How to convince a non-believer

[katisha]

How would you convince someone that JFK's murder was a conspiracy followed by a giant cover-up? Imagine this person is a bit like me a year ago: they know Kennedy was assassinated (well, dur! ); they know the official verdict is that Oswald did it alone; they know there are a lot of theories that go against that official verdict, but they've never been interested enough to look into it.What would you show them as evidence?I'd stick to official documents and other records, and leave out books, essays, TV interviews and films - both documentaries and entertainments such as Oliver Stone's film. I'm not saying there's no truth in any of these; of course there's been some compelling, well-argued research published in these formats, but to convince an intelligent, thoughtful person I'd prefer to rely on primary sources: documents from the Warren Commission, HSCA, ARRB and any other investigations; CIA, FBI, Government and police memos; medical and autopsy reports; contemporary newspaper articles, photos, films, recordings of phone conversations etc. I would also not get into criticising the assertions of people like Bugliosi and Posner - not that there's anything wrong with THAT, in other contexts; I just wouldn't use it for this particular exercise.Of course you guys don't have to stick to my limits. If you think a passage from a book, or an excerpt from a TV interview, for instance, would be just as convincing then bung it down, for sure. I'd start with (disclaimer – I’m doing these from memory, so any quotes may not be 100% accurate, but I hope I’ve captured the sense of the original):1. film - either movie frames or photgraphs - of Kennedy's head going back and to the left2. Nicholas Katzenbach's memo saying 'We must convince people that Oswald did it alone' (link; source Mary Ferrell Foundation website): http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archi ... Id=7568773. the recording of the phone conversation where LBJ says, in response to the other person (I think it was Senator Richard Russell)'s comment that he doesn't think Oswald did it alone, 'I don't either'I’ll look for others and post them here in the next few days, and also try to find those I’ve mentioned and provide links to them; at the moment I just want to get this down while it’s fresh in my mind and, I hope, spark some suggestions from the rest of you (if anyone's awake, that is. I've no idea what time it is in the US, Germany etc now).

[ThomZajac]

Excellent question!For years I've been trying to determine what would be the cleanest way to convince non-believers of both a conspiracy and a massive coverup. I recently came up with the answer, but up until now it has simply remained on my list of things to do. I will try to find the links later but here it is:Many if not all the Parkland Hospital Doctors, and some of the autopsy technicians at Bethesda are on you tube describing a massive exit wound in the rear of JFK's head. Put together, these testimonies would be incredibly powerful and absolutely convincing to all but the most stubborn.Additionally, collaborating youtube testimony from scores of eye witnesses who saw and/or heard something in the grassy knoll area (Holland, Bowers, Moorman, etc, etc etc) You could add the morticians affidavit as well. All youtube stuff (except maybe the mortician, but you can get that from Wim's site)That's it. Overwhelming and conclusive evidence that the president was shot at least once from the front and suffered a massive exit wound in the back of his head. And since a shot or shots hitting the president from the rear is a given, it absolutely follows that the president was killed as the result of a conspiracy. The fact that the government destroyed and altered evidence (failure to recognize the massive exit wound in the back of JFK's head could not have been an innocent mistake) is proof that a massive and powerful coverup was quickly put in place by conspirators in very high places.(No need to talk about his enemies, about the magic bullet, about Oswald, or any other of the multitude of revelant details that are not necessary to establish conspiracy.)Exit wounds in back of JFK's Head + shot(s) from front = conspiracy to kill the presidentExit wounds hidden by government= coverup conspiracy to coverup the conspiracy to kill the president.The Parkland doctor testimony is incredible powerful- irrefutable. I'll look for the links-And good luck! (I may try to make this presentation myself)

[katisha]

Very neat, Thom. Maybe we won't need as much documentation as I was thinking. I've seen those clips of the Parkland doctors, and as you say, they're very compelling. Do you know if they were taken at the time? I'm just thinking if they weren't spontaneous comments (and hand-gestures), made on the same day, as evidence they could be open to accusations of collusion, or suggestions of faulty memory etc - not that any such accusations would necessarily be true, but it might tend to reduce their value as absolute evidence. Anyway, I'll wait and see what you find.Didn't know about the mortician's affadavit; thanks for telling me - I'll have a look at it.

[ThomZajac]

katisha wrote:Very neat, Thom. Maybe we won't need as much documentation as I was thinking. I've seen those clips of the Parkland doctors, and as you say, they're very compelling. Do you know if they were taken at the time? I'm just thinking if they weren't spontaneous comments (and hand-gestures), made on the same day, as evidence they could be open to accusations of collusion, or suggestions of faulty memory etc - not that any such accusations would necessarily be true, but it might tend to reduce their value as absolute evidence. Anyway, I'll wait and see what you find.Didn't know about the mortician's affadavit; thanks for telling me - I'll have a look at it.Glad you like the idea (sorry for my sloppy typos). The doctor testimony will be attacked by the bad guys for a variety of reasons (not under oath, they were guessing etc), but open-minded people, in my opinion will be blown away, Not just one doctor- all of them!I don't know when I'll get to this, but I will....

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

I usually start with showing them the Zapruder film's headshot. Most of my friends who have half a brain recognize that back-and-to-the-left motion as being caused by a final shot from the front.I next tell them the official version of the path of the magic bullet. Actually, just telling them about the magic bullet's supposed path and where it was found, and its pristine condition (only rifling marks on it and no flattening of the nose) pretty much convinces them that the official story is BS. This is ALWAYS where I start when I'm talking to someone who doesn't know much about the JFK assassination.Then, they come back with more questions, and I encourage them to look up, or Google, or whatever, any information that they might be skeptical about.Then I warn them about disinformation people on forums. That's when I warn them about sites like McAdams and authors like Posner and guys like Dale Myers.

[katisha]

Yes, Pasquale, that's one I missed.I'd definitely show them a photo of the bullet and the description of the wounds it was supposed to have caused. I might have a rootle through the WC stuff and see if I can find them and post a link here.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

katisha wrote:Yes, Pasquale, that's one I missed.I'd definitely show them a photo of the bullet and the description of the wounds it was supposed to have caused. I might have a rootle through the WC stuff and see if I can find them and post a link here.I don't know of anybody I have shown the Zapruder film headshot to who didn't look at the headshot and didn't think it came from the right front...and I mean NOBODY. The last person I showed it to was a Republican Bush supporter who is a former Marine. He saw the headshot and immediately said something like "He was shot from the front!" Don't forget to tell them that the magic bullet supposedly just fell out of Conally's leg and was found in the hospital hallway! LOLHere's a picture of it. Just right-click and save it.

[ThomZajac]

The nearly pristine magic bullet is powerful evidence, no doubt about that. But in my opinion, it is not the best evidence, nor a good place to start. It requires a level of understanding that is not all that easy to grasp for those unfamiliar with many details of the assassination. I, of course, agree with the assertion that the single bullet theory is a sick fairy tale, but I do think the Parkland doctors testimonies are more directly to the point. As David Lifton so keenly has pointed out, the body is the best evidence. And in this case, the Parkland Hospital doctors descriptions of the fatal head wounds could not be more clear.Here are a few links (more to come)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksPOObPv ... h0-2Sthn9A

[katisha]

Thanks for the pic, Pasquale. It does look nice and clean and tidy, doesn't it? Interestingly, the Warren Report doesn't actually say that all the wounds were caused by the one bullet, although it comes bloody close to saying so: "Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President's throat also caused Governor Connally's wounds" (Chapter 1, Summary and Conclusions, p19)The bit I've bolded makes me laugh. Not necessary to any essential findings! When the whole premise of the report is that only 3 shots were fired, all by Oswald, one of which was the fatal shot; and there's independent evidence that another shot missed altogether (the James Tague one). This report is very carefully and cleverly written, I'll say that for it.However, that's just my speculation, not evidence from a primary source, so it doesn't count.

[katisha]

ThomZajac wrote:The nearly pristine magic bullet is powerful evidence, no doubt about that. But in my opinion, it is not the best evidence, nor a good place to start. It requires a level of understanding that is not all that easy to grasp for those unfamiliar with many details of the assassination. I, of course, agree with the assertion that the single bullet theory is a sick fairy tale, but I do think the Parkland doctors testimonies are more directly to the point. As David Lifton so keenly has pointed out, the body is the best evidence. And in this case, the Parkland Hospital doctors descriptions of the fatal head wounds could not be more clear.Here are a few links (more to come)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksPOObPv ... hn9AThanks Thom, those interviews with the Parkland doctors are great. They were part of what turned me into a believer, but this imaginary non-believer of mine is a bit of a cynic, and he won't accept them because they aren't contemporaneous. He's a stubborn git! He'll allow the head-point by Malcolm Killduff at 1330 on 22/11/63 (sorry, I must try to remember to do it in the American order - 11/22/63) http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/pointing_to_head.htm, and he'd accept recordings/films of the reports of wounds from the front that James Fetzer refers to as being 'widely broadcast on radio and TV that afternoon [of the assassination]' if we could play them for him, but as Fetzer said, they were 'quickly suppressed', so no primary source evidence there.Don't get me wrong, I'm not doubting Fetzer's word: I believe him without reservation. I'd just like to identify all the absolutely incontrovertible evidence from the time.Hm, I'm starting to sound like I'm trying to rustle up something in response to our friend Gary Mack's demand for 'hard evidence', but that's not why I started the thread, honest