MovieChat Forums > JFK (1991) Discussion > The best evidence I've seen that proves ...

The best evidence I've seen that proves we're being lied to about the JFK assassination.

posted a year ago by KinkyInk (1694)
13 replies | jump to latest

I try to take all the claims about the JFK assassination with a grain of salt, realizing that most people are trying to push an agenda. Who is really telling the truth? It's hard to tell sometimes.

But there's a few things that stick out to me as being unexplainable, coming from people who have no reason to lie.

The first is Kennedy's head wound. It was described by practically all of the medical staff at Parkland Hospital as a massive wound at the back of Kennedy's head. Including the doctor who stood behind his head and looked down on him as he lay on the gurney in the emergency room. He described how he could see the brain through the opening, and as he watched, part of Kennedy's brain fell out onto the gurney.

Here's a video of some of them discussing it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTPAYVEl4LY

Now if you look at Kennedy's autopsy photos (not going to link to them here but they're easy to find), you'll see that the back of Kennedy's head is mostly intact, other than a small bullet hole. There is no way this matches what the medical professionals at Parkland described.

Then there is Jeremy Gunn. Dr. Gunn was the Executive Director and General Counsel of the JFK Assassination Records Review Board, a government agency. He's not pushing any conspiracy theory.

At the 32:42 mark of this video, Dr. Gunn talks about the autopsy. He noticed the discrepancy between the description of the wound at Parkland and the autopsy photos, so he tracked down the woman who developed the autopsy photos. She testified to him that the official autopsy photos were not the photos she developed. She described the head wound in the photos she developed exactly how the Parkland people did.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6zYC6gFCdw

It's clear to me from this evidence that the autopsy photos don't match the reality of Kennedy's head wound.

Then there's the Zapruder film. This is the most important piece of evidence we have concerning the Kennedy assassination. We can all look at it and see what happened.

However, that many not be the case.

In this video, Douglas Horne, Chief Analyst of Military Records at the Assassination Records Review Board, shows an interview with Dino Brugioni, the Chief Information Officer at the CIA's National Photographic Interpretation Center. Brugioni was among the first people to see the Zapruder film, and was put in charge of creating briefing boards from the film. Briefing boards were large poster boards with enlarged still shots taken from the individual frames of the film.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_QIuu6hsAc&t=1393s

Watch the video and see Brugioni talk about how the version of the Zapruder film he first saw was different from the one we're all seeing now. Watch his surprise when it's revealed to him the subterfuge that went on behind his back to alter the film. By people he trusted.

None of this proves who the shooter was or whether the CIA/Mafia/Castro was behind the assassination. But it does lead me to believe our government is lying to us about what happened.

[–] Stratego (30494) a year ago

That's not evidence, unless you can find another photo that confirms what those people claimed years after the fact.

Mr. Gunn may say he is not a conspiracy theorist, but everything he says or does certainly seems to encourage such speculation. "Seeking the truth" already suggests that he doesn't accept the official explanation as the truth.

[–] riraho (128) 8 months ago

There is never any real evidence it was someone other than Oswald.

[–] [deleted] a year ago

What's weird is that 60 years later, those who can are still protecting the official story. You'd think everyone involved had passed on by now.

[–] Ranb (9595) a year ago

Who is still protecting the official story and how are they doing it?

[–] liscarkat (18367) 4 months ago

There is no evidence that what we have been told and show isn't the real story. Everything else is speculation.

[–] Information-Police (4889) a year ago

I don't know about that, but there is one thing that many claim that I totally disagree with. Many say that Oswald want a good enough marksman to make those shots. I've stood at the window where Oswald shot from and its looks as easy as shooting fish in a barrel

[–] Ranb (9595) a year ago

The maximum range to the target was about 88 yards. The limo was moving at about 5-10 mph at a small angle of departure while the shooting took place. A human body is a rather large target at a range of less than 100 yards for a shooters with a rifle in a braced position.

The target was about 20 minutes of angle across, this is large. One minute of angle is equal to about one inch at 100 yards.

I own a 6.5mm Carcano rifle identical to the one that was found in the TSBD; it is in poor condition, especially the bore as it is black and pitted. I can still shoot a four inch group at 100 yards with it. The Carcano itself is a decent quality rifle that was used for many years by the Italian Army.

The action is slick, better than my Savage and Remington actions, but not as good as a WWI era Enfield. A clean action with a single drop of oil on the bolt makes it function very well.

I am a decent shot with a rifle. Not going to say that I was better than anyone who made it through USMC boot camp, but I don't think I would have a problem with that shot.

[–] riraho (128) 8 months ago

The problem with any of the conspiracy theories is that they are wholly, totally illogical.

Why go to the trouble of shooting him and then creating SO MUCH clean up afterwards? Shoot JFK and then if anyone took video, find it and alter it? Find any witnesses and kill them?

Why not just shoot him from behind with 1 guy and make that the conspiracy??

[–] Martoto (5024) 7 months ago

All Parkland staff bar one have since looked at the Bethesda autopsy photographs and confirmed that they are authentic and that there is no exit wound in the back of the President's head. The wound shown above and just ahead of the president's right ear was unanimously confirmed to be what they had seen in the emergency room. The Senate Assassinations committee that accepted that it was possible that a conspiracy could have taken place (one or more unknown people involved) still concluded that the autopsy photographs could not have been faked or altered.

Parkland staff who remarked at the time that there appeared to be occipital damage or parietal-occipital skull damage have stressed that they were not examining the president's wounds or treating them. They were trying to save his life. The one parkland outlier was said (by the few who actually remember him taking any significant part) to be the other side of the room, at the president's feet, while another doctor spent most of the time standing at the president's head blocking it from view.

[–] Martoto (5024) 4 months ago

[deleted]

[–] DarthAckbar (2039) 4 months ago

who in the hell would trust human memory over film and photographic evidence?

[–] liscarkat (18367) 4 months ago

I'm old enough to remember as far back as 1963. There are things that I remember quite clearly from long ago, that other people who were there, too, remember were different. There are things I remember well that I have found photos of that proved to be completely different. There are also people who say controversial things, that can't be disproved, in order to get attention.

[–] DarthAckbar (2039) 4 months ago

👍