THERE IS NO MAGIC!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

So!

1. Q. Why does the right transverse process of the C7 vertebrae of JFK demonstrate fracture and fragmentatiion when in fact the nose of CE399 demonstrates no indication of impact.

A. Because the bullet struck in a base-first attitude.

2. Q. Why does the damage at the right transverse process of the C7 vertebrae demonstrate (on x-ray) images which appear to be metallic fragments/flakes, when in fact none of the nose of CE399 was absent or unaccounted for?

A. Because the metallic residue came from the lead core at the base of the bullet.

3. Q. Why does the copper jacket base of CE399 (prior to removal) demonstrate impact damage?

A. Because it impacted with the right transverse process of the C7 vertebrae, thus creating this damage.

4. Q. Why does the lead core at the base of CE399 demonstrate "gouging" of the lead core?

A. Because the right transverse process of the C7 vertebrae gouged into the lead core of the bullet as well as the exterior copper jacket.

5. What happen to that portion of the lead core at the base of the bullet, which is now missing?

A. The small 4.5mm width projectile was sheared from the base of CE399 due to impact with the vertebrae and subsequently exited the anterior throat of JFK at approximately the third tracheal ring, thus causing the anterior neck/throat wound. (see missing fragment from CE840)

6. Why did someone have to enter the National Archives and remove that portion of the copper jacket, which is located at and partially covers the lead core, at the base of the bullet?

A. Because FBI Agent Robert Frazier, during the Clay Shaw Trial testimony, had opened up the possibility that CE399 could have only deposited metallic residue/fragments into the neck of JFK, had the bullet struck in a "base-first" attitude. And, the unaltered base of CE399's copper jacket, clearly demonstrated such impact damage.

Now, without completely giving the farm away, for benefit of the "new guys", the deformed base to CE399 measured exactly 4mm X 7mm.

The "punch-type" entry wound into the back of JFK, which wound had "punched" out fabric from his coat and shirt carried down into the shallow wound of entry, measured exactly 4mm X 7mm in size.

Let's see now! 4mm X 7mm deformed bullet base: 4mm X 7mm "punch-type" wound of entry:

Think Hard! This one is really difficult to figure out!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Comparison photographs of the missing lead fragment from CE840 as compared with a lead core protrusion out the base of a WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullet.

The bullet was mashed/flattened only in the front portion of the bullet, thus allowing the uniform column of the lead core to squeeze/extrude out the base of the bullet through the 4.5mm width channel created by the overlap portion of the copper jacket at the base of the bullet.

With CE399, the progression of deformation was from the nose of the bullet, progressively towards the tail/base of the bullet, with the bullet base being the most deformed.

Therefore, in the "instant" at which the lead core was being forced out the base of the bullet, the "channel" at the base of the bullet was also being forced closed due to deformation of the bullet base and collapse of the 4.5mm channel.

Thus creating a "cone-shape" to the lead core protrusion as it was progressively extruded out the base and the channel through which it was being extruded was progressively, at the same instant, being closed.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Comparison photographs of the missing lead fragment from CE840 as compared with a lead core protrusion out the base of a WCC 6.5mm Carcano bullet.

The bullet was mashed/flattened only in the front portion of the bullet, thus allowing the uniform column of the lead core to squeeze/extrude out the base of the bullet through the 4.5mm width channel created by the overlap portion of the copper jacket at the base of the bullet.

With CE399, the progression of deformation was from the nose of the bullet, progressively towards the tail/base of the bullet, with the bullet base being the most deformed.

Therefore, in the "instant" at which the lead core was being forced out the base of the bullet, the "channel" at the base of the bullet was also being forced closed due to deformation of the bullet base and collapse of the 4.5mm channel.

Thus creating a "cone-shape" to the lead core protrusion as it was progressively extruded out the base and the channel through which it was being extruded was progressively, at the same instant, being closed.

That should about take care of CE840 and the missing lead core fragment.

In event that there are any legitimate questions, let me know as this pony ride is about to talk about the "punch-type" entry through the coat and shirt of JFK.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

So, where did it go?

To, beyond any reasonable doubt, this fragment of lead was utilized to replace those lead fragments which were removed from the right wrist of JBC, while this evidence (CE843)

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ce843.gif

No one going to "call my hand" on that?

Mr. SPECTER - Was a fragment of metal brought to you which was identified as coming from the wrist of Governor Connally?

Mr. FRAZIER - It was identified to me as having come from the arm of Governor Connally.

Mr. SPECTER - Will you produce that fragment at this time, please?

Mr. FRAZIER - This one does not have a Commission number as yet.

Mr. SPECTER - May it please the Commission, I would like to have this fragment marked as Commission Exhibit 842.

(Commission Exhibit No. 842 was marked for identification and received in evidence.)

CE842 was the initial Exhibit number assigned to the fragment which was entered into evidence.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Ce842.gif

And, as anyone who has followed the evidence trail is aware, CE842, (those fragments purported to have been removed from the wrist of JBC0 as sealed and given to the National Archives, had been

broken into when the HSCA went to examine this evidence.

Beside the facts that none of the previously reported weights matched anything which Guinn could resolve.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

.....talk about not being able to see the forest, for the trees......

I know you have invested a lot of time and energy on this magic and single bullet theory....but you ignore, not only the utter impossibility of it, but all else about Oswald that shows he was:

- an operative of ONI, CIA and FBI

- set-up as the patsy

- Not a shooter on 11/22

- never owned the M-C in question

- a creature of 'Operation Oswald' run by JJA and others

- killed to silence his truth 'I'm just a patsy'.

- impersonated by many others

- in the USSR as a spy, not a defector

- married to a KGB single, double or triple agent

- had many false documents, photos and other information about him propagated by 

he 'intelligence' community.

- perhaps a composit of two persons

-trained in unconventional warfare at 'Naggs Head, NC'

- involved in some way in the U-2 affair

....yet your focus on the bullets that never existed and the shooter that never was goes on and on and one and on......to what end? I remain totally unconvinced...totally.

You call youself a seeker of the truth? I do not. Sorry. If you are sincere, you are sincerely misguided, mistaken and mis-informed IMO. His marksmanship is as relevant as his spelling or malaprops. If a unlimited number of monkeys on an unlimited number of computers typing for an unlimited amout of time can produce a work of Shakespeare, so can LHO somehow be able to shoot the MB.....neither are in the realm of reality or sanity, IMO.....they are well within the realm of disinformation and psyops, however.

All of which clearly demonstrates why, after some 40+years, you are out chasing mythological creatures and "lapping" up the BS of those such as "Tosh".

Of course, had I been stupid enough to fall for "THE SHOT THAT MISSED" as expoused by the WC, not to even mention having given credence to the Plumlee BS, and all of the other mythological creatures, then I too would probably go to my grave yelling "MULTIPLE ASSASSIN".

Certainly beats having to yell "BOY AM I STUPID"!

Meanwhile, for those few individuals who like to deal with fact!

[Charles Drago]

A scientist, after working a lifetime, created a breakthrough in interspecies communication.

To demonstrate, he took a flea, said, "Fly, flea," and the flea flew.

"Fly, flea," and the flea flew, again and again.

Then the scientist surgically removed the wings from the flea.

He said, "Fly flea," but the flea didn't fly.

"Fly, flea."

Nothing.

So!

That night the scientist recorded his conclusion.

"When one removes the wings from a flea, it becomes deaf."

Edited October 25, 2007 by Charles Drago

[Mark Stapleton]

A scientist, after working a lifetime, created a breakthrough in interspecies communication.

To demonstrate, he took a flea, said, "Fly, flea," and the flea flew.

"Fly, flea," and the flea flew, again and again.

Then the scientist surgically removed the wings from the flea.

He said, "Fly flea," but the flea didn't fly.

"Fly, flea."

Nothing.

So!

That night the scientist recorded his conclusion.

"When one removes the wings from a flea, it becomes deaf."

You're the best, Charles.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

A scientist, after working a lifetime, created a breakthrough in interspecies communication.

To demonstrate, he took a flea, said, "Fly, flea," and the flea flew.

"Fly, flea," and the flea flew, again and again.

Then the scientist surgically removed the wings from the flea.

He said, "Fly flea," but the flea didn't fly.

"Fly, flea."

Nothing.

So!

That night the scientist recorded his conclusion.

"When one removes the wings from a flea, it becomes deaf."

I, for one, am most assuredly glad to see that you stick within the limits of your abilities.

Perhaps there are some "childrens forums" where you can impress!

[Charles Drago]

A scientist, after working a lifetime, created a breakthrough in interspecies communication.

To demonstrate, he took a flea, said, "Fly, flea," and the flea flew.

"Fly, flea," and the flea flew, again and again.

Then the scientist surgically removed the wings from the flea.

He said, "Fly flea," but the flea didn't fly.

"Fly, flea."

Nothing.

So!

That night the scientist recorded his conclusion.

"When one removes the wings from a flea, it becomes deaf."

I, for one, am most assuredly glad to see that you stick within the limits of your abilities.

Perhaps there are some "childrens forums" where you can impress!

Okay.

Two guys are sitting on the latrine. As the one who's known to be a Class A cheapskate stands up, a quarter and a dime fall out of his pocket and into the hole.

So!

The cheapskate doesn't miss a beat. He takes a twenty dollar bill from his wallet and drops it in.

"What the hell did you do that for?" his friend asks.

And the cheapskate says, "You don't expect me to go down there for 35 cents, do you?"

You see, both stories speak to your ...

Never mind.

Why do I bother?

Edited October 26, 2007 by Charles Drago

[Thomas H. Purvis]

A scientist, after working a lifetime, created a breakthrough in interspecies communication.

To demonstrate, he took a flea, said, "Fly, flea," and the flea flew.

"Fly, flea," and the flea flew, again and again.

Then the scientist surgically removed the wings from the flea.

He said, "Fly flea," but the flea didn't fly.

"Fly, flea."

Nothing.

So!

That night the scientist recorded his conclusion.

"When one removes the wings from a flea, it becomes deaf."

I, for one, am most assuredly glad to see that you stick within the limits of your abilities.

Perhaps there are some "childrens forums" where you can impress!

Okay.

Two guys are sitting on the latrine. As the one who's known to be a Class A cheapskate stands up, a quarter and a dime fall out of his pocket and into the hole.

So!

The cheapskate doesn't miss a beat. He takes a twenty dollar bill from his wallet and drops it in.

"What the hell did you do that for?" his friend asks.

And the cheapskate says, "You don't expect me to go down there for 35 cents, do you?"

You see, both stories speak to your ...

Never mind.

Why do I bother?

Please continue!

I for one, continue to bask in the extremely dull light of your display of intelligence, not to mention your grasp of the facts of the JFK assassination.

Exactly when was it that we could expect something in the way of "original research" from you????

Although possibly all alone in this boat, I most certainly await and anticipate such a momentous event.

P.S. As a former Diver & Diving Instructor, I can also hold my breath for a long time while we all wait.

[Charles Drago]

"Dogs look up to you. Cats look down on you. Pigs treat you as an equal."

-- Sir Winston Churchill

[Dawn Meredith]

A scientist, after working a lifetime, created a breakthrough in interspecies communication.

To demonstrate, he took a flea, said, "Fly, flea," and the flea flew.

"Fly, flea," and the flea flew, again and again.

Then the scientist surgically removed the wings from the flea.

He said, "Fly flea," but the flea didn't fly.

"Fly, flea."

Nothing.

So!

That night the scientist recorded his conclusion.

"When one removes the wings from a flea, it becomes deaf."

You're the best, Charles.

Ditto! (Opps, for the record I NEVER listen to Rush).

Dawn

[Thomas H. Purvis]

"Dogs look up to you. Cats look down on you. Pigs treat you as an equal."

-- Sir Winston Churchill

http://www.pigs.org/article.asp?article_id=3

Pigs are intelligent and have been placed fourth on the intelligence list (humans, primates, dolphins/whales, pigs).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.guardian.co.uk/life/interview/s...1326316,00.html

Watson says pig ignorant people say

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would suppose that one could state that you and your cute quotes would fall within the "pig ignorant people" classification.

One thing is for certain, anyone who fell for the WC's "THE SHOT THAT MISSED", and thereafter embarked on some extended journey for a mythological creature (multiple assassins) which never existed to begin with, certainly can not claim to be smarter than a "pig".

Therefore, it is assumed that one can delete "pig", and just stick with "Ignorant".

At least of the simple facts of the JFK assassination.

For the enjoyment of the reading audience:

1. Would you care to explain exactly why you chose to believe the WC in their shooting scenario/aka Z313 being the last shot?

Could it be that you did not do your homework prior to insertion of foot into mouth?

2. Would you care to explain exactly why you did not question the US SS Document which states that the third shot impact was down at survey stationing (5+00 minus 4-feet/aka 4+96) when in fact the WC survey plat clearly states that the Z313 impact was at stationing 4+65.3?

Could it be that you did not do your homework prior to insertion of foot into mouth?

3. Would you care to explain exactly why you think that the WC decided that there was nothing past frame# 334 of the Z-film worth seeing (and thus printed only to this point) when in fact James Altgens clearly testified that the LAST shot impact was when JFK was directely (15-feet) in front of him, and in fact James Altgens does not even come into the Z-frame film until Z339?

Could it bed that you did not do your homework prior to insertion of foot into mouth?

4. Would you care to explain exactly why the US Secret Service, as well as the FBI, during their survey work and assassination re-enactments, both determined that the impact point for the THIRD/LAST/FINAL shot fired, was down Elm St. directly in front of James Altgens position, yet the WC could not even find this location, despite having in their possession that copy of the FBI Survey Plat which clearly demonstrated this impact location as well as the slope distance of the shot?

"Mr. SIMMONS. I stand corrected. These are values--we were informed that the numbers on the survey map were possibly in error. The distances are very close, however. "

Mr. EISENBERG. Could you explain your reference to a map? You have made several references to that.

Mr. SIMMONS. I refer to the survey plat which is dated December 5, 1963.

Mr. EISENBERG. And how were you supplied with that?

Mr. SIMMONS. To the best of my knowledge, you gave it to one of the employees in my office.

Mr. EISENBERG. Mr. Chairman, this is a plat made by a licensed surveyor of the area immediately adjoining the Texas School Book Depository. I would like to introduce it into evidence solely to show the basis which Mr. Simmons was using in his test, and not for the truth, of the measurements which are shown in here.

Mr. McCLOY. It may be received.

Mr. EISENBERG. That would be Commission 585.

(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 585 and received in evidence.)

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol17_0144b.htm

Note: The survey is dated December 5, 1963 in the legend block. However! In event that one looks down at the bottom, they will find that this is a "revision" which was done for the FBI survey and assassination re-enactment of 2/7/64, in which the third/last/final shot impact point is still down in front of the James Altgens position, and the slant/slope distance from the window edge to impact with the pavement is 294 feet.

Could it bed that you did not do your homework prior to insertion of foot into mouth?

Shall I continue with little demonstration of how little you actually know in regards to the events in Dealy Plaza on 11/22/63, as well as how little you know in regards to the actual Warren Commision Investigation.

As you should know, a "pig" would never be caught looking this ignorant!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol17_0144b.htm

Note: The survey is dated December 5, 1963 in the legend block. However! In event that one looks down at the bottom, they will find that this is a "revision" which was done for the FBI survey and assassination re-enactment of 2/7/64, in which the third/last/final shot impact point is still down in front of the James Altgens position, and the slant/slope distance from the window edge to impact with the pavement is 294 feet.

But of course, you knew all of this didn't you Mr. Drago?

Just keeping it a secret or what?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol17_0144b.htm

Note: The survey is dated December 5, 1963 in the legend block. However! In event that one looks down at the bottom, they will find that this is a "revision" which was done for the FBI survey and assassination re-enactment of 2/7/64, in which the third/last/final shot impact point is still down in front of the James Altgens position, and the slant/slope distance from the window edge to impact with the pavement is 294 feet.

But of course, you knew all of this didn't you Mr. Drago?

Just keeping it a secret or what?

I for one am most certainly glad that you are around to demonstrate exactly how little the US Secret Service as well as the FBI knew about the assassination.