Glenn Nall Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) folks, this is eerie - and I know many have already seen this, but I just came across it for the first time (further proof that I don't know a single thing about... anyway...) and had to put it out there for some extraneous commentary, opining and what not. a LIVE camera from the 6th floor museum "sniper's position" provided by earthcam and - Gary, did you have something to do with this...??? egads. how creepy. http://www.earthcam.com/usa/texas/dallas/dealeyplaza/?cam=dealeyplaza ok, not creepy - i'm thinkin' tacky... ok, D. here's your chance - show how this proves O. did it alone... Edited June 28, 2015 by Glenn Nall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) ok, D. here's your chance - show how this proves O. did it alone. Oswald took his gun to the sixth floor....fired three shots at JFK on the street below....hitting the President twice....and killing him. ~~Mark VII~~ P.S., Can any conspiracy theorist answer this for me?..... If firing those shots at JFK from the sixth floor (while using the Carcano rifle) was so utterly "impossible" (as many conspiracy theorists seem to think it truly was)....and if a large part of the assassination "plot" was to frame Lee Harvey Oswald....then why were the architects of the "frame-up plot" so reckless? Did they think (on 11/21/63) they could make people believe Oswald could really do the impossible? In reality, of course, the shots from Oswald's sniper's perch were not difficult shots at all. All of the shots were under 90 yards. And even if LHO didn't use the scope, so what? He was trained to use a rifle in the military. And he compiled some pretty decent shooting statistics (while firing at targets a lot farther away than 88 yards). And he certainly didn't have the benefit of a four-power telescope to aid him when he attained the ranking of Sharpshooter in the Marines in 1956. So why would shooting at a target that was barely in motion at all (JFK's head), from a distance of under 90 yards, be such an arduous chore for a former Marine like Oswald? In short, the notion that Oswald's shooting performance in Dallas on November 22, 1963, was more difficult than building the Pyramids is yet another conspiracy myth that was disproven decades ago. And yet the myth persists. Edited June 28, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) A LIVE camera from the 6th floor museum "sniper's position". .... egads. how creepy. .... ok, not creepy - i'm thinkin' tacky... I've never thought of the "Dealey Plaza EarthCam" as being either creepy or tacky. (But to each his own, I guess.) I've always thought of it as more of an "Eye on History", as the 24/7 camera is able to take all of us instantly to the location where an important historic event took place. It's fascinating, IMO. Sometimes I'll go to the Dealey Cam website and just watch for a little while, and count the number of people who dodge traffic in order to stand in the middle of the street on Robert Groden's "X". (Now THAT is something that qualifies as "tacky", Glenn---that "X" in the middle of Elm Street. I think it's rather offensive. But, YMMV.) Here's the view through the "Dealey Cam" on the 50th anniversary (Nov. 22, 2013)..... Edited June 29, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenneth Drew Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Glenn, you should bear in mind that much has changed in 50 years, trees have grown, etc. I noticed the trees were much different back in the 90's than they were back in the 60's the first time I was there. So you can't rely on the view from the 6th floor as being very similar. One thing you also can't get the feel for is that you can't just stand at that window and get that view. The camera appears to be about 3 feet above floor level, a position that would not have been possible in 63 because of the upper half of the window. Actually firing a rifle from the spot necessary based on window opening at the time, shooter would have to be sitting or lying on the floor and sighting with his left eye. Basically an impossible shot. You can't see any of the obstructions within the room itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 DVP I am still waiting for you to explain how the bullet made its way through JFK's neck without hitting any vertebrae. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted June 28, 2015 Author Share Posted June 28, 2015 Glenn, you should bear in mind that much has changed in 50 years, trees have grown, etc. I noticed the trees were much different back in the 90's than they were back in the 60's the first time I was there. So you can't rely on the view from the 6th floor as being very similar. One thing you also can't get the feel for is that you can't just stand at that window and get that view. The camera appears to be about 3 feet above floor level, a position that would not have been possible in 63 because of the upper half of the window. Actually firing a rifle from the spot necessary based on window opening at the time, shooter would have to be sitting or lying on the floor and sighting with his left eye. Basically an impossible shot. You can't see any of the obstructions within the room itself. please don't read so much into my comments, Ken - was just saying that the whole idea is, to me, tacky. I still hold to a need for some dignity and reverence to the area. nothing to do with the many obvious problems with the SBT. simply the lack of respect, TO ME, of the whole thing. even the hordes of people milling about makes me a bit jittery, even though I hold the same fascination (more than, really) as they do. to me it's like walking through a graveyard. I lower my voice and step around things. why? reverence. I'm pretty I'm not disturbing the dead people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted June 28, 2015 Author Share Posted June 28, 2015 DVP I am still waiting for you to explain how the bullet made its way through JFK's neck without hitting any vertebrae. Robert, Really? One of the things I've learned in life is the application of REALISTIC expectations. Expectations are, in general, very dangerous. Learning from previous experience what to expect next time around is what maintains the serenity. From previous experience we know that D. habitually dodges uncomfortable questions, ergo, the expectation of his answering a new one - with a reasonable, logical answer, no less - should be kept to a bare minimum, much like expecting a bullet to bend its course in midair. oh! that analogy just came out from nowhere. wow. I'm being melodramatic (i've discovered that i might need to explain that at times), i hope you realize. One must learn from experience. Don't hold your breath. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 ok, D. here's your chance - show how this proves O. did it alone. Oswald took his gun to the sixth floor....fired three shots at JFK on the street below....hitting the President twice....and killing him. ~~Mark VII~~ P.S., Can any conspiracy theorist answer this for me?..... If firing those shots at JFK from the sixth floor (while using the Carcano rifle) was so utterly "impossible" (as many conspiracy theorists seem to think it truly was)....and if a large part of the assassination "plot" was to frame Lee Harvey Oswald....then why were the architects of the "frame-up plot" so reckless? Did they think (on 11/21/63) they could make people believe Oswald could really do the impossible? In reality, of course, the shots from Oswald's sniper's perch were not difficult shots at all. All of the shots were under 90 yards. And even if LHO didn't use the scope, so what? He was trained to use a rifle in the military. And he compiled some pretty decent shooting statistics (while firing at targets a lot farther away than 88 yards). And he certainly didn't have the benefit of a four-power telescope to aid him when he attained the ranking of Sharpshooter in the Marines in 1956. So why would shooting at a target that was barely in motion at all (JFK's head), from a distance of under 90 yards, be such an arduous chore for a former Marine like Oswald? In short, the notion that Oswald's shooting performance in Dallas on November 22, 1963, was more difficult than building the Pyramids is yet another conspiracy myth that was disproven decades ago. And yet the myth persists. David... has anyone since been able to do it? No. regardless of the quality of weapon. Can you get the rifle to the 6th floor assembled? No Can you get corroboration that a bag big enough to carry the rifle was ever in Oswald's possession - that he made it and brought it home? No Can you explain how a bullet rises from front to back when shot from 70 feet in the air? You see Dave... it is much more complicated than "point and shoot"... if you can't get him and the rifle to the TSBD at the right time... your argument is moot If you can't explain how the bullet goes in lower than it emerges while JFK was NOT tying his shoes but sitting upright.. Oswald's shooting ability and the crap condition of the rifle are moot points. If you can't dissect the neck and upper torso or probe the wounds IN THE EVIDENCE, no DR in the world can come to or offer any conclusions related to those wounds... but they do anyway. You see Dave, you need to go back a while and get the rifle from Klein's to Oswald... and nothing you have in the evidence can do that... The Money Order was never processed (and a new essay outlining that little problem is forthcoming) - and that's only the tip of the Money order and delivery problems... So yes David... until anyone can come close to reproducing this "easy feat of shooting" with that rifle... it hasn't been proven it can be done. When you figure out how to dismiss an entire ER of nurses and doctors who's job it is to triage and treat asap... who all say the throat wound was an entry wound... then we can BEGIN to discuss any shots Oswald may have fired or not... Mr. BALL - Now, is that a very definite impression that you saw him that morning when he came to work? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, oh--it's like this--I'll try to explain it to you this way--- you see, I was sitting on the wrapping table and when he came in the door, I just caught him out of the corner of my eye---that's the reason why I said it that way. Mr. BALL - Did he come in with anybody? Mr. DOUGHERTY - No. Mr. BALL - He was alone? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes; he was alone. Mr. BALL - Do you recall him having anything in his hand? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't see anything, if he did. Mr. BALL - Did you pay enough attention to him, you think, that you would remember whether he did or didn't? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I believe I can---yes, sir---I'll put it this way; I didn't see anything in his hands at the time. Mr. BALL - In other words, your memory is definite on that is it? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, sir. Mr. BALL - In other words, you would say positively he had nothing in his hands? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I would say that---yes, sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted June 28, 2015 Author Share Posted June 28, 2015 good GOD, David you're attempting REASON and EVIDENCE with the man - I think that trickery's been used and he saw right through it. i believe he's more wiley than we thought, but good luck with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 Glenn, you should bear in mind that much has changed in 50 years, trees have grown, etc. I noticed the trees were much different back in the 90's than they were back in the 60's the first time I was there. So you can't rely on the view from the 6th floor as being very similar. One thing you also can't get the feel for is that you can't just stand at that window and get that view. The camera appears to be about 3 feet above floor level, a position that would not have been possible in 63 because of the upper half of the window. Actually firing a rifle from the spot necessary based on window opening at the time, shooter would have to be sitting or lying on the floor and sighting with his left eye. Basically an impossible shot. You can't see any of the obstructions within the room itself. Why do you believe the shooter would have to be sighting with his let eye? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) David J., Not taking into account WHO was firing the rifle, the FACT remains that Carcano rifle # C2766 WAS fired at President Kennedy on 11/22/63. That fact is proven by the existence of CE567 and CE569 in the front seat of JFK's car. You can try and dodge those C2766 bullet fragments by pretending those fragments really WEREN'T fired from the C2766 rifle at all (despite the numerous firearms identification experts who said they were) or that those two fragments were planted into the official record in this case by some person or persons who wanted to frame Lee Oswald for the President's murder. But those two fragments are forever going to be part of the evidence in this case just the same---whether you like it or not. And if you DON'T think those fragments were planted into the official record, then it's impossible for Rifle C2766 to NOT have been fired at Kennedy's car on November 22nd. Now, David, can you PROVE that CE567 and 569 are fraudulent pieces of evidence? Edited June 28, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Prudhomme Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 DVP How did the bullet get through JFK's neck without striking any vertebrae? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) DVP How did the bullet get through JFK's neck without striking any vertebrae? You don't KNOW that the bullet would have absolutely HAD to have struck JFK's vertebrae. You're GUESSING. That's all. Nothing more. You know, of course, that many many doctors (pathologists) have endorsed the idea that one bullet DID transit through JFK's upper back and neck, including the three autopsy surgeons. But you don't care about all those doctors' opinions, do you? You think Bob Prudhomme, MD, is MUCH more qualified to tell the world about this matter. Right, Bob? Tell me, Bob, what year did you graduate medical school? And why should I toss the entire WC and HSCA and Clark Panel and Rockefeller Commission and the autopsy doctors under the bus because some self-appointed "expert of the human vertebrae" has posted endless amounts of his anti-SBT opinions at various Internet forums? In short, you need to dig up John F. Kennedy's body in order to have a chance at proving your anti-SBT theory. Plus, when we factor in the absurd "Two Bullets Entered & Never Exited & Both Bullets Disappeared" alternative, it then becomes quite clear that the idea of a NON-transiting missile entering JFK's body is an idea not even worth considering---and that's because the CTers need TWO of those non-transiting bullets to make their theory work. And what rational person could possibly even begin to accept such a remote possibility? Edited June 28, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glenn Nall Posted June 28, 2015 Author Share Posted June 28, 2015 see? bob and weave. stick and move. when a man cannot reason, his only response is a counter-attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted June 28, 2015 Share Posted June 28, 2015 (edited) No, Glenn. It's part of that "common sense" stuff I'm always talking about. You know, it's that stuff ("common sense and deductive reasoning") that you said there is "NO room for" when trying to ascertain someone's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. I can just hear Vince Bugliosi laughing aloud at this ludicrous statement.... "Guilt requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. There IS NO room for "plain ordinary common sense and deductive reasoning"." -- Glenn Nall; 6/26/15 Edited June 28, 2015 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now