Mike Williams
-
Posts
1,023 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Mike Williams
-
-
Mike,
One of the strongest reasons to suspect that photos and/or film of the assassination were altered is because of the extensive eyewitness testimony that seems to contradict what we see in them. There are the numerous witnesses who, independently of each other, reported that the motorcade had stopped or nearly stopped. While eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable, when that many people mention the same point (without being prompted), it's extremly unlikely they are all identically mistaken. Reasonable investigators would pay attention to what they were saying. There is strong eyewitness testimony about the bullet hole in the windshield. Reporter Richard Dudman described being shoved by a Secret Service agent when he tried to examine the hole more closely. Doug Weldon did some great work on this- study his research.
Do you also believe that the autopsy photos are genuine? What we see in these photos contradicts the professional opinions of every doctor and nurse who saw the back of JFK's head at Parkland Hospital. People do not see huge, gaping wounds where they don't exist. Certainly, a large number of medical personnel could not have made the same egregious error in describing what they saw. Thus, the autospy photos are clearly and unequivocally altered. So alteration is not a myth.
Witnesses like Richard Dudman had no reason to invent a story about seeing a bullet hole in the windshield. Those who were already starting to cover up the truth about the assassination had very obvious reasons for claiming that there was no hole in the windshield.
Agreeing with Tom Purvis's incomprehensible and rambling theories doesn't exactly lend credibility to your position, although I must grudgingly admire anyone who can halfway understand them.
Quick question- do you believe Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy?
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
-
http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=-426494027647785903
Watch the end of the clip, where Harper mention the "miniscule" lead particles.
He calls it "lead", because he thinks of a bullet. And with a bullet you don't think of mercury.
Lead oxidates rapidly and gets a grey color when exposed to the atmosphere. Mercury stays shiny and metallic.
Wim
Here is the description of JFK's head x-rays given by Dr. Humes that is posted in various locations throughout the internet:
Dr. Humes said, "that the X rays
showed "30 or 40 tiny dustlike particle fragments" of metal in the
President's head (II, p. 353). Humes cautioned that the fragments that
appeared to be "the size of dust particles" (2H359) on the X rays
would actually have been smaller because "X ray pictures . . . have a
tendency to magnify these minute fragments somewhat in size" (II, p.
353). And luckily SS agent Kellerman saw the X rays during the autopsy
and provided a similar description: " . . . the whole head looked like
a little mass of stars, there must have been 30, 40 lights where these
little pieces were so minute that they couldn't be reached" (II, p.
100).
A lead core FMJ bullet does not breakup into tiny dust like particles upon impact with relatively soft live human skull and brain tissue. However, mercury being a liquid metal at nominal ambient temperatures, and having high surface tension properties will break up into such small dust like particles as described by Dr. Humes, and will remain locked in the soft brain tissue matrix as small individual dust like particles. The material properties of lead and mercury are what lend credence to the story that James Files told your group about how he allegedly used mercury tipped bullets that the Wolfman made for him. Either James Files actually is the grassy knoll shooter, or he is an agent provocateur that was given this information to eventually cause the destruction of your efforts to prove how JFK was murdered.
Craig Roberts and David Mantik on mercury bullets
Next was a "Forensic Techniques" panel that included presentations by Margaret and Art Snyder, which I missed, and Craig Roberts. Mr. Roberts is a former Marine sniper and author of A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza and other books. He said he made a close study of the Zapruder film, "And I'll tell you what I saw --- as a sniper --- through the eyes of a sniper ... I saw a guy hit from the right front, with a frangible mercury bullet." Such a bullet, Roberts continued, will do its destructive work, and essentially disintigrate.
From:
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_i...e/overview.html
A Mercury Bullet? All three skull X-rays show a spatially consistent, fuzzy, gray cloud (about 4 x 1 cm) near the center of the fragment trail that extends across the top of the skull (Figure 16).
Figure 16. CLOSE-UP OF LATERAL X-RAY This fuzzy gray cloud can best be seen on the X-rays at NARA. It does not look like metallic lead (or copper) debris, but might have been caused by a mercury bullet. This fuzzy cloud might be more consistent with mercury (extruded from a bullet) rather than lead. An attempt to kill DeGaulle with a mercury bullet occurs in The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth. Amazingly enough, this plot occurs in the summer of 1963
Forsyth's descriptions of the effect of mercury bullets seem to fit the JFK skull wounds remarkably well.
A fuzzy white cloud in the metal fragment trail might be mercury.
14. There are remarkably many, tiny metal fragments widely scattered on the skull X-rays--even on the left side and on the inferior skull, including at least four near the chin on the frontal X-ray. This remarkable, and heretofore ignored, observation is hardly compatible with the passage of a single, full metal-jacketed, Mannlicher-Carcano bullet near the top of the skull, but might more easily have resulted from a hollow point or mercury bullet-or perhaps even from shrapnel from a bullet that was not counted by the Warren Commission.
The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth:
As soon as the bullet struck flesh, gristle or bone, it would experience a sudden decelaration.
The effect on the mercury would be to hurl the droplet forward towards the plugged front of the bullet. Here its onward rush would rip away the tip of the slug, splaying the lead outwards like the fingers of an open hand or the petals of a blossoming flower. In this shape the leaded projectile would tear through nerve tissue, ripping, cutting, slicing, leaving fragments of itself over an area the size of a teasaucer. Hitting the head, such a bullet would not emerge, but would demolish everything inside the cranium, forcing the bone-shell to fragment.
From:
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
-
I gotta tell you you schleps on the left SUREEEEEEEEEEEEE know how to pick em!
HEH.
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
-
Hi Mike.
I wasted a lot of time chasing after holes in the windshield myself - went round in a few circles - if you'd like, I can send you the high res scan I did of a Nov 63 crop print taken from the Altgens. Here's a nice view of it - plus I think I have another one up elsewhere on the forum.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=144615
Sort of a dynamic and learning excercise I went through - but my primary goal was to refute the supposed evidence of a hole -put forth in MIDP I think - which suggested a South Knoll shot, and a 'spiral shaped' crack/hole allegedly seen in Altgens and evidence of a hole in the z-footage. I believe that much of the conjecture for a south knoll shooter relies upon information provided by Tosh Plumlee. If one examines a higher quality version of the photo - it is clear that there is no such 'spiral shaped' anything.
In all honesty, after reading, reviewing, etc., my view at the moment would lean towards agreement with Tom Purvis - that the hole/crack in the windshield was the result of a fragment which was part of the rear graze shot to the top of Kennedy's head. There is also the blood on the inside of the windshield to consider [see Robin Unger's stuff on that - here someplace on the forum], the possibility of the rearview mirror suffering damage, and of course the dent in the chrome.
Aside: MANY of the Altgens photos I obtained had signs of I guess what I will have to call 'retouching.' That is not to suggest alteration - but highlighting and 'fixing' a photo prior to publication in a newspaper. I can provide one for example if you'd care to see it. However, that having been said, I have never been satisfied that the original photo was genuine - there are problems with it which still remain unresolved in my opinion.
Al Carrier suggested that shooting a target through a windshield is possible - I agree - it's possible, but that doesn't mean that is what happened - he also posted evidence of the possibility, showing a windsheild with golf-ball sized holes in it. Didn't seem to do much to support his case in my opinion.
Anyway - have a look at the Altgens in the link - if you'd like a copy, let me know. I wasted quite a bit of money collecting Altgens stuff in as original and as early sources as possible.
- lee
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
-
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 , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon:
Wim,I like the XP 100 IN 221 Fireball, low recoil pretty accurate out to 250 yards. It can be used very well with a rifle type scope such as a 4.5x14x40. Try it you'll like it!
John
If as the official records claim, Lee Harvey Oswald is the shooter of JFK, the rifle that was "recovered" in the depository was a Manlicher bolt action rifle. It shoots a 6.5 mm cartridge, more powerful than the .223 win/5.56 NATO or the .221 Rem Fireball. Recoil from that rifle with the military loading is slightly less than the .308 win/7.62 Nato. Never have I seen in print (anywhere) that JFK was shot with a handgun. Whomever is telling you that a .221 fireball kicks "like a mule" and "harder than any rifle", apparently is regurgitating information that he/she has heard somewhere.The fireball was introduced in a bolt action hand gun in 1962 (not a pistol), and propelled a 50 gr bullet in the 2600-2700 fps range. I'd even be picky enough to tell you that someone who calls an Remington XP100 a "pistol" has a lot more to learn about firearms than they are going to by reading internet conspiricy theories. Felt recoil from a typical 4lb6oz handgun will be in the 5 to 7 lb range. Compare this to a typical 30-06 rifle (180 gr bullet) at 19 lbs, and you'll wonder how big this person's mule really is.
Dan
Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this:
I was aiming for his right eye, which to me is the left side of his head looking head on. But for him it would be his right eye, and when I pulled the trigger, and I'm right in on it, and it's almost like looking six feet away through the scope. As I squeezed, take off my round, his head moving forward, I missed and I came in right along the temple. Just behind the eye.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
-
Mike,
The one that was asking was me, but you didn't respond. Not really, only with insignificant ridicule. You only agreed with Don Bailey that there was no shot from behind the picket fence, which puts you in the vast minority here, defying 70 % of the Dealey Plaza witnesses.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55jY6RUvxAI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYj3FAUHwro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVHyFZuzGH4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pweuPLTVfl4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VaJQgLmeTg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLd3O-Tch6o
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJE9XQZvis8
You say you are a gunsmith and a sharpshooter? Did you never do practice shooting with a varmint gun on a moving target? Or are you just not that good to hit a target at 35 yards with a powerscoped accurate handgun like the XP-100 that Files used?
http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=8361392529474898810
You even started calling me a fraud! Are you just too proud and stubborn? Or is the only fraud in this discussion you?
Wim
Here is the description of JFK's head x-rays given by Dr. Humes that is posted in various locations throughout the internet:
Dr. Humes said, "that the X rays
showed "30 or 40 tiny dustlike particle fragments" of metal in the
President's head (II, p. 353). Humes cautioned that the fragments that
appeared to be "the size of dust particles" (2H359) on the X rays
would actually have been smaller because "X ray pictures . . . have a
tendency to magnify these minute fragments somewhat in size" (II, p.
353). And luckily SS agent Kellerman saw the X rays during the autopsy
and provided a similar description: " . . . the whole head looked like
a little mass of stars, there must have been 30, 40 lights where these
little pieces were so minute that they couldn't be reached" (II, p.
100).
A lead core FMJ bullet does not breakup into tiny dust like particles upon impact with relatively soft live human skull and brain tissue. However, mercury being a liquid metal at nominal ambient temperatures, and having high surface tension properties will break up into such small dust like particles as described by Dr. Humes, and will remain locked in the soft brain tissue matrix as small individual dust like particles. The material properties of lead and mercury are what lend credence to the story that James Files told your group about how he allegedly used mercury tipped bullets that the Wolfman made for him. Either James Files actually is the grassy knoll shooter, or he is an agent provocateur that was given this information to eventually cause the destruction of your efforts to prove how JFK was murdered.
Craig Roberts and David Mantik on mercury bullets
Next was a "Forensic Techniques" panel that included presentations by Margaret and Art Snyder, which I missed, and Craig Roberts. Mr. Roberts is a former Marine sniper and author of A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza and other books. He said he made a close study of the Zapruder film, "And I'll tell you what I saw --- as a sniper --- through the eyes of a sniper ... I saw a guy hit from the right front, with a frangible mercury bullet." Such a bullet, Roberts continued, will do its destructive work, and essentially disintigrate.
From:
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_i...e/overview.html
A Mercury Bullet? All three skull X-rays show a spatially consistent, fuzzy, gray cloud (about 4 x 1 cm) near the center of the fragment trail that extends across the top of the skull (Figure 16).
Figure 16. CLOSE-UP OF LATERAL X-RAY This fuzzy gray cloud can best be seen on the X-rays at NARA. It does not look like metallic lead (or copper) debris, but might have been caused by a mercury bullet. This fuzzy cloud might be more consistent with mercury (extruded from a bullet) rather than lead. An attempt to kill DeGaulle with a mercury bullet occurs in The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth. Amazingly enough, this plot occurs in the summer of 1963
Forsyth's descriptions of the effect of mercury bullets seem to fit the JFK skull wounds remarkably well.
A fuzzy white cloud in the metal fragment trail might be mercury.
14. There are remarkably many, tiny metal fragments widely scattered on the skull X-rays--even on the left side and on the inferior skull, including at least four near the chin on the frontal X-ray. This remarkable, and heretofore ignored, observation is hardly compatible with the passage of a single, full metal-jacketed, Mannlicher-Carcano bullet near the top of the skull, but might more easily have resulted from a hollow point or mercury bullet-or perhaps even from shrapnel from a bullet that was not counted by the Warren Commission.
The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth:
As soon as the bullet struck flesh, gristle or bone, it would experience a sudden decelaration.
The effect on the mercury would be to hurl the droplet forward towards the plugged front of the bullet. Here its onward rush would rip away the tip of the slug, splaying the lead outwards like the fingers of an open hand or the petals of a blossoming flower. In this shape the leaded projectile would tear through nerve tissue, ripping, cutting, slicing, leaving fragments of itself over an area the size of a teasaucer. Hitting the head, such a bullet would not emerge, but would demolish everything inside the cranium, forcing the bone-shell to fragment.
From:
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
-
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 , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon:
Wim,I like the XP 100 IN 221 Fireball, low recoil pretty accurate out to 250 yards. It can be used very well with a rifle type scope such as a 4.5x14x40. Try it you'll like it!
John
If as the official records claim, Lee Harvey Oswald is the shooter of JFK, the rifle that was "recovered" in the depository was a Manlicher bolt action rifle. It shoots a 6.5 mm cartridge, more powerful than the .223 win/5.56 NATO or the .221 Rem Fireball. Recoil from that rifle with the military loading is slightly less than the .308 win/7.62 Nato. Never have I seen in print (anywhere) that JFK was shot with a handgun. Whomever is telling you that a .221 fireball kicks "like a mule" and "harder than any rifle", apparently is regurgitating information that he/she has heard somewhere.The fireball was introduced in a bolt action hand gun in 1962 (not a pistol), and propelled a 50 gr bullet in the 2600-2700 fps range. I'd even be picky enough to tell you that someone who calls an Remington XP100 a "pistol" has a lot more to learn about firearms than they are going to by reading internet conspiricy theories. Felt recoil from a typical 4lb6oz handgun will be in the 5 to 7 lb range. Compare this to a typical 30-06 rifle (180 gr bullet) at 19 lbs, and you'll wonder how big this person's mule really is.
Dan
Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this:
I was aiming for his right eye, which to me is the left side of his head looking head on. But for him it would be his right eye, and when I pulled the trigger, and I'm right in on it, and it's almost like looking six feet away through the scope. As I squeezed, take off my round, his head moving forward, I missed and I came in right along the temple. Just behind the eye.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
-
Blindness and idiocy are incurable, I should have realized that!
Or maybe it's better to say that you can't teach the devil to be good.
Wim
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
-
The whole Badgeman/Gordon Arnold diversion was created to attract your attention away from the real gunman in the Moorman picture. In Robert Groden’s video, “The Case for Conspiracy” he shows a close-up of what looks like two men behind the picket fence next to a tree, that area is where I believe a real shooter was hiding. IMO, someone cut out the Groden close-up and pasted it to the other side of the photo to create Badgeman.
Don Bailey
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
-
However obviously the whole Files thing is just ridiculous. Con man nothing more nothing less.
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
-
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.
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
-
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 , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon:
Wim,I like the XP 100 IN 221 Fireball, low recoil pretty accurate out to 250 yards. It can be used very well with a rifle type scope such as a 4.5x14x40. Try it you'll like it!
John
If as the official records claim, Lee Harvey Oswald is the shooter of JFK, the rifle that was "recovered" in the depository was a Manlicher bolt action rifle. It shoots a 6.5 mm cartridge, more powerful than the .223 win/5.56 NATO or the .221 Rem Fireball. Recoil from that rifle with the military loading is slightly less than the .308 win/7.62 Nato. Never have I seen in print (anywhere) that JFK was shot with a handgun. Whomever is telling you that a .221 fireball kicks "like a mule" and "harder than any rifle", apparently is regurgitating information that he/she has heard somewhere.The fireball was introduced in a bolt action hand gun in 1962 (not a pistol), and propelled a 50 gr bullet in the 2600-2700 fps range. I'd even be picky enough to tell you that someone who calls an Remington XP100 a "pistol" has a lot more to learn about firearms than they are going to by reading internet conspiricy theories. Felt recoil from a typical 4lb6oz handgun will be in the 5 to 7 lb range. Compare this to a typical 30-06 rifle (180 gr bullet) at 19 lbs, and you'll wonder how big this person's mule really is.
Dan
Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this:
I was aiming for his right eye, which to me is the left side of his head looking head on. But for him it would be his right eye, and when I pulled the trigger, and I'm right in on it, and it's almost like looking six feet away through the scope. As I squeezed, take off my round, his head moving forward, I missed and I came in right along the temple. Just behind the eye.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
-
A lot of truth in that article.
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
-
IMO there's not enough detail (or pixels) in the attached photos to determine whether the damaged area in the windshield shows a hole. More importantly IMO the existance of this defect (and the one in the trim of the windshield) indicates that most likely, there were more than 3 shots fired at the limo and it's occupants, thus indicating a conspiracy.
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
-
You know,
I think these photographs take up a lot of space on the main board and that's one of the reasons why the whole forum went down a few times near the end of the month when the alloted bandwith was exceeded.
I don't see any positive use of posting ostensibly funny photos and then reposting them over and over again in replies, especially if it takes up valuable forum space that could be betters served by posting documents and photos releated to the assassination or educaiton.
Just a thought,
BK
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.
-
However obviously the whole Files thing is just ridiculous. Con man nothing more nothing less.
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
-
Yeah Mike, it's probably better to chase Jack's hogwash of Badgeman and the moon landing that never happened
http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/badgeman.htm
About the two headshots:
http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/headshot.htm
Regarding Files’ claims of the synchronistic headshots, Dankbaar concludes “there are two possibilities: 1) Files made a frame by frame study of the Zapruder film or 2) He knows the head went forward because he was aiming for the right eye, and missed because the head snapped forward first. And that's of course what I believe.
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
-
It just amazes me that he was the best the left could scrounge up......
Better start practicing the phase....."President John McCain"
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
-
Files sees a shot hit the back of the head and then HIS shot hits the front?
Gimme a break.
Jack
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
-
I gotta tell you you schleps on the left SUREEEEEEEEEEEEE know how to pick em!
HEH.
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"
-
When I think of Russia, I think of Aleksandr Isayevich Solzhenitsyn and gulags, not peacekeepers
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?
-
Simply, Yes, yes he will be.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
I gotta tell you you schleps on the left SUREEEEEEEEEEEEE know how to pick em!
HEH.
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.....
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
-
Simply, Yes, yes he will be.
HAHAHAHAHAHA
I gotta tell you you schleps on the left SUREEEEEEEEEEEEE know how to pick em!
HEH.
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.....
:lol: 
you've a very selective memory - not recall what he had to say about the US?
Joe West with Bill Harper
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
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