E-Mail

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Mark;

This "email response" topic, quite possibly should have begun long ago.

Long ago I received an email form "across the pond" from a researcher who had read my comments here and responded that I was "absolutely correct".

And, although it is quite irrelevant as to whether or not I am correct, those medical personnel/aka Coroner's, MD's, etc; who long ago reviewed my materials, do have some "weighted" opinion.

The topic of the long gone email was the TWO bullet pathways through the brain of JFK.

Being:

1. The Z313 impact which struck in the "cowlick" area of the back of the head and went across the top of the brain tearing the brain considerably due to the manner in which the bullet was ripped apart by the skull, and then (fragments) from the bullet exiting in the frontal lobe vicinity.

2. The Stationing 4+95 impact which struck in the lower edge of the hairline at the base of the neck and passed through the soft tissues at the base of the neck on a tangent due to the bent forward position of JFK and his head, to strike in the EOP region of the skull.

This bullet left it's pathway from the tip of the occipital lobe, through the mid-brain of JFK's brain, and for all practical purposes this completely seperate pathway damage through the mid-brain was missed until such time as the brain was examined after "fixation".

It is unknown as to exactly what qualifications the "across the pond" emailer had, or if he merely took the provided information to those who actually possess the qualifications to decipher this information.

Whichever, he emailed back that I was "correct". Which is in itself not entirely correct.

My works demonstrated the probability of the two seperate and distinct bullet pathways.

The MD's who have reviewed this work are the "Correct" ones, and merely confirmed what I strongly felt was correct.

JFK has TWO seperate and distinctive bullet pathways through his brain, both impacts having occurred from the rear and from a firing position which was above.

P.S. As I have always, and will continue to point out! The third shot impact went through the coat of JFK at the lower edge of the coat collar, passing through the coat (and line) on an oblique/tangent, prior to exiting the coat and striking JFK at the lower edge of the hairline and then passing from the tip of the occipital lobe through the mid-brain.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Mark,

Unlike a lot of researchers now, I don't necessarily accept any of the official story. This includes anything about the Mannlicher Carcano. First, it hasn't been established that Oswald purchased the rifle. The whole question of "Hidell" is shrouded in mystery. I tend to think that the "Hidell" alias was concocted as part of the framing of Oswald. Peter Dale Scott was the first to point out, I believe, that the Selective Service card Oswald was allegedly carrying, with his photo and the name of "Hidell" on it, would have been of no use to anyone actually trying to use it, since real Selective Service cards had no photos on them. The early critics went into great depth on the whole question of the Klein's ad, which rifle would have been ordered, etc. They also examined the post office box, allegedly ordered by Oswald under Hidell's name, and the reasonable doubt about that (not to mention the common sense questions of why anyone would have ordered his weapons through the mail, easily traced to a p.o. box, when they could be easily bought locally). There is a lot of confusion there, to say the least.

Even if Tom has a different scenario than the Warren Commission's (and it isn't much different), he is still promoting the "Oswald-did-it-alone" theory, which works against the evidence as we know it. There is abundant evidence that JFK was shot at least once, and probably twice, from the front. Honest research cannot compel one to believe all shots came from behind. We have the laws of physics, not to mention most of the eyewitness testimony, that tells us at least one shot came from somewhere around the grassy knoll. These are very old, familiar arguments, and I'm sure you've heard them all before. Still, they bear repeating, when someone so adamantly disputes them.

The only thing we know for certain about Oswald's shooting ablility are his test scores as a marine. They show him to have deteriorated in ability over the course of time, with his last score being, in the words of the government itself, representative of "a rather poor shot." None of the government (or mainstream media) expert shooters, in all the "reconstructions" of the shooting (with none being really identical), have been able to match Oswald's alleged feat. Even if you throw in two extra seconds, as Tom does (this argument was started by lone nutter extraordinaire Gerald Posner, and is not credible), it is still a dubious proposition that a "rather poor shot" could do the job (remember, there is absolutely no credible evidence that Oswald ever shot a gun again after leaving the marines, fresh off his poor showing on the firing range).

I bear no animosity towards Tom, and certainly not towards you. I started trying to read his posts a long time ago, but had to give up because of their length and unclarity. I think that a lot of great citizen researchers have shown, over the course of time, that Lee Harvey Oswald didn't shoot anyone on November 22, 1963. To believe otherwise is, imho, to work against truth and justice.

there is absolutely no credible evidence that Oswald ever shot a gun again after leaving the marines, fresh off his poor showing on the firing range).

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

Mr. LIEBELER. Can you tell us what happened right there at the rifle range that day?

Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir; I came out there. I had-been shooting for about 10 or 15 minutes and he came up next to me and started shooting, and he only shot about 8 or 10 times and I noticed every time he got through shooting he would take the breech and open it up and put the shell in his pocket. We went down

to check our target and I remembered that his was almost always in the eye. And as we came back to shoot again. I talked to him and I said, "Sir, is that a 6.5 Italian carbine?" And he said, "Yes, sir."

Mr. LIEBELER. Why did you ask him that question?

Mr. WOOD. Because I read gun books and I was pretty sure that was a 6.5 Italian carbine and I wanted to make sure.

Mr. LIEBELER. Have you told your father about this, that that was an Italian carbine?

Mr. WOOD. Yes.

Mr. LIEBELER. How did you express it?

Mr. WOOD. I said, "Daddy, it looks like a 6.5 Italian carbine," and I asked him if it was a four-power scope, because it was funny looking, it wasn't American, and he said, "Yes, it was."

Mr. LIEBELER. Now later on the next week after the President was assassinated, did you see a picture of this man or observe his picture on television or the radio or newspaper, or see him in any other way?

Mr. WOOD. Are you talking about Oswald?

Mr. LIEBELER. The man that was firing at the rifle range?

Mr. LIEBELER. The first time you saw this guy's picture was in the newspaper, is that right?

Mr. LIEBELER. You told your father that this guy you saw at the rifle range looked like Oswald, based on the picture of Oswald in the newspaper?

Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now I want to show you another photograph which has not yet been marked, and ask you to look at it very carefully and tell me if any of the people in that picture look like the boy at the rifle range?

Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. Which one?

Mr. WOOD. That one with the paper in his hand.

Mr. LIEBELER. Now I want to show you another picture that has been marked as Pizzo Exhibit 453-B, and ask you, that is the same picture, isn't it?

Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.

Mr. LIEBELER. You pointed out that he has a green line over his head and you say that is the fellow you saw at the rifle range?

Mr. WOOD. Yes, sir.

==================================================================

The boy just identified LHO from two seperate photographs.

=================================================================

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

Mr. LIEBELER. After you saw this man, you left the rifle range. Then later on the next Friday the President was assassinated, and at sometime subsequent to that time, did you connect up Lee Harvey Oswald with this man that you saw at the rifle range?

Dr. WOOD. I did.

Mr. LIEBELER. Tell me when and how you did that?

Dr. WOOD. I saw him flashed on the television screen at home several times. They would interrogate him and bring him down the hall and bring him back to his cell. This particular time I mentioned to my wife, I said to her, "Honey, that looks exactly like the fellow that was sitting next to Sterling at the rifle range. But I am not going to say anything to Sterling because I want to see if he recognizes him and if he thinks it was."

Well, I would say within 30 minutes or an hour he was flashed back on the screen and he said to me, "Daddy, that is the fellow that was sitting next to me out on the rifle range."

=================================================================

Sterling Wood's father has now identified LHO as the individual who was observed at the rifle range.

=================================================================

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

Mr. LIEBELER. He was a pretty good shot?

Mr. WOOD. He was the most accurate of all the targets that I noticed.

================================================================

Considering how little you appear to know about LHO, it would be a complete waste of time to attempt to "re-educate" you as to the actual facts surrounding the assassination.

There is absolutely ZERO forensic; ballistic; pathological; and/or physical evidence to indicate that JFK was struck by shots which were fired from any location other than the from the rear and above.

And, just as the great majority of witnesses have indicated that three shots were fired, so to are there those who have told us that the Z313 impact was the second shot, as well as the fact that the impact of the third/last/final shot was also fully witnessed.

This happens to be so simple that a "caveman" could figure it out if they actually were to conduct true research into the subject matter/

[Don Jeffries]

As I'm sure you know, the sightings of "Oswald" at two different firing ranges have long been considered, by many researchers, to represent examples of an imposter posing as a future assassin. Coupled with several other incidents outside of firing ranges, this has led many of us to believe that someone was impersonating Oswald in the weeks leading up to the assassination. In no way, shape or form does Wood's testimony constitute credible evidence that Oswald fired a rifle after he left the Marines, fresh off his "rather poor" shooting performance.

Your lengthy, convoluted doubletalk regarding the head wound(s) can't change the fact that every doctor and nurse at Parkland Hospital reported the exact same gaping hole, in the exact same spot on the back of JFK's head. Either ALL of those professional medical people were wildly mistaken, in the EXACT same manner, or all of them lied knowingly about the head wound of the most important patient they'd ever treated, or were ever likely to treat. Maybe they were all trying to distort the record to protect Lee Harvey Oswald, and blame the crime on some imaginary shooter from the front. It also can't change the fact that Dr. Malcolm Perry, the surgeon who treated JFK's throat wound, described it as wound of "entry." Entry wound and exit wounds are easy for trained surgeons to identify. It's very unlikely that an experienced surgeon made such a sloppy error. Perhaps he, too, was covering up for that supposedly "lone" nut Oswald, and trying again to pin the blame for the crime on some patsy firing from the front.

The majority of witnesses reported that shots were fired from the grassy knoll area, not the TSBD (this includes some who were actually INSIDE the TSBD, which is incredible, if shots were really being fired above them in the same building). Film footage in the immediate aftermath of the shooting shows witnesses and police swarming up the knoll area, towards the railroad tracks. Little or no attention seems to be directed at the TSBD. That makes absolutely no sense, if all shots were fired from there. No "echo chamber" effect in the world could make all those witnesses mistaken, just like the Dallas docters were, in the EXACT same way.

Assassination 101- JFK's head is driven backwards violently at Zapruder frame 313. This is probably the main reason most of us became believers in conspiracy in the first place. Any 10 year old can tell you that such a reaction is not consistent with a shot entering from behind. The laws of physics trump any "jet propulsion" or "neuro muscular effect" nonsense. To believe your contention that all shots were fired from behind, one has to reject the eyewitness observations of all those trained medical staff, the physical reaction of JFK to the head shot, the eyewitness reports that shots were fired from the front and the photographic evidence that reveals virtually all attention in the first moments after the shooting was directed at the knoll area.

As I stated earlier, there is no credible evidence that Oswald ever ordered any rifle. Someone ordered a rifle to a P.O. box, under the name of "Hidell." The whole "Hidell" alias is bogus, imho; the Selective Sevice card with a photo on it is enough to show that Oswald couldn't possibly have used it for any real identification purposes. Your faith in that Mannlicher Carcano is admirable; perhaps you should have been there to reassure the original expert marksmen that they needn't fear for their saftey when they refused to test fire it until it had been repaired. The weapon was old, defective and not anything that an aspiring assasin would opt for. The fact that it was ordered through an easily traceable P.O. box, under an alias, when a better weapon could have been obtained with no trouble on almost any street corner in Texas, just adds to the absurdity of the situation.

Okay, I tried. I'm not going to go over the basics of this case with you again. You must know these essential facts- why do you insist on promoting a theory that is actually more ridiculous than the official story?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

As I'm sure you know, the sightings of "Oswald" at two different firing ranges have long been considered, by many researchers, to represent examples of an imposter posing as a future assassin. Coupled with several other incidents outside of firing ranges, this has led many of us to believe that someone was impersonating Oswald in the weeks leading up to the assassination. In no way, shape or form does Wood's testimony constitute credible evidence that Oswald fired a rifle after he left the Marines, fresh off his "rather poor" shooting performance.

Your lengthy, convoluted doubletalk regarding the head wound(s) can't change the fact that every doctor and nurse at Parkland Hospital reported the exact same gaping hole, in the exact same spot on the back of JFK's head. Either ALL of those professional medical people were wildly mistaken, in the EXACT same manner, or all of them lied knowingly about the head wound of the most important patient they'd ever treated, or were ever likely to treat. Maybe they were all trying to distort the record to protect Lee Harvey Oswald, and blame the crime on some imaginary shooter from the front. It also can't change the fact that Dr. Malcolm Perry, the surgeon who treated JFK's throat wound, described it as wound of "entry." Entry wound and exit wounds are easy for trained surgeons to identify. It's very unlikely that an experienced surgeon made such a sloppy error. Perhaps he, too, was covering up for that supposedly "lone" nut Oswald, and trying again to pin the blame for the crime on some patsy firing from the front.

The majority of witnesses reported that shots were fired from the grassy knoll area, not the TSBD (this includes some who were actually INSIDE the TSBD, which is incredible, if shots were really being fired above them in the same building). Film footage in the immediate aftermath of the shooting shows witnesses and police swarming up the knoll area, towards the railroad tracks. Little or no attention seems to be directed at the TSBD. That makes absolutely no sense, if all shots were fired from there. No "echo chamber" effect in the world could make all those witnesses mistaken, just like the Dallas docters were, in the EXACT same way.

Assassination 101- JFK's head is driven backwards violently at Zapruder frame 313. This is probably the main reason most of us became believers in conspiracy in the first place. Any 10 year old can tell you that such a reaction is not consistent with a shot entering from behind. The laws of physics trump any "jet propulsion" or "neuro muscular effect" nonsense. To believe your contention that all shots were fired from behind, one has to reject the eyewitness observations of all those trained medical staff, the physical reaction of JFK to the head shot, the eyewitness reports that shots were fired from the front and the photographic evidence that reveals virtually all attention in the first moments after the shooting was directed at the knoll area.

As I stated earlier, there is no credible evidence that Oswald ever ordered any rifle. Someone ordered a rifle to a P.O. box, under the name of "Hidell." The whole "Hidell" alias is bogus, imho; the Selective Sevice card with a photo on it is enough to show that Oswald couldn't possibly have used it for any real identification purposes. Your faith in that Mannlicher Carcano is admirable; perhaps you should have been there to reassure the original expert marksmen that they needn't fear for their saftey when they refused to test fire it until it had been repaired. The weapon was old, defective and not anything that an aspiring assasin would opt for. The fact that it was ordered through an easily traceable P.O. box, under an alias, when a better weapon could have been obtained with no trouble on almost any street corner in Texas, just adds to the absurdity of the situation.

Okay, I tried. I'm not going to go over the basics of this case with you again. You must know these essential facts- why do you insist on promoting a theory that is actually more ridiculous than the official story?

You must know these essential facts-

Considering that you give the appearance of one of those who has, and will quite obviously continue to chase mythological multiple assassins, then perhaps you just may want to reconsider your purported "facts"!

As example:

Assassination 101- JFK's head is driven backwards violently at Zapruder frame 313. This is probably the main reason most of us became believers in conspiracy in the first place. Any 10 year old can tell you that such a reaction is not consistent with a shot entering from behind. The laws of physics trump any "jet propulsion" or "neuro muscular effect" nonsense.

===============================================

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...t=0&start=0

Post #7

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/084...rimesceneinvest

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-h...20J.M.%20DiMaio

Now! Most would consider Dr. DiMaio as a bonafide and certified EXPERT in the field.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/scientific_to...high-speed.html

High-speed bullets damage organs in ways different from what we usually think. Here is an extended passage from one of the U.S.’s foremost authorities on the subject, Dr. Vincent J. M. Di Maio, Chief Medical Examiner and Director of the Regional Crime Laboratory, County of Bexar, San Antonio, Texas (from his Gunshot Wounds, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1985)

"Implications for the physics of JFK’s head shot

Note how the bullet interacts with the head in two stages. In the first stage, the bullet passes rapidly through, leaving an expanding temporary cavity in its wake. The separate events of this first stage are (1) the bullet enters the skull by drilling a small entrance hole; (2) some brain matter is ejected backward out this hole (tail splash); (3) the bullet, beginning to tumble, passes through the brain; and (4) the bullet leaves the skull by blasting a large exit hole. Note how each of these four events transfers forward momentum from the bullet to the head (the first movement of the head).

In the second stage (after the bullet has left the skull), brain matter continues moving radially outward from the path of the bullet until the head bursts from the accumulated pressure, which can reach 100 to 200 atmospheres. Brain matter is ejected out all available openings, the largest of which will usually be the exit wound or an expanded version of it, with its size depending on how large the internal pressures became. As brain matter is ejected through the enlarged exit wound, it exerts a recoil force in the opposite direction, or backward. If this force is strong enough relative to other forces being experienced by the head at that time (which is well after the hit), the head may actually move backward (the so-called "jet effect"). If the recoil force is small relative to those other forces (such as neuromuscular reactions), the head may more in some other direction, with its motion being only modified by the jet effect.

Thus we expect a bursting head to show at least two separate movements. The first must be in the direction of the bullet, the second probably opposite to it. (Specifics of any movements beyond the first are difficult or impossible to predict, however.) In fact, JFK’s head did move twice—first briefly forward (the "snap"), then backward (the "lurch"). The quick forward motion proves that the killing shot came from the rear. The rearward motion was likely some combination of jet effect and a neuromuscular stiffening of the back muscles, which together straightened him up and threw him backward.

Could the rearward lurch have been the result of a second bullet, from the front, as implied in JFK? No, for several reasons: (1) There was only one set of wounds to the head, a tiny entrance wound in the rear and a larger exit wound on the right side/rear. (2) There is only one pattern of lead fragments in the head—a cone fanning out from the rear entrance wound to the side exit wound. (3) There was no second diffuse cloud of tissue and large fragments, as created by the first hit. (4) There was no damage to the left hemisphere of JFK’s brain, as would be required by a shot coming from the knoll, which was really to JFK’s right rather than to his front. (5) The rearward lurch was an entirely different kind of movement from the forward snap. The lurch began in the right shoulder and arm and involved the head only later. It did not look at all like the snap. (6) Because the lurch involved the whole upper torso, it required more energy than the snap. Many weapons did not have enough energy. Thus JFK’s head was hit by only one bullet, from the rear."

Certainly would appear that this guy knows what he is speaking of.

At least to me!

================================================================

So! Again excuse me while I take the word and opinion of a factually true EXPERT on the subject matter, as opposed to some "Pseudo-Physicist" who post on this forum, and who does not even understand the pathological damage to the skull and brain of JFK which was created by the shot from the rear (Cowlick entry) which, by all known "PHYSICS" caused JFK's head to react EXACTLY as it should have from the impact and exit of this bullet and it's associated fragments.

==============================================================

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...12519&st=45

Post #50

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/page05.html

Like the targets in the experimental shootings, the Zapruder film also demonstrates a pronounced and violent movement of the President's head to the rear, in agreement with the laws of physics (35).

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

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/wecht2.htm

The following is from Wecht's testimony at the Menendez retrial. See:

Q ISN'T IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING, THOUGH, AS

9 A MATTER OF PHYSICS -- I KNOW YOU'RE NOT AN

10 ENGINEER, BUT AS A MATTER OF PHYSICS, WOULDN'T -- IF

11 YOU IMPART A FORCE IN A SPECIFIC DIRECTION, ISN'T

12 THERE A TENDENCY TO MAKE THE OBJECT THAT IS STRUCK

13 TRAVEL IN THE SAME DIRECTION UNLESS THERE'S A REASON

14 TO BE THROWN IN A DIFFERENT OBJECTION?

15 A SURE.

16 MS. ABRAMSON: OBJECTION. WELL, I'M GOING TO

17 OBJECT TO THAT AS IRRELEVANT UNLESS THE OBJECT WE'RE

18 TALKING ABOUT IS PART OF THE HUMAN BODY.

19 THE COURT: OVERRULED.

20 THE WITNESS: THAT'S ONE, I THINK, OF THE

21 BASIC NEWTONIAN PRINCIPLES OF LAWS OF PHYSICS;

22 HOWEVER, YOU SEE, WHEN YOU DEAL WITH THESE THINGS ON

23 A PURELY ENGINEERING BASIS, YOU'RE FORGETTING THAT

24 THE HUMAN BODY HAS MOVEMENT AT JOINTS AND YOU'RE

25 FORGETTING THAT THE HUMAN BODY HAS MOVEMENT THAT IS

26 CONTROLLED VOLUNTARILY OR EVEN INVOLUNTARILY BY THE

27 PARASYMPATHETIC NERVOUS SYSTEM.

28 SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE PROBLEM IN

42677

1 TRYING TO DEAL WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS FROM A

2 PURELY MECHANICAL ENGINEERING OR PHYSICIST

3 STANDPOINT. SOME OF THE CONCEPTS, INDEED, ARE

4 APPLICABLE AND RELEVANT, BUT YOU HAVE TO THEN FACTOR

5 IN THE BIOLOGICAL ELEMENT, THE ENTIRE NEUROMUSCULAR

6 SYSTEM AND SO ON, ALL OF THE VOLUNTARY AND

7 INVOLUNTARILY REFLEXIVE ASPECTS OF IT, AS WELL AS

8 WHAT SOMEBODY SETS OUT TO DO IN THIS KIND OF A

9 SITUATION.

10 AND HERE, YOU KNOW, SIR NEWTON AND

11 OTHERS JUST NEVER DEALT WITH THOSE THINGS. THEY

12 DEALT WITH STATIONARY OBJECTS MOVING IN A CERTAIN

13 FASHION WHEN OTHER OBJECTS STRIKE THEM OR ARE STRUCK

14 BY A MOVING OBJECT, AND THAT'S JUST A VERY DIFFERENT

15 SITUATION.

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

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/scientific_to...high-speed.html

. As brain matter is ejected through the enlarged exit wound, it exerts a recoil force in the opposite direction, or backward. If this force is strong enough relative to other forces being experienced by the head at that time (which is well after the hit), the head may actually move backward (the so-called "jet effect").

(emphasis added)

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

And there, we have the correct application of the laws of physics.

1,400 to 2,900 PSI of internal pressure created within the cavity of the skull, being suddenly allowed to release out the large frontal exit wound, literally "kicks" the head backwards.

At the same instance, the expanding pressure continues to fracture and fragment the skull, which causes the right temporal area of the skull to rupture and separate to the side (along with the skull cap section), and we now have this extremely high pressure buildup within JFK's skull being released from the frontal as well as the right temporal area.

With the end result being JFK's head being "thrust" backwards and to the left!

Merely simple "rocket science"!

And Lastly:

http://www.randomquotes.org/author/5584-wi...m-g-mcadoo.html

Quote by William G. McAdoo

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument.

[Mark Knight]

"So Good-bye, Yellow Brick Road,

Where the dogs of society howl...."

Can we get this train of thought back on track ? Or has it run out of steam already?

Or by posting here am I simply hijacking a previously redirected thread?

Edited December 4, 2008 by Mark Knight

[John Dolva]

Don, apparently you haven't been able to follow Tom's posts, either. If I might add my understanding of what Tom has posted, Tom shows that the SS and the FBI both allowed for three shots that hit JFK, based upon the survey work of a Mr. West, who surveyed points in Dealy Plaza for both the SS and for the FBI. The surveys show what the WC refers to as the first and the third shots, but what were on the survey as shots 1 and 2. Shot 3 was further down Elm. Tom's 3-shot scenario--all at under 100 yards, and within 8 or more seconds and not the 6 seconds the WC tried to sell.

As for the rifle...LHO ordered, and Klein's apparently shipped, a model 91/24 Carcano 6.5 mm rifle. The 91/24 had left the factory with a progressive-gain twist rifled barrel, but as sold by Klein's, the barrel had been shortened and its accuracy was a joke. Yet the rifle recovered in the TSBD was a model 91/38 Carcano 6.5mm rifle. This rifle was produced without the progressive-gain twist rifling, and was a fairly accurate firearm.

Tom also has shown evidence that, while Oswald might not have been the best rifleman ever turned out by the USMC, he was certainly capable of making 3 accurate shots at under 100 yards in an 8-second timeframe. What Tom HASN'T insisted is that Oswald is unequivocably the triggerman; he was merely CAPABLE of making the shots, and he worked in the TSBD. Tom also disputes the SBT as hawked by Spector and Company, as Tom's position is that Conally's wounds were caused by his being struck by two separate bullets/fragments.

[Have I about covered it in a nutshell, Tom?]

Now, Don...since that differs consderably from what the WC was peddling, how do you conclude that "[Tom] supports the official version of the shooting" ??

I'm not Einstein, but even I was able to detect those differences between Tom Purvis' tale and the one told by the WC...and Tom's has a lot more ring of truth to it than the Commission's. While Tom and I don't see eye-to-eye on every point, I find him more convincing, based upon the evidence, that any scenario of body-snatching and wound alteration [except for the examination/sectioning of a second, intact brain] I've yet heard.

The reason and timing of the shortening of the barrel (as I understand Tom) was due to, while it was an excellent sniper rifle or long distance rifle, the Italian soldiers in North Africa found it to be difficult in close fights. They complained sufficiently so that the shortening of the rifle was approved. Thus the Italians lost one advantage and gained a poor substitute.

How many of the relevant serial number rifles were made. How many are known (location etc.)? How/who brought a Carcano with said serial # to the USA?

_________

The Presidential Commission held a number of glaring typesetting errors re switching of relevant frames in at least two films. Deliberate, coincidence, message? Whatever, it's been loaded with a renaming to Warrens Report. Warren was under fire from the JBS and others pre assassination. Kennedy's men perhaps did the only thing they could under a possible coup: create a report that did have flaws, but flaws that point to where how and why.

Who was the typesetter and final clearer of the final report which now resides in toto in many libraries around the world?

___________________

There are many reasons that Tom's input should be taken seriously, not least of all his demonstrated ability to be corrected, and his overall attempt at a careful analysis that has many hallmarks of a scientific examination. In the scientific field, scenarios or hypothesis are presented for refutation or confirmation. Non objective or pre judiced beliefs or opinions have little place in such an endeavour. In trying to analyse Tom's hypthesis' on occasion other equally (to me) possibilities have credence. However it is a concerted effort devoid of vitriol or praise but focussing on the 'meat' that is most likely to bear fruit. Offbeat suggestions have a place as well. Let's call is the 'bull pit'. Out of it comes worthwhile paths to follow (and drop) and when all is stripped away a theory may emerge.

Belief doth not a Truth make.

Some minor points that highlights subtle obfuscation: The TSBD was a company sharing a building with a number of other companies. They were housed in a building which has had many 'names' including the "TSBD building" Oswald worked for the TSBD in the TSBD building, getting ther job shortly before the assassination, on the day of the assassination RRC sought work in another building. Other interesting 'witnesses' are Ruby, with a possible clear sight from the DMH? The "WC" is correctly named the "Presidential ......" . Dealey Plaza for the most of the time of investagation has been misnamed, The northern half of Dealey Plaza is not Dealey Plaza.

Edited December 5, 2008 by John Dolva

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Don, apparently you haven't been able to follow Tom's posts, either. If I might add my understanding of what Tom has posted, Tom shows that the SS and the FBI both allowed for three shots that hit JFK, based upon the survey work of a Mr. West, who surveyed points in Dealy Plaza for both the SS and for the FBI. The surveys show what the WC refers to as the first and the third shots, but what were on the survey as shots 1 and 2. Shot 3 was further down Elm. Tom's 3-shot scenario--all at under 100 yards, and within 8 or more seconds and not the 6 seconds the WC tried to sell.

As for the rifle...LHO ordered, and Klein's apparently shipped, a model 91/24 Carcano 6.5 mm rifle. The 91/24 had left the factory with a progressive-gain twist rifled barrel, but as sold by Klein's, the barrel had been shortened and its accuracy was a joke. Yet the rifle recovered in the TSBD was a model 91/38 Carcano 6.5mm rifle. This rifle was produced without the progressive-gain twist rifling, and was a fairly accurate firearm.

Tom also has shown evidence that, while Oswald might not have been the best rifleman ever turned out by the USMC, he was certainly capable of making 3 accurate shots at under 100 yards in an 8-second timeframe. What Tom HASN'T insisted is that Oswald is unequivocably the triggerman; he was merely CAPABLE of making the shots, and he worked in the TSBD. Tom also disputes the SBT as hawked by Spector and Company, as Tom's position is that Conally's wounds were caused by his being struck by two separate bullets/fragments.

[Have I about covered it in a nutshell, Tom?]

Now, Don...since that differs consderably from what the WC was peddling, how do you conclude that "[Tom] supports the official version of the shooting" ??

I'm not Einstein, but even I was able to detect those differences between Tom Purvis' tale and the one told by the WC...and Tom's has a lot more ring of truth to it than the Commission's. While Tom and I don't see eye-to-eye on every point, I find him more convincing, based upon the evidence, that any scenario of body-snatching and wound alteration [except for the examination/sectioning of a second, intact brain] I've yet heard.

The reason and timing of the shortening of the barrel (as I understand Tom) was due to, while it was an excellent sniper rifle or long distance rifle, the Italian soldiers in North Africa found it to be difficult in close fights. They complained sufficiently so that the shortening of the rifle was approved. Thus the Italians lost one advantage and gained a poor substitute.

How many of the relevant serial number rifles were made. How many are known (location etc.)? How/who brought a Carcano with said serial # to the USA?

_________

The Presidential Commission held a number of glaring typesetting errors re switching of relevant frames in at least two films. Deliberate, coincidence, message? Whatever, it's been loaded with a renaming to Warrens Report. Warren was under fire from the JBS and others pre assassination. Kennedy's men perhaps did the only thing they could under a possible coup: create a report that did have flaws, but flaws that point to where how and why.

Who was the typesetter and final clearer of the final report which now resides in toto in many libraries around the world?

___________________

There are many reasons that Tom's input should be taken seriously, not least of all his demonstrated ability to be corrected, and his overall attempt at a careful analysis that has many hallmarks of a scientific examination. In the scientific field, scenarios or hypothesis are presented for refutation or confirmation. Non objective or pre judiced beliefs or opinions have little place in such an endeavour. In trying to analyse Tom's hypthesis' on occasion other equally (to me) possibilities have credence. However it is a concerted effort devoid of vitriol or praise but focussing on the 'meat' that is most likely to bear fruit. Offbeat suggestions have a place as well. Let's call is the 'bull pit'. Out of it comes worthwhile paths to follow (and drop) and when all is stripped away a theory may emerge.

Belief doth not a Truth make.

Some minor points that highlights subtle obfuscation: The TSBD was a company sharing a building with a number of other companies. They were housed in a building which has had many 'names' including the "TSBD building" Oswald worked for the TSBD in the TSBD building, getting ther job shortly before the assassination, on the day of the assassination RRC sought work in another building. Other interesting 'witnesses' are Ruby, with a possible clear sight from the DMH? The "WC" is correctly named the "Presidential ......" . Dealey Plaza for the most of the time of investagation has been misnamed, The northern half of Dealey Plaza is not Dealey Plaza.

Some minor points that highlights subtle obfuscation: The TSBD was a company sharing a building with a number of other companies. They were housed in a building which has had many 'names' including the "TSBD building" Oswald worked for the TSBD in the TSBD building, getting ther job shortly before the assassination,

And, the Yellow Brick Road, (or at least a relatively unknown photograph) will tell the names of some of these "other companies", which one may find of particular interest if they stay on that road back to New Orleans.

Lastlly! Anything is possible, so long as it stays within the realm of the forensic; ballistic; pathological; and physical facts.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

As I'm sure you know, the sightings of "Oswald" at two different firing ranges have long been considered, by many researchers, to represent examples of an imposter posing as a future assassin. Coupled with several other incidents outside of firing ranges, this has led many of us to believe that someone was impersonating Oswald in the weeks leading up to the assassination. In no way, shape or form does Wood's testimony constitute credible evidence that Oswald fired a rifle after he left the Marines, fresh off his "rather poor" shooting performance.

Your lengthy, convoluted doubletalk regarding the head wound(s) can't change the fact that every doctor and nurse at Parkland Hospital reported the exact same gaping hole, in the exact same spot on the back of JFK's head. Either ALL of those professional medical people were wildly mistaken, in the EXACT same manner, or all of them lied knowingly about the head wound of the most important patient they'd ever treated, or were ever likely to treat. Maybe they were all trying to distort the record to protect Lee Harvey Oswald, and blame the crime on some imaginary shooter from the front. It also can't change the fact that Dr. Malcolm Perry, the surgeon who treated JFK's throat wound, described it as wound of "entry." Entry wound and exit wounds are easy for trained surgeons to identify. It's very unlikely that an experienced surgeon made such a sloppy error. Perhaps he, too, was covering up for that supposedly "lone" nut Oswald, and trying again to pin the blame for the crime on some patsy firing from the front.

The majority of witnesses reported that shots were fired from the grassy knoll area, not the TSBD (this includes some who were actually INSIDE the TSBD, which is incredible, if shots were really being fired above them in the same building). Film footage in the immediate aftermath of the shooting shows witnesses and police swarming up the knoll area, towards the railroad tracks. Little or no attention seems to be directed at the TSBD. That makes absolutely no sense, if all shots were fired from there. No "echo chamber" effect in the world could make all those witnesses mistaken, just like the Dallas docters were, in the EXACT same way.

Assassination 101- JFK's head is driven backwards violently at Zapruder frame 313. This is probably the main reason most of us became believers in conspiracy in the first place. Any 10 year old can tell you that such a reaction is not consistent with a shot entering from behind. The laws of physics trump any "jet propulsion" or "neuro muscular effect" nonsense. To believe your contention that all shots were fired from behind, one has to reject the eyewitness observations of all those trained medical staff, the physical reaction of JFK to the head shot, the eyewitness reports that shots were fired from the front and the photographic evidence that reveals virtually all attention in the first moments after the shooting was directed at the knoll area.

As I stated earlier, there is no credible evidence that Oswald ever ordered any rifle. Someone ordered a rifle to a P.O. box, under the name of "Hidell." The whole "Hidell" alias is bogus, imho; the Selective Sevice card with a photo on it is enough to show that Oswald couldn't possibly have used it for any real identification purposes. Your faith in that Mannlicher Carcano is admirable; perhaps you should have been there to reassure the original expert marksmen that they needn't fear for their saftey when they refused to test fire it until it had been repaired. The weapon was old, defective and not anything that an aspiring assasin would opt for. The fact that it was ordered through an easily traceable P.O. box, under an alias, when a better weapon could have been obtained with no trouble on almost any street corner in Texas, just adds to the absurdity of the situation.

Okay, I tried. I'm not going to go over the basics of this case with you again. You must know these essential facts- why do you insist on promoting a theory that is actually more ridiculous than the official story?

You must know these essential facts-

Considering that you give the appearance of one of those who has, and will quite obviously continue to chase mythological multiple assassins, then perhaps you just may want to reconsider your purported "facts"!

As example:

Assassination 101- JFK's head is driven backwards violently at Zapruder frame 313. This is probably the main reason most of us became believers in conspiracy in the first place. Any 10 year old can tell you that such a reaction is not consistent with a shot entering from behind. The laws of physics trump any "jet propulsion" or "neuro muscular effect" nonsense.

===============================================

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...t=0&start=0

Post #7

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/084...rimesceneinvest

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/search-h...20J.M.%20DiMaio

Now! Most would consider Dr. DiMaio as a bonafide and certified EXPERT in the field.

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/scientific_to...high-speed.html

High-speed bullets damage organs in ways different from what we usually think. Here is an extended passage from one of the U.S.’s foremost authorities on the subject, Dr. Vincent J. M. Di Maio, Chief Medical Examiner and Director of the Regional Crime Laboratory, County of Bexar, San Antonio, Texas (from his Gunshot Wounds, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, 1985)

"Implications for the physics of JFK’s head shot

Note how the bullet interacts with the head in two stages. In the first stage, the bullet passes rapidly through, leaving an expanding temporary cavity in its wake. The separate events of this first stage are (1) the bullet enters the skull by drilling a small entrance hole; (2) some brain matter is ejected backward out this hole (tail splash); (3) the bullet, beginning to tumble, passes through the brain; and (4) the bullet leaves the skull by blasting a large exit hole. Note how each of these four events transfers forward momentum from the bullet to the head (the first movement of the head).

In the second stage (after the bullet has left the skull), brain matter continues moving radially outward from the path of the bullet until the head bursts from the accumulated pressure, which can reach 100 to 200 atmospheres. Brain matter is ejected out all available openings, the largest of which will usually be the exit wound or an expanded version of it, with its size depending on how large the internal pressures became. As brain matter is ejected through the enlarged exit wound, it exerts a recoil force in the opposite direction, or backward. If this force is strong enough relative to other forces being experienced by the head at that time (which is well after the hit), the head may actually move backward (the so-called "jet effect"). If the recoil force is small relative to those other forces (such as neuromuscular reactions), the head may more in some other direction, with its motion being only modified by the jet effect.

Thus we expect a bursting head to show at least two separate movements. The first must be in the direction of the bullet, the second probably opposite to it. (Specifics of any movements beyond the first are difficult or impossible to predict, however.) In fact, JFK’s head did move twice—first briefly forward (the "snap"), then backward (the "lurch"). The quick forward motion proves that the killing shot came from the rear. The rearward motion was likely some combination of jet effect and a neuromuscular stiffening of the back muscles, which together straightened him up and threw him backward.

Could the rearward lurch have been the result of a second bullet, from the front, as implied in JFK? No, for several reasons: (1) There was only one set of wounds to the head, a tiny entrance wound in the rear and a larger exit wound on the right side/rear. (2) There is only one pattern of lead fragments in the head—a cone fanning out from the rear entrance wound to the side exit wound. (3) There was no second diffuse cloud of tissue and large fragments, as created by the first hit. (4) There was no damage to the left hemisphere of JFK’s brain, as would be required by a shot coming from the knoll, which was really to JFK’s right rather than to his front. (5) The rearward lurch was an entirely different kind of movement from the forward snap. The lurch began in the right shoulder and arm and involved the head only later. It did not look at all like the snap. (6) Because the lurch involved the whole upper torso, it required more energy than the snap. Many weapons did not have enough energy. Thus JFK’s head was hit by only one bullet, from the rear."

Certainly would appear that this guy knows what he is speaking of.

At least to me!

================================================================

So! Again excuse me while I take the word and opinion of a factually true EXPERT on the subject matter, as opposed to some "Pseudo-Physicist" who post on this forum, and who does not even understand the pathological damage to the skull and brain of JFK which was created by the shot from the rear (Cowlick entry) which, by all known "PHYSICS" caused JFK's head to react EXACTLY as it should have from the impact and exit of this bullet and it's associated fragments.

==============================================================

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...12519&st=45

Post #50

http://jfklancerforum.com/sherryg/page05.html

Like the targets in the experimental shootings, the Zapruder film also demonstrates a pronounced and violent movement of the President's head to the rear, in agreement with the laws of physics (35).

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

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/wecht2.htm

The following is from Wecht's testimony at the Menendez retrial. See:

Q ISN'T IT YOUR UNDERSTANDING, THOUGH, AS

9 A MATTER OF PHYSICS -- I KNOW YOU'RE NOT AN

10 ENGINEER, BUT AS A MATTER OF PHYSICS, WOULDN'T -- IF

11 YOU IMPART A FORCE IN A SPECIFIC DIRECTION, ISN'T

12 THERE A TENDENCY TO MAKE THE OBJECT THAT IS STRUCK

13 TRAVEL IN THE SAME DIRECTION UNLESS THERE'S A REASON

14 TO BE THROWN IN A DIFFERENT OBJECTION?

15 A SURE.

16 MS. ABRAMSON: OBJECTION. WELL, I'M GOING TO

17 OBJECT TO THAT AS IRRELEVANT UNLESS THE OBJECT WE'RE

18 TALKING ABOUT IS PART OF THE HUMAN BODY.

19 THE COURT: OVERRULED.

20 THE WITNESS: THAT'S ONE, I THINK, OF THE

21 BASIC NEWTONIAN PRINCIPLES OF LAWS OF PHYSICS;

22 HOWEVER, YOU SEE, WHEN YOU DEAL WITH THESE THINGS ON

23 A PURELY ENGINEERING BASIS, YOU'RE FORGETTING THAT

24 THE HUMAN BODY HAS MOVEMENT AT JOINTS AND YOU'RE

25 FORGETTING THAT THE HUMAN BODY HAS MOVEMENT THAT IS

26 CONTROLLED VOLUNTARILY OR EVEN INVOLUNTARILY BY THE

27 PARASYMPATHETIC NERVOUS SYSTEM.

28 SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THE PROBLEM IN

42677

1 TRYING TO DEAL WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS FROM A

2 PURELY MECHANICAL ENGINEERING OR PHYSICIST

3 STANDPOINT. SOME OF THE CONCEPTS, INDEED, ARE

4 APPLICABLE AND RELEVANT, BUT YOU HAVE TO THEN FACTOR

5 IN THE BIOLOGICAL ELEMENT, THE ENTIRE NEUROMUSCULAR

6 SYSTEM AND SO ON, ALL OF THE VOLUNTARY AND

7 INVOLUNTARILY REFLEXIVE ASPECTS OF IT, AS WELL AS

8 WHAT SOMEBODY SETS OUT TO DO IN THIS KIND OF A

9 SITUATION.

10 AND HERE, YOU KNOW, SIR NEWTON AND

11 OTHERS JUST NEVER DEALT WITH THOSE THINGS. THEY

12 DEALT WITH STATIONARY OBJECTS MOVING IN A CERTAIN

13 FASHION WHEN OTHER OBJECTS STRIKE THEM OR ARE STRUCK

14 BY A MOVING OBJECT, AND THAT'S JUST A VERY DIFFERENT

15 SITUATION.

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

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/scientific_to...high-speed.html

. As brain matter is ejected through the enlarged exit wound, it exerts a recoil force in the opposite direction, or backward. If this force is strong enough relative to other forces being experienced by the head at that time (which is well after the hit), the head may actually move backward (the so-called "jet effect").

(emphasis added)

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

And there, we have the correct application of the laws of physics.

1,400 to 2,900 PSI of internal pressure created within the cavity of the skull, being suddenly allowed to release out the large frontal exit wound, literally "kicks" the head backwards.

At the same instance, the expanding pressure continues to fracture and fragment the skull, which causes the right temporal area of the skull to rupture and separate to the side (along with the skull cap section), and we now have this extremely high pressure buildup within JFK's skull being released from the frontal as well as the right temporal area.

With the end result being JFK's head being "thrust" backwards and to the left!

Merely simple "rocket science"!

And Lastly:

http://www.randomquotes.org/author/5584-wi...m-g-mcadoo.html

Quote by William G. McAdoo

It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument.

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

An Interview With Duncan MacPherson - author Bullet Penetration: Modeling the Dynamics and the Incapacitation Resulting From Wound Trauma. (El Segundo, CA, 1994, Ballistic Publications)

G: It is common knowledge that, as captured by Abraham Zapruder, President Kennedy's head and upper torso lurch energetically immediately following the explosion of his head. Could this movement have been caused by the directly transferred momentum of a bullet? That is, can a bullet "push" somebody like that?

MacP: No, and no. The movement of a body due to bullet momentum cannot be greater than the movement of the same body if it was holding the gun that fired the bullet. This is a result of elementary physics and is not disputed by anyone who understands physics. The major frustrating feature of the Kennedy assassination phenomenon is the willingness of people to pretend to talk authoritatively on subjects they know absolutely nothing about, especially things related to firearms. This body recoil is one favorite. Another is the "puff of smoke from the grassy knoll"; the theory here seems to be that someone shot Kennedy with a flintlock.

G: If the effects observed on the Zapruder film are not the result of a direct "push" by a bullet, what could account for JFK's movements?

MacP: In general, body movement in response to nervous system trauma is a result of contractions in body muscles. This is related to movements of your leg when a doctor raps you on the knee with his little mallet; your leg moves because a nerve induces a muscle contraction, not because it was driven into motion by the force of the tiny rap with the mallet. The slightly peculiar location of Kennedy's arms after the 399 bullet impact is known as Thorburn's position, after a description by Dr. William Thorburn in an 1889 paper on injuries to the area of the spinal chord damaged by bullet 399. In addition to this effect, simulations have shown that bullet strikes to the skull that result in blowing out a significant hole upon exit result in skull recoil towards the bullet entry direction. The dynamics of this are a little complicated, but are more related to the pressure inside the skull cavity created by the bullet passage than to effects directly related to the bullet movement. The dynamics of this kind of impact were demonstrated independently in testing by Dr. Luis Alvarez and by Dr. John K. Lattimer et al.

=================================================================

Always nice to have a bonafide "Rocket Scientist" to substantuate the "physics" of this as well.

[Mark Knight]

Are you following this thread?

Streaks in Nix Film

IMHO, this effect is only possible from a shot originating behind the limo.

Now....what about those SS re-creation films, Tom ?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Are you following this thread?

Streaks in Nix Film

IMHO, this effect is only possible from a shot originating behind the limo.

Now....what about those SS re-creation films, Tom ?

Are you following this thread?

Mark;

Not really!

Now that you have brought it out, I have looked at it. And although there are questions surrounding what one is of the opinion that they see in the film, so remains the Zapruder film (copy) which is of an even better quality.

If one could resolve the issues of the assassination shot sequence merely by looking at the various films, then this entire subject would have been long ago put to rest.

Since the third/last shot impact occurred directly in front of James Altgens, with the result being that cerebral tissue was blown to the left side, in Altgens position, and neither Altgens nor any "spray" is observed, then this leaves us with the conclusion that these various frames of the "Nix" film demonstrate the cerebral tissues which can be seen in Z313 after impact of the second shot.

Now....what about those SS re-creation films, Tom ?

As recently stated, I experienced a major "meltdown" on my computer, which pretty well ate up everything stored.

Therefore, as an "excuse", and since everything is again boxed away, one will have to bear with me if they want to stay on the correct (yellow brick) road.

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

Mr. SIMMONS. The marksmen were instructed to take as much time as they desired at the first target, and then to fire--at the first target, being at 175 feet--to then fire at the target emplaced at 240 feet, and then at the one at 265 feet.

Mr. EISENBERG. Can you state where you derived these distances?

Mr. SIMMONS. These distances were the values given on the survey map which were given to us.

Mr. EISENBERG. Are you sure they were not the values I gave to you myself?

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.

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

As has been previously presented, CE585 IS NOT the US Secret Service Survey Plat of 12/5/63.

It is in reality the Survey Plat as generated for the FBI for their 2/9/64 assassination re-enactment in which the third shot impact at survey stationing 4+95 (directly in front of James Altgens position), was left in place and an attempt was made to "fudge" the Z313 impact back up Elm St approximately 24 feet, prior to JFK even having passed the position of Hill & Moorman.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z349.jpg

Note James Altgens and the yellow curb mark.

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

Third Shot Impact survey stationing (4+95)

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

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

Z313 survey stationing (4+65.3)

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

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/40/4074-001.gif

Again, the FBI "modified" version. One should note that the legend block which contains the "revision date" is not shown in this photo.

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

In fact, if one will correctly "rotate" this larger version, they will be able to locate the #1 impact point; the "moved" #2 impact point which is some 24 feet prior to the first yellow curb mark, and finally, the #3 impact point which is in direct alignment with the second yellow curb mark which can be seen in the Zfilm, some 3 to 5 feet farther past the Altgen position.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z349.jpg

=============================================

(to be continued)

Questions????? on this portion?

[Thomas H. Purvis]

No Questions?----Comments?-----or even criticisms????????

Mark;

In order to fully grasp the WC's duplicity in their completely phony assassination re-enactment, one must follow the "bouncing ball" from "A" to "Z".

So!

Beginning with the first shot! Please recall that the WC decided that they could not tell us the position of JFK at impact of the first shot, and in fact, even gave us all of the "political doubletalk" that the first shot may have in fact been "THE SHOT THAT MISSED".

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...eport_0067b.htm

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

However! The US Secret Service during the 12/5/63 assassination re-enactment, as well as the FBI during their 2/9/64 assassination re-enactment, both concurred that JFK had been hit by the first shot at this location.

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/40/4076-001.gif

And, although this location is slightly different from the Time/Life survey, the Time/Life work is based on the location at the time of the shot, which places JFK's position at the approximately 204/206 position, which also corresponds with the previously presented information which indicates that the WC gave serious consideration to this position as well after a full review of the Z-film in which they could observe JFK's hand and arm suddenly and rapidly drop.

Before proceeding to the other two shots, there are several items which one should be aware of as regards the SS/FBI works and the WC's work.

First off:

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/40/4076-001.gif

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z216.jpg

One needs to give particular attention to the location of the sign posts as well as top elevation of the sign in regards to background items.

As well as the elevation of the limbs of the live oak tree in the background in relationship to the concrete/block wall.

The better image of this SS assassination re-enactment photo was long ago discussed, and although taken at virtually the exact same elevation as the Zapruder film, it is nevertheless slightly off in horizontal location.

[Mark Knight]

Tom,I'm trying to play devil's advocate here and enhance my understanding of the facts. Now, based upon the medical evidence you've shown as to how the 3rd shot traveled in the President's head, I'm having difficulty reconciling that with the not-so-clear still from the Z-film--Z-349--to determine that what Altgens says happened, occurred the way your interpretation of the medical evidence states that it happened.

IOW, was JFK's body/head in the proper position for a 3rd shot at approximately Z-349--with the limo at the Altgens position--for the bullet to have gone where the evidence suggests it did? Or if not here, then when?

Not criticising, as much as I'm just trying to get a better understanding.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom,I'm trying to play devil's advocate here and enhance my understanding of the facts. Now, based upon the medical evidence you've shown as to how the 3rd shot traveled in the President's head, I'm having difficulty reconciling that with the not-so-clear still from the Z-film--Z-349--to determine that what Altgens says happened, occurred the way your interpretation of the medical evidence states that it happened.

IOW, was JFK's body/head in the proper position for a 3rd shot at approximately Z-349--with the limo at the Altgens position--for the bullet to have gone where the evidence suggests it did? Or if not here, then when?

Not criticising, as much as I'm just trying to get a better understanding.

Tom,I'm trying to play devil's advocate here and enhance my understanding of the facts.

[b]Not criticising, as much as I'm just trying to get a better understanding.[/b]

Play the advocate and criticize all that you want. If it cannot hold up to that, then it would be quite worthless.

And, the answer is that it becomes a perfect alignment.

1. Sit upright in a chair.

2. Lean the head forward with the chin almost to the chest.

3. Roll the head and face to the right to the extent that the chin is now pointing towards the right arm pit.

4. Lean forward and to the left at an approximately 45-degree angle until such time as the right ear is pointed almost directly up and the earlobe is in an almost horizontal plane.

This position now places the right rear EOP area of the skull into direct alignment with the sixth floor window line of fire (along with the slightly elevated coat collar).

What Dr. Boswell drew as "up" and slanting from left to right, is in reality DOWN, with a slightly right to left angle.

http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol17_0036a.htm

Due to the now "downward" angle of penetration, the majority of cerebral tissue which would have been blown forward from this shot, went downward and forward over the back of the jump seats, as well as over the back of JBC and Nellie.

And, due to the cross-angle of fire from the TSDB, any cerebral tissue which went outside the boundary of the Presidential Limo would have done so towards the left side of the vehicle, in the direction of James Altgens.

And of course, the bullet continued forward through the mid-brain of JFK, exiting in the right frontal lobe, only to continue on it's downward track to strike JBC in the right rear shoulder which was exposed as he lay over across the void area between the jump seats.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...2&hl=Nellie

Post #5

As a last item, it should be noted that Nellie Connally ultimately wrote/published a book on the events in Dallas on 11/22/63. Of specific noteworthiness is her handwritten notes which she states were made 10 days after the event.

In these handwritten notes, she states:

"Quickly there was a second shot (John had turned to the right at the first shot to look back & had then whirled to the left to get another look---realized the President had been shot said "No, No, No)

Was hit and said "My God, they are are going to kill us all"--Wheeled back to the right crumpling his shoulders and his knees in the most unpleasant & pitiful position a tall big man could be in.

I reached over and pulled him to me & tried to get us both down in the car. Then came a third shot.

With John in my arms and still trying to stay down I did not see the third shot hit--but I felt something falling all over me. My sensation was of spent buckshot. My eyes saw bloody matter in tiny bits all over the car."

================================================================================

That this, the last/final/third shot, struck JFK at the base of the neck at the edge of the hairline and then "tunnelled" upwards through the soft tissue at the base of the skull to then strike the skull in the EOP region at a point which was "higher" than the point of entry into the scalp, has always been one of those things which researchers have failed to understand.

Thusly, claiming that Humes & etc; did not know what they were doing; the body was kidnapped and wounds altered; etc; etc; etc;.

When in fact, as with virtually every single item of forensic; ballistic; pathological; and physical evidence, there is a complete and logically explainable reason as to exactly why and how it occurred.

Tom

P.S. In referencing this, the last shot, we are in fact discussing the one and only true "Magic Bullet".

That being the bullet which penetrated through JFK to exit and then penetrate through JBC's chest and then exit the chest and lodge in the left leg.

Only to thereafter "disappear"! (almost so anyway!)

P.P.S. Don't forget the "tangential" penetration through the coat of JFK which struck just below the edge of the coat collar and penetrated the outer as well as inner liner on a somewhat oblique angle.

[William Kelly]

All of these questions and arguments will be answered when the murder victim receives a proper forensic autopsy, which will eventually happen, it's just a matter of when.

BK

[Thomas H. Purvis]

All of these questions and arguments will be answered when the murder victim receives a proper forensic autopsy, which will eventually happen, it's just a matter of when.

BK

it's just a matter of when.

That would be when the general public no longer gives a sh*t about who Gerald Ford; Arlen Specter; and even JFK actually were.

I personally would like to at least see Arlen Specter's skin nailed to the wall while he is still living and breathing inside it.

Although it is recognized how unlikely that too will be.