Posted on 12/04/2021 4:50:53 PM PST by Fester Chugabrew
Like the sinking of the Titanic, the assassination of John F. Kennedy has been a subject of fascination for me over the years.
I remember perusing Mom and Dad's copy of the Warren Commision Report with great interest. I remember, earlier than that, repeatedly combing through the National Geographic issue shortly after the assassination and developing a crush on Caroline Kennedy who would have been about my age at that time. In Jr. High School I wrote a short paper based on Mark Lane's assertion of a second assassin or more and conspiracies surrounding the event.
The presentation given here has a way of objectively questioning dependence on the Zapruder film as definitive of the sequence of what happened. Holland pins down the timing at closer to 11 seconds, rather than 6 seconds using sound reasoning.
It takes time to watch, but is worth it. On a side note, this past summer I had the privilege of walking laps around the inside of Pembroke Mall in Virginia Beach with Secret Service Agent Win Lawson's widow (during vacation accompanying my father-in-law for his daily walking exercise). Win is mentioned at some length here, and his stated conviction that there was a gap between the first shot and remaining shots is vindicated by Holland's research.
Ok, whatever on the supposition.
Fragments were found in JFK’s head.
The damage to the surface of the underpass was repaired within hours. Strange for a crime scene.
Your comment #92 was completely rebutted by my citation from Menninger that there were many witnesses (see my comment #93) who saw agent Hickey armed standing in the follow car while the car was in Dealey Plaza.
Without citation, you now allege his gun was an M 14, not an AR 15 which is reported in Menninger’s book with pictures. Don’t intend to be mean or grind an ax with you, I’ll take Menninger’s book as correctly reported and consider your comment as inaccurate, factually wrong.
I just looked at the picture and you can tell it is a M 14 as I remember them. I own a AR 15 and that is not an AR IMHO. I have not ever heard of any witness who saw him standing in my research at the 6th Floor Museum. I will ask around. Again, if he was the shooter, the SS guys in the front seats would have known as they would have been almost deaf for a while whith earaches from the shot. Why no testimony about that in any reports? I will take my common sense over what Menninger reports. AR 15 vs. M 14? I just think it is a M 14 from the fuzzy picture. I’ll take your word on that. Minor point. The agents in the front seat not ever saying that a gun went off behind their heads I will bet money on.
Thank you for your explanations.
Your question about there were any “aural witnesses” to Hickey firing his gun is a good one and shoul be answered. I can’t quickly go through the book to see how this specifically was addressed. There were many witnesses who said how noisy(echo-chamber) and chaotic it was in the plaza. On a related matter, I want to say that Menninger wrote that no one testified/reported ever seeing end of barrel flash from Hickey’s gun. That does not mean the gun was not fired. Donahue explained not seeing a barrel flash was based on the type of gun and the time of day (lighting) that it would not necessarily be observed if the AR15 were fired.
With regards to AR15, I am not a person one would go to for these kinds of things to describe differences and similarities between AR15 and M14. It looks like an AR15 to me. Menninger’s book went through a lot of checking and re-checking before it was published. I would be surprised that this type of error would not have been noticed. A misstatement of key fact like that would discredit the entire book, and converts “gun expert” Donahue into “nut job”. Donahue had a well respected reputation, including a level head.
There is a lot of other stuff (evidence) that was collected and is missing. Explanations for missing evidence by the givernment is given as “gee, it’s missing, ho hum”. E.g. JFK’s brain with metal fragments that were seen on xrays is reported as missing, at least as early as 1968. The AR15 bullet composition is described in the book is nearly 100% copper, where as the Carcano rifle bullet was 90% copper, 8% zinc. Also the Secret Service refused to confirm the “open secret” that Hickey’s gun seen in public and photographed was an AR15 because “their policy” not to disclose what guns agents carry except for one type of sidearm that everyone knew they carried. “Awww gee fellas, can’t test the composition of the fragments in JFK’s brain to see if it belonged to the AR15 which we won’t admit that we had in the car behind JFK in 1963.”
Despite these givernment roadblocks, inaccuracies and omissions in the Warren Commission’s final report, Donahue makes a compelling case that can’t be ignored. If givernment declassification of JFK assassination documents shows that Donahue was on the right path about who killed JFK, then one can understand why the the givernment will not fully declassify until all who were alive in 1963 are dead and gone plus 25 years.
Just my opinion, but when I read about Donahue’s investigation, his makes the most sense and disproves a lot of other theories and beliefs. Seems only the givernment can refute his findings but they don’t, and they won’t. Then givernment people wonder why citizens don’t trust them.
Were the fragments found to be of two different types of bullets?
I knew exactly where you were and are going with your previous question on fragment. You should buy the book as a Christmas gift for yourself. You’ll be glad you did.
Until then, look at my post #105, right smack in the middle where I give some information that begins to answer your question ... about the fragments seen in JFK’s brain ...
I get the impression you think I’m conniving and have some agenda here. You don’t ‘know exactly where I’m going’ . You think think you do is all. I have no agenda. I was looking for a simple answer is all.
No, not at all. Sorry if I gave you that impression, not intended at all.
I meant ... I know where you were going to go with your line of questioning. Kind of like ... “Were there fragments? - Yes. ... Can they trace it to a gun that was at the scene?
well first .... What was the composition of the bullet fragments? .... What kind of bullet has that composition? ... What kind of gun would use that type of bullet .... to where one links those fragments to the guns at the scene .... Oswald’s or the Secret Service Agent’s or [fill in the blank]....
Hello,
I did some further investigation into why I am so dimissive f Howard Donahue and Bonar Menniger’s book “Mortal Error.” I read this back in the late 1990’s and have an opinion myself. Two facts come to my mind. The first did the Secret Service clam up and conspire to keep this secret? The two people in the front seat would have had an earache after the gun went off, if it did so.
The second, and you want mme to bring facts, comes from OPJ.GOV. Wriersnof these type of conspiracy books ignore facts that contradict them, so here is my reason. The 1963-1964 analyses of Kennedy assassination evidence included an analysis of the various bullet fragments, using emission spectrography. The results showed that all of the bullet-lead specimens were qualitatively generally ‘similar’ in elemental composition and ‘could be’ all of the same brand of ammunition. This is from analysis in 1963 or probably 1964. This was the bullet found on the Connaly stretcher. The bullet fragments on the INSIDE of the windshield of Kennedy’s limo. These frgments could only have come from the head shot. Also compared were the bullets left behind on the 6th floor. The testing was from using emmission spectography. In 1977 bullet analysis, using instrumental neutron activation analysis (INAA) was done as this is more accurate. I studied chemistry in college and understand these tests. They can’t say definitely 100 %, that they are all from the same batch when the lead is analyzed, but what are the odds that the SS bullets were of the same analysis percentages. From what I remember Menninger ignored this info and did not address it. Laser Ablation would be used today and would have been more accurate in the lead content, and also the impurities of other compounds in the lead, such as copper, etc.
Thanks for your more detailed explanation and why you dismiss Donahue’s theory. I don’t know if you would consider re-reading the Menninger book with a fresh set of eyes to test your previously formed opinions about the assassination via Donahue’s work, and whether Donahue’s work is still not worthy of some consideration.
Your question is a good one about why no agent in the front seat had an earache if Hickey shot the AR15. I’ll read the book again this holiday and confirm that it is not reported in there. It certainly would bolster Donahue’s theory. It’s absence, does challenge his theory, but I do not believe it is fatal to his theory.
With regards to the chemical analysis of the bullet fragments and the Connolly slug. You state that based on the 1963 - 64 spectrographic analysis, the windshield fragments could ONLY have come from the head shot. That is the Warren Commission’s conclusion. But Menninger wrote about those fragments too - that the car fragments probably did not come from the head shot, ...
“According to the [Warren Commission], the fragments found in [JFK’s limo] were remnants of the bullet that hit Kennedy in the head. Donahue’s research, however, suggested this claim was not supported by the facts. The fragments appeared to be free of blood, bone, brain tissue and hair, indicating they PROBABLY did not pass through [JFK’s] skull, and one was deformed in such a fashion as to show it likely hit something very hard, such as the pavement on Elm Street.
“Perhaps it was only investigative ineptitude that allowed the Commission to ignore these facts, as they had numerous eyewitness reports that suggested [Oswald’s] first shot missed. Because [Dr Humes (who was in charge of JFK’s autopsy)] never identified the ricochet fragment on Kennedy’s skull in his autopsy report, investigators may well have been unaware of it and as a result unable to interpret the other clues that suggested the first shot went wide...” pp 113 - 114
Hence, your noting the chemical similarity between the Connolly stretcher slug and the fragments found in the car from the 1963 - 64 spectrographic tests would support Donahue’s analysis/theory that the fragments are probably from the ricochet. Without JFK’s brain/tissue matter on the fragments on those fragments, one cannot conclude they could only have come from the head shot.
As far as “Why did the SS clam up and conspire to keep this a secret?” There are many possible reasons but is not worth opining on them here today. But SS clamming up and keeping things secrets, lying by omission, etc ... that is not beyond the realm of possibility for them or any branch and agency of the givernment. Just ask Trump, Comey, Clapper, FISA court, General Flynn, et al for their opinions on whether the givernment people lie, falsify sworn affidavits, lose key evidence, suppress evidence but tell a court they have disclosed everything in their files, etc etc etc and more etc. Lying has been around as long as humans - feral givernment is no exception.
One thing that's always bothered me (I was a JFK assassination nerd in the 1980s and early 90s) was the theft of the brain, especially the evidence that RFK took it.
Like, what motive could there be?
Well, here it is. INAA on the fragments.
The cover up has to always win. The disputers only need to win once.
INAA seems to be the key to get to advance to the motive. It would show if the Warren Commission’s single gunman conclusion remains intact, or whether there is a 2nd gun.
If it is the latter, then Donahue’s theory moves forward. That might get drowned out in part by resurrecting the grassy knoll gunman theory, but Donahue deals with that. The bigger uproar seems the debate over the blue panel Warren Commission’s lone gunman conclusion - incompetence or cover-up. For example, if the truth comes out that JFK was killed by accident as Donahue alleges, then whatever evidence and conclusions the givernment puts forward now will be viewed cynically unless there are nongovernmental people with high integrity and the intellectual smarts to use logic and be unemotional and apolitical who are on the new panel. My opinion, it will never happen in the lifetime of anyone alive (including those born) in Nov 1963. Feral givernment cannot “win” here, even if it can be proved Warren is correct. That itself would make one ask why they stonewalled for what is now approaching 60 years, and that will be another hornets nest of conspiracies.
Well, I will probably not re-open my investigation as I have other things going on. I used to follow the goings on with interest, but I just retired and only get interested in the Kennedy Assasination in November. Hell, one guy on TV was crying and saying “They killed my President.” The fatal shot?? He said it was take from the sewer on the right side of the road. Wow!.
The fragments not having blood or hair or skin on them? If the bullet was the first one, and it matches the lead composition of the bullets, all of them, then if the fatal shot came from the SS behind——where are their fragments? There would be some.
Still of interest, I will give out tours of the Kennedy Assasination to my friends coming down for the Cotton Bowl. I have even met Marina as I knew where she worked. She loved one of my friend’s son so we always had him with us. She used to work at the now closed Army/Navy store on Mckinney Avenue. She is alive and living in Rockwall I ahve heard.
As pointed out in #105 and #112, JFK’s brain with fragments (visible in the xrays) is “lost or missing” since 1968 or before. As I understand it (need to confirm again) analysis on fragments is missing or unreadable.
Not sure if the voluminous Warren Commission materials have been digitized. If I don’t have better things to do when I retire in the next 4 - 7 years (and I am sure you already know there are too many things to do), using word search techniques, those materials could be analyzed then interpreted in ways that only people with photographic memories might have done in the 1960s. For example, as noted in previous post, witnesses said Oswald’s (first) shot missed and hit the pavement. Warren did not address this. What does the raw data/reord say, what did Warren conclude, or did they ignore it completely?
Going from my memory cells, which under retirement I am happily turning off, or taking out with beer, I think the first shot hit a tree limb or the traffic lights. It ricocheted to the south side of the triple overpass, wounding slightly a person standing there. I do not know if that is in the Warren report or not. Shot 2 was the one that passed through Kennedy and into Connaly. Three was the headshot which left fragments on the inside of the windshield. Shot one taken almost straight down, with a ricochet, could not have left any fragments on the inside of the windshield. That is my humble opinion. Until I see facts with contradictins I am at this point. Enjoy retirement as it is truly enjoyable. Go Bearcats!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.