Antti Hynonen

Thank you for your replies. I agree that the Australian test bullet came out more intact than I had expected. However, in all fairness the differences between the actual and mock shootings should have been clearly outlined as well. To me it seemed like they edited or were hiding the exit wound in the JFK torso (which was in a different location thatn the actual). In my mind the team only did a half decent job (could have been due to financial restrictions), as they didn't use more than one set of dummies. They should have had 2 or three sets of dummies to ensure that at the very least the equivalent number of (similar) bones were hit, as in the actual event. To compare CE399 with their bullet, the minimum requirement ought to have been that the test bullet hit a similar set of bones (in number and density) and tissue. Now their test remains incomplete. The FMJ rounds that I've fired (into fresh wood) have usually mushroomed a little, so I'm surprised to see the test bullet relatively intact. Also one of the Australian team members said he thought the test bullet was not quite like CE399, as it was more bent. I assume the test results would be even more dissimilar, if it had indeed hit all sections of the intended targets. I can't understand how the shooter missed the target drawn on the torso, I've done better shooting without a scope, and I'm only an average shot.... Still puzzled.... as in my mind the test did not perform as the actual "magic bullet". In relation to this, I still think about the JFK autopsy comments regarding the wound in the back (which as I recall was proded) and then the pathologist conlcuded it was only an inch or so deep. In other words I still think the neck wound (in the front) must be from a different shot that the back wound.... why neither seemed to penetrate the body completely, I don't know. Now, trying to fathom the back wound being the entry and the neck wound the exit doesn't make sense, the angle gets too complicated... Let's remember that the magic bullet has received it's name from a multitude of traits; not only because of being relatively intact, but also from the number of wounds attributed to it and also the debated path it took. Therefore the test firing and the documentary should have adequately addressed all these issues, not just the condition of the bullet.

Mr. Von Pein, I your posting (quoted above, with sections highlighted), you discuss the Australian documentary: "JFK: Beyond The Magic Bullet". Regarding this documentary (which I saw several months ago), I'd have a couple of questions which left me somewhat puzzled. Perhaps you can help?: 1) In the mock shooting, where did the "magic bullet" exit Kennedy's body? Why was this location on the JFK dummy never shown (should have been in the center of Kennedy's throat, below the Adams apple)? At least I didn't see it... Would have been interesting to compare to the actual wound location and shape, size etc. 2) Why do you think the bullet didn't do the same damage to Connally's wrist and thigh as the actual bullet? In other words, how successful was their attempt after all? 3) A more challenging mock shooting would have been the attempt to replicate the Kennedy head shot. I was disappointed that the Australian team didn't attempt that as well, since they had most of the equipment and materials set up there. What do you think? Of course the title of the documentary would have to be changed.... (In my mind the head shot could be called the second magic bullet (OR MAGIC SHOT)). 4) The forensic pathologist interviewed in the show was asked for an opinion regarding the number of shooters after he read the damage to the victims from the reports given to him (or something to that effect). The pathologist thought there were at least 2 shooters.... Any thoughts on that? Kind regards,

So Mr. Slattery, You have no regrets of the action taken by the Bush administration (and the "coalition")? Are you trying to say that you are satisfied with the situation and it will merely need some more time to resolve? I'm saying the situation in Iraq went from bad to way worse. I fear the world may be falling into WWIII due to events which have transpired in the middle east over the last 3 years. Nevertheless, a little progress (less killing) would be comforting? Things have escalated to new levels since the Iraqi campaign and the situation is definitely not under (any nations') control any longer. The events you listed are terrible events indeed. I agree that some action was needed to retaliate against these acts of terrorism. Regarding the perpetrators of these tragic events you listed, how many of them were Iraqi national or individuals residing in Iraq? Would you know? I'm trying to ask what the direct links are between the second gulf war in Iraq and say, 9/11? To be frank with you, times did seem more peaceful during the Clinton era, and yes fuel was a lot cheaper (stability in the region). Also something called a "Palestinian and Isreali road map" was being worked on... I guess that's history now. There was a lot less fighting and killing (stability in the region), actually yes, reality was a lot closer to Disneyland then than now.

... and where are we today? http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/02...eech/index.html Bush: Ending Saddam's regime will bring stability to Mideast Thursday, February 27, 2003 Posted: 0955 GMT WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush on Wednesday said ending the "direct and growing threat" posed by Saddam Hussein will create a "free and peaceful" Iraq and bring stability to the entire Mideast. "The danger posed by Saddam Hussein and his weapons cannot be ignored or wished away. The danger must be confronted," Bush said in a speech to the American Enterprise Institute. The administration hopes that the Iraqi regime will meet U.N. disarmament requirements, he said. If not, force will be used to make Baghdad comply. "Either way, this danger will be removed," he said. Creating a free Iraq will be a difficult task requiring a "sustained commitment" from the United States and other countries, but a new Iraq could serve as "a dramatic and inspiring example of freedom" throughout the Middle East, Bush said. "Bringing stability and unity to a free Iraq will not be easy. Yet, that is no excuse to leave the Iraqi regime's torture chambers and poison labs in operation," Bush said. "Any future the Iraqi people choose for themselves will be better than the nightmare world that Saddam Hussein has chosen for them," he said, adding "we will ensure that one brutal dictator is not replaced by another." Bush said the United States does not plan any permanent occupation of Iraq, but he did not offer a timeline. "We will remain in Iraq as long as necessary and not a day more," he said. If war does come, coalition forces will protect oil fields "from sabotage by a dying regime and ensure those resources are used for the benefit of the owners, the Iraqi people," Bush said. The president compared the rebuilding of Iraq to U.S. efforts after World War II to rebuild war-ravaged countries, including wartime enemies Germany and Japan. "After defeating enemies, we did not leave behind occupying armies. We left constitutions and parliaments. We established an atmosphere of safety, in which responsible, reform-minded local leaders could built lasting institutions of freedom. "In societies that once bred fascism and militarism, liberty found a permanent home." Reminding Americans of the price the nation paid on September 11, 2001, Bush said the "safety of the American people depends on this direct and growing threat" posed by Saddam. "The passing of Saddam Hussein's regime will deprive terrorist networks of a wealthy patron that pays for terrorist training and offers rewards to families of suicide bombers. And other regimes will be given a clear warning: That support for terror will not be tolerated." An end to Saddam's reign also would have positive ramifications on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He said it would set in motion "progress towards a truly democratic Palestinian state," and Palestinians would be rid of Saddam's "outside support for terrorism." "The world has a clear interest in the spread of democratic values, because stable and free nations do not breed the ideologies of murder. They encourage the peaceful pursuit of a better life, and there are hopeful signs of the desire for freedom in the Middle East," Bush said. Earlier in the day, Bush's father, former President George Bush, spoke at Tufts University in Massachusetts and detailed his view for the Middle East. He said stability requires a "new vision to be advanced by the region's leaders and embraced by the people. It will require them to once again rise above violence and recrimination, and to choose hope over hate." "I believe in the longer run the 21st century will offer leaders throughout the eastern Mediterranean a real chance to emerge from their current period of conflict and begin building a brighter future worthy of their proud peoples," he said. At one point, antiwar protesters interrupted the speech by shouting at the elder Bush. As security escorted the demonstrators away, the former president said, "We've now found another real good reason to use duct tape." ----End ----- ... and where are we today? I'm glad that went well. How many people (American and Iraqi) are dead now and counting? Is oil and gas any cheaper (stability to the region)? Has the threat of terrorism lessened (stability to the region)? Ok, Saddam is in court, was it worth it (stability to the region)? Nice going, really nice. Stability to the region my ***!

A black Cadillac was the car used by persons assumed and/or identified as being Oswald, Shaw and Ferrie in Clinton Louisiana in the summer of 1963. Didn't Dave Ferrie admit to have driven to Tx for the 11/22/1963 week-end with some boys.... maybe he drove a black Caddie in the Dallas area that afternoon? A link to an article on the Mcadams site, I'm only using this link and article to provide support for my own recollection of the witness statements relating to the black car and the 3 persons: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/clinton1.htm

Interesting! Milteer and possible GA associates come to mind. I wonder if this particular tag no. was ever traced down. It might be worthwile to know how was "traveling north on Harry Hines at a high rate of speed" Friday afternoon on 11/22/1963.

Over the years, one's handwriting and signature will change somewhat. It would be interesting to see when each of these signatures have been created. If there are several years between them, the slight difference in styles would seem quite normal to me.

Yes, As I recall, Lee never received an upgrade regarding his discharge, despite his attempts. Therefore he probably kept trying. This is also one of the reasons Lee was in touch with Dean Andrews... See below SS report on Dean Andrews re: Lee Oswald http://www.jfk-online.com/ce3094.html

What came to mind of that photo comparison is not Jackie's hand, but rather the question: Where's Connally in Altgens? Is the Altgens shot here, too cropped to see where JBC went? In Zap 254 he seems to be directly in front of Jackie's hand and partially aligned with Kennedy's body. Didn't the LN team always use the argument that the SBT trajectory lines up "nicely" with everything since the jump seats were closer together in the center of the limo than what the Presidential couple was seated in the back seat. If that's the case, where's JBC? That argument doesn't seem to hold here, unless the uncropped Altgens reveals something else..... IMO there's nothing suspicious about Jackie's hand and the way it can be seen in the comparison, perhaps the distance and angles of the photographers does help explain how we can see her hand in the manner we do in both frames. I'm not suggesting photo manipulation necessarily, I'm suggesting that the alignment of the seating in the limo à la Lone Nut and SBT doesn't seem to hold when looking at the Altgens, which taken roughly at ZAP 250-260????

Glad to see you consider this forum a serious one.

Chuck, This is exactly the procedure used by (all) official parties investigating this assassination. If there was anything suspicious, pointing to anyone else except Oswald, it was to be ignored, suppressed, ridiculed or otherwise condemned as unbelievable, in order to avoid deviating from the initial patsy LN theory fed to the general public.

Au contraire mon ami. It is specifically the original, non-manipulated, forensic; ballistic; pathological; and/or physical evidence which proves more than one assassin, firing from at least two directions. The cover-up of the forensic; ballistic; pathological; and physical evidence shows a massive government led conspiracy to hide and distort the true events, which transpired 11/22/1963.

duplicate post removed

Looks like you've got the case pretty much cleared up then....good for you. You achieved something none of the investigating entities were able to do. However, you haven't convinced me, and I might just keep looking for multiple assassins for 43 more years. Actually it's more a question of nailing down who they were, the fact is they were there as witnessed by numerous eye witnesses.

Thanks for the compliments. Sure enough the WC SBT is crap, which - on the other hand, makes it even harder to believe a single assassin. The reason why Mr. Specter came up with the SBT was to explain a single assassin from behind and to get the shot sequence to sort of jive with some of the (manipulated?) testimony. I've been trying to follow your theories relating to the shot sequence, the Carcano etc. but am unable to follow (this seems to be the case with many other members as well, I believe). To reiterate, do you mind telling us what shot caused what wound, the damage to the limo, Tagues wound etc? Also, how many shots do you believe were fired? Personally, I believe more than 3 shots were fired, from at least two positions. (The eye witness accounts from along Elm St. where JFK was hit seem to be the most reliable.) On another note, what do you (and other members) think of the competence of the investigating bodies of the JFK case? In particular, considering that the event was photographed and videotaped from multiple locations and also witnessed by dozens. What I'm saying is murders have been solved with no photographic nor video evidence, let alone eye witnesses and here we are some 43 years later discussing and debating what happened...

From Mr. Purvis' post above: Dr. GREGORY - My initial impression was that whatever produced the wound of the wrist was an irregular object, certainly not smooth nosed as the business end of this particular bullet is because of two things. The size of the wound of entrance, and the fact that it is irregular surfaced permitted it to pick up organic debris, materials, threads, and carry them into the wound with it. Dr. GREGORY - The wound of entrance is characteristic in my view of an irregular missile in this case, an irregular missile which has tipped itself off as being irregular by the nature of itself. Mr. DULLES - What do you mean by irregular? Dr. GREGORY - I mean one that has been distorted. So much for the Connally wounds to have been caused by the fantastic, magic CE-399, I might add almost intact bullet....

According to several sources there were warning signs (in the fall of 1963) which suggested that during the Texas visit Kennedy's life might be in greater danger than usual. This information was received by federal agencies from various sources at this time. I would argue that in the fall of 1963 extra caution would have been in place, even after taking into account what was known prior to 11/22/1963. In my mind Mr. Slattery is correct that the SS standard operating procedures seem to vary from motorcade to motorcade and is quite inconsistent. I have also heard that from time to time, President Kennedy himself would instruct the SS to stand down and to allow him to greet the crowds. However, as I stated earlier the trip to Texas came with several warning signs regarding potential aggression. These warnings were not heeded. Whether Mr. Roberts was involved or not can not be determined from the video nor from his actions alone IMO.

The gentleman who wrote the article should contact Ruth Paine in Florida, since he is certain that Ruth was Mrs. Pentz in 1961. Confronting her and getting supporting opinions from his air force buddies that Ruth Paine in fact was Mrs. Pentz at Carswell might produce some additional information or reactions. If this turns out to be accurate, Marguerite Oswald's (was it Marguerite or Robert) opinion that the Paine's were "somehow involved", is accurate. The article also brings to mind hypnosis as a means to activate Jack Ruby for Oswald's murder. Ruby promptly took action immediately following the honking of a horn.

Mark, I believe, DeMohrenschildt's daughter was/is called Alexandra DeMohrenschildt. Of course he may have another daughter, whom I do not know of. Alexandra's last residence was in New Mexico as far as I know (FWIW).

Any chance of seeing such photos posted here?

Greg do you mean "Impeach Kennedy" sign? Or was there an "Impeach Earl Warren" sign too?

Thanks Steve and Larry for clearing up the 3126 Harlandale stuff. I wonder if Orcarberrio, Rodriguez and Parrel have any interesting associates we could ultimately tie to the TSBD, Dealy Plaza or Oswald. I have a hunch that the Odio visitors, Harlandale fellows and murders in Dallas over 11/22/63 - 11/24/63 are all connected.

Parkland was a wild goose chase. Pop was at another Dallas area clinic, of which I do not recall the name.

Which is it, 3128 or 3126 Harlandale? It would be interesting to see if we could dig up exactly who rented the location and list all the names of the indivuals who lived there in the fall of 1963.

Yes Owen, in my opinion, you hit the very essence of the entire thread, with the "no probative value" -quote. Replying to Question: Do you discount Everything About New Orleans? No, I do not. The WC seemed to follow their given guidelines very carefully, which in essence was: Oswald is the guilty party, and he alone is guilty. Make sure the evidence and your investigation supports this, and only this. So despite some controversy within the commission, the WC used the strategy of ignoring and eliminating all evidence which did not support Oswald's guilt. Jim Garrison and his investigation took a more thorough look, and took into account all the evidence, in particular the New Orleans aspect of a conspiracy. His investigation brought new life to the case, which remains usolved to this day. It also showed the severe flaws of the WC to the general public, and the need to carry forward from where he left off.