Jump to content
The Education Forum
Fred Litwin

Need single bullet theory diagram

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Francois:

Precisely what makes Myers and Von Pein "experts" and "scientists"?

 

“Precisely” is without a doubt asking for too much. Give some leeway and he’s answer would still be amusing, is not absurd.

What I am more interested in is Francois’ claim to exrordinary abilities in the realm of critical thinking. That is a term that is often bandied-about by many, yet Francois has shown NOTHING that give a hint that he knows ANYTHING about Critical Thinking or expression. The first litmus test......

Francois, if you have a clue of what critical thinking consists, you would have to know what an example of the opposite would be. Tell us, show us, since you have pointed-out that this entire forum is populated with non-critical thinkers, what is an example of non critical thinking. That should be easy. Yet, I am quite sure that you are blowing smoke and have no clue how to answer this challenge To be sure I can and will clarify this for you after you make a fool of yourself or otherwise obfuscate the issue

Have at it, Francois. But don’t take too much time

I am waiting

 

Cheers,

Michael

 

18 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

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

It is not a lie, it is a political statement. The problem with the SBT is that there was no serious thinking about the implications of the theory. Though I have agreed not to argue the point there is no way a missile could travel from JFK's back wound to his throat without encountering the spine. By the   same token nobody took seriously the the steepness of Connally's wound. YOU say that until it strikes the rib the bullet trajectory is 17.72º As I pointed out that might work but the rib is likely to be the 4th rib rather than the 5th. And that is because you are starting with a shallower trajectory. A trajectory of 17.72º will not travel in the same places in the body that a trajectory of 27º.

Soon I will address exactly how the bullet traveled through Connally's body. The WC dealt in generalities hoping everyone would not ask any annoying questions. Well too bad soon I will be asking difficult questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, has anyone actually read page 107 in the Warren Report which DVP is quoting his information from?

If you have not read it, this is what it appears to be based upon.  It talks about Specter's rod being placed at the 17 degree angle. And its during that silly car exercise of which DVP only uses one picture, without the other two pics that Speer produced--and DVP will not-- that expose it for a set up.  It then does not specify where the wound was on JFK.  It just says it was approximated based on the autopsy report and pics. I am not kidding, that is what it says!  :mellow:

I mean what can one say about this kind of work.  Or DVP smearing anyone else for saying that such stuff is simply unreliable.  When clearly it is.

One of the worst things that the HSCA did was that it did not reexamine this first day evidence, or the actual basis on which the Single Bullet Fantasy was based.  Therefore, they assumed it as part of their report.  Largely based upon Guinn's NAA experiment, which we all know today to be BS.

Sprague was actually heading toward that kind of analysis of this so called evidence when he was terminated.  I think that is a major reason why he was removed. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Sprague was actually heading toward that kind of analysis of this so called evidence when he was terminated.  I think that is a major reason why he was removed.  

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.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

without the other two pics that Speer produced--and DVP will not--

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.

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You did not use them here.  Especially the second one that Pat produced.

And many years ago, when you first started on this rant about he rod, Gil had to produce the other two photos and you were not happy about it.

 

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

You did not use them here [i.e., the "opposite angle" photos relating to CE903].

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.)

 

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, it is the Single, Lone Nut, Magical, Pristine bullet Theory.  Never peer reviewed.  In fact disproven.  Actually a "Conspiracy Theory".  Ford conspired with Specter when he moved the back wound up to the neck to try to make it work.  But bullets still don't change direction in mid air.  So it takes a "Magic" bullet to make this conspiracy theory to work. 

Edited by Ron Bulman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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:

JFKs_Limousine_After_Assassination.jpg


JFK-Limo-Schematic.gif
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

Dealey-Plaza-May-24-1964.jpg

http://kennedy-photos.blogspot.com/2012/11/kennedy-gallery-268.html

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davey likes to say things like bullocks and then smears someone.

For instance, in the above, he only showed the reverse angle of the CE 903 when he had to since Speer was calling him out on it and was about to show it himself.

Even at that, Speer then showed the other reverse angle which completely vitiates what Specter was trying to do with the first censored version.  Just look at the three pictures of the Specter rod yourself. 

 

And one of the first times DVP tried this charade, Gil jesus did insert the reverse angle and he told me about it and how angry DVP was about it.  So I guess in a private email to me Gil Was Lying.  Right Davey.  :please

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still waiting for a reply to this one:

BTW, has anyone actually read page 107 in the Warren Report which DVP is quoting his information from?

If you have not read it, this is what it appears to be based upon.  It talks about Specter's rod being placed at the 17 degree angle. And its during that silly car exercise of which DVP only uses one picture, without the other two pics that Speer produced--and DVP will not-- that expose it for a set up.  It then does not specify where the wound was on JFK.  It just says it was approximated based on the autopsy report and pics. I am not kidding, that is what it says!  :mellow:

I mean what can one say about this kind of work.  Or DVP smearing anyone else for saying that such stuff is simply unreliable.  When clearly it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DVP:  

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.

This is one of the most ignorant statements Davey has made of late.  (Which will probably be surpassed very soon after he wakes up.)
 
The whole point of my post is that Sprague was going to do a reinvestigation of the original evidence.  That is surely the impression he left with those who worked with him before he resigned. He was not going to accept the WC/DPD version of the crime scene and CE 399 and the Magic Bullet.  In fact, I once heard Tanenbaum, his assistant, say words to the effect, "If you go with the whole sniper's nest scenario"; which clearly denotes that he is saying that he has real reservations about it being for real.
 
Now, see Davey, let us take a historical cause and effect view so you will not sound so ignorant of the facts I am about to elucidate.
 
Step 1: Sprague is asked to resign, or the message is the committee will not get funded again.
 
Step 2: The committee now has a hard time getting a replacement.  Goldberg, for example, will not take the job after seeing what happened to a first rate prosecutor like Sprague. Or as ACLU lawyer Joe Rauh once said, "You know, I never thought the Kennedy case was a conspiracy until now.  But if they can do that to Dick Sprague it must have been."
 
Step 3: Chris Dodd has to set up a search committee in order to find candidates.  In a newly declassified transcript , its Dodd who pushes Blakey as the choice against one other candidate. (Davey would not know anything about this since he does not search declassified files..)
 
Step 4: Blakey is walked around the committee by Tanenbaum for a few weeks and, as Fonzi describes it, he realizes what the lay of the land is.
 
Step 5: The decision is now made not to go down the complete forensic overhaul path. The committee decides not to reexamine the first day crime scene, the Magic Bullet, the origins of CE 399 or the whole sniper's nest scenario.  This was done in back to back meetings  involving Baden and Purdy and Blakey.  Prior to this, both Baden and Purdy had been in the Sprague/Tanenbaum camp.  (This last piece of information was given to me by Eddie Lopez who was there, and he could hardly believe what happened. As he said to me, "Jim, from that moment on, Andy Purdy had religion about the Magic Bullet.")
 
Step 6: What makes this so astonishing is that Purdy was one of the members of Mark Lane's Citizen's Commission of Inquiry. In fact, it was Purdy who got Groden to show Tom Downing's son the Zapruder film.  Downing's son then insisted they show it to his congressman father and this is how the HSCA got off the ground in the first place. It was Downing, who after taking a vote in the committee, called Sprague and offered him the position. 
 
Needless to say, this information--which Davey could have never discovered since he admits he does no original research--is crucial in showing what happened to the HSCA.  How it went from a no holds barred, unfettered quest for forensic truth in the JFK case, to a much more narrow and guided view of the JFK case.  
 
As Mr. Gordon noted above, the original finding about the Single Bullet Fantasy is really a political statement. It was designed that way, mostly by by Specter. Unfortunately, that is what happened to the HSCA also.  I think Blakey has some regrets about this, as he later denounced the NAA as junk science and says the CIA lied to him about Johannides, and he cannot trust them on anything.  I don't think Sprague would have fallen for those two pretexts in the first place.  Because he was a very experienced and efficient prosecutor from the beginning.
Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davey, in none of your replies have you noted the fact that Specter's Rod did not work on the actual Cable TV demonstration about the Magic Bullet. In Beyond the Magic Bullet the bullet came out the chest.

See, that was  a real experiment,  it tested itself.    Did not work.  Specter with a pointer is not an experiment. it is a set up for people like you.

 

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

From Pat Speer's site,   this quote:" In his March 16, 1964 testimony before the Commission, Dr. Humes testified that the approximate angle of decline of the bullet in the drawing was 45 degrees.  Where did he get this from? Was this angle measured at the autopsy.  This 45 degrees certainly didn't come from the drawing itself.

Now, we have three sources that indicate a much steeper angle than that used by the WC: Frazier, Sibert and O'Neill report and this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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?....

CE903-Zoomed.png

 

Screen%20Shot%202018-01-31%20at%201.11.5

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

×
×
  • Create New...