Post something controversial you believe in

[J70]

There are some photos from the autopsy here: http://www.celebritymorgue.com/jfk/jfk-autopsy.html.

I don't know how legit they are.

[pintsofguinness]

J70, you've pointed out yourself the autopsy was fucked up, (btw don't you think it's a little odd that a person without experience of bullets was left to do it?) and as stated in that site there are another set of photos of the autopsy that tell a different story.

How to you explain Kennedy's reaction to the head shot?

[J70]

J70, you've pointed out yourself the autopsy was fucked up, (btw don't you think it's a little odd that a person without experience of bullets was left to do it?) and as stated in that site there are another set of photos of the autopsy that tell a different story.

How to you explain Kennedy's reaction to the head shot?

I don't think it (the autopsy) was that odd. Everything was in uproar, they need it done quickly, mistakes get made. Are you suggesting that the fix was in from the very beginning, that the botched autopsy was part of the conspiracy?

And again, I am far from an authority on this stuff, so I have no idea whether the reaction of Kennedy to the head shot is decisive. What I am wary of is people with a little knowledge and a lot more ignorance making proclamations, which happens a lot in conspiracy theorizing (e.g. your average creationist publication). Whether that is the case in this instance, I do not know, but we are certainly not going to solve it here (unless you are a bit of an expert on the impact of bullets on the body?).

It seems to me that the investigation was screwed up at the time, and the resulting uncertainty has fueled the conspiracy theories. By the time they came back to do the proper investigation, in so far as they could, 15 years later, it was too late. No matter what they found then or since, there was no way they were going to satisfy people. Even if they honestly and genuinely came to the conclusion that Oswald had done it alone with the two shots, there was going to be a whole host of people crying "whitewash".

But, for what its worth, from the same Wikipedia article:

"Because this conclusion appeared to be inconsistent with the backward motion of the President's head in the Zapruder film, the committee consulted a wound ballistics expert to determine what relationship, if any, exists between the direction from which a bullet strikes the head and subsequent head movement. The expert concluded that nerve damage from a bullet entering the President's head could have caused his back muscles to tighten which, in turn, could have caused his head to move toward the rear. He demonstrated the phenomenon in a filmed experiment which involved the shooting of goats. Thus, the committee determined that the rearward movement of the President's head would not be fundamentally inconsistent with a bullet striking from the rear."

[The Real Laoislad]

Jaysis the poor goats

[Aristotle Flynn]

I believe that there is nothing that I believe that is controversial.

[pintsofguinness]

"Because this conclusion appeared to be inconsistent with the backward motion of the President's head in the Zapruder film, the committee consulted a wound ballistics expert to determine what relationship, if any, exists between the direction from which a bullet strikes the head and subsequent head movement. The expert concluded that nerve damage from a bullet entering the President's head could have caused his back muscles to tighten which, in turn, could have caused his head to move toward the rear. He demonstrated the phenomenon in a filmed experiment which involved the shooting of goats. Thus, the committee determined that the rearward movement of the President's head would not be fundamentally inconsistent with a bullet striking from the rear."

But there's the similar problem, it could have done this and that. 
Everything points to more than one gun man and the explanations are based on a chance.  Oswald broke a world record to get all three shots off in the time he did, he, very unusually, got more accurate with each shot, this magic bullet that jumps out of people's bodies onto stretchers with no damage done to it (btw, the bullet that hit Kennedy's head was severely damaged), his back spasmed with the head shot, and his blood and brain tissue was blew into the air in a way it shouldnt (but I'm sure there's some explanation for that).  And some nightclub owner with organised crime links suddenly comes overwhelmed with emotion for Jackie Kennedy that he's willing to spend the rest of his life in jail to save her the agony of testifying at a trial.  You see if one of these things happened but everything else happened the way they were suppose to, if the Warren commission was to be believed, then maybe you would believe one unusual event but everything? 

I think we'll never know the truth but I think the level of the conspiracy would be quite shocking.

[pintsofguinness]

The link between Kennedy and Lincoln is a bit weird (there is a theory out there that Kennedy was Lincoln reincarnated)   
http://www.qsl.net/w5www/presidential.html

# Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.

# John F Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.

# Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.

# John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.

# The names Lincoln and Kennedy each contain seven letters.

# Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

# Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.

# Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.

# Both Presidents were shot in the head.

# Lincoln's secretary was named Kennedy.

# Kennedy's secretary was named Lincoln.

# Both were assassinated by Southerners.

# Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson.

# Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.

# Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Kennedy, was born in 1908.

# John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839.

# Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born in 1939.

# Both assassins were known by their three names.

# Both names are composed of fifteen letters.

# Lincoln was shot at the theater named 'Ford.'

# Kennedy was shot in a car called 'Lincoln.'

# Booth ran from the theater and was caught in a warehouse.

# Oswald ran from a warehouse and was caught in a theater.

# Booth and Oswald were assassinated before their trials.

AND HERE'S THE KICKER:
# A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland.

# A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe.

[J70]

"Because this conclusion appeared to be inconsistent with the backward motion of the President's head in the Zapruder film, the committee consulted a wound ballistics expert to determine what relationship, if any, exists between the direction from which a bullet strikes the head and subsequent head movement. The expert concluded that nerve damage from a bullet entering the President's head could have caused his back muscles to tighten which, in turn, could have caused his head to move toward the rear. He demonstrated the phenomenon in a filmed experiment which involved the shooting of goats. Thus, the committee determined that the rearward movement of the President's head would not be fundamentally inconsistent with a bullet striking from the rear."

But there's the similar problem, it could have done this and that. 
Everything points to more than one gun man and the explanations are based on a chance.  Oswald broke a world record to get all three shots off in the time he did, he, very unusually, got more accurate with each shot, this magic bullet that jumps out of people's bodies onto stretchers with no damage done to it (btw, the bullet that hit Kennedy's head was severely damaged), his back spasmed with the head shot, and his blood and brain tissue was blew into the air in a way it shouldnt (but I'm sure there's some explanation for that).  And some nightclub owner with organised crime links suddenly comes overwhelmed with emotion for Jackie Kennedy that he's willing to spend the rest of his life in jail to save her the agony of testifying at a trial.  You see if one of these things happened but everything else happened the way they were suppose to, if the Warren commission was to be believed, then maybe you would believe one unusual event but everything? 

I think we'll never know the truth but I think the level of the conspiracy would be quite shocking.

But sometimes the unusual does happen. All of those things are explainable. (I'm not saying that there couldn't have been more people involved BTW e.g. Ruby).

What are the chances to the little-known David Tyree would make the once-in-a-lifetime catch that set up the Superbowl win for the Giants last week, or that Eli Manning would escape the Patriots linemen in the manner he did to throw the ball so he could make the catch? Each event itself unlikely, two together very improbable, 75 seconds from the end of the biggest game of their lives beggared belief. Improbable things happen... every day.

[deiseach]

Everything points to more than one gun man and the explanations are based on a chance.  Oswald broke a world record to get all three shots off in the time he did, he, very unusually, got more accurate with each shot, this magic bullet that jumps out of people's bodies onto stretchers with no damage done to it (btw, the bullet that hit Kennedy's head was severely damaged), his back spasmed with the head shot, and his blood and brain tissue was blew into the air in a way it shouldnt (but I'm sure there's some explanation for that).  And some nightclub owner with organised crime links suddenly comes overwhelmed with emotion for Jackie Kennedy that he's willing to spend the rest of his life in jail to save her the agony of testifying at a trial.  You see if one of these things happened but everything else happened the way they were suppose to, if the Warren commission was to be believed, then maybe you would believe one unusual event but everything?

This website makes mincemeat of all of the above, but I'd draw particular attention to the notion that all these things supporting the lone nutter theory of Kennedy's assassination are so bizarre that a conspiracy is more believable. This is addressed in the section titled Assassination Logic and asks, among other things, why it is perfectly plausible that so many witnesses can be wrong

[pintsofguinness]

J70

But sometimes the unusual does happen. All of those things are explainable. (I'm not saying that there couldn't have been more people involved BTW e.g. Ruby).

What are the chances to the little-known David Tyree would make the once-in-a-lifetime catch that set up the Superbowl win for the Giants last week, or that Eli Manning would escape the Patriots linemen in the manner he did to throw the ball so he could make the catch? Each event itself unlikely, two together very improbable, 75 seconds from the end of the biggest game of their lives beggared belief. Improbable things happen... every day.

Yes but with Kennedy you're talking about several very improbable things happening. 
Look at the Diana crash, I was convinced for a long time that it couldn't have been an accident.  I watched a really good documentary on it where they went and recreated Diana's car hitting the Fiat?  Now, they had specialised drivers on the job who claimed before they done anything that it would be impossible for the Diana's car to hit the Fiat and not turn it over never mind that the Fiat driver wouldn't realise what had happened.  Guess what, when they done it exactly as they expected it would have happened the man driving the Fiat barely realised he'd been hit.  That is an example of one unusual event that may be believeable, if there were 5, 6 or 7 of those events inside minutes it becomes unbelievable. 


Deiseach I haven't really time to read those sites now (I've to be up in six hours) but I will and I've read every argument and counter argument dozens of times over the years and as you allude to the conspiracy is more believeable than what the Government claimed happened.  There's just too many coincidences and improbable incidents for it to happen they way they say.

"You may fool all the people some of the time, you can even fool some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time."

[deiseach]

Deiseach I haven't really time to read those sites now (I've to be up in six hours) but I will and I've read every argument and counter argument dozens of times over the years and as you allude to the conspiracy is more believeable than what the Government claimed happened.  There's just too many coincidences and improbable incidents for it to happen they way they say.

As opposed to the conspiracy theorists, whose version(s) of events require no coincidences or improbable incidents.

As a firm believer in the value of Occam's Razor, I subscribe to the lone nutter theory

[heganboy]

for those of you debating the merits of whether gay couples can adopt or not, did you know that straight couples in the North can't adopt either, unless of course they happen to be married to each other at the time of the adoption.

[J70]

J70

But sometimes the unusual does happen. All of those things are explainable. (I'm not saying that there couldn't have been more people involved BTW e.g. Ruby).

What are the chances to the little-known David Tyree would make the once-in-a-lifetime catch that set up the Superbowl win for the Giants last week, or that Eli Manning would escape the Patriots linemen in the manner he did to throw the ball so he could make the catch? Each event itself unlikely, two together very improbable, 75 seconds from the end of the biggest game of their lives beggared belief. Improbable things happen... every day.

Yes but with Kennedy you're talking about several very improbable things happening. 
Look at the Diana crash, I was convinced for a long time that it couldn't have been an accident.  I watched a really good documentary on it where they went and recreated Diana's car hitting the Fiat?  Now, they had specialised drivers on the job who claimed before they done anything that it would be impossible for the Diana's car to hit the Fiat and not turn it over never mind that the Fiat driver wouldn't realise what had happened.  Guess what, when they done it exactly as they expected it would have happened the man driving the Fiat barely realised he'd been hit.  That is an example of one unusual event that may be believeable, if there were 5, 6 or 7 of those events inside minutes it becomes unbelievable. 

I don't see any problem at all as long as those individual events can be explained. Improbable events do not bother me - impossible ones do. Unusual sequences of events happen - that's a fact of life.

[deiseach]

I don't see any problem at all as long as those individual events can be explained. Improbable events do not bother me - impossible ones do. Unusual sequences of events happen - that's a fact of life.

Indeed. When I think of the improbable chain of events that led to me meeting Mrs d, it makes much more sense that we would never meet. Yet I'm pretty sure we did meet - or is it more likely that I'm living in the world of Jacob's Ladder?

[DrinkingHarp]

The National Geographic Channel has a program on tonite called  "Six Degrees Could Change The World" - The potential effect of global warming of the planet, one degree at a time over the next 100 years.

At the same time the History Channel has "The Kennedy Assassination:Beyond Conspiracy" - An exact computer simulation of the famous Zapruder film offers suprising results.

I think there is a conspiracy between the board and tv.