ABC's 2 hour special on JFK, spectacular disinformation Options

[A. Canuck]

ABC's simulation: spectacular disinformation

Jim Fetzer (Reader Weekly 6 November 2003, p. 18)

ABC has announced a simulation of the death of President John F. Kennedy will be
broadcast as part of a two-hour special on Thursday, 20 November 2003. The study
supports the official Warren Commission conclusion that Lee Oswald acted alone.
According to one release, Dale Myers, an award-winning animator, has spent the past
decade creating a computer-generated reconstruction of the assassination based upon
maps, blueprints, physical measurements, more than 500 photographs, the Zapruder film,
and the official autopsy report.
The program will be narrated by Peter Jennings. “There has been so much innuendo and
presumption in the conspiracy theories that, on this 40th anniversary of the President's
murder, the subject cries out for review”, said Jennings. According to the program's
executive producer, Tom Yellin, “It leaves no room for doubt!” He calls the results of
ABC's study “enormously powerful. It's irrefutable.” Yellin's declarations, however,
leave some room for doubt and raise the suspicion that this broadcast may actually be an
exercise in disinformation on a spectacular scale.
Even in pure mathematics, proofs are only irrefutable relative to an assumed set of
assumptions. That the interior angles of a triangle equal 180 degrees, for example, is true
in plane geometry but not in spherical or in hyperbolic. That this program, which
vindicates The Warren Report (1964), is not "irrefutable" is easy to demonstrate. There
were at least two shots from the front—one of which hit Jack's neck, the other his right
temple—and a shot from behind his his back about 5 ½ inches below the collar.
If there were shooters in front and the "magic bullet" theory—which assumes that the
shot to the back hit at the base of the back of his neck—is false, The Warren Report is not
only "refutable" but has actually been "refuted"! Even Gerald Ford admitted that
he had had the description of the wound to the back changed to "the base of the back of
the neck", which otherwise destroyed the "magic bullet" theory before it was launched.
And David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D., has taken a CAT scan of a patient with neck and
chest dimensions similar to those of President Kennedy and has demonstrated that no
bullet could have passed through the neck without hitting any bony structures, as the
“magic bullet” theory requires. So the "magic bullet" theory is not only false but provably
false and not even anatomically possible—which not only refutes The Warren Report
(1964) but also The House Select Committee on Assassinations Report (1979) and Gerald
Posner's Case Closed (1963), all of which take the "magic bullet" for granted.
So what's going on here? GI/GO, "garbage in/garbage out", is an axiom of computer
science. A phony "computer reconstruction" appears as a diagram in Case Closed, but
data about the President's position, the location of the limousine and his wounds' exact
properties are not provided. Indeed, that kind of information even in grossly inaccurate
forms is not to be found in the pages of this book. Shots to the throat and to the right
temple from in front were widely reported on radio and television that day. Studies now
published in Assassination Science and in Murder in Dealey Plaza have shown that those
reports were correct.
Posner, like the HSCA before him, represents trajectories by using "cones". So where are
the computer reconstruction "cones" for these shots? If this is indeed a Posnerite
reconstruction, then where is the data on which the reconstruction is allegedly based?
Such a reconstruction has to assume that the Zapruder film is authentic, that the autopsy
report is correct, and all the rest—hook, line, and sinker.
Any computer reconstruction must be based upon assumptions and data. What data did
Dale Myers assume about the location of the limousine, the position of the President's
body, and the trajectories based upon the wounds? The limo's location is clearly up for
grabs, especially because of uncertainty about when shots were even fired. So when were
the shots fired, according to Myers? This is even separate from the possibility that the
limo was some 30-40 feet further down Elm Street, which is discussed in The Great
Zapruder Film Hoax (2003).
Moreover, Stewart Galano r, Cover-Up (1998), has juxtaposed Warren Commission
drawings of the trajectory with the position of the President's head in frame 312 of the
film, which the government contends was the last frame before the fatal head shot. When
it is properly oriented, however, the trajectory has a slightly upward direction, which,
given the slop of Elm Street, appears to be consistent with a shot from the Dal-Tex
Building but not from the Book Depository.
And does anyone think the massive, messy, wound to the head allowed any precise
measurements about the trajectory? Without them, there can be no calculation of any
trajectory and no foundation for simulation. So the government's own evidence
contradicts the government's own official findings—and provides no foundation for a
“computer reconstruction” of the assassination.
Study the autopsy report, which may be found in Assassination Science, Appendix F, and
tell me where you find the kind of data that would be required for an "irrefutable
computer reconstruction"? It is not there. And if it is not there, it does not exist. The
fellow who drew the diagrams—H. Rydberg—was not even allowed to view the body. So
his drawings showed whatever he was instructed to draw. There is no basis here for the
kind of data an accurate comp uterized reconstruction would require.
What we know now disproves the “magic bullet” theory on many different grounds.
Consider: JFK's jacket shows a bullet hole about 5 ½ inches below the collar. His shirt
also shows a bullet hole about 5 ½ inches below the collar. Autopsy pathologist J.
Thornton Boswell diagrammed a wound about 5 ½ inches below the collar—a diagram
verified by the President's personal physician. And FBI Agent James Sibert, who
observed the autopsy on behalf of J. Edgar Hoover, its Director, shows the wound to the
back well below the wound to the throat.
The President's personal physician, moreover, identified a wound at the same location in
his death certificate. The mortician who prepared the body for burial also describes it.
And reenactment photographs show the President's stand- in with a large, circular patch
about 5 ½ inches below his collar. And The New York Times (3 July 1997) reported that
Gerald Ford had acknowledged having the description of the wound moved upward from
“the uppermost back” (which is already an exaggeration) to “the base of the back of the
neck”.
If the shot to the back hit about 5 /12 inches below the collar, as all of this evidence
implies, then it did not hit at the base of the back of the neck. If it did not hit at the base
of the back of the neck, then the "magic bullet" theory is false. If the "magic bullet"
theory is false, then the wound to the throat and wounds to Texas Governor John
Connally have to be explained on the basis of other shots and other shooters.
Other shots and other shooters, in turn, imply a conspiracy to kill the President. That
means every study based upon it—including The Warren Report, The HSCA Report,
Case Closed, and ABC's simulations—are inconsistent with the evidence and cannot be
sustained. There was no magic bullet. Which means there is no foundation for ABC's
computer simulation.These points reflect the obvious. Any computerized reconstruction must be based upon a
reconstruction. The foundation for this fantasy is taking The Warren Report itself as the
basis for this simulation. It then becomes painfully apparent why this computerized
simulation matches The Warren Report : it takes The Warren Report for granted!
Yet The Warren Report suffers from the problems identified above, which introduce
outright falsehoods and uncertainties that are not even measurable in their magnitude.
GI/GO is the right attitude to adopt about this simulation. ABC has begged the question
by taking for granted the conclusion to its own study. Coming soon on network TV.
_______________________________
Jim Fetzer, a professor of philosophy, is the editor of Assassination Science (1998),
Murder in Dealey Plaza (2000), and The Great Zapruder Film Hoax (2003). He has
made more than 250 radio talk shows appearances discussing the death of JFK.

[PaineInTheArse]

Sheesh, don't get me started!

I bet they do not mention the acoustic proof that at least 4 shots were fired.

[underbear1]

ABC has already proven how credible they are on recent history,(ie. Matthew Shepard Hate Crime.) They lost me as a viewer on that 20/20 special, so it
hardly matters what they air, I won't be watching it.

[A. Canuck]

http://assassinationresearch.com/articles/lonenutter.html

Check out the above site. It's got photos of JFK's jacket and shirt and the autopsy drawings which each show a hole 5 inches below the neck line. Oswald was 6 stories up and about 270 feet away. Kennedy would have to have been just about standing on his head for that bullet to have gone upwards!! All people have to do is think about it. How the hell is that shot possible! The slope of the street wasn't nearly that much.

[CrowNotAngelGRL]

What's with these neocons trying to rewrite history? I wish we could unlock those documents now. <_<

Sheesh, don't get me started!

I bet they do not mention the acoustic proof that at least 4 shots were fired.

[graham4anything]

Just a note-isn't this article something that happened 11/20/2003?
Over a year ago? Not recent?

No excuse for ABC after the Matthew Shepard crap...and they say
Disney(ABC owner)is liberal...ha ha ha

[CrowNotAngelGRL]

The pro-Bushie's say all the media is liberal and Fox is fair and balanced.

Just a note-isn't this article something that happened 11/20/2003?
Over a year ago? Not recent?

No excuse for ABC after the Matthew Shepard crap...and they say
Disney(ABC owner)is liberal...ha ha ha

[A. Canuck]

It was from 2003 but some people reading this site might have seen it. It's a good criticism of the show. ABC replayed it again last month and it is disinformation. People who have only seen this show will be mislead. A person is just supposed to take the word of the show that the computer animation is accurate. Just because the person presenting the computer analysis said he had been analyzing this for 10 years doesn't mean a thing. Some JFK experts have been analyzing the cover-up and the single-bullet theory for 30 years. They agree it was a cover-up and a conspiracy.

[CrowNotAngelGRL]

It's just like that video game. "We just want to teach history." Yeah, right. And I'm Santa Claus.

It was from 2003 but some people reading this site might have seen it. It's a good criticism of the show. ABC replayed it again last month and it is disinformation. People who have only seen this show will be mislead. A person is just supposed to take the word of the show that the computer animation is accurate. Just because the person presenting the computer analysis said he had been analyzing this for 10 years doesn't mean a thing. Some JFK experts have been analyzing the cover-up and the single-bullet theory for 30 years. They agree it was a cover-up and a conspiracy.

[PaineInTheArse]

Some JFK experts have been analyzing the cover-up and the single-bullet theory for 30 years. They agree it was a cover-up and a conspiracy.

And we all know who invented the SBT???? Arlan Spector :o

[vitw]

With an amateurishly botched autopsy, a laughable attempt at security at the time of the assasination, a hopelessly ineffective reaction to events, and the Warren Report itself (silly flawed design to prove a preconcieved conclusion rather than gather facts), it's no wonder conspiracy theories still flourish.
If the assassination demonstrates one thing it's that highly paid professionals involved with government agencies can, and do demonstrate the highest levels of incompetence. And it's even worse today.

[A. Canuck]

There's been about a 1000 books written on JFK and Nov. 22 and they can't all be wrong. A lot of conspiracy theories are wrong, but it doesn't mean they all are. That's what happens when there's freedom of speech. Everyone gets to express their view. If the view is based on facts it will survive. If it isn't it will get destroyed by the facts.
People have tried to confuse and complicate the issue by misrepresenting the facts. Then they force people to search and find out for themselves what is real and what isn't. That's what makes it complicated.
A lot of people don't believe that the government would cover something like this up. They think government officials would never lie! People need to know the facts. They need to know that their government lied to them because they will do it again, and again. What kind of country can survive when their people are being lied to constantly by their government. That's why the U.S. is going downhill at the moment. The lies are destroying it from the inside. Most media won't do the tough stories. They don't want to hurt their careers. People need to stop this.

[graham4anything]

Like the phony stuff about 9-11 "they" shoved down our throats, the more "they"
say we are nuts and conspiracy theorists, the more likely I know we are correct.

There are those on the other side that say Al Gore lost in 2000 too, and we know they are lying there...


Bush=Conspiracy 50 years and counting of creating events and then saying you are nuts for beliving things didn't happen the way that we were told

[Dogday]

Someone passed out the Koolaid at ABC. Why are they spoon feeding us this junk?

[CrowNotAngelGRL]

LOL government people not lying? That's a new one on me. People today still think everything is fine and dandy and the government is doing a great job. LOL.

There's been about a 1000 books written on JFK and Nov. 22 and they can't all be wrong. A lot of conspiracy theories are wrong, but it doesn't mean they all are. That's what happens when there's freedom of speech. Everyone gets to express their view. If the view is based on facts it will survive. If it isn't it will get destroyed by the facts.
  People have tried to confuse and complicate the issue by misrepresenting the facts. Then they force people to search and find out for themselves what is real and what isn't. That's what makes it complicated.
  A lot of people don't believe that the government would cover something like this up. They think government officials would never lie! People need to know the facts. They need to know that their government lied to them because they will do it again, and again. What kind of country can survive when their people are being lied to constantly by their government. That's why the U.S. is going downhill at the moment. The lies are destroying it from the inside. Most media won't do the tough stories. They don't want to hurt their careers. People need to stop this.

[Magmak1]

Saw this ABC show when it originally aired.... Immediately fired off an angry e-mail to ABC for doing a huge disservice to the American public; said I no longer considered them a credible source of information. I am in the mid-50's, was a teen-ager when the "event" went down. Have read (or seen) everything of a major nature published (or broadcast) on this and related events. Could tell early on the ABC approach was pure hogwash. The entire history of the JFK assasination (and related events) is all a very fascinating story, and should be aired in its entirety every November until we finally get the message.

[A. Canuck]

I recently came across a website that uses computer animation to attempt to prove that JFK's head moved forward just before the fatal shot. It's meant to prove that Oswald was the lone shooter. This animation might as well be a cartoon, because it's totally inaccurate.
They only show a close up of JFK in the car, but the truth is that everyone in the car moved forward at that exact time. A researcher on the recent C-SPAN panel discussion showed the view of everyone in the car and I could clearly see that they all moved slightly forward at that time.
An analysis of the car speed showed that the driver, for whatever reason, put on the brakes slightly at that moment. It's no wonder why people are confused.
If Jennings were a real reporter he would have examined the computer evidence of Tom Wilson, who was seen in "The Men Who Killed Kennedy" series on A&E. He worked for U.S. Steel for about 20 years and developed a computer program to analyze steel and identify imperfections that the human eye can't see, as the human eye is much more limited than a computer. He analyzed the governments' official autopsy photos and proved that they were faked. A person can clearly see the difference between what the photos looked like and what the computer saw when it analyzed the photos. It showed where the photos were altered. If a person looks at the Zapruder film you can see that there's no way that those photos could have been real. They've been totally altered to make it look like a shot from behind.
Just like a prosecutor doesn't want to admit that he locked the wrong person up for 20 years, the government doesn't want to admit that they covered up and then lied to keep it covered up. Most of the media would rather take the easy way out and just say everything is a wild conspiracy theory, rather than researching it for themselves. They are doing nothing but helping themselves and their own careers.

[Captain America]

Peter Jennings is a lying SOB. Anyone with half a brain can tell you that JFK wasn't shot from behind when he was hit in the head. Watch the film of the assassination, and you'll see Kennedy lurch violently back onto his seat, after the head shot. If he was shot from behind with a high powered rifle, he would have been motivated forward.