THE DECEMBER 9, 1963, FBI REPORT (OFFICIALLY KNOWN AS "INVESTIGATION
OF ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY"):
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10402
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=327195
====================================================
While looking at some assassination-related documents at the excellent
Mary Ferrell website at http://MaryFerrell.org, I started reading
through
the original FBI Report (Warren Commission Document #1 [CD 1]; linked
above at the top of this post), which is the Federal Bureau of >Investigation's initial 5-volume report on the JFK assassination,
issued on December 9, 1963, just 17 days after the President's murder
in Dallas, Texas.
The 400-page original FBI Report contains quite a bit of detail on the >background and the early life of President Kennedy's assassin, Lee
Harvey Oswald, which is information that was obtained relatively
quickly by J. Edgar Hoover's Bureau, with this information then
written up in the FBI's December Report in a very reader-friendly
style.
Begging the question, of course...
Overall, in my opinion, the FBI's December 1963 Report is a good
overview (or "Summary", as it's referred to at the Ferrell website) of
the tragic events that transpired in Dallas on November 22, 1963.
Except, of course, that you don't believe it.
But Mr. Hoover's original Report is certainly not without a few
(pretty large) mistakes, such as when the FBI reached the erroneous >conclusion (revealed on Page 1 of its Report) that each of the three
shots fired by Lee Harvey Oswald struck one of the two victims seated
in the Presidential limousine (JFK and Governor John Connally of
Texas).
This is supported ironically by the closest eyewitness looking
directly at the victims from outside the limo.
Von Penis simply asserts what he cannot prove. He's simply begging
the question.
This scenario of having all three shots striking a victim in the car
was undoubtedly fueled mainly by the report filed by two of the FBI's
agents who were present at President Kennedy's autopsy in Bethesda,
Maryland (James Sibert and Francis O'Neill), a report which stated
that the bullet that entered JFK's upper back "did not exit" the body.
Sheer speculation on your part...
I note for the record that you didn't bother to list other evidence
supporting their conclusions... such as Chaney.
This determination reached by the two FBI agents, however, was found
to be false via the revised autopsy report signed by all three of
JFK's autopsy physicians (which was an autopsy report that the FBI
apparently never bothered to read at all):
"The missile contused the strap muscles of the right side of the
neck, damaged the trachea and made its exit through the anterior
surface of the neck. As far as can be ascertained this missile struck
no bony structures in its path through the body." -- EXCERPT FROM JOHN
F. KENNEDY'S OFFICIAL NOVEMBER 1963 AUTOPSY REPORT
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0281b.htm
You're simply begging the question. Any honest person can EQUALLY say
that the determination reached by the WCR was found to be false by the
FBI's investigation.
The FBI, in its Assassination Report of December 1963, decided to rely
on the Sibert/O'Neill version of events regarding the President's back
wound, rather than the updated/revised autopsy report which was signed
by Drs. Humes, Boswell, and Finck (i.e., the three people at Bethesda
who actually performed the post-mortem exam on the late President).
Another speculation that you've simply asserted as the truth - yet you
can't support it.
This same reliance on the early incorrect information about a bullet
not transiting the back and neck of JFK is also evident in another
blatant error made by the FBI concerning which stretcher the >Mannlicher-Carcano bullet was discovered on, which is an error that
can be found on Page 18 of the FBI Report:
Again, you merely speculate that the earlier information was
incorrect, rather than the later information.
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10402&relPageId=25
But if the FBI had investigated further,
Again, posting your opinion as fact... you're pretending that the FBI
didn't already have *ALL* the relevant information.
You **KNOW FOR A FACT** that there's contradictory information, and
you're simply ignoring it.
it would have been able to
easily verify the fact that the "stretcher bullet" (which was to later
be labeled by the Warren Commission as "CE399") could not have
possibly come from President Kennedy's hospital stretcher, since the >President's stretcher was never located in the area of Parkland
Hospital where the bullet was found by hospital employee Darrell
Tomlinson prior to 2:00 PM CST on 11/22/63.
The Warren Commission probed further and deeper into the murder of the >President and the wounding of Governor Connally throughout the year
1964, with the Commission's investigation, of course, being able to
correct the initial mistakes made by the FBI.
The Commission's "investigation" was almost COMPLETELY dependent on
the FBI's investigation.
You are, again, merely begging the question.
In Vincent Bugliosi's comprehensive
So "comprehensive" in fact, that although he showed knowledge of
critical questions about this case, he absolutely REFUSED to address
them.
https://groups.google.com/g/alt.conspiracy.jfk/c/UQQLevakWvc/m/hAArrn1z5o0J
2007 book "Reclaiming History: The
Assassination Of President John F. Kennedy", Bugliosi makes the
following comments about the FBI's "All Shots Hit Somebody" mistake
that surfaces not only in the original FBI Report of 12/9/63, but also
in the FBI's 99-page "Supplemental Report" on the assassination, dated >January 13, 1964 (which can be located in "Commission Document 107"):
No-one is interested in his unsupported comments...
--------
"{The} FBI at first thought that three separate bullets caused
the wounds: Though J. Edgar Hoover gave a good explanation in the
statement he issued on November 26, 1966, for the error made in the
FBI’s original report of December 9, 1963, that suggested Connally
must have been hit by a separate bullet,
I think I'll label this a lie without even looking it up.
Von Penis just asserted that Hoover admitted an error. And did so in
print.
Naturally, Von Penis didn't cite it.
the FBI’s supplementary
report of January 13, 1964, made the same error, only stating it
explicitly, not by implication, when it said, “Medical examination of
the President’s body had revealed that the bullet which entered his
back had penetrated to a distance of less than a finger length” (CD
107, p.2, January 13, 1964).
What's the error? This is indeed what the medical examination of
JFK's body ACTUALLY SHOWED.
"In other words, that bullet could not have gone on to hit
Connally. The only explanation for this error being repeated by the
FBI in its supplementary report is that whoever prepared the report
failed to completely read, or read at all, the autopsy report, which
had been received by the FBI at the time of this second report and
contained the correct information that the bullet which entered the >president’s back had, in fact, exited in the front of his throat (CE
387, 16 H 981).
Or, they DID read it, and made a judgment on the conflicting evidence
to come to a conclusion.
Von Penis keeps putting forth his biased opinion as fact, yet can't
cite for it.
"It should be noted that by the time of the January 13, 1964,
report, the FBI lab had examined the president’s clothing
Notice that Von Penis lied here.
He knows full well that the prosectors were DENIED permission to
examine the clothing.
Yet he omitted this fact.
and
discovered what appeared, Hoover said, to be “an exit hole for a
projectile” in the FRONT of the shirt “one inch below the collar
button,” and this finding, in fact, WAS put into the January 13 report
to rebut what the autopsy surgeons had orally said on the night of the >assassination and to clarify what happened (November 25, 1966,
Prepared statement of J. Edgar Hoover, New York Times, November 26,
1966, pp.1, 25; CD 107, p.2).
Again, simply begging the question.
"So the January 13, 1964, supplementary report is itself
internally inconsistent. A further indication that the January 13
report merely repeats, without reflection, the essence of the December
9, 1963, FBI report is that the January 13 report did not concern
itself with the autopsy.
"In its sixty-seven pages {not counting "Part 3" of the Report,
which was devoted solely to "Supplemental Exhibits"}, the reference to
the “medical examination” revealing that the bullet penetrated to a
distance of less than a finger length is one of only two sentences
making reference to the autopsy (CD 107, pp.2–3, January 13, 1964)."
-- VINCENT BUGLIOSI; PAGE 298 OF "RECLAIMING HISTORY" ENDNOTES (c.
2007)
CD 107: >http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10507&relPageId=2
--------
Many JFK assassination researchers might find the original FBI Report
a very interesting document to look through, as I did.
I always applaud believers who actually go and read primary material
on this case.
And laugh when they then lie about it...
As mentioned
earlier (and despite the few errors that exist in the Report), the
December 1963 FBI Report reveals a lot of detailed research
surrounding the assassination and information about President
Kennedy's murderer, with this research being performed fairly quickly
by a (no doubt) large number of FBI agents.
Constant and non-stop speculation...
The FBI Report also contains several intriguing photographic exhibits
as well, with one such very interesting exhibit appearing on Page 14
of Volume 2 of the Report. It's a picture of Oswald's disassembled >Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, placed alongside the brown paper bag which
was found under the assassin's window in the Book Depository.
As can easily be seen in this FBI exhibit, the lengthiest section of
Oswald's rifle, when broken down into pieces, certainly did not exceed
the length of the handmade paper sack found in the Sniper's Nest:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=327309
Von Penis won't tell you how *MANY* pieces the broken down rifle
consists of.
Nor can he explain the complete lack of scratches in the wooden stock
from the barrel & chamber assembly.
And of course, Von Penis is again begging the question.
The exact same black-and-white photo linked above also appears in the
32-page photo section of Vince Bugliosi's book "Reclaiming History".
While reading Mr. Bugliosi's outstanding book on the assassination,
If it's so "outstanding" - one wonders why you keep running away from
all of the refutations of that book I've been posting?
I had asked myself, "I wonder where Vince got that picture?", because I
don't recall having ever seen it prior to seeing it in VB's book. But
now I know where he got it -- via "CD 1" [Commission Document #1,
Volume 2, Page 14].*
Silly.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)