David Josephs

David, I appreciate your thoughtful response. But the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 elevated the CIA above the military. Peace to you as well, M. Thanks Mike... Hope you read "None Dare....." I believe if you have not, it will change the way you see the assassination and CIA.... With regards to your comment above.... would you quantify "elevated" please... I've read over the Act and while it allows Financial and personnel secrecy... the CIA still had to go thru the Military for anything they wanted.. If anything, the Act allowed the CIA to get into more trouble than the 1947 envisioned. I look forward to your response DJ David, Oddly enough None Dare Call It Conspiracy was the first book I ever read on this subject. In 1973, was loaned to me by a college friend as I was talking about the JFK conspiracy to him. I'd like to read it again, but I recall it was quite from a John Bircher bent. Dawn Hey there Dawn... Would like to know what you mean by "Bircher bent" thanks DJ

David, I appreciate your thoughtful response. But the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 elevated the CIA above the military. Peace to you as well, M. Thanks Mike... Hope you read "None Dare....." I believe if you have not, it will change the way you see the assassination and CIA.... With regards to your comment above.... would you quantify "elevated" please... I've read over the Act and while it allows Financial and personnel secrecy... the CIA still had to go thru the Military for anything they wanted.. If anything, the Act allowed the CIA to get into more trouble than the 1947 envisioned. I look forward to your response DJ Yes, under the Act, the CIA "had to go thru the Military for anything they wanted." But that's the point. The CIA got anything it wanted. The Act gave it unlimited access to military resources for its own purposes without accountability under certain circumstances, which it could (and often did) fabricate. The Act allowed the CIA to call the shots and not even the JCS would know what it was doing. That's a coup in itself: a secret agency obtaining use of all U.S. military power. Biography: http://educationforu...st&p=235641 I will grant you that the Act made the CIA much more powerful and less accountable... yet all the Military Intelligence acronyms were in existence well before and imo the line between the CIA and Military was virtually invisible. The Military had the budget, manpower, equipment and history... I think the CIA simply took the most evil and cunning of the Military intelligence... added European spy networks and more Evil... added other "personnel" with very little care other than their ability to destroy... and the CIA was born. Curious... Anthony Frank used to post here often and had a POV that stated the KGB had so infultrated the CIA by then that this and other assassiantions were all part of a KGB plan... he says that in the 1984 closed sessions, hundreds of KGB were identified within the CIA... he wrote an interesting book on the subject that he let me read the drafts of, yet it seemed to me to stop short of the required proof... just wondering if you had come across his posts DJ

David, I appreciate your thoughtful response. But the Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 elevated the CIA above the military. Peace to you as well, M. Thanks Mike... Hope you read "None Dare....." I believe if you have not, it will change the way you see the assassination and CIA.... With regards to your comment above.... would you quantify "elevated" please... I've read over the Act and while it allows Financial and personnel secrecy... the CIA still had to go thru the Military for anything they wanted.. If anything, the Act allowed the CIA to get into more trouble than the 1947 envisioned. I look forward to your response DJ

A very valid point Martin... But since the DPD Homicide Division did not see clear enough to want to use a stenographer for Oswald's interrogation... I get the feeling the DETAILS were really not all that important, as in "we're helping with the frame-up so all the details have to work" was NOT a train of thought... What was ? Getting the (Ozzie/Hidell) rifle to the 6th floor FROM Irving the day before..... If they didn't need his interrogation in court... what use would there be for all the other "evidence"? It would make sense that those who dropped the hulls and rifle would also leave the bag... and this presupposes that Oswald was TOLD to go home on Thurday for whatever reason that was needed. Now, if Oswald had Irving Sports Shop mount a scope in Novemeber... and this was OUR OSWALD how are the BYP authentic with a scoped rifle in March? That morning FBI Agent Emory Horton arrived at Dial Ryder's house in Irving at 10:30a m. Commission atorney Liebeler asked, "How did Horton know to come out to the sports shop?" Ryder replied, "Actually, I don't know .... .I told him I had a ticket with the name Oswald, no date, no address, just for drilling and tapping and boresighting-no address, or name; he didn't say he'd like to see the ticket ..... we went up to the Irving Sports Shop and I opened it up and got the ticket and showed him."78 Liebeler asked, "Did you give the tag to Mr. Horton?" Ryder replied, "No; he told us to hold on to it, keep it and they would probably get it later on and they did."79 Ryder told agent Horton there was no record of selling mounts for the scope and this indicated to him that the customer (allegedly Oswald) brought the scope and mounts with his gun. Ryder said the only work he would have performed was the labor to drill, tap, and bore sight the rifle. When shown a photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald, Ryder said that he associated Oswald's picture with that of an individual who brought in an Argentine made rifle about two weeks ago and had a scope attached to the gun.80 But Ryder explained that an Argentine rifle has a different bolt assembly than did the gun found on the 6th floor of the TSBD. The FBI neither asked Ryder for the name and address of the man who brought in the Argentine rifle, nor did they review the shop's repair tickets, nor did they make any attempt to learn if the individual ever existed.

According to Armstrong (page 17) NOTE: After the assassination Dallas Police detectives found a document that has been incorrectly identified as Oswald's birth certificate. This document is listed as item #448 in Warren Commission Exhibit 2003 and identified as "Birth Certificate# 17034." This document is NOT a birth certificate nor is it the "Declaration of Birth" mentioned above. Item #448 is merely an acknowledgment by the New Orleans Parish Office of Records of Births, Marriages and Deaths that Oswald's birth was recorded in Book 207, Folio 1321. 52-03 Upon payment of a small fee, anyone can obtain such a certificate. The orinal "Declaration of Birth" has never been found, nor was a copy published in the Warren Volumes. The FBI obtained a Copy of this document from an unknown source, which was released by the FBI along with thousands of other J F K related documents in 1978. So still no Birth Certificate for Oswald...

The bag was needed to get the rifle to the TSBD... there NEVER was a bag in Wesley's car... In fact, the bag may have been brought in by the man Yates gives a ride and drops off right outside the TSBD... with a 3-4 foot package. The bag also was never in the corner of the TSBD... an interesting mystery inside the mystery... Read the testimony of Studebaker, Day, Montgomery... and try to find out who and how that bag gets from that corner, to the photos of Monty holding the bag out front... I'veposted it before... it is very telling... Enjoy DJ

Trying to find WHEN Rose/Stovall could have picked up his rifle and WHY? Here are the first references to a 30-30... 12:44 9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer) The type of weapon looked like a 30-30 rifle or some type of Winchester. 12:44 Dispatcher 9, it was a rifle? 12:44 9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer) A rifle, yes. 12:44 Dispatcher 9, any clothing description? 12:44 9 (Inspector J.H. Sawyer) About 30, 5'10", 165 pounds. 12:47 Dispatcher Signal 19, involving the President. Suspect: white male, thirty, slender build, five feet ten inches, one hundred sixty-five pounds, believed to have used 30 caliber rifle. Believed to be in the old School Book Depository, Elm and Houston, at this time. And some proof that a poly was done.... Mr. BALL. Okay, that will be fine. We will do this. Thanks very much. Mr. ROSE. Let's see, there was something else I was going to tell you now, I wanted to mention--we did run Wesley Frazier on the polygraph, did you know that? Mr. BALL. I know you did--we know about that. If shots were fired within that building... why do we see over and over the DPD letting citizens BACK IN right afterward? Representative FORD - Did any of the policemen interfere with your efforts to go into the Building and eventually down into the basement where you had your lunch? Mr. FRAZIER - No, sir; they didn't. I found Rose's report about going back and searching Wesley's place... The last page has them taking Wesley home and then getting a call and turning around... I thought maybe Dowdy did the report but there's nothing in the database authored by him.... and only one poly from Lewis... We all know (incl DPD) that a polygraph wasn't all that reliable... what was so important that Wesley HAD to be shown to be telling the truth? The Bag?? DJ http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box3.htm Folder 1 - #3

Yet his rifle and ammo was STILL taken from him... How can this possibly be related if the rifle was at Wesley's place? And why would Rose and Stovall even bother with him AND HIS RIFLE on the 22nd? unless to intimidate? Confiscated Evidence?? Cheers DJ

Had not seen that Josh, thanks Do you get the feeling he "un"says that they were going to charge him and miraculously the paper bag is born... and coroborrated by family... and no one else. 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. Mr. BALL - Or, are you guessing? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I don't think so. Mr. BALL - You saw him come in the door? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes.

Completely agree... yet I get the feeling LBJ was more "opportunist" than planner... And with as much hate as there was against JFK at the time... STEERING the hate was more important than anything else... Aren't the best plans those that dont look like plans at all? "Making it easier" could have been the plan of the reluctant conspirators... yet as Harry Dean mentions, there HAD to be something pretty substantial to keep EVERYONE from saying something and going along... I simply do not believe that people in 2012 can grasp the electricity in the air in Dallas, the USA and the World in 1963. Secrecy, Fear... this was when it STARTED.... not where we are now where Fear and Secrecy are the expected norm... corruption and scandal - expected... In 1963 the great ole USA could do no wrong in the minds of its people... and its government was believed, period. That we come to find something different as the years peel away the lies goes to show that history will forever repeat itself as long as WE THE PEOPLE let it.

"Lyndon Johnson, one of the key players in the JFK assassination," Hey there Robert... It was refreshing to read this post of yours where you seem to be taking a step back from LBJ all powerful MASTERMIND of the assassination... which he wasn't.. He was indeed, a "player" and benefitted enormously (hint: read as "highly motivated") Do you really see this as David or Nelson sitting at the dining room table mapping out an assassination strategy? or more likely those wishing to remain on the "King's" good side and maybe even pull that thorn from his paw... made it happen? If one believes Harry Dean... the mechanics were equally as crazed right wing militia ready to literally die for the purity of their country. The Rockefellers MAY have pushed that pebble down the mountain.... but that's the great part of being one of "THEM" - no direct connection, no risk, all reward. LBJ could have been taken out just as easily and he knew it... David and Nelson had nothing to fear... ever. Dulles had their protection Hoover might have had some of their fears so he was kept on place And Dillon? Not sure but I feel as if the SS Senior Staff did not let this one go to Dillon... yet it was not as if he wasn't in the Rockefeller embrace... Flyod Boring and E. Roberts more likely as well as Rowley... Through the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial, established by John D. Rockefeller, Jr. in 1918 and named after his mother, the family shifted the focus of philanthropy into the social sciences, stimulating the founding of university research centres and creating the Social Science Research Council. This memorial fund was subsequently folded into the foundation in a major reorganization in 1928/9. John D. Rockefeller, Jr. became the foundation chairman in 1917. One of the many prominent trustees of the institution since has been C. Douglas Dillon, the United States Secretary of the Treasury under both Presidents John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson. The foundation also supported the early initiatives of Henry Kissinger, such as his directorship of Harvard's International Seminars and the early foreign policy magazine Confluence, both established by him while he was still a graduate student.[15]

It may have been touched upon... wouldn't the SS have to be told some story that would elicit that poor a response? An exercise that they were told about ahead of time perhaps... as there really is no way to explain the behavior away... no two ways, Kellerman should have been over JFK after the first SOUND like a shot. Greer... speeding off. what could they have been told to make sure they 1) put the limo out front, and 2) didn't react? had to have been pretty good.

You aint gonna learn what you dont wanna know Glenn... And you simply do not want to know that your snippet and the JFK shot have nothing whatsoever to do with each other... But if you want to continue to make your point with non sequitur... and then build your case with your hands over your ears/mouth/eyes have at it. I explained the differences... the man in your snippet does not move since the bullet only contacts a very small portion of the man's skull and is thru without an explosion of the skull. A better question is why are you using an example of a shot that does not blow chunks of skull from the victim? Newton then is correct since you snippet does not allow for anough mass to push thru the skull to move the man... Now, if you were to try a hollow-point bullet that mushrooms and/or fragments as it tunnels so that much more surface area is affected... you get something resembling the JFK shot... And why do you not acknowledge the real extent of the motion... In your snippet the man falls to the ground... does the bullet do this or is this the result of gravity on a dead person? JFK's head moves because the bullet hits the top right front... His shoulders barely move at all... He falls to the left FROM GRAVITY.... just like your snippet He falls to BACK due to the limo moving and again, GRAVITY and the fact the shot came from the right... not behind... if from behind, in the way he was sitting, he would have fallen to his right.. but again.. If you dont want to open yourself to possibilities to answer your question then it seems you simply have an agewnda that does not include finding or discussing answers and only includes your POV... which again is fine... but then don't keep asking the same question hoping for a different answer... DJ

Mike, After reading this entire thread, I too agree with some, disagree with some yet feel as if you've taken the next step with Nazi's yet not with the CIA. Even Douglas' book does not delve into the men behind the men... Have you read "None Dare Call it Conspiracy"? http://www.kamron.com/none_dare_call_it_conspiracy.htm I come from a Finance background... Money/Banking and Marketing to boot.... The selling of "Nothing to see here, just move on" is explained very well... (also see XAT's "History of Money" as well as parts of "Zeitgeist") The Military DID it (edit: also remember that EVERYONE was in or had been in the military at one time or another in 1963.. THEY were the big boys, not the CIA) The CIA created the stories to COVER IT UP The Johnson Administration, FBI and everyone who has ever argued for or against a conspiracy ASSISTED THE COVERUP by not aloowing us to admit how transparent it was (Salandria) The PLAYERS benefitted by now playing a more interesting, costly and important "game" While The OWNERS, those international Money Men... and by default those in bed with them as captains of: industry, media, natural resources, etc were the BENEFACTORS Even the "lowliest" human will find a way to get ahead whether it be cheating, lying, stealing or blaming others Now add an Ivy league education, the right friends and gobs of money... and the same person simply affects a bigger audience... ... add control of a nation's money supply... and I would venture to say that NOTHING earthly would be able to stand in the way... and voila... the Council on Foreign Relations. IMHO, "None Dare" is the book that explains the WHY, BEHIND the JFK assassination... Peace DJ

"Please, please don't bring up Jean Hill, Gordon Arnold or Ed Hoffman" There are 50 others who will tell us about the GK shooter... so that's fine. "Contempory News Reports" told us three shots, three hits... JFK first, JC next, then JFK... books and articles published well into 1964 say the same thing. Three seperate and distinct shots that each hit something... and yet.. there are RESULTS in DP that point to well more than just 3 shots... but you know that. and here you go... avlused: and the cover-up of said hole: Glenn... Let's please stay on the same page...k? I am saying as well as providing the supporting evidence, that JFK's HEAD and arms move AFTER his brains are blown out... In your little snippet... where is the blowing open of the skull? Blood shooting high into the air? A piece the size of HARPER blown off? Did you SEE what Boswell says the head looked like? From one FMJ bullet?? All you showed us was a small calibre hole at point blank range from a handgun with nowhere NEAR the velocity or the ammo type... But other than that your snippet is a perfect example of the JFK headshot... From all I've read, what happens when a bullet strikes is close to impossible to determine other than Small hole in - LARGE hole out... and that in a vehicle moving forward, and a person going from alive to dead... the person will fall AWAY from the shot and opposite from the movement of the vehicle based on gravity and the laws of motion. Back and to the LEFT... the bullet is only one small piece of the equation to determine JFK's movements... look at my graphic again... his right shoulder barely moves.. Tell you what... take your snippet, and at the moment he is shot, have someone push on his chest, just a small push, right after the shot... wanna guess which direction he's gonna fall? The only shooter was seen, and heard, up in that sixth floor window of the TSBD (although, true to form, you maintain that no shots were fired from that window). Please, please don't bring up Jean Hill, Gordon Arnold or Ed Hoffman. Most witnesses heard three shots. I'm not aware of a single contemporary news report that said there were more, and I've seen and heard quite a few of those. The Zapruder film doesn't show a large and avulsed wound at the back of JFK's head.

No doubt there are reasons to explain what we see... What caught my eye was watching these frames in context - it SEEMS as if JFK is hit again thru the top of the head... Probably the effect of the blurr and camera movement... but it SEEMS that his head moves much more abnormally than just blur. Just a theory... a hypothesis... to explain the hole in the lower head and the trail of particles in the upper.... A common distinction made in science is between theories and hypotheses. Hypotheses are individual empirically testable conjectures; while theories are collections of hypotheses that are logically linked together into a coherent explanation of some aspect of reality and which have individually or jointly received some empirical support. And of course Craig... I have no idea how blurring works. and you haven't a clue about how math shows the zfilm impossible... We'll just leave it at that and call it even..... when you can figure out why the WCR tell us the limo was only going 3mph from z161-z166... you let us know... if not, we can explain it again. I'll start measuring blur... after you explain how to do it correctly and actually SHOW US... like we do with the math. And then we can talk about the assassiantion itself... you got the chops to present something other than photo analysis... or just going to stay in your safe little world where conclusions and connections are irrelevent to your participation?

As I was examing the extent of the fall "back and to the left" I noticed the blurrs and clarity of these three frames and what looks like a shot flying thru the top of JFK's head. At 318 the entire frame is blurred as one expects... yet on 319... the background is not blurry while the foreground is a mess... If one shot when thru the right temple and out the back... "something" had to leave the trail of particles high up... (if the xrays are trustworthy for this) Simultaneous shots accomplishes this and would be good reason to remove key frames DJ

Glenn, the movement of a head after being shot is related to how much of the bullet's energy is left in the head. A high-velocity bullet shooting straight through a head will impart very little energy to the head. The movement of the head will be negligible. A low velocity bullet, such as that fired from a handgun, would similarly cause very little movement. But a high-velocity bullet which fragments upon impact will impart far more energy to the head than normal, and cause far more movement than normal. I have concluded that the bullet struck Kennedy at the supposed exit, from behind, and that this led to a reaction much like the reaction one would have to being slapped on the top of the head--the chin flies down and bounces back, and the elastic recoil of the neck muscles leads him to fall backwards. Or, as explained by Newton's laws... his head moves forward as he is hit from the front... a slight move and EXACTLY what would be expected... until the bullet destroys all of the motor functions for the man and he essentially falls limp to his left... away from where the shot originated. That someone of your knowledge base and history would still talk about the headshot coming from the rear is simply amazing to me. If he was hit from behind he would have done exactly the opposite... slight move toward the bullet and then fall away from it... he does no such thing. And if Z was the ONLY evidence then I agree, a discussion is in order... but it is no where NEAR the only evidence for a frontal shot... When all toaken together... it is impossible to conclude that shot(s) were not fired from the right front. That we are even discussing it is a surprise Pat. If you of all people are going to argue against a frontal shot... is that what you're doing? DJ

Glenn... then deal with this please. I am stating that his body did not move nearly as much as it was made out to be... and that his head moves an entire width for very good reason. He was not THROWN back and to the left... He was leaning left, shot in the right front, his head moves back as described below and the body falls... How is this inconsistent with a frontal shot (along with blood and gore that was sprayed back and left) and how is this CONSISTENT with a shot from the rear? You should also notice that there is no "back splatter" that propels the head anywhere... nor does the man fall INTO the shooter... but slightly away. Add some mushrooming and a slight explosion and your snippet would show the same thing as what happened to JFK DJ

Seems that Paul has got MIA... Paul... help us understand the extent of the movement YOU see... I see a very short distance in a very short timeperiod... Are you still saying that he was thrown BACK and to the LEFT in such a manner as to make it impossible in a real physcial world?

Okay Glenn... slowly this time and with feeling... One is shot with a pistol at point blank range - the hole with blood fountaining out did NOT fragment on impact, did NOT blow a hole out the back of his head, but DID enter his head in just about the same spot but in a different angle. The OTHER SHOT... was fired at less than 2000fps (please see bullet fragmentation chart), MAY have been a fragmenting bullet based on the trail of particles left in the head, and could have imparted much more force if expanding than the pistol shot BUT WELL MORE IMPORTANT IS THE FACT that JFK did not move nearly as much as you are making it out to be... The major movement was centered around his HEAD... since he was hit at the right, top, front we can at least agree that external stimuli to that part of the head would AT LEAST push his head up and back a bit.... JFK's head moves around the right shoulder... if the body FLEW BACK as you describe then the immediate motion would be in his entire torso... it is not... His head moves, his arms go limp, and he falls to the left after his head is pushed back.. the bottom frame in my graphic is the farthest point to the rear he goes... Very little motion at all compared to z312... Yes, the head moves its entire width... but the rest of his body does what we see in that film... it simple falls based on gravity and motion ala Newton. 3.Third law: The mutual forces of action and reaction between two bodies are equal, opposite and collinear. There is nothing we see in Z that contradicts this law, nor is there a HUGE backandtotheleft movement of his BODY... and Glenn... I asked a question of you - show us any other FMJ bullet doing the damage shown in the xray...leaving a trail of vapor and micro sized particles.. surely in all of history this is not the ONLY TIME it ever happened... you know, like the first time steel building(s) ever fell and disintegrated down due to fire... 3 times in the same day.

Robert... My jury is still out on LBJ's exact role yet one has to accept he benefitted and was just the right person for the job... YET, Couldn't his awareness of "something in the works" just led him to plan to take full and complete advantage of the situation when/if the time arose? The people in charge didn't necessarily WANT LBJ... they simply DIDN'T want JFK to interfere any longer. Evil usually recognizes Evil... which could by why LBJ went along and hoped to gain favor with a force that even he recognized was well behond his reach. LBJ behaves the same way post assassination whether he planned it or not... His own planning of it and control of it could not be near as complete as the CFR backed conspirators... nor would LBJ be worried or concerned about his being taken out if it was his doing... It wasn't... Not to the extent you would have us accept - at least not yet for me. It's much more plausible that LBJ realizes how little power as POTUS he would really have, yet how much more he would have if he cooperated... He KNEW something bigger was involved, something that for the first time he would not be able to control, murder or intimidate - and that scared the piss out of him. So he did what he was told - primarily by Bundy.... got his war, got his wealth, and saw first hand how he was no longer the big bully on the block. Just today's POV on LBJ. I don't see how a cadre of elite international bankers would give LBJ a second's thought other than to use, as they use any other resource. Cheers Robert DJ

So the handgun example was one of these bullets that fragmented and disintegrated THRU the man's head? How does the track of particles and fragments MOVE UP above the line of either the WCR OR the HSCA entracne wounds? and please provide ANY EXAMPLE ANY WHERE IN HISTORY where a FMJ bullet left a trail of micro-sized and normal sized fragments... The speed to cause a FMJ bullet to fragment into IDENTIFIABLE pieces is much faster than the MC could fire... The REAL question is how did the hole in the right rear happen if the frontal shot disintegrated into these fragments well above where the bullet exited... and the only thing I can come up with are from tests of holoow-point ammo... there is usually a large fragment of two that is left... and THIS would have caused the hole in the right rear while the rest of the bullet was either left all thru JFK's head or the extra with those fragments is NOT JFK... DJ "An expanding bullet is a bullet designed to expand on impact, increasing in diameter to limit penetration and/or produce a larger diameter wound. It is informally known as a Dum-dum or a dumdum bullet. The two typical designs are the hollow point bullet and the soft point bullet" In essence, the hollow point bullet has several purposes: hollow points designed to expand increase in size once within the target, thus maximizing tissue damage and blood loss or shock, and to remain inside the target, thereby transferring all of its kinetic energy to that target (some fraction would remain in the bullet if it passed through instead). Jacketed hollow points (JHPs) or plated hollow points are covered in a coating of harder metal to increase bullet strength and to prevent fouling the barrel with lead stripped from the bullet. The term hollow-cavity bullet is used to describe a hollow point where the hollow is unusually large, sometimes dominating the volume of the bullet, and causes extreme expansion or fragmentation on impact. Soft-point bullets are less common than hollow points, due to the slower expansion and greater penetration, but they fill roles that hollow points do not. In some cases the reduced expansion is desired, so that more penetration is achieved before the bullet begins the rapid deceleration caused by expansion. In other cases, the smooth, rounded profile typical of a soft-point bullet is preferred over the concave tip of a hollow point, because the latter tends to suffer failure to feed malfunctions in certain magazine-fed firearms. Many of the more modern magazine-fed firearms were expressly designed to feed hollow points reliably, but many older and military-derived designs were not. Many military firearms, especially pistols, were designed to fire only full metal jacket bullet (FMJ) ammunition, and will suffer failures to feed with hollow-point ammunition, leaving soft-point ammunition the best choice for non-military defensive purposes in these firearms. Military firearms are designed to use FMJ rounds because the Hague Convention prohibits nations which are signatory to the convention from using expanding bullets in warfare. However, this convention does not apply to individuals in non-warfare situations, such as law enforcement, personal defense and hunting.

In the HSCA the footnote for (368) (2) A photograph designated as 133C-Dees, obtained from the Dees' widow ; (156) (156) See ref. 150. (150) Staff summary of interview with Mrs. G. Dees, Jan. 5, 1977, House Select Committee on Assassinations (J .F .K . Document 004030) 2. The Dees (White) Photo HSCA VI, p 141 The committee obtained an 8 X 10 print of an additional view of Oswald holding the rifle in a pose different from CE 133-A or generation print, * was given to the committee on December 30, 1976 by Mrs. Geneya Dees of Paris, Tex, According to Mrs. Dees, it had been acquired by her former husband, Roscoe White, now deceased, while employed with the Dallas Police at the time of the assassination. The panel designated this recently discovered photograph as 133-C. Gil - can you dig up this document? J .F .K . Document 004030 This is related to the 133C prints - yet we NEVER had an original negative for either A or C prints.... Both are enlargements from the original negative.* *Dallas police officer R. L. Studebaker testified to the House Select Committee on Assassinations that in 1963, while working in the Dallas Police Department Photography Laboratory, he made numerous copies of the Kennedy photographic evidence for fellow Dallas police officers ; included in the pictures distributed were prints of CE 133-A and CE 133-B as well as of the third pose not seen by the Warren Commission. Testimony of R. L. Studebaker, supra note 127. Mr. BALL. Have you had some experience in operating a camera? Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes. Mr. BALL. How much? Mr. STUDEBAKER. Well, on this certain camera? Mr. BALL. Yes. Mr. STUDEBAKER. About 2 months. Mr. BALL. But you have had photography in your crime lab work? Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes. Mr. BALL. For how long? Mr. STUDEBAKER. Was about 2 months. Mr. BALL. How long have you done photography altogether? Mr. STUDEBAKER. In my lifetime? Mr. BALL. No, as one of the assistants in the crime lab, what period of years? Mr. STUDEBAKER. 2 months. I went to the crime lab in October, the 1st of October. Mr. BALL. You did - had you done any photography before that? Mr. STUDEBAKER. Just home photography.