Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Von Pein

Members
  • Content count

    5,009
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by David Von Pein

  1. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    I wasn't pointing out your misspellings, Michael. I used the word "non sequitur" as a playful reference to describe what you did in this post of yours, which was, indeed, a "non sequitur". I wasn't mocking the fact that you misspelled the same word (although I can certainly see why you might think I was). But I was using that word on my own to describe your actions, not your spelling.
  2. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    New nickname.... Michael "Non Sequitur" Clark.
  3. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    And what the heck has any of that got to do with this comment of mine that you were responding to?.... "And what better VISUAL source for the assassination could you possibly get?" 
  4. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    Boy, what a silly comment that was. As if the ZAPRUDER FILM has anything whatsoever to do with the Warren Commission. (Or maybe Michael thinks Arlen Specter HIMSELF altered the Z-Film. Is that how you equate The Warren Commission with Visual Evidence Contained Within The Zapruder Film?)
  5. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    In one very important and key way, Dale Myers' computer model is much BETTER than the Warren Commission's 5/24/64 re-enactment in Dealey Plaza itself. Why? Because Myers' model is locked in (frame by frame) to the actual film of JFK's assassination---the Zapruder Film. And what better VISUAL source for the assassination could you possibly get? (Notwithstanding, of course, the alterationists who continue to believe the silly theory about the Z-Film being a fake.) Dale Myers explains the "Key Framing" process here.... http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/kframe.htm
  6. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    I don't know why I bother to post this Dale Myers photo here (since you, Pat Speer, don't believe a thing in Dale's computer animation), but here it is anyway....and this Z223 image (per Dale Myers) was Key Framed to the Z-Film itself (not just made up by Myers). The trajectory is perfect for the SBT at Z223....
  7. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    Pat, Just take a good look at these two pictures below (in tandem). Now are you really going to continue to maintain that Specter's pointer/rod in CE903 is situated ABOVE the entry wound location in John F. Kennedy's upper back. If anything, I'd say the rod is situated a little bit too LOW, not too HIGH (but you've been saying it's too HIGH for years now). But does the autopsy photo on the right REALLY bear out your theory about the rod being "INCHES above the back wound location in the FBI's photos"? I don't think so....
  8. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    I want to thank Pat Speer for the following two photos from the 5/24/64 garage re-enactment. Based on the file names that Pat has placed on these pictures, it appears that Pat added them to this lengthy page of his website fairly recently (in January and February of 2018). I'm glad I scrolled down his page to find them. Very nice clarity in the CE903 blow-up in the first image (which I've added to one of my CE903 webpages, with credit being given to Pat). While I don't adhere to the same conclusions regarding Arlen Specter and the Warren Commission that Pat Speer does, I must acknowledge the tremendous amount of time and effort that Pat has put into just that one page ("Chapter 10") of his PatSpeer.com website. Can you tell me where you got these photos, Pat?....
  9. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    From an April 2012 discussion.... PAT SPEER SAID: They [Arlen Specter and Lyndal Shaneyfelt] gave the illusion the trajectory passed close to the back wound [in Commission Exhibit No. 903], when they both KNEW it passed inches above it. DAVID VON PEIN SAID: Bullxxxx. Some things had to be approximated, and the Warren Commission was forthright about such approximations. And the trajectory the WC ultimately used (which was for the equivalent of Z217.5) is obviously not going to be the EXACT trajectory for the single bullet that struck JFK and Connally--unless, by some incredibly good fortune, the Commission did, indeed, just happen to choose the EXACT half of a Zapruder frame (Z217.5) when the SBT bullet did strike the victims, which is very unlikely. (The SBT actually occurs, of course, at precisely Z224, and there are many reasons why this is so.) Therefore, Shaneyfelt's and Specter's "approximately" language does come into play...and rightly so. In fact, that's probably the reason why Specter's rod is above the chalk mark on the JFK stand-in in some of the re-enactment photos taken in the garage near Dealey Plaza. Because, I assume, that the angle being used for all of those photos is identical (17 degrees, 43 minutes, 30 seconds). And since a 17-43-30 angle is only the average angle between Z210 and Z225, then (quite obviously) the REAL angle of descent for the SBT at Z224 (per my opinion about when the bullet struck) is going to be a little less than 17-43-30 because the car has travelled further down Elm Street between Z217.5 and Z224, decreasing the angle from Oswald's window. But the CE903 reconstruction is so incredibly close to being spot-on perfect (angle-wise and wound location-wise) that only the hardcore conspiracy buffs who refuse to "approximate" anything relating to this case will be unconvinced by it. With those conspiracists also, of course, ignoring the undeniable common sense elements that exist in the 6 points I'm going to talk about below too. When we factor in the basic garden-variety common sense of the Single-Bullet Theory (coupled with the Warren Commission's May 24, 1964, re-creation of the shooting in Dealey Plaza), the SBT becomes crystal clear as the probable truth: 1.) At Zapruder Film frames 210-225, when looking through the scope of Oswald's rifle from the Sniper's Nest window in the Book Depository, President Kennedy and Governor Connally are lined up--one in front of the other. 2.) JFK was hit in the back by a bullet. 3.) JFK had a bullet hole in his throat. 4.) Governor Connally was hit in the back by a bullet at just about the exact same time that JFK was being struck by a bullet. 5.) No bullets were inside JFK's throat/neck/upper back. 6.) The only physical evidence of any shooter in Dealey Plaza was found on the 6th Floor of the TSBD. Now, just add up #1 thru #6 above and tell me the Single-Bullet Theory is a load of xxxx. Based on just the above basic facts in this case ALONE (and each one is definitely a proven fact, without a speck of a doubt), the SBT is the best explanation for the double-man wounding of John Kennedy and John Connally on November 22, 1963. DAVID VON PEIN LATER SAID: RE: THE LIMOUSINE'S JUMP SEAT MEASUREMENTS.... The more I think about this topic, the more convinced I am becoming that the U.S. Secret Service (Thomas J. Kelley) merely measured the "inboard" distance of John Connally's jump seat from a different place from that which appears on the official Hess & Eisenhardt body draft of the 1961 Lincoln limousine, just as I speculated the other day when I said this: "I think BOTH Kelley and the Hess & Eisenhardt schematic are correct. And that's because Kelley's measurement must have been taken from a slightly different place on the car than was the H&E measurement for the jump seat location. Do you really think Kelley just MADE UP his six-inch figure? I don't. I think that measurement must have been different because they were measuring from a different starting point. Or, perhaps the "finishing point" was different than H&E's." -- DVP; 4/12/12 Now, when we look at the two pictures below, I can easily envision the Secret Service's measurement for the jump seat being calculated from a different starting point on the car to account for the 3.5-inch difference in the measurements when compared to Hess & Eisenhardt. If the Secret Service measurement also included the area between the arrows in the second picture, it looks to me as though that would add up to just about six inches when the 2.50-inch measurement in the H&E diagram is included too: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Furthermore, the HSCA also used the six-inch [approx. 15 cm.] figure, when it said this: "Connally...was seated well within the car on the jump seat ahead of Kennedy; a gap of slightly less than 15 centimeters separated this seat from the car door." -- HSCA Volume 6; Page 49 Moreover, the HSCA's "slightly less than 15 centimeters" figure was obviously NOT being derived solely from Thomas Kelley's testimony, because just after citing the "15 centimeters" measurement at 6 HSCA 49, the HSCA gives a source for the 15-cm. measurement—Figure II-19, at 6 HSCA 50—which is the H&E body draft of the limo, which says the jump seat is 2.50 inches inboard. Which makes me think the HSCA was also using a measurement that included the 2.50-inch measurement we see specified in the H&E body draft PLUS an additional 3.5 inches of space that I've outlined with arrows in my photo above. I'll also add this: At one point in the endnotes in his JFK book, when Vincent Bugliosi cited his source for a "six-inch gap" between the jump seat and the limo door, Vince cited the HSCA and not Thomas Kelley's Warren Commission testimony: "A six-inch gap separated Connally's jump seat from the right door [6 HSCA 49]." -- "Reclaiming History"; Page 344 of Endnotes Final Thought: In my opinion, BOTH Thomas Kelley and the Hess & Eisenhardt measurements are accurate. It's just that each of those figures was calculated in a different manner, utilizing a different starting point on the SS-100-X limousine. That's all. 2008 "JUMP SEAT" DISCUSSION: JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/Dale Myers And The SBT David Von Pein April 13, 2012 April 14, 2012 http://kennedy-photos.blogspot.com/2012/11/kennedy-gallery-268.html
  10. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    Dead wrong. I embedded one of those other photos in a post I wrote 4 days ago (on Page 6 of this very thread).... http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25012-need-single-bullet-theory-diagram/?page=6&tab=comments#comment-381729 (....And be sure to check the "Edit" time in the above post, so you can know that I didn't just this minute add the photo to my July 2nd post. You probably DO think I am THAT dishonest, but I am not.)
  11. David Von Pein

    McAdams gets Salvaged

    Hear, hear!
  12. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    I guess there's no chance that DiEugenio will EVER stop telling this lie, is there Jim? As I told you previously, I've used the other pictures multiple times on my site.
  13. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    That's right, Jim. It was The World Vs. The Patsy all the way through the HSCA even (despite the fact the HSCA said there WAS a conspiracy). Go figure that.
  14. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    Does this mean you're in bed with Weisberg and believe that NO SHOTS came from the 6th Floor? (Please say yes, Jim. It'll make my day if you do.) https://app.box.com/embed/preview/3rrtvmfia343qhdiihcn
  15. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    It says that Oswald's bullet hit the two victims at a 17-degree angle, and then the bullet changed course to a 27-degree angle after striking JBC's fifth rib....just as WCR Page 107 says. But I'm supposed to merely think that Page 107 is nothing but a rotten evil LIE, right Jim? https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0066a.htm
  16. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    And yet a gun was seen in that exact window by numerous witnesses at the precise time when a gun was being fired at JFK on Nov. 22. (Funny co-inky, huh?) Did they all lie? Or were they seeing just a "prop gun"? (You must be related to Harold Weisberg, Michael. He believed in that same silly junk too.) http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/10/harold-weisberg.html
  17. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    You don't know what you're talking about. You're just spitting out theories about steeper angles just to hear yourself talk. The exact angle measurements were taken by surveyors in Dealey Plaza on May 24, 1964, when the WC and FBI performed their assassination re-enactments. The exacting measurements are revealed on page 106 of the WCR.... https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0065b.htm But Jim D. thinks all those detailed measurements about the angles are nothing but LIES spouted by the WC, right Jim? And Jim must think that Dale Myers just made up his own set of figures too (via Myers' "Secrets Of A Homicide" project). All of these figures are just lies too, right Jim?.... http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl3.htm In short, DiEugenio (as usual) is blowing smoke (and a lot of hot air).
  18. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    Amen, Francois. And it's good to see you posting again. I see that you had not posted here since September of 2010. That's a long dry spell. Please post more often. You always make good solid points.
  19. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    Yes, after reading the pertinent Shaw testimony again the other day, I concur with you on that point. The correct angle is 27 degrees, not 25.
  20. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    But why would anyone use ONLY the CLOTHING holes to try and determine the bullet's trajectory? We KNOW the HOLES IN CONNALLY'S BODY (SKIN) resulted in a measured angle of 25 to 27 degrees, not 30 to 40 degrees. And the BODY (SKIN) wounds are obviously the BEST EVIDENCE to use, right? So why, James, did you even bring up the clothing angles? Just to bolster your very weak "The SBT Was Impossible" claim? We all know that the hole in the front of Connally's jacket was much lower than the hole in his chest. But, just like with the holes in JFK's clothing, since there's only ONE hole in the front of JBC's jacket and only ONE hole in the front of his chest.....it must mean what? That ONE bullet went through BOTH of those holes. So, again, what was your point in emphasizing the low hole in Connally's suit coat, James G.? You don't think there were TWO bullets involved in John Connally's chest injury....do you?
  21. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    Yes, I read that testimony too. But it doesn't specifically say that Connally was STANDING when the 25d measurement was taken. It could mean that JBC was seated but just not "the way he was" when he was shot. (See what I mean?) Anyway, it's a very small difference either way, as Dr. Shaw noted at 4 H 138 --- "That didn't make much difference" [R. Shaw].
  22. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    What's your source for that "standing" conclusion? Because I didn't see anything in Shaw's testimony about a "standing" measurement being taken. I looked for it too, and I didn't see anything in Shaw's testimony that confirmed what position JBC was in when the 25-degree angle was taken. Did I miss it? Can you cite it for me? Yes, I know that's not the 17-degree angle. I just posted it as an "FYI" bonus. I disagree (again). Maybe you can create a chart to illustrate your point about how JBC's rib couldn't possibly have been hit if the bullet enters his back at 17+ degrees....then continues on that same 17+-degree trajectory until it gets to the area of JBC's fifth rib....then the bullet hits the rib and changes to a steeper angle....and then the missile exits under the right nipple....with the OVERALL angle between the entry and exit wounds being the steeper-than-17 angle (whether it be 25 or 27 degrees). Can the "impossibility" of such a bullet journey be visually demonstrated via a schematic/chart? That'd be nice to see, if possible.
  23. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-217.html http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/dale-myers-and-sbt.html http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/dale-myers-and-sbt-part-2.html
  24. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    No, the trajectory is not "27 degrees throughout". The TOTAL DECLINATION ANGLE between the two wounds in Connally was said to be approx. 25 degrees (again see WCR, p.107 please; plus, as you cited previously, 4 H 137-138 indicates two different measurements made by Dr. Shaw on Connally's body---the first one was 25 degrees, the second was 27 degrees). So, for a brief period after entering Connally's upper back, the trajectory probably remained at about 17.72 degrees. The bullet then hit the rib, causing the steeper deflection. But I don't know why you would insist that the steeper (25 to 27º) angle had to necessarily START at the instant the bullet struck Connally's upper back. The steeper trajectory angle very likely began when the missile hit the fifth rib, with the angle being measured between the two bullet holes (which seems logical to me). What source do you have to prove this statement of yours, James?.... "The bullet can only strike the rib if its trajectory angle is 27º throughout." Also see Dr. Shaw's testimony at 4 H 105. And also see CE680, showing the trajectory of the bullet through Connally's body (with the solid line, initialed by Shaw [R.R.S.], being drawn in by Shaw during his testimony to correct the steeper dotted line, which Shaw said was incorrect)....
  25. David Von Pein

    Need single bullet theory diagram

    There's absolutely nothing "preposterous" about it in the least. The bullet struck the rib and changed its trajectory. It's to be expected. Why on Earth you think such a thing is "preposterous" is preposterous. The same "deflection" thing happened with the head shot too ----> http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl3.htm
×