Discovery Channel is pure BS when it comes to JFK

[Bob]

There have been a lot of comments or posts here in the past about the obvious lies that the Discovery Channel's specials portray about the JFK assassination over the last few years. I just wanted to give this subject it's own thread. Anyone that has ever seen a "special" about the JFK assassination on Discovery, and has good knowledge about the murder, know that the productions are based on bullshit. Jim Marrs and Robert Groden both spoke of this among other things recently on Alex Jones...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UydIdgo1SK4 (part one of three)We always see the same bad actors in these "specials". Gerald Posner, Dale Myers and the infamous Gary Mack. These "specials" never include guests (REAL JFK assassination experts) like Marrs, Groden or Wim to contest their findings. Marrs for example said the the actual plat map of Dealey Plaza was not used by the Warren Commission to construct their "magic bullet theory", or for that matter any of the lies that Myers uses in his "reenactments". Here is just one example of how much BS that Discovery tries to slip by viewers...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hgec6oCd ... atedBottom line, the Discovery Channel and their JFK assassination specials are just like the "library" at Mack's 6th floor museum at the TSBD. There are NEVER any contrary opinions. Why is that Discovery? What is that Gary?

[ChristophMessner]

Bob wrote: Bottom line, the Discovery Channel and their JFK assassination specials are just like the "library" at Mack's 6th floor museum at the TSBD. There are NEVER any contrary opinions. Why is that Discovery? What is that Gary? Therefore it is necessary to conquer their activity with at least the same counter-activity.

[Bob]

Good point Chris, but the MSM is bought and paid for by disinformation experts that lie for a living and the REAL truth will never get out that way. People like Alex Jones and sites like Wim's are all we have right now. Air America radio isn't bad either, but that is very rare in the MSM, with people like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Bill O' Reilly shouting down any one who disagrees with them and their bought off and rabid views on their radio and TV shows.Discovery Channel and the History Channel were good when they first got started, but at least in terms of the JFK assassination stuff as of late, they went to the dark (disinformation) side.

[Pasquale DiFabrizio]

I have to go along with you, Bob and Chris. When I first saw the documentary where they shot a bullet through two fake human torsos, for example, I remember thinking two things. I remember thinking that I saw the bullet for only a split second and it was way more deformed than the magic bullet. Then I remember thinking that that was only HALF of the job that the magic bullet supposedly did, as the magic bullet supposedly traversed two human torsos AND a human wrist and THEN into the left thigh of Conally. I think that was one of the Discovery Channel documentaries, but it might have been History channel...wait...I think it WAS Discovery because I keep thinking that Mack was in that one too.The only thing that has been pointed out to me repeatedly is some bogus test where a similar bullet was shot through multiple inches of wood that came out in "pristine" condition. I know it's bull as nobody can duplicate those supposed tests in real time at all...not even the FBI or military shooters. Not even the Warren Commission could duplicate it, and there it was...on Discovery and/or History Channel where they claimed that it was possible.The funny thing is that it goes right back to my long-winded explanation of deception and how it's done. On that documentary where they shot a bullet through those mock human torsos, they came out with the conclusion that it could be done. Okay...WHAT could be done? Could a bullet traverse two human torsos? Absolutely. Does that mean that it's proof of the magic bullet theory? Absolutely NOT. It was only half the damage, and the bullet looked NOTHING like the pristine bullet. The deception comes in when they pretended that it was proof. It's the same failed logic and reasoning that a lot of those Mythbusters forum members use. They can separate out each individual aspect, but they fail to step back and look at the bigger picture. So...for example, if you present numerous witnesses, on video, they claim that they're mistaken individually. If you present the Zapruder film to them, they claim that the back-and-to-the-left motion of JFK's head is neuromuscular, even though it's clearly NOT. Then you can present the acoustic evidence where the House Select Committee on Assassinations placed a shooter in exactly the location Files said he was (and NOT in the Badgeman position), and they'll argue that the acoustic evidence is wrong. Then there's the impossible path of the magic bullet and, on top of that, its pristine condition, AND, on top of that, the fact that it was just FOUND in the hallway of the hospital. Rather than just step back and admit that the bullet was planted there (based particularly on where it was found, it's relatively pristine condition, and the fact that more fragments were removed from Conally's wrist than are missing from the bullet), they'll nit-pick and try and proove their theory by picking apart each part INDIVIDUALLY. Individually, any of these issues can be argued to death. Taken as a whole package, a reasonable person just cannot argue them away as anomalies. ALL of the evidence, taken as a whole, would simply not lead a reasonable person to conclude anything other than there were shooters from the front and that the magic bullet theory is false. Similarly, if you notice, those bogus documentaries, like the one Mack was involved in recently, can separate the issues and argue them to death, but they simply can not argue the evidence taken as a whole package. What are the odds that the 50+Dealy Plaza witnesses could be wrong about a shot from the front? In addition to those odds, what are the odds that JFK's back-and-to-the-left head snap is neuromuscular? Now factor in the acoustic evidence placing a shot in the Files position as done by the U.S. Government? What are the odds that the doctors, FBI, nurses, medical aids who all told of a large hole in the back of JFK's head (an EXIT wound) are all mistaken? The odds become less and less with the more information that is presented. I haven't seen any statistical figures, but common sense would tell any reasonable person that the odds in the equation above become infinitely less and less...meaning that it just seems statistically improbable by FAR that there was no conspiracy in the JFK assassination.Here's the failed logic of those Mythbusters forum members. When I last logged on there, they got muddled in the issue of whether Files is for real and whether the shell casings that were found were made prior to 1970. This is because they simply can not argue the information as a whole package.

[ChristophMessner]

Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote:I have to go along with you, Bob and Chris. When I first saw the documentary where they shot a bullet through two fake human torsos, for example, I remember thinking two things. I remember thinking that I saw the bullet for only a split second and it was way more deformed than the magic bullet. Then I remember thinking that that was only HALF of the job that the magic bullet supposedly did, as the magic bullet supposedly traversed two human torsos AND a human wrist and THEN into the left thigh of Conally. I remembered the same. The deliberate cut out of frames was apparent. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: On that documentary where they shot a bullet through those mock human torsos, they came out with the conclusion that it could be done. Okay...WHAT could be done? Could a bullet traverse two human torsos? Absolutely. Does that mean that it's proof of the magic bullet theory? Absolutely NOT. It was only half the damage, and the bullet looked NOTHING like the pristine bullet. The deception comes in when they pretended that it was proof. Correct. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: It's the same failed logic and reasoning that a lot of those Mythbusters forum members use. They can separate out each individual aspect, but they fail to step back and look at the bigger picture. ... they'll nit-pick and try and proove their theory by picking apart each part INDIVIDUALLY. Individually, any of these issues can be argued to death. Taken as a whole package, a reasonable person just cannot argue them away as anomalies. ALL of the evidence, taken as a whole, would simply not lead a reasonable person to conclude anything other than there were shooters from the front and that the magic bullet theory is false. Yes, thinking in the whole, that is what misses most in politics. Instead what we have is limited horizon and ruthlessness and flexibility with truth while seeking the individual advantage. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: The odds become less and less with the more information that is presented. I haven't seen any statistical figures, but common sense would tell any reasonable person that the odds in the equation above become infinitely less and less...meaning that it just seems statistically improbable by FAR that there was no conspiracy in the JFK assassination. I still have the hope that endurance in telling all the people the "more" information can bring the "official" theory to fall, because telling the truth is like seeing sharper and once you saw sharper something you'll always remember that more or less consciously and you never want to go back to the blurry picture. Pasquale DiFabrizio wrote: Here's the failed logic of those Mythbusters forum members. When I last logged on there, they got muddled in the issue of whether Files is for real and whether the shell casings that were found were made prior to 1970. This is because they simply can not argue the information as a whole package. Behind that is the fear to lose a convenient world view. It's so simple to say: "We need a strong CIA!" (And give them blanko cheque to do terror, while sitting in TV chair and shout on the "Al Quaida" and demand the authoritarian state (who throws trillions of tax dollars towards robbers and vandals)

[AnthonyAthletic]

Just shown tonight on UK TV "Discovery" Channel's 'Inside the Target car'. Described loosely as 'proof' via a reconstruction by Gary Mack and his team.Rubber torso with a series of human pound for pound skulls mounted. With an English Sharpshooter firing possible shots from 3 or 4 Plaza locations.Dealey Plaza substituted for some place in the American outback, the car substituted by a box on wheels elevated by a few tree trunks, the TSBD substituted for a hill with a scissor lift taking us upto the 6th floor. The now 70 year Mannlicher Carcano, as it was on the day, similar bullets but with a state of the art scope mounted. Sharpshooter lines up shot and blows out one of the skulls, in fact he did this twice...excellent shooting but without the pressure, without having to do it under the stress of missing with your first shot and not getting the job done with shot two and when the panic sets in the third shot does the trick...nope the reconstruction was just for accuracy, the sharpshooter firing when ready.Winchester used with scope, looking from where Tosh Plumlee was on the opposite Knoll, South. Not really a good place, not a good view (ruled out), then from a place on the Knoll but near the underpass, although possible this was (ruled out) because there were 15 or so persons in that area and 'it would have been seen'.So the Grassy Knoll, the infamous spot, ruled out because anyone firing from behind the fence to the left of the tree would basically take a human head off with a shot from there. Sadly no mention of a Remington, but a state of the art Winchester with hollow tips which dessimated the model skull...took it off the stand basically...so no, there could not have been a shot from behind the fence....anyway any shot from the Knoll could not have failed to hit The First Lady. All this was proven, honest.The shot which killed JFK was proven to have come from the 6th floor, without fail....Laws of Physics can not be denied.Mr Mack was amazed, 'wow, there you go, the shots came from the TSBD', 'Oswald did it'Is the Discovery Channel always this good, do they always report one side? One point which did amaze me was the fact that on one hand Gary Mack said "Due to the acoustics of the Plaza, you can not tell where the sound of any one shot comes from" then minutes later he said "Within minutes the Police were charging into the room on the sixth floor"....I thought he just said "Due to the acoustics of the Plaza, you can not tell where the sound of any one shot comes from" Pretty good guess eh, from the Police? Worth the hour watch, and no doubt I will watch it again and no doubt think about Mack when he said in summary, that the Warren Commission 'Got it Right' (There's not a smiley been invented yet to handle these words from Mr Mack) LOL

[saracarter766]

you could not pay me to watch inside the target car it's a pack of lies and bs and so it that judas so lovingly known as the man mr mack. i'd rather be bound and gagged and be tied in a chair in a padded room and be forced to watch barney.

[Bob]

saracarter766 wrote:you could not pay me to watch inside the target car it's a pack of lies and bs and so it that judas so lovingly known as the man mr mack. i'd rather be bound and gagged and be tied in a chair in a padded room and be forced to watch barney. Sara, you don't like the Andy Griffith show with Barney Fife? He was my favorite character. Oh, I guess you were talking about the purple dinosaur.

[saracarter766]

yes i was talking about the purple dinosaur haha.

[Bob]

saracarter766 wrote:yes i was talking about the purple dinosaur haha. You mean this adorable guy ...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsKO_r76kfQWhen my son was born and was very young, I had to watch a LOT of Barney with him.Barney can be a little irratating, but not as much as this guy (Gary Mack)...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW7t9vkBlNU