Bill Fite
-
Posts
286 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Bill Fite
-
-
Sorry to have to ask, but given the bullet fragments on the X-ray posted previously, with the larger ones to the rear of the skull and the cloud of smaller ones more to the front --doesn't that indicate a shot from the front given the formula for momentum?
momentum = mass * velocity
velocity has both speed and direction
so the larger fragment would travel farther away from the point of entry.
Is there another explanation?
Also, the bullet path would be more at the temple area then going back across the top of the brain.
-
58 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:
-- JFK's tax cut proposal included a provision to cut the top marginal tax rate 91% to 65%, a staggering reduction of 28%. Name me one current prominent Democrat would who support such a thing.
-- In 1962, JFK used an investment tax credit and an increase in depreciation allowances to give corporations a 10% reduction in their income taxes. Name me a current Democrat who would support such a thing, other than Manchin and perhaps Sinema.
-
You're ignoring what the tax rates were and what they are now.
Why don't you post them?
-
37 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:
But when you jump from that point and then claim that JFK would have completely withdrawn and completely disengaged from South Vietnam, you are going well beyond what the evidence supports.
Here's the evidence right here -- a memo from the head of the JCS on Oct 4, 1963:
Quote* The precise instructions for withdrawal delivered by Maxwell Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to his fellow Chiefs on October 4, 1963, in a memorandum that remained classified until 1997.
Taylor wrote:
“On 2 October the President approved recommendations on military matters contained in the report of the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The following actions derived from these recommendations are directed: … all planning will be directed toward preparing RVN forces for the withdrawal of all US special assistance units and personnel by the end of calendar year 1965. The US Comprehensive Plan, Vietnam, will be revised to bring it into consonance with these objectives, and to reduce planned residual (post-1965) MAAG strengths to approximately pre-insurgency levels… Execute the plan to withdraw 1,000 US military personnel by the end of 1963…”
-
I think any question about JFK's intentions wrt Vietnam at the time of his death would be put to bed with the memo from the head of the JCS, Maxwell Taylor on Oct 4, 1963.
Quote* The precise instructions for withdrawal delivered by Maxwell Taylor, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to his fellow Chiefs on October 4, 1963, in a memorandum that remained classified until 1997.
Taylor wrote:
“On 2 October the President approved recommendations on military matters contained in the report of the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The following actions derived from these recommendations are directed: … all planning will be directed toward preparing RVN forces for the withdrawal of all US special assistance units and personnel by the end of calendar year 1965. The US Comprehensive Plan, Vietnam, will be revised to bring it into consonance with these objectives, and to reduce planned residual (post-1965) MAAG strengths to approximately pre-insurgency levels… Execute the plan to withdraw 1,000 US military personnel by the end of 1963…”
-
55 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:
Nixon and Kissinger were hardly libs, and quite willing to inflict lots of harm on anyone---but they both concluded the VW was unwinnable, soon after gaining power in 1968. Nixon extended the war so as to not lose before the 1972 elections.
If the VW war was winnable, why did not Nixon and Kissinger win it?
One of the most interesting questions I've ever heard. Certainly something all of those who claim the war was winnable will be unable to answer.
QuoteNot only that, Vietnam was not vital to US interests. After Vietnam went commie, the only wounds inflicted on the US were done from within, as we all know.
In recent decades, nearly every square inch of the planet has been described as "vital" to the US.
No one I ever know had any interests in Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan or Syria, although almost everyone I knew needed a job, healthcare and safe streets.
IIRC - The late great Joseph Heller had a quote in his book, Picture This a quote about Vietnam to the effect that the US had 500 thousand troops in Vietnam to protect its vital interests. Its only vital interest was the lives of the 500 thousand troops in Vietnam.
-
Is part of the belief in a lone assassin the mixing of 2 different questions?
(1) Was there a conspiracy?
if Yes in (1) - (2) Who was involved?
if No in (1) - (2) Was LHO the assassin?
Is the other significant piece of the puzzle the mixing of 'could have happened' with probabilities?
Because something could have happened doesn't mean that it did.
Specifically, for (1) to be no then a series of events would have to happen including but not limited to (depending on assumptions:
* 3 or more shots in < 8.5 seconds
* 2 or more of the 3 shots hit the target
* the magic bullet would have to emerge in its shape after inflicting all the wounds
* etc...
People mistake the result that something is possible with the probability of multiple independent events happening. They don't bother to get the probability estimates and then multiply them together. p(A and B ) = P(A) * P(B ) if A and B are independent -- like the experiments on replicating the Z film timing (first 2 above) and number of hits as A and the not significantly damaged state of the magic bullet as B.
The probabilities of successful (i.e. a lone assassin shooting from the 6th floor) outcomes could all be estimated from the results of experiments without discussing / arguing over the reliability of eye/ear witness testimony.
-
35 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:
Mark Lane was Jim Jones' lawyer. Lane made public statements suggesting that the government was conspiring against Jones.
I asked Mark about this once. I asked him if he felt any responsibility for what happened. He said no. That he was as surprised as anyone when Jones started killing people. Lane said furthermore that he was terrified for his life and had to race across the jungle to safety. I suspect he discusses this in his autobiography, which, strangely, I never got around to reading.
He discusses it in the Pauley Perrette documentary - Citizen Lane which is an incredibly interesting film.
The Jonestown segment is quite harrowing.
-
IMO:
Well, I would bet the odds were that a House Committee would have had at least 1 northern liberal on it.
That might have made a difference.
What would have made a difference is if a House Committee would have put the investigation in the hands of prosecutors instead of lawyers and the FBI.
-
12 hours ago, Ian Lloyd said:
What would be good, I think is if, say, a movie producer with the resources available, to commission a mannequin to JFK's height and build etc., mark the mannequin with the (supposed) positions of the bullet entry & exit wounds and, assuming (as we seem to be doing) that the bullet passed through JFK in a straight line, drill a hole through the mannequin at the marked points. The mannequin can then be used to correctly represent what CE903 is purportedly representing and see how that looks.
No need to impale any living (or deceased) people David (I'm not sure why you're so obsessed with impaling people?).
Just a matter of finding such a person with the resources who is interested enough in the truth, I guess.
As Pat Speer said - it's been tested. Here's a link to the video of the parts of interest he referenced:
(3 minutes long)
-
16 minutes ago, Gary Murr said:
Hello Bill:
If you haven't already done so, might I suggest you read the late John Hunt's essay on the issue of CE 399 and it's ability to generate the various wounding processes assigned to it and the SBT. A link to this essay is below.
https://www.history-matters.com/essays/jfkmed/Breakability/Breakability.htm
Gary Murr
Thanks Gary.
-
1 hour ago, Joe Bauer said:
Is the "100 shots/100 significantly deformed 6.5 Carcano bullets" story true?
If so, how can anyone ever justify or give any credibility to the "Magic Bullet" theory again?
Do head shots into game animal's that may have skull thicknesses similar to a man's and that are spring loaded by connection to necks like JFK's was show the massive skull damage that JFK incurred on 11,22,1963? I've never hunted so I wouldn't know.
I asked the following question on another thread two days ago:
Was it scientifically possible that the first shot into JFK's back that supposedly came out the front of his throat could have had it's velocity so slowed in it's run through muscles, tendons and flesh that it just fell down onto the floor of the limo right after exiting JFK?
Hence the almost pristine bullet that SS agent Sam Kenney was reported to have found there?
Hi Joe - go to 40:55 in this video posted by Vince Palamara --the experimental results are discussed there by Dr Joseph Dolce (sp?) who ran the experiments. Dr Wecht discusses the goat cadaver tests in the minute before that.
The first half of this video is a surprising interview w the Head of Nursing at Parkland where she discusses and displays a 'souvenir' bullet she was given at Parkland on the 22nd.
-
14 hours ago, Pat Speer said:
I discuss a number of tests (performed for the WC, TV, or research articles) on my website. Chapter 16, in which I discuss a number of shooting simulations performed on melons and skulls, and how the results of these simulations were spun to deceive the public, might be of particular interest.
Since you mention Hathcock, the thought occurs that you are interested as well in attempts at replicating the timing of the shots. There is a great deal of material on this in Chapter 4g.
Thank you very much, sir.
It's this type of data that I am interested in.
QuoteHoward Donahue, a ballistics expert, had his own doubts that Olivier's tests accurately replicated Kennedy's wounds. In August 1977, Donahue was interviewed on radio station WBAL. He told his interviewer that in the late sixties “I went and visited the laboratories at Edgewood Arsenal and talked to Dr. Olivier himself. Now he had fired ten shots into ten inert skulls from Oswald’s rifle. Now, an inert skull is a human skull which has been filled with gelatin. None of these skulls showed the giant, enormous, macerating effect that Kennedy’s head showed.And then I began to look at the two holes in his head. And I realized it couldn’t have come from Oswald’s rifle. And then a strange pattern of events started to occur that everything that supported the Warren Commission was easily obtainable for evidence and that which contradicted it was not available.”
While the skull presented by Olivier in his Warren Commission testimony was purported to have had its right side blown off, we can presume he conceded to Donahue that this only became apparent upon the removal of the gelatin 'scalp,' and that none of the ten skulls he'd had fired upon had been as "macerated" as Kennedy's skull.
I've just started reading through and have 1 somewhat unrelated question about shooting melons (and other items) off of ladders section.
I read the book Head Shot: The Science Behind the JFK Assassination. In this book Chambers makes the argument that (from memory) that the human head isn't a rounded object sitting on a flat plane but is suspended by the neck. So, shooting into an object on top of a ladder opens the experiment up to the application of backspin if the object is struck by the bullet below the center of gravity. The experiments should be done on melons suspended from below by being on a spring or from above by a rope, in which case they all would go forward in the direction of the bullet indicating a shot from the front.
Any thoughts on that?
-
I just watched the 'Death of the Magic Bullet Theory' video Vince Palamara posted on YouTube. Thanks for that Mr Palamara.
I'm interested in looking at experimental evidence in the murder of JFK.
This could be either evidence for / against a conspiracy or LHO's guilt / innocence. But... it would have to include the number of experiments run and the results - not anecdotal evidence such as the Carlos Hathcock quote that the Marines had tried to duplicate the lone gunman TSBD scenario and failed every time. The number of tests is unknown.
A good example from that video:
- The test firings of the MC rifle into goat & human cadavers to experimentally simulate the Connally wounds to the rib and arm - 100 trials with 100 bullets significantly deformed according to the ballistics expert who ran the tests & is quoted in the video.
Any suggestions of other experiments that were run in addition to the above would be appreciated.
-
41 minutes ago, Joe Bauer said:
Bien mal acquis ne profite jamais.
Mangez bien, riez souvent, aimez beaucoup.
+1
-
13 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:
Ron-
My understanding is that in Europe, voter ID is required before voting. I do not know if they have absentee voting.
Interesting topic.
QuotePARIS -- French voters in Sunday's presidential election will use the same system that's been used for generations: paper ballots that are cast in person and counted by hand. Despite periodic calls for more flexibility or modernization, France doesn’t do mail-in voting, early voting or use voting machines en masse like the United States. President Emmanuel Macron is the clear front-runner, though an unprecedented proportion of people say they are unsure who they will vote for or whether they will vote at all.
PAPER BALLOTS
Voters must be at least 18 years old. About 48.7 million French are registered on the electoral rolls of the place where they live.
Voters make their choices in a booth, with the curtains closed, then place their ballot in an envelope that is then put into a transparent ballot box. They must show photo identification and sign a document, next to their name, to complete the process.
Volunteers count the ballots one by one. Officials will then use state-run software to register and report results more efficiently.
But legally only the paper counts. If a result is challenged, the paper ballots are recounted manually.PROXY VOTING
People who can't go to the polls for various reasons can authorize someone else to vote for them.
To do so, a voter must fill out a form ahead of time and bring it to a police station. A person can be the proxy of no more than one voter living in France — and potentially one additional person living abroad.
Up to 7% of people voted by proxy in the last presidential election five years ago.
NO MAIL-IN VOTING, RARE MACHINE-VOTINGMail-in voting was banned in 1975 amid fears of potential fraud.
Machine-voting was allowed as an experiment starting in 2002, but the purchase of new machines has been frozen since 2008 due to security concerns. Only a few dozens towns still use them.
Last year, Macron's centrist government tried to pass an amendment to allow early voting by machine to encourage electoral participation amid the COVID-19 pandemic. The Senate, led by a conservative majority, rejected the measure, arguing it was announced with too little notice and was not solid enough legally.
COVID-19 MEASURES
Most COVID-19 restrictions have been lifted in the country. Though the number of cases is significantly lower than earlier this year, infections have been creeping up again for several weeks, reaching over 130,000 new confirmed cases each day.
People who test positive for the virus can go to the polls. They are strongly advised to wear a mask and follow other health guidelines.
Voters can wash their hands at polling stations, which will also have hand sanitizer available. Equipment will be frequently cleaned. Each voting station will let fresh air in for at least 10 minutes every hour.
TWO-ROUND SYSTEM
France's presidential election is organized in two rounds. Twelve candidates met the conditions for Sunday's vote, including Macron and French nationalist leader Marine Le Pen, his main challenger.
In theory, someone could win outright by garnering more than 50% of the vote in the first round, but that has never happened in France.
In practice, the two top contenders qualify for a runoff, with the winner chosen on April 24.
Other significant differences:
- The election is only for one position -- president.
- There are no primaries -- you can vote for any of the 12 candidates who qualified -- they've had 500 mayors sign their petition to run (IIRC).
- 2 weeks later is the parliamentary representative election
- You can vote a blank piece of paper --> none of the above.
- Elections are held on Sundays when most stores are closed and people are off and not on a workday.
-
On 7/11/2022 at 3:45 PM, Sandy Larsen said:
The Democratic Party has no choice but to depend upon "big money" for it's campaigns. Does Reich expect the working class to pay for them?
I dunno.....
Fetterman seems to be doing quite well by not being a corporate Democrat.
QuoteIn sharp contrast to Oz's Koch- and self-financed bid, McPhillips noted that Fetterman's campaign "is funded solely by our grassroots supporters and donors kicking in a couple bucks at a time."
-
Robert Reich has posted an interesting take on the Democratic Party:
Bullet points are key sentences from post - italics & bold mine.
Quote- Both Clinton and Obama stood by as corporations hammered trade unions, the backbone of the working class.
- At the same time, Clinton and Obama allowed antitrust enforcement to ossify, enabling large corporations to grow far larger and major industries to become more concentrated.
- Both Clinton and Obama depended on big money from corporations and the wealthy. Both turned their backs on campaign finance reform.
- Throughout these years, Democrats drank from the same campaign funding trough as the Republicans – big corporations, Wall Street, and the very wealthy. Democrats became financially dependent on big corporations and the Street.
- By the 2016 election, the richest 100th of 1 percent of Americans – 24,949 extraordinarily wealthy people – accounted for a record-breaking 40 percent of all campaign contributions. That same year, corporations flooded the presidential, Senate and House elections with $3.4 billion in donations. Labor unions no longer provided any countervailing power, contributing only $213 million – one union dollar for every 16 corporate dollars.
- The Democratic Party still prioritizes the votes of the “suburban swing voter” – so-called “soccer moms” in the 1990s and affluent politically independent professionals in the 2000s – who supposedly determine electoral outcomes. And, as noted, the party depends on big money for its campaigns. Hence, it has turned it back on the working class.
The most powerful force in American politics today is anti-establishment fury at a rigged system. There is no longer a left or right. There is no longer a moderate “center.” The real choice is either Republican authoritarian populism (see here, here, and here) or Democratic progressive populism. Democrats cannot defeat authoritarian populism without an agenda of radical democratic reform — an anti-establishment movement. Democrats must stand squarely on the side of democracy against oligarchy. They must form a unified coalition of people of all races, genders, and classes to unrig the system. Trumpism is not the cause of our divided nation. It is the symptom of a rigged system that was already dividing us.
-
Interesting history, thanks.
-
Here's one I never heard of before:
Jim Reeves, Chet Atkins and John D Loudermilk
-
6 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:
I did not know this. Are you sure Bill?
That's where they said he was going on the broadcast I was watching in France. I remember because I was so surprised.
-
4 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:
No. Where did Trump go?
Got in the limo right after the Obamas left and headed straight to Langley. I was really surprised, thought he would meet w the cabinet or his staff.
-
2 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:
So why does the M$M keep making Trump the issue?
just a guess here using a surfing analogy:
- There was a wave of dissatisfaction with MSM-approved politicians to surf around 2008 (finally!)
- Obama rode it to the presidency defeating Mrs Clinton and John McCain
- Bernie almost rode the same wave vs Mrs Clinton
- Trump decided to ride the wave where it broke right
- then Trump destroyed the Rep msm-named "deep bench" in the primaries by calling these pansies names
- and by telling Jeb that his brother 'had not kept America safe on 9-11'
- the Dems then in typical Dem fashion ignored the wave and sent out the MSM-approved candidate Mrs Clinton with disastrous results
btw: Did anyone else notice where Trump went for a meeting immediately after seeing the Obamas off after the inauguration?
-
3 hours ago, Chris Bristow said:
In the first clip from Penn and Teller the melon rolls very gently off the rear of the platform. Not easy to see how little force there is when they cut to slow motion. But as soon as the melon is off the platform it is falling almost straight down.
Isn't the problem with the melons on a board that the head is attached to the neck and to get an accurate reaction they should have either suspended the melon with string or attached it to a spring?
In other words - any strike on the melon that produces some backspin, like on a cue ball in pool, will cause the melon to roll backwards.
-
Thanks for posting these videos on YouTube.
They are very interesting and informative.
COUP IN DALLAS
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
The fact is the orders were given from the President to the JCS and then noted in the memo.
Have fun in the imaginary land it seems you inhabit.