Mike Williams Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 Blindness and idiocy are incurable, I should have realized that! Or maybe it's better to say that you can't teach the devil to be good. Wim I asked you legit things Wim. The very fact that you have an issue with that shows me that you either wont support your position, or you cant. Neither is good. Thank you for your time though. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 (edited) Mike, The one that was asking was me, but you didn't respond. Not really, only with insignificant ridicule. You only agreed with Don Bailey that there was no shot from behind the picket fence, which puts you in the vast minority here, defying 70 % of the Dealey Plaza witnesses. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55jY6RUvxAI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYj3FAUHwro http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVHyFZuzGH4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pweuPLTVfl4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VaJQgLmeTg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLd3O-Tch6o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJE9XQZvis8 You say you are a gunsmith and a sharpshooter? Did you never do practice shooting with a varmint gun on a moving target? Or are you just not that good to hit a target at 35 yards with a powerscoped accurate handgun like the XP-100 that Files used? http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=8361392529474898810 You even started calling me a fraud! Are you just too proud and stubborn? Or is the only fraud in this discussion you? Wim Here is the description of JFK's head x-rays given by Dr. Humes that is posted in various locations throughout the internet: Dr. Humes said, "that the X rays showed "30 or 40 tiny dustlike particle fragments" of metal in the President's head (II, p. 353). Humes cautioned that the fragments that appeared to be "the size of dust particles" (2H359) on the X rays would actually have been smaller because "X ray pictures . . . have a tendency to magnify these minute fragments somewhat in size" (II, p. 353). And luckily SS agent Kellerman saw the X rays during the autopsy and provided a similar description: " . . . the whole head looked like a little mass of stars, there must have been 30, 40 lights where these little pieces were so minute that they couldn't be reached" (II, p. 100). A lead core FMJ bullet does not breakup into tiny dust like particles upon impact with relatively soft live human skull and brain tissue. However, mercury being a liquid metal at nominal ambient temperatures, and having high surface tension properties will break up into such small dust like particles as described by Dr. Humes, and will remain locked in the soft brain tissue matrix as small individual dust like particles. The material properties of lead and mercury are what lend credence to the story that James Files told your group about how he allegedly used mercury tipped bullets that the Wolfman made for him. Either James Files actually is the grassy knoll shooter, or he is an agent provocateur that was given this information to eventually cause the destruction of your efforts to prove how JFK was murdered. Craig Roberts and David Mantik on mercury bullets Next was a "Forensic Techniques" panel that included presentations by Margaret and Art Snyder, which I missed, and Craig Roberts. Mr. Roberts is a former Marine sniper and author of A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza and other books. He said he made a close study of the Zapruder film, "And I'll tell you what I saw --- as a sniper --- through the eyes of a sniper ... I saw a guy hit from the right front, with a frangible mercury bullet." Such a bullet, Roberts continued, will do its destructive work, and essentially disintigrate. From: http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_i...e/overview.html A Mercury Bullet? All three skull X-rays show a spatially consistent, fuzzy, gray cloud (about 4 x 1 cm) near the center of the fragment trail that extends across the top of the skull (Figure 16). Figure 16. CLOSE-UP OF LATERAL X-RAY This fuzzy gray cloud can best be seen on the X-rays at NARA. It does not look like metallic lead (or copper) debris, but might have been caused by a mercury bullet. This fuzzy cloud might be more consistent with mercury (extruded from a bullet) rather than lead. An attempt to kill DeGaulle with a mercury bullet occurs in The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth. Amazingly enough, this plot occurs in the summer of 1963 Forsyth's descriptions of the effect of mercury bullets seem to fit the JFK skull wounds remarkably well. A fuzzy white cloud in the metal fragment trail might be mercury. 14. There are remarkably many, tiny metal fragments widely scattered on the skull X-rays--even on the left side and on the inferior skull, including at least four near the chin on the frontal X-ray. This remarkable, and heretofore ignored, observation is hardly compatible with the passage of a single, full metal-jacketed, Mannlicher-Carcano bullet near the top of the skull, but might more easily have resulted from a hollow point or mercury bullet-or perhaps even from shrapnel from a bullet that was not counted by the Warren Commission. The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth: As soon as the bullet struck flesh, gristle or bone, it would experience a sudden decelaration. The effect on the mercury would be to hurl the droplet forward towards the plugged front of the bullet. Here its onward rush would rip away the tip of the slug, splaying the lead outwards like the fingers of an open hand or the petals of a blossoming flower. In this shape the leaded projectile would tear through nerve tissue, ripping, cutting, slicing, leaving fragments of itself over an area the size of a teasaucer. Hitting the head, such a bullet would not emerge, but would demolish everything inside the cranium, forcing the bone-shell to fragment. From: http://assassinationresearch.com/v2n2/pittsburgh.pdf Edited August 10, 2008 by Wim Dankbaar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 Something else I might add is the fact that Files claims to have seen the head go forward, and then his shot strike in his scope. As you said the alleged 3" forward movement would be imperceptible to the eye....so how could he have seen this? How would he have witnessed his own bullet strike when one considers the recoil of the weapon? Mike , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon: Wim, I like the XP 100 IN 221 Fireball, low recoil pretty accurate out to 250 yards. It can be used very well with a rifle type scope such as a 4.5x14x40. Try it you'll like it! John If as the official records claim, Lee Harvey Oswald is the shooter of JFK, the rifle that was "recovered" in the depository was a Manlicher bolt action rifle. It shoots a 6.5 mm cartridge, more powerful than the .223 win/5.56 NATO or the .221 Rem Fireball. Recoil from that rifle with the military loading is slightly less than the .308 win/7.62 Nato. Never have I seen in print (anywhere) that JFK was shot with a handgun. Whomever is telling you that a .221 fireball kicks "like a mule" and "harder than any rifle", apparently is regurgitating information that he/she has heard somewhere. The fireball was introduced in a bolt action hand gun in 1962 (not a pistol), and propelled a 50 gr bullet in the 2600-2700 fps range. I'd even be picky enough to tell you that someone who calls an Remington XP100 a "pistol" has a lot more to learn about firearms than they are going to by reading internet conspiricy theories. Felt recoil from a typical 4lb6oz handgun will be in the 5 to 7 lb range. Compare this to a typical 30-06 rifle (180 gr bullet) at 19 lbs, and you'll wonder how big this person's mule really is. Dan Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this: I was aiming for his right eye, which to me is the left side of his head looking head on. But for him it would be his right eye, and when I pulled the trigger, and I'm right in on it, and it's almost like looking six feet away through the scope. As I squeezed, take off my round, his head moving forward, I missed and I came in right along the temple. Just behind the eye. Thus he concluded the head snapped forward, because he was aiming for the eye and MISSED, because his bullet came in behind the eye. Thirdly, if Files was not in the military, you must also accept that he invented his military service as far back as the sixties, when he told his wife that he was. He also raised his two daughters with the phantom idea. Talking about ridiculous and obvious, can you give me good reason why makes that up to his blood relatives? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/faith.htm And the girls from Saigon sending him love letters? He picked those up on vacation, right? Before he went to jail in 1980, right? Saigon was then what Bangkok is now, right? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/vietnamcard2.JPG Fourthly, absence of physical evidence is never evidence of absence. Besides, in this case much physical evidence has been altered or removed. Or can you give me the cigarette butts from behind the picket fence? Or the photopgraphs of the footprints maybe? The brains of JFK? Now we only have X-Rays and expert opinions as evidence that the "dustlike particles" were mercury .......... Wim Wim, First off a rifle locked in the shoulder firing at 19 lbs, and a handgun fired from the extended arm at 5-6 lbs are completely different. Like comparing apples to oranges. Second, I would like to ask you if you have ever fired an xp, so as to speak from first hand experience? My father was an avid silhouette shooter, owning 2 xps one in .221 and one in .223. I have, over the course of time, had the opportunity to fire many of these, in many different calibers. Aiming for his right eye? Looking through a scope mounted on a handgun, with outstretched arms? On a moving target? That in itself is ridiculous. Mercury eh? I can almost hear the James Bond music playing in the background. Can you offer something in the way of proof that the bullets were mercury, and do you have any idea of what the wound ballistics of a mercury bullet look like ( I do.)? Ah yes the military career, Files may or may not have been in the military. Hard to tell with his tall tales, however there are some serious problems with his time line, as I am sure you are aware of. Kinda nifty how his packet just kinda showed up isnt it? Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Mike Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Perhaps an apology is in order as some are far more perceptive than I may have given credit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christopher Hall Posted August 10, 2008 Share Posted August 10, 2008 Something else I might add is the fact that Files claims to have seen the head go forward, and then his shot strike in his scope. As you said the alleged 3" forward movement would be imperceptible to the eye....so how could he have seen this? How would he have witnessed his own bullet strike when one considers the recoil of the weapon? Mike , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon: Wim, I like the XP 100 IN 221 Fireball, low recoil pretty accurate out to 250 yards. It can be used very well with a rifle type scope such as a 4.5x14x40. Try it you'll like it! John If as the official records claim, Lee Harvey Oswald is the shooter of JFK, the rifle that was "recovered" in the depository was a Manlicher bolt action rifle. It shoots a 6.5 mm cartridge, more powerful than the .223 win/5.56 NATO or the .221 Rem Fireball. Recoil from that rifle with the military loading is slightly less than the .308 win/7.62 Nato. Never have I seen in print (anywhere) that JFK was shot with a handgun. Whomever is telling you that a .221 fireball kicks "like a mule" and "harder than any rifle", apparently is regurgitating information that he/she has heard somewhere. The fireball was introduced in a bolt action hand gun in 1962 (not a pistol), and propelled a 50 gr bullet in the 2600-2700 fps range. I'd even be picky enough to tell you that someone who calls an Remington XP100 a "pistol" has a lot more to learn about firearms than they are going to by reading internet conspiricy theories. Felt recoil from a typical 4lb6oz handgun will be in the 5 to 7 lb range. Compare this to a typical 30-06 rifle (180 gr bullet) at 19 lbs, and you'll wonder how big this person's mule really is. Dan Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this: I was aiming for his right eye, which to me is the left side of his head looking head on. But for him it would be his right eye, and when I pulled the trigger, and I'm right in on it, and it's almost like looking six feet away through the scope. As I squeezed, take off my round, his head moving forward, I missed and I came in right along the temple. Just behind the eye. Thus he concluded the head snapped forward, because he was aiming for the eye and MISSED, because his bullet came in behind the eye. Thirdly, if Files was not in the military, you must also accept that he invented his military service as far back as the sixties, when he told his wife that he was. He also raised his two daughters with the phantom idea. Talking about ridiculous and obvious, can you give me good reason why makes that up to his blood relatives? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/faith.htm And the girls from Saigon sending him love letters? He picked those up on vacation, right? Before he went to jail in 1980, right? Saigon was then what Bangkok is now, right? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/vietnamcard2.JPG Fourthly, absence of physical evidence is never evidence of absence. Besides, in this case much physical evidence has been altered or removed. Or can you give me the cigarette butts from behind the picket fence? Or the photopgraphs of the footprints maybe? The brains of JFK? Now we only have X-Rays and expert opinions as evidence that the "dustlike particles" were mercury .......... Wim Wim, First off a rifle locked in the shoulder firing at 19 lbs, and a handgun fired from the extended arm at 5-6 lbs are completely different. Like comparing apples to oranges. Second, I would like to ask you if you have ever fired an xp, so as to speak from first hand experience? My father was an avid silhouette shooter, owning 2 xps one in .221 and one in .223. I have, over the course of time, had the opportunity to fire many of these, in many different calibers. Aiming for his right eye? Looking through a scope mounted on a handgun, with outstretched arms? On a moving target? That in itself is ridiculous. Mercury eh? I can almost hear the James Bond music playing in the background. Can you offer something in the way of proof that the bullets were mercury, and do you have any idea of what the wound ballistics of a mercury bullet look like ( I do.)? Ah yes the military career, Files may or may not have been in the military. Hard to tell with his tall tales, however there are some serious problems with his time line, as I am sure you are aware of. Kinda nifty how his packet just kinda showed up isnt it? Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Mike Mike- I agree with a lot of what you say regarding handgun recoil and shooting a scoped handgun. I have never shot a Remington XP 100 or the 221 Fireball round, but I have shot many hundreds of handguns and never shot one with no material recoil. Even when I shoot a heavy bull-barreled 22 Long Rifle, there is still significant muzzle rise, certainly enough to distort (for a brief period) a shooter's ability to hold it on target. Most handguns return to the point of aim if the shooter has a proper grip, but they still sustain some degree of muzzle rise (which some people call recoil, even though I think that recoil is the backward thrust of a fired weapon and not the muzzle rise). Interestingly, though, some scopes give a pretty wide field of vision and some, particularly one's with "eye relief", provide a more (and sometimes exceedingly)narrow view of the target. Although I don't buy into the Files version of the assassination, I can see that someone could take a shot and see the aftermath of its hitting the target. I shot a dot-scoped rifle (in 223 caliber) last weekend, with both eyes open, and made a plastic drink bottle dance around the range, so I can see how someone can see the follow-through of his shot hitting the target. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 Something else I might add is the fact that Files claims to have seen the head go forward, and then his shot strike in his scope. As you said the alleged 3" forward movement would be imperceptible to the eye....so how could he have seen this? How would he have witnessed his own bullet strike when one considers the recoil of the weapon? Mike , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon: Wim, I like the XP 100 IN 221 Fireball, low recoil pretty accurate out to 250 yards. It can be used very well with a rifle type scope such as a 4.5x14x40. Try it you'll like it! John If as the official records claim, Lee Harvey Oswald is the shooter of JFK, the rifle that was "recovered" in the depository was a Manlicher bolt action rifle. It shoots a 6.5 mm cartridge, more powerful than the .223 win/5.56 NATO or the .221 Rem Fireball. Recoil from that rifle with the military loading is slightly less than the .308 win/7.62 Nato. Never have I seen in print (anywhere) that JFK was shot with a handgun. Whomever is telling you that a .221 fireball kicks "like a mule" and "harder than any rifle", apparently is regurgitating information that he/she has heard somewhere. The fireball was introduced in a bolt action hand gun in 1962 (not a pistol), and propelled a 50 gr bullet in the 2600-2700 fps range. I'd even be picky enough to tell you that someone who calls an Remington XP100 a "pistol" has a lot more to learn about firearms than they are going to by reading internet conspiricy theories. Felt recoil from a typical 4lb6oz handgun will be in the 5 to 7 lb range. Compare this to a typical 30-06 rifle (180 gr bullet) at 19 lbs, and you'll wonder how big this person's mule really is. Dan Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this: I was aiming for his right eye, which to me is the left side of his head looking head on. But for him it would be his right eye, and when I pulled the trigger, and I'm right in on it, and it's almost like looking six feet away through the scope. As I squeezed, take off my round, his head moving forward, I missed and I came in right along the temple. Just behind the eye. Thus he concluded the head snapped forward, because he was aiming for the eye and MISSED, because his bullet came in behind the eye. Thirdly, if Files was not in the military, you must also accept that he invented his military service as far back as the sixties, when he told his wife that he was. He also raised his two daughters with the phantom idea. Talking about ridiculous and obvious, can you give me good reason why makes that up to his blood relatives? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/faith.htm And the girls from Saigon sending him love letters? He picked those up on vacation, right? Before he went to jail in 1980, right? Saigon was then what Bangkok is now, right? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/vietnamcard2.JPG Fourthly, absence of physical evidence is never evidence of absence. Besides, in this case much physical evidence has been altered or removed. Or can you give me the cigarette butts from behind the picket fence? Or the photopgraphs of the footprints maybe? The brains of JFK? Now we only have X-Rays and expert opinions as evidence that the "dustlike particles" were mercury .......... Wim Wim, First off a rifle locked in the shoulder firing at 19 lbs, and a handgun fired from the extended arm at 5-6 lbs are completely different. Like comparing apples to oranges. Second, I would like to ask you if you have ever fired an xp, so as to speak from first hand experience? My father was an avid silhouette shooter, owning 2 xps one in .221 and one in .223. I have, over the course of time, had the opportunity to fire many of these, in many different calibers. Aiming for his right eye? Looking through a scope mounted on a handgun, with outstretched arms? On a moving target? :lol: That in itself is ridiculous. Mercury eh? I can almost hear the James Bond music playing in the background. Can you offer something in the way of proof that the bullets were mercury, and do you have any idea of what the wound ballistics of a mercury bullet look like ( I do.)? Ah yes the military career, Files may or may not have been in the military. Hard to tell with his tall tales, however there are some serious problems with his time line, as I am sure you are aware of. Kinda nifty how his packet just kinda showed up isnt it? Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Mike Mike- I agree with a lot of what you say regarding handgun recoil and shooting a scoped handgun. I have never shot a Remington XP 100 or the 221 Fireball round, but I have shot many hundreds of handguns and never shot one with no material recoil. Even when I shoot a heavy bull-barreled 22 Long Rifle, there is still significant muzzle rise, certainly enough to distort (for a brief period) a shooter's ability to hold it on target. Most handguns return to the point of aim if the shooter has a proper grip, but they still sustain some degree of muzzle rise (which some people call recoil, even though I think that recoil is the backward thrust of a fired weapon and not the muzzle rise). Interestingly, though, some scopes give a pretty wide field of vision and some, particularly one's with "eye relief", provide a more (and sometimes exceedingly)narrow view of the target. Although I don't buy into the Files version of the assassination, I can see that someone could take a shot and see the aftermath of its hitting the target. I shot a dot-scoped rifle (in 223 caliber) last weekend, with both eyes open, and made a plastic drink bottle dance around the range, so I can see how someone can see the follow-through of his shot hitting the target. Chris Chris, It only stands to reason that one has to teach recruits to reacquire the sight picture and sight alignment on the M16, which is .223 and far heavier, that a significantly lighter weapon that is held in a far less stable position would have more recoil energy and recoil velocity. I have an M4 here that I use the halo system on and its a bottle hopper. Now bear in mind the M16 is gas operated and uses a buffer spring system, which actually transfers some of the recoil energy to cycle the action. The xp is a straight bolt gun, no buffer no gas break...nothing. I have never at any time viewed a target through the scope on one of these post trigger pull. I would mention though should you get the chance to fire one....it is a BLAST! Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 (edited) Mike, The one that was asking was me, but you didn't respond. Not really, only with insignificant ridicule. You only agreed with Don Bailey that there was no shot from behind the picket fence, which puts you in the vast minority here, defying 70 % of the Dealey Plaza witnesses. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55jY6RUvxAI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYj3FAUHwro http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVHyFZuzGH4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pweuPLTVfl4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VaJQgLmeTg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLd3O-Tch6o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJE9XQZvis8 You say you are a gunsmith and a sharpshooter? Did you never do practice shooting with a varmint gun on a moving target? Or are you just not that good to hit a target at 35 yards with a powerscoped accurate handgun like the XP-100 that Files used? http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=8361392529474898810 You even started calling me a fraud! Are you just too proud and stubborn? Or is the only fraud in this discussion you? Wim Here is the description of JFK's head x-rays given by Dr. Humes that is posted in various locations throughout the internet: Dr. Humes said, "that the X rays showed "30 or 40 tiny dustlike particle fragments" of metal in the President's head (II, p. 353). Humes cautioned that the fragments that appeared to be "the size of dust particles" (2H359) on the X rays would actually have been smaller because "X ray pictures . . . have a tendency to magnify these minute fragments somewhat in size" (II, p. 353). And luckily SS agent Kellerman saw the X rays during the autopsy and provided a similar description: " . . . the whole head looked like a little mass of stars, there must have been 30, 40 lights where these little pieces were so minute that they couldn't be reached" (II, p. 100). A lead core FMJ bullet does not breakup into tiny dust like particles upon impact with relatively soft live human skull and brain tissue. However, mercury being a liquid metal at nominal ambient temperatures, and having high surface tension properties will break up into such small dust like particles as described by Dr. Humes, and will remain locked in the soft brain tissue matrix as small individual dust like particles. The material properties of lead and mercury are what lend credence to the story that James Files told your group about how he allegedly used mercury tipped bullets that the Wolfman made for him. Either James Files actually is the grassy knoll shooter, or he is an agent provocateur that was given this information to eventually cause the destruction of your efforts to prove how JFK was murdered. Craig Roberts and David Mantik on mercury bullets Next was a "Forensic Techniques" panel that included presentations by Margaret and Art Snyder, which I missed, and Craig Roberts. Mr. Roberts is a former Marine sniper and author of A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza and other books. He said he made a close study of the Zapruder film, "And I'll tell you what I saw --- as a sniper --- through the eyes of a sniper ... I saw a guy hit from the right front, with a frangible mercury bullet." Such a bullet, Roberts continued, will do its destructive work, and essentially disintigrate. From: http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_i...e/overview.html A Mercury Bullet? All three skull X-rays show a spatially consistent, fuzzy, gray cloud (about 4 x 1 cm) near the center of the fragment trail that extends across the top of the skull (Figure 16). Figure 16. CLOSE-UP OF LATERAL X-RAY This fuzzy gray cloud can best be seen on the X-rays at NARA. It does not look like metallic lead (or copper) debris, but might have been caused by a mercury bullet. This fuzzy cloud might be more consistent with mercury (extruded from a bullet) rather than lead. An attempt to kill DeGaulle with a mercury bullet occurs in The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth. Amazingly enough, this plot occurs in the summer of 1963 Forsyth's descriptions of the effect of mercury bullets seem to fit the JFK skull wounds remarkably well. A fuzzy white cloud in the metal fragment trail might be mercury. 14. There are remarkably many, tiny metal fragments widely scattered on the skull X-rays--even on the left side and on the inferior skull, including at least four near the chin on the frontal X-ray. This remarkable, and heretofore ignored, observation is hardly compatible with the passage of a single, full metal-jacketed, Mannlicher-Carcano bullet near the top of the skull, but might more easily have resulted from a hollow point or mercury bullet-or perhaps even from shrapnel from a bullet that was not counted by the Warren Commission. The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth: As soon as the bullet struck flesh, gristle or bone, it would experience a sudden decelaration. The effect on the mercury would be to hurl the droplet forward towards the plugged front of the bullet. Here its onward rush would rip away the tip of the slug, splaying the lead outwards like the fingers of an open hand or the petals of a blossoming flower. In this shape the leaded projectile would tear through nerve tissue, ripping, cutting, slicing, leaving fragments of itself over an area the size of a teasaucer. Hitting the head, such a bullet would not emerge, but would demolish everything inside the cranium, forcing the bone-shell to fragment. From: http://assassinationresearch.com/v2n2/pittsburgh.pdf Wim, I said Files was a fraud, whether you are a fraud or not is your decision. I have fired more varmit rounds than I care to count. I suggest you brush up on your firearms before you continue. A scoped weapon, on a target that close would be more difficult to track than open sights, ESPECIALLY IN A HANDGUN SCENARIO! So what ever load of bullcrap you are selling, I hope you have a large community of firearms stupid people who are buying. I did not disagree with a North Knoll shooter, I simply said the trajectory does not reflect a shot from the North. If there was a North shooter he didnt hit anything. Period. Mercury....ah yes....you need to find out what happens when hydrogen molecules invade mercury at high speed, then come tell me about mercury bullets. The little dutch boy should be selling paint.....it lasts 10 years......Files crap wont wash for 10 seconds. Seriously Wim, if you think your gonna pass off this story you need to consult someone who at least has a working knowledge of firearms, so they can at least make the fable sound believable. Mike Edited August 11, 2008 by Mike Williams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 Something else I might add is the fact that Files claims to have seen the head go forward, and then his shot strike in his scope. As you said the alleged 3" forward movement would be imperceptible to the eye....so how could he have seen this? How would he have witnessed his own bullet strike when one considers the recoil of the weapon? Mike , first of all, there is no significant recoil for that weapon: Wim, I like the XP 100 IN 221 Fireball, low recoil pretty accurate out to 250 yards. It can be used very well with a rifle type scope such as a 4.5x14x40. Try it you'll like it! John If as the official records claim, Lee Harvey Oswald is the shooter of JFK, the rifle that was "recovered" in the depository was a Manlicher bolt action rifle. It shoots a 6.5 mm cartridge, more powerful than the .223 win/5.56 NATO or the .221 Rem Fireball. Recoil from that rifle with the military loading is slightly less than the .308 win/7.62 Nato. Never have I seen in print (anywhere) that JFK was shot with a handgun. Whomever is telling you that a .221 fireball kicks "like a mule" and "harder than any rifle", apparently is regurgitating information that he/she has heard somewhere. The fireball was introduced in a bolt action hand gun in 1962 (not a pistol), and propelled a 50 gr bullet in the 2600-2700 fps range. I'd even be picky enough to tell you that someone who calls an Remington XP100 a "pistol" has a lot more to learn about firearms than they are going to by reading internet conspiricy theories. Felt recoil from a typical 4lb6oz handgun will be in the 5 to 7 lb range. Compare this to a typical 30-06 rifle (180 gr bullet) at 19 lbs, and you'll wonder how big this person's mule really is. Dan Secondly, Files does not say he actually SAW the head move forward. What he says is this: I was aiming for his right eye, which to me is the left side of his head looking head on. But for him it would be his right eye, and when I pulled the trigger, and I'm right in on it, and it's almost like looking six feet away through the scope. As I squeezed, take off my round, his head moving forward, I missed and I came in right along the temple. Just behind the eye. Thus he concluded the head snapped forward, because he was aiming for the eye and MISSED, because his bullet came in behind the eye. Thirdly, if Files was not in the military, you must also accept that he invented his military service as far back as the sixties, when he told his wife that he was. He also raised his two daughters with the phantom idea. Talking about ridiculous and obvious, can you give me good reason why makes that up to his blood relatives? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/faith.htm And the girls from Saigon sending him love letters? He picked those up on vacation, right? Before he went to jail in 1980, right? Saigon was then what Bangkok is now, right? http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/images/vietnamcard2.JPG Fourthly, absence of physical evidence is never evidence of absence. Besides, in this case much physical evidence has been altered or removed. Or can you give me the cigarette butts from behind the picket fence? Or the photopgraphs of the footprints maybe? The brains of JFK? Now we only have X-Rays and expert opinions as evidence that the "dustlike particles" were mercury .......... Wim Wim, First off a rifle locked in the shoulder firing at 19 lbs, and a handgun fired from the extended arm at 5-6 lbs are completely different. Like comparing apples to oranges. Second, I would like to ask you if you have ever fired an xp, so as to speak from first hand experience? My father was an avid silhouette shooter, owning 2 xps one in .221 and one in .223. I have, over the course of time, had the opportunity to fire many of these, in many different calibers. Aiming for his right eye? Looking through a scope mounted on a handgun, with outstretched arms? On a moving target? :lol: That in itself is ridiculous. Mercury eh? I can almost hear the James Bond music playing in the background. Can you offer something in the way of proof that the bullets were mercury, and do you have any idea of what the wound ballistics of a mercury bullet look like ( I do.)? Ah yes the military career, Files may or may not have been in the military. Hard to tell with his tall tales, however there are some serious problems with his time line, as I am sure you are aware of. Kinda nifty how his packet just kinda showed up isnt it? Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Mike Files is a fraud Wim, and I am sorry if you bought his load of crap, but, to perpetuate this con one becomes a con themselves. Have you no honor? Perhaps an apology is in order as some are far more perceptive than I may have given credit! No apologies needed Tom we all disagree time to time. Oh yeah....and I can shoot, at least! HAHA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Bailey Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 Mike, The one that was asking was me, but you didn't respond. Not really, only with insignificant ridicule. You only agreed with Don Bailey that there was no shot from behind the picket fence, which puts you in the vast minority here, defying 70 % of the Dealey Plaza witnesses. Wim, What I said was, "No head shot came from behind the picket fence." The shot that hit JFK in the throat came from behind the picket fence... IMO. Please do not use my name in your postings if you cannot correctly quote what I've said. Don Bailey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 Mike, The one that was asking was me, but you didn't respond. Not really, only with insignificant ridicule. You only agreed with Don Bailey that there was no shot from behind the picket fence, which puts you in the vast minority here, defying 70 % of the Dealey Plaza witnesses. Wim, What I said was, "No head shot came from behind the picket fence." The shot that hit JFK in the throat came from behind the picket fence... IMO. Please do not use my name in your postings if you cannot correctly quote what I've said. Don Bailey Don, How would you then account for the lack of residue on the clothing? Where did this bullet go? Why do we see significantly less damage than we would expect? Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 Mike, The one that was asking was me, but you didn't respond. Not really, only with insignificant ridicule. You only agreed with Don Bailey that there was no shot from behind the picket fence, which puts you in the vast minority here, defying 70 % of the Dealey Plaza witnesses. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=55jY6RUvxAI http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYj3FAUHwro http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVHyFZuzGH4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pweuPLTVfl4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5VaJQgLmeTg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLd3O-Tch6o http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJE9XQZvis8 You say you are a gunsmith and a sharpshooter? Did you never do practice shooting with a varmint gun on a moving target? Or are you just not that good to hit a target at 35 yards with a powerscoped accurate handgun like the XP-100 that Files used? http://video.google.nl/videoplay?docid=8361392529474898810 You even started calling me a fraud! Are you just too proud and stubborn? Or is the only fraud in this discussion you? Wim Here is the description of JFK's head x-rays given by Dr. Humes that is posted in various locations throughout the internet: Dr. Humes said, "that the X rays showed "30 or 40 tiny dustlike particle fragments" of metal in the President's head (II, p. 353). Humes cautioned that the fragments that appeared to be "the size of dust particles" (2H359) on the X rays would actually have been smaller because "X ray pictures . . . have a tendency to magnify these minute fragments somewhat in size" (II, p. 353). And luckily SS agent Kellerman saw the X rays during the autopsy and provided a similar description: " . . . the whole head looked like a little mass of stars, there must have been 30, 40 lights where these little pieces were so minute that they couldn't be reached" (II, p. 100). A lead core FMJ bullet does not breakup into tiny dust like particles upon impact with relatively soft live human skull and brain tissue. However, mercury being a liquid metal at nominal ambient temperatures, and having high surface tension properties will break up into such small dust like particles as described by Dr. Humes, and will remain locked in the soft brain tissue matrix as small individual dust like particles. The material properties of lead and mercury are what lend credence to the story that James Files told your group about how he allegedly used mercury tipped bullets that the Wolfman made for him. Either James Files actually is the grassy knoll shooter, or he is an agent provocateur that was given this information to eventually cause the destruction of your efforts to prove how JFK was murdered. Craig Roberts and David Mantik on mercury bullets Next was a "Forensic Techniques" panel that included presentations by Margaret and Art Snyder, which I missed, and Craig Roberts. Mr. Roberts is a former Marine sniper and author of A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza and other books. He said he made a close study of the Zapruder film, "And I'll tell you what I saw --- as a sniper --- through the eyes of a sniper ... I saw a guy hit from the right front, with a frangible mercury bullet." Such a bullet, Roberts continued, will do its destructive work, and essentially disintigrate. From: http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_i...e/overview.html A Mercury Bullet? All three skull X-rays show a spatially consistent, fuzzy, gray cloud (about 4 x 1 cm) near the center of the fragment trail that extends across the top of the skull (Figure 16). Figure 16. CLOSE-UP OF LATERAL X-RAY This fuzzy gray cloud can best be seen on the X-rays at NARA. It does not look like metallic lead (or copper) debris, but might have been caused by a mercury bullet. This fuzzy cloud might be more consistent with mercury (extruded from a bullet) rather than lead. An attempt to kill DeGaulle with a mercury bullet occurs in The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth. Amazingly enough, this plot occurs in the summer of 1963 Forsyth's descriptions of the effect of mercury bullets seem to fit the JFK skull wounds remarkably well. A fuzzy white cloud in the metal fragment trail might be mercury. 14. There are remarkably many, tiny metal fragments widely scattered on the skull X-rays--even on the left side and on the inferior skull, including at least four near the chin on the frontal X-ray. This remarkable, and heretofore ignored, observation is hardly compatible with the passage of a single, full metal-jacketed, Mannlicher-Carcano bullet near the top of the skull, but might more easily have resulted from a hollow point or mercury bullet-or perhaps even from shrapnel from a bullet that was not counted by the Warren Commission. The Day of the Jackal by Frederick Forsyth: As soon as the bullet struck flesh, gristle or bone, it would experience a sudden decelaration. The effect on the mercury would be to hurl the droplet forward towards the plugged front of the bullet. Here its onward rush would rip away the tip of the slug, splaying the lead outwards like the fingers of an open hand or the petals of a blossoming flower. In this shape the leaded projectile would tear through nerve tissue, ripping, cutting, slicing, leaving fragments of itself over an area the size of a teasaucer. Hitting the head, such a bullet would not emerge, but would demolish everything inside the cranium, forcing the bone-shell to fragment. From: http://assassinationresearch.com/v2n2/pittsburgh.pdf Wim, I said Files was a fraud, whether you are a fraud or not is your decision. I have fired more varmit rounds than I care to count. I suggest you brush up on your firearms before you continue. A scoped weapon, on a target that close would be more difficult to track than open sights, ESPECIALLY IN A HANDGUN SCENARIO! So what ever load of bullcrap you are selling, I hope you have a large community of firearms stupid people who are buying. I did not disagree with a North Knoll shooter, I simply said the trajectory does not reflect a shot from the North. If there was a North shooter he didnt hit anything. Period. Mercury....ah yes....you need to find out what happens when hydrogen molecules invade mercury at high speed, then come tell me about mercury bullets. The little dutch boy should be selling paint.....it lasts 10 years......Files crap wont wash for 10 seconds. Seriously Wim, if you think your gonna pass off this story you need to consult someone who at least has a working knowledge of firearms, so they can at least make the fable sound believable. Mike So what ever load of bullcrap you are selling, I hope you have a large community of firearms stupid people who are buying. Mercury....ah yes....you need to find out what happens when hydrogen molecules invade mercury at high speed, then come tell me about mercury bullets. The little dutch boy should be selling paint.....it lasts 10 years......Files crap wont wash for 10 seconds. Seriously Wim, if you think your gonna pass off this story you need to consult someone who at least has a working knowledge of firearms, so they can at least make the fable sound believable. ====================================== Contrary to my better judgement, I am actually beginning to like this guy! P.S. For those who are unaware: Anyone who would be foolish enough to actually pay a New Orleans hustler for this story, would also be sufficiently foolish to continue to attempt to promote it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Files =============================================================================== http://www.bobvernon.com/Letter.html First, please allow me to compliment you on your research and the diligent efforts you have made in exposing the James Files / Wim Dankbaar hoax. As I stated above, I do agree with your conclusion however I would like to add one more sentence to your statement that “Files is a fraud.” It is based on my personal experience with Dankbaar himself. He has proven less than honest, irreparably harmed me and my family with no sense of decency, twisted the truth to meet his personal objectives and monetary gain and to make matters worse, Dankbaar has conspired and consorted with a convicted felon, currently in Federal Prison for defrauding the United States Government, to further commit conspiracy and fraud against me which has further harmed me and my family irreparably. So I must add to your conclusion, not only is James Files a fraud; Wim Dankbaar is a fraud, a xxxx and a very immoral person to put the Files hoax on the worldwide commercial market and profit from it. Dankbaar has done a tremendous disservice to the JFK Research community as well as to the American and International public by perpetrating the Files hoax along with others that Dankbaar “controls” with his blatant abuse of money. Then again, how can anyone expect a man who doesn't believe in God to tell you the truth about anything. =============================================================================== Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 You're funny, Purvis. You call Vernon "A New Orleans hustler" and then you start to promote his words! That says a lot about you! I bet you're one of those that would call Joe West a hustler too. Wim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Williams Posted August 11, 2008 Share Posted August 11, 2008 You're funny, Purvis. You call Vernon "A New Orleans hustler" and then you start to promote his words! That says a lot about you! I bet you're one of those that would call Joe West a hustler too. Wim Apparently a Orleans Hustler is smarter than a less than honorable Dutchman. I notice Wim that rather than engage me in the issues you just call me the devil, etc. Have I jabbed at you, well certainly, how could I not. However I continue to wait upon you to refute just one issue I set forth. You won't you cant. You sell tall tales Wim, you dishonor yourself, and the research community in general. No wonder it is difficult to find anyone to take so much of this seriously. You do this for profit, and that is just despicable. Crawl back under your rock Wim, Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 You're funny, Purvis. You call Vernon "A New Orleans hustler" and then you start to promote his words! That says a lot about you! I bet you're one of those that would call Joe West a hustler too. Wim Apparently a Orleans Hustler is smarter than a less than honorable Dutchman. I notice Wim that rather than engage me in the issues you just call me the devil, etc. Have I jabbed at you, well certainly, how could I not. However I continue to wait upon you to refute just one issue I set forth. You won't you cant. You sell tall tales Wim, you dishonor yourself, and the research community in general. No wonder it is difficult to find anyone to take so much of this seriously. You do this for profit, and that is just despicable. Crawl back under your rock Wim, Mike No wonder it is difficult to find anyone to take so much of this seriously. The subject matter lost any and/or all semblance of reasonability and seriousness when it was published that JFK's body was kidnapped and his wounds were altered.-----------And, purportedly educated and intelligent persons actually believed it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 You're funny, Purvis. You call Vernon "A New Orleans hustler" and then you start to promote his words! That says a lot about you! I bet you're one of those that would call Joe West a hustler too. Wim Do not know Joe West personally, therefore will refrain from comment! Did he sell you something also? Do you buy a lot of "used cars"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted August 12, 2008 Share Posted August 12, 2008 You're funny, Purvis. You call Vernon "A New Orleans hustler" and then you start to promote his words! That says a lot about you! I bet you're one of those that would call Joe West a hustler too. Wim Do not know Joe West personally, therefore will refrain from comment! Did he sell you something also? Do you buy a lot of "used cars"? http://roswell.fortunecity.com/angelic/96/filesv~1.htm The tip led West to Joliet and a prisoner named James E. Files...Through months of personal visits and detailed correspondence, Files began to reveal his participation in the JFK killing. Files was nearing a full confession when West took sick and passed away in 1993. In this last exchange between Files and Vernon, Files leaves us with what is probably his only cohesive thought: V: "When people see this interview on TV, what do you think people with think?" F: "Most of them, I don't think they will believe me." I certainly don't.... ============================================================================== Kindly add the name: Thomas H. Purvis to that listing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now