Mike Williams
-
Posts
1,023 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Mike Williams
-
-
I'll get a grip on myself and move on.
Charles
Charles, Benny Hill would have paid a fortune for material like that.
Stephen,
It also by definition is a contemptuous person.
Benny Hill did pay a fortune for this material. Where do you think Charles GETS his stuff?
I hope you reconsider as a moderator, I assure you the options look bleak.
Mike
Oooooooooh! I'm being called a plagiarist. First by "Colby," now by "his" putative herr apparant.
Or I am noting nothing more than coincidence -- as opposed to happenstance and/or enemy action, as Ian Fleming might have it?
It may be difficult for some of the limited intellects on this Forum to grasp, but original wit comes easy to some of us.
So don't tell me I steal others' lines.
Or pretty soon you won't have Charles Drago to kick around anymore.
Charles,
It was a joke, apparently the wit missed you. Slow your breathing, relax, everything IS going to be ok. I promise
As for not being around to kick anymore. I could swear I have read you were leaving before, and before, and before. The turnstile never stops clicking.
I would certainly hope you remain. Your humor is priceless.
Mike
-
I've never stolen a joke in my life.
(Exposed a few? Guilty.)
And there are countless people who can back me up on this.
Take my wife. Please.
Once upon a time, my wife told me that she wanted me to take her, for our anniversary, to somewhere she had never been before.....I told her "Well how about the kitchen?"
-
I'll get a grip on myself and move on.
Charles
Charles, Benny Hill would have paid a fortune for material like that.
Stephen,
It also by definition is a contemptuous person.
Benny Hill did pay a fortune for this material. Where do you think Charles GETS his stuff?
I hope you reconsider as a moderator, I assure you the options look bleak.
Mike
-
I think Charles would be a good moderator.
FWIW.
The contents of Charles' posts on this forum thus far suggests a man puffed up with self importance and the rather unsupported idea that he is some sort of intellectual. I therefore think he'd be an extremely poor moderator.
However I also believe the experience might do him some good and so will not stand in his way
.***********************************************
Gee, that's mighty white of you, Andy.
Thats a racial attack on another menber of the forum. Since the mods have deems attacks on another member an offence, the author of this post needs to be placed on moderation.
I could not possibly more readily agree.
An obvious racial attack.
Mike
-
The "hole in the windshield" was first mentioned by Hale Boggs in the WC Ex. session on December 16, 1963. Note: nobody answered: No, there is no hole. They knew: there was a hole. Later it became, surprise, surprise a " crack".
From a HOLE on Dec 16. 1963
To a CRACK without a perforation... on April 30. 1964...
Karl,
Surprise surprise. There was no hole in Altgens, there was no hole at Parkland, and there was no hole at 1am in the WH garage. That is very clear.
Mike
-
Now!
If I could only get the Attorney General's Office to complete the "Questionaire" on this information and return it.
Tom,
Nope no questions. I am up to speed and following.
The only comment I would have is to say this is a completely possible scenario.
And hell yea I wanna hear about 2 &3.
Mike
-
Relate the hole then align it back on the horizontal plane, it struck at 4 degrees. From here we can then get a general measurement to the SS follow up car, figure in the 4 degrees and realize that it would not have cleared the ss car windshield.
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
-
Get XXXX, Williams.
Edited for offensive language
It was Thomas Paine, I believe, who noted that, ""The natural bent of my mind was to science."
This quote ocurred to me, I guess, insofar as the natural bent of my mind often is to humor. And God knows this Forum and all who read it could benefit from a healthy dose of laughter right about now.
Music might also soothe some raw nerves. Might I suggest listening to one of my favorite European jazz musicians, the incomparable Bengt Hallberg?
Humor. Music. What better way to make certain that we don't get bent out of shape?
A bit of Herb Albert, from his "Rise" album would be wonderful!
-
To the Owners of the Education Forum:
I would like to be considered for the position of moderator.
Would you please post the formal criteria for selection?
My C.V. is available upon request.
Sincerely,
Charles
Charles you can only be a moderator if we currently stock your size in hob nail jack boots. Special orders are out of the question....
Thank YOU
As an aside. I just envisioned Dopey Dwarf in Hob nailed jack boots, and almost wet my pants! Heres to you Kathy!
***********************************************
Get XXXX, Williams.
Edited for offensive language
Kathy,
Thank you very much for editing this most vulgar expression from Ms. Mauro. Not only was it shocking and appalling , I would have expected much more from a lady.
-
To the Owners of the Education Forum:
I would like to be considered for the position of moderator.
Would you please post the formal criteria for selection?
My C.V. is available upon request.
Sincerely,
Charles
Charles you can only be a moderator if we currently stock your size in hob nail jack boots. Special orders are out of the question....
hank YOU
As an aside. I just envisioned Dopey Dwarf in Hob nailed jack boots, and almost wet my pants! Heres to you Kathy!
***********************************************
Get XXXX, Williams.
Oh the humanity. I would have at least expected something with wit. But on second thought.......
remove offensive remark
-
Tom and I have just finished looking at his first shot scenario. I can also say that I very much look forward to stepping through each shot with him.
So far there is no reason to believe that he has not done his homework, as everything he has shared with me thus far looks very plausible.
There are many who do not understand ballistics, and prefer to go with what they "think".
A wise man once said that a truly intelligent man knows just how stupid he is.
I would be very careful in using the citations by Carlos and Craig. One of their biggest issues was the TIMING of the shots.
Tom,
I am looking very much forward to discussing the next shot. I do have a few questions about the first, but nothing that hampers its likely hood.
Well done!
Mike
Tom and I have just finished looking at his first shot scenario.
Nah!
Whoever said we were "finished", lied!
There still remains the "good" part, as well as the "great" part.
Perhaps finished was the wrong term. However I am satisfied with what I have read so far. I have no issues from a ballistic standpoint!
Looking forward!
Cheers!
-
To the Owners of the Education Forum:
I would like to be considered for the position of moderator.
Would you please post the formal criteria for selection?
My C.V. is available upon request.
Sincerely,
Charles
Charles you can only be a moderator if we currently stock your size in hob nail jack boots. Special orders are out of the question....
Thank YOU
As an aside. I just envisioned Dopey Dwarf in Hob nailed jack boots, and almost wet my pants! Heres to you Kathy!
-
Tom and I have just finished looking at his first shot scenario. I can also say that I very much look forward to stepping through each shot with him.
So far there is no reason to believe that he has not done his homework, as everything he has shared with me thus far looks very plausible.
There are many who do not understand ballistics, and prefer to go with what they "think".
A wise man once said that a truly intelligent man knows just how stupid he is.
I would be very careful in using the citations by Carlos and Craig. One of their biggest issues was the TIMING of the shots.
Tom,
I am looking very much forward to discussing the next shot. I do have a few questions about the first, but nothing that hampers its likely hood.
Well done!
Mike
-
Because it was possible. Probable no, possible yes. Just because it did not happen, does not mean it could not have happened. Not to difficult to understand really.
Mike
There is no proof that it did happen and the actual evidence suggests it is impossible.
Only one bullet in the Warren Commission commission tests was recovered in a condition comparable to CE399, and that was the bullet fired into cotton wadding.
So if we are to be guided by EVIDENCE instead of theories, then the Magic bullet theory is impossible on the evidence produced so far.
So you are right and sensible to believe that it never happened.
Raymond,
I also believe there were some tests done at Edgewood that replicated the damage, and 399 quite well. It has been some time since I dug into that bag of biscuits.
There is much, to much in my opinion, that limits its probability.
But then again, what could we expect about a theory that was based on necessity rather than evidence?
-
KK
Um gee I wonder.....
I suspect Pamela is correct, Altgens and Zappy are two different views.
-
Or an other trucker.
_________________________
All kidding aside, my cousin Louie had a summer job in quality control at a company that sold cork for marine and wine industry use.
His task was to test the product's saturation levels by immersing samples, chosen at random, in moving water of various temperatures and salinities.
His official job title was cork soaker.
__________________________
Many observers of organized crime know that Sammy "The Bull" Gravano was "flipped" by the "Feds" to "rat out" his former boss, the late John Gotti. It now seems that Gravano, who recently opted out of the Witness Protection Program, is carrying a pistol for purposes of personal protection.
This weapon might artfully be described as a gun of a snitch.
___________________________
Do you know the difference between an arrogant rooster and a corrupt barrister?
The arrogant rooster clucks defiance ...
____________________________
Just my cute little way of probing (sorry) for limits.
Hey, it's as rational as Burton's objections to "ranker."
probing enemy lines worthy of recon status Mr. Drago!
Bully for you sir!
Mike
-
Mike,
Please do NOT use that term; I realise it may not necessarily be considered offensive in your country, but it is in many nations. Thank you.
First and only warning regarding use of language.
Paul,
That term may be a colloquialism in the UK (I note the British origin) but it is not in common use in my military, nor would it seem in Mike's. At least 3 people thought it referred to something else - a word that I would imagine a person in the UK would easily recognise, and recognise as a swear word. Please avoid any confusion in future.
What?? So the term "ranker" which is NOT a swear word but could be "confused" with a word that is is now off limits??
At first I thought this had to be a joke.
What on earth is happening here?
"And the rest is silence"
Dawn
Ms. Dawn,
I whole heartedly agree. I see no harm in the word ranker. Its meaning is enlisted man, and that suits me just fine!
However I will certainly avoid calling anyone a trucker!
Mike
-
But it nevertheless remains a fact that no purchase of [RIFLE] ammunition ..... was ever connected with Oswald, and that no other shells or bullets other than those found at the murder scene..... were ever found to have ever been in his possession.
Duke: Your post covers the FBI ammo investigation in the Dallas area, and thank you for posting the links.
Do you know if the FBI made similar inquiries in New Orleans?
Raymond,
Excellent question. I meant to ask that earlier, but lost my train of thought.
Unfortunately that train often consists of nothing more than a coal car, and a caboose, and even then its only HO Scale.
Ugh,
Mike
-
So here is the point, if he acquired ammo for the pistol, which he obviously did, in an undetected manner, then there is no reason to believe that he could not have done the same for the Carcano.
Of course it is POSSIBLE that he bought ammo for the rifle, but a MERE POSSIBILITY that something happened does nothing to PROVE or ESTABLISH AS A FACT that the something in question ever did happen. Human history is full of stuff that could have happened but never did.
I am sure you know that an accused person doesn't have to prove ANYTHING. The BURDEN of PROOF is on the accuser and the fact remains that no one has ever proven that Lee Oswald ever bought or possessed ammunition for the rifle.
Let's go back to the questions that began this thread:
So my questions:1. Is it true that no extra ammo was found in any of Oswald's effects?
2. If so, would it be unusual to not find any?
3. If so, what are we to make of the fact that none was found?
Thanks,
Dan
I submit that the answers are:
1. YES
2. YES. If he had bought a box of rifle ammo we would expect to find some evidence. In the case of revolver ammo we do find evidence, hence the two cases are very different.
But the logical conclusion is that, had I purchased a box of ammunition, and used less that the entire box, the remaining ammunition would've been found either on my person or in my personal effects somewhere.3. This fact supports the plea of NOT GUILTY he entered at Arraignment.
That is about as far as we can take the rifle ammo question for now. We should know more about the rifle ammo when the documents still classified TOP SECRET are finally made public.
Raymond,
And what an interesting day that will be!
I would submit that Oswald has shown a precedent. He has shown his ability, in the pistol ammunition, to acquire such in an undetectable manner. While there is no evidence that he obtained rifle ammunition in this manner, it does exhibit his ability to do so.
I agree the ammo case is pending new documents! I wonder what those papers will tell us, and why they have been hidden?
-
Mike,
Please do NOT use that term; I realise it may not necessarily be considered offensive in your country, but it is in many nations. Thank you.
First and only warning regarding use of language.
Paul,
That term may be a colloquialism in the UK (I note the British origin) but it is not in common use in my military, nor would it seem in Mike's. At least 3 people thought it referred to something else - a word that I would imagine a person in the UK would easily recognise, and recognise as a swear word. Please avoid any confusion in future.
What language? I used the word properly, and by definition.
Now it is plain to see why the complaints section is the longest running one here.
I have no issue with being called a ranker.....I am (was) in fact an enlisted man.
Paul should have no issue, given his proud contempt, with being called a word that by definition means a contemptuous person.
Whats the issue here Evan?
-
In the military its a matter of respect the rank, not the person. Something similar could be said here.
It would only be fair, then, to characterise you as a complete and committed ranker?
I am shocked and appalled to have received a complaint from a Mod about the above posting.
I have implied no more than that which I post below: A Mod has inferred, well, I dread to think, and he has yet to specify.
For the record, then, what is a "ranker"?
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ranker
rank·er (rngkr)n. Chiefly British
1. An enlisted soldier.
2. A commissioned officer who has been promoted from enlisted status.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
To characterise Mikey as "a complete and committed ranker" is thus absolutely accurate, given his self-confessed militaristic view of human affairs.
Ignorance of the English language, not to mention a vague beastly-mindedness, is no defence.
I rest my case, probably in lost property.
EP Rigby
Oh where to begin?
If your inference was to enlisted rank, then yep, I was enlisted and reached the top of that chain. However, I doubt you know enough about me to state my views as militaristic.
Was it militaristic to state that one should debate the issues rather than discredit the poster? Hardly.
Of course I would not expect Mr. Rigby to understand such distinctions.
Where in your definition Paul does it add beastly minded? Where does it add militaristic? Are those just little add ins that you try to associate to the base definition of an enlisted man?
Of course what is apparent is that you were unhappy with just the base definition of an enlisted man, so you try to add something to that in an attempt to slide in an insult.
Nice try.
However this does show that you have contemptible views towards the military. That is of course your right. But it also makes you by definition XXXXXX.
A contemptuous person.
So I will with pride be called a ranker, and given your contempt for the military you should be proudly called a xxxxxxx.
Mike
You've lost it, Mikey, good style.
PS I thought it was only the Taiwanese military that got up tight about that sort of thing? Er, whatever it is.
Where does it show I am uptight? Im simply calling it as it is.
I apologize if that is difficult for you to deal with Paul.
-
In the military its a matter of respect the rank, not the person. Something similar could be said here.
It would only be fair, then, to characterise you as a complete and committed ranker?
I am shocked and appalled to have received a complaint from a Mod about the above posting.
I have implied no more than that which I post below: A Mod has inferred, well, I dread to think, and he has yet to specify.
For the record, then, what is a "ranker"?
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ranker
rank·er (rngkr)n. Chiefly British
1. An enlisted soldier.
2. A commissioned officer who has been promoted from enlisted status.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
To characterise Mikey as "a complete and committed ranker" is thus absolutely accurate, given his self-confessed militaristic view of human affairs.
Ignorance of the English language, not to mention a vague beastly-mindedness, is no defence.
I rest my case, probably in lost property.
EP Rigby
Oh where to begin?
If your inference was to enlisted rank, then yep, I was enlisted and reached the top of that chain. However, I doubt you know enough about me to state my views as militaristic.
Was it militaristic to state that one should debate the issues rather than discredit the poster? Hardly.
Of course I would not expect Mr. Rigby to understand such distinctions.
Where in your definition Paul does it add beastly minded? Where does it add militaristic? Are those just little add ins that you try to associate to the base definition of an enlisted man?
Of course what is apparent is that you were unhappy with just the base definition of an enlisted man, so you try to add something to that in an attempt to slide in an insult.
Nice try.
However this does show that you have contemptible views towards the military. That is of course your right. But it also makes you by definition XXXXX.
A contemptuous person.
So I will with pride be called a ranker, and given your contempt for the military you should be proudly called a xxxxxxx.
Mike
Evan,
How in the world could you conclude that word offensive?
I, unlike Rigby, used it in its unblemished definition? I added nothing, nor took anything away?
Rigby has openly shown his contempt for the military, and by such, has exhibited he is a contemptuous person, which is the EXACT definition.
Yet Rigby goes on to add parameters to the definition of ranker and remains unscathed? What is wrong with this picture?
-
Mythbusters will be doing a "Moon Hoax" special on Discovery Channel (US) 27 AUG 08. I'm unsure when it will be shown on other nation's Discovery Channel.
Should be very interesting viewing.
Thank You Evan. Interesting indeed!
I do not always agree with their methods and conclusions, but could you possibly think of a job that would be more fun to have?
Mike
-
Mike, this stuff about the '67 CBS tests leads me to wonder which Carcano they used: the accurate 40-inch "short rifle" [model 91/38] or the less-accurate 36-inch "shortened" rifle [model 91/24]. Might've made a BIG difference in the accuracy part of the tests.
BTW: Wasn't Howard Donahue the man behind the Bonar Menninger book, Mortal Error ? That would be the book that accused SS agent Hickey of accidentally firing the fatal headshot from the SS follow-up car from his AR-15...for which, IIRC, Hickey sued Menninger...is that not correct?
Mark,
Im not convinced that the differences in rifles would have made a major change in such a short distance shooting event.
I believe that is the same Donahue. It also seems, if I recall correctly, there was some conflict between them after the book. what I suspected was that Donahue was less than impressed with the way Menninger portrayed the information.
Be that as it may, it does not change the fact that Donahue actually completed the event.
Best,
Mike
The Model 91/24 to which Mark refers is the old Long Rifles of the period from when these weapons were placed into service in 1892 until the year 1924 when a modification began in which literally thousands of the old Long Rifle which had the progressive gain twist were converted to Model 91/24 Carbines by having the front 32.8 cm/12.79 inches of the rifle barrel cut off.
Dependent upon exactly how much wear the weapon had prior to "cut-down", at a hundred yards, some of them may have difficulty in repetetively hitting between the two end-zone goal posts.
Which weapon is of course responsible for much of the "lore" in regards to the inability to hit anything with the weapon, as well as the unsafe nature of the weapon.
Both of which have considerable merit for that specific weapon, which also happens to be the weapon in the Klein's add that LHO ordered.
http://www.carbinesforcollectors.com/9124ts.html
Barrel Length Model 91 Long Rifle:---------------------------------------78cm
Barrel length Model 91/24 Carbine:--------------------------------------92.1cm
12.79 inches of the barrel, which also contained the final full-gain twist of the rifling, now gone.
So the longer rifles of course would be more accurate, and the shorter "modified" rifles a crap shoot dependent upon wear before the modification began. Makes sense.
So if in fact a carbine were in place during the shooting event, its accuracy would have been great to lousy.....
Nothing comes easy do it?
The Klein's add was for the Model 91/24 Carbine, (cut-down Long Rifle) which by it's very nature is extremely inaccurate.
The Order number of LHO's order form was for the Model 91/24 Carbine, which only a complete fool would attempt to utilize in an assassination attempt.
LHO, as demonstrated by his discussion with Adrian Alba, clearly demonstrated his knowledge of the potential effect that shortening a rifle into a carbine, could have on accuracy.
Then, LHO is shown holding a Model 91/38 Short Rifle.
And lastly, a Model 91/38 Short rifle, which was utilized in the assassination of JFK, is recovered on the sixth floor of the TSDB.
Me thinks that Mark is merely attempting to get a "second" informed opinion as to the viability of utilization of a Model 91/24 Carbine in the shooting event, and exactly why one would not want to attempt to utilize such a weapon.
These old 91/24's demonstrated considerable internal wear also. The progressive gain twist obviusly cut down on some of this initial wear, but the early day highly corrosive powder did it's damage quite effectively.
Actually, Tom, the point I was attempting to raise was...if CBS attempted the recreation with the 91/24 that Oswald ordered from Klein's, instead of the 91/38 that was found in the TSBD, it might explain why their experts had trouble with accuracy, as well as why thry might've had trouble with the operation of worn bolts and such. Whereas, if CBS attempted their recreation with the 91/38 short rifle, the degree of difficulty would, IMHO, be quite different.
Anyone know if there's a record of what variety rifle CBS used?
Good point, as well as one that had never crossed my mind.
However, so long as anyone continues to attempt to "stuff" three-hit scenario's into an approximately 5.6 to 5.8 second elapsed time, irrelevant as to which model Carcano utilized, there will always be problems.
Provided of course we stick with the "lone shooter" concept.
Tom,
It is good to see that I am not the only one who sees the real issue of stuffing!
It just seems many dont "get it"
Mike
The Case of Len Colby
in Political Conspiracies
Posted
Sorry I missed out on that election....not born till 67