after watching JFK--- Shocked, Suspicious, Confused

I actually own the complete gov't issued Warren Commission and i will read it some day. It's just so f'in long.....

facts?
This is a pretty interesting read.
Edit (Moderator): Link removed

A few Highlights:

"Researcher Joel Grant interviewed Duncan MacPherson, a rocket scientist (literally) since the 1950s. Listing some of his credentials, Grant writes that in 1959, MacPherson "developed a new guidance technique and the equations that were used to guide the Mercury astronauts into orbit on the Atlas launch vehicle. These equations were modified under his supervision to control Gemini and, later, Apollo launches." In the late 1960s, "MacPherson branched into Systems Engineering, relating primarily to trajectory dynamics." Since 1989 "Mr. MacPherson has been an independent technical consultant to organizations interested in space flight activities."

"Q. It is common knowledge that, as captured by Abraham Zapruder, President Kennedy's head and upper torso lurch energetically immediately following the explosion of his head. Could this movement have been caused by the directly transferred momentum of a bullet? That is, can a bullet "push" somebody like that?

A. No, and no. The movement of a body due to bullet momentum cannot be greater than the movement of the same body if it was holding the gun that fired the bullet. This is a result of elementary physics and is not disputed by anyone who understands physics. The major frustrating feature of the Kennedy assassination phenomenon is the willingness of people to pretend to talk authoritatively on subjects they know absolutely nothing about, especially things related to firearms. This body recoil is one favorite. . . .

Q. If the effects observed on the Zapruder film are not the result of a direct "push" by a bullet, what could account for JFK's movements?

A. In general, body movement in response to nervous system trauma is a result of contractions in body muscles. This is related to movements of your leg when a doctor raps you on the knee with his little mallet; your leg moves because a nerve induces a muscle contraction, not because it was driven into motion by the force of the tiny rap with the mallet. . . . In addition to this effect, simulations have shown that bullet strikes to the skull that result in blowing out a significant hole upon exit result in skull recoil towards the bullet entry direction. The dynamics of this are a little complicated, but are more related to the pressure inside the skull cavity created by the bullet passage than to effects directly related to the bullet movement. The dynamics of this kind of impact were demonstrated independently in testing by Dr. Luis Alvarez and by Dr. John K. Lattimer, et al. . . . The main aspect of the Kennedy assassination that would surprise most people is how uncontroversial the wound ballistics aspects are among the physicians in the country who are most experienced in gunshot trauma. (I am not one of these, but have talked to several.) It is a sad truth that most autopsy reports are full of errors and inconsistencies which are obvious to any careful review; it shouldn't be like this, but it is. The problems with the Kennedy autopsy do not require a conspiracy to explain, they are more or less business as usual exposed to the glare of careful examination. "


Gus Russo's epiphany:

"Gus Russo (leading JFK conspiracy author and consultant on the film) began his inquiry into the assassination believing that a conspiracy including several gunmen had taken President Kennedy's life. While he still is not convinced that Lee Harvey Oswald acted without guidance or assistance (see his book, Live by the Sword), he learned long ago that the facts preclude a gunman on the grassy knoll.

Russo writes:

When one first stands behind the picket fence, he/she is struck by a number of sensations. First, there is no clear shot at the middle lane of Elm Street [where the limousine was] until the instant of the head shot, allowing for no earlier shots or tracking of the moving target. It turns out that the intended victim is obscured by road signs and a white retaining wall about ten feet in front of the fence.

An even more compelling problem was driven home during the filming of JFK. I was fortunate to be able to stand near the camera as this scene was reenacted. With the street crowd added as it appeared on the day of the shooting, it became clear that, insofar as the first two shots are concerned, a grassy knoll shot was also obstructed by the crowd that lined the sidewalk. The assassin would thus [have] had to shoot through the white wall, the road signs, and bystanders to get to the President. If the assassin shot Kennedy in the head, he had to shoot in the first second the car emerged from behind the retaining wall, again past (or through) the heads of spectators. "

Edit (Moderator): Link removed

I wouldn't waste your time Kristie

To wade through an interminably long piece of fiction like the Warren commission report would be akin to spending your entire life in the search for the truth about Jonah's time inside the whale.

I cannot believe Americans can still give the slightest credence to what is clearly the biggest insult to our collective intelligence of all time, the only thing that equals this piece of fiction is the claim that the holocaust was faked.


There have been many truly absurd claims over the years about who killed Kennedy (google James Files for example) but the most truly absurd claim that has ever been made is that Lee Harvey Oswald did it.

I didn't say I believed the Warren report however, I also don't believe in making a judgement without all the information. Since all the information can't be obtained, I will have to settle for what is available. And the Warren report is information.

No it isn't Kristie,

The Warren report is the most insulting document to ever be foisted upon the people of America, and if you dont think so there can only be one explanation which is that you don't have the vaguest knowledge of the JFK assassination.

Do you?

Excuse me?

Yes, I do. And the movie was not my education before you go ahead and make assumptions about my knowledge. I don't need to guess that you think you are the formost expert on the JFK assassination.

For you to insinuate that you KNOW something isn't correct means that
a) you're full of yourself
b) you're delusional
c) you're a flat out liar
d) you did it yourself

Now, it your answer is d, I'd really like to talk with you.

However, as it probably stands, I don't particularly like your "I'm right and your wrong" stance on this. I've studied the assassination. I've read and seen modern technology rule out and then bring back every conspiracy theory out there. If you can "prove" something, there is a guarantee that someone else out there can "disprove" it. Forensics and science have made sure of that.

Were you there? If you were, you have a better first hand understanding than I'll ever have.

But do you know who did it and why? Probably not. And the fact remains that there is a 99.9% chance that no one will know what happened in Dallas. So take whatever position you want on the Warren report. Hate it, love it, whatever. But don't tell me I'm some idiot for reading it. A true scientist doesn't take the facts and information he wants to hear. He takes them all, studies them all and then decides what is good and what is crap. You might have already ruled the Warren report out. But I haven't. So give me my scientific liberty to do so.

Also, I am not in any mood to "discuss" this with you.

So call me what you will. I know what I know, and I know what I don't know. And proving to you that I know something about anything is not high on my list of priorities today.

Yes, I do. And the movie was not my education before you go ahead and make assumptions about my knowledge. I don't need to guess that you think you are the formost expert on the JFK assassination.

For you to insinuate that you KNOW something isn't correct means that
a) you're full of yourself
b) you're delusional
c) you're a flat out liar
d) you did it yourself

a I'm not
bNo I'm not
cWhat?
dIn 1963 I was a 15 year old grammar school boy

I didn't call you an idiot for reading it and if you can show that I did say that, I will send a cheque for $1000 to a charity of your choosing.

.

Most of what is in JFK is fabricated. It's shocking.

And, again, Oliver Stone has stated over and over that it is a hypothetical story of what could have happened. It was food for thought as well as entertainment knowing that with the information that is out there nobody is seems to be able to come up with a comprehensively accurate scenerio. I believe the Warren Commission just tired of trying to root out the facts out of FBI files that likely didn't lead anywhere at the time. All of the totally serious conspiracy theories I've read are tantamount to the "we never went to the moon" baloney.

Whoever had killed JFK, whether there was a stunning conspiracy or not, whether the conspiracy theory is tantamout to a baloney, anyway, Oliver Stone's this movie really gave me a FASCINATING weekend.
That is the only thought I have only remained now

About the assassination. Is there a sort of important archives to be unclassified in the year of 2029 or 2039? What's that? Top national security document? Where is it at present? CIA?

JFK Assassination

Here is your answer. Or at least what "they" want you to believe. :wink:

National Archives Page-JFK
This is a good resource to start with if you want to begin learning about the assassination. You won't want to pay for the copies of the documents and unless you live in Washington, you can't view them online here. (you can go to the National Archives and get copies there) But you can see a list of documents available for public viewing.

There are a ton of websites out there with a lot of crap. I'm sure there's some crap on this one too. There are places you can view certain documents and letters and stuff. If you are truly interested, I would be more than happy to get you some resources. I am sure others here would be willing to help you out as well.

Here is another page from the National Archives website you might find helpful.


JFK-

JFK-Good Side
This website has a lot of different stuff and links. The guy who put it together revered Kennedy so ....the page is pretty slanted as to what a saint he was...ha.

Photo History
Interesting little photo history page.

Arlington
Some more interesting pics.

JFK
I found this site interesting. It has a lot of "debunking" evidence, some modern forensic evidence and some documents for you to view.


Just to get you started...Amazon.com has a ton of books on JFK you can get used for cheap. Documentaries on DVD are out there....just a ton of stuff. Good luck and happy hunting!

Thanks for the links, kristie. The Warren Commission would have some explaining to do today about the holes in their theory. If there are substantiations in material not accessible to the public, which I think goes without saying, it's taking an inordinately long time to present it. It's easy to doubt that he was a lone shooter but the grassy knoll always appeared to be rather far-fetched, but it doesn't mean that although he may have delivered all the shots that there were not others involved.

JB has approached the movie the way it was suppose to be approached. It questions the logical rationale of the Warren Report.

It was Oswald who fired the two shots that hit the president and Connally. The first shot missed the limo entirely and richocheted off the curb, broke into pieces and hit J. Tague.
How many people were actually involved, that I don't know. If there was another shooter in the Grassy Knoll, it was for the purpose of distraction only. All the nay sayers and conspiracy buffs say it isn't possible for all three shots to have come from the depository but it is possible to get the shots off in time, with accuracy. I don't have a doubt as to who actually, physically did it. What I just can't figure out is why. Did he do it for money? Because he was a nut? Because he was ordered to do it? Were there others involved? There are so many different avenues you can take. The mob. The FBI/CIA. Cuba. How many other people had reasons to kill him?

And with all the hype out there, all the misinformation, it's hard to decide what is fact and what is fiction.

"JFK" insinuates all sorts of answers and you are right that it's not just lack of information but all the misinformation that befuddles the true answer.

Well after a FULL TWO DAYS of investigation Kristie, may I say on behalf of the entire scientific community that has worked tirelessly to solve the case of who killed Kennedy, spanning four decades without success, you have shown us the way, if we had had your brilliance in 1963 we would have had no problem.

I will use every means possible to ensure that you receive at least a pullitzer prize for your work in establishing the guilt of Lee Harvey Oswald.

We (the free world) can never thank you enough for you're tireless efforts.

There are many books including the scientific studies of primarily the paths of the bullets and the study of the Zapruder film. I don't believe Kristie is stating her personal opinion with just "a full two days" of study (it is unnecessary to shout out your opinion). She's obviously been read a lot of the material, perhaps all of it, debunking the Warren Report as well as supporting it and the new theories of what took place. I've read enough to question the Warren Report's accuracy but not to lead to any believably concrete alternative. "JFK" was a good film and Oliver Stone never meant it to be taken as absolute fact. It's conjecture based on his own scepticism of the Warren Report. I believe it is obvious one should be sceptical of Oswald being the only shooter but until there is something more presented than conspiracy theories without much to back them up, there's only those who have completely access to the factual material, especially the questionable autopsy, who might be closer to the answer.
As Kristie has also pointed out, I don't believe we will know the answers in our lifetime and perhaps the final historical account will never be written.