THERE IS NO MAGIC!

[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.

I would suppose that they were merely attempting to confuse us with the facts.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Which indication is that they totally succeeded as far as you are concerned Mr. Drago!

And only mildly succeeded in regards to Pat.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...126&t=11297

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...Vol17_0449a.htm

Now, Mr. Drago!

In event that you have any further math difficulties, such as:

1. Distinguishing between survey stationing 4+65.3/aka impact point for the Z313/aka second shot fired- headshot as compared to the THIRD/LAST/FINAL shot fired which impacted down at stationing 4+95, approximately 30-feet farther down Elm St.

2. Distinguishing between the street elevation of 416.83 for the elevation of the THIRD/LAST/FINAL shot down at stationing 4+95, and that street elevation of 418.48 for the street elevation of the Z313/aka SECOND SHOT.

3. Or even merely adding 2 + 2!

Then just let me know and I will give Jethro Bodine a call, as he was a "higher math" major in the Sixth Grade, and can assist you in resolving this highly complex/higher math problem.

[Charles Drago]

My apologies to every thinking person on the forum.

It seems that our resident city planner is obsessing over me to the point that he's doubling his efforts to flood these pages with endless examples of sophistic constructs.

Most addressed to me.

My own private bobby soxer ... whudda thunk it?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

My apologies to every thinking person on the forum.

It seems that our resident city planner is obsessing over me to the point that he's doubling his efforts to flood these pages with endless examples of sophistic constructs.

Most addressed to me.

My own private bobby soxer ... whudda thunk it?

Not unlike the JFK assassination, "whudda thunk" that this late in the game, that never revealed factual evidence would have surfaced.

Which, when presented, would demonstrate that all of those who's research consisted mainly of reading "BEST EVIDENCE"/"CROSSFIRE" & watching the movie "JFK" some thirteen times, were somewhat lacking in their methodology.

Especially considering that within the volumes of the WC can be found that evidence which is necessary to have told one exactly were the third/last/final shot was fired.

"whudda thunk" that those who run around claiming to know something in regards to the assassination would have never even bothered to have researched through these records.

Quite irrelevant as to whether the third/last/final shot which impacted down in front of James Altgens was/or was not fired by LHO, the evidence has always indicated that a shot was fired at this location, which struck JFK in the rear of the head and thus exited forward, blowing cerebral tissue towards James Altgens as well as blowing it forward in the Presidential Limo, all over Nellie & JBC.

"Whudda thunk" that anyone who claimed to be an researcher, would not have figured at least this much out.

Simply stated, "whudda thunk" ain't thunk at all!

Not to mention the fact that he also has not done much in the way of actual research of the subject matter.

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

Now back to subject matter:

It would be hoped that those who search for the facts would be aware that JEH, who's assassination re-enactment work of 2/7/64, still stated that the first shot merely lodged into JFK's back a short distance.

As well as continueing to insist that the third/last/final shot impact point was down in front of James Altgens.

Now!

Is anyone of the opinion that JEH & Company was so incompetent that they would not know that a normally 1,800 to 2,000 fps bullet does not, under any given circumstances, only penetrate a short distance into someone's back unless that bullet has had it's velocity severely diminished by some object which was within it's line-of-flight?

Is anyone of the opinion that JEH & Company was so incompetent that they would not know that for a bullet to strike in the lower edge of the hairline, and thus penetrate through the soft tissue of the neck to strike the skull in a location that was higher than the point of entrance through the scalp, that the head could not have been held erect at the time of impact for a shot fired on a downward angle?

There are most assuredly a lot of persons (especially on these talk shows) who do not/and have never understand the pathological evidence.

However, one can rest assured that JEH & Company, who had possession of ALL of the evidence, fully understood it.

And, all that anyone requires is an understanding of exactly how that evidence was manipulated, in order to understand what this evidence originally represented.

Which by the way, Mr. Drago & Company does not have!

P.S. Charles, I long ago ceased to be "out on this limb" all alone, and, although limited in numbers, I find that the company is obviously not believers of "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Now!

For those who are unaware, Mr. Drago and I are up here in the same tree.

However!

Mr. Drago is way over there on the other side of the tree, and he has climbed about as far out on the CT/Multiple Assassin/Stupid limb as one can get.

Whereas I, on the other hand, am about as far out on a limb on the other side of the tree as one can get, in that there was only a LONE SHOOTER!

Factual history will have to ultimately determine exactly which of us is going to ultimately appear extremely ignorant!

Meanwhile!

Since I have never considered myself more qualified than was the US Secret Service, as well as the FBI, to determine the facts of the assassination, and being an ole "skydiver", then rest assured that I at least have a "reserve parachute" with me, up this tree.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/gauthier.htm

Mr. SPECTER. Did you participate in the onsite tests made in Dallas?

Mr. GAUTHIER. I did.

Mr. SPECTER. Was a survey made of the scene used to record some of the results of that onsite testing?

Mr. GAUTHIER. Yes.

Mr. SPECTER. And by whom was the survey made?

Mr. GAUTHIER. The survey was made on May 24, 1964, by Robert H. West, county surveyor, a licensed State land surveyor, located at 160 County Courthouse, Dallas, Tex.

Now!

One could assume that Mr. Drago, in all of his great knowledge of the facts related to the JFK assassination, could explain exactly why the FBI was still involved in re-work of their 2/7/64 assassination re-enactment and survey work, and that this work continued on until 6/25/64.

A full month after the WC had completed their assassination re-enactment.

However, one would be incorrect if they expected Mr. Drago to know anything about this work.

(as well as anything else that is factual)

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...eport_0068a.htm

Now!

The WC, (as well as Mr. Drago & associates) appears to have had an extremely difficult time in determination of which shot was "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol17_0139a.htm

Had they taken the time to speak with one of their own members, then perhaps they could have at least resolved that if a shot actually missed, then it most certainly was not the first shot.

And, had they even bothered to check with JEH & Company, then it is most probable that they would have known the unliklihood that the first shot missed, since the SS on 12/2-3-&4/63, as well as the FBI on 2/7/64, had fully determined the exact position at which JFK could be seen reacting to having been hit by this shot, and as late as one month after the WC completed their survey work and re-enactment, the FBI was still stating the determined impact (JFK reaction) point for the first shot.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/...eport_0068a.htm

Now!

The WC, (as well as Mr. Drago & associates) appears to have had an extremely difficult time in determination of which shot was "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol17_0139a.htm

Had they taken the time to speak with one of their own members, then perhaps they could have at least resolved that if a shot actually missed, then it most certainly was not the first shot.

And, had they even bothered to check with JEH & Company, then it is most probable that they would have known the unliklihood that the first shot missed, since the SS on 12/2-3-&4/63, as well as the FBI on 2/7/64, had fully determined the exact position at which JFK could be seen reacting to having been hit by this shot, and as late as one month after the WC completed their survey work and re-enactment, the FBI was still stating the determined impact (JFK reaction) point for the first shot.

OK!

So, if as demonstrated, the FBI was aware that the first shot did not miss, then what about the second shot?

NOPE!

The 6/25/64 FBI updated survey plat:

Second shot impact/aka Z313, still located exactly where the US Secret Service placed it on 12/2-3-&4/63.

Well!

Just perhaps there was no "THE SHOT THAT MISSED"!

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/altgens.htm

Mr. ALTGENS- There was not another shot fired after the President was struck in the head. That was the last shot--that much I will say with a great degree of certainty.

Mr. LIEBELER - What makes you so certain of that, Mr. Altgens?

Mr. ALTGENS - Because, having heard these shots and then having seen the damage that was done on this shot to the President's head

Mr. ALTGENS- I had refocused to 15 feet because I wanted a good closeup of the President and Mrs. Kennedy, and that's why I know that it would be right at 15 feet, because I had prefocused in that area, and I had my camera almost to my eye when it happened and that's as far as I got with my camera.

Mr. ALTGENS - Yes. What made me almost certain that the shot came from behind was because at the time I was looking at the President, just as he was struck,

There was flesh particles that flew out of the side of his head in my direction from where I was standing,

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z341.jpg

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/conn_n.htm

Mrs. CONNALLY- I just pulled him over into my arms because it would have been impossible to get us really both down with me sitting and me holding him. So that I looked out, I mean as he was in my arms, I put my head down over his head so that his head and my head were right together, and all I could see, too, were the people flashing by. I didn't look back any more. The third shot that I heard I felt, it felt like spent buckshot falling all over us, and then, of course, I too could see that it was the matter, brain tissue, or whatever, just human matter, all over the car and both of us.

"THE SHOT THAT MISSED"------------Didn't miss!

[Charles Drago]

Not to mention the fact that he also has not done much in the way of actual research of the subject matter.

The "he" in the above quote is me.

So!

Mr. Purvis: Given your definitive tone, surely you must be able to cite, with specificity and in its totality, the history of my work on this case.

Or shall we appreciate your ill-informed, rhapsodically sophistic, typically petulant portrayal of my contributions to truth and justice as a fair exemplar of the quality of the balance of your posts hereon?

Charles Drago

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Not to mention the fact that he also has not done much in the way of actual research of the subject matter.

The "he" in the above quote is me.

So!

Mr. Purvis: Given your definitive tone, surely you must be able to cite, with specificity and in its totality, the history of my work on this case.

Or shall we appreciate your ill-informed, rhapsodically sophistic, typically petulant portrayal of my contributions to truth and justice as a fair exemplar of the quality of the balance of your posts hereon?

Charles Drago

surely you must be able to cite, with specificity and in its totality, the history of my work on this case.

Factual totality:------------------------------------ZERO

BS totality:-----------------------------------------Right up there with a lot of others.

Nothing difficult with that one either!

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=223344

[Charles Drago]

As I suspected.

You have exposed yourself, dear boy.

Now go play in the street with your maps, and leave the serious people alone.

Bye bye.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

As I suspected.

You have exposed yourself, dear boy.

Now go play in the street with your maps, and leave the serious people alone.

Bye bye.

You have exposed yourself, dear boy.

OH! You sweet thing!

Perhaps we shall just wait and see exactly who it is that is "exposed".

Can we expect something factual from you soon?????

Can't hold my breath much longer!