a 3 year marriage (you know what that means.....what a failure???). Yea, be bounced from job to job a little (while working at photo lab doing top secret work??? and a coffee company tied to the CIA??)..Just as I and millions of other men did at 22 years of age after the military or collage. If he wasn't , i would think that was strange. In many ways, he was a model person, he did not drink and he did not smoke..and by all accounts he loved is children dearly. He read voraciously, on a wide range of topics...including the Russian classics like Tolstoy...which he read in Russian! He was looking to always improve himself and was working on a book on his Russian travels and according to Judeth Baker was very interested in being a writer (possibly of science fiction stories) Did he get published in his brief life? Nope, but even Steven King did not get his first book published until he was 26....Lee didn't live that long...so I guess that makes him a "failure"??...I could go on and on, but you get my point. If an exceptional person like Lee Oswald could be so easily smeared as a failure..anyone can. And smears are not the truth, that must be looked for a little deeper than childish character assassination.
@@JohnJohnson-pq4qz your assessment of Oswald is totally incorrect, he wasn’t patriotic that’s why he fled to Russia, he was disobedient in the marines and had several charges against him and was demoted , he didn’t like the US and soon became disenchanted with Russia, you don’t get credit for fathering children any fool can do that, he wasn’t doing secret work for the photo company and he was sacked for incompetence. He was unsuccessful at everything he did, couldn’t even keep his jobs, constantly beat up his wife, couldn’t keep a home, couldn’t get along with anyone, was aggressive, antisocial, discontented and wanted to leave his mark on history, and he certainly did that.
Wow, very interesting!! An interview with Gerald Posner, the author of Case Closed on the JFK assassination has garnered only 23k views thus far (06/23). One would imagine views in the millions by now!!
Every one knows he a plagiarist. Except you.
@@peggylavelle581 I was being sarcastic. Hehehe.
Why? Everyone knows he's a parasitical fraud.
Haha I came to tell you you are insane. Well played. Posner is a punchline like the Warren Report. It’s sad America is still being lied to by scums like GP
Younger people nowadays really do not care much about history!...And quite a few of us, old enough to remember how awful this murder was, have died...I am 76 now...when I mention this murder to my youngest sister-a bright 63yo woman, she just rolls her eyes, and says "Nobody cares...get a life!"
When I felt my kid was old enough -- almost 16 -- I stopped shielding him from stuff I watched on the JFK assassination. One doc I was watching with him in the room was about to show the Zapruder film, so before it rolled I warned him: "This is graphic and I know you're kinda squeamish with blood and things, so you might not want to see this," but he insisted he did. Now keep in mind, he didn't know a thing about the assassination or my views of it, but after the film rolled he first exclaimed "That was the ACTUAL footage of him getting shot??" and I of course said "Yes." He was speechless. Then I asked him: "Where do you think that shot came from?" and without a pause he said "From the right side maybe a little in front of him."
But Posner (and the Warren Commission) of course tell us: "Don't believe your lying eyes." 🙄
"But Posner (and the Warren Commission) of course tell us: "Don't believe your lying eyes.""
The thing is, however, that many people make the mistake that the "back and to the left" motion seen in the Zapruder film all by itself "proves" that the shot came from the right and partly in front of JFK. When I've heard or read what these people say regarding this, I often notice that they never, or very rarely, mention that this is only one detail seen in the film, and there are a larger number of other details also seen in the same film that indicate a greater likelihood that the bullet was fired from behind him after all.
@@ccrider4516 Bullets can indeed do weird things. But two things they pretty much always do is (1) their momentum carries their target in the same direction as the bullet was flying, and (2) they become damaged when they strike hard things like human bones. And yet we're to believe that on 11/22/63 one bullet hit Kennedy from behind but threw him *backwards* and to the left. And another went through 2 men causing 7 wounds and yet came out looking virtually pristine. It's absurd how many people actually buy this malarkey.
As far as listening to doctors, I do listen to them. All the time. Doctors like Dr. Cyril Wecht.
czcams.com/video/KCmtzTQwJ6A/video.html
@@ccrider4516 Spoken like a true Mr. Know It All.
@@Caeruleo Complete Hooey. read "Head Shot" by Paul Chambers, if i recall right, he is a physics PHD and an expert on explosions and the effects of forces etc. Long story short...Its impossible that that shot came from any where but from his front right. Case Closed.
@@JohnJohnson-pq4qz "Complete Hooey."
You mean it is complete hooey in your opinion. Yet I notice that you did not name any of the other details in the film that I was talking about that suggest a greater likelihood that the fatal head shot came from behind JFK after all. This gives the impression that you don't know about these other details in the first place.
"read "Head Shot" by Paul Chambers, if i recall right, he is a physics PHD and an expert on explosions and the effects of forces etc."
Uh-huh. Does Chambers make any mention of the fact that frames 312-313 of the Zapruder film show that when JFK's head was first struck by the bullet his head jolted forward several inches in only 1/18th of a second, as if indeed the bullet struck the rear of his head after all and knocked his head forward? Does Chambers also mention that this cannot have been caused (as Tink Thompson and others have mistakenly suggested) by William Greer tapping on the brake, since Jackie's, Nellie's, and John Connally's heads do not jerk forward an iota in those frames?
Does Chambers also mention that the "back and to the left" motion does not even begin for the first time until several frames after the initial forward jerk of JFK's head, and that the "back and to the left" motion is also much slower than the initial forward jerk?
Does Chambers also mention that frames 313 and several following frames show that the majority of the bloody spray and other material of his head exits forward or upward and partly forward and that much less exits even partly backward?
Does Chambers also mention that the "back and to the left" motion does not begin until after material is seen exploding mostly forward out of his head, as if it was actually the material exploding forward which shoved his head backward rather than the direction the bullet was traveling?
Does Chambers also mention that in the last second before the head shot JFK was already leaning far to his left anyway, so that no matter what direction the bullet came from his head would have almost certainly gone to the left anyway, "back and to the left," "forward and to the left," or whatever? Does he mention that this is called "gravity"?
Does Chambers also mention that the film shows that by far the most obvious exit damage is in front of JFK's right ear, with those big, horrible flaps of bone and scalp hanging down from the upper right front of his head? Does he also discuss the fact that people like Douglas Horne are very unlikely to be correct when they say that those horrible flaps were "added" to the film later, given that nearly all of the closest witnesses on JFK's right, such as Emmett Hudson, Bill Newman, Gayle Newman, Marilyn Sitzman, and Zapruder himself, corroborated what is seen in the film? All of them said they saw the right side of his head explode, not the rear. Zapruder on live television only two hours after the assassination, before he or anyone else had yet seen the developed film for the first time ever, said, "And then I heard another shot or two - I couldn't say whether it was one or two, and I saw his head practically open up, all blood and everything, and I kept on shooting." At the same time as he is speaking those words we see him place his right hand on the right side of his own head in front of his right ear to demonstrate which part of JFK's head he saw explode, exactly the area where we see the greatest damage to his head in the film. In stark contrast, the film shows no significant damage at all to the entire rear half of his head, and the hole in the rear of his head seen at Parkland is barely visible, nowhere even remotely near as blindingly obvious as those horrible flaps in front of his right ear.
And is Chambers demonstrate his honesty by mentioning that Bobby Hargis was only one of eight people who were showered by blood and other material from JFK's head, unlike the people who only mention him to try to make a case that the material exited "only" or "primarily" to the left rear due to a shot from the right front? Is he honest and does he inform the reader that Billy Joe Martin was also showered with such material? And is he honest and does he also inform the reader that both motorcycle policemen riding on the other side of the limo, the right rear, James Chaney andDouglas Jackson, were also showered with material from JFK's head, and that it has never been proven that "more" of the material went to the left than to the right since the amount of such material that landed on each of these officers was never "measured" in any way? And is he also honest by informing the reader that all four people sitting in front of JFK, John Connally, Nellie Connally, William Greer, and Roy Kellerman, were also showered with blood and pieces of JFK's brain, and that it has also never been proven that "more" of the material landed on the officers behind the limo than landed on the people in front of JFK? Does Chambers honestly quote John Connally as saying that immediately after he heard the third shot, "Immediately I could see on my clothes, my clothing, I could see on the interior of the car which, as I recall, was a pale blue, brain tissue, which I immediately recognized, and I recall very well, on my trousers there was one chunk of brain tissue as big as almost my thumb, thumbnail, and again I did not see the President at any time either after the first, second, or third shots, but I assumed always that it was he who was hit and no one else"? Does Chambers also honestly admit to the reader that such material also landed all over the inside of the car, and also landed as far forward as on the windshield and on the front hood of the car? Does Chambers also admit that since the four motorcycle policemen were constantly moving forward anyway, they would have almost certainly have driven into the bloody spray anyway, even if the majority of it exited forward. Is he also honest and does he admit that the same cannot be true in reverse, that any material exiting even slightly rearward would have all fallen back down and landed behind JFK and that only material exiting significantly forward would have landed on all four people sitting in front of him, and all over the inside of the car, and on the windshield, and on the hood?
And does Chambers mention that the main reason that the big, horrible flaps in front of JFK's right ear weren't especially noticeable at Parkland was almost certainly because Jackie closed them up on the way to the hospital? Does Chambers admit to the reader that Jackie said that she was trying to hold his head together on the way to the hospital? Does Chambers show the reader the quote of what she said to Theodore White one week after the assassination? "I kept holding the top of his head down, trying to keep the brains in." Does he make sure the reader take note of the fact that she said she was trying to hold down the "top" of his head, not the "rear"?
And is Chambers honest and does he correctly point out to the reader that the observations of the Parkland doctors and nurses are extremely limited in value, because they did not perform an autopsy at Parkland and only examined JFK while he was still technically "alive"? That because of this they never pulled back his thick hair and scalp to view his skull directly? That they also never took a single x-ray of him at Parkland? That because of these things they would have no possible way of knowing, no matter how great their "expertise," whether the hole they saw in the rear of his head represented the majority of the damage to his skull or only a minority of the damage to his skull? That only after his thick hair and scalp were pulled back and only after x-rays were taken could such a thing be determined with any certainty? And is he honest and does he make sure the reader knows that the more forward damage to JFK's skull was not entirely missed at Parkland? Does he make sure the reader knows that Dr. Adolph Giesecke said that he saw that parts of JFK's skull were missing as far forward as just above the browline, which is precisely what is also shown in both the anterior and lateral x-rays from Bethesda, the only x-rays ever taken of his head after he was shot?
Because unless Chambers specifically mentions every single one of these things in at least half as much detail as I have, he is guilty of misleading the reader by ignoring too much of the evidence.
"Its impossible that that shot came from any where but from his front right."
In your opinion.
"Case Closed."
In your opinion. But you have not demonstrated, in any detailed discussion of the evidence yourself here, independently of the claims of any author of any book, exactly how the cased is "closed" on the shot coming from his right front.
And I have long ago found that books about the assassination are often among the least reliable sources of information about the assassination. I have long ago lost count of how many times I have caught authors of books badly misrepresenting the evidence. For example, when referencing testimony by witnesses, these authors will quite frequently quote only the individual sentences spoken or written by a witness which make it seem as if the witness is supporting the author's point of view, but make no mention of the other sentences spoken or written by the same witness in the same testimony which cast a very different light on the point the witness was actually making. Far better to study the evidence itself directly, independently of any author's interpretation of the evidence.
Hindsight! Just so much hindsight. Oswald had enough time, and enough desire, and was a good enough marksman. It was not a difficult shot, and the car slowed down, after the first shot.
Gerald P, the face of the JFK LHO love group. Posner reminds me of being asleep at the wheel on a full-time basis.
You should know!
"reminds me of being asleep at the wheel on a full-time basis"? If you are asleep at the wheel you need to look into that. You may have a medical condition.
The gold standard of lies.
You are the fools Gold of replies!
@@curbozerboomer1773 Keep believing your fairy tales if it makes you feel better. It is your right and privilege.
Are you sure Oswald even took the shot
Who do you got taking the shot?
@@radar0412 i'm not sure because I cannot prove it
@@neilallison8521 But for some suspicious reason you're Discrediting the Rifle that had Oswald's fingerprints, the shell casings and Oswald's bullet found on Connolly's gurney? Hmm..
I’ve been to the scene. The angle from the 6 floor window is about 40 degrees plus. The trajectory is not addressed.
I don't have to read all, or any, of the WC to form an opinion on the presentations of those who have. I put the Posners and the Lanes in the balance and see what's what.
This is akin to how juries weigh "expert opinion" witnesses. When Max Holland points out that a slug's exit-hole in the wall of the skull (or glass, etc. for that matter) is spalled outward conically, it saves me an incredible amount of reading.
LEE OSWALD - “I’m just a patsy”. “I didn’t kill anyone!” “I want a lawyer”. “I emphatically deny these charges!”
And you believe him?
Easier to believe Oswald than Dulles/ WCR. CIA/ Dulles - Mossedegh/ Arnbenz/ Suharto/ Allende/ Noriega/ . . .. .the hits just keep coming. . .
Sounds like Alec murdaugh.
Great interview I wish you would have asked him about the Tampa and Chicago plots supposed plots and Bolden.
Thank you for the kind words. Great call out on the Tampa and Chicago plots -- very interesting when comparing to Dallas.
@@HindsightHistory Threats of violence against political figures happen all the time. Alleged previous plots against JFK have never been connected to Dallas & Oswald. Simply because there's no evidence of any such connection.
@Hindsight History they both had patsies ready, just like Dallas.
This guy talks like he's holding 20 spinning plates simultaneously and speed-running covering up the assassination in real time
He doesn't say who conducted the test of the magic bullet theory.
The test was done by Failure Analysis Associates (now Exponent, Inc.) in work done for the '92 mock trial of Oswald for the American Bar Association.They used 3-D computer animation and modeling techniques to research the bullet trajectory.
Think about it. The bullet caused seven wounds, broke two major bones, and lost only 1.5% of its weight, yet it looked like it was never fired. Explain that.
@@robertgross9180 "The bullet caused seven wounds, broke two major bones, and lost only 1.5% of its weight, yet it looked like it was never fired."
Where on earth are you getting this from? The bullet in evidence, CE 399, has a base that is severely flattened, with some of the metal core having been forced out. I don't think most people would agree with you that that's the equivalent of it looking like it was never fired.
The video footage that proves the shot came from the front is that Jackie was attempting to recover brain matter that exited the rear of his head, landing on the trunk of the limo.
No one else is saying this....I agree with you ! Thought the same thing. Some people don't see the elephant in the room. Good post.
@@kathrynleaser5093 let them get over the shock, then see how many make up the "Magic brain particle" theory.
"The video footage that proves the shot came from the front is that Jackie was attempting to recover brain matter that exited the rear of his head, landing on the trunk of the limo."
Wrong. It has never yet to this day been proven that Jackie was attempting to recover brain matter that landed on the trunk. She herself said she did not even remember climbing out on the trunk at all. Clint Hill merely said that she appeared to be "reaching for something coming off the right rear bumper of the car," but he never said what this "something" was, and definitely never said it was brain matter, and he also never said he actually saw her grab any object of any type. Also, you didn't know that all four people sitting in front of JFK, John Connally, Nellie Connally, William Greer, and Roy Kellerman, were also showered with blood and pieces of JFK's brain, and that such material from his head also landed in front of him all over the inside of the car, and as far forward as on the windshield and on the front of the car? John Connally said that immediately after he heard the third shot he saw pieces of JFK's brain land all over him and all over the inside of the car. Nellie Connally said the same thing. Roy Kellerman said that immediately after the third shot was fired he saw flesh from JFK's head fly between him and the driver, William Greer. Greer himself said the back of his jacket was soaked with JFK's blood. Robert Frazier said that blood was also present on the windshield and on the hood of the car.
I'm curious as to why you didn't bother to mention that plenty of material from his head went forward also. Why did you only mention material from his head landing on the trunk behind him without being fair and also mentioning the material from his head that landed in front of him. Did you not even know about this in the first place? Or did you know, and you just deliberately did not mention it in order to deceive people here on CZcams?
@@kathrynleaser5093 "No one else is saying this....I agree with you ! Thought the same thing. Some people don't see the elephant in the room. Good post."
What elephant in the room? Reginald's misleading statement that makes it out as if pieces of JFK's landed "only" on the trunk behind him when in fact many pieces of his brain also landed on all four people sitting in front of him, John Connally, Nellie Connally, William Greer, and Roy Kellerman, and on the windshield, and on the hood of the car?
@@reginaldlott236 "let them get over the shock, then see how many make up the "Magic brain particle" theory."
You mean like you made up the myth that brain matter from JFK's head landed "only" behind him on the trunk, instead of telling the real truth and admitting that many pieces of his brain also landed well in front of him, on John Connally, Nellie Connally, William Greer, and Roy Kellerman, and also landed all over the inside of the car, and on the windshield, and on the hood of the car?
Oswald’s televised statement to the press was that he was a “patsy”. A person in that situation acting alone would either declare innocence or guilt (with his motives). Very unusual for an accused to immediately declare themselves as a participant in a plot unless they actually are.
Yup. No chance whatsoever Oswald Acted Alone. The SBT is impossible! No honest person that is knowledgeable could ever believe the official story.
Thats right Don. Oswald knows what is happening to him. The setting up of patsy's isn't some big secret, Intelligence services use it all the time all around the world. Doesn't mean he participated, but it does mean he understands the nature of those who did and could point fingers at who did. Had he been able to defend himself and spill the beans we might all know who did it today. They knew it too and couldn't let that happen.
🤣😅😂 Oh yeah, if LHO said he was a patsy then he must be. What did you expect him to say ? You people prove PT Barnum was right.
@@user-wx7id3yh7i I expect him to say “I am innocent”, say nothing or say “I did it”. Name one time in human history where an assassin claimed to be a participant in a conspiracy (because that was a patsy is) and that was not demonstrated to be the case?
@@vernpascal1531 Oswald being a patsy is not inconsistent with the SBT
Does this guy really believe what he is saying, ok please explain why these people are in Dealy Plaza , Johnny Roselli , Chuck Nicoletti , Malcolm Wallace , Sheriff Weathersford , Rosco White , James Files , why did everyone run to the grassy knoll , why were reports coming in of secret service keeping people away from grassy knoll , explain umbrella man explain Mary Morman photo , explain the hundreds of mysterious deaths of witnesses and police
Gregory, ... Why don't you read the book? That is all covered in there. He explains the umbrella man. He covers the Babuska lady. Umbrella man was named in his book, and I believe the Umbrella man was protesting a certain political issue Kenndey administration was dealing with. Posner list the names of the people who ran over to the Grassy Knoll. He talked to and interviewed many of them. He goes over the not-so-mysterious-mysterious deaths.
I haven't read the book in years, but Mr. Posner covers everything you mentioned.
It is not known as the "Gold Standard." "Silver Standard" perhaps, but the "Gold Standard" is Vincent Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History."
I just read Bugliosi's book as well. I found it equally convincing.
This is true!...but "Reclaiming History" is so amazingly huge, nearly 1700 pages--that most folks will never even bother to read it!
The thing is...Bugliosi, in his book, deals with the likelihood that most folks would not want to plow through his 1700 page book...but he hoped that, maybe 100 years down the road, his effort would be the main "textbook" for study by college students, etc. He knew he would not make much money on this book--he already was a millionaire author, because of several True Crime books that were best-sellers.
If you don't get a hernia picking it up.
Bugliosi was a hot head but a very effective prosecutor.
“Reclaiming History” by Vince Bugliosi is the “gold standard” regarding this topic.
Thank you for the comment, Jeff. I've read both and have been able to bounce any new "evidence" or theories off what's contained in Reclaiming History and Case Closed. Both are excellent.
@@HindsightHistory agree and you are welcome!
Yes!...Bugliosi knew, when he wrote this compendium, that it would not sell well...but he felt that Americans needed to hear the well-researched, proven truth. He is a real patriot, IMO. He hoped, in interviews, that someday his book would be standard curriculum, in schools. Bugliosi could be arrogant, and it shows in his book, but he did earn the right as the other side was even more arrogant!..and they continue to be just that!
@@curbozerboomer1773 agree.
How does he explain the 4th entry bullet hole on the windshield?
"How does he explain the 4th entry bullet hole on the windshield?"
Who says that's a "fourth" bullet entry? Why can't that and the dent on the *inside* surface of the chrome frame have instead both been caused by fragments from the head shot? Two bullet fragments were found in the car, the larger of which was found in the driver's seat. Those could quite easily account for the dent in the chrome and the damage to the windshield, and the two photos by William Altgens prove that the windshield was still undamaged after Connally was hit and did not show damage until after the head shot.
The assassination was the only success LHO ever managed to achieve in his life.
Multiple people in Dealy plaza that day recalled the smell of gun smoke. If there was a sole gunmen up on the 6th floor then there wouldn't have been a smell of gun smoke. Is he saying that there were all wrong?
Oswald + de Mohrenschildt, (CIA) = Walker, (blocks from Ruby's Vegas club). Oswald's whereabouts unknown for approx. three hours following attempt. Oswald kills Kennedy. Where was he going after leaving rooming house? Good question. See map of Dallas. Draw straight line from N. Beckley rooming house to Tenth + Patton... and continue. Few blocks later you will cross Ruby's S. Ewing address. Waggoner Carr sent memo to J. Lee Rankin regarding this issue. No follow-up. Ruby tells Earl Warren he fears for his life and those of his family because of the JBS and Edwin Walker. Doesn't prove anything, but certainly is interesting. And this is just the tip of a huge iceburg. Would enjoy speaking with Mr. Posner. He is three years my elder. I have a great respect for his intellect and his work.
"See map of Dallas. Draw straight line from N. Beckley rooming house to Tenth + Patton... and continue. Few blocks later you will cross Ruby's S. Ewing address."
Wrong. You need to check the map again. And I've lived in Texas all my life and have been right there in that neighborhood multiple times and have been to all the addresses involved. A straight line from the rooming house to 10th and Patton does *not* continue on to intersect Ruby's address on Ewing. The line would have to turn left a significant number of degrees from 10th and Patton to intersect Ruby's address.
"Ruby tells Earl Warren he fears for his life and those of his family because of the JBS and Edwin Walker."
Now that, at least, you are correct about. And more to the point, he also said he wanted to be taken to Washington so that he could tell the truth, that he *wasn't* involved in any conspiracy.
@@Caeruleo 1963 map of Dallas
@@cjcar63 "1963 map of Dallas"
Which shows the same thing: it was not a straight line from the rooming house to the scene of the Tippit shooting and then to Ruby's address. There was a left turn of quite a few degrees from the Tippit shooting to Ruby's address.
Lee”s uncle was best friends with Sam,that’s where Lee always had money to spend,simple,Ruby shut him up!!
That Ruby killed Oswald because of his patriotism or he loved JFK is the biggest lie of the whole story
A man is innocent, until proven guilty, in this country, Oswald never stood trial. Case not closed
"A man is innocent, until proven guilty, in this country, Oswald never stood trial. Case not closed"
All that means is that he was never proven to be guilty in a court of law. But that is meaningless, since he never would have stood trial anyway, because Jack Ruby killed him before he could stand trial. And many things can be proven without a trial. One doesn't have to go to court to prove that the earth is orbiting the sun; the evidence for that is already overwhelming in the first place.
Sounds like someone has a serious crush on Lee Harvey Oswald.
The evidence would've put Oswald in the electric chair
wow. wow. who is this guy working for. or what is he on
@@dennisstephens8793 You're clearly working for some Crooked people within the Conspiracy theory Industrial Complex.
There were several witnesses who disputed Oswald as the shooter of JD Tippitt. One such notable person was Acquilla Clemons who claims there were two shooters and that one of them was short and stocky. Ms. Clemons also said that she was told by authorities to keep quiet. Nevertheless she was interviewed by Mark Lane in 1966 for his well known documentary which was an adjunct to his book "Rush to Judgement". Shortly thereafter Clemons disappeared and she has not been heard of since. Additionally, the bullets found at the scene were identified as being shot from a 38 automatic gun and did not match ,nor were they compatible with Oswald's 38 revolver.
In general, I find Posner's account here very disappointing for several reasons but I want to keep this as brief as possible:
What I see here is a man who is arguing his case from a lawyer's perspective. Posner in deed states this truth more than once and as everyone knows, when a defendant hires a lawyer to represent his interests the one question he never asks is whether or not his client committed the crime of which he or she is being accused. Fact is, a lawyer's job is to advocate for a particular outcome which may or may not be the actual truth.
Clearly that is what Posner is doing here.
Second, by definition a conspiracy theory is one in which the conclusion is drawn and then evidence is cherry picked to fit the predetermined outcome. I cannot think of a more obvious example than a person who would write a book entitled "Case Closed" and then work backwards as a lawyer does in court, cherry picking evidence, glossing over other exculpatory evidence, and taking great liberty in asserting his opinions as fact at every turn. As one of MANY examples: How does Posner know Marina Oswald's motivation to move to New Orleans was due to her husbands bad temper and fear that he might try and kill the president? There are way too many instances when Posner fills in the blanks with his opinion yet produces little or no facts to support his position. Much of it seems to be based on hearsay, conjecture and his own imagination.
Posner's account is not a serious study of this tragic event.
As an American citizen who was born when President Kennedy was in office, I care deeply about my country and I want to know what actually happened. I have no interest in half baked conspiracy theories but Posner's entire approach and conclusions are so flawed that I cannot possibly take him seriously either.
Perhaps the answer lies in his explanation near the start of the video where Posner said he knew that taking such a position as a counter the Oliver Stone movie would generate interest and no doubt sell a lot of books and make him a lot of money but as I see it, he is no better than the other grifters out there trying to capitalize on a sacred national tragedy. Shame on him
Reference: Acquilla Clemons statement to Mark Lane regarding her witnessing the JD Tippitt murder is readily available on You tube. It's worth watching
I found her highly unbelievable. Most do as well.
I'm glad to see some sanity after 5 minutes of viewing and reading comments here. I wouldn't waste my time reading Posner's book and I was hoping to hear some contrition from him for writing it. I quit watching when I knew that wouldn't be forthcoming.
For a good CZcams video I recommend "JFK Assassination Aftermath - Who Killed J. D. Tippit?". The 1966 Mark Lane documentary you mentioned is also good. It has plenty of eye witness testimony. I could recommend several books on the subject but I 'll start with Jim Garrison's "On the Trail of Assassins".
The WCR fits your definition of a conspiracy theory.
Clemmons wasn't a witness
She actually did not claim there was two shooters that's what Lane wanted her to say. Youre starting to embarass yourself with the misinformation.
Though Posner surely wanted to make money off the book it is factual. This crap you're trying to pull with Clemmons is total BS which I doubt you or Lane believes. So Clemmons disappeared mysteriously. Ever think she wanted to no part of this which is what she indicated when Lane sent his investigators to investigate her. She was afraid she was going to be fired. By the way Bugliosi and Dale Myers has exposed this myth about Clemmons you schould be ashamed of yourself.
When you talk about Fmj bullets and bullet fragments in the same conversation you loose me
Thank you for your wonderful channsl. Posner's argument is impressive. I buy his explanation of the 2nd shot, but still can't fathom how that bullet, after shattering bone, remained pristine.
Thank you for the kind words. After speaking with Gerald, he's examined CE-399 (the magic bullet) up close and it looks much different than in photographs. But I initially had the same exact thought.
The bullet did not remain pristine. It was damaged.
@@jeffsilverberg5848 You are correct
@Jeff Silverberg it was not damaged the way it should have been after it ricochet. Too many things have come to light to prove his book false.
The "magic" bullet wasn't "pristine". It was flattened, just the way you would expect since it entered Connally's body on a sideways angle.
Kennedy was shot in the throat, from the front. Oswald could not have made that shot from behind and five stories high. Case closed.
Thank you for your comment, Andrew. This topic gets addressed at 22:30 - 25:13
Entrance wound was found on JFK'S back. Oops. 😂
@@radar0412 Entrance wound on back was only two inches deep when probed at autopsy. Also, the back wound was inches lower than wound on throat.
@@phillydog17 Deceitful comment. You failed to produce your own personal Autopsy photos that support your claims. Your comment is invalid.
No one can convince me that Oswald who was documented not being a very good shooter with the marines pulled this assassination off with a ww2 italian rifle with a defective scope
So now who solves all the other deaths .
That's your job. We just got Oswald for you.
Posner nails it! Case closed!
Why we need another fake book somebody can git rich off of it no thank
"Get"
Me and you could write one we'll make at least fifty grand each that's all I need to live out the rest of my life. I'm old
"fake book"? No it's real. I own a copy.
The only flaw in this is Oswald would also run if he realized he was set up. There is no doubt he was in on the plot but he could have realized very quickly that he was set up and ran.
What was his role in the plot, if not to do the shooting? Did he hold the assassin's coat while he took the shot? Face it. He ran because he was the one who planned the assassination, bought the rifle, carried the rifle to the Depository, and then fired the shots.
"could have!" means nothing.
Logic.
IF Oswald was involved in the plot, how did he realize HE was set up?
Did he find his gun first?
Did he know the shots came from the Depository?
Did someone say "If the president gets shot in front of your building, you're going to be blamed"?
Where was he when the shots were fired - out front with everyone else with an ironclad alibi?
@@franclin0 Its very simple. He goes outside and finds there is no car waiting for him. Oooops.
@@nickv4073 Oops what? What are you implying?
I like Posner's analysis of Oswald's personality dynamics which ties in well with Norman Mailer's, but there is one thing that troubles me. This is governor Connolly's testimony and the way it ties in with the film of the shooting. Connolly said he heard what sounded like a shot and he turned around to the right to look, in the film you see him doing this just when Kennedy's arms are going up to under his chin. Then Connolly said he turned to the left and felt something hit him but didn't hear the shot. Connolly was holding a white Stetson hat in his left hand whilst he initially turned turned to the right but then dropped it when he turned to the left consistent with being hit in the wrist on this second turn. Connolly's testimony is completely consistent with the film of the shooting. However it raises a question in my mind. If the first shot missed why didn't Connolly hear it, clearly in the movie Connolly, consistent with his testimony. turns to the right when he hears the shot just as Kennedy reacts with his arms to the first hit, then Connolly turns to the left drops the Stetson and then comes the kill shot to JFK's head may he RIP. Which means if there was a bullet that missed then there were four shots. Bullets travel faster than sound and as any veteran who's been shot will tell one doesn't hear the bullet that hits you as when it does one's system goes into shock and the sound doesn't register and consistent with this Connolly testifies he felt but didn't hear the shot that hit him when he turned to the left.
Whilst I accept that it's a important to actually stick to the essential facts it's important not to ignore real anomalies in the evidence i.e. the rifle found on the 6th floor at the Texas Book Depository wasn't identified as being the sort that Oswald was said to have purchased but instead to be a 7.65 German Mauser and Roger Craig one of the police men who found it said they thought it was a 7.65 Mauser because this was what was written on the side of the rifle. The other policeman (Seymour Weitzman) who identified it as a 7.65 Mauser owned a gun store and was considered to be knowledgeable about firearms making this misidentification seem quite improbable . The identification was of course subsequently changed.
I don't know if only Oswald was involved, the portrait given of him as schizoid narcissist is certainly consistent with the facts going back to the psychiatrist Doctor R. Hertogs who diagnosed him as such in New York in the early fifties. It's no great stretch of the imagination to believe him capable of using assassination as a way to achieve historical greatness. On the other hand there's important evidence that Posner dismisses too lightly because of it's inconsistency with his analysis.
I suspect that if Oswald had lived and there had been a trial that Mark Lane would have been able to introduce enough inconsistent evidence that a jury wouldn't have been able to say that Oswald was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
"Connolly said he heard what sounded like a shot and he turned around to the right to look, in the film you see him doing this just when Kennedy's arms are going up to under his chin."
You seem to be describing a different "Zapruder film" than the one I've been seeing for 35 years. Connally first turns his head about halfway to the right in frames 160-170. His head remains continuously turned partway to the right all the way to when he disappears behind the sign, and when he emerges from behind the sign his head is still turned about halfway to the right. Suddenly, at frames 224-228 his head snaps forward and it is only then that JFK's hands and arms first begin to rise in the rapid motion which will culminate less than a full second later with his elbows splayed, etc. His arms do not rise while Connally is still looking to the right, as you seem to be mistakenly claiming. And Connally himself said he was hit just as he turned his head to face slightly left of straight forward toward the front of the limousine, and that is exactly where we see him jerk violently, beginning in frame 226. And it is only 1/9th of a second earlier, frame 224, that we see the front of his jacket suddenly bulge outward several inches in only 1/18th of a second, as if that's when the bullet exited his chest. JFK's violent jerk begins in precisely the same frame as Connally's, 226. JFK's left hand is still moving downward in frames 224-225; it begins to move continuously upward in frame 226.
"Then Connolly said he turned to the left and felt something hit him but didn't hear the shot."
He said that because he had failed to see JFK over his right shoulder, he then began to turn to his left to try to see JFK over his left shoulder instead. He said he only got far enough in the turn where he was "looking a little bit to the left of center" (his exact words) when he felt himself to be hit in the back. And as I've said above, his head snaps forward at almost precisely the same instant as JFK's arms and hands first begin to rise. You seem to be implying that JFK was already raising his hands *before* Connally turned his head forward and that is not true.
"Connolly was holding a white Stetson hat in his left hand whilst he initially turned turned to the right but then dropped it when he turned to the left consistent with being hit in the wrist on this second turn."
That is incorrect. Connally did not drop the hat. He can still be seen holding it in frames following the fatal head shot to JFK, after he has already fallen back or been pulled back against Nellie. But the violent flip of his hat begins at frame 226, precisely the same frame in which JFK's arms and hands first begin to rise. In other words, both men jerk violently beginning in exactly the same frame, 226, as if they've both just been hit by the same bullet.
"Connolly's testimony is completely consistent with the film of the shooting."
Indeed it is.
"If the first shot missed why didn't Connolly hear it,"
Huh??? Connally said he *did* hear the first shot.
"clearly in the movie Connolly, consistent with his testimony. turns to the right when he hears the shot just as Kennedy reacts with his arms to the first hit"
Wrong. I correct you on this yet again. JFK does *not* raise his arms at any point while Connally has his head turned to the right. He first raises his arms at the same instant that Connally turned his head *forward*, which is precisely when Connally himself said he was hit.
"Which means if there was a bullet that missed then there were four shots."
Huh??? How on earth are you working this out? Connally first turns his head to the right at frames 160-170. JFK does not begin raising his arms until frame 226, which at 18.3 frames per second is at least three seconds after Connally appears to have heard the first shot.
"Whilst I accept that it's a important to actually stick to the essential facts it's important not to ignore real anomalies in the evidence i.e. the rifle found on the 6th floor at the Texas Book Depository wasn't identified as being the sort that Oswald was said to have purchased but instead to be a 7.65 German Mauser and Roger Craig one of the police men who found it said they thought it was a 7.65 Mauser because this was what was written on the side of the rifle."
I would suggest that you study Roger Craig's claims more carefully. The earliest known claim of his that the rifle on the sixth floor was a Mauser dates from the 1970s, long after the assassination which took place in 1963. Prior to 1970 his claims were quite different. He previously said that he had no earthly idea what type of rifle it was. Also not one of the other witnesses who saw the rifle on the sixth floor ever corroborated Craig's claim that the actual word "Mauser" was visible on the rifle. He remains to this day the one and only witness who saw the rifle while it was still on the sixth floor who ever said that that word was visible on the rifle.
"The other policeman (Seymour Weitzman) who identified it as a 7.65 Mauser owned a gun store and was considered to be knowledgeable about firearms making this misidentification seem quite improbable ."
You seem to be making the same mistake that others have made by exaggerating Weitzman's supposed expertise in identifying such firearms. In no statement ever made by him, in any year, in any decade, did Weitzman ever say that he actually saw the word "Mauser" on the rifle. In fact, he never said that he saw *any* words, or letters, or numerals on the rifle at all. He also never said that he had ever seen a Carcano even once in his life before that day. He also never said that he had even *heard* or *read* the word "Carcano" even once in his life before that day. Thus it cannot be proven that before that day, Weitzman even knew what a Carcano was, or even knew that there had ever been a rifle by that name. So if he had never seen a Carcano before, and did not even know the word "Carcano," he cannot reasonably be expected to know the difference between a Carcano and a Mauser unless he had looked closely enough to see words, and/or letters, and/or numerals on the rifle, correct? It seems more likely than not that he said "Mauser" simply because that was a rifle that was much more familiar in U.S. sporting goods sales at that time. The Carcano was much less well-known back then. A much larger number of people were familiar with the name "Mauser" than with the name "Carcano"; in fact, many people in the United States had never even heard or read the word "Carcano" in any context until after the assassination.
In stark contrast, another witness who saw the rifle while it was still on the sixth floor did indeed say, contemporaneously (not years later like Craig) that he saw specific words and numerals on the rifle, and that was J. C. Day, who said he saw "6.5 caliber C-2766, 1940 made in Italy" right there on the rifle. Not one of the witnesses ever disputed him on that claim for the entire remainder of the 1960s, and only Roger Craig claimed otherwise and not until the 1970s, and he had to contradict his own earlier claims to do so.
"The identification was of course subsequently changed."
Maybe the true reason it was "changed" was because it really is the truth that Weitzman was simply mistaken in his initial identification of the rifle as a Mauser?
"I suspect that if Oswald had lived and there had been a trial that Mark Lane would have been able to introduce enough inconsistent evidence that a jury wouldn't have been able to say that Oswald was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt."
Perhaps, but you may also need to do some careful study of how badly Mark Lane misrepresented the evidence on a number of occasions.
@@Caeruleo I'm describing the same Zapruder film shown to Governor Connolly and I trust his opinion over yours or Gerald Posner's.
@@michaelkulyk "I'm describing the same Zapruder film shown to Governor Connolly and I trust his opinion over yours or Gerald Posner's."
And Connally's opinion is mostly quite consistent with mine. Interesting that you don't bother to mention that part. He said that both the first and the third shots sounded as if they came from behind him and none from any other direction. He said he didn't hear the second shot, but that instead he felt it hit him in the back. Thus he was quite obviously saying that all three shots came from behind him and none from any other direction. That also is consistent with my opinion, that the majority of the evidence suggests that more likely than not there was only one shooter, and that more likely than not that shooter was behind the limousine, not to the right of or in front of the limousine. And I've already corrected you on what you claimed about Connally. You falsely claimed that Connally turned to his right when JFK's arms were *already* going up under his chin. Connally never said that. He said that he did not turn far enough to his right to see JFK at all, not even barely out of the corner of his eye. And Connally also said that he was not hit until the exact moment that he then turned his head toward the front of the limousine. I can quote him verbatim in his own exact words from multiple years and multiple decades saying exactly that, as I have done many times before on the internet. Would you like me to do so again now?
So how, exactly, is my opinion different from Connally's? You have yet to explain that.
And I see you have completely ignored my corrections of your other errors, such as you falsely claiming that Connally dropped his hat immediately after being shot, and you also ignored my detailed discussion of why the initial identification of the sixth floor rifle as a Mauser is questionable. Is the reason you ignored these things because you cannot prove that anything I said is incorrect?
@@Caeruleo Connolly didn't agree with the magic bullet theory. He didn't believe that the first bullet missed but instead he believed that this was the bullet that initially hit Kennedy from behind resulting in the upward motion of his arms towards his throat, Connolly believed that he himself was hit by a second shot after he turned to the right when he heard the first shot and that it was on the third shot that Kennedy received the fatal head shot. He never agreed with the Warren commission's majority conclusion that one bullet missed and that there were only two bullets involved with the wounds he and Kennedy received. As far as I know he never claimed that any of the shots came from the front. This of course leaves open the question of the bullet that missed. As I'm sure you know the commission needed to explain how three shots over a 6.5 second period with one missing the limo entirely could have produced the results that occurred hence the so called magic bullet theory that was used to explain this.
@@michaelkulyk "Connolly didn't agree with the magic bullet theory."
I don't agree with the "magic" bullet theory either. I do, however, after having studied this case extensively since 1988, believe that the "single" bullet theory (in my opinion a completely different theory from the "magic" bullet theory) is plausible. Would you like me to explain further? I can quite easily do so, since I've done that very thing many times on the internet for more than two decades now.
"He didn't believe that the first bullet missed but instead he believed that this was the bullet that initially hit Kennedy from behind resulting in the upward motion of his arms towards his throat,"
You are making some gigantic, glaring omissions. Connally said specifically in statements made in multiple years in multiple decades that he never once saw JFK at all during the entire shooting sequence, not even barely out of the corner of his eye, and thus that he had no possible way of knowing from his own personal observations whether or not JFK raised his arms after the first shot or after the second shot. The primary reasons he disputed the single bullet theory were these:
1. The Warren Commission foolishly claimed that it was an equal possibility that it was either the first or the second or the third shot which completely missed everyone in the limousine. Since Connally knew perfectly well that the second shot hit him, naturally he disputed the idea that it was even slightly possible that the second shot missed.
2. His wife, Nellie, claimed that she saw JFK raise his arms/hands after she heard the first shot but before she heard the second shot, and John Connally believed her. However, her claim is contradicted by both her husband's own testimony and by the Zapruder film. He said that he heard the first shot and turned his head partway to the right, but not far enough to see JFK over his right shoulder. We see him turn his head about halfway to the right at frames 160-170 in the film. His head remains continuously turned to the right all the way until he disappears behind the sign and when he emerges his head is still turned about halfway to the right. He said that he then intended to turn around the other way to look over his left shoulder, but that he only got far enough in the turn so that his head was facing almost directly toward the front of the limousine. He said he felt himself to be hit just at the instant that his head was facing almost directly forward. We see him suddenly turn his head forward in frames 224-228. And in frame 224 we see the front of his jacket suddenly bulge outward several inches in only 1/18th of a second, as if that's when the bullet exited his chest. And he jerks violently beginning only two frames later, 226, as if that's when he first began reacting to being hit. During the same frames JFK is emerging from behind the sign and we see his left hand move *downward* in frames 224-225. His hand does not begin to move upward again until frame 226, precisely the same frame in which Connally's violent jerk begins. In other words, both men jerk violently beginning at exactly the same instant in exactly the same frame, 226, as if they've just been hit by the same bullet. Connally also said that he estimated that at least six seconds, or more, passed between the instant when he heard the first shot and the instant in which he felt himself to be hit by the second shot. The one and only way Nellie could have been correct about JFK raising his arms/hands after the first shot but before the second shot without contradicting both her husband's testimony and the Zapruder film is that he would have to already be exhibiting such a reaction before Connally's head turns forward, and thus would have to be already raising his arms/hands *before* emerging from behind the sign, or even before disappearing behind the sign. But there is no evidence of that, and instead evidence to the contrary as I've already explained above.
"Connolly believed that he himself was hit by a second shot after he turned to the right when he heard the first shot and that it was on the third shot that Kennedy received the fatal head shot."
You are correct about that part at least. He additionally said that immediately after hearing the third shot he saw pieces of JFK's brain land all over him and all over the inside of the car.
"He never agreed with the Warren commission's majority conclusion that one bullet missed and that there were only two bullets involved with the wounds he and Kennedy received."
And I have already explained why that is: because the WC stupidly suggested that it was possible that the second shot missed everyone in the limo, and because his wife, Nellie, seems to have mistakenly believed, without realizing that she was mistaken, that she saw JFK raise his arms/hands before she heard the second shot. But in the Zapruder film it looks to me as if she doesn't even look at JFK for the first time until after frame 224, although it's hard to know for sure, of course. But as I've already described in detail above, the majority of the evidence indicates that more likely than not she was simply mistaken in her recollection, which any human witness can be.
"As far as I know he never claimed that any of the shots came from the front."
Indeed. He was quite clear that both the first and third shots sounded as if they came from behind him and that none sounded as if they came from even partly in front of him, and quite obviously the second shot came from behind him or else it would not have hit him in the back. Nellie also said that all three shots sounded as if they came from behind and that no shots sounded as if they came from even slightly to the front.
"This of course leaves open the question of the bullet that missed. As I'm sure you know the commission needed to explain how three shots over a 6.5 second period with one missing the limo entirely could have produced the results that occurred hence the so called magic bullet theory that was used to explain this."
Where on earth are you getting "a 6.5 second period" from? The Warren Commission never said that. Instead they said that the total time between first and last shots might have been as short as 5.6 seconds (but *only* if it had been the second shot that missed) but that if it had been either the first or the third shots that missed it could have been as long as 7.9 seconds or even longer. And as I've already said, Connally himself thought that the amount of time just between the first and second shots was at least six seconds, or longer. In fact his exact words were that it might have been anywhere from six to *ten* seconds between the first and second shots. And the number of frames between when we see Connally's jacket suddenly bulge outward and when we see material first begin to exploder from JFK's head is 89 frames. At 18.3 frames per second this suggests that the shortest possible amount of time between the second and third shots was 4.9 seconds. And counting from when we first see him turn his head partway to the right, which is when he himself said he heard the first shot, to frame 313, the earliest frame showing any damage to JFK's head, we get a time of at least 8 seconds between the first and last shots, and that's only if Connally turned his head to the right *immediately* after hearing the first shot, as in less than half a second after hearing it. Any delay longer than that between him hearing the shot and him turning his head naturally increases the total time between first and last shot. And Max Holland and other researchers have discussed evidence which suggests the possibility that the first shot was fired just as the limousine had barely finished turning the corner from Houston Street onto Elm Street, which raises the possibility that the amount of time between shots one and two might have been twice as long as the amount of time between shots two and three, which would put the total time between shots one and two at approximately 9.8 seconds and thus the total time from shot one to shot three at approximately 14.7 seconds. And I remind you again that Connally himself said it might have been as long as 10 seconds between shots one and two. And he was not the only witness who said that. Earle Cabell said his recollection was that approximately 10 seconds passed between shots one and two and approximately 5 seconds between shots two and three.
Was this filmed in May of 2023? Or when?
Yes, we filmed on May 3, 2023.
Oswald was framed
The stupidity by conspiracy theories is never ending .
@@barryirvin2417 because the whole event is difficult to unravel. First of all the conspirators plan way ahead and have alternate plans and create scenarios to lead investigators up the wrong tree. Lee Oswald knew he was going to die but he didn’t know what was in store for him. Judith knew he was in trouble but had hope. But the powers that be had other plans. JFK had to go. He was the fly in their ointment. JFK had money to burn. He had his fun in the sun but was cut down by the powers that operating at that time we were flush with cash also. Lee Oswald was cool, calm, and collected. He was a trained agent. The worst thing that came out of the assassination was the escalation of the Vietnam war. Which was not an official war. Congress held the pursue strings so we were not allowed to fight all out. So we pulled out in the end and the north Vietnam overran the south
Bottom line,The Head Shot Came From The Front…Cade Closed !!
Modern day forensics and Ballistics proves you're wrong.
"Cade" closed!!!hahaha
And then they said look at the Emperor's new clothes and Posner says ya look.
No matter what we know,assume,uncover;it ain't gonna bring him back.He's long gone,it's over.
Oswald wasn't even at that window on floor six, and he never fired that rifle that day. Its the truth.
"Oswald wasn't even at that window on floor six, and he never fired that rifle that day. Its the truth."
And your proof of this is...what, exactly?
Get a real job ya daftie.
Some might say that this was going to happen. That it was just part of the universe unfolding as it continues on its existence. It was fated since the beginning and there's the view of the multiverse that in another universe Kennedy isn't killed or Oswald killed Walker etc etc. Will we ever know the absolute answer, the answer is no and maybe that's just the way it is meant to be, because we are humans and not gods and some things are unknowable. Posner's work as far as the actual physical assassination is based on facts as is Oswald's motivations. Oswald never received love and in fact felt ignored and unappreciated and suffered from one of the worst emotional conditions of all low self-esteem and delusions of grandeur. Like Posner said Kennedy just fell into his lap and he was in that agitated state, he had the skills from the Army 🪖 and the ability to buy a rifle because of Americans gun fetish, and that combination my friends led to November 22, 1963 Jack Ruby was another loser and mental defective who again fell into killing Oswald due to gun fetish and emotional instability and having to wire one of his strippers money and Oswald's transfer to the Dallas jail was running late. If he had been transferred at the correct time, Oswald would not have been killed then and there. He might have been killed regardless but not there and not then and probably not by Ruby. ijs
The question remains, for all of us...just Who/What created this Unfolding Universe?...Why?
@@curbozerboomer1773 Dunno and that's ok. 👍🏻😎😁💯🤷🏻
You are correct, and I like your "Cosmic" observations, as to the inevitability of not understanding some things!...We humans clearly do not have enough mental horsepower to truly understand our situation! We just have to accept that, which we cannot understand.
I want to see Gerald on America's Untold Stories.
Certainly so would I. But just as the principal players on the Warren Commission never came to the table to defend their Report when called out by Mark Lane, Ill bet that Posner won't go anywhere near Mark Groubert.
@432b86ed Evolutionary scientists don't like to debate creationists because they don't want them to think they have a place at the table because they push 'junk science'.
I'd still like to see it, and I mean Groubert and Posner. Groubert insists Oswald was ONI, does he completely reject Oswald's official background? That he was a child misfit with mental health issues? That he was a misfit in the Marines as well with very serious issues? Hardship discharged at 19 years old, a 19 year old jarhead spy? They must have groomed him from childood then fabricated his whole life. But there's no evidence to support that, no GOOD evidence. Oswald wasn't fluent in Russian either and he did not attend the DLI in Monterrey. Oswald's Russian wasn't that good, it was passable. This is where the conspiracy guy say's 'No, Oswald spoke fluent Russian and everybody who say's he didn't is CIA or KGB, including all the Russian civilians who knew him in Russia and in the U.S.' Everybody is a spy, he's got Oswald doing all kinds of cloak & dagger stuff and I have yet to see any GOOD evidence to support that, all the evidence points to the contrary and this is where conspiracy guys just say all THAT evidence is fabricated.
And Oswalds past is just for starters, all the eyewitness stuff is nothing but rabbit holes and hearsay, no real GOOD actual evidence.
This is coming from a guy (me) who was once a true believer in the JFK conspiracy. I'm 56 years old now but I converted about 20 years ago, and I was a believer since I was a little kid. And it wasn't Posner or Bugliosi who converted me, I knew about them since I was kid when I started gobbling all that stuff up.
All I can tell you is give the counter-conspiracy theories 'Equal Time'. But maybe you have and you're still a true believer? In that case I really don't know what more to say.
I really just want to hear Posner and Groubert discuss Oswald's past and the 'Snipers Nest', and the what, 6 or 7 rifles Groubert say's were laying all over the TSBD?
Posner came up with the idea that if he left out certain facts and reshaped the narrative, he could solve the crime. Anyone whose studied the "Assassination"can poke holes in his conclusion.
Absolutely and Nick the moderator was so ill prepared.
What did Posner leave out? 1 example will do.😊
Precisely
@@AlisonMcClelland-bi4hu really? What did he leave out? Just one example will be sufficient. And...go.
No they can't. You're exactly the 9/11 moron he was discussing.
Brain and blood splatter to the back of the car and street. Parkland doctors and nurses on record saying there was a large exit wound in the back of the head. Limousine comes to a near complete stop at the moment of fatal impact violating secret service training to the max, if you don't think that is true then explain Clint Hill being able to run to the back of the car. The car stopped! Oh and BTW the house select committee determined there was a probability of multiple shooters, so officially, per the government it was a conspiracy.
You are aware the evidence the HSCA used to reach that conclusion, the dictabelt recording, was investigated, found to be erroneous and invalid, and soundly debunked more than 40 years ago, right?
Blood and gore went in all directions, splattering everybody seated forward in the limo.
The idea somebody went about falsifying the evidence and altering the wounds just to conceal the existence of a second shooter is ridiculous. Just leave well enough alone and say Oswald must have had an accomplice who got away, which would have suited any conspiracy just fine.
"Brain and blood splatter to the back of the car and street."
Oh, you didn't know that all four people sitting in front of JFK, John Connally, Nellie Connally, William Greer, and Roy Kellerman, were also showered with blood and pieces of his brain? You didn't know that such material also landed all over the inside of the car? You didn't know that such material from his head also landed as far forward as on the windshield and on the hood of the car? Interesting that you only mention such material exiting rearward from his head but make no mention whatsoever of the considerable amount of material that exited forward from his head.
"The car stopped!"
You are repeating an urban legend about the JFK assassination. It has never been proven that the limousine stopped completely on Elm Street. Some researchers, such as Vince Palamara, have falsely claimed that as many as fifty witnesses said the car stopped completely. That is absolutely and provably false. Of the *sixty* closest witnesses, only a small minority said that the limo came to a complete stop. A much larger number merely said the limo slowed down, or made no mention of it either way. There is also no photographic proof that the limo stopped completely. All the films which show the limo on Elm at that time unanimously show the limo slowing down but not stopping. And it's too many different films for it to be at all plausible that all of them were "faked" in exactly the same way, especially since each of the films has a completely different history of possession from the others.
"Oh and BTW the house select committee determined there was a probability of multiple shooters, so officially, per the government it was a conspiracy."
You are making a gigantic, glaring omission. The one and only reason the HSCA issued that conclusion was that at the eleventh hour, when they were just about to disband, and when they had already drafted a conclusion that there was only one shooter, they were suddenly presented with what turned out later to be a seriously flawed acoustic study of the DPD dictabelt recording which claimed that the recording had captured the sounds of four gunshots, three from the TSBD and one from the grassy knoll. Within the first few years after the conclusion was issued this acoustic study was widely disputed. The acoustic claims are also not corroborated by any photographic evidence, so in other words there is no independent corroboration that the original acoustic study got the shots in the right place. The most fatal flaw of all in the original acoustic claim is that shots two and three were six seconds apart and shots three and four were only 0.7 seconds apart. For either of the last two shots to have been the fatal head shot that hit JFK, the shot that hit Connally (whether or not it also hit JFK) would have to be an absolute minimum of six seconds before the head shot. But that blatantly ignores both the photographic evidence and what Connally said about hearing the first shot, then feeling himself to be hit by the second shot, and when he was hit. Six seconds before the head shot puts Connally being hit before he disappears behind the sign in the Zapruder film, which is quite obviously incorrect, since when he then emerges from the sign he is still at first showing no reaction to being hit. He also said he was hit exactly when he turned his head forward after previously turning his head to the right. He turns his head forward in frames 224-228, which is also when he jerks violently, as if he's just been hit by a bullet. The front of his jacket also suddenly bulges outward several inches in only 1/18th of a second at frame 224, as if that's when the bullet exited his chest. But this is all quite a few frames after he has emerged from behind the sign and it is only 4.9 seconds before the head shot, not 6.0 seconds.
It has also never actually been proven that the sounds of gunshots really were captured on the dictabelt recording. The shots cannot be heard at all with human hearing. They are supposedly buried so deeply in the background noise that they can only be detected electronically. This means that the average person cannot verify that any gunfire was captured on that recording at all. This is extremely different from photographic evidence, in which the average person with only average eyesight can easily see that both Connally and JFK jerk violently beginning in exactly the same frame of the Zapruder film, 226, that Connally's jacket suddenly bulges outward only two frames earlier, that his head does not turn forward until those same frames, etc.
Blood splatter was also in front of JFK as well. Oops. 😂
The car did not stop completely..Hill caught up to it!
Nobody can place Oswald on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting. Not the Warren report, not Bugliosi, and not Posner. If Posner could do that, he wouldn't have to go on about Oswald's psychology and smirk. The case against Oswald in the Walker shooting is so thin it wouldn't be laughed out of court, it could never get to court in the first place. At the time, people thought Walker himself arranged it for publicity. The bullet was identified as a steel-jacketed 30-06 round. The Warren commission turned it into a copper-jacketed Carcano round. When Walker was shown the bullet by the House Select Committee on Assassinations, he called it a "ridiculous substitution.
The physical evidence in the Tippit case lacks all chain of custody and again, no conviction in a court of law could be obtained. Only two Warren commission witnesses actually claimed to see the shooting: Domingo Benevides, who did not identify anyone; and Helen Markham, whose story changed so many times the commission said her testimony wasn't really essential.
Posner is a very engaging fellow, but he's very disingenuous. I wonder if you noticed that he said the throat shot entered "high in the neck." That of course is a fabrication, but a necessary one. JFK was hit in the third thoracic vertebra. That's the upper back. How did a shot from the sixth floor hit him in the back and then deflect upwards, without hitting any bone, to exit his throat?
Readers interested in a meticulous demolition of Posner's book can refer to this article. www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/case-closed-30-years-on-even-worse
Ford moved the second shot up to the throat with no forensic justification.
Oswald had pictures of Walkers house not too flimsy evidence he was stalking Oswald. You don't know really what the fbi had now do you plus the note.
No cinviction in a court of law could be obtained That's a asinine comment you left out all the witnesses that Id Oswald within seconds of shooting Tippit the Davis Sisters Cab Calloway many more. A ten year old school kid could debunk your nonsense with 30 minutes of googling.
The bullet did not deflect upward The bullet hole seems to be higher because of the anotomic position of the President when the bullet hit. The bullet was always on a downward angle Vincent Bugliosi explains this beautifully in his book.
"Nobody can place Oswald on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting."
While I suppose it could be said that way, it could also be said that no one can place any other person besides Oswald on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting either, which would all by itself weaken the claim that someone else besides him fired from there. It is also true that no one can place Oswald anywhere else at the time of the shooting either. No TSBD employee ever said they saw Oswald elsewhere at the moment the shots were fired. Carolyn Arnold said she might have seen him as little as five minutes before the shooting, but that's still plenty of time for him to get from any floor in the building to the sixth floor sniper's nest and still have at least two minutes to spare before the presidential limousine first came into view. No other TSBD employee ever said they saw Oswald less than five minutes before the shooting. After the shooting, Marrion Baker and Roy Truly said they saw him in the second floor lunchroom perhaps as little as 90 seconds after the shooting, but both of them admitted that it could have been longer, perhaps as long as two minutes after the shooting. And Oswald could have quite easily gotten from the sniper's nest to the second floor lunchroom in no more than 70 seconds, and indeed Baker's impression when he first saw Oswald was that Oswald had just entered the lunchroom only seconds earlier.
The ct people truly ought to listen carefully to this video and learn many many things and be open to changing their minds.
Turkey Shoot; more than one gunman. LeeHO knew something and shot live on TV by JRuby, but Ruby gets cancer: dead. That female reporter , Killgallen who was found dead supposedly by suicide, all the witnesses mysteriously DEAD. Killers are hiding in plain sight.
Ever lose something & go nuts looking for it just to find it under your nose ?
I recall that film: JFK's head goes up ,then to the left; grabs his throat and his back harness prohibits evasive movement ; next shot , head explodes. I can believe driver turned around and shoots. In either case of so many possibilities, Kennedy was NOT supposed to survive.
And we're not even discussing how the President's body was handled between Parkland Hospital and Bethesda Naval in Washington ...
the different types of caskets. Why did LBJ get sworn in as POTUS right hand placed on a Missle, not a Bible on plane with,
Jacqueline Kennedy standing right next to him in bloody dress?
For sure : more questions than answers, and the moment someone gets too close, like the Vatican Library: records SEALED.
Oops, did i get too close again? Yes, i did.
Subjective BS.
@@curbozerboomer1773
What makes u uncomfortable, the TRUTH, Freedom of Speech or r u just stuck in storm shelter trolling?
In almost 60 years no one has been able to show anyone else's involvement other than Oswald. Oswald did this alone, he was not part of a conspiracy. Posner's book is valuable for the interviews he did with people that knew Oswald, he talked with people that were in the military and other walks of life with and around Oswald. Oswald's guilt is established beyond all doubt but the book is still worth reading as a study of the psychology of Oswald through the people that knew him.
There's a 6 part doc on Hulu that deals w the "network" that enabled LHO. He did it. But he definitely didn't act alone.
Posner did a good job in debunking the myths on JFK assassination.
No myths, just facts and cheery picking at its best.
I've just been watching a vid on YT about the murder of Tippit, and it's at complete odds with this guys opinion. I've been reading / watching /you name it, all about this tragedy since I saw it on TV , that very day. There's FAR TOO much contentious information to accept this mans conclusion. I'll leave that to his Pro critics, to analise and conclude, for me.
Maybe stop watching youtube and read the book. Then Bugliosi's book. Then the Warren Report.
Curtis LaMay, General Walker, LBJ, Hoover and the CIA. Officer Tippit was killed by Ruby and used as a body double. Look up Mark Groubear
"Officer Tippit was killed by Ruby and used as a body double."
That's one of the silliest claims I've ever seen made about this case. To start with, it has never yet been proven that Jack Ruby was anywhere within a quarter mile in any direction of the Tippit shooting at the time it occurred. And if by "body double" you are referring to the silly myth that I've seen some people here on CZcams mindlessly repeat, that Tippit's body was used as a "double" for JFK in the Bethesda autopsy that evening, I'd suggest you do better research. For one thing, Tippit did not look similar enough to JFK for that to have a snowball's chance of surviving a summer day in Texas of fooling anyone. Secondly, Earl Rose's autopsy of Tippit (I'm guessing you've never actually read the autopsy report) occurred too late in the day for Tippit's body to have then been flown from Texas to Maryland in time to be present for the JFK autopsy.
"Look up Mark Groubear"
Don't you mean Mark Groubert? If so, that's laughable, since he has never come anywhere even remotely close to proving that Jack Ruby was anywhere near the scene of the Tippit shooting, nor has he come anywhere even remotely close to proving that Tippit's body was used as a double or any other such nonsense. If you think I'm wrong, please describe, here, in detail, the evidence Groubert has presented which you think proves these things. Thanks.
@@Caeruleo so the eye witnesses on film, that state they watched Ruby exit a car and shoot Tippit don't count. Same ok spin Jonny Carson used on Garrison..Why NBC pulled the video. The Oswald phone call to Hurt...records don't lie. Oswald called the CIA handler. Those records belong to the phone company. Care to comment on the phone call your buddies missed
@@c.hundley9714 "so the eye witnesses on film, that state they watched Ruby exit a car and shoot Tippit don't count."
Please say the full names of the eyewitnesses who said on film that they saw Jack Ruby shoot Tippit. I have been studying this assassination for 35 years and I do not recall any witness saying anything even remotely similar to that, on film or in print. And let me turn this around on you: the *majority* of the eyewitness at or near the scene of the Tippit shooting said the man they saw either was definitely Oswald, or at the very least looked reasonably similar to Oswald, and several of them said it both on film and in print. So according to you, what the majority of the witnesses said doesn't count?
Look up...here comes Santa Claus!!
You deep State thugs couldn't make a better argument. Your boys missed Oswald s phone call. Not speculation. Bell Telephone records and guess what. Two women who worked the Dallas pbx are on video record talking about placing it. Oswald was under the impression he was CIA. CIA fuck wads. Take your best shot, ceicil. You can't get past the fuck up of Oswald calling a known CIA house. Bring it. Bell Telephone....you messed up. Hahaha it's out there.
Oswald kills two, Ruby kills one then Ruby stays tight lipped, gets very ill and dies in Prison about 3 years after he's in jail. That's the way it always happens...
"Oswald kills two, Ruby kills one then Ruby stays tight lipped, gets very ill and dies in Prison about 3 years after he's in jail."
Not sure where on earth you're getting the idea that Jack Ruby, of all people, stayed "tight lipped." He did precisely the opposite of that, talking on and on and on to Earl Warren and others, describing his actions, his motivations, his suspicions, etc. in tremendous detail. I'm guessing you've never read more than one percent of his Warren Commission testimony. Try reading all of it, all the way through from the first word of the first sentence to the last word of the last sentence, and every word and sentence in between. It is in two parts, and it is very, very long, one of the longest testimonies given by anyone to the WC. There are pages where it is just Ruby speaking continuously for many lines in a row without anyone speaking. The man had diarrhea of the mouth. He was precisely the opposite of "tight-lipped."
And the testimony is most instructive due to what he *really* said about why he wanted to be taken to Washington. Many authors and makers of videos have falsely claimed that he wanted to be taken to Washington to reveal inside information about the assassination, but the reasons he actually gave were quite different from that.
@@Caeruleo Convicts always die (55 years old) of cancer 3 years after going to solitary confinement in Prison, and before their second trial. So the video where Ruby states clear as day no one will ever no his motives or the people that were behind it has to be a fake video just like the Warren Commission. Keep watching CNN.
I greatly respect Mr. Posner's passion and research, and I absolutely believe Oswald was shooting from the sixth floor, and the first shot that hit JFK came from him. But after seeing the Zapruder film, I started thinking that the fatal shot may have come from the area of the grassy knoll. I believed it even more when Dr. Robert McClelland, one of the trauma doctors who oversaw the effort to save President Kennedy’s life, examined Kennedy's wounds and he came to the conclusion that the fatal shot came from the area of the grassy knoll. I have no idea what the absolute truth is, and I doubt that any of us ever will, which is beyond pathetic.
The headshot came from the sewer drain, a wide open can't miss 15-20 foot shot. In some footage you can clearly see a cop drop his bike at the curb, staring down at the drain a few feet away and heading in for a closer look. Opinions on this will forever be divided on this, all the way from "oswald acted alone", to "there were seven shooters stratigically placed around the plaza". Not many trust the gov anymore, so even if they do release the rest of the files, not many will believe what they feed us anyways. They lost the public on this one over half a century ago.
Half his solutions to the main questions are sketchy, I’m with you that fatal shot was from the Picket fence , and the doctors who tried to save him they knew the fatal shot was from the front , the autopsy was a coverup big time the body of the president was tampered with , there are videos out there , this year is the 60th year of the assassination I believe technology this year will show for sure there was more than one shooter , but most of us believe that already but in November mote people will believe the warren commission and that single bullet theory was a crock of , and because of all the researchers in the assassination community keeping the truth alive , in. November this year the truth will be out !
@@C77-C77 "The headshot came from the sewer drain, a wide open can't miss 15-20 foot shot."
Nonsense. Photographic evidence from multiple sources proves that by the time of the fatal head shot JFK was already leaning far over to his left. His head would thus have not been visible from the sewer drain. The shooter would have had to fire through the side of the car to hit JFK's head, with no way of knowing if he was aiming accurately. And what is your proof that a man could even *fit* in that drain? And where would he have entered the sewer system to reach that particular drain and how would he know which of the many branching passages to take to reach that particular drain?
"In some footage you can clearly see a cop drop his bike at the curb, staring down at the drain a few feet away and heading in for a closer look."
So? How do you know he wasn't looking at the drain for a completely different reason? What was the policeman's full name, and what did he himself say in his own exact words regarding why he looked at the drain?
The good Dr. admitted to Bugliosi, that he might have been a bit wrong about seeing JFKs large back of the head wound...after all, JFK was lying with his large head being very flat on the gurney, and the several doctors did not examine the head during their efforts to save JFK...Only Dr. Kemp Clark saw the head evaluated the wound, and proceeded to give a less than great evaluation...saying the wound was located in the Occiput, but extending into the Parietal area (side) of the head. He was a little off, as the official x-rays and photos prove...and interestingly, he very rarely gave any interviews over the ensuing years of his career!..I think he knew he made a hasty, poor evaluation.
Posner with "people spend too much time thinking about Dealey Plaza" is just silly. The Zapruder film shows evidence that at least one bullet came from the front. He is trying to psychoanalyze Oswald. How do you do that with a 24 yr old kid who is hardly known to anyone? (other than his CIA handlers like DeMarchildt and Ruth Paine) Had he lived and could have been interviewed, maybe, but trying to do that with a couple of remarks he made on a radio show in New Orleans or something someone heard him say in the army? Give me a break.
OK, Sherlock!
@@curbozerboomer1773 I am more interested in the facts. Oswald had a higher Security Clearance than his Commanding officer. He wasn't just a run-of-the-mill private in the Marines. He worked as a Radar Technician on a base that tracked the U2 Jets. He got an early Discharge because his mother was ill. And yet instead of going home to attend to her he stopped in Helsinki and entered the USSR, presumably to Defect. And then when he supposedly decided he didn't like it, he and his Russian wife (daughter of a Soviet Intelligence officer) were allowed to enter the U.S. no questions asked. Then this failed Defector got a job at the Jaggers-Chiles-Stoval Company in Dallas which made highly classified maps for the U.S. Government. When they searched Ruth Paine's home he had a very expensive spy camera. Actually, there were 2. One of them was owned by Michael Paine. Nope. The evidence points to Oswald being involved, but in what role? As the shooter? Hardly. He couldn't shoot worth shit, and the gun he supposedly owned was a piece of crap.
Zfilm .... rooftop of the Dallas county records bldg....frame 313...318... Sprocket hole .. evidence of a second shooter..and in no words did I mention the Knoll... that's enough in itself to raise serious questions...I believe Oswald got the scope in the eye when the recoil snapped back which would explain the bent scope, and the shot that went wild down Elm Street
"Zfilm .... rooftop of the Dallas county records bldg....frame 313...318... Sprocket hole .. evidence of a second shooter"
How on earth is that evidence of a second shooter?
@@Caeruleo It's... definitely ... evidence... of ... elipses.
He’ll never stop talking absolute rubbish. He can waffle on all day but no way will Posner or anyone else convince me that the head shot didn’t come from the front, unfortunately for Posner and other lone nutters, the Zapruder film shows just that.
"He can waffle on all day but no way will Posner or anyone else convince me that the head shot didn’t come from the front, unfortunately for Posner and other lone nutters, the Zapruder film shows just that."
Well now, that's certainly a closed-minded attitude. No one will ever convince you. So in other words you've already decided in advance that even if you're presented with evidence you have never known about before, no matter what that evidence is, you're still going to refuse to believe that the head shot didn't come from the front?
And how on earth does the Zapruder film "show" that the head shot came from the front? You must be talking about the silly claim, made by all too many people, that the "back and to the left" motion of his head, all by itself, "proves" that the shot came from the front. But that is only one detail seen in the film. What about the larger number of other details also seen in the film that seem to suggest that the shot was actually fired from behind JFK after all? Do you even know which other details I'm talking about?
Can't rely on that film. It was damaged during developing. Plus the back of JFk's head is blacked out.
@@peggylavelle581 "Can't rely on that film. It was damaged during developing."
There is plenty of independent corroboration of what is seen in the film. Would you like me to describe that evidence in detail? Given that I have been discussing that evidence in detail for decades on the internet, I can quite easily do it again now.
"Plus the back of JFk's head is blacked out."
Nope, that has never been proven. You are repeating an unproven factoid or urban myth that is promoted by people such as Douglas Horne, who is one of the most biased and unreliable researchers I have ever come across, and I can also easily explain in detail why I think so, as I have also done that before too.
I just finished the audio version of Posner's book. It was riveting. Before listening to it, I was vaguely interested in the Kennedy assassination because I was in grade school when it happened, but then 20 years later, I worked on a TV mini-series called Kennedy, starring Martin Sheen in which we closed down the financial disctrict of Richmond, Virginia and turned it into Dealy Plaza. The old Medical College of Virginia was used for Parkland Hospital. It was a fascinating project.
I have always presumed that Oswald was more or less set up as a "Patsy" for the shooting in some plot. But then I spent the next 30 years in law enforcement and learned through experience that nobody keeps their mouth shut for that long in a criminal conspiracy. The murder of Oswald by Jack Ruby kept me believing in some sort of mob plot. Much of this I now know was just based on false information reported as fact, usually by some nut job with a book to sell, or someone who got invited to a public library to give everyone the "inside story of what really happened".
I heard everything about Oswald's alleged involvement with spy planes in Japan, to how his rifle was either (depending on whom you ask) a crappy Italian Carcano that wouldn't hit anything to a beautifully made German Mauser that had been switched to a Carcano after the shots were fired. I heard all kinds of things about Jack Ruby being a hit man for the mob. I heard about four shots, the grassy knoll, and pretty much everything else you can imagine. You can fall down a CZcams rabbit hole on JFK and spend weeks just watching. By the end of it, you can be convinced that space aliens killed Kennedy. It was in watching one such video where I saw a "JFK researcher" refer to the book Case Closed as "total crap". So of course I had to read it. It was in a search for the book that I found the audio version and listened to it all in one sitting except for bathroom breaks. Finally it all made sense.
My career led me to become a criminal investigator, and also an expert witness on firearms. I had seen many shoddy investigations before, and some where comments were made before all the facts were in. I'd also seen firearms misidentified by responding officers, such as one case where the first guy on scene had identified a Smith and Wesson automatic as a "Glock". The kid told me he thought that Glock was a generic name for a handgun. So, it didn't suprise me that some Texas cop misidentified a rather obscure Italian rifle as the much more familiar Mauser. The Carcano is a well-made rifle, certainly capable of making the shots that Oswald made. It is an accurate rifle, but its ergonomics are a little balky in working the bolt. And since it is a smaller rifle chambered for a powerful cartridge, it kicks like a mule. Ammunition was not so easy to find. So of the WWII mail order surplus rifles, it would not have been my first choice of what was available in the 60's, but was certainly the cheapest option. I think Oswald bought what he could afford, and the pre-installed scope had to be attractive. I actually borrowed one in the 90's and was perfectly capable of replicating Oswald's shots. So much for that. I can say that if a professional assasin had been tasked with the killing, the Carcano would not be their first choice of weapon. But it was perfectly capable. I actually replicated his shots with a handgun on three fixed targets. No problem. Just about any repeating rifle would have worked. I also learned a long time ago never to speculate what a bullet will or will not do as it passes through flesh and bone, or what it will look like when recovered. I wasn't at JFK's autopsy, but I have sat in on 250 others where people were shot with firearms, and have seen entrance wounds mistaken for exit wounds initially and vice versa. I have no problem believing that excited ER doctors saw what they thought was one type of wound was actually found to be something else on autopsy. Just normal human error.
Posner's chapters on Oswald's biography were most instructive. I am surprised he had such a troubled life, and can easily see how, having failed at everything, he craved the feeling he belonged to some cause, and was hungry for recognition for something, anything that people would remember him by. His psych profile reads like the typical Active Shooter of today, except that I do not believe he thought he was going to get caught.
But the most interesting parts of Case Closed to me are the parts about Jack Ruby. I'll admit that his murder of Oswald spontaneously is a bit hard to swallow until you understand that Ruby was a small-time wanna be hood who was pretty bent psychologically and had a mercurial temper. Posner is right that he craved action and wanted to be known as a big man around town. He befriended cops to that end, even though they all thought he was a flake. Posner is right that he had multiple chances to kill Oswald over the weekend, but just had to get himsef wound up enough to go through with it. Until I read the book, the thing I got stuck on was the fact that he left his dog in his car when he went in on the day of the murder. He either didn't know when he went inside that he was going to kill anyone, or less likely, that he knew what he planned to do and thought he would be hailed as a hero and would be right back to his dog. And, if this was a hit to close off some mob conspiracy, do we really think organized crme entrusted this to a small time strip joint owner? And if so, why was Ruby left alive after being arrested? He could have been shanked at any time while he was in custody which would realy cleaned up a loose end. But yet he died in 1967 of lung cancer.
So what I think now is that the whackiest little nut job in Dallas on that day took a rifle to work and killed the President. Later that weekend, the second whackiest nut job in Dallas killed Oswald. A mishandled government investigation left us all with the impression that something more complicated was going on and being hidden. Occam's Razor in action figures this one out for us. I think if there was any sort of "conspiracy" it took the form of Oswald making noises about killing Kennedy to his Cuban friends so he would be allowed into Cuba as a hero by Castro, and them saying "Yeah, you should totally do that." But that is pure guesswork on my part. Maybe I should try giving a talk on this at the public library.
@Tom Crawford Great analysis on a lot of dynamics from the case. Thank you for sharing!
@@HindsightHistory Thanks for your kind reply. I devoted a few days to the CZcams Rabbit Hole and then Posner's book while I was laid up with an illness. The contrast between his book and most of what I saw was striking in terms of serious research and logical support. But then it was time to move on and go back to real life. I have no idea how people can devote their whole lives to a single murder and be as passionate about it as if they were JFK's family. Maybe I'm just callous because I've stood over so many dead bodies, but for me this was nothing more than a distraction from being ill for a week. Now that I'm better and back to real life, I ask myself "Who killed JFK?" I find myself replying "Who cares?"
Problem is a have just stumbled onto interviews where people say a shot was fired from behind the fence. Multiple people. Or at least the shot was fired from behind where they were standing…Seven different people.
@@machivellisucstwogo7103 "Problem is a have just stumbled onto interviews where people say a shot was fired from behind the fence. Multiple people. Or at least the shot was fired from behind where they were standing…Seven different people."
But those are nowhere even remotely close to all the people who gave statements regarding where they thought the sounds of the gunfire came from, and nowhere close even to the majority of those people. More than 100 Dealey Plaza witnesses gave such statements. What about what the other 93+ witnesses said? Also didn't all seven or nearly all seven of those people also say that all the shots sounded as if they came from behind the fence and no other direction? How does that support the idea of multiple gunman? And we know for a fact that it is impossible for all the shots to have come from behind the fence, because we know for a fact that John Connally, at least, was hit in the back by a shot fired from behind him, whether or not that same bullet also hit JFK.
@@Caeruleo I now think there were multiple shooters. I think I now heard at least eight people say it. These people didn’t know each other and they are saying basically the same thing. I can give you links to videos.
The entire last section from Oswald leaving the scene through Jack Ruby is completely unconvincing. Poser does not even begin to address the patsy angle, which could largely explain Oswald‘s actions. Why? Because it undermines his tidy narrative.
If he was a pasty why would he leave work?. Why kill JD Tippet?. Where the all the people involved in him being hired in the texas school book depository in on it?.
Here are two facts that prove that there was more than one shooter. (1) The "magic bullet" was almost pristine and yet there bullet fragments in Governor Connally. So the magic bullet was not involved. (2) The bullets from Oswald's rifle were full metal jacket bullets (FMJB) which are difficult to fragment. The fatal bullet that hit JFK in the head was highly fragmented. It was not a FMJB. So It did not come from Oswald's rifle. So there was more than one shooter and the Oswald rifle was not the one that killed the president. CASE CLOSED.
Bullet, of course, is not "pristine," it is badly crushed at the nose and flattened down one side, perfectly consistent with going through Kennedy without hitting bone, slowing and tumbling on leaving him, and broadsiding its way through Connally's ribs.
We look forward to you explaining how anybody planting a bogus bullet within one hour of the shooting could possibly have known a bullet needed planting at all or that he wasn't simply planting one bullet too many into evidence and blowing the whole plot.
All bullets and fragments ever found were matched to Oswald's rifle, of course he shot him.
@@aaronz7056 I said the bullet was "almost pristine" which it was. It was not crushed at the nose and it was only slightly flattened. A bullet like that which allegedly went through so many bones and yet did not show expected damage. Tests of same type of bullet on carcass showed significant damage. The bullet that hit JFK's head could not be matched to Oswald's rifle as it was just fragments. The bullet exploded on impact. Yes, the bullet was foolishly planted by the cover up team. JFK's car (a crime scene)was washed of all evidence and windscreen (with bullet hole, where did that bullet come from? More than 3 bullets?) was replaced.
@@roberttohill627 A) You are blatantly lying about the bullet's condition, but who should people believe, you or their own eyes?
B) Only damage to the windshield, still in the National Archives, is a crack caused by a bullet fragment which also damaged the chrome plating... from the INSIDE.
The idea somebody was standing squarely in front of the limo, firing through glass and past the ears of a carful of passengers while shooting Kennedy in the face, fully expecting to frame this on Oswald from behind, is idiotic.
C) I asked you to explain HOW somebody could have known a bullet needed planting and your only answer is "the bullet was planted." You obviously can't answer the question and therefore haven't a leg to stand on, thanks anyway.
"(1) The "magic bullet" was almost pristine"
Oh, here we go again with the silly "almost pristine" myth. You seem to be just mindlessly repeating what certain authors and makers of videos often claim about the bullet without bothering to do actual research to see if their claims are really credible. You also give the impression that you are yet another person who has looked at less than 50 percent of all the photographs ever taken of the bullet. Photos taken of the base of the bullet, as opposed to those taken directly from the side (which appear to be the only ones you've seen) show the base to be severely flattened, with part of the metal core having been forced out. That is not what most people would call "almost pristine."
"(2) The bullets from Oswald's rifle were full metal jacket bullets (FMJB) which are difficult to fragment."
But nowhere near impossible to fragment.
"The fatal bullet that hit JFK in the head was highly fragmented. It was not a FMJB. So It did not come from Oswald's rifle."
Nope, that does not follow. You are using faulty logic. The bullet that struck JFK's head struck his skull first without passing through or hitting any other object first to reduce its velocity. Since the skull is one of the hardest bones in the human body it is not at all implausible that a FMJ bullet would fragment in such circumstances.
"So there was more than one shooter and the Oswald rifle was not the one that killed the president. CASE CLOSED."
Nope, you have come nowhere even remotely close to demonstrating that there was more than one shooter. You merely mistakenly think you have.
@@roberttohill627 "I said the bullet was "almost pristine" which it was."
No, it was not.
"It was not crushed at the nose and it was only slightly flattened."
Nonsense, the base of the bullet is far more than "slightly" flattened.
"A bullet like that which allegedly went through so many bones and yet did not show expected damage."
I don't agree. The bullet would have passed through JFK first without hitting any bone. That would, quite obviously, slow its velocity significantly but not cause any significant damage to the bullet. It would mean that the bullet entered Connally's back at a significantly slower velocity than it would have had it struck Connally first without previously passing through something else. The bullet then still had to travel almost all the way through his torso from back to front before it finally struck any bone for the first time, so that would have of course slowed its velocity even further before it finally struck anything even remotely as hard as bone. And the first bone it finally struck was a rib, which is nowhere even remotely close to being one of the hardest bones in the human body, so that would reduce the possibility of damage to the bullet even further. And since it is the base, rather than the nose of the bullet, which is *severely* (not "slightly") flattened, this suggests that by this time the bullet was tumbling (which is not even slightly uncommon for bullets to do) and struck the rib sideways rather than nose first. By the time the bullet finally exited Connally's chest its velocity would have been slowed even more, so that when it passed through his wrist and through one of the narrow, brittle wrist bones (also nowhere even remotely close to being one of the hardest bones in the human body) it was barely moving fast enough to even make it all the way through his wrist. Further evidence of this is the fact that it penetrated his thigh such a short distance that not only did it never even touch his femur but also fell out of his thigh in the hospital.
Had the bullet hit Connally only I would expect not only far greater damage to the bullet but also that it would have gone far enough into his thigh to hit and also damage his femur. The most plausible explanation for why it did not penetrate farther into his thigh is that it passed through more than just Connally's body before reaching his thigh.
"The bullet that hit JFK's head could not be matched to Oswald's rifle as it was just fragments."
The bullet that hit JFK's head struck his skull first, one of the hardest bones in the human body, without passing through anything else first. So naturally it fragmented. This comes nowhere even remotely close to "proving" that it was a different type of bullet from the one that hit Connally. And you didn't know that at least one of the bullet fragments found in the limo was indeed ballistically matched to the Carcano? And what about the dent on the inside surface of the chrome frame of the windshield? That was quite obviously caused by something striking the frame from behind, since it was on the wrong side to have been caused by anything coming from in front. How do you know that that dent wasn't caused by the very bullet fragment found in the limo that was ballistically matched to Oswald's Carcano?
"Yes, the bullet was foolishly planted by the cover up team."
I'm guessing you are talking about CE 399, the bullet alleged to be the single bullet. If so, what is your proof that it was "planted" and that there even was such a "cover up team" in the first place?
No matter what this man says or does, the conspiracy theorists will always believe the conspiracy.
Which 'conspiracy"? You cant be talking about the JFK assassination, since the HSCA found in 1979 that JFK was most likely killed "as the result of a conspiracy" meaning multiple people planned and carried it out. I hate to break it to you, since you appear to have been leaving under a rock with only pimp Posner's long ago debunked book (including by Vince Buglisio..lol) to keep you comapany, but the official position of the US congress is that there was a conspiracy in the JFK killing. How can you lat earthers not know this? but keep listening to admitted liars like pimp Posner??
I used to reflexively defend the government's 'official' story line of a 'lone wolf killer' with no friends or associations, who is then murdered amidst 50 police officers by another 'lone wolf killer' with no friends or associations. All it took for me to dispel that nonsense was to actually look at the case with fresh eyes and an objective viewpoint.
And once you look into the lives of the people involved, and the backgrounds of the key officials, the official story breaks down quickly. They were LYING, the coverup is obvious and was hastily strung together with so many errors, omissions and pitfalls it's pathetic.
@@ghostdance56 I don't think the public will ever have access to all of the evidence and information the government has. Just, like 9/11, the public will never know for sure what happened.
@@JohnJohnson-pq4qz "You cant be talking about the JFK assassination, since the HSCA found in 1979 that JFK was most likely killed "as the result of a conspiracy" meaning multiple people planned and carried it out."
And you omit that the one and only reason the HSCA came to the conclusion that there were multiple shooters was due to an extremely flawed acoustic analysis of the dictabelt recording that has since been widely discredited. The real truth is that still to this day it has never actually been proven, for the first time ever, that the sounds of any gunfire were actually captured on that recording, though some people mistakenly think it is proven.
@@ghostdance56 you are deluded or misinformed.
Well,..... It seems to me that this JFK assassination or 911 or so many other things in life,....... you never know who's zoomin who. ...... NEVER.
Everybody gets the origin story of the Single Bullet Theory wrong...completely backward: including Gerald Posner. It was the dawning realization of a young associate counsel to the Warren Commission who suddenly realized that they weren't asking the right questions; and, in finding answers to the correct ones, the conclusion surprisingly fell out of the answers. It was just stunning detective work. It was not Arlen Specter who deserves the credit for formulating the Single Bullet solution, it was the insight of the late David W. Belin who proved, conclusively, that one bullet struck both Pres. Kennedy and Gov. Connolly.
Thank you for bringing up David Belin.
I believe if Oswald had lived, he would have changed his story up to the day of his execution. James Earl Ray was changing his story up till the day he died. It's part of their personality disorder, of which compulsive lying was one of the symptoms.
Perhaps thats why we've never been permitted to hear what Oswald had to say. His story may have exonerated him totally, and it was not permitted to be heard by anyone. They produced no interrogation notes and claimed the room was 'too small' to obtain a tape recorder. Oswald never had his day in court to defend himself and tell what he knew.
Oswald had been a Marine and was granted a top secret security clearance working on the most sensitive military program at the time, the U2 flights. Hardly sounds like a man with any personality disorder son.
@@ghostdance56 kind of ironic also that we know there was a Chicago plot just a month before Dallas which was foiled. Coincidentally, there were a bunch of Cubans with high powered rifles found in a hotel room speaking about killing the president.
Oh, and the fall guy was set to be an aimless wanderer in his early 10s who happened to have served in the USMC
The problem is LHO could never have been convicted by that pile of dung they called "evidence. Rifles appearing and disappearing, 2 not 3 shells originally found and photographed. Paraffin and neutron activation tests proving he did not fire a rifle that day. and a completely screwed up chain of evidence on any ballistics. At least 2 WC lawyers said as much in the 60s and things have only got much worse for the evidence. Mark Lane could have slept in, forgot his glasses and brief case and come to trial with a hang over and still got that shoddy set up job dismissed just on evidence incompetence....But some people will believe what they are told.
"How do others get such a different opinion from Posner?"
Perhaps by studying less than 50 percent of the evidence?
@@Caeruleo - No document in history has been more scrutinized by more people than the Warren report has over the last 60 years. Posner leaves out what the Warren report leaves out, just as you do. He's a shill for the CIA anyway, anyone reading his other work knows this.
Ben Bradlee couldn't believe that a man so inconsequential had such an impact. He was wrong. Oswald was consequential.
My main concern is the trajectory of the magic bullet. I can’t see how the right side of JFK was hit near the T3 and ended up coming out the throat. Upwards out of JFK to Connally now going downwards. POSNER HIMSELF DISPOVES THE SINGLE BULLET THEORY. How can it go straight threw Kennedy if it’s shot from the 6th floor? But really it’s not straight threw its at an upward trajectory.
And the back wound was lower than the neck so impossible it was the same shot, and also the doctors thought the neck wound was an entry wound.
One bullett did not hit both men, and there were more than three shots, yes only three were heard, there was a hole in the windshield, from the front
"and there were more than three shots"
Nope, it has never yet been proven that there were more than three shots. You are merely speculating or getting this from someone else who was merely speculating.
"there was a hole in the windshield, from the front"
How do you know that the damage to the windshield was from the front?
@Caeruleo The very experienced glass professional at the Ford plant who handled the damaged windshield said that it was a through and through shot from the front and he included a statement to this effect in his estate papers.
@@julesclay8142 "The very experienced glass professional at the Ford plant who handled the damaged windshield said that it was a through and through shot from the front and he included a statement to this effect in his estate papers."
Uh-huh. Let's explore that carefully. You seem to be talking about George Whitaker. This is what he claimed in a 1993 interview:
"And the windshield had a bullet hole in it, coming from the outside through…it was a good, clean bullet hole, right straight through, from the front. And you can tell, when the bullet hits the windshield, like when you hit a rock or something, what happens? The back chips out and the front may just have a pinhole in it…this had a clean round hole in the front and fragmentation coming out the back."
But that's hardly the end of the story. Now let's look at an article by Vincente Velasco:
**********
Vicente S. Velasco says:
March 12, 2021 at 8:16 am
If you are referring to George Whitaker, sad to say that he was a liar. He was in no position to make such a statement because he never worked on the limo when it was transported to the Ford plant. Researcher Pamela Brown effectively debunked Whitaker:
**qu0te on**
George Whitaker worked at the Rouge in Dearborn, at the Glass Plant. He said he saw the limo in the B building, which was the final assembly building. Whenever the limo was at Ford it went to the Experimental Garage; a different location. There are other FMC employees who have said nearly the same thing as this man did about seeing the limo at Dearborn for the teardown that took place prior to the rebuild. This process did not start until the end of December 1963. (Whether or not it should have started at all is another question).
Vaughn Ferguson, who was the FMC employee in DC directly responsible for the limo spent the four days after the assassination with the limo. His memo, which was mistakenly sent to me by NARA provides concrete documentation as to what did happen during that time.
Mr. Whitaker and other FMC employees likely heard Vaughn Ferguson talking about the limo when he was at Dearborn. He drove the car there from the White House Garage in DC in December 1963. He also loved to play golf when he was there. One of these men was a golf buddy of his. I believe that is how Ferguson’s statements spread and changed. Mr. Whittaker’s story has many gaffes in it, that were mostly sanitized by the time TMWKK [The Men Who Killed Kennedy] was taped, largely because of corrections made after I presented to Weldon and his mentor [James] Fetzer documentation from the Henry Ford Museum that helped define them.
**quote off**
**********
Thus there seems to be some doubt about Whitaker's credibility. Now let's look at Robert Frazier's much more contemporaneous account of the original examination of the windshield before it was sent to the Ford plant:
**********
Mr. SPECTER - Did you have occasion then to examine the windshield of the Presidential limousine?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes; I did.
Mr. SPECTER - What did that examination disclose?
Mr. FRAZIER - On the inside surface of the windshield there was a deposit of lead. This deposit was located when you look at the inside surface of the windshield, 13 1/2 inches down from the top, 23 inches from the left-hand side or driver's side of the windshield, and was immediately in front of a small pattern of star-shaped cracks which appeared in the outer layer of the laminated windshield.
Mr. DULLES - What do you mean by the "outer layer of the laminated windshield"?
Mr. FRAZIER - The windshield is composed of two layers with a very thin layer of plastic in between which bonds them together in the form of safety glass. The inside layer of the glass was not broken, but the outside layer immediately on the outside of the lead residue had a very small pattern of cracks and there was a very minute particle of glass missing from the outside surface.
Mr. DULLES - And the outside surface was the surface away from where the occupants were sitting?
Mr. FRAZIER - That is correct; yes.
Mr. DULLES - And the inside surface was the surface nearest the occupants?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes.
Mr. SPECTER - What do those characteristics indicate as to which side of the windshield was struck?
Mr. FRAZIER - It indicates that it could only have been struck on the inside surface. It could not have been struck on the outside surface because of the manner in which the glass broke and further because of the lead residue on the inside surface. The cracks appear in the outer layer of the glass because the glass is bent outward at the time of impact which stretches the outer layer of the glass to the point where these small radial or wagon spoke-wagon wheel spoke-type cracks appear on the outer surface.
Mr. DULLES - So the pressure must have come from the inside and not from the outside against the glass?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir; that is correct.
Mr. DULLES - As far as the car is concerned from the back to the front?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
Mr. DULLES - Not from outside against the glass--from the front against the glass.
Mr. FRAZIER - That is right.
Mr. SPECTER - Was a comparison made of the lead residues on the inside of the windshield with any of the bullet fragments recovered about which you have heretofore testified?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes. They were compared with the bullet fragment found on the front seat, which in turn was compared with Commission 399. The lead was found to be similar in composition. However, that examination in detail was made by a spectrographer, Special Agent John F. Gallagher.
Mr. SPECTER - Was that examination made in the regular course of examining procedures by the FBI?
Mr. FRAZIER - Yes, sir.
**********
See how this account is far more detailed than the Whitaker account? Whitaker made no mention of any lead deposit, which gives the impression that if he was even telling the truth at all about seeing the windshield, he didn't examine the damage nearly as closely as Gallagher did. Also, did you know that two bullet fragments were found in the car, one of them in the driver's seat? Did you also know that there was a dent on the rear surface of the chrome frame above the windshield? That dent could only have been caused by something striking the chrome from behind because if it had come from in front the dent would be on the opposite side of the chrome. It is thus entirely plausible that these two fragments could have been from the same bullet, the one that struck JFK in the head, and that one fragment could have caused the dent in the chrome and the other could have caused the damage to the windshield.
@@Caeruleo Great info!
Well thank you for that. I look forward to reading your book.