Pat Speer Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 hi pat..i think you are somewhat cherry picking if you want to compare what the witnesses stated the where. you think or the back of the head blow out just for one check the willis family what each stated the back of the head blew out..also others imo you cannot use some and leave the others out but that is m/o..hope you have a good new year...b Happy New Years to you as well. I used Newman and Zapruder because they are the only close-by witnesses I could find who demonstrated their impression of the wound location on 11-22. Another close-by witness, James Chaney, told a TV interviewer JFK was hit in the face. It is undoubtedly intriguing that none of these men, who saw Kennedy while he was still upright, thought the large head wound was on the back of JFK's head. As far as the Willis family, none of them were quoted till many months later, and they were some distance away. From their perspective, it would have been incredibly hard--probably impossible--to differentiate between an explosion of blood from the top of JFK's head while he was moving away from an explosion of blood from the back of his head. Even so, the FBI report on Marilyn Willis, the most consistent of the family, reported that she saw a "red halo" erupt from the top of Kennedy's head, not the back of his head. Phil Willis, moreover, not only testified that he did not see the impact of the final shot (which he apparently believed was the head shot) he testified that "The minute the third shot was fired, I screamed, hoping a policeman would hear me, to ring that building because it had to come from there." Pat check these out..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmfqDOnZu_Q FRANK O'NEILL RIGHT REAR Interviews - Phil Willis & Family video'sfrom gil jesus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2-_UhD3Qgk witnesses The back of his head blew off http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVhZdryIs_A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh0-2Sthn9A the large back of the head wound.. the Doctor's JFK's head wound http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhWJowvbtxs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P29j9PFZBM wound was in the back of his head to the right... b.. Exactly my point, Bernice. In light of their original statements, the 25 year removed statements of the Willis family are not exactly credible. If you can find records of them describing the shooting and talking about a wound on the back of the head prior to this time, however, I will add them to my database. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 Actually, the shot to the back (about 5 1/2 inches below the collar and to the right of the spinal column) Dr. Fetzer, I divide the John F. Kennedy Assassination Critical Research Community into two definitive types -- those who put JFK's back wound about 5.5" below the collar, and those who place it significantly (2"+) higher. Since you are of the former, I regard you as on the side of the angels. Nevertheless, we have disagreements over far less important issues. appears to have been fired from the top of the County Records Building by Harry Weatherford, a Dallas County Deputy Sheriff, who was using a sabot to fire a Mannlicher-Carcano bullet from a higher caliber weapon. A FMJ that left a shallow wound and no bullet? That dog don't hunt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 In order for you to advance the position you have defined here, you must (1)be unfamiliar with David W. Mantik's studies of the X-rays, which were published in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), (2) have never read his brilliant synthesis of the medical evidence published in MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), and (3) be unfamiliar with frame 374 of the Zapruder film, which I accented in the color photo section of THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003). That is stunning. Yes Dr. Fetzer, there are vast rabbit holes in the John F. Kennedy Assassination Critical Research Community I don't go down. I'm unfamiliar with the NAA, the acoustic evidence, 95% of the head wound evidence, 95% of the Zap film alteration evidence, and 100% disinterested in all the witness bashing I see from all quarters of various debates. I specialize in evidence that doesn't require a college degree to verify. I specialize in advancing the case for conspiracy a 5 year old could grasp. I try very hard not to argue anything not perfectly evident in the historical record. I find any argument that seeks to establish the case for conspiracy on evidence it takes an "expert" to verify is inherently weak as primary evidence. The back and throat wounds don't require "expertise" to understand. I know that brilliant work is being done making mountains out of evidentiary molehills...meanwhile, the historical record clearly points to CIA Technical Service Division chief Dr. Sidney Gottlieb as a bona fide Person of Interest...oh, shoot, he just died early last year. I didn't try to get a crack at interviewing him, either... From (1) we know the outline of "Area P", which was used to conceal the massive blow-out at the back of the head. From (2) we know that JFK was hit twice in the head, once from in behind and once from in front, which was a frangible (exploding) bullet that blew about half his brains out the back of his head with enormous force. From (3), we can actually see the blow out to the back of his head in a frame that appears to have escaped the notice of those who were engaged in faking the film. This is consistent with the 5% of the head wound evidence with which I am familiar. My argument is that JFK was killed earlier between Z186 and Z255 -- struck first with a blood soluble paralytic and then struck with a blood soluble toxin. The shots to the head (three makes sense to me) were part of the cover-up as much as the killing...JFK was for all intents and purposes doomed by Z255. The simultaneous head shots were for show. They, of course, were preoccupied with frames 313, 314, 315, and 316, which isentirely understandable. The question that arises for Josiah Thompson is how he could possibly have undertaken his study and not even sketched three of those crucial frames and only an opaque version of the fourth. The question that arises for you is how you could be so massively ignorant about the head wound(s) that you appear to know nothing about some of the most important research on them. All I need to know is that there was surgery done to the head. I'll argue that this is a massive distraction from clear evidence that someone CIA-connected struck JFK and paralyzed him in the throat. That is the salient fact of the entire case, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted January 3, 2010 Share Posted January 3, 2010 hi pat..i think you are somewhat cherry picking if you want to compare what the witnesses stated the where. you think or the back of the head blow out just for one check the willis family what each stated the back of the head blew out..also others imo you cannot use some and leave the others out but that is m/o..hope you have a good new year...b Happy New Years to you as well. I used Newman and Zapruder because they are the only close-by witnesses I could find who demonstrated their impression of the wound location on 11-22. Another close-by witness, James Chaney, told a TV interviewer JFK was hit in the face. It is undoubtedly intriguing that none of these men, who saw Kennedy while he was still upright, thought the large head wound was on the back of JFK's head. As far as the Willis family, none of them were quoted till many months later, and they were some distance away. From their perspective, it would have been incredibly hard--probably impossible--to differentiate between an explosion of blood from the top of JFK's head while he was moving away from an explosion of blood from the back of his head. Even so, the FBI report on Marilyn Willis, the most consistent of the family, reported that she saw a "red halo" erupt from the top of Kennedy's head, not the back of his head. Phil Willis, moreover, not only testified that he did not see the impact of the final shot (which he apparently believed was the head shot) he testified that "The minute the third shot was fired, I screamed, hoping a policeman would hear me, to ring that building because it had to come from there." Pat check these out..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmfqDOnZu_Q FRANK O'NEILL RIGHT REAR Interviews - Phil Willis & Family video'sfrom gil jesus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2-_UhD3Qgk witnesses The back of his head blew off http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVhZdryIs_A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh0-2Sthn9A the large back of the head wound.. the Doctor's JFK's head wound http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhWJowvbtxs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P29j9PFZBM wound was in the back of his head to the right... b.. Exactly my point, Bernice. In light of their original statements, the 25 year removed statements of the Willis family are not exactly credible. If you can find records of them describing the shooting and talking about a wound on the back of the head prior to this time, however, I will add them to my database. hi pat ; well we differ again but as usual not nastily...of course if anything comes up i would be delighted to see that you get a copy...meanwhile we all carry on...i certainly hope that you have never recalled any information somewhat with a difference 25 years back...as if so you would now be called not credible...crap on the witnesses time seems to come around so very often in the these threads on the forum...they are always in error and those that say so were not there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 hi pat..i think you are somewhat cherry picking if you want to compare what the witnesses stated the where. you think or the back of the head blow out just for one check the willis family what each stated the back of the head blew out..also others imo you cannot use some and leave the others out but that is m/o..hope you have a good new year...b Happy New Years to you as well. I used Newman and Zapruder because they are the only close-by witnesses I could find who demonstrated their impression of the wound location on 11-22. Another close-by witness, James Chaney, told a TV interviewer JFK was hit in the face. It is undoubtedly intriguing that none of these men, who saw Kennedy while he was still upright, thought the large head wound was on the back of JFK's head. As far as the Willis family, none of them were quoted till many months later, and they were some distance away. From their perspective, it would have been incredibly hard--probably impossible--to differentiate between an explosion of blood from the top of JFK's head while he was moving away from an explosion of blood from the back of his head. Even so, the FBI report on Marilyn Willis, the most consistent of the family, reported that she saw a "red halo" erupt from the top of Kennedy's head, not the back of his head. Phil Willis, moreover, not only testified that he did not see the impact of the final shot (which he apparently believed was the head shot) he testified that "The minute the third shot was fired, I screamed, hoping a policeman would hear me, to ring that building because it had to come from there." Pat check these out..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmfqDOnZu_Q FRANK O'NEILL RIGHT REAR Interviews - Phil Willis & Family video'sfrom gil jesus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2-_UhD3Qgk witnesses The back of his head blew off http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVhZdryIs_A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh0-2Sthn9A the large back of the head wound.. the Doctor's JFK's head wound http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhWJowvbtxs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P29j9PFZBM wound was in the back of his head to the right... b.. Exactly my point, Bernice. In light of their original statements, the 25 year removed statements of the Willis family are not exactly credible. If you can find records of them describing the shooting and talking about a wound on the back of the head prior to this time, however, I will add them to my database. hi pat ; well we differ again but as usual not nastily...of course if anything comes up i would be delighted to see that you get a copy...meanwhile we all carry on...i certainly hope that you have never recalled any information somewhat with a difference 25 years back...as if so you would now be called not credible...crap on the witnesses time seems to come around so very often in the these threads on the forum...they are always in error and those that say so were not there... In my impression, the arrow above points to the hair and scalp overlying the broken bones on the back of Kennedy's skull, and not an actual blow-out where bullet brain and blood exited the skull. As far as eyewitnesses...I agree with you that many refuse to take them seriously, and that if they did they would see that more than one shooter was likely. In chapters 5 thru 9 I go through the eyewitnesses and list their statements in chronological order. This makes it painfully obvious that the closest witnesses, almost to a man, thought the president was hit by the first shot they heard, and hit in the head by one of the two bullets fired bang-bang five or six seconds later. This is extremely damaging to the "official" story. Thus the WC made the conscious decision to ignore the closest witnesses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 (edited) hi pat..i think you are somewhat cherry picking if you want to compare what the witnesses stated the where. you think or the back of the head blow out just for one check the willis family what each stated the back of the head blew out..also others imo you cannot use some and leave the others out but that is m/o..hope you have a good new year...b Happy New Years to you as well. I used Newman and Zapruder because they are the only close-by witnesses I could find who demonstrated their impression of the wound location on 11-22. Another close-by witness, James Chaney, told a TV interviewer JFK was hit in the face. It is undoubtedly intriguing that none of these men, who saw Kennedy while he was still upright, thought the large head wound was on the back of JFK's head. As far as the Willis family, none of them were quoted till many months later, and they were some distance away. From their perspective, it would have been incredibly hard--probably impossible--to differentiate between an explosion of blood from the top of JFK's head while he was moving away from an explosion of blood from the back of his head. Even so, the FBI report on Marilyn Willis, the most consistent of the family, reported that she saw a "red halo" erupt from the top of Kennedy's head, not the back of his head. Phil Willis, moreover, not only testified that he did not see the impact of the final shot (which he apparently believed was the head shot) he testified that "The minute the third shot was fired, I screamed, hoping a policeman would hear me, to ring that building because it had to come from there." Pat check these out..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmfqDOnZu_Q FRANK O'NEILL RIGHT REAR Interviews - Phil Willis & Family video'sfrom gil jesus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2-_UhD3Qgk witnesses The back of his head blew off http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVhZdryIs_A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh0-2Sthn9A the large back of the head wound.. the Doctor's JFK's head wound http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhWJowvbtxs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P29j9PFZBM wound was in the back of his head to the right... b.. Exactly my point, Bernice. In light of their original statements, the 25 year removed statements of the Willis family are not exactly credible. If you can find records of them describing the shooting and talking about a wound on the back of the head prior to this time, however, I will add them to my database. hi pat ; well we differ again but as usual not nastily...of course if anything comes up i would be delighted to see that you get a copy...meanwhile we all carry on...i certainly hope that you have never recalled any information somewhat with a difference 25 years back...as if so you would now be called not credible...crap on the witnesses time seems to come around so very often in the these threads on the forum...they are always in error and those that say so were not there... In my impression, the arrow above points to the hair and scalp overlying the broken bones on the back of Kennedy's skull, and not an actual blow-out where bullet brain and blood exited the skull. As far as eyewitnesses...I agree with you that many refuse to take them seriously, and that if they did they would see that more than one shooter was likely. In chapters 5 thru 9 I go through the eyewitnesses and list their statements in chronological order. This makes it painfully obvious that the closest witnesses, almost to a man, thought the president was hit by the first shot they heard, and hit in the head by one of the two bullets fired bang-bang five or six seconds later. This is extremely damaging to the "official" story. Thus the WC made the conscious decision to ignore the closest witnesses. hi pat have a further lookie at these from the nix film do you also know what is being thrown up into the air after mr.kennedy is hit in the head can't be hair and scalp overlying the broken bones on the back of his scull as you mention re the zapruder film and it cannot be such as dust from the wind. imo...it is his head matter being blown out from the back of his scull..caught on the NIX FILM...imo the w/c is an ugly fairy tale they made up as it went along...ignoring all and every that disagreed...dishonest crap in otherwards was and still is....b Edited January 4, 2010 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted January 4, 2010 Share Posted January 4, 2010 (edited) hi pat..i think you are somewhat cherry picking if you want to compare what the witnesses stated the where. you think or the back of the head blow out just for one check the willis family what each stated the back of the head blew out..also others imo you cannot use some and leave the others out but that is m/o..hope you have a good new year...b Happy New Years to you as well. I used Newman and Zapruder because they are the only close-by witnesses I could find who demonstrated their impression of the wound location on 11-22. Another close-by witness, James Chaney, told a TV interviewer JFK was hit in the face. It is undoubtedly intriguing that none of these men, who saw Kennedy while he was still upright, thought the large head wound was on the back of JFK's head. As far as the Willis family, none of them were quoted till many months later, and they were some distance away. From their perspective, it would have been incredibly hard--probably impossible--to differentiate between an explosion of blood from the top of JFK's head while he was moving away from an explosion of blood from the back of his head. Even so, the FBI report on Marilyn Willis, the most consistent of the family, reported that she saw a "red halo" erupt from the top of Kennedy's head, not the back of his head. Phil Willis, moreover, not only testified that he did not see the impact of the final shot (which he apparently believed was the head shot) he testified that "The minute the third shot was fired, I screamed, hoping a policeman would hear me, to ring that building because it had to come from there." Pat check these out..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bmfqDOnZu_Q FRANK O'NEILL RIGHT REAR Interviews - Phil Willis & Family video'sfrom gil jesus http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c2-_UhD3Qgk witnesses The back of his head blew off http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVhZdryIs_A http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sh0-2Sthn9A the large back of the head wound.. the Doctor's JFK's head wound http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhWJowvbtxs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8P29j9PFZBM wound was in the back of his head to the right... b.. Exactly my point, Bernice. In light of their original statements, the 25 year removed statements of the Willis family are not exactly credible. If you can find records of them describing the shooting and talking about a wound on the back of the head prior to this time, however, I will add them to my database. hi pat ; well we differ again but as usual not nastily...of course if anything comes up i would be delighted to see that you get a copy...meanwhile we all carry on...i certainly hope that you have never recalled any information somewhat with a difference 25 years back...as if so you would now be called not credible...crap on the witnesses time seems to come around so very often in the these threads on the forum...they are always in error and those that say so were not there... In my impression, the arrow above points to the hair and scalp overlying the broken bones on the back of Kennedy's skull, and not an actual blow-out where bullet brain and blood exited the skull. As far as eyewitnesses...I agree with you that many refuse to take them seriously, and that if they did they would see that more than one shooter was likely. In chapters 5 thru 9 I go through the eyewitnesses and list their statements in chronological order. This makes it painfully obvious that the closest witnesses, almost to a man, thought the president was hit by the first shot they heard, and hit in the head by one of the two bullets fired bang-bang five or six seconds later. This is extremely damaging to the "official" story. Thus the WC made the conscious decision to ignore the closest witnesses. hi pat have a further lookie at these from the nix film do you also know what is being thrown up into the air after mr.kennedy is hit in the head can't be hair and scalp overlying the broken bones on the back of his scull as you mention re the zapruder film and it cannot be such as dust from the wind. imo...it is his head matter being blown out from the back of his scull..caught on the NIX FILM...imo the w/c is an ugly fairy tale they made up as it went along...ignoring all and every that disagreed...dishonest crap in otherwards was and still is....b..ps some gifs work some no longer so i have replaced ...one... Edited January 4, 2010 by Bernice Moore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dugan Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Arguably the two most important research works of the Internet Age areZapruder film analyses: Gil Jesus' analysis: "Was JFK Trying to Cough Up a Bullet?" You have got to be kidding me I almost fell out of my chair laughing when watching "Was JFK Trying to Cough Up a Bullet?" at your response. but watching the close up in that youtube vid, it appears that the President's left hand is on his tie (you can see the tie move) and his right hand is covering his mouth. I'm just saying. Could the "round" have been slowed down enough to pierce the windshield, strike him in the throat, and not penetrate any futher? And the trajectory line added to said video that passed over the Governor Connally's left shoudler, causing him to move to his right looks legit. I'd like to know where that trajectory line originates. Thoughts? Thanks to all that have been contributing to this thread. It's great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 (edited) Cliff, Since you profess to be ignorant of most of the evidence in this case, I am surprised that you would reject what I have said out of hand. That is not a rational response. This shot appears to have been fired using a sabot, which is a plastic collar that allows a smaller caliber bullet to be fired from a higher-caliber weapon. In this case, it seems to have been a Mannlicher- Carcano bullet fired from a 30.06. The sabot was actually found by one of the members of a radical fringe group, who gave it to their leader. He was subsequently raided and, when his possessions were returned to him, the only item missing was the sabot. Jim Marrs and I discussed all of this on "The Real Deal", whose archived can be found at radiofetzer.blogspot.com. Its velocity may have been slowed by use of the sabot, for example, or by passing through the backseat of the limo or encountering JFK's back brace. Why don't you check it out? You might even reduce your ignorance ratio. Jim Actually, the shot to the back (about 5 1/2 inches below the collar and to the right of the spinal column) Dr. Fetzer, I divide the John F. Kennedy Assassination Critical Research Community into two definitive types -- those who put JFK's back wound about 5.5" below the collar, and those who place it significantly (2"+) higher. Since you are of the former, I regard you as on the side of the angels. Nevertheless, we have disagreements over far less important issues. appears to have been fired from the top of the County Records Building by Harry Weatherford, a Dallas County Deputy Sheriff, who was using a sabot to fire a Mannlicher-Carcano bullet from a higher caliber weapon. A FMJ that left a shallow wound and no bullet? That dog don't hunt. Edited January 5, 2010 by James H. Fetzer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 Well, the shot to the throat passed through the windshield, which appears to be part of that vast amount of knowledge about the case that you do not possess. Read the statements by Robert Livingston, M.D., and by Richard Dudman in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998). Then read the chapter by Doug Weldon, J.D., about the limousine, MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000). Two small wounds to JFK's face appear to have been caused by tiny shards of glass, which splintered when the bullet passed through the windshield. A fellow named Jim Lewis has been traveling through the South and firing high- velocity bullets through windshields and has discovered that they make the sound of a firecracker when they pass through. I don't know if that impacts your fund of knowledge about the case, but it further confirms that the shot to the throat traversed the windshield. It was traumatizing, not paralyzing. In order for you to advance the position you have defined here, you must (1) be unfamiliar with David W. Mantik's studies of the X-rays, which were published in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), (2) have never read his brilliant synthesis of the medical evidence published in MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), and (3) be unfamiliar with frame 374 of the Zapruder film, which I accented in the color photo section of THE GREAT ZAPRUDER FILM HOAX (2003). That is stunning. Yes Dr. Fetzer, there are vast rabbit holes in the John F. Kennedy Assassination Critical Research Community I don't go down. I'm unfamiliar with the NAA, the acoustic evidence, 95% of the head wound evidence, 95% of the Zap film alteration evidence, and 100% disinterested in all the witness bashing I see from all quarters of various debates. I specialize in evidence that doesn't require a college degree to verify. I specialize in advancing the case for conspiracy a 5 year old could grasp. I try very hard not to argue anything not perfectly evident in the historical record. I find any argument that seeks to establish the case for conspiracy on evidence it takes an "expert" to verify is inherently weak as primary evidence. The back and throat wounds don't require "expertise" to understand. I know that brilliant work is being done making mountains out of evidentiary molehills...meanwhile, the historical record clearly points to CIA Technical Service Division chief Dr. Sidney Gottlieb as a bona fide Person of Interest...oh, shoot, he just died early last year. I didn't try to get a crack at interviewing him, either... From (1) we know the outline of "Area P", which was used to conceal the massive blow-out at the back of the head. From (2) we know that JFK was hit twice in the head, once from in behind and once from in front, which was a frangible (exploding) bullet that blew about half his brains out the back of his head with enormous force. From (3), we can actually see the blow out to the back of his head in a frame that appears to have escaped the notice of those who were engaged in faking the film. This is consistent with the 5% of the head wound evidence with which I am familiar. My argument is that JFK was killed earlier between Z186 and Z255 -- struck first with a blood soluble paralytic and then struck with a blood soluble toxin. The shots to the head (three makes sense to me) were part of the cover-up as much as the killing...JFK was for all intents and purposes doomed by Z255. The simultaneous head shots were for show. They, of course, were preoccupied with frames 313, 314, 315, and 316, which isentirely understandable. The question that arises for Josiah Thompson is how he could possibly have undertaken his study and not even sketched three of those crucial frames and only an opaque version of the fourth. The question that arises for you is how you could be so massively ignorant about the head wound(s) that you appear to know nothing about some of the most important research on them. All I need to know is that there was surgery done to the head. I'll argue that this is a massive distraction from clear evidence that someone CIA-connected struck JFK and paralyzed him in the throat. That is the salient fact of the entire case, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest James H. Fetzer Posted January 5, 2010 Share Posted January 5, 2010 It originated from the above-ground sewer opening on the south side of the Triple Underpass. Try Doug Weldon's chapter on the limousine in MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000) if you want a better understanding of trajectory and its effects. Arguably the two most important research works of the Internet Age areZapruder film analyses: Gil Jesus' analysis: "Was JFK Trying to Cough Up a Bullet?" You have got to be kidding me I almost fell out of my chair laughing when watching "Was JFK Trying to Cough Up a Bullet?" at your response. but watching the close up in that youtube vid, it appears that the President's left hand is on his tie (you can see the tie move) and his right hand is covering his mouth. I'm just saying. Could the "round" have been slowed down enough to pierce the windshield, strike him in the throat, and not penetrate any futher? And the trajectory line added to said video that passed over the Governor Connally's left shoudler, causing him to move to his right looks legit. I'd like to know where that trajectory line originates. Thoughts? Thanks to all that have been contributing to this thread. It's great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 (edited) Well, the shot to the throat passed through the windshield, which appearsto be part of that vast amount of knowledge about the case that you do not possess. I have no knowledge of this case. I don't cite things I know. I cite statements made by people who were there, I cite photographs taken there, and I cite contemporaneous properly prepared official documents. My knowledge or lack thereof is irrelevant. Is the testimony of Rosemary Willis concerning Black Dog Man irrelevant to you? Clear indicator of a shooter, who then "disappeared the next instant" circa Z215 as per Don Roberdeau's "Head Snap" analysis. Is the HSCA photographic panel's identification of a "very distinct straight-line feature" in the region of Black Dog Man's hands in Willis 5 irrelevant to you? Read the statements by Robert Livingston, M.D., and by RichardDudman in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998). Then read the chapter by Doug Weldon, J.D., about the limousine, MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000). Two small wounds to JFK's face appear to have been caused by tiny shards of glass, which splintered when the bullet passed through the windshield. What precludes a separate bullet hitting the windshield? A fellow named Jim Lewis has been traveling through the South and firing high-velocity bullets through windshields and has discovered that they make the sound of a firecracker when they pass through. What precludes a separate bullet hitting the windshield? And this is the same bullet that fragmented upon entering the throat? Since when is the apex of the lung harder tissue than windshield glass? I don't know if that impacts your fund of knowledge about the case, but it further confirms that the shot to the throat traversed the windshield. Your scenario does not preclude another shot hitting the windshield. How many shots were fired at JFK. 8? A dozen? I don't like your odds, Jim, one shot doing all that damage...:-> It was traumatizing, not paralyzing. Not according to the witness and film evidence: Linda Willis, Clint Hill, Nellie Connally, Jackie Kennedy, Betzner 3, Willis 5, Altgens 6 and Z186 thru Z255. Grabbing at his throat. Seized up in two seconds. Quizzical look on his face. Clear evidence of a shot from Black Dog Man circa Z190 that clearly misses the windshield. Consistent with prosectors preliminary conclusions and the neck x-ray. The universe of people with access to blood soluble paralytics in 1963 was very small: Richard Helms, Sidney Gottlieb, Charles Senseney, Mitchell L. WerBell 3. Edited January 6, 2010 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted January 6, 2010 Share Posted January 6, 2010 It originated from the above-ground sewer opening on the south side of the TripleUnderpass. Try Doug Weldon's chapter on the limousine in MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000) if you want a better understanding of trajectory and its effects. I recommend a better understanding of the Dealey Plaza witnesses and photos. A shot from Black Dog Man circa Z190 is well indicated by witness statements and Plaza photography. You have no logical basis to summarily dismiss this evidence, no matter what Doug Weldon speculates. John Dugan: but watching the close up in that youtube vid, it appears that the President's left hand is on his tie (you can see the tie move) and his right hand is covering his mouth. I'm just saying. Could the "round" have been slowed down enough to pierce the windshield, strike him in the throat, and not penetrate any futher? And the trajectory line added to said video that passed over the Governor Connally's left shoudler, causing him to move to his right looks legit. I'd like to know where that trajectory line originates. Thoughts?Thanks to all that have been contributing to this thread. It's great. You're welcome! I disagree with that part of Gil's analysis. There was a clear shot from Black Dog Man at Z190, Rosemary Willis called BDM a "conspicuous" person who seemed to "disappear the next instant," and the HSCA photographic panel identified a "very distinct straight-line feature" in the region of BDM's hands. And on what logical basis is this clear and consistent evidence dismissed? 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