Skip to main content

New York Times covers this material in the paper today. Very high quality for CT.

Play the lecture video. At 18:15 of 20 minutes you get Zapruder's home movie with audio background, depicting the JFK assassination. Four rifle shots, not three. Kennedy's head driven backward with bone and blood sprayed to the left rear of the limousine. Motorcycle officer statements that match up.

First-rate forensic engineering is applied to clarify what is happening on the Zapruder video frames and a Dallas audio tape. The speaker in the video is Josiah “Tink” Thompson. Yale educated. Covered the Kennedy assassination for "Life" magazine in 1963. Knows how to think and how to value professional forensic engineering.

The video runs about 20 minutes. Not boring. And it gets really hot at that 18:15 mark. By then you are ready to see everything come together.
.
.  

NY Times has a story up today on this. They run a promo video on a film about Thompson's discoveries. NY Times is a day early, too.

What makes for a knock out punch is a synchronization of the Zapruder film with audio from a Dallas police Dictaphone belt. This gives four (4) distinct shots including echo analysis with two of the shots very close together.

Motorcycle officer testimony from 1963 gets new photographic support. There's organic debris blasted out of the limousine. We get new info on where the blast went. And it wasn't forward.

There is no call for unsupported CT. There's none of that here. Really.

But maybe it is important to know that damn near anything in America can be hidden. Covered up. America didn't have a Manning or a Snowden in the right place in 1963.  

Details and open questions below the muffin.

Here is the NY Times link:

-- www.nytimes.com/2013/11/21/opinion/morris-november-22-1963.html

The YouTube vid is better.

Thompson's got the four (4) assassination shots when he got the sync done for the Zapruder film and the audio track. You see it on the video toward the last section.

Takes a while to prepare you for what you're looking at. There's a lot here:

-- Trace the spray patterns on Frame #313 for bone and other fragments coming away from Kennedy's head.

-- Put away the earlier analysis saying Kennedy's head moved forward ("2.3 inches in 1/18th of a second.") That was incorrect -- a panning effect that was introduced when Zapruder jerked his camera.

-- Check the Dallas police audio tape to see if the interevent timings for rifle fire match up with the visual evidence in the Zapruder film's separate frames.

-- Present the results of echo analysis from that  audio tape -- an old Dictabelt -- to identify locations for rifle shots.

-- Consider other photographs of the site taken that morning as the assassination happened.

Thompson developed photographic evidence showing that two police officers on motorcycles riding on Kennedy's limo's "8" were hit with debris from the head shot. They had claimed it at the time, but were ignored.

Errol Morris has put Thompson's work into a film. "November 22, 1963." The video on YouTube has the core of what he's found, presented quickly.

And yes, personally, I never believed that the shooting pattern alleged to have been done by Oswald was plausible. You learn about getting off second shots from hunting as a kid. Your best shot is going to be the first shot; never, ever the third shot of such a rapid fire sequence.

What else had happened with assassinations ? Before Kennedy?

"Doves have come home to roost" over the 3-million piasters/$42000 paid to kill the Diem brothers ???

Why not? But that's a conjecture. Way above our pay grades. And for that, there's no new evidence. I await my new CT Overlords -- 9/11 amd 11/22 deserve special handling for schemes and wack-a-doodle takes on evidence.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  oy. (4+ / 0-)

    I wondered if there was a conspiracy myself until I had the opportunity to visit Dallas for another reason and stand on the actual spot, in the actual street. The space, I felt, was surprisingly tiny. I was expecting this wide-open street and it's really not. In fact I think my current driveway is longer. It is a really short block. I guess I expected bigger and wider in Dallas.

    Standing in that space, on the infamous "Grassy Knoll" in fact (where a man tried to sell his "The True Story" book, really!) I couldn't see how there was a second shooter. Oswald, and Oswald alone, did it.

    Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility (not an original but rather apt)

    by terrypinder on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 12:55:10 PM PST

    •  But ballistics prove that he could not have fired (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      waterstreet2013

      4 shots in succession that quickly. I don't know ballistics but I doubt that Oswald was a lone gunman. He doesn't seem to have been that smart for an operation like that.

      I just heard a Canadian reporter McNeil of the former McNeil/Lerher PBS news show. He was in the 7th vehicle in the motorcade, he heard 3 shots. He saw police and others run towards the grassy knoll. He believes in the one gunman theory but wonders why they ran there and why he followed them. It proves that even an eyewitness has doubts about what really happened. So much evidence was destroyed at the Naval autopsy, I don't think we will ever know.

      To thine ownself be true

      by Agathena on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 06:02:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Because there were only three shots (0+ / 0-)

        And Oswald wasn't that smart.  One more reason why any conspirator wouldn't have worked with someone as unreliable and mercurial as someone like him.  It doesn't take much smarts to get a rifle, aim it and shoot it.  If he'd been smart he would've found a means of escape which he obviously didn't plan out.

        Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

        by Sky Net on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 07:18:03 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  The audio is readily available. (0+ / 0-)

        Shot and echoes consistent with the surroundings and each other.

        The audio has also been matched to the Zapruder film.

        Overall, the technology for computer analysis of audio caught up with the CSI problem, here.

        Plus, the fourth shot produced spray patterns -- putting parts of JFK's head on the two officers riding motorcycles to the left and rear of the limousine.

        Of course those officers stopped their motorcycles and charged the hill on the other side of the limo.

        •  i'm going with the "there were only (0+ / 0-)

          3 shots" idea. The evidence for four is tenuous.

          Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility (not an original but rather apt)

          by terrypinder on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 04:33:37 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Not any more. (0+ / 0-)

            Watch the video, then revisit what you think.

            Advanced technology has a way of digging out new items. Here, the audio analysis got much, much better.

            •  it wasn't good enough for me. (0+ / 0-)

              i remain a skeptic.

              Dawkins is to atheism as Rand is to personal responsibility (not an original but rather apt)

              by terrypinder on Sat Nov 23, 2013 at 06:38:11 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You have not looked at the evidence. (0+ / 0-)

                The modern technology added echo analysis to the older Fourier based filtering technology.

                This is the advance that clarified the presence of four gun shot sounds. Four shots with four consistent echo patterns.

                The video in the Intro section presents this work.

                Supporters of the Lone Gunman theory are still quoting technical work from 1976-1979 and 1982. That's before computers got into the system.

                They also obsess with the question of whether Officer H. B. McLain was the motorcyclist with the open switch, the rider on the motorcycle with the radio that recorded the shots of the assassination.

                House Select Committee on Assassinations had the recording from Dallas police radio channel 1. But there was no way on earth at that time -- 1976-1978 -- to convert the recording to digital format and build a consistent CGI model for the events, echo characteristics, and power curves for what happened during the Kennedy assassination.

                Back in the 1970s such a project would have been new ground. Only a hand full of supercomputers existed, such as the CDC 7600. The Symbolics line of LISP simulation workstations didn't arrive until the mid-1980s. Echo analysis, like today, did not exist except for the Navy's singular "tongue in the ocean" system. That system had taken a decade to build.

                Now days ??? Finding four shots and four matching echo patterns from the Channel 1 recording uses the same technology that video games and movies use for sound effects -- running the programs on generic nothing-special computers.

  •  No wonder Caroline left for Japan at the (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    waterstreet2013, Catte Nappe

    earliest opportunity.

  •  I think the term is (5+ / 0-)

    commemoration, not celebration.  Unless you have a particular animus against President Kennedy.

    Saw recent documentary "JFK: Inside The Evidence" hosted by Bill Kurtis, which  posits that the bullet which struck Kennedy in the head (the third bullet) was actually accidentally shot by Secret Service agent George Hickey, Jr, normally a driver, in the follow car.  He was seen by a number of witnesses to stand up and pick up an automatic weapon, after the first shot which struck the pavement was heard.  When the vehicle sped forward, he pitched forward and accidentally fired.  This explains both the trajectory and the different kind of bullet.  It should be noted that nine Secret Service agents(including Hickey) had been out drinking until about 5 am.

    If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? When I am only for myself, then what am "I"? And if not now, when?

    by betorah on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 01:08:08 PM PST

  •  Extravaganza???? (4+ / 0-)

    I'm guessing you were either not alive on November 22, 1963 or you weren't compis.

    " My faith in the Constitution is whole; it is complete; it is total." Barbara Jordan, 1974

    by gchaucer2 on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 01:12:02 PM PST

  •  I learned my skepticism early (5+ / 0-)

    from watching the circus known as the  Warren Commission
    try to explain the events of 11/22/63.  They are still trying...

    ...and I am even more skeptical now.

    PS,  I hope you know enough to be wearing your flack jacket and helmet;  you are likely to soon see how fast 5 bars of mojo and TU status can disappear.  

    don't always believe what you think

    by claude on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 01:13:11 PM PST

  •  Dallas (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    waterstreet2013, Catte Nappe, 6412093

    This diary's not the most coherent and I can't even figure out if there's a conspiracy theory here, but a couple points.

    A recent analysis of the Dictabelt confirms three shots, not four.

    The second and third shots were markedly easier as the first was at a high angle due to the proximity of the limo to Oswald.  As the limo pulled away it was much easier to line up a shot.

    Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

    by Sky Net on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 01:14:30 PM PST

  •  watched the video (5+ / 0-)

    at the NYT link.

    I am recommending this diary because that video ought to be seen.

    don't always believe what you think

    by claude on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 01:32:57 PM PST

  •  Lets look at some angles we MUST deny... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    claude, waterstreet2013, worldlotus

    Consider how it would have played for the stability of the USA if any of these had been the case:

    1. FBI killed him. Think of the chaos that would have followed if it had been proving that the government overthrew its own president.

    2. Mafia killed him. Think of the chaos if what people saw as 'common thugs' proved to have the power to topple the 'leader of the free world'.

    3. The GOP killed him. If opposing political parties were offing each other's members - we'd land smack in the realm of one of the banana republics.

    4. His own family took him out. Ideas about American icons could not survive this notion.

    5. Cubans got him. We're supposed to smack the third world around - if they'd managed to do the opposite, notions of American supremacy would collapse.

    6. Soviets got him. Response would have been, "where mah nukes at" and none of us would be here today pondering this.

    7. Religious faction took him out. Violent Evangelicals had not made notable public inroads yet at the time - but imagine if they had and took down a president... We'd land smack into the middle of the Reformation again. I mention this only because if we do lose another president in the next 20 years, I will suspect this as the cause.

    8. Revenge killing for Marilyn Monroe? We as a nation could handle this one - but we would not have and still likely could not handle the lead in: the conspiracy theory that JFK had her taken out.

    9. Lone crazy gunman with delusions of belonging to some enemy faction. This one plays just fine... A lone gunman means the trail can stop and we don't have to ask questions about fundamental problems in our socio-political dynamic. You can attribute ANY cause to the gunman, because he's crazy. ALL you have to do... is make sure he doesn't live to tell his story in a sane way.

    So we kind of had to go with number 9... because any other theory we can come up with - is one we cannot afford to have found out as true.

    Everybody knows now that there is a problem with the line-gunman theory. What with it being 7 (I think?) hits from one bullet at multiple different angles...

    But this far on... no one cares enough to force a correction... and the nation can survive without having to answer an impossible question.

    It sucks, from a historical point of view. But I'd wager that for at least another 50 years, we as a nation will still have socio-political dynamics that would explode if whatever really happened ever comes out.

    OMG, like, gag them with a multi-colored spoon. Like, ya know.

    by Jyotai on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 01:35:09 PM PST

    •  Plus (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Nowhere Man

      There hasn't been any evidence that any of those groups had any involvement, whereas there's a boatload that Oswald took all three shots.  #9's the only one that makes sense.

      Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

      by Sky Net on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 01:45:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I thought... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        claude, waterstreet2013, worldlotus

        We had all kinds of stuff on different angles?

        But yes - all of those were conspiracies. My point wasn't to advocate any of them - but to show that if any of the various conspiracies we've heard over the years was true, at the time it would have led to sheer chaos. And even if one were found true this far out from the incident, it might still lead to major unrest.

        In other words - regardless of what actually happened, we cannot afford to have anything be true other than Oswald...

        Not until we have politics less built on stacking wineglasses and avoiding a strong breeze...

        Or at least enough distance that it no longer matters... like how its not relevant today that Lincoln was a founder of the Republican party, or like how its not relevant that Caesar was killed by his own political allies.

        OMG, like, gag them with a multi-colored spoon. Like, ya know.

        by Jyotai on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 02:22:55 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Or any friend of the Diems. (0+ / 0-)

      Kennedy had invited President Deim over. Gave him a ticket tape parade up Broadway in New York. There's a nice commemorative brass strip in the sidewalk.

      Then $42,000....

      The Kennedys made enemies. Some for no reason.

    •  sadly, I suspect the implosion (2+ / 0-)

      wouldn't happen anymore.  We would just accept it as further evidence to bolster our cynicism.  It would make no difference in my own life.  I doubt any revelation would surprise me,  other than to be surprised it got out.

      don't always believe what you think

      by claude on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 02:18:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  You omitted the CIA. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      waterstreet2013

      To thine ownself be true

      by Agathena on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 06:13:52 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  What's the fact he introduced that was wrong? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    waterstreet2013

    I got tossed off twice before he got there.

    "When dealing with terrorism, civil and human rights are not applicable." Egyptian military spokesman.

    by Paleo on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 02:27:32 PM PST

  •  Oh man (4+ / 0-)

    There is a good discussion on NPR, on a program called Open Source which was broadcast as part of a series called "We Knew JFK."  James Douglas discusses his book, "JFK and the Unspeakable."  The basic idea is that Kennedy was proving to be a president who had the courage to stand up to the military types and work towards reducing the WWII establishment to bring about world peace.  

    He doesn't seem to care who actually pulled the trigger, so much as that there was enough animosity against Kennedy to boil over into violence because of the direction he was going in.  

    He had been in the navy in the Pacific in WWII and had seen a lot of war and the way the military was.  He also was a very astute student of history and had really thought about the need for a leadership that could take the world in a different direction.  

    The premise of the book is that his courage and his intellect and the power of his popularity are what got him killed.

    Given JFK, MLK and RFK it seems a plausible way to think about this.  What I get from that is that we all need to have the courage to stand up to this in our own way and to create that world that JFK envisioned.   The particulars of ballistics don't really matter in that regard.

    hope that the idiots who have no constructive and creative solutions but only look to tear down will not win the day.

    by Stuart Heady on Thu Nov 21, 2013 at 02:33:04 PM PST

  •  I was 16 years old when President Kennedy was (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    waterstreet2013

    murdered.  I remember walking across the Abilene High School (Abilene, Texas) parking lot on my way to lunch, when a friend told me about the shooting.  Not too long after that, I saw a photograph in the local paper.  It was of a Dallas police detective holding a scoped 6.5mm Mannlicher Carcano rifle above his head.  The headline was something like "The Rifle That Killed Kennedy", or words to that effect.  Like many young Texans of the time, I hunted a lot, and I was proud of my knowledge of firearms, both military and civilian.  I knew about the Mannlicher Carcano.  It was a basic infantry weapon, and not a very good one at that.  I remember thinking at the time, there was no way on earth anyone could get off three aimed shots at a melon size moving target at such a range, all in around six seconds or so.  There was just no way anyone could work the action on that weapon and get off three aimed shots in that amount of time.  I believed that then, and I believe it now.  So, I also remember thinking: "They're lying to us."  It's been going on for fifty years.  They're still lying to us.

    Hony soit qui mal e pense!

    by bobwilk on Fri Nov 22, 2013 at 08:51:34 AM PST

    •  I had the same reaction back then. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      bobwilk

      Then you see that the first shot clean missed the limousine. Kinda panicky.

      The second shot from the School Repository hit Kennedy under the right collarbone -- mostly soft tissue.

      Then the third and fourth shots go off close together in time. One of them takes his head apart -- spraying the pair of mounted motorcycle officers behind and to the left side of the limo.

      Sounds like three shooters. The panicky one who missed twice. Plus two professional snipers, used to hitting moving targets. The first sniper hit Kennedy and Connolly, possibly from the roof of the School Repository. Then the second sniper hit Kennedy in the head from the front.

      When I was a kid I tried to replicate these shots, just moving from one fixed target to the next. Using a bolt action rifle, it's something out of the Olympics to get 3 shots off in the general area of the targets.

      You'll enjoy the video from the Intro section. Do the whole 20 minutes.

      •  I agree. The video synced with the film seems (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        waterstreet2013

        to make a case for at least triangulated fire by a three shooter team.  The very fact that the findings of the HSCA's findings were ignored by everyone, including the press, indicates that there was a cover up in place then, and it continues to date.  The whole thing still just pisses me off.  And, when you look at the whole picture of the sixties, the murders of the Kennedy brothers, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X, those four murders completely decimated the progressive movement in this country, and continues to effect it today.  In my opinion, that's when the music stopped.

        Hony soit qui mal e pense!

        by bobwilk on Sat Nov 23, 2013 at 12:22:37 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The networks did all they could to support (0+ / 0-)

          the Warren Commission "lone gunman" claim. But of course that was what J. Edgar Hoover had "decided" in the first hours after the assassination.

          Once a hoax is sold, it gets its own life.

          Friday morning the CBS early show had yet another overweight middle-age male with FBI credentials come on to tell Charlie Rose that "the overwhelming body of scientific evidence" supports the Lone Gunman theory.

          CBS would have anyone who looks at the Zapruder+audio video tagged as a nut. It's an amazing lie:

          "How could you believe your own eyes and ears and listen to those stupid motorcycle cops, when CBS is telling you just the opposite ?"

          And believe corporate media that FBI and NSA and CIA are to be trusted. That there's no back door between FBI and the large corporations.

          Believe that blackmailing politicians and judges is not the prime objective for this modernized Nixonian surveillance of America's ruling class.

          (Yeah, Nixon invented it. He had FBI tailing his presidential rivals looking for sex hijinks. They went all over the country and spent millions of dollars a year. Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson never did a lick of it.)

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site