Talk:Assassination of John F. Kennedy/Archive 10

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Hi there, this is a very extensive article, very detailed. I wanted to suggest a Popular Culture chapter. The Kennedy assassination has inspired lots of books, movies and TV shows. Ranging from the JFK movie, several documentaries, to episodes of Seinfeld and South Park, spoofing it. Robin.lemstra (talk) 14:28, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

See John F. Kennedy assassination in popular culture. — MrDolomite • Talk 20:56, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

First of all, because the assassination of John F. Kennedy was a CONSPIRACY emanating from the highest levels of official government (Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover, the CIA, elements of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) and the powerful shadow government (probably folks like HL Hunt, Clint Murchison, Sr.), we need to be including key information relating to this on the JFK assassination page. Conspiracy was at the heart of the JFK assassination.

I propose including information on the spotters for the sniper assassins of JFK: "Umbrella Man" and "Dark Complected Man." These are the folks who signaled to the snipers on the Grassy Knoll (and elsewhere) that JFK was still alive as he pass Dealey Plaza and to KEEP ON SHOOTING until you blow his brains out.

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/Umbrella_Man_Dark_Complected_Man__(DCM).jpg

In my opinion,"Dark Complected Man" with his 1) raised fist as JFK's limo passes (signaling "Keep shooting, JFK is still alive!" and 2) his WALKIE TALKIE is much more significant than Umbrella Man. I do think Umbrella Man was both TAUNTING JFK, displaying a Neville Chamberlain type umbrella as a way of calling JFK an appeaser/traitor and also signaling to the sniper assassins that JFK was still alive, thus keep shooting.

Check out the photo on the lower right - with "Umbrella man" and "dark complected man". The dark complected man is standing holding a raised fist in the air just as JFK's limo passes by. He is signaling for the snipers to blow of JFK's head. This is a very important photo.

http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/gallery/albums/userpics/10001/Umbrella_Man_Dark_Complected_Man__(DCM).jpg

The "Umbrella man" is also signaling that JFK's limo is now present. I think he is also TAUNTING John Kennedy at his death, symbolically calling him a traitor and appeaser with a direct reference to Neville Chamberlain and his umbrella. The CIA, the anti-Castro Cubans and military leaders like Curtis LeMay pretty much equated JFK with Chamberlain.

Also, note the WALKIE-TALKIE that "dark complected man" is talking on in the upper right photo, and how he puts it in his back pocket casually in the lower right photo, as all the spectators run up the grassy knoll to where they think the sniper is.

photo of Neville Chamberlain and his umbrella: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3266/2474813644_75d37d460f.jpg

After the assassination, "umbrella man" and "dark complected man" (the guy with the walkie talkie) sat down nonchalantly and cool as cucumbers while all chaos was breaking loose on Dealey Plaza. http://www.jfk-assassination.de/images/umbrella.gif

The give away clues to the photos are: 1) the raised fist of "dark complected man" just as JFK limo is passing (almost like a black power salute from the later 1960's) 2) the walkie talkie of the dark complected man 3) the taunting umbrella man sending signals to snipers, too 4) the studied non-chalance of umbrella man and especially "dark complected man" just after the assassination in the midst of all that chaos.

Another key photo: note the raised fist of "dark complected man" on the right. That was the signal to the snipers to keep shooting JFK. Also note JFK has already been shot from the front in his throat and he is raising his elbows. And the umbrella man is to the left from this angle. Really, the dark completed man with the raised fist and the walkie talkie is more important than umbrella man. http://www.jfk-assassination.de/images/umbrella2.gif

In the photo above, JFK has ALREADY been shot in the throat, and dark complected man and Umbrella man are signaling to the snipers to KEEP ON SHOOTING because JFK is STILL ALIVE !!

More photos: http://www.google.com/images?hl=en&q=umbrella%20man%20JFK&um=1&ie=UTF-8&source=og&sa=N&tab=wi Morrow321 (talk) 03:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

The guy with the walkie-talkie is intriguing. Here's the thing: you're never going to get assassination conspiracy theories onto this page. Won't happen. Please consider improving the JFK assassination theories page instead. I'm author of about 30% of that article. Join me! Thanks. Joegoodfriend (talk) 04:01, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Blah blah blah "Taunting"? Why the hell would umbrella man be taunting the targeted person, a person who will be dead in seconds. Wow. Binksternet (talk) 04:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Morrow, this is all covered on various pages delving into the assassination. There are literally HUNDREDS of theories on who, besides LHO, was behind the assassination, which is why there is a page on conspiracy theories, and other pages on other aspects. The Umbrella Man has his own page, and the very argument you refer to above is found there (the umbrella man had a dark-skinned accomplice).

The bottom line here is that inserting unproven theories - when there is an abundance of counter-theories, also unproven - would quickly make this page unmanagable and impractical. As long as the fact there are many people who disbelieve the Warren Commission is noted on the page, and the links to those views are included, then your main focus should be on improving those various pages rather than trying to drastically change this page which is a non-starter as long as those views are not representative views (even if true). Canada Jack (talk) 21:36, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Two points: the "Dark Complected Man" is more important than Umbrella Man. "Dark Complected Man" has a walkie talkie on him and acts very casual - suspiciously cool as a cucumber AFTER the JFK assassination - no rolling on the ground, crying, or chatting it up with reporters for him! The reason the spotters were there was to DETERMINE IF JFK WAS STIL ALIVE. And if JFK was still alive, the spotters were to signal that a kill shot to the head was STILL needed. If you look at the photos, "Dark Complected Man" raises his arm in a FIST as JFK limo approaches... then as JFK's limo reaches him, Dark Complected Man pulls his arm DOWN and holds his arm, still in with a fist, across his belly and parallel to the ground. Dark Complected Man did this because he DID NOT WANT HIS ARM/HAND BLOWN OFF by shots from a sniper positioned on the Grassy Knoll. Umbrella Man was there to TAUNT JFK at his moment of death as well as also SIGNAL the snipers that JFK needed a head shot to kill him. The CIA's Frank Sturgis who told E. Howard Hunt that Lyndon Johnson went to Cord Meyer of the CIA to begin the JFK assassination plot, Frank Sturgis used LOVE TO USE WALKIE TALKIES whenever he was on an operation, assassination, or mission. The walkie talkie of Dark Complected Man is very suspicious, especially since the Secret Service said NONE of their agents were on the Grassy Knoll (but there were FAKE ones!!)

The OTHER point I would like to make is that this Wiki page on the JFK assassination is a complete disaster with its presentation of the false lone nut theory and its reliance on the Warren Report farce and the HSCA farce/cover up report as well. It is like walking into a time warp of Lyndon Johnson, Hoover, CIA, Arlen Specter/ Warren "Report" lies, disinformation and rank propaganda. It is just regurgitating the Big Lie of the JFK Assassination long after most people and most researchers have discarded it. The current, credible research on the JFK assassination is that a high level governmental conspiracy murdered John Kennedy - probably executed by the CIA and with Lyndon Johnson and Hoover there to cover up. This conspiracy included both top players of the US government and top players of the "shadow government" very likely including folks like HL Hunt and Clint Murchison, Sr. - both BIG supporters of Lyndon Johnson and haters of John Kennedy. We need to present this conspiracy view point as the dominant viewpoint of this wiki page and toss out completely any respect for the discredited lone nut viewpoint. Morrow321 (talk) 03:47, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Again, even if the above is all true, it is not a representative view, it is one of many competing theories outside of the official investigations. For the purposes of the page, the standard sequence in describing a controversial event is a) describe the conclusions of the official investigations b) if a controversy, note the controversy c) if the event is complicated and convoluted, the controversies should be briefly noted and given their own page. Your best course of action here is to improve the pages where the conspiracy theories reside, including the one on the umbrella man who has his own page.

As for you particular conclusions, there are numerous holes in your theory. For one, the Umbrella Man was identified and testified in 1978. Louie Witt. For another, it's rather silly to assume that numerous "spotters" would be needed to determine if JFK was fatally shot or not. If there was an organized team, then we'd expect those snipers to keep their eye on the target, not on a bunch of accomplices standing to the side. They'd know what to do. They wouldn't need to be told with a second to get ready that another shot was needed.

There were hundreds of people at the scene. Many never spoke to the media or rolled on the ground. How this is "suspicious" behaviour just tells me some people are grasping at straws. The Grassy Knoll? The one witness who actually was in a sight line to see people behind the fence - Lee Bowers - stated NO ONE was standing there at the time of the assassination. Your comments on the "Secret Service" are misinformed and misleading. ALL the personnel who were back there have been identified, some were agents but not with the Secret Service per se. Further, the giant hole in the Grassy Knoll theory is that the autopsy and the photos and the x-rays ALL INDICATE SHOTS FIRED FROM BEHIND. Period. Those who claim that JFK's body movement indicates a shot from the right front - the Grassy Knoll - don't know what they are talking about. A 200-gram bullet shot from that distance WOULD NOT KNOCK A MAN WEIGHING 180 POUNDS OVER. Those who claim otherwise don't know their physics. We'd expect a body movement of about two INCHES. Therefore, JFK's movement HAD TO BE the result of something else, Jackie pulling at him, or, most likely, a neuro-muscular reflex action.

As for the general critque of the Warren Report etc., even if it is true that LBJ assumed that there was a conspiracy, even if it is true that the WC also believed that to be true or were in an effort to promote the lone nut theory over any suggestion of a conspiracy, the bottom line is the evidence points to a single unaided man, Lee Harvey Oswald, and no one else. All you have is what YOU determine to be "suspicious" activity and wild conclusions (Man has a walkie talkie! Frank Sturgis used walkie talkies! Sturgis was a CIA operative! Therefore the CIA or its operatives conspired to kill JFK!) when the actual physical evidence we have points in an entirely different direction.

Bottom line, you are entitled to your own opinion, you are not entitled to your own facts, and the facts we have can't be ignored and those facts point to a lone assassin. Period. Canada Jack (talk) 14:45, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Canada Jack, you are not entitled to your own set of facts. The overwhelming evidence is that that was a high level conspiracy, very likely emanating from men like Lyndon Johnson and Allen Dulles to murder John Kennedy. And there is the root of the problem, the murderers of John Kennedy were the ones in control of the non-investigation of his murder and the blaming or framing of it on patsy Lee Oswald.

One big point, those autopsy photos, especially of the rear head view were FORGED AND FAKED. The reason we know that is because a massive amounnt of Parkland doctors and nurses report a huge gaping hole in JFK's rear of his head. There were other witnesses, too, who saw that head wound, too- Ed Hoffman being just one. People who came in direct contact with JFK's body often commented on the oozing brains and blood coming out the back, and the jelly like consistency of the back of his head. The men who put him in the casket at Parkland talk about that.

Of course, the point being is that the large gaping wound on the back of JFK's head was the result of a HEAD SHOT FROM THE FRONT. Many/most exit wounds caused by bullets are much larger than the often small entrance wounds. So the large exit wound on the back of JFK's head is indicative of SHOT FROM THE FRONT.

There is a very illuminating book to read called The Grassy Knoll Witnesses by Harry Yardum (2009) http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Harry+Yardum

In The Grassy Knoll Witnesses, person after person emphatically describes hearing shots come from the Grassy Knoll, especially behind the picket fence, or seeing a puff of gun smoke. Lee Bowers himself said the shot he heard came from between the TSBD and the Triple Underpass (that means Dealey Plaza or behind the picket fence). So Lee Bowers is a great witness for a shooting from the front, he even saw two men milling around the fence just moments before JFK got shot.

The reason the Zapruder film is so important is that it shows JFK's head being knocked BACK AND TO THE LEFT. Certainly, a 200 gram bullet can and often does blast a man's head in the opposite direction. An adult human head weighs about 10 pounds and yes a bullet fired at 2,000 meters per second (or faster) can easily knock it backwards. And that is the reason the government and the murderers of JFK suppressed the Zapruder film, hiding it from the American people. And it is the reason the CIA assets at LIFE magazine - who bought the rights to the Zapruder film - did NOT show it to the American people.

Thank God for Robert Groden going on the Geraldo Rivera show in 1975 and showing the Zapruder film to tens of millions of Americans. And when they saw JFK's head being knocked BACK AND TO THE LEFT, which implied a kill shot from the FRONT RIGHT, i.e. grassy knoll area, they KNEW that the Warren Report was a bucket of horseshit and that they had been LIED to all those years by the government and the political elites who were pushing the Big Lie. Really, Canada Jack, you had the nerve to call Madeleine Duncan Brown's book Texas in the Morning "bullshit" and yet you talk about JFK's body moving due to a "neuro-muscular reflex action" - now that "theory" is the ULTIMATE IN BULLSHIT!

Btw, as of November 26, 1963 Zapruder had the original. Life had a 1st generation copy, FBI in Washington had a 2nd generation copy, Washington Secret Service had a 1st generation copy, Dallas FBI had a 2nd generation copy and the Secret Service in Dallas had a 1st generation copy. And NONE of the Zapruder film was shown to the American people until 1975 on Geraldo's night show. The firestorm that ensued (from people knowing the Warren Report was a LIE) caused the HSCA to be created. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morrow321 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

In sum, this wiki page is massively flawed. It is a flat out lie because it relies on the Big Lie of the Warren Report [really the murderers report] the HSCA cover up part II, the myth of patsy Lee Harvey Oswald, and the long ago discredited myth of 3 shots and no conspiracy. All garbage. The official reports are garbage and they should be treated like garbage on this page.

Here is another fantastic book to read on the JFK assassination - a LOT of truth in this book- and it describes in detail the high level conspiracy to murder John Kennedy-- Bloody Treason: The Assassination of John Kennedy by Noel Twyman, you can get it on Kindle for $10 at Amazon. It is a classic. Or you can by a hard copy used for $75.

In my opinion Lyndon Johnson made a dirty deal with the CIA to murder John Kennedy. The CIA's job (probably Edward Lansdale, Frank Sturgis, E. Howard Hunt and crew) was to kill JFK and the job of Lyndon Johnson and his very good friend and neighbor of 19 years, J. Edgar Hoover, was to cover it up. I think they did a splendid job and it is really sad to see Wikipedia carry water for these murderers 47 years later. So this whole page needs to be rewritten. Morrow321 (talk) 02:51, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

One big point, those autopsy photos, especially of the rear head view were FORGED AND FAKED. The reason we know that is because a massive amounnt of Parkland doctors and nurses report a huge gaping hole in JFK's rear of his head.

The main problem in discussing this with you is you clearly are completely unaware of the evidence which supports the WC's conclusions - you have obviously being reading a lot of material from those who dismiss it out of hand. Now it's fine to take a stance, but to ignore the evidence which drove the various conclusions you dispute is intellectually dishonest. The above is a case in point. If you knew what the evidence which drove the medical conclusion I wouldn't need to tell you that a) the autopsy photographs of JFK were confirmed to be of JFK by a panel of photographic and medical experts, b) the images were not manipulated as any such manipulation would have been easily detected given the then level of possible photographic maniuplation, c) the same applies to the x-rays, d) a panel of pathologists ALL agree that two bullets struck the president, both from the rear. There was no "gaping wound" in the back of the head, as such a wound would have been clear and obvious. Even Cyril Wecht, who claims there was a conspiracy, agrees with this. d) the three autopsy surgeons who actually saw JFK in 1963 describe the wounds in the same way, with some testimonial disagreement over the precise location of the head's entry wound.

So, what about the Parkland doctors? (I kept saying "Parklawn" above, a street near me...) A lot of those doctors suggest either a gaping wound more towards the rear or at the rear itself. But not all. Secondly, the primary function of these doctors was NOT to assess and describe the president's wounds; it was to attempt to revive him. Third, NO EXAMINATION OF THE CORPSE WAS CARRIED OUT BY PARKLAND DOCTORS. Beyond stemming the bleeding, inserting tubes and catheters etc., they left the body as is. People weren't lifting his head to check out the wounds, which is what they would have had to do to examine a rear head wound. Indeed, if you were aware of the evidence, you'd know they left the body as is, wrapped the head, put it into a coffin. Done. They didn't even detect the rear back wound! Fourth, the president was placed on a gurney and put onto the operating table. All the time, he was ON HIS BACK. How could all these Parkland doctors and others see a "gaping hole" in the "rear of his head" when he was LYING ON HIS BACK? Fifth, the nature of JFK's wound has to be realized. A large flap of skin was dangling down, brain matter was emerging from the wound, and Kennedy's ample amount of hair made for a gruesome mess. In short, a cursory look - which is all the Parkland people had - would not be able to clearly understand the exact nature of JFK's head wounds, ESPECIALLY if they didn't lift his head. In short, the Parkland doctors were a) in no position to accurately assess the president's wounds and b) would not have been able to see the wound they claim to have seen as the president for the entire time save for the moment he was transferred from the limo WAS LYING ON HIS BACK.

But this is part of the "bullshit baffles brains" modus operandi of so many in the conspiracy industry. Ignore common sense (how could they see the back of the president's head in the first place? how are the opinions of the reviving doctors more reliable than pathologists?) to SELL A LOT OF BOOKS.

In The Grassy Knoll Witnesses, person after person emphatically describes hearing shots come from the Grassy Knoll, especially behind the picket fence, or seeing a puff of gun smoke.

Question 1 - How many people said they heard a grassy knoll shot? Question 2 - How many people said they heard a TSBD shot? Question 3 - How many people said they heard shots from BOTH locations? We have numerous people who said they heard GK and TSBD shots - but almost NO ONE SAID BOTH. Since we KNOW shots were fired from the TSBD, the obvious conclusion to be drawn is that the acoustics of the plaza fooled a lot of people. IF this was not so, most people who heard shots would have said they heard them from two directions.

Puff of smoke? NO ONE reported a "puff of smoke" - until years later. Further, unless a blunderbuss or a cannon was being employed by any assassin at the fence THERE WOULD BE NO SMOKE. This has been one of the silliest claims made over the years. Anyone who knows their rifles should know there'd be no visible smoke. When Oliver Stone shot JFK, they had to use smoke machines to create this smoke as any "smoke" would be invisible. Well, duh.

Really, Canada Jack, you had the nerve to call Madeleine Duncan Brown's book Texas in the Morning "bullshit" and yet you talk about JFK's body moving due to a "neuro-muscular reflex action" - now that "theory" is the ULTIMATE IN BULLSHIT!

Again, Morrow, you, simply put, don't know what you are talking about. Do you know your physics? Clearly not. Because you are suggesting that a, at most, 200 gram bullet with a muzzle speed of 2,000 feet per second striking a ~20 pound object (JFK's head) attached to a body weighing about 180 pounds would propel that body three or four feet. This is, in a word, BULLSHIT. Energy would be transferred, but that would mean a body movement of about TWO INCHES. Don't believe me? Well, we all agree JFK was hit be a bullet earlier - why wasn't he propelled into Connally by this force? Why wasn't Connally himself knocked to the floor?

It is truly laughable to see people like Groden and Rivera talk sagely about "physics" and "every action requires a reaction" etc., when it is clear they haven't the slightest idea of the physics involved. Simply put, a shot from the right front WOULD NOT ACCOUNT FOR JFK's BODY MOVEMENT. If a CANNON BALL was fired, perhaps.

So Lee Bowers is a great witness for a shooting from the front, he even saw two men milling around the fence just moments before JFK got shot. And, if you read what he actually SAID and not the expurgated version that conspiracy theorists published, he EXPLICITLY described the men moving to the FRONT of the fence when the motorcade passed. ANd is anyone claiming these two to have fired from in FRONT of the fence? If there was anyone firing from behind the fence HE WOULD HAVE SEEN THEM AS HE HAD AN UNOBSTRUCTED VIEW. Bet you didn't know that, eh? But why deal with facts when you have a great lie of a story to publish?

And NONE of the Zapruder film was shown to the American people until 1975 on Geraldo's night show. The firestorm that ensued (from people knowing the Warren Report was a LIE) caused the HSCA to be created. Well, I'd say this is accurate, outside of the emergence of the film for the Clay Shaw trial and a bootleg copy of same which toured College campuses. I was one of those people saying "they can't hide this from the public now" back in 1975. But I, like most people, wasn't aware of the evidence and had my knowledge of the effects of gunshots from cop shows and movies. In other words, I, like most people, had no idea what I was talking about. What changed? The high-resolution copies of the Zapruder film which showed that the WC had it correct.

In sum, this wiki page is massively flawed. It is a flat out lie because it relies on the Big Lie of the Warren Report [really the murderers report] the HSCA cover up part II, the myth of patsy Lee Harvey Oswald, and the long ago discredited myth of 3 shots and no conspiracy. All garbage.

In sum, in matters not one whit how "flawed" the investigations are, it matters what the official investigations said and how critics characterized the flaws. Which is how the page is structured currently. AS has been repeatedly pointed out to you, there are HUNDREDS of scenarios as to what critics say "really" happened. So, as a result, we'd have to create an unwieldy page full of competing conspiracy theories. Which is beyond the scope of this page and the scope of other pages, as also previously noted.

Your error here, Morrow, while pointing out flaws with the Warren Commission etc is that EVEN IF YOU ARE 100 % CORRECT, the page MUST stay in the form it is in now. As we don't pretend here to have the "truth," we simply report the "official" conclusions and then report that those conclusions are contentious. Your further error is characterizing the page as "flawed" for suggesting the Warren Report is "correct." It does no such thing. I, Canada Jack, may believe that the WC got it mostly right (with some major deficiencies), I nevertheless am careful not to import that POV onto the page itself (I have had only minor contributions here, anyway, like "from 1966," polls showed the public disbelieved the WC, etc.) If you care to carefully read the page, you'd be hard-pressed to conclude that the page is created in a form which leads the casual reader to the inescapable conclusion that only the WC and HSCA got it right. Canada Jack (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

I have only one simple question Why was it that no one, so far as I know, ever asked Governor John B. Connolly who all the people were when he, while the shots were being fired, made what one might think was a believable statement, "Oh, no, no, no. My God. THEY are going to kill us all." It would seem, based on his statement at a time when he had no time to devise some sort of one-man-did-it scenario, as the Warren Commission quickly trumpeted Hoover's hand-written statement to DPD, "no need to pursue other suspects; real suspect is in custody," written less than 3 hours after the assassination, that Connolly had to have known something about "they" that he never told anyone. Jus my guess, but I'm thinking that the meeting likely did take place, as Madeleine Duncan Brown, said it did. Her story is backed up by a cook and seamstress, someone named Beulah May..."Part Nine of "The Men Who Killed Kennedy, The Guilty Men."

It just seems to me that the weight of the verifiable evidence shows that there was a conspiracy, and that it is time the American people were allowed to grow up and just accept it for what it is. Time to stop attmepting to stifle free speech by asking people to not state a prejudice on the matter of the Kennedy assassination.

Of the 94 people in the Plaza who said they heard the shots, 58 of them said the shots also came from the grassy knoll. The Warren Commission accepted none of their statements into evidence. That is a travesty of justice. Look at the computer enhancements of the Mary Ann Moorman polaroid photo, taken 1/6th of a second after the fatal shots to the president's head. What is there, visible now, has always been there, but technological limitations did not permit the viewer to see what is now obvious to anyone with normal vision. See YouTube This Is The Man Who Shot President Kennedy. There were three on the knoll, based on the photograph. Then, look at the Abraham Zapruder film and see the flash-reflections on the outside chrome at the top of the passenger-side windshield. Three distinct flashes can be seen. Now, it is "Case Closed." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.189.139.133 (talk) 04:55, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

I have only one simple question Why was it that no one, so far as I know, ever asked Governor John B. Connolly who all the people were when he, while the shots were being fired, made what one might think was a believable statement, "Oh, no, no, no. My God. THEY are going to kill us all." It seems to me like the most sensible thing to say - one would not likely say "my God, HE is going to kill us all" now, would they? How in God's name would Connolly know who "he" was? Saying "they" is what most people would say if an unknown person or persons was firing. Indeed, Jackie Kennedy was quoted as saying "they" killed JFK. If, as you suggest, Connolly had some sort of inside information, then, using your logic, so did Jackie. Which makes precisely zero sense.

Hoover's hand-written statement to DPD, "no need to pursue other suspects; real suspect is in custody," written less than 3 hours after the assassination There certainly was a rush to judgment here, but by the end of the day of the assassination, it seemed obvious to everyone involved in the investigation that the killer was caught. Why? Several people witnessed Oswald firing the shots, he was the only employee of the TSBD to flee the building after the shooting, and he soon shot and killed a police officer. Hoover etc had every reason in the world to think they had got their man. Further, though people ran to the Grassy Knoll, NOT A SINGLE PERSON that day reported actually seeing anyone firing from there, the ONLY gun or bullet shells found at the scene of the crime were in the position witnesses saw Oswald at. By the next morning, the autopsy of the president revealed that the entry wounds were from the rear, as were Connolly's wounds, all consistent with the presumption that Oswald was the only assassin.

The only real question by the morning of November 23rd, was whether Oswald had any accomplices who put him up to the assassination. There was no question in their minds that he was the one, the only one, to have killed Kennedy.

It just seems to me that the weight of the verifiable evidence shows that there was a conspiracy, and that it is time the American people were allowed to grow up and just accept it for what it is. Time to stop attmepting to stifle free speech by asking people to not state a prejudice on the matter of the Kennedy assassination. Not sure what you mean by this. A CLEAR majority of people believe JFK died as the result of a conspiracy, this has been true for some 44 years, and people are not shy about expressing this view. In terms of THIS PAGE, we should a) reflect the conclusions of the several official investigations, b) refer to the critiques of the investigations, and c) take no stand on the "truth" here, allowing casual readers to understand the viewpoints of the various interpreters of the assassination.

Of the 94 people in the Plaza who said they heard the shots, 58 of them said the shots also came from the grassy knoll. The Warren Commission accepted none of their statements into evidence. That is a travesty of justice. Obviously, you've not read the Warren Report. The WC mention claims that shots came from elsewhere, towards the underpass, but there was no evidence otherwise of gunmen other than at the TSBD. The WC therefore concluded that Oswald alone fired the shots. What many fail to appreciate is that there were numerous people who also heard shots from the direction of the TSBD, but virtually NO ONE said shots came from BOTH directions, which would have been expected if there were multiple gunmen. Indeed, one of the very few who said they heard shots from two directions heard so as they were travelling in the motorcade. So, why did no one hear shots from TWO directions when we have multiple reports of shots from two locations? The explanation has to lie in the acoustics in the plaza which easily confused witnesses.

Look at the computer enhancements of the Mary Ann Moorman polaroid photo, taken 1/6th of a second after the fatal shots to the president's head. Etc. I've seen those enhancements, and I don't see humans behind the fence. Further, dozens ran back there - there were no people behind the fence during the assassination. And the one person in the yard behind, Lee Bowers, unequivocally stated there were NO PEOPLE behind the fence when the motorcade went by. There were BEFORE the assassination and, of course, after. But pro-conspiracy authors omit Bowers statements about the most pertinent time, DURING the assassination. Flashes? If there were flashed reflected on the windshield, then we would have EASILY detected gun flashes in the Nix film, etc. We don't. Canada Jack (talk) 17:37, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Echo Correlation Analysis and the Acoustic Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination Revisited, by Dr. Donald Thomas, Science and Justice Journal 2001, vol. 41, pp. 21–32, peers reviewed and accepted 8-10-00.

Hear No Evil, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 11-17-01.

Emendations, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 2002.

Crosstalk: Synchronization of Putative Gunshots with Events in Dealey Plaza, by Dr. Donald Thomas, Science and Justice Journal 11-23-02.

Impulsive Behavior: The CourtTV - Sensimetrics Acoustical Evidence Study, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 2003.

Criminal Acoustics: IBM Launches Counter-Attack on the JFK Evidence, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 2005.

Interview with Dr. Donald Thomas, by the Mary Ferrell Foundation, 2006.

Video Presentation on the Acoustics Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination, part 1, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 2006.

Video Presentation on the Acoustics Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination, part 2, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 2006.

Video Presentation on the Acoustics Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination, part 3, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 2006.

Overview and History of the Acoustical Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination Case, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 2007.

Video Presentation on the Acoustics Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 2008.

“Hear No Evil: Social Constructivism and the Forensic Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination”, by Dr. Donald Thomas, 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.136.107.237 (talk) 23:48, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Removed, at least temporarily pending discussion by editors more acquainted with what has been added. "pages.prodigy.net" appears to be someone's personal website, as is the geocities site. I'm unconvinced on the reliability of the videos stored on a wiki, and equally unconvinced on youtube videos. The fact that there are 13 footnotes all citing the work of Donald Thomas is complete and total overkill. I'm unhappy leaving a statement sourced by only one person into the lead, but I'll defer to others if they want to add back something more acceptably sourced. 2 lines of K₃₀₃ 11:51, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I don't think that this is necessary in the lede. We have the conclusion of the HSCA and the point that this conclusion has been called into question (as has the "lone gunman" conclusion of the WC). To insert a rebuttal to the rebuttal in the lede would, if balanced, also require a rebuttal to the rebuttals to the WC conclusions.

Besides, this is further explored within the article itself, which includes the conclusions of Dr Thomas. (Which, I should also note, has its own rebuttals...) Canada Jack (talk) 13:41, 22 October 2010 (UTC)