Skip to comments.JFK: The Smoking Gun and Mortal Error...revealing presentations of investigation [vanity]
Posted on 05/06/2014 9:10:00 PM PDT by logi_cal869
I just got done bookending a book with a movie (albeit documentary). I had missed prior threads here at FR here and here (I just got done hunting down whether this had been posted prior).
Seeing the posts on the topic, I almost let it go. Then I read the comments. The absolute statements of derision and dismissive/dissension on a plausible explanation for all the (non-LHO/JR) holes in the Warren Commission floored me.
I'm posting this as a "Recommendation": If you have any interest at all in the JFK assassination, no matter from what angle, and have an open mind, I highly recommend picking up the book, Mortal Error and watching the movie/documentary JFK: The Smoking Gun.
I highly encourage checking them out.
And while I realize I'm sticking my neck out here (given the veracity of opinion to the contrary last year), I don't care; the recommendation is too important not to make. I'd never heard of either the book nor the movie until just recently. With my open mind, I'd have appreciated a similar recommendation thrown my way; sadly, that never came and I just happened across the topic completely by accident searching for something else. I had seen the listing for "JFK: The Smoking Gun" prior but, frankly, didn't find it intriguing enough as all the other JFK analyses (CGI et al) had jaded me as being both inconsistent and too 'hyped'. For me, the JFK story comprises 2 parts: The 'Lee Harvey Oswald' story up to HIS assassination, and the post-Daley Plaza events through the Warren Commission. IMHO, without regard to LHO and that ongoing conspiracy, I think this resolves the bulk of it.
I highly recommend both or, at least, the movie as an opening to the book.
(for what it's worth, the movie is on Netflix streaming)
Read Mortal Error years ago. Sorry, Oswald acted alone.
Depends on what the meaning of "alone," is.
It is ok to read conspiracy theories, but we should balance them out with more sober, scientific books as well.
Read it years ago. Great read. Plausible and fills in a lot of blanks. Like why were the records sealed? A well thought out book. Glad you enjoyed it.
Was just in Dallas a week ago and went to the Daeley Museum and walked around outside. They have white X’s where the shots hit JFK, kinda morbid imho.
Thanks for the info, I’m interested to learn much more.
Just wondering, how can anyone overlook Ruby getting to Oswald and killing him, just too pat for me to accept.
Not really, when you look at how that went down. There were dozens and dozens of people there with no real organized control. It was just a media circus. Imagine large groups of people upstairs watching for the move to the armored van or vehicle, then running en-masse down stairwells then pushing and shoving, to get the best vantage point while the people already there jostled for the position they had. There were people shoving and pushing each other, standing on desks both upstairs and downstairs. People are yelling across the room, waving to get the attention of someone else, trying to pass information on phones to their paper, and so on.
Someone tries to restrict the area to authorized press passes, but nobody listens to him. He guides this person and that person with no pass away from the gaggle, and ten more surge into space. They have people camped in offices, using police telephones, etc.
The police who are supposed to be outside keeping people from walking in on the ramp past the truck aren't even paying attention to that, they are rubbernecking to the craziness inside.
Ruby, who knew the area well, just walked on the other side of the truck like a good gate-crasher would, looking like he knew where he was supposed to go. Which he did. All the policemen and detectives knew who he was because he had been there a lot, even handing out passes to the police department personnel for his all-girl review show. And they would thank him by name, and some would even go to the shows where they were sometimes given free drinks.
Not that outlandish to me. It was a crazy zoo with zero to little security and control.
Johnson was as corrupt then as Obama is now. I don’t know why people defend him. Guess it’s the same mentality as Obama supporters.
Everything WAS just too pat. During all the panic and confusion that ensued after the shooting they knew Oswald had done it and had apprehended him within 80 min. BS!
He was a lone gunman yet all the evidence had to be locked up until a time in the future when everyone involved would be dead. Yeah, right. He was a lone gunman all right. (eye roll)
The fact that Ruby could get to Oswald is not the whole issue. It’s the reason he claimed he shot Oswald, to spare Mrs. Kennedy of the ordeal of a trial. Come on......if you examine Ruby and his life, does that sound plausible? If so, I have a bridge that connects Alaska and Russia for sale, cheap.
What I found jaw dropping was that my young daughter, who took her sweet time going through the museum and listening to all the left leaning recordings of the JFK era, walked away saying that it didn’t add up. A kid, well, young adult really, but for her to decide that something was amiss just surprised me!
Chalk it up to one of the many things I will never know the truth about, too much garbage thrown into the mix to find the truth, if it’s even possible to get the truth! Damn, these creeps are really good at that aren’t they?!
Yes they are.
Actually, if you look at his life and the way he was, he isn’t someone who could be a hit man.
In my opinion it is far more unrealistic to see Ruby as someone more than he was.
Anyway, my comment was more towards the comment that there was no way Ruby could have gotten close to him without help. That flies in the face of what went on that day.
I have no problem with the conspiracy theorists on this. As long as someone doesn’t resort to ad-hominem attacks on me because I don’t believe there was a vast cabal involved, then I don’t mind reading them listening to them.
Not all evidence was “locked up.” Volumes were released and there is no evidence anyone other than Oswald shot JFK.
Yes and all put out by the government. The fox that guards the henhouse. It’s like believing this administrations account of Benghazi, the IRS scandal etc. If you are that naïve, fine, believe it but this isn’t the first administration to lie to the American people. I grew up during that time and for decades afterward there have been documentaries, books, articles and movies about it. I have seen eye witness interviews of people that said the government manhandled them and their accounts,they claim, were never put on the record. They seemed quite believable to me. I have a hard copy of the Warren Report.
“Volumes were released and there is no evidence anyone other than Oswald shot JFK.”
Of course not. Would you expect there would be considering who compiled it?
Ruby changed from his original claim of sparing Mrs. Kennedy. Unless you think you can’t believe your lying eyes you can see what he actually says in the video at the top of this link. If you watch the whole thing be aware that it shows graphic footage of Kennedy during and after the assassination.
But the implication was the files were not released to hide damning facts, otherwise why not reads the fabrications? You can’t have it both ways.
I have no idea what you are referring to.
I am referring to your post no 9, where you stated that all the evidence was locked up for fifty years. My response was that not all files were locked up, that the Warren Report included thousands. Then you replied “yeah they’re all government files” indicating they’re all lies because they were produced by the Feds.
So, again, you can’t have it both ways. If they’re all lies, why would the Feds keep some secret? If the fact they’re holding files secret for half a century is indicative of evidence of another shooter, then they’re not all lies.
You can’t have it both ways.
Sorry. Didn’t know I was dealing with a literal nit picker. (Are you also a spelling/grammar Nazi in your spare time?) Let me rephrase for you. All the evidence that conformed to what they wanted the American people to believe was released. Anything that would implicate anyone in power or didn’t conform, wasn’t. Just like the cover up going on about Benghazi and the video. Look it up for yourself. It’s not difficult.
“So, again, you cant have it both ways. If theyre all lies, why would the Feds keep some secret?”
Why does the Obama administration lie and hide information? Surely you can figure it out.
I’m a horrible speller and only call mistakes out when the poster makes claims of superior intelligence while butchering the language in the process.
That being said, I’d hardly characterize the point as “nitpicking.” It’s typical of conspiracy buffs. If a piece of evidence provided by the government supports a conspiracy theory it’s accepted as real. Or if it’s withheld from the public then it also supports a conspiracy theory. If evidence doesn’t support a conspiracy theory, well, it can’t be trusted because it’s from the government. The same logic permeates the 911 truther community, the landing on moon was faked crowd, etc.
Maybe someone will address my question.
I went to Dealy Plaza last year. Looked at the “sniper’s nest” and stood in the next window to the right. Walked the Plaza etc.
When I was in the building, I wondered about the fact that Oswald was working there and the motorcade came right by the building.
Was this just a crime of opportunity? How did he get that job and when?
I have read sometime ago the route had been changed and was published in the paper.
I think it’s a moot point and prone to conjecture & supposition. A great question, but impossible to answer.
However, if you take into account the CIA docs that assert, without evidence, that Oswald “probably lied” on his timesheet to permit a ‘fitting timeline’ for the assassination, well then...they did an excellent job of putting square pegs into round holes. (/s)
I have a better question: Why do the order forms & receipts for Oswald’s alias for ordering the Carcano rifle show a “36 inch” rifle and the FBI produced a “40.2 inch” rifle for evidence?
No matter how good the cover up was, there was bound to be a major mistake that reveals what happened.
Here it is:
There are two independent ways to determine the time between each of the shots that were fired that day. OBVIOUSLY if both ways are valid, then the time between shots would be the SAME.
The simple observations that I am going to show you has never been shown in any book or documentary, NONE. Americans have been TRAINED to accept mostly what they are told and to write off those pesky things that don’t fit what they are told.
In the Zapruder film, there are two times almost everyone agrees shots were fired:
1. Obviously when JFK was shot in the head (Zapruder frame 313)
2. John Connally begins his first reaction to a shot right after the Stemmon’s sign at Z224.
To calculate the time between those two shots you only need to know the film speed of Zapruder’s camera. The FBI measured that as approximately 18.3 frames per second. That means the time between those two shots (313 - 224)/18.3 or about 4.8 seconds.
Now we look at the other way to determine the time between two of the shots. Although you may have bought the vicious attacks made by the gubermint and other critics, it also shows the time between two of the shots is 4.8 seconds!
Go look at all the published information out there on the JFK assassination and you will have to use a microscope to find that 4.8 seconds is common in BOTH the Zapruder film AND the ONLY independent audio recording that could have recorded the sounds of the shots!
I have been told by others that 4.8 seconds in BOTH ways to determine the time between shots means nothing, it is just a statistical anomaly. But is that true?
As you look at the audio recording timing, after the Z313 JFK head shot, you’ll see 0.7 seconds later that another shot was fired. So the last two shots according to the audio recording were fired BANG-BANG. In this YOUTUBE video, I show several witnesses who say they heard the last two shots were BANG-BANG.
Isn’t it interesting that two independent ways to determine the time between shots both show 4.8 seconds between shots?
Isn’t it interesting that many witnesses agree with the audio recording: The last two shots were fired BANG-BANG.
Isn’t it interesting that John Connally says that when he was shot in the back, he was bent over? The gubermint investigators ignored what John Connally said because it conflicted with three shots/ one shooter. To lie to the public, information that conflicted with what J Edgar Hoover and others said had to be minimized and neglected.
If you GOOGLE 4.8 seconds, 0.7 seconds and JFK, you’ll see I am the only one who gives a reasonable interpretation of this information. How is it possible that the most written about murder in history has significant information that has not been addressed? Part of the answer is easy: To fool Americans, you only have to fool the presstitutes. The presstitutes think their job is to interpret big brother’s story and feed it to the little people. And the little people believe what they are told.
YOUTUBE has threatened to totally shut down my channel. It has almost a million views but they no longer allow me to post. Seems some people don’t like an unknown like myself saying that there is information that PROVES the US government lied about what happened when JFK was killed.
You can know with absolute certainty what happend when JFK was killed. You can’t just accept what I say, you must verify everything for yourself. When you do, your jaw will hit the table.
Interesting. Thanks for that.
Ah, and yes...what a most perfect day to comment.
Big claims require big proof.
This figure tells a significant amount about the assassination but before you can interpret what it says you must understand why it is valid.
As shown previously, there are two shots in the Zapruder film that are easily tied to frame numbers:
1. Z frame 224, right after Connally emerges from behind the Stemmons freeway sign sign
2. Z frame 313: JFK is shot in the head.
The time between 1 and 2 is calculated by determining the number of frames and noting the camera speed was about 18.3 frames per second.
Time between two of the shots in the Z film is (313 - 224)/18.3 = about 4.8 seconds
As you look at the figure of the analysis of the Dallas police radio recording, you'll see the time between shots #3 and #4 is also 4.8 seconds! Obviously if the Dallas police radio does have the sounds of the shots then the time between shots would match the Zapruder film. Nothing could be simpler than that.
If you do a google of 4.8 seconds and look for the match between the Zapruder film having that time between shots AND the Dallas police radio recording (frequently called the acoustical evidence) you won't find much except what I have written.
If this match exists and this is the most written about and studied murder in history, how could 4.8 seconds in both the Z film and the acoustical evidence not be investigated? The answers to that question and many more are available BUT first you have to understand why it can be said with certainty that the Dallas police radio recording did record the sounds of the shots.
Many contend the acoustical experts working for the House Select Comm. on Assassinations in 1978 were looking at random noise. But they found 4.8 seconds between two of the echo patterns that they determined looked like shots! If that doesn't look like it is important, turn in your badge and go to sleep. You'll never understand it.
What is the probability that the audio experts in 1978 would find two shot like patterns 4.8 seconds if they were looking at random noise? The microphone was keyed approximately 5 minutes (or 300 seconds). Because the Z film and the audio tape have a useful resolution of about 0.1 seconds, that means there would be 3000 intervals.
You'll also notice that all of the shot like echo patterns occur less than 10 seconds from the first to the last one.
BJ Clinton had trouble with the definition of what "IS" is. The JFK research/peanut gallery have trouble with the definition of AND. When you say AND, you multiply probabilities together to get the overall probability of both of these events occurring.
In this case, probability that we'd get 4.8 seconds between two of the shots AND all of the shots would be grouped within 10 seconds is:
Overall probability: (1/3000) X (10 seconds/300 seconds) which means getting both of these things simultaneously if the audio experts were looking at random noise is not very probable.
But remember AND! The figure shows the last two shots were fired a split second apart, BANG-BANG. My video shows several witnesses who said the last two shots were BANG-BANG. What is the probability of that happening if that was only one shot fired at the end of the shooting? If you buy the gubermint's explanation of an echo, why didn't the first two shots echo?
You probably know the acoustical evidence indicated shot #4 on the figure was fired from in front of JFK. IF so, then some witnesses would have seen a large exit wound in the rear of JFK's head. If you are even remotely familiar with the JFK assassination, you know the doctors and nurses at Parkland Hospital say they saw a large wound in the right rear of JFK's head.
Then we have to factor in that Secret Service agents in both Dallas and Bethesda in Washington also describe a large exit wound in the right rear of JFK's head.
ETC. When you use the definition of AND and you multiply these other factors you determine that the probability that the sounds were recorded on the Dallas Police radio recording are astronomical. Not large but astronomical.
What does this mean? Looking at the figure with the last two shots fired BANG-BANG, it means that a conspiracy killed JFK as the person in the Texas School Book depository could not have fired both shots. It also means that it is impossible that Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK. Not improbable but impossible.
So why did the US government hide the truth in 1963/64 and why is 4.8 seconds and BANG-BANG still not talked about today? You might suspect the conspiracy was run from high in the US government. The FBI collected all of the Dallas evidence and took it to Washington. If evidence was forged, and the acoustical evidence proves it was, it means the US government forged evidence to hide the truth.
And why is this important today? Simply because if you can pull off the JFK assassination and get away with it, you can tell any lie you want to. But they don't have to fool individual citizens, they only have to fool the presstitutes. When Hussein Obama lies you to you, he knows there will be no real criticism because of the JFK assassination and how the presstitutes failed miserably in doing their Constitutional function, report the truth and hold the government acountable. The US government has a license to lie no matter what their agenda is and the presstitutes and therefore the public are powerless to stop them.
Preaching to the choir, dude. Regardless which one ‘part’ of the JFK conspiracy you focus on, I AM the OP for the article under which you commented.
I am NOT one you need to convince. “Interesting” is it in its totality. The GSR test was enough for me to assert they should have kept looking for the shooter(s)...