David Von Pein

Bob, does that mean you want to put a make-believe bullet and an imaginary wound in JBC's left shoulder?

No, I'm not gagged, Bob. But you might want to know that you SBT Deniers here at the Edu. Forum are out of the cellar as far as your anti-SBT crackpottery. You've been beaten out by somebody named Mike at the aaj newsgroup. Mike thinks that Connally's tie is moving around at Z225 because--get this--JBC was reacting to being hit by a super slow-speed bullet that exited JFK's neck and evidently glanced off of (or perhaps entered) JBC's LEFT SHOULDER (despite, of course, a complete lack of injury to John Connally's left shoulder). To continue the hilarity and hogwashery, go here ----> google.com/d/msg/alt.assassination.jfk

Pat, And yet, despite all that information being gathered by John Connally, he was still all wrong about the SBT. But Connally did say he thought the SBT was "possible" when asked about it by CBS News in 1967.... JOHN CONNALLY -- "The only way that I could ever reconcile my memory of what happened and what occurred, with respect to the One-Bullet Theory is .... it had to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit us both." EDDIE BARKER -- "Do you believe, Governor Connally, that the first bullet could have missed, the second one hit both of you, and the third one hit President Kennedy?" JOHN CONNALLY -- "That's possible. That's possible." ~~~~~ So, unlike nearly all "Internet CTers", at least the Texas Governor was a reasonable critic of the single-bullet conclusion. dvp-video-audio-archive.blogspot.com/2012/03/john-and-nellie-connally.html ~~~~~

He's not wrong about when he was injured, James. John Connally's testimony and his other comments in interviews are in perfect harmony with the SBT and the overall "Lone Assassin Fired Three Shots" scenario.... Connally ALWAYS said he was not hit by the first shot, but was hit by Shot #2. That's exactly what I think happened too. So I don't think JBC is "wrong" at all. He's 100% right. And he was in the process of turning to his left when he was hit by the SBT bullet at Z224. As for JBC's anti-SBT stance, that is something he HAD to have gotten mostly from his wife Nellie. We certainly know that JBC *himself* couldn't know if JFK was hit by the first bullet or the second bullet....because JBC always said he never physically SAW Kennedy after the shooting began.... "I never saw either one of them [JFK or Jackie] after the firing started." -- John B. Connally; 1964 WC Testimony Regarding Connally's "The President had slumped" remark in the bedside interview with Martin Agronsky.... jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/06/what-did-john-connally-see.html

Ah! The irony in the above comment by Bob is thick. (Think "Howard Brennan" to grasp the irony.)

Let's hear what Mr. Connally was saying about the Warren Commission on November 23, 1966.... "I'm satisfied beyond any doubt that there was only one [assassin]." -- John B. Connally; 11/23/66

Yes. Edited above.

This is really getting weird. How about "more than one shooter"? And those multiple shooters fired separate bullets into JFK's upper back and throat----with neither bullet exiting the other side of his body?? And then a third bullet struck John Connally at almost the exact same moment? And then all three bullets disappear?* Now THAT'S weird, Ron. * This assumes you believe CE399 touched no victim on Nov. 22. A fairly safe assumption on my part.

Why rely on Carrico at all? Just look at the autopsy photos. They show where the wound/trach is located---very LOW in the front of the neck.... And that throat wound is totally consistent with the back wound and with the SBT.... Well, Ray, what are you suggesting then? Are you saying that there were TWO bullets that caused the two slits in the shirt? Is that it? But if so, where's the second bullet hole in the throat? ~shrug~

Big deal, Ray. It's not like Carrico ran up to JFK's throat wound with a tape measure during those critical moments when the doctors were trying desperately to save the President's life.

Well, Jim, when you can't even get the frame numbers right, you (of course) will not be able to see the tie bulge for yourself. In Post 111, you seem to think the "tie bulge" is occurring between 223 and 224. Why on Earth did you suggest that? I never claimed any such thing. The tie is moving in the 224-225 clip. But I'm enjoying seeing all the CTers in "Full Fledged Denial" mode in this thread. I've seen the SBT denial bit being done before, of course, on many other forums. But this thread takes the cake. I have provided clip after clip showing exactly the same JBC reactions. And yet you still cling to the absurd notion that all of those clips are "corrupt" --- even the MPI version! Pathetic.

This is getting more hysterical with each passing hour. James provides further proof that he's lost in the woods. James now seems to think that I think Connally's tie is moving between 223 and 224. I never claimed any such thing. The tie isn't moving (or "bulging") between 223 and 224, and I have never said it was. The tie is bulging outward, without a doubt, between Z224 and Z225, just like I've been saying all along. Why James is moving the time period up to 223-224 is anyone's guess. ~shrug~ The way things are going now, it looks like it will only be a few days more before James Gordon will be denying the existence of John B. Connally in the car at all. And once again I want to point out to James my previous posts in this thread [Posts 104 and 105] which feature SIX different "versions" of the Z-Film and Z-Film GIF clips, which I collected over the years from multiple different sources. They are not from the exact same source that James thinks contains "corrupt" frames. And one of those six sources is the 1998 MPI digital version of the Z-Film. And surely James isn't going to say that MPI's version consists of "corrupt" frames. Are you, Jim? And in all six of those Zapruder Film examples that I provided, Governor Connally's reactions between Z224 and Z227 can be seen. Every single one. So Jim will have to call ALL SIX sources "corrupt" in order for Connally's tie NOT to be moving at Z224-Z225 and for Connally's shoulders NOT to be flinching at Z224-Z225 and for Connally's right arm NOT to be jerked skyward at Z225-Z226. Good luck with all that, Jim.

For Pete sake, Bob, I never implied that the BULLET directly was responsible for the tie movement. The tie is bulging outward at the exact same instant the shoulder shrugging/flinching is beginning---at Z225. When Connally flinched his shoulders, it affected his necktie too. The bullet didn't directly cause the tie to move--but Connally's flinching sure as heck did. And as I said previously, that tie bulge is perfectly consistent with the flinching and shoulder hiking we see in Z225. They are "in harmony" with each other. Don't tell me YOU can't see the tie moving in the various clips I provided earlier, Bob. You aren't going to deny that John Connally's tie IS moving around at Z225, are you? Take a look again....

Take a look at this very clear version of Z-Film frame 317....and notice the complete lack of an injury (or any blood even) at the BACK of President Kennedy's head. There's no wound in the rear of the head visible whatsoever.....

jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/jfk-back-wound-location.html

This could be the most amazing statement ever posted on the forum. Just wanted to acknowledge it. It's not so amazing. It's true.

And here are two more versions for good measure. The top one is a slow-motion version that I created using all 486 "Costella" frames (at Jim Fetzer's site). And those Costella frames are quite clear too. And, sure enough, all of Connally's flinching and arm-raising activities are visible here too. It's a little more difficult to see Connally's reactions in this version, but that's only because the size of the image is smaller than the other versions above. But I can still quite easily see the flinching and hat-raising.... And then there's the 1998 MPI version, which also very clearly shows the exact same JBC reactions....

Incredible. What a pack of deniers we've got here. You guys win the 2015 prize in the category of.... "Failure To See The Obvious". Congratulations. For the record, I have several other versions of the Z-Film (collected from various online sources, that is), and I just checked each one, and every single version I have shows exactly the same reactions on the part of John Connally. I'll post them all again below. So, I guess James Gordon's next move is to tell me that ALL of these clips (which have come from different Internet sources over the years) are filled with nothing but "corrupt" frames too. .... Shoulders rising (and tie bulging outward): Different version---with the shoulders also rising and the tie moving in the exact same manner as in the clip above this one (just an illusion, Jim?): And here's another, again showing the very distinct riseof Connally's shoulders, plus the hat flip, plus the tie movement: And here's yet another source for the same Z-Film scene, again showing JBC's shoulders hiking up at Z225 (also "corrupt", James?): If James Gordon comes up with more lame excuses to deny what his eyes are seeing in all of the above versions of the Z-Film, he'll win a new trophy --- the "Robert Groden Award" --- in memory of Mr. Groden's fiasco at the O.J. Simpson civil trial, where Groden was shown 30 different pictures of Simpson wearing the very same shoes, but Groden still insisted one of the photos showing the same shoes was a fake.

Not to the degree of pinpoint, to-the-millimeter accuracy that CTers think they can prove or disprove things with regard to the bullet transiting JFK's body. Common sense ALONE practically proves the SBT. And the LACK of things that SHOULD be in evidence--but aren't--only further strengthen the SBT's viability --- e.g., the LACK of bullets in JFK's body, and the LACK of substantial damage inside JFK's back & neck areas. Those things would be present if the CTers are right. But they're not there. And CTers can never tell us WHY they're not there (without resorting to the "Everything's Fake" routine).

They're very likely connected, though.... 1.) Bullet hits Connally's coat. 2.) Coat moves a little bit after being hit by bullet. 3.) The brisk breeze catches ahold of the moving coat and causes lapel to flip up. Tell me how that's not possible. Raspberry.

It's not just Connally's left shoulder that's flinching. His right shoulder is rising too. But I suppose that's just a "shadow" too, right?

Of course the large lapel movement at precisely Z224 had something to do with the bullet hitting JBC. It would be an incredible coincidence if that were not the case.

Bob, The wind probably caught ahold of the lapel after the bullet passed through Connally's jacket, causing it to flip up more dramatically. Is that not at least POSSIBLE, Robert?

This is hilarious. And absolutely mind-boggling, to boot. The levels of total denial the CTers will rise to in order to ignore the obvious signs of JBC being in distress in Z225-Z230. It couldn't be more obvious that Connally's shoulders are shrugging from a flinch starting at Z225, and yet I'm supposed to believe it only looks that way because JBC is turning to his left. Does EVERY "left turn" made by all limo occupants give the false appearance of "shoulder shrugging", James? Get real. And I guess you still want to ignore Connally's moving tie, eh? Is his tie bulging outward due to his "left turn" too? And the startled look that we can see on his face starting in Z225 too? And the opening of the mouth? Are none of these things enough to give you pause to even consider the possibility that Connally has just been shot and is reacting to that shot in an involuntary manner starting at Z225? And then there's the hat flip at Z226 too. Are we really to believe that JBC's arm-raising is also NOT indicative of Connally reacting to a bullet---even when we know JBC was struck by a bullet in that very SAME right arm/wrist that's flipping upward ultra-fast at Z226? You're not going to pass off the hat/arm flip as "video distortion" too, are you Jim?

Bob, Nothing you say from this point on can possibly debunk the last comment I made in my last post about "using HIS [JFK's] BODY and ONLY HIS BODY". You'll try to pretend, of course, that my comment has no validity whatsoever, but we all know you'll just be pretending.