Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
David Von Pein

John Connally's Lapel

Recommended Posts

Sorry, Dave, you can't have it both ways.

Why not?

You're completely wrong about it being some bizarre combination of wind and bullet. Quite simply put, Connally was turning and, at one point, turned far enough that the wind caught his lapel.

Case closed.

What's bizarre about it?

We know a bullet DID go through the right side of John Connally's coat at just about the same time as the lapel flip.

And we know the wind was pretty gusty that day.

So why would a theory incorporating both of those known FACTS be considered "bizarre" in any way at all?

You can't possibly prove it was ONLY the wind that moved Connally's lapel. Just as I cannot possibly prove that it was a combination of "bullet + wind". But I have at least SOME evidence to back up my theory---a bullet hole in the right half of John Connally's jacket. It's not a hole in the LAPEL, that's true enough. But there IS a hole in the right side of the jacket, which is a jacket that likely MOVED at least a little bit when the bullet passed through it.

Case totally NOT closed (on this point).

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the extant Z-film is true, I can buy either side's argument as to the information it provides.

If there were plotters who had the Z-film altered into the extant Z-film, they could not be more pleased. LN and CT camps are left arguing over what the extant Z-film says. CT camps argue over what the extant Z-film says. If I'm a plotter, I take a sip of single malt, and am pleased.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, Dave, I'm quite interested in what line of work you are in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously, Dave, I'm quite interested in what line of work you are in.

I'm co-owner of a KFC restaurant in central Indiana.

JFK-related segue (sort of)....

"Did You Know?" .... that Colonel Sanders was the very first contestant on the first episode of the popular CBS-TV game show "What's My Line?" to be aired after President Kennedy's assassination (December 1, 1963)....

DVP-Potpourri.blogspot.com/2010/04/game-shows-with-colonel-sanders.html

WML-12-1-63.png

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Von Pein said:-

“Revised website link below (updated by DVP in order to archive the astounding amount of total denial exhibited by members of The Education Forum relating to the obvious signs of distress visible in Governor Connally's reactions when viewing Abraham Zapruder's motion picture film)…..”

I find that to be a quite extraordinary statement. In your opinion the membership of the Education Forum are in denial because they do not happen to agree with your opinion of the Single Bullet Theory. By using that expression that the membership are in “total denial” you are actually questioning the sanity of the membership of the Education Forum. Indeed you find this to be so important an issue you have decided to update your website so others can see how wrong the membership of the Education Forum is compared to you assessment of the assassination.

Having studied these frames - Z 222 to Z 230 - it is clear that what is happening is that John Connally is turning his body to the left so that by Z 230 he is actually facing forward. These frame in a gif would demonstrate that - were Z 226 and Z 227 and Z 228 not partially or wholly blurred. Unfortunately they are blurred and when incorporated into a gif these same frames throw up extraordinary results. It is these same extraordinary results that allow members like you to suggest that these very frames actually suggest that John Connally is reacting to being struck by a bullet when - in fact - he has not been struck.

Aside from your statement about the tie, nothing you say about these frames stands up to serious scrutiny. That leads me to wonder who is it, that is actually in “total denial.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me try this approach....

1.) James R. Gordon knows for a fact that John B. Connally was shot by a rifle bullet on 11/22/63 at a point in time which James also knows is very close in "real time" to Zapruder frames 224-230 (give or take a FRACTION OF A SECOND).

2.) Therefore, since #1 is so obviously true, there is probably a point in the Zapruder home movie that shows Connally's initial reaction(s) to being hit by the bullet that injured him.

3.) As I have illustrated about 99 times now, Zapruder frames 224 to 227 indicate some definite changes in Governor Connally's appearance that could very easily be said to be "involuntary startle reactions" to some kind of external stimulus.

4.) When factoring in #2 and #3, in tandem, what do you suppose the odds are that the movements by John Connally seen in Zapruder frames 224-227 are movements that have nothing whatsoever to do with the injuries sustained by John Connally at almost that exact same time (give or take a FRACTION OF A SECOND)?

5.) There are no frames in the Zapruder movie AFTER approx. Z230 in which any kind of "jerky" or "startle" type reactions can be seen with respect to Governor Connally's movements.

With the above five things in mind, James, do you still want to stick with this conclusion?....

"It is these same extraordinary results that allow members like you to suggest that these very frames actually suggest that John Connally is reacting to being struck by a bullet when - in fact - he has not been struck." -- J. Gordon

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me try this approach....

My responses in red.

1.) James R. Gordon knows for a fact that John B. Connally was shot by a rifle bullet on 11/22/63 at a point in time which James also knows is very close in "real time" to Zapruder frames 224-230 (give or take a FRACTION OF A SECOND).

Actually I do not know that. It is not a fact that John Connally was wounded within this time frame. It is the theory of David Von Pein that John Connally was wounded at this time. In no sense of the word is John Connally’s wounding at this a fact: it is a theory.

2.) Therefore, since #1 is so obviously true, there is probably a point in the Zapruder home movie that shows Connally's initial reaction(s) to being hit by the bullet that injured him.

Deary me! Is that the best you can so??

3.) As I have illustrated about 99 times now, Zapruder frames 224 to 227 indicate some definite changes in Governor Connally's appearance that could very easily be said to be "involuntary startle reactions" to some kind of external stimulus.

If these frames do indicate “definite changes”, then it is a consequence that you have a mixture of clear frames [ Z222 to Z 225 ] and blurred frames [ Z 226 + Z 227 ]. Include blurred frames in any frame sequence and you are bound to get unusual results. Within the clear frame sequence you have clearly not analysed what the frames tell us.

One example:-

One observation that you made was that there is a bigger “bulging out” of John Connally’s jacket at Z 224 - when you believes the bullet struck John Connally. Post 1

What you actually said was in that post was And then we get the bigger “bulging out” (for lack of a better term) of that same area of Connally’s jacket at the precise instant when I think the bullet is striking Connally (at Z224). There is no way this is only a shadow, IMO:”

The gif that you used was the one you also referenced in post 114. It is an appallingly poor video. The actual image was shown on Page 2 of the PDF. I pointed out if that video gif is indeed an accurate reflection of what Zapruder shows then it ought to be seen on better videos

What you do not make clear is that between Z224 and Z 225 John Connally is turning to his left. He has moved around 4 to 5º and it is that movement that has caused the jacket to move. All you has noticed is the jacket and you has not been prepared to investigate why the jacket has moved. Had there been no movement by John Connally between these two frames then I would have been prepared to agree that the jacket has indeed bulged and that maybe it was the consequence of a bullet passing through John Connally’s body.

However it is clear that John Connally has turned his body leftwards between these two frames and that is why the jacked has changed its position.

In post 44 you agreed that between Z 222 and Z 230 John Connally is indeed seen to be turning left. And this is critical to this whole story. Between Z 222 and Z 230 John Connally is turning left to face forward. The dispute here is that in making this turn you are interpreting moments in this turn as demonstrating evidence that John Connally has been wounded when in fact all that is happening is that John Connally is turning to his left.

4.) When factoring in #2 and #3, in tandem, what do you suppose the odds are that the movements by John Connally seen in Zapruder frames 224-227 are movements that have nothing whatsoever to do with the injuries sustained by John Connally at almost that exact same time (give or take a FRACTION OF A SECOND?
I have just pointed out that one example in your argument at #3 is wrong. John Connally’s jacket is not bulging out. Nor has his left shoulder changed its shape. Nor is his mouth open at Z 225. Nor does John Connally’s hat begin to flip at Z 226 forwards. The only point that appears to be correct is that John Connally’s tie appears to distort and bulge outwards.


5.) There are no frames in the Zapruder movie AFTER approx. Z230 in which any kind of "jerky" or "startled" reactions can be seen with respect to Governor Connally's movements.
These “jerky” and “startled” reactions that you talk about only occur between Z 226 and Z 228. And these are blurred frames. These reactions have nothing to do with John Connally, they are a consequence of Zapruder moving his camera and thereby butting the frames.


When viewing things with the above four things in mind, James, do you still want to stick with this conclusion?....

"It is these same extraordinary results that allow members like you to suggest that these very frames actually suggest that John Connally is reacting to being struck by a bullet when - in fact - he has not been struck."
-- J. Gordon

Yes!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JAMES GORDON SAID:

In post 44 you agreed that between Z 222 and Z 230 John Connally is indeed seen to be turning left. And this is critical to this whole story. Between Z 222 and Z 230 John Connally is turning left to face forward. The dispute here is that in making this turn you are interpreting moments in this turn as demonstrating evidence that John Connally has been wounded when in fact all that is happening is that John Connally is turning to his left.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Let me repeat my earlier question that I asked you a day or two ago....

"It couldn't be more obvious that Connally's shoulders are shrugging from a flinch starting at Z225, and yet I'm supposed to believe it only looks that way because JBC is turning to his left. Does EVERY "left turn" made by all limo occupants give the false appearance of "shoulder shrugging", James? Get real."


JAMES GORDON SAID:

Nor does John Connally’s hat begin to flip at Z 226 forwards.


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

That's an astonishing statement, James, in light of the fact that I've already provided you with SIX different versions of the Z-Film (collected by me from various Internet sources, including the MPI "Image Of An Assassination" digital version), which ALL show the hat flip beginning at the exact same moment--Z226.

Here once again is one of those six versions produced earlier, and this is a good quality version, which positively proves you are wrong regarding the hat flip. It's occurring at Z226, just like in all of my other versions. Deny it if you desire, but it's here just the same:

Z-FilmClipSBTInMotion.gif


JAMES GORDON SAID:

These “jerky” and “startled” reactions that you talk about only occur between Z 226 and Z 228. And these are blurred frames. These reactions have nothing to do with John Connally, they are a consequence of Zapruder moving his camera...


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Incredible, Jim. Simply incredible. Your denial has reached a new zenith. It's not an easy task to totally dismiss so many VISUAL clues about John Connally's reactions that everybody can easily see right before their own eyes. But you have managed to accomplish it. My congratulations go out to you.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

REPRISE....

JAMES R. GORDON SAID:


These “jerky” and “startled” reactions that you talk about only occur between Z 226 and Z 228. And these are blurred frames. These reactions have nothing to do with John Connally, they are a consequence of Zapruder moving his camera...


DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Once again, James is wrong on the frame numbers. The "jerky" reactions by Connally begin at Z225, not Z226. And here's yet another GIF showing the jerks and flinches of JBC (this clip ends at Z225)....

Z-FilmClipSBTInMotion3.gif?t=1276374284

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DAVID VON PEIN SAID:

Once again, James is wrong on the frame numbers. The "jerky" reactions by Connally begin at Z225, not Z226. And here's yet another GIF showing the jerks and flinches of JBC (this clip ends at Z225)….

David, what you refer to as a “jerky” movement is no such thing. It is the changing positions of John Connally’s left shoulder. The shoulder’s position changes because John Connally is in the process of turning his body to his left. And the position of his shoulder between Z 224 and Z225 is different. That change in position is what the gif is showing. It is not a “jerk” but quite a significant change in the shoulder’s position.

That has been repeatedly explained to you and has been repeatedly ignored by you. It is clear you have never examined these frames and simply take on trust what it is they show you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't ignored your explanation, Jim. I've been laughing at it, because it's so amazingly wrong (and silly) in light of what is clearly visible in this film clip....

Z-Film-Clip-SBT-In-Motion---3.gif

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And there lies the difference. You take on face value what you see on these various videos. You comment on how many videos all show the same thing. Of course they do: they are all showing the same frames. What you have never done is examine why these videos all show the same thing. You have never examined what is on frames 224 and 225 that could account for this movement. That fact there is this anomaly is sufficient in itself to support your position.

You say you have been laughing because what I say is so amazingly wrong (and silly) in light of what is clearly visible in this film clip.

But you have no idea whether what I say is right or wrong because you have never examined the frames: you just accept what they say.

You prefer to practise ridicule to seriously examining the argument.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, another thing that is happening with JBC in the above clip is that his head moves DOWNWARD just slightly at Z225. This can be "measured" (at least in part) by looking at Jackie and then comparing the level of Connally's head to Jackie's in Z225. JBC's head moves a little LOWER than Jackie's head behind him. This type of head movement (akin to a "ducking" motion) is also in perfect harmony with all of Connally's other movements at Z225 --- the flinching shoulders, the opening of his mouth, the startled look (which is not there on his face at Z224, at least as far as I can tell; but, I'll grant you, the frames aren't super clear, but they are clear enough to make these basic determinations, IMO). And I also detect Connally's eyes closing shut for one frame at Z225 too. Again, perfectly consistent with an involuntary flinch right after he was shot.

So, we've got....

Flinching of the shoulders.

Scrunching of the head downward.

Mouth opening.

Eyes closing.

Lapel flipping.

All in just Z224 and Z225 alone.

Then, just one frame later, that hat flip---which James says is just a figment of my imagination too....

109.+Z225-Z226+Toggling+Clip.gif

And yet, even with all of the above, according to CTers, Connally HASN'T been hit by a bullet yet. The bullet's going to hit him in another one second or so (probably even less than that). And his RIGHT WRIST is going to get smashed by that bullet---which, per CTers, HASN'T yet hit him as of Z226, even though the same RIGHT ARM/WRIST goes flying upward at 226. Go figure that. I sure can't.

That's a lot of stuff for me to be fooled by, don't you think? It's a whole array of things in Z224-227 that James Gordon is filing in his folder labelled....

Things that appear to be happening to John B. Connally in the Z-Film, but aren't really happening at all. It's all due to either "corrupt" video frames, Mr. Zapruder's camera movement, and/or the simple fact that Governor Connally is merely turning to his left in his seat.

Yeah, sure James. And I'm going to win TWO lotteries next week.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×