Mike Williams

Ok, so I have to ask this. I think that we do know if the man in the black shirt backed towards the fence, that he would become smaller, and his feet would rise because of Mooremans uphill angle. So there is no reason to believe that he would not replicate the Arnold position UNLESS he could not back far enough from the wall before hitting the fence. It is supposed that Arnold was between the wall and the fence if I remember correctly. So are you saying in effect, that the man in the black shirt would just run out of runnin room to replicate Arnolds position? Mike

Duncan, In the flashing animation above, there is a horizontal line which in the static photo would come pretty close to the man in the black shirts feet. Now the man in the black shirt is almost as wide as the tree which is behind him, this would tell us he has to be closer to the camera than the tree. If we moved that man back towards the fence, his feet would be higher because Mooreman is looking uphill and his body would be smaller overall because of the added distance to the camera. Would this not replicate what we see in the photo of where Arnold may have been? Mike

Yes Get your Hot off the Press copy of the Files Hoax TODAY.....(found in your local FICTION section). The guy in that video Wim kinda reminded me of the lady in Romper room looking through the magic mirror. "And I see the Easter Bunny, and Santa, and the tooth fairy, and James Files......"

I'm beginning to think this thread is a meeting of the Mutual Admiration Society. Happy to flick off those pesky little gnats with sardonic asides as with not responding to those which are perhaps a tad more challenging and continuing with sweeping generalities. If, as noted before, there was no dent in the windshield frame at Love Field, and there was one at Parkland, then I guess one of those "full velocity" "silent bullets" that "made no noise whatsoever" must've done it. Unless there's another solution? And how do we know there was "no noise whatsoever?" The acoustics analysis, for whatever weight you might give it, did not attempt to analyze where any impulses there may have been had emanated from - whether the TSBD or elsewhere, or anywhere in particular from the TSBD - so to say that a noise that was not analyzed did not come from any particular location is, again, a fallacy. "I heard a noise but don't know where it came from, so that fallen tree over there didn't make it." Hullo?!? Still haven't heard back on the question of how you know any "full velocity" round was involved since, presumably lacking evidence of that what kind of round it may have been, we don't know what its full velocity was. You're offering presumptions as proof and derision to create doubt. If this is a crusade, I fear it's failing miserably. As near as I have been able to determine, there is little physical evidence that would indicate anything but a 6.5mm Carcano was fired that day. Unless you are thinking it possible someone was plinkin away at the President with a .22 then a less than full velocity strike to the chrome would stand. Im sure Tom would know that as well as I do. I just add this for you, because you may not be aware of the impact energy of some projectile. I also do agree with you that there was no damage to the chrome at Love Field. It had to have happened during the shooting event. And the answer is: Gee Tom, why was it again we were examining a Carcano Bullet??

I'm beginning to think this thread is a meeting of the Mutual Admiration Society. Happy to flick off those pesky little gnats with sardonic asides as with not responding to those which are perhaps a tad more challenging and continuing with sweeping generalities. If, as noted before, there was no dent in the windshield frame at Love Field, and there was one at Parkland, then I guess one of those "full velocity" "silent bullets" that "made no noise whatsoever" must've done it. Unless there's another solution? And how do we know there was "no noise whatsoever?" The acoustics analysis, for whatever weight you might give it, did not attempt to analyze where any impulses there may have been had emanated from - whether the TSBD or elsewhere, or anywhere in particular from the TSBD - so to say that a noise that was not analyzed did not come from any particular location is, again, a fallacy. "I heard a noise but don't know where it came from, so that fallen tree over there didn't make it." Hullo?!? Still haven't heard back on the question of how you know any "full velocity" round was involved since, presumably lacking evidence of that what kind of round it may have been, we don't know what its full velocity was. You're offering presumptions as proof and derision to create doubt. If this is a crusade, I fear it's failing miserably. As near as I have been able to determine, there is little physical evidence that would indicate anything but a 6.5mm Carcano was fired that day. Unless you are thinking it possible someone was plinkin away at the President with a .22 then a less than full velocity strike to the chrome would stand. Im sure Tom would know that as well as I do. I just add this for you, because you may not be aware of the impact energy of some projectile. I also do agree with you that there was no damage to the chrome at Love Field. It had to have happened during the shooting event.

John, I will not comment on the rumor, and its intent. I will say that I am sorry to hear of the health issues of your wife. My thoughts are with you. Mike

Yes in an attempt to kill a President, I would intentionally create a diversion, with a deliberate miss, rather than just shoot the target. :lol:

Tom, Its gonna take me some time to chew this over. But it will be time well spent I am sure. Do I notice a touch of the diplomat in those letters? I am enjoying the read. Thank You again for sharing this with me. Mike

The Altgens photo show sthat the limo has not quite reached Charles Brehm's location, so if one advances the Zapruder film forward just a little bit ... they will see Charles Brehm being passed. So the proof is that the Zapruder film matches Altgens #6 and its the interpreter who is wrong - as usual! Bill Miller Ups. These are the shadows of Brehm, his son, Moorman and Hill...I was wrong...and Bill Miller is right--- for the first time at this forum! Certainly NOT the first time Bill was correct, and likewise without question not the first nor last time you will be wrong. The alteration claims just get funnier and funnier, its like the Mad magazine of JFK Research! Mike

Pamela, Wholeheartedly agree. No hole and exactly as you say, Just a defect. The evidence supports nothing more. Mike Evaela Glanges: Through and through bullet hole Richard Dudman: Hole Frank Cormier: Hole Stavies Ellies: Through and through hole H.R Freemann: Hole Nick Prinzipe: Hole Charles Taylor jr: hole Abraham Bolden: Hole Georg Whitaker: Hole Hale Boggs: Hole Mike Williams and Pamela McElwain Brown: No hole. Possible scenario: There was a hole, a trough and through bullet hole caused by a shot from the front, from the south knoll, i guess at Z 315 to 320, and it was a miss, because JFKs head moved backward "with considerable violence!", and Connally was not sitting anymore...(Note: Mr Plumlee said, he felt, there was one shot from the south Knoll)... I am and I will be a "hole- supporter"... till hell freezes ... Of course thats your decision , but can you offer any physical evidence? Where is this "hole" which should be readily apparent in the Parkland photo? I suppose they swapped it out in a stop on the way to Parkland. So far your ability to decipher evidence is batting 1000. After reading your "analysis" of the shadows I eagerly wait your interpretation of the Parkland photo.

Understood Evan, my apologies! Mike

After the Len 'Colby' Brazil exposure you're might testy these days. Wrong as usual David, like lots of people I use a screen name on other forums. But this subject has been declared verboten so I’ll leave it at that. Well, not only did Old Redd Foxx live in the neighborhood, its known by many of his Las Vegas neighbors (also those that regularly sat around Las Vegas card rooms with him) are quick to note; whenever Redd appeared on television he could deliver just one 'original' line from his act: "he can smoke". That s it. Now, where have you heard an original Redd 'Sanford' Foxx joke, Mr. Brazil? Wikipedia your best friend these days? You do know that Foxx had a stand up career that long predated his appearance on TV? He was one of the funniest men ever to grace this planet, Drago is to Foxx what a kid who can barely do the doggy paddle is to Michael Phelps. I’ve been listening to his “party albums” since long before Al Gore invented the internet or I had any idea who you or Drago or anybody else here was. I doubt anybody else wrote this stuff it is my understanding that comics on the “Chitlin’ Circuit” wrote their own material. Do yourself a favor listen to Foxx’s “Mother Frockers and Cork Soakers” and some of his other skits warning all of them violated the forum’s obscenity rule. http://www.rhapsody.com/reddfoxx/thebestof...kerscorksoakers Unfortunately that won’t play for folks like me who are outside the US, here is the 1st 30 seconds of the above mentioned routine. http://sample.music.yahoo.com/radio/client...mp;sids=1273860 Len, me wrong? LMAO!... Redd *Sanford* Foxx lived a few doors from me, right off Eastern, for many years... back then Las Vegas was a small place. You knew he lived in Las Vegas, yes? You play poker, Len? Ya couldn't keep Redd out of the Dunes cardroom. He couldn't win either. So tell us about Al Gore inventing the internet, Len. Seems to me your digging in the wrong cesspool again..... p.s. I heard all the acts LIVE, Len. Some of them in the Dunes cardroom, twice.... I was not aware the Dunes supported Old maid, Crazy 8's and Go Fish. Thats the only way I could figure you would be in those card rooms David...unless....of course.....you were serving drinks. sitdown Sgt. Mikey... when I need you I'll ring... so, let me know when your in Vegas.... till then I was speaking with buddy Len Brazil Colby. Btw, Sgt Mikey, I noticed you were nosing around some of John Ritchson old posts. Old JohnR could of taught you a few things Sgt. Mikey. Not getting your ducks in a row are ya? If so, good idea..... We're gonna want to hear from your sniper buddies as to LHO prowess. We've got a few lined up? So, cocktail sir? Oh, you don't have a room key? Sorry! Ya don't pass go LMAO..... David, I doubt you know enough about anything to know who could teach who. But I do find amusement in your incoherent babble, do continue. Your opening your mouth, and doubt is quickly fading. Mike

Pamela, Wholeheartedly agree. No hole and exactly as you say, Just a defect. The evidence supports nothing more. Mike

After the Len 'Colby' Brazil exposure you're might testy these days. Wrong as usual David, like lots of people I use a screen name on other forums. But this subject has been declared verboten so I’ll leave it at that. Well, not only did Old Redd Foxx live in the neighborhood, its known by many of his Las Vegas neighbors (also those that regularly sat around Las Vegas card rooms with him) are quick to note; whenever Redd appeared on television he could deliver just one 'original' line from his act: "he can smoke". That s it. Now, where have you heard an original Redd 'Sanford' Foxx joke, Mr. Brazil? Wikipedia your best friend these days? You do know that Foxx had a stand up career that long predated his appearance on TV? He was one of the funniest men ever to grace this planet, Drago is to Foxx what a kid who can barely do the doggy paddle is to Michael Phelps. I’ve been listening to his “party albums” since long before Al Gore invented the internet or I had any idea who you or Drago or anybody else here was. I doubt anybody else wrote this stuff it is my understanding that comics on the “Chitlin’ Circuit” wrote their own material. Do yourself a favor listen to Foxx’s “Mother Frockers and Cork Soakers” and some of his other skits warning all of them violated the forum’s obscenity rule. http://www.rhapsody.com/reddfoxx/thebestof...kerscorksoakers Unfortunately that won’t play for folks like me who are outside the US, here is the 1st 30 seconds of the above mentioned routine. http://sample.music.yahoo.com/radio/client...mp;sids=1273860 Len, me wrong? LMAO!... Redd *Sanford* Foxx lived a few doors from me, right off Eastern, for many years... back then Las Vegas was a small place. You knew he lived in Las Vegas, yes? You play poker, Len? Ya couldn't keep Redd out of the Dunes cardroom. He couldn't win either. So tell us about Al Gore inventing the internet, Len. Seems to me your digging in the wrong cesspool again..... p.s. I heard all the acts LIVE, Len. Some of them in the Dunes cardroom, twice.... I was not aware the Dunes supported Old maid, Crazy 8's and Go Fish. Thats the only way I could figure you would be in those card rooms David...unless....of course.....you were serving drinks.

I think most non-Americans know what part of the anatomy is being referenced here. But I'm appalled that the Australian mod has not stood up and covered his own (US usage) fanny by protecting the eyes of all his fellow country-folk from this disgraceful (Oz usage) swear word which seeks to demean the female anatomy by equating it with (rhymes with) rankers and ricks of the lowest order. ----------------------- As I recall it, John Simkin requires real names and real photos for a reason. You might want to check out threads on these forums regarding wikipedia and anonymity for good examples of why. And doesn't Lancer - where you seem to have some sort of ... rank(?) insist on posters using their own (real) name? Just for the record - I think Colby is indeed a real person. That doesn't necessarily mean he is the only person posting under his name. I have no knowledge of it one way or the other. Greg, I would agree I believe Colby is a real person. I would also agree with John that the concept is good, having a photo and name to attach humanity. It obviously does not work, but the concept is good. As for the lingo.....thank god none have mentioned English Cigarettes......until now! Best to ya Greg, Mike

David, I doubt you would find any that dont know the name of the President. Something you repeatedly struggle with. RIGHT? Healey just to bring you up to speed its John FITZGERALD not Frances, as you so repeatedly called him. The researchers at Lancer are quite good, they even know WHO we are discussing. http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspir...arch+this+group What a laughing stock. I love the way the news groups guys just completely discount you, as well they should. Gee Dave Ive been at this less than a year and seem to have no trouble at all debating you. When we can actually get you to talk about the case at all. So why not offer something? Come on....you can do it, I know you can. In 5 or 6 years....You can probably.....get the .....PRESIDENTS NAME RIGHT. Nice job there superstar. Your single claim to fame is your Microsoft paint illustrations in TGZFH. If I were associated with such crap I would hide my head in shame. Hell even Fetzer will only claim to be an editor of that trash! Amazing that you wave it as a proud banner. Obviously not cognizant enough to know when you are being laughed at. This is the best part. And so fitting. You and Rigby. That is so comical its almost sad. Ray Charles coming to the aid of Helen Keller. Does the fun ever end?

I love the idea you are "the military." Pomposity and self-delusion on the very grandest scale. But also instructive of a profound cultural division. In the UK, a guy who goes around boasting about his military record is regarded as a bore and a pratt. Quite right, too. Nothing: You just blew that eagerly sought Mods post. Which wasn't a million miles away from my intention. Paul Paul, I see you affluence for attaching words and meaning is as elusive as your perceptions of evidence in the Kennedy Assassination. No wonder you struggle so. I have never boasted about anything, as much as you would try and attach that to me. Your reference to an enlisted man as well as your fumbling to attach meaning to that, shows your contempt of the military Paulie. I had to add nothing nor take anything away for that to be clear. I hardly think if your intention was to grab your fanny with both hands that you would find success. Even if your change purse were to burst into flames. For the record please post a brag that I have made would you? Just once I would love to see you live up to your ridiculous claims. Or is this a case of your alligator mouth writing a check your tweety bird butt cant cash? I would love to see you come to Lancer with some of your unsupported half baked claims. Here they ride, there you would be feasting on crow. As for the word I used for you. I only refrain from using it again because Evan ask me nicely not to. But it was accurate, used properly and with a resourced definition. I added nothing to it nor took anything away. Since I used a legitimate word, in proper text, which was not and is not profanity, why would this ruin a chance at being a Mod if in fact I did pursue that position? Clutching at straws is so unbecoming for you Paul. I myself feel your embarrassment. Mike

Surely this is a joke. Charles, Missing more periods than the Golden Girls! That was good I must confess!!! One for the soup two for da cook! Mike

Tom, I have not read that the spinal column was deviated. I will look into that as it could be significant. The damage to the traverse process alone would have been minimal, and barely made a nick in the bone. Im not altogether certain this would hamper the accuracy of the velocity of the bullet in regard to the depth of the wound. Determining penetration is rather simple when we know what the required energy is for a single inch of penetration. Further, and this is something I am working on, this could be directly related to the size and surface resistance of the projectile. If it requires 30 ft lbs of energy for a 161 grain projectile to penetrate one inch, with a surface area of 33.183mm then the resistance of human tissue can be calculated and velocity projected for much smaller fragments. It would boil down to the fragment having enough velocity to transit the remaining distance after the projectile stopped its forward movement. This is also something I have been looking into in regard to another thread discussing the fragment in the thigh with Jim Root. One thing to consider in the case of a fragment, is that it lacks the weight to surface area ratio of the projectile on a whole. Mike

So I have to ask, why not just apply the same formula to Tony Cummins, that you did to Gordon Arnold? Would that not end this and forever put this issue to rest? We obviously see that Tony Cummins is real. Bill appears to have a legit question, in asking you to do that. If everything is on the up and up, this is your opportunity to fully prove Bill wrong. It would also prove you right! And using Bills own photo to boot!! Mike

Funnily! Scotch vernacular. Im off to have tee martoonies.

Unfair enough. I'm put in mind of a classic Groucho-ism: "I wouldn't join a club that would have me as a member." Here in the Great Democracy, voter roles routinely are purged of individuals considered likely to support Democratic candidates. One of the criteria used to justify removal: So-and-so is a convicted felon. I mention this in asking for reconsideration. Charles Sorry Charles you failed the interview And so the saga ends on a sad note. We are left needing a moderator, and Charles is cast into the soup kitchen!

Tom, A question. Since the .9 grain fragment was a cast off from the impacting projectile, are we certain that it would have had the energy to have traveled through the remainder of the tissue and exited? Is it possible that this may have been a fragment from something different, a head shot perhaps? It would seem to me that this fragments journey would be about 6 inches at least. If the main projectile traveled in to 2" that remains for the fragment to have traveled another 4" on its own to exit. Im not sure it would retain the velocity, due to its loss in mass, to achieve this. This so far is the only real issue I have. Mike

Recently Tom Purvis and I have been discussing the first shot, and examining some of the evidence from that shot. We both do agree that the projectile penetrated to about 2" and that the projectile did not strike JFK at full velocity. We have many witnesses who tell us that JFK was driven forward, and slightly left by this impact. The question led me to take a look and compare the kinetic energy transfer of a transiting shot, as compared to one that simply penetrated 2" and stopped. First lets take a look at the transfer from a transiting shot. The average bullet velocity was 2182 fps, the projectile weight is 161 grains. This gives us an impact energy of 1701 ft lbs. In the WC version this bullet struck no bone, which is significant in our analysis. The only way a projectile can transfer its full force of momentum is if said projectile remains inside the target. In situations where the projectile passes through we see a very small amount of the energy transfered. In cases where it strikes no bone, and using full metal jacket bullets, the transfer is approximately .01% of the total kinetic energy of the bullet itself. In this particular case, that equates to .1701 ft lbs, not even 1/4 of a ft lb of force. This would cause no movement of notice at all in a target as heavy as the human toro. Now to give full perspective we must also consider that at 2182 feet per second, the bullet would have passed through the body in less than .0006 seconds. Now lets take a look at a shot, that for what ever reason would have penetrated to 2". Tests conducted on the ammunition provide that it requires 30 ft lbs of force to penetrate human soft tissue to the depth of one inch. Since our depth here is 2" we then know that the bullet struck with 60 ft lbs of force. Given the weight of the projectile we know that it struck at 409 feet per second. So then in the first case scenario we have .1701 ft lbs being transfered to the target, and in the latter instance we have 60 ft lbs transferring. In the first case the impact energy would be insignificant enough to move the target torso any noticeable amount. The second is a much different story. 60 ft lbs of energy would certainly move the torso, and noticeably so. Sports physics tells us that the average energy of a human punch is in the 60-90 ft lb range. Of course we are not talking Rocky Marciano here (his punch delivered at times almost 1000 ft lbs!) The bottom line is that had the bullet transited at full velocity, it is doubtful the witnesses would have observed the President being knocked forward and left. However with a non-transiting bullet in the 60 ft lb class, this would be very likely exactly what they would see. This may also be considered in the wounding of Connally. But thats for another time. Mike

In your theory only, look at the vertical plane and you will see a shot from the right of the limo totally missing the SS follow up car. Ok then at what frame do you suspect this happened? And where do you place your shooter? You do realize of course that this could not have been a direct impact, and was likely caused during the head shot sequence right? Duncan MacRae Ok Duncan, So when did this fellow take his shot and where did it go? IMO, the bullet from the 2nd floor struck the chrome trim, (direct hit) split into pieces. One piece hit the rearview mirror then hit the windshield. When the 2nd floor shot occured the president's limo was in the area of Johnson's car in the Altgens 6 photo. Don Don, What ballistic evidence can you offer to support that? Or is this simply a guess? Might want to read what Frazier had to say about this. It was not and could not have been a direct hit. Mike Or is this simply a guess? Just in case you have not caught on, that is how much of the JFK assassination research is conducted. With that stated, I will now pull out my OUIJI Board and Crystal ball and briefly discuss the two remaining shots which also struck JFK (in the head). Tom, Nope no guess. The Carcano at the average velocity yields 1701 ft lbs of energy from an intact 161 grain projectile. The trim covering on the limo, as in the replica is about 1/16" thick and the steel mullion under that was basically 1/8" walled reenforced(had to be with a convertable) tubing. The trim itself was not steel, but chrome covered tin. The steel underneath was not hardened. If we look into these metals, and the required 1/4 inch punch pressure of the same, we can, and would see, that the projectile had to be at less than full velocity. Full velocity would have yielded a complete penetration, and a far more significant amount of damage to the chrome strip. I think that Frazier was pretty well on the nail when he swung that hammer. Mike