behind_eyes schrieb:Analog zu den UFO Gläubigen die ähnlich argumentieren, Stand der Erkenntnis aber unlogisch ihrem Wahn verfallen sind.
Ist die Haag-Simulation logisch?
Ist es logisch, von Fingerabdrücken am Gewehr auszugehen, wenn du Beweismittelerhebung fragwürdig ist?
Kann man experimentell erhobene Daten verwenden, selbst wenn man weiß, dass die Experimente unsauber durchgeführt wurden?
Groucho schrieb:Aber 1963?Was hätte man dazumal für Erkenntnisse aus den Blutspritzern haben können, die man nicht von der Leiche Kennedys erfahren konnte?
behind_eyes schrieb:Exakt das meine ich. Genau das.
Schade, wie wenig Bildung hier herrscht.
Although research continued into blood spatter patterns in homicide cases, the watershed moment for using blood spatter evidence in American legal cases would not arrive until 1955, when Dr. Paul Kirk submitted an affidavit of his findings in the highly publicized case of the State of Ohio v. Samuel Sheppard. Kirk showed the position of the assailant and the victim, and his research revealed that the attacker struck the victim with his left hand. Significantly, Sheppard was right-handed [source: Eckert and James].
http://science.howstuffworks.com/bloodstain-pattern-analysis4.htm
Was uns zu der anormalen Fragmentspur bringt, die nicht nur mit der im Autopsiebericht beschriebenen nicht übereinstimt, sondern auch nicht mit dem Winkel aus dem sniper´s nest. Ein Stealth Helikopter aus Stroh muss es nicht unbedingt gewesen sein- vielleicht war einfach die fragmentspur falsch?
On the morning of 11/23, or the morning after the assassination, Custer was given some skull fragments that he had heard had arrived “from Dallas” the night before. However, these bones may not have been from Kennedy’s body, for Custer did not see them during the autopsy. He was told by Dr. Ebersole to tape some metallic fragments to these skull bones. These were then to be taken to a private room and X-rayed with the same machine, at the same distance, that he used the night before. He says, “I was told by Dr. Ebersole that they were to be taken to make measurements, to make a bust of President Kennedy… He gave me three or four different metal fragments, varying in size. And he asked me to tape them to the bones… As soon as he walked in, that’s the first thing he said. ‘I want these bone fragments X-rayed with metal fragments taped.’” The only witness to this procedure, according to Custer, was Dr. Ebersole, who had just returned from his visit to the White House. Ebersole had discussed the manufactured X-ray (X-ray No. 4) with the HSCA, and stated that it was created to measure magnification levels. This procedure is performed when a piece of metal is placed on a bone and an X-ray is taken from a specific distance: 72 inches. When it is performed correctly, no magnification of the metal will be seen. Asked about the possibility of the exposure being created for this reason, Custer stated, “But he knows to get no magnification – this is part of his board certification – everything has to be taken at 72 inches. Not 44 inches. And this was all taken at 44 inches that night, which causes magnification. This was supposed to be a radiologist that knew what he was taking about.” Also, according to the Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, the piece of metal to be used during this procedure needs to be of a standard known thickness and density (the journal recommends using a British ten pence coin, which matches these criteria) ,making the choice of random metal fragments very questionable. The exact purpose of these X-rays is unclear, but Custer’s testimony sheds serious doubt on the official explanation.
https://debunked.wordpress.com/2015/12/13/an-analysis-of-the-arrb-testimony-of-jerrol-custer/Siehe auch:
https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1-8mCXDxEdU1tSEtWW2jTGAv8LLTZql2Pk40bW_ojxhw/edit#slide=id.p1
Nemon schrieb:Man muss immer auch einräumen, dass alle unmittelbar Anwesenden noch traumatisiert waren, was Kurzschlussreaktionen triggern kann.
LBJ war jedenfalls nicht traumatisiert. Siehe seine Iniative bei der Vereidigung. Emery Roberts auch nicht, der hat in Love Field und während der Schüsse JFKs Leibwächter zurückgepfiffen. Außerdem war er nicht sonderlich traumatisiert:
Although Agent Roberts admitted recognizing "Oswald's" first shot as a rifle blast, 27 as the Altgens photo confirms, he made a mysterious transmission via radio microphone that is not accounted for in his reports or in the official record. 28 Instead of offering a shout of alarm, alert, or orders to his agents to do something that their own initiative lacked for some reason, ie., protective action, he did nothing to help the wounded President. Roberts' recall of Agent Ready is well documented, 29 although we have...
Cover-up number four:
The alleged speed of the limousine and the alleged distance between the two cars (9-11 mph and five feet in reality, not the 20-25 mph and 20-25 feet stated in both SAs Roberts and Agent Ready's reports) was used as the pretext for the recall of Ready. 30 Taking everything cited to the point into account, there is still another factor that has escaped virtually everyone, and this "factor" came about quite accidentally. In Groden and Livingstone's High Treason , (pages 16 and 487 of the Berkley edition, respectively), it was noted that "Emory Roberts ordered the agents not to move," which I took to be an unintended overstatement at the time. So, I decided to read the passage to Sam Kinney who told me, "Exactly right, and I'm involved in that, too!" Besides the Love Field recall of Agent Rybka and Dealey Plaza recall of Ready, Roberts also immobilized the other agents at a critical juncture in the shooting, causing a non- JFK agent (Clint Hill) to react too late to do anything but cover the corpse of the President. 31 I believe aides Ken O'Donnell and Dave Powers best summed up the situation when they wrote:
"Roberts, one of President Kennedy's agents...had decided to switch to Johnson as soon as Kennedy was shot" (emphasis added. 32 In addition, four other authors have noted Agent Roberts' "switch of allegiance," including Chief Curry! 33 Once at Parkland Hospital, SA Robert totally usurped his superior, number three man Roy Kellerman (on his first trip on his own for the first-time vacationing Gerry Behn, leaving Floyd Boring in charge of the Texas trip back in Washington, DC) 34; Emory ordered Kellerman's agents around and confided in Rufus Youngblood, the soon-to-be SAIC, replacing the absent Behn (just as ASAIC Youngblood replaced SAIC Stu Knight in Dallas, and Henry Fowler re-placed the absent Treasury Secretary C. Douglas Dillon. For his part, Youngblood was to become the SAIC of the Vice-Presidential Detail on November 25,1963, a move planned before Dallas, but he rose much higher after Dallas). What William Manchester reports as having occurred at Parkland on page 170 of his book makes one both sick and repulsed: "Powers and O'Donnell bounded toward the Lincoln. Powers heard Emory Roberts shouting at him to stop but disregarded him; a second might save Kennedy's life [Dave, too bad you weren't on the running board of the follow-up car...!]...Emory Roberts brushed past O'Donnell, determined to make sure that Kennedy was dead. 'Get up,' he said to Jacqueline Kennedy. there was no reply. She was crooning faintly. From his side Roberts could see the President's face, so he lifted her elbow for a close look. He dropped it. To Kellerman, his superior, he said tersely, 'You stay with Kennedy. I'm gong to Johnson.'" (Emphasis added) 35
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/palamara/roberts.htmlLBJ und seine Kumpels waren auch schwer traumatisiert:
Lyndon Johnson “had been lobbying his bereaved cabin mates one by one,” writes Jeff Shesol in his book Mutual Contempt, “forcing a consensus that the plane should not leave the ground before the transition of power was properly-constitutionally-confirmed.” Whatever his aims were in assuring that presidential continuity be achieved swiftly and legitimately, Johnson’s decision to seek the guidance of the nation’s Attorney General, who at this moment in time was above all a freshly grieving brother, was consistent with behavior that Godfrey McHugh (Air Force Aide to President Kennedy, who had once dated Jackie Bouvier) found “obscene”.
“A lot of people think I should be sworn in right away,” Johnson urged when he got through to Bobby.
“Do you have any objection to that?” He then tactlessly barraged the slain president’s sibling with very specific legal, procedural questions pertaining to taking the oath of office, forcing Bobby to consult his Deputy Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach who was “absolutely stunned” by Johnson’s crass requests.
www.historyisnowmagazine.com/blog/2015/2/22/let-them-see-what-theyve-done-the-kennedys-and-the-swearing-in-of-lyndon-b-johnson#.XUcAYfZuI2w=
Africanus schrieb:Ich habe allerdings auch einen Umstand erwähnt, der erklärt, warum die Austrittswunde im Hals kleiner gewesen sein kann als die Eintrittswunde im Rücken. Auch darauf gehst Du nicht ein.
bredulino schrieb:Schade, wie wenig Bildung hier herrscht.
Aniara schrieb:Experten,
NightSpider schrieb:Finde es mittlerweile argumentativ ein Akt der Hilfslosigkeit wenn man in einer Diskussion ständig Mitdiskutanten die einfach nicht alles was sie von Medien und ofiziellen Stellen vorgelegt bekommen kritisch hinterfragen als Vtler zu beleidigen.
dawnwatchers schrieb:Bezüglich des Paperbag bzw Papiertüte von Oswald gibt hier dazu eine Erklärung von John Mcadmas Website http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/bag.htm (Archiv-Version vom 07.08.2019)
