Mike Williams

No worries there Wim, I get plenty of work from those unlike yourself who actually know something about firearms. I have been studying JFK less than one year, and been helping out around gunsmith shops far longer, yep Im a newbie, yet I find it odd that you can not directly refute one thing I have said. Could it be that newbie was smart enough not to buy into the Files trash, and someone far more experienced, and knowledgeable in the research did buy into it? Huh, imagine that! Mike

Don, Good to hear from you. I have studied the windshield quite a bit, and the one thing that keep coming back, is that the parkland damage replicates the CE350 photo, they are alike, and there is no hole. It really is that simple. There were in fact some, not many, who talk about a hole, yet significantly they do not all put the hole in the same place. A reasonable researcher has to take all this into account as well. The physical evidence simply does not support a hole in the glass. Nor does the inconsistencies in many of those who say there was a hole. I do in fact have issues with the autopsy photos, in some instances, and I do believe that there may have been issues there in regard to alteration. However, I always hesitate to say something is altered simply because I lack the knowledge to explain it. The comparison of the autopsy photos to the limo glass is a bit off kilter. A large hole in the rear of the head would without fail mean an exit, whereas a hole in the glass could have been written off to a rear penetration, and not a frontal penetration. I find to many of the times things that can not be explained get written off as altered, I do not buy that, and will not allow myself to enter this quagmire. It could, and for some has, become habitual. Can you tell me how in the world was the hole covered up between Parkland and the Ce350 photo? They both depict the same damage, see post above. Moreover, can you tell me why a hole that should be at least 3/8 of an inch, is not observable in the Dallas News Photo taken at Parkland? Obviously, a 1/8 inch translucent area is visible, however this is to small to be a bullet hole, and furthermore, could have just been a chip in the glass, just as Frazier reported. Are you saying without fail that the photo from parkland is doctored? Oswald ...well Im still out on this one, and I will tell you why. The doctors have said that the shot to the back may not have been fatal, so therefore the head shot killed JFK and I am uncertain that Oswald fired that shot. I also can offer no evidence that he fired any shots that day. Having said that, I also, in light of some things I have been working on, struggle to believe he was 100% innocent. Now Tom Purvis. I understand where Tom is coming from, although I do not agree with all of what he says. However, that does not nullify all his work. That would be pompous. It simply means I don't agree with parts of it. Tom has in fact done some good work. In the same regard I have issues with some of my own work in this area and could not say that I feel I am 100%, because there are still issues I have uncertainties about. You may consider Tom as rambling, but dont downplay his work because of your inability to understand it. Mike

Mercury bullets......riiiiiigggghhhhhtttttt :lol: You are to much Wim. I had a dog that chased his tail once, he grew out of it maybe you will too. Mike

Oh yeah you rightwingers do a much better job Len, Those were great photos thank you! I am partial to the one of Bush in his flight suit, I have been looking for some indication that Barack Hussein Obama Served, but it eludes me. If you happen across a photo of him in a military uniform (US Military preferable) kindly pass it along to me. It just amazes me that he was the best the left could scrounge up...... Better start practicing the phase....."President John McCain" That's one of my favorites of the stocking stuffer-in-chief as well especially the roll of socks or kielbasa or what ever it was he (they?) stuffed down his “pants”. As for Bush’s military service, every one knows what that was about, to avoid doing what you did, go to Nam. I wouldn’t get to worked up your boy McCain his much ballyhooed war hero status, unless you consider being accident prone heroic, seems more a work of PRmanship than a reflection of reality, back in the day he was referred to as a “songbird” and it had nothing to do with his singing ability (see links below). I’m not saying I wouldn’t have done the same as he did in the same situation but I hope once I got back I would be honest about it. Will he be elected, I sure hope not and the polls still seem to indicate otherwise note that the source I’m citing used to rather openly pro-GOP http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/ma...bama_vs_mccain/ http://www.counterpunch.org/valentine06132008.html http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/8/3...6744/756/561647 http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccai...word%5B1%5D.pdf http://www.nationinstitute.org/ifunds/79/m...tionable_record Oh and Bill, my images were linked as well so they use up no bandwidth Len, Im not impressed with anyone. Mike

Lee, Yes Please I would like a copy of that. I agree there is no hole or damage at this time. I also agree with you and Tom that this is a damage from the head shot, further I do not believe there was a hole. As we know when a bullet transits glass it bevels out the inside. We have reports of lead samples being taken from the inside, if it were a hole from an outside shot, there would be no lead smear inside. It was that very thing, nothing more than a fragment from the head shot, I am in 100% agreement. Mike

Mike , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon: Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this: Thus he concluded the head snapped forward, because he was aiming for the eye and MISSED, because his bullet came in behind the eye. Thirdly, if Files was not in the military, you must also accept that he invented his military service as far back as the sixties, when he told his wife that he was. He also raised his two daughters with the phantom idea. Talking about ridiculous and obvious, can you give me good reason why makes that up to his blood relatives? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/faith.htm And the girls from Saigon sending him love letters? He picked those up on vacation, right? Before he went to jail in 1980, right? Saigon was then what Bangkok is now, right? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/vietnamcard2.JPG Fourthly, absence of physical evidence is never evidence of absence. Besides, in this case much physical evidence has been altered or removed. Or can you give me the cigarette butts from behind the picket fence? Or the photopgraphs of the footprints maybe? The brains of JFK? Now we only have X-Rays and expert opinions as evidence that the "dustlike particles" were mercury .......... Wim Wim, First off a rifle locked in the shoulder firing at 19 lbs, and a handgun fired from the extended arm at 5-6 lbs are completely different. Like comparing apples to oranges. Second, I would like to ask you if you have ever fired an xp, so as to speak from first hand experience? My father was an avid silhouette shooter, owning 2 xps one in .221 and one in .223. I have, over the course of time, had the opportunity to fire many of these, in many different calibers. Aiming for his right eye? Looking through a scope mounted on a handgun, with outstretched arms? On a moving target? :lol: That in itself is ridiculous. Mercury eh? I can almost hear the James Bond music playing in the background. Can you offer something in the way of proof that the bullets were mercury, and do you have any idea of what the wound ballistics of a mercury bullet look like ( I do.)? Ah yes the military career, Files may or may not have been in the military. Hard to tell with his tall tales, however there are some serious problems with his time line, as I am sure you are aware of. Kinda nifty how his packet just kinda showed up isnt it? Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Mike Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Perhaps an apology is in order as some are far more perceptive than I may have given credit! No apologies needed Tom we all disagree time to time. Oh yeah....and I can shoot, at least! HAHA

Wim, I said Files was a fraud, whether you are a fraud or not is your decision. I have fired more varmit rounds than I care to count. I suggest you brush up on your firearms before you continue. A scoped weapon, on a target that close would be more difficult to track than open sights, ESPECIALLY IN A HANDGUN SCENARIO! So what ever load of bullcrap you are selling, I hope you have a large community of firearms stupid people who are buying. I did not disagree with a North Knoll shooter, I simply said the trajectory does not reflect a shot from the North. If there was a North shooter he didnt hit anything. Period. Mercury....ah yes....you need to find out what happens when hydrogen molecules invade mercury at high speed, then come tell me about mercury bullets. The little dutch boy should be selling paint.....it lasts 10 years......Files crap wont wash for 10 seconds. Seriously Wim, if you think your gonna pass off this story you need to consult someone who at least has a working knowledge of firearms, so they can at least make the fable sound believable. Mike

Mike , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon: Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this: Thus he concluded the head snapped forward, because he was aiming for the eye and MISSED, because his bullet came in behind the eye. Thirdly, if Files was not in the military, you must also accept that he invented his military service as far back as the sixties, when he told his wife that he was. He also raised his two daughters with the phantom idea. Talking about ridiculous and obvious, can you give me good reason why makes that up to his blood relatives? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/faith.htm And the girls from Saigon sending him love letters? He picked those up on vacation, right? Before he went to jail in 1980, right? Saigon was then what Bangkok is now, right? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/vietnamcard2.JPG Fourthly, absence of physical evidence is never evidence of absence. Besides, in this case much physical evidence has been altered or removed. Or can you give me the cigarette butts from behind the picket fence? Or the photopgraphs of the footprints maybe? The brains of JFK? Now we only have X-Rays and expert opinions as evidence that the "dustlike particles" were mercury .......... Wim Wim, First off a rifle locked in the shoulder firing at 19 lbs, and a handgun fired from the extended arm at 5-6 lbs are completely different. Like comparing apples to oranges. Second, I would like to ask you if you have ever fired an xp, so as to speak from first hand experience? My father was an avid silhouette shooter, owning 2 xps one in .221 and one in .223. I have, over the course of time, had the opportunity to fire many of these, in many different calibers. Aiming for his right eye? Looking through a scope mounted on a handgun, with outstretched arms? On a moving target? :lol: That in itself is ridiculous. Mercury eh? I can almost hear the James Bond music playing in the background. Can you offer something in the way of proof that the bullets were mercury, and do you have any idea of what the wound ballistics of a mercury bullet look like ( I do.)? Ah yes the military career, Files may or may not have been in the military. Hard to tell with his tall tales, however there are some serious problems with his time line, as I am sure you are aware of. Kinda nifty how his packet just kinda showed up isnt it? Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Mike Mike- I agree with a lot of what you say regarding handgun recoil and shooting a scoped handgun. I have never shot a Remington XP 100 or the 221 Fireball round, but I have shot many hundreds of handguns and never shot one with no material recoil. Even when I shoot a heavy bull-barreled 22 Long Rifle, there is still significant muzzle rise, certainly enough to distort (for a brief period) a shooter's ability to hold it on target. Most handguns return to the point of aim if the shooter has a proper grip, but they still sustain some degree of muzzle rise (which some people call recoil, even though I think that recoil is the backward thrust of a fired weapon and not the muzzle rise). Interestingly, though, some scopes give a pretty wide field of vision and some, particularly one's with "eye relief", provide a more (and sometimes exceedingly)narrow view of the target. Although I don't buy into the Files version of the assassination, I can see that someone could take a shot and see the aftermath of its hitting the target. I shot a dot-scoped rifle (in 223 caliber) last weekend, with both eyes open, and made a plastic drink bottle dance around the range, so I can see how someone can see the follow-through of his shot hitting the target. Chris Chris, It only stands to reason that one has to teach recruits to reacquire the sight picture and sight alignment on the M16, which is .223 and far heavier, that a significantly lighter weapon that is held in a far less stable position would have more recoil energy and recoil velocity. I have an M4 here that I use the halo system on and its a bottle hopper. Now bear in mind the M16 is gas operated and uses a buffer spring system, which actually transfers some of the recoil energy to cycle the action. The xp is a straight bolt gun, no buffer no gas break...nothing. I have never at any time viewed a target through the scope on one of these post trigger pull. I would mention though should you get the chance to fire one....it is a BLAST! Mike

I asked you legit things Wim. The very fact that you have an issue with that shows me that you either wont support your position, or you cant. Neither is good. Thank you for your time though. Mike

Yeah Don, sure, sure How does the tune to The Twilight Zone go again? LOL!!! I'm sure even Bill will agree with me for once, that in this instance you are stark raving three thirds crazy bonkers Duncan I hear that tune every time you objectors of the "Grassy Knoll Truth" speak. Just once I would like to see North Knoller provide the trajectory for a shot that would not damage the left side of the head. Mike

Now it gets interesting, Mike. Please give me ONE piece of HARD evidence that Files is a con, especially why it is so obvious. . Wim The trajectory of the second head shot was at an upwards angle hitting the right temple area and exiting the back of the skull. No head shot came from behind the picket fence. Don Bailey Agreed. One thing I have used in the past is one of Don Roberdeaus maps to show this very thing. One consistency is that there was no left side head damage, something that would be impossible to avoid with a shot from the North Knoll. When you say "upward" can you offer a theoretical shooting location to replicate this? Mike

I thought that it would have been required reading. Quite. Perhaps we could come out with a coloring book version, that might be the enticement todays politicians need. Mike

Mike , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon: Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this: Thus he concluded the head snapped forward, because he was aiming for the eye and MISSED, because his bullet came in behind the eye. Thirdly, if Files was not in the military, you must also accept that he invented his military service as far back as the sixties, when he told his wife that he was. He also raised his two daughters with the phantom idea. Talking about ridiculous and obvious, can you give me good reason why makes that up to his blood relatives? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/faith.htm And the girls from Saigon sending him love letters? He picked those up on vacation, right? Before he went to jail in 1980, right? Saigon was then what Bangkok is now, right? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/vietnamcard2.JPG Fourthly, absence of physical evidence is never evidence of absence. Besides, in this case much physical evidence has been altered or removed. Or can you give me the cigarette butts from behind the picket fence? Or the photopgraphs of the footprints maybe? The brains of JFK? Now we only have X-Rays and expert opinions as evidence that the "dustlike particles" were mercury .......... Wim Wim, First off a rifle locked in the shoulder firing at 19 lbs, and a handgun fired from the extended arm at 5-6 lbs are completely different. Like comparing apples to oranges. Second, I would like to ask you if you have ever fired an xp, so as to speak from first hand experience? My father was an avid silhouette shooter, owning 2 xps one in .221 and one in .223. I have, over the course of time, had the opportunity to fire many of these, in many different calibers. Aiming for his right eye? Looking through a scope mounted on a handgun, with outstretched arms? On a moving target? :lol: That in itself is ridiculous. Mercury eh? I can almost hear the James Bond music playing in the background. Can you offer something in the way of proof that the bullets were mercury, and do you have any idea of what the wound ballistics of a mercury bullet look like ( I do.)? Ah yes the military career, Files may or may not have been in the military. Hard to tell with his tall tales, however there are some serious problems with his time line, as I am sure you are aware of. Kinda nifty how his packet just kinda showed up isnt it? Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Mike

Yea, the odds are 20-1 that al Qada will succeed in its goals. 10,000 to one before 9/11. Instead of sending NFL players after Bin Laden, maybe we should send some NYPD street cops. BK You would have thought at some point someone would have found truth in the writings of Sun Tzu, written in the 6th century BC, and still just as true today. Mike

Antti, The one certain thing is that a hole would leave a translucent area. We can see the crack in the parkland photo, and an alleged area of translucence. This area however could also be the chip in the glass that we see in the CE350 photo also above. The similarities in the cracks are marked by colored arrows. This means we are looking at the same damage in the PL photo that we are looking at in the CE350 photo (ala no switcheroo). There is not a single photo in evidence that shows a hole in the glass. Not one. Yet all the photos in evidence share like characteristics with the original damage. Further evidence of the lack of a hole. As for the damage to the limo overall being an indication of a conspiracy, you will have to expand on this a bit, as both the glass and chrome damage could come from a single shot passing through the rear of the head of JFK, fragmenting, and causing the damage. The total damage can be attributed to a single shot. Best, Mike

The photos appear to be linked, not attached. This is a far better way to post images as even those who are not logged in can see them. Craig, Roger that. They are linked. I would not want to eat up bandwidth needlessly. Although, at least these photos are not childish bickering. And they are a source of humor. Mike

This one looks about right.

Now it gets interesting, Mike. Please give me ONE piece of HARD evidence that Files is a con, especially why it is so obvious. I'm sure my readers, the researchers mentioned here: http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/researchers.htm , but most of all myself, would like to know. We can surely use some education from one that knows better, the more so when we are so delusional as to rate the story with 5 stars. And while you're at it, can you give also give a plausible explanation for the 3 inch forward headsnap of Kennedy's head - faster than a human muscle can steer, faster than a human eye can detect, but not faster than he speed of a bullet - other than a bullet, a neurospastical reaction, or fakery of the Zapruder film? Wim Wim, I would be glad to share with you. I have actually been working on a Files project on and off for a short bit of time. Interesting stuff really. I will move this to the top of the stack, and have something to you as soon as I can manage it. I will first offer it in an email, I feel that is the only proper way to proceed. I will give you a small hint, one is a piece of physical evidence, and the other it files Military History. The physical evidence will come to you from another source, but never fear, you'll know it was with my help. Now this forward movement. I believe I did just explain it, even inanimate objects when struck, tend to move towards the direction from which the bullet came. I might be able to dig up a few photo examples for you. The other thing to consider is the transfer of kinetic energy from a transiting bullet. Its very minor, and less than 1% of the total energy of the projectile. Of course the only real way for a bullet to transfer the full energy is to remain inside the target. A .01% transfer from a 161 grain projectile traveling at 2182 FPS is roughly only .1 FT LBS. Now one has to consider the time. At 2182fps the bullet would transit a 12 inch head in .000458295 seconds. The impact of .1 ft lbs in this short amount of time would not even come close to the required energy to move the average 8 lb head 3 inches. Something else I might add is the fact that Files claims to have seen the head go forward, and then his shot strike in his scope. As you said the alleged 3" forward movement would be imperceptible to the eye....so how could he have seen this? How would he have witnessed his own bullet strike when one considers the recoil of the weapon? Mike

Wim, It would help your case if you could find one instance when I supported the moon landing or Badgeman theories. I also would not at all say that there was NOT two head shots. However obviously the whole Files thing is just ridiculous. Con man nothing more nothing less. Just as a technical reminder there did not have to be a shot from the back for the head to move forward. It is common for even inanimate objects to act in this manner. Mike

The asylums are full of these people. Is there nothing we can do to help them? I believe there is. Send large sums of money - preferably your own, but let's not nitpick - to: The P. Rigby Foundation (for the Care of Unhinged and Delusional Republicans) Please remember to omit the definite article, the word "Foundation," the brackets and, indeed, the writing in between, when making out your much-needed cheques. Hurry - we can give them the help and peace of mind they so badly need, but only from tax exile. Digby, Thats the best you have.....how disappointing..... Mike

Jack, FWIW I agree 100%. Its ridiculous. Those who buy into the Files garbage bought a pig in a poke......but without the Pork or Burlap! Mike

Oh yeah you rightwingers do a much better job Thought you might apperciate these Len, Those were great photos thank you! I am partial to the one of Bush in his flight suit, I have been looking for some indication that Barack Hussein Obama Served, but it eludes me. If you happen across a photo of him in a military uniform (US Military preferable) kindly pass it along to me. It just amazes me that he was the best the left could scrounge up...... Better start practicing the phase....."President John McCain"

Then a) you're education is shamefully limited, as the Soviet period of Russian history lasted a mere 70+ years; and you've a very selective memory - not recall what he had to say about the US? Georgia, with obvious US approval, attacked a province of the former USSR which made the same decision to divorce as Georgia did - only the South Ossitians chose to remain with Moscow. Your inability to comment on the obvious fact of Georgian aggression represents precisely the kind of divorce from observable reality that characterises the Bush White House. Paul So so easily deceived..... Paul by the way where is your Forum required bio?

Mike, you can't blame anybody on the left for electing the next president of the United States. The one and only person you can blame is George W. Bush. BK Wow the old Bush is responsible for EVERYTHING line.....I am.....shocked..... NOT EVERYTHING. I'M ONLY SAYING George W. Bush is only responsible for pissing off enough citizens of both parties that whoever the Democratic candidate is he will win the election. Mickey Mouse could be the contender and win. Conservative Republicans will probably not get back in the White House ever. Now don't be blaming liberals or leftests for Barack Obama becoming president, as only W. can take that blame. And I didn't and don't blame him for EVERYTHING, just enough things for his party to lose power. And you can be sure the Democratic candidate will select a running mate that will scare you even more, as an insurance policy against being assassinated. It's a shame Cynthia McKinney is running as a Green Party candidate as she would be a scarry Veep for Barrak. And Mike, as a firearms expert, what do you think of the chances of my neighbor Matt Emmons bringing home another gold? http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...mp;#entry151695 BK Bill I would say as long as your fella keeps it on the right target.....he will do very well. I have been following this chap for sometime, and am really pulling for him. Regarding GW. I do not believe its him and him alone. I think it is a sad state of affairs that it had some to this. As you said Mickey could run, and the fact is Mickey maybe the best candidate. I really do not believe the Dems will pull off a victory, but I do believe in this election there is NO winner for the American people. Im 41 Bill, and the sad thing is, during my voting life, It has always been the lesser of two evils in choice. Just once I would love to have someone I actually believed in to vote for. Bill.....would you consider running? HAHAH Best to you Bill, Mike

Mike, you can't blame anybody on the left for electing the next president of the United States. The one and only person you can blame is George W. Bush. BK Wow the old Bush is responsible for EVERYTHING line.....I am.....shocked.....