David Von Pein

Thanks for the close-up of Clint Hill in Z340, Robin. And I realize that we're looking at Hill in that Z-frame through the sprocket holes, which makes things a little "hazier" (if that's the right word) when looking at objects in that part of the film strip, but that "looking through the sprocket holes" fact doesn't change the BLACKNESS that is most definitely apparent on the back of Clint Hill's head. And, to emphasize again --- Since no plotter or conspirator bent on altering or faking the Zapruder Film would possibly have had any need or desire to alter any part of Clint Hill's image in the film, then I think even most conspiracy believers would agree with me that the "blackness" that we see at the back of Clint Hill's head in frame 340 is legitimate, unaltered blackness being seen on his head. Therefore, since Hill's "blackness" is real and legit in Z340, then why would anybody think that the similar "blackness" at the back of President Kennedy's head in Z317 (which is just 1.25 seconds earlier than Z340 in the very same home movie) is blackness that must have been added to the film by some unknown film-fakers? It's time to stamp the "blacked out head" theory with this label --- DEBUNKED!

Obviously you're wrong, because the back of JFK's head does not have the noonday sun shining directly on it. But I've got a question for you, Robert.... Do you think the back of JFK's head has been artificially "blacked out" in this Z-Film frame?....

I never sleep, Bob. The bigwigs at Langley have been cracking the whip lately. All CIA Disinfo agents are now on call 24/7. It's a bitch. I even have to beg for my meals.

Mighty weak, Bob. The two pictures in my comparison are only 1.25 seconds apart in real time. Do you really think the degree of blackness (due to shadow) is going to have changed THAT much in just 1.25 seconds? Plus, as I mentioned before, many CTers think JFK's head has been "blacked out" in ALL post-Z313 frames. (Of course they think that. It would be kind of silly to believe in the "blacked out" theory and yet believe that only SOME Z-frames showing the back of Kennedy's head AFTER the head shot have been blacked out. Right?) So my comparison of the Z317 and Z340 frames is perfectly appropriate, given what many CTers believe about ALL of the post-Z313 frames depicting JFK's head. And as can be plainly seen in Z340, the back of Clint Hill's head is pitch black....just exactly like Kennedy's head in Z317. And the only difference that I can see in the two men's position (relating to the sun in the sky) is that Hill's head is turned a little more to his right (north) in Z340 than JFK's head is in Z317. So, quite obviously, since the back of JFK's head is still dark in Z340, it must mean that the back of his head is still deep enough in shadow so that the sunlight is not directly shining on that part of his cranium. Try again, Bob. Maybe your next theory will make more sense. Because my Hill/JFK comparison photo destroys the "blacked out" theory, IMO.

In this comparison I made below of the head positions of Secret Service agent Clint Hill and JFK, it doesn't look to me as if Hill's head is in a position (relative to the sun) that is all that much different than JFK's head position. Does it? And yet I see the same blackness appearing at the back of both of their heads. And with respect to the Z317 frame shown here of President Kennedy's head, I've heard many conspiracy theorists say that they think JFK's head has most certainly been artificially "blacked out" here.... Looks like one more conspiracy myth debunked by merely examining other parts of the same allegedly "altered" Zapruder home movie.

What's causing the same kind of "blackness" to appear on the back of Clint Hill's head in the very same Z-Film frame? Was Hill's head "blacked out" by the conspirators too?....

That's been blatantly obvious for days now.

Yes, I know that. I answered anyway. Is that against forum rules now?

But James.... Once we get to the blurry frame 227, it's all over with anyway. I.E., Connally's already been hit and he has ALREADY reacted back there in the clearer frames (Z224-225-226). So what makes the difference whether Z227 is clear or not? The cat's already out of the bag (so to speak). Connally's already been wounded prior to Z227, and he is visibly REACTING to being hit by the bullet in the clearer frames (Z224-226). So you can have Z227. I sure as heck don't need that frame to prove my point regarding John Connally's reactions. Because it's all over and done with by Z226.

Amen, Mark. And this slo-mo GIF shows Connally's initial involuntary reactions even better (this clip ends at Z225, before the arm/hat flip starts)..... And then, just one frame later, the arm/hat flip at Z226, which just happens to be the EXACT same frame when President Kennedy starts raising his right arm too. The right arms of the two victims who were shot that day are jerking upward simultaneously. If this isn't a good solid indication that both Kennedy and Connally were hit by the very same bullet, then what is? .... jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/02/sbt-clips.html single-bullet-theory.blogspot.com/#Debating-The-SBT

"Until recently"? You mean Oswald was in the lunchroom until just last week (or maybe last night)? That's amazing. They didn't see Oswald in the lunchroom at exactly 12:30. They saw him there a couple of minutes later after Oswald shot the President from the sixth floor and then hurried down the back stairs. And to pre-empt your next argument, Vickie Adams' testimony doesn't pave the way for Oswald's innocence either. Here's why -----> jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/07/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-743.html It's funny to note that the conspiracy theorists don't think Lee Oswald had a prayer of getting from the sixth floor to the second floor of the Book Depository in 90 seconds, and yet those same conspiracists don't have any problem at all believing that the two women (Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles--wearing high heels too) could go from the 4th floor to the 1st floor in just 60 seconds. And the difference in the distance travelled is just one floor (with Oswald needing to travel down four flights--from 6 to 2--while the girls need to go down three flights--from 4 to 1). I guess the CTers just can't believe that Oswald could have traversed that ONE extra flight of stairs (and hid the rifle near the stairs) in the 30 seconds that separates LHO's time from the time the CTers like for the girls so much (1 minute flat). Ironic, huh? No, he wasn't in the Dal-Tex. He was just where Howard Brennan saw him---on the sixth floor of the Depository firing a rifle at President Kennedy.

OK, Kathy. Thanks.

Exactly, Kathy. And who among us enjoys seeing our opinions (and beliefs) smashed to bits by somebody else on a public forum for many other people to witness? A "firm opinion" (even if it's an inaccurate one) is difficult to soften. Wouldn't you agree, Kathy? He did? Where? I must have missed that post by James.

Huh? Why on Earth would you say such a thing, James? How is it that my posts regarding various other issues connected with the SBT and John Connally's reactions in the Z-Film --- which are issues that YOU yourself have commented on repeatedly in this thread --- are prohibiting other members from steering the conversation back to my thread-starting title -- "John Connally's Lapel"? Are all other Education Forum members now somehow gagged? And are they somehow forced to keep quiet about the "lapel" even though this thread -- like all forum threads almost always do -- drifted away from the "lapel" topic and focused more on Connally's other reactions as seen in the Z-Film? I'm afraid I'm forced to do another one of these (and it's almost as noticeable as the one John Connally can be seen doing in the Zapruder movie).... ~ SHRUG ~ Time for another one of these.... ~shrug~ I think a better question is: Why is James Gordon inventing a "problem" where none seems to exist at all? Fellow members are still free to post anything they want. (Aren't they, Jim?) And fellow posters can steer the debate back to ONLY the topic of "John Connally's Lapel" if they want to. Right? So what IS the "problem"? I see none--other than a "problem" being manufactured by an administrator named James Gordon who seems to have a desire to FIND some kind of "problem" with an Education Forum member he vehemently disagrees with named David R. Von Pein. And, btw, even though I gave this thread the title of "John Connally's Lapel", everybody can easily see that in the thread-starting post, I talk about a whole lot of OTHER stuff besides just the "lapel". So, in reality, this thread HAS remained pretty much on course and on the rails when the TOTALITY of everything I discuss in my thread-starter is taken into account (the actual title of the thread notwithstanding). Everyone is free to disagree with my next comment if they so desire, but.... Based on the comments I just quoted above by James Gordon, it sounds to me like James is trying his hardest to steer the topic back to ONLY the area of "John Connally's Lapel" and keep the discussion AWAY from some of Connally's other reactions seen in the Z-Film (e.g., the flinching, the grimace, the arm raising, etc.). And the only reason I can envision James wanting to do that is because he knows--deep down--that his posts in this thread have been totally defeated and flattened by my counter-arguments and various GIF clips proving that James is 100% wrong about his interpretations concerning Governor Connally's movements in frames 224 to 227 of the Zapruder Film. (IMHO.)

But....why? Plus, you can see it does no good to "hide" them if other posters use the QUOTE feature to make them visible in later posts. Why did they need to be hidden in the first place? I really don't understand.

Question: Why were these two posts deleted (or "hidden") earlier today? Mark Valenti, on 19 May 2015 - 09:23 AM, said: James R Gordon, on 19 May 2015 - 04:46 AM, said: Those two posts are only showing up now because other people have used the "Quote" feature and so they show up in subsequent posts. ~shrug~

That's another conspiracy myth that refuses to die the agonizing death it deserves (just like dozens of other such conspiracy-oriented myths and fairy tales). The truth is, of course, that Lee Harvey Oswald's purchase and ownership of Carcano Rifle #C2766 and Smith & Wesson Revolver #V510210 have been established and proven beyond all possible reasonable doubt (and in many different ways, to boot), as I demonstrate at the links below.... jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/07/mannlicher-carcano.html jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/08/dvp-vs-dieugenio-part-42.html jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-postmark-on-commission-exhibit-773.html

Gee, I thought I was doing pretty good---what with all this stuff linked below that can't possibly be reasonably refuted. It can only be attacked by CTers who want to whine about the Z-Film being faked; but that's not a "reasonable" argument, so it can be dismissed right away.... Single-Bullet-Theory.blogspot.com/#Debating-The-SBT Oswald wasn't in the second-floor break (lunch) room at 12:30 PM CST on 11/22/63. And just how do you think those 2 large fragments from "Oswald's bullet" managed to find their way into JFK's car if Oswald's gun wasn't being used that day to shoot bullets at Kennedy? jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/09/ce567-and-ce569.html And can you tell me who was MORE LIKELY to be using Oswald's gun on Nov. 22 (or any other day) than Oswald himself?

I doubt either thing was possible (given the Z-Film evidence). Dale Myers' exacting "key framing" of his computer 3D model to the Zapruder Film itself makes it fairly evident that Ron's first suggestion couldn't have occurred ("They could have been hit at virtually the same time but not by the same bullet"). It's pretty clear that Kennedy is in the bullet path during the critical Z-Film period in question when Connally was most likely hit by a bullet. So it looks like that bullet had NO CHOICE but to go through Kennedy first in order to get to Connally's upper back.... As for the two simultaneous head shots --- If that were the case, why is there just ONE explosion of JFK's head? Why don't we see MULTIPLE explosions of blood and brain matter if JFK had been hit two times in the head? In other words, how could TWO separate shots to the head look so much like just ONE?.... And I think a similar "In other words" question can be asked of the conspiracy theorists who detest the Single-Bullet Theory so much --- In other words, how could TWO (or more!) bullets have caused the damage to both President Kennedy and Governor Connally....and yet have those multiple bullets look so much like a SINGLE-BULLET EVENT in Abraham Zapruder's home movie AND in Commission Exhibit No. 903, to boot?

So, you think it's more reasonable to believe that the shots that Connally said he heard coming FROM BEHIND really came from the FRONT (or at least one of those shots anyway), even though we KNOW that at least one of the shots that was fired that day definitely DID come from behind Connally (based on the fact Connally was physically hit by that bullet IN THE BACK, which means it HAD to have come "from behind")? Is that about the size of your argument, Ray? If so, you need to re-think a few things. Because that theory is really bizarre and unreasonable (from virtually every perspective).

I disagree, Pam. As do many others -----> jfk-archives/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-940.html You really think this is merely a "shadow", Pam? .... Plus, how does the "side window" play any part in this at all? We're not looking through that side window to see Connally's lapel. The lapel is to the left (east) of the window. What am I not understanding about your "side window" claim, Pam? Am I not understanding the angles that you think are involved here? In addition, I could also make a pretty fair argument that, at least in part, Connally's necktie is bulging outward as a result of the lapel physically touching the tie and causing it to move too. It's hard to tell, but I think what I just said about the lapel hitting the tie could possibly have some merit.

You must be joking this time, Ray. The things you mentioned above regarding Governor Connally fit the "Lone Assassin" and "SBT" scenarios beautifully. In fact, it's perfect. Everything John Connally has said over the years regarding the things he had first-hand knowledge of has been perfectly consistent with the Single-Bullet Theory and the overall "Oswald Did All The Shooting From The Sixth Floor Of The Book Depository" scenario. Connally was hit in the back by the shot that was directly IN-BETWEEN the two shots he heard coming from "back over my right shoulder". Ergo, the shot he felt hit him (but did not hear) obviously ALSO had to have come from the same general direction as the two shots he did hear---i.e., from behind him. There's nothing inconsistent or unbelievable about any of Connally's testimony whatsoever. And it fits the SBT to a tee. As for JBC's belief that he and JFK were struck by different bullets --- that belief almost certainly stemmed in large part from his wife's belief that JFK reacted first and then JBC reacted after Kennedy. But Nellie certainly wasn't aware of all of these ultra-fast reactions that took place an instant after Z224. No way she saw all this flinching and lapel movement and grimacing and arm raising and tie displacement. What Nellie saw, instead, were her husband's SECONDARY and VOLUNTARY reactions, which began just a short time later. And in her mind, she thought the reactions of the two victims were separated by a lengthier period of time than they really were. And who could blame her? I think any of us probably would have thought the same thing Nellie thought, given the circumstances. But if I had a chance to show the late Mrs. Connally and the late Governor Connally the in-motion GIF clips presented below, I'm confident that I could make SBT believers out of both of them in less than 15 minutes.... http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2013/02/sbt-clips.html

Mark Knight, of course, will just ignore the fact that John Connally's "ALL OF THE SHOTS CAME FROM BACK OVER MY RIGHT SHOULDER" testimony is buttressed by all of the physical evidence that was found in a building that was located BACK OVER CONNALLY'S RIGHT SHOULDER. Funny coincidence there, huh?

Well....uh....let me think.... Maybe he could tell by the sound of the shots? Could that possibly have been it?

And by that, can I assume that you DO believe ALL of John Connally's testimony and statements? Including this statement?.... "All of the shots came from the same place--from back over my right shoulder. They weren't in front of us. They weren't at the side of us. There were no sounds like that emanating from those directions." -- John Connally; 1967; CBS-TV