Jump to content
The Education Forum

Another Look at the Shooting


Recommended Posts

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat,

Perhaps I should have stated that differently. People did hear the shot that contributed to the movements at 223-224. In any case they would have heard a silenced shot as well. I would have no issue with the SBT hitting JFK at 190. In fact I have posted this as the first shot on several occasions. See the first shot first hit thread I wrote a few years ago. It makes an excellent point in showing how that first shot related to the Wilis photo at 202, and also shows the shot timing in relation to Betzner.

Robert is incorrect at any time when he says a suppressed shot would not be heard. See the information provided on suppressors in my original post.

So if we are now to say that this shot happened at say 195, then Roberts shooter had even less time to remove his silencer and reacquire the target.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 67
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I wrote umbrella rather than umbrella man, and I don't know if JFK could see the umbrella from there. The overexposed frame, a lean rather than fall et.c. are suggested alternatives. Sighting an umbrella is suggested as a reason for the lean over to look.

Well, it's an interesting thought. And there is quite a tale to be told about UM and his dark complected buddy. But, I can't help but notice that these reactions began at almost the exact instant that the limo pulled in front of the Daltex building.

Bob

Sure Bob, like I said an interesting study. Just throwing thoughts into the pot. I kinda think that if a credible alternative exists then that is an important part of a process. Ultimately it's a matter of Legal Teams ( a la BK and co) using irrefutable and near irrefutable evidence that will win the day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat,

Perhaps I should have stated that differently. People did hear the shot that contributed to the movements at 223-224. In any case they would have heard a silenced shot as well. I would have no issue with the SBT hitting JFK at 190. In fact I have posted this as the first shot on several occasions. See the first shot first hit thread I wrote a few years ago. It makes an excellent point in showing how that first shot related to the Wilis photo at 202, and also shows the shot timing in relation to Betzner.

Robert is incorrect at any time when he says a suppressed shot would not be heard. See the information provided on suppressors in my original post.

So if we are now to say that this shot happened at say 195, then Roberts shooter had even less time to remove his silencer and reacquire the target.

So tell me, Michael. Since the large majority of witnesses only heard one shot prior to the very end of the attack, do you think it is more likely that they would overlook a suppressed shot or an unsuppressed shot?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat, I don't know if you've had a chance to view the video or not, but please let let me clarify what I am saying.

When Oswald's rifle was tested by acoustics experts they discovered that it generated a 130 decibel shock wave within a ten foot radius of the bullet and a muzzle blast that to the ears of the limo passengers, would have generated a level ranging from 115-130db, depending on the distance from the rifle. Other high powered rifles are are known to be twice that loud.

That was many times louder than the level that is known to generate visible startle reactions, which is exactly what we see, following the known shot at 312 and the shot at 285, which I have been talking about for many years. But there were no startle reactions at all, prior to 285. People looked around with a "what was that" kind of reaction, but that was much different than the dramatic reactions following those other two shots.

The lack of startle reactions, combined with the large consensus who only heard one early report (which most did not recognize then, as a gunshot) strongly suggests, that the early shots were suppressed. They simply could not have come from Oswald's or any other high powered rifle.

I firmly believe that JFK and Connally were either hit by one bullet at 223, or they were hit almost simultaneously, by a semi-automatic weapon. But whichever it was, nobody heard the shot(s), including John Connally.

JFK had to have been hit at or very close to 223, Pat. His rising arms had nothing to do with reaching up to his neck wound. It was entirely a neurological reaction, which means it had to be VERY fast. His right hand and arm began to rise at 226, which is a perfect match with a shot at 223. That has to trump the subjective recollections of witnesses trying to remember where the limo was when they heard the first shot. I suspect that each of those people actually heard the shot at 160 and it just took a small amount of time to sink in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat,

Perhaps I should have stated that differently. People did hear the shot that contributed to the movements at 223-224. In any case they would have heard a silenced shot as well. I would have no issue with the SBT hitting JFK at 190. In fact I have posted this as the first shot on several occasions. See the first shot first hit thread I wrote a few years ago. It makes an excellent point in showing how that first shot related to the Wilis photo at 202, and also shows the shot timing in relation to Betzner.

Robert is incorrect at any time when he says a suppressed shot would not be heard. See the information provided on suppressors in my original post.

So if we are now to say that this shot happened at say 195, then Roberts shooter had even less time to remove his silencer and reacquire the target.

So tell me, Michael. Since the large majority of witnesses only heard one shot prior to the very end of the attack, do you think it is more likely that they would overlook a suppressed shot or an unsuppressed shot?

They would over look neither Robert, as I clearly informed you that suppressors emit over 100db blast in high power rifles, even if they are using sub sonic ammo.

The very notion that these would not be audible is evidence that you have no clue what you are talking about in regard to firearms and ammo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat, I don't know if you've had a chance to view the video or not, but please let let me clarify what I am saying.

When Oswald's rifle was tested by acoustics experts they discovered that it generated a 130 decibel shock wave within a ten foot radius of the bullet and a muzzle blast that to the ears of the limo passengers, would have generated a level ranging from 115-130db, depending on the distance from the rifle. Other high powered rifles are are known to be twice that loud.

That was many times louder than the level that is known to generate visible startle reactions, which is exactly what we see, following the known shot at 312 and the shot at 285, which I have been talking about for many years. But there were no startle reactions at all, prior to 285. People looked around with a "what was that" kind of reaction, but that was much different than the dramatic reactions following those other two shots.

The lack of startle reactions, combined with the large consensus who only heard one early report (which most did not recognize then, as a gunshot) strongly suggests, that the early shots were suppressed. They simply could not have come from Oswald's or any other high powered rifle.

I firmly believe that JFK and Connally were either hit by one bullet at 223, or they were hit almost simultaneously, by a semi-automatic weapon. But whichever it was, nobody heard the shot(s), including John Connally.

JFK had to have been hit at or very close to 223, Pat. His rising arms had nothing to do with reaching up to his neck wound. It was entirely a neurological reaction, which means it had to be VERY fast. His right hand and arm began to rise at 226, which is a perfect match with a shot at 223. That has to trump the subjective recollections of witnesses trying to remember where the limo was when they heard the first shot. I suspect that each of those people actually heard the shot at 160 and it just took a small amount of time to sink in.

Again, even suppressed high power rifle shots are over 100db, using sub sonic ammo. Regular ammo would be much louder.

These shots would have been fully audible in the plaza and heard by many, especially those closest to the shooter. I would also suggest that the dictabelt would certainly have picked these up.

The firearms factoid of suppressed shots is the easiest of myths to disprove.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat, I don't know if you've had a chance to view the video or not, but please let let me clarify what I am saying.

When Oswald's rifle was tested by acoustics experts they discovered that it generated a 130 decibel shock wave within a ten foot radius of the bullet and a muzzle blast that to the ears of the limo passengers, would have generated a level ranging from 115-130db, depending on the distance from the rifle. Other high powered rifles are are known to be twice that loud.

That was many times louder than the level that is known to generate visible startle reactions, which is exactly what we see, following the known shot at 312 and the shot at 285, which I have been talking about for many years. But there were no startle reactions at all, prior to 285. People looked around with a "what was that" kind of reaction, but that was much different than the dramatic reactions following those other two shots.

The lack of startle reactions, combined with the large consensus who only heard one early report (which most did not recognize then, as a gunshot) strongly suggests, that the early shots were suppressed. They simply could not have come from Oswald's or any other high powered rifle.

I firmly believe that JFK and Connally were either hit by one bullet at 223, or they were hit almost simultaneously, by a semi-automatic weapon. But whichever it was, nobody heard the shot(s), including John Connally.

JFK had to have been hit at or very close to 223, Pat. His rising arms had nothing to do with reaching up to his neck wound. It was entirely a neurological reaction, which means it had to be VERY fast. His right hand and arm began to rise at 226, which is a perfect match with a shot at 223. That has to trump the subjective recollections of witnesses trying to remember where the limo was when they heard the first shot. I suspect that each of those people actually heard the shot at 160 and it just took a small amount of time to sink in.

Again, even suppressed high power rifle shots are over 100db, using sub sonic ammo. Regular ammo would be much louder.

These shots would have been fully audible in the plaza and heard by many, especially those closest to the shooter. I would also suggest that the dictabelt would certainly have picked these up.

The firearms factoid of suppressed shots is the easiest of myths to disprove.

Mike, I've done a bit of reading on this topic as well, and I think you are incorrect. The sound of a suppressed shot would be lost in the sounds of the cheering crowd and motorcycles. Surprisingly, I found support for this in a most unexpected place...

From chapter 20 at patspeer.com:

"After my study of the eyewitness statements and Zapruder film suggested that at least one burst of shots--the one (or two) shots hitting Kennedy and Connally around frame 224--was not heard by the crowd, I decided to read up on the use of silencers and subsonic ammunition. While some "experts", including the FBI's Robert Frazier in the trial of Clay Shaw, have been dismissive about the use of a silencer on 11-22-63, claiming the shots would still have been heard, they ignore that the use of a silencer still had its advantages. Vincent Bugliosi, in his book Reclaiming History, admits as much. In arguing that Oswald could not have been a hit man, because a hit man would have used a silencer, he unwittingly undercut many of his supporters, who'd been insisting for years that the use of a silencer was impractical and unlikely. On page 1452, Bugliosi quotes an unnamed LAPD firearms expert and asserts that by 1963 silencers were sophisticated enough to reduce the sound of a rifle to nothing louder than "the hitting of a pile of wood with a hammer." Bugliosi's expert said, furthermore, that state-of-the-art silencers at the time "probably wouldn't have even been heard above the background noise of the motorcade and crowd."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat, I don't know if you've had a chance to view the video or not, but please let let me clarify what I am saying.

When Oswald's rifle was tested by acoustics experts they discovered that it generated a 130 decibel shock wave within a ten foot radius of the bullet and a muzzle blast that to the ears of the limo passengers, would have generated a level ranging from 115-130db, depending on the distance from the rifle. Other high powered rifles are are known to be twice that loud.

That was many times louder than the level that is known to generate visible startle reactions, which is exactly what we see, following the known shot at 312 and the shot at 285, which I have been talking about for many years. But there were no startle reactions at all, prior to 285. People looked around with a "what was that" kind of reaction, but that was much different than the dramatic reactions following those other two shots.

The lack of startle reactions, combined with the large consensus who only heard one early report (which most did not recognize then, as a gunshot) strongly suggests, that the early shots were suppressed. They simply could not have come from Oswald's or any other high powered rifle.

I firmly believe that JFK and Connally were either hit by one bullet at 223, or they were hit almost simultaneously, by a semi-automatic weapon. But whichever it was, nobody heard the shot(s), including John Connally.

JFK had to have been hit at or very close to 223, Pat. His rising arms had nothing to do with reaching up to his neck wound. It was entirely a neurological reaction, which means it had to be VERY fast. His right hand and arm began to rise at 226, which is a perfect match with a shot at 223. That has to trump the subjective recollections of witnesses trying to remember where the limo was when they heard the first shot. I suspect that each of those people actually heard the shot at 160 and it just took a small amount of time to sink in.

Again, even suppressed high power rifle shots are over 100db, using sub sonic ammo. Regular ammo would be much louder.

These shots would have been fully audible in the plaza and heard by many, especially those closest to the shooter. I would also suggest that the dictabelt would certainly have picked these up.

The firearms factoid of suppressed shots is the easiest of myths to disprove.

Michael, we have been through all this before. Even the Warren Commission admitted that most witnesses only heard one early shot and then closely bunched shots at the end.

Therefore, unless you believe that was all there were, then at least one of those early shots went totally unheard. And the one that was heard, wasn't even recognized by most witnesses as a real gunshot. And that makes perfect sense, since we can see that no-one was startled by any of the shots prior to frame 290-291.

The individuals in the limousine further corroborated that fact. Mrs. Connally for example, was very specific that she only heard one shot, until after she looked back and saw JFK in distress and after he had begun to shout, which is the same thing that Mrs. Kennedy said.

Greer said he heard one "noise" and then no other shots prior to near simultaneous shots at the end.

Kellerman heard one shot and then nothing until a "flurry" at the end of the attack.

Therefore, Michael, if there was more than one early shot, which we both acknowledge, then at least one of them went unheard.

And finally, as we discussed before, there is no proof that the early shots came from a high powered rifle, or any kind of rifle for that matter. The quiet shots were only fired when the limo was relatively close to the Daltex. This video shows a guy using both a suppressed pistol and a suppressed rifle. And it sounds like the recording level is set normally.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfPO6cFstTk

I have no problem believing that witnesses could have overlooked shots from either of those weapons, especially with the crowd noise and motorcycles.

What IS outrageous, is to imagine that they overlooked the report and shock wave of an unsuppressed, high powered rifle, which would have been many times louder.

Had Oswald fired the early shots, Michael, they would have been the loudest of all. The limo passengers would have been severely startled, the Secret Service would have jumped into action immediately, and people would have been screaming and diving to the ground all over Dealey Plaza.

Those early shots could not have been fired by Oswald.

Edited by Robert Harris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat, I don't know if you've had a chance to view the video or not, but please let let me clarify what I am saying.

When Oswald's rifle was tested by acoustics experts they discovered that it generated a 130 decibel shock wave within a ten foot radius of the bullet and a muzzle blast that to the ears of the limo passengers, would have generated a level ranging from 115-130db, depending on the distance from the rifle. Other high powered rifles are are known to be twice that loud.

That was many times louder than the level that is known to generate visible startle reactions, which is exactly what we see, following the known shot at 312 and the shot at 285, which I have been talking about for many years. But there were no startle reactions at all, prior to 285. People looked around with a "what was that" kind of reaction, but that was much different than the dramatic reactions following those other two shots.

The lack of startle reactions, combined with the large consensus who only heard one early report (which most did not recognize then, as a gunshot) strongly suggests, that the early shots were suppressed. They simply could not have come from Oswald's or any other high powered rifle.

I firmly believe that JFK and Connally were either hit by one bullet at 223, or they were hit almost simultaneously, by a semi-automatic weapon. But whichever it was, nobody heard the shot(s), including John Connally.

JFK had to have been hit at or very close to 223, Pat. His rising arms had nothing to do with reaching up to his neck wound. It was entirely a neurological reaction, which means it had to be VERY fast. His right hand and arm began to rise at 226, which is a perfect match with a shot at 223. That has to trump the subjective recollections of witnesses trying to remember where the limo was when they heard the first shot. I suspect that each of those people actually heard the shot at 160 and it just took a small amount of time to sink in.

Again, even suppressed high power rifle shots are over 100db, using sub sonic ammo. Regular ammo would be much louder.

These shots would have been fully audible in the plaza and heard by many, especially those closest to the shooter. I would also suggest that the dictabelt would certainly have picked these up.

The firearms factoid of suppressed shots is the easiest of myths to disprove.

Mike, I've done a bit of reading on this topic as well, and I think you are incorrect. The sound of a suppressed shot would be lost in the sounds of the cheering crowd and motorcycles. Surprisingly, I found support for this in a most unexpected place...

From chapter 20 at patspeer.com:

"After my study of the eyewitness statements and Zapruder film suggested that at least one burst of shots--the one (or two) shots hitting Kennedy and Connally around frame 224--was not heard by the crowd, I decided to read up on the use of silencers and subsonic ammunition. While some "experts", including the FBI's Robert Frazier in the trial of Clay Shaw, have been dismissive about the use of a silencer on 11-22-63, claiming the shots would still have been heard, they ignore that the use of a silencer still had its advantages. Vincent Bugliosi, in his book Reclaiming History, admits as much. In arguing that Oswald could not have been a hit man, because a hit man would have used a silencer, he unwittingly undercut many of his supporters, who'd been insisting for years that the use of a silencer was impractical and unlikely. On page 1452, Bugliosi quotes an unnamed LAPD firearms expert and asserts that by 1963 silencers were sophisticated enough to reduce the sound of a rifle to nothing louder than "the hitting of a pile of wood with a hammer." Bugliosi's expert said, furthermore, that state-of-the-art silencers at the time "probably wouldn't have even been heard above the background noise of the motorcade and crowd."

Pat,

We do not even with today's technology have silencers that would make a high powered rifle shot sound like hitting a wood pile with a hammer.

There are silencers that can do this, but not with high power rifles. Sub9 configurations, sure, .22 low velocity ammo, sure. High powered rifle ammunition no.

The very best technology we have today can barely make subsonic ammo dampen to 100dB.

This certainly would have been heard.

http://www.sandv.com/downloads/0908rasm.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat, I don't know if you've had a chance to view the video or not, but please let let me clarify what I am saying.

When Oswald's rifle was tested by acoustics experts they discovered that it generated a 130 decibel shock wave within a ten foot radius of the bullet and a muzzle blast that to the ears of the limo passengers, would have generated a level ranging from 115-130db, depending on the distance from the rifle. Other high powered rifles are are known to be twice that loud.

That was many times louder than the level that is known to generate visible startle reactions, which is exactly what we see, following the known shot at 312 and the shot at 285, which I have been talking about for many years. But there were no startle reactions at all, prior to 285. People looked around with a "what was that" kind of reaction, but that was much different than the dramatic reactions following those other two shots.

The lack of startle reactions, combined with the large consensus who only heard one early report (which most did not recognize then, as a gunshot) strongly suggests, that the early shots were suppressed. They simply could not have come from Oswald's or any other high powered rifle.

I firmly believe that JFK and Connally were either hit by one bullet at 223, or they were hit almost simultaneously, by a semi-automatic weapon. But whichever it was, nobody heard the shot(s), including John Connally.

JFK had to have been hit at or very close to 223, Pat. His rising arms had nothing to do with reaching up to his neck wound. It was entirely a neurological reaction, which means it had to be VERY fast. His right hand and arm began to rise at 226, which is a perfect match with a shot at 223. That has to trump the subjective recollections of witnesses trying to remember where the limo was when they heard the first shot. I suspect that each of those people actually heard the shot at 160 and it just took a small amount of time to sink in.

Again, even suppressed high power rifle shots are over 100db, using sub sonic ammo. Regular ammo would be much louder.

These shots would have been fully audible in the plaza and heard by many, especially those closest to the shooter. I would also suggest that the dictabelt would certainly have picked these up.

The firearms factoid of suppressed shots is the easiest of myths to disprove.

Mike, I've done a bit of reading on this topic as well, and I think you are incorrect. The sound of a suppressed shot would be lost in the sounds of the cheering crowd and motorcycles. Surprisingly, I found support for this in a most unexpected place...

From chapter 20 at patspeer.com:

"After my study of the eyewitness statements and Zapruder film suggested that at least one burst of shots--the one (or two) shots hitting Kennedy and Connally around frame 224--was not heard by the crowd, I decided to read up on the use of silencers and subsonic ammunition. While some "experts", including the FBI's Robert Frazier in the trial of Clay Shaw, have been dismissive about the use of a silencer on 11-22-63, claiming the shots would still have been heard, they ignore that the use of a silencer still had its advantages. Vincent Bugliosi, in his book Reclaiming History, admits as much. In arguing that Oswald could not have been a hit man, because a hit man would have used a silencer, he unwittingly undercut many of his supporters, who'd been insisting for years that the use of a silencer was impractical and unlikely. On page 1452, Bugliosi quotes an unnamed LAPD firearms expert and asserts that by 1963 silencers were sophisticated enough to reduce the sound of a rifle to nothing louder than "the hitting of a pile of wood with a hammer." Bugliosi's expert said, furthermore, that state-of-the-art silencers at the time "probably wouldn't have even been heard above the background noise of the motorcade and crowd."

Pat,

We do not even with today's technology have silencers that would make a high powered rifle shot sound like hitting a wood pile with a hammer.

There are silencers that can do this, but not with high power rifles. Sub9 configurations, sure, .22 low velocity ammo, sure. High powered rifle ammunition no.

The very best technology we have today can barely make subsonic ammo dampen to 100dB.

This certainly would have been heard.

http://www.sandv.com/downloads/0908rasm.pdf

well, there's the problem, Mike. You're thinking inside the box. Who says the bullet or bullets striking JFK and Connally circa 223 were fired from a high-powered rifle? The CIA's manual on assassinations says a .22 firing subsonic ammunition oughta work just fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, we have been through all this before. Even the Warren Commission admitted that most witnesses only heard one early shot and then closely bunched shots at the end.

Actually it was one early shot and then two close shots at the end.

EX. Miss WILLIS. Yes; I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time, and then there were two real fast bullets together.

Therefore, unless you believe that was all there were, then at least one of those early shots went totally unheard. And the one that was heard, wasn't even recognized by most witnesses as a real gunshot. And that makes perfect sense, since we can see that no-one was startled by any of the shots prior to frame 290-291.

I have to tell you. In all the different accounts I have read about the Z film. I have NEVER in my life, heard anyone say that they could not see anyone startled by shots before 290-291. I think I am going to have to hang onto this as another epic quote. I guess you just missed the whole 223 -224 episode?

Anyhow more to the point of your question.

Of course thats all I believe there was. 3 Shots. There is no other ballistic evidence to support any other shots, or shooters.

As for most witnesses not recognizing the first shot. Why would this surprise anyone? It is not like they were going to a trick shooting event. They never expected to hear gunfire. So when one says the first shot did not sound like gunfire, I can easily understand why. This does not take a huge leap into the world of silencers and other subversiveness.

The individuals in the limousine further corroborated that fact. Mrs. Connally for example, was very specific that she only heard one shot, until after she looked back and saw JFK in distress and after he had begun to shout, which is the same thing that Mrs. Kennedy said.

Greer said he heard one "noise" and then no other shots prior to near simultaneous shots at the end.

Kellerman heard one shot and then nothing until a "flurry" at the end of the attack.

Therefore, Michael, if there was more than one early shot, which we both acknowledge, then at least one of them went unheard.

I do not recall acknowledging "more than one early shot", but nice try. Of course the witnesses only heard one shot by this time, that's all that had been fired. Definitely not rocket science.

And finally, as we discussed before, there is no proof that the early shots came from a high powered rifle, or any kind of rifle for that matter. The quiet shots were only fired when the limo was relatively close to the Daltex. This video shows a guy using both a suppressed pistol and a suppressed rifle. And it sounds like the recording level is set normally.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfPO6cFstTk

So now you are changing your position from a rifle to a pistol. No worries there. The video you posted is of a .22 caliber rifle, and a .22 caliber pistol, neither of which even comes close to representing a High powered rifle that your videos and past comments portray. I suggest before you get to carried away that you check the ballistic properties for the .22 using suppressor equipment, and also consult someone with experience on the insanity of engaging a target in a moving vehicle from an elevated position with a pistol. That prospect is humerus. No assassin in their right mind is going to engage a target at over 100' with a .22 caliber pistol. By the way, I have no recollection of us discussing anything involving a pistol in the past, as you claim. If we had I assure you you would have met with the same reply.

I also find it entertaining to see your theory evolve. But you should be commended for this, as correction is the only way you will ever get the truth.

I have no problem believing that witnesses could have overlooked shots from either of those weapons, especially with the crowd noise and motorcycles.

Again, it is pure ballistic idiocy to think that someone would engage a target with the types of weapons in your video. Especially from an elevated position over 100' away from the target in a moving vehicle.

What IS outrageous, is to imagine that they overlooked the report and shock wave of an unsuppressed, high powered rifle, which would have been many times louder.

Ah the winds of change. Its good to see that some of what I have been teaching you is sinking in. This is a complete reverse from your video in which you adamantly say that the reason no one heard the shots is that the rifle was suppressed. You then go on to tell us in great detail how it would be a disadvantage for someone to Assemble a rifle at the target area. So we know you were talking about a high powered rifle, as you go to great lengths to discuss this.

Had Oswald fired the early shots, Michael, they would have been the loudest of all. The limo passengers would have been severely startled, the Secret Service would have jumped into action immediately, and people would have been screaming and diving to the ground all over Dealey Plaza.

First let me say that in respect to BK I will not use the term Oswald in referencing the shooter. Bill makes a valid point that there is no 100% proof that Oswald was the shooter. I believe the evidence strongly points to Oswald, and Bill knows this. But out of respect for his work I will defer.

I will say that there is strong evidence that an unsuppressed weapon fired ALL the shots.

The reason these shots that you alleged were not heard, is simply because they did not happen.

But alas you are confusing the issue here. First you say that JFK reacted to a shot in Towner. The in the 160 area Jackie is reacting in turning towards JFK. Then you say JFK is reacting to a shot in the late 180's early 190's by grimacing and shielding his face, which he is clearly not doing per the Z film and the Witness testimony. Now you are saying that no one reacted to these shots.

Which is it?

Those early shots could not have been fired by Oswald.

Quite correct, they were not fired by anyone.

For clarification to those that might not understand my position. I believe there are two possibilities. I believe that the first shot fired was in the mid 190's. Hill, Willis, Betzner, and a host of others seems to confirm this. I believe that JBC is hit in the early 230's, and of course the head shot at 313.

I believe this is one scenario.

The next one is very difficult for me to admit. But it is the SBT. I never in my life have thought I would be the one saying that, but in light of recent research, I think it is a viable possibility far more than I ever had before.

For now I am sticking with 3 shots 3 hits, but I am giving the SBT a considerable thought.

Please lets not let this get off into an SBT discussion, there is always another thread for that, I just simply wanted those who do not know to understand my position.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat, I don't know if you've had a chance to view the video or not, but please let let me clarify what I am saying.

When Oswald's rifle was tested by acoustics experts they discovered that it generated a 130 decibel shock wave within a ten foot radius of the bullet and a muzzle blast that to the ears of the limo passengers, would have generated a level ranging from 115-130db, depending on the distance from the rifle. Other high powered rifles are are known to be twice that loud.

That was many times louder than the level that is known to generate visible startle reactions, which is exactly what we see, following the known shot at 312 and the shot at 285, which I have been talking about for many years. But there were no startle reactions at all, prior to 285. People looked around with a "what was that" kind of reaction, but that was much different than the dramatic reactions following those other two shots.

The lack of startle reactions, combined with the large consensus who only heard one early report (which most did not recognize then, as a gunshot) strongly suggests, that the early shots were suppressed. They simply could not have come from Oswald's or any other high powered rifle.

I firmly believe that JFK and Connally were either hit by one bullet at 223, or they were hit almost simultaneously, by a semi-automatic weapon. But whichever it was, nobody heard the shot(s), including John Connally.

JFK had to have been hit at or very close to 223, Pat. His rising arms had nothing to do with reaching up to his neck wound. It was entirely a neurological reaction, which means it had to be VERY fast. His right hand and arm began to rise at 226, which is a perfect match with a shot at 223. That has to trump the subjective recollections of witnesses trying to remember where the limo was when they heard the first shot. I suspect that each of those people actually heard the shot at 160 and it just took a small amount of time to sink in.

Again, even suppressed high power rifle shots are over 100db, using sub sonic ammo. Regular ammo would be much louder.

These shots would have been fully audible in the plaza and heard by many, especially those closest to the shooter. I would also suggest that the dictabelt would certainly have picked these up.

The firearms factoid of suppressed shots is the easiest of myths to disprove.

Mike, I've done a bit of reading on this topic as well, and I think you are incorrect. The sound of a suppressed shot would be lost in the sounds of the cheering crowd and motorcycles. Surprisingly, I found support for this in a most unexpected place...

From chapter 20 at patspeer.com:

"After my study of the eyewitness statements and Zapruder film suggested that at least one burst of shots--the one (or two) shots hitting Kennedy and Connally around frame 224--was not heard by the crowd, I decided to read up on the use of silencers and subsonic ammunition. While some "experts", including the FBI's Robert Frazier in the trial of Clay Shaw, have been dismissive about the use of a silencer on 11-22-63, claiming the shots would still have been heard, they ignore that the use of a silencer still had its advantages. Vincent Bugliosi, in his book Reclaiming History, admits as much. In arguing that Oswald could not have been a hit man, because a hit man would have used a silencer, he unwittingly undercut many of his supporters, who'd been insisting for years that the use of a silencer was impractical and unlikely. On page 1452, Bugliosi quotes an unnamed LAPD firearms expert and asserts that by 1963 silencers were sophisticated enough to reduce the sound of a rifle to nothing louder than "the hitting of a pile of wood with a hammer." Bugliosi's expert said, furthermore, that state-of-the-art silencers at the time "probably wouldn't have even been heard above the background noise of the motorcade and crowd."

Pat,

We do not even with today's technology have silencers that would make a high powered rifle shot sound like hitting a wood pile with a hammer.

There are silencers that can do this, but not with high power rifles. Sub9 configurations, sure, .22 low velocity ammo, sure. High powered rifle ammunition no.

The very best technology we have today can barely make subsonic ammo dampen to 100dB.

This certainly would have been heard.

http://www.sandv.com/downloads/0908rasm.pdf

well, there's the problem, Mike. You're thinking inside the box. Who says the bullet or bullets striking JFK and Connally circa 223 were fired from a high-powered rifle? The CIA's manual on assassinations says a .22 firing subsonic ammunition oughta work just fine.

Pat,

I address the high power rifle because that is what Robert speculates on in his video.

I would suggest a close look at the ballistics involved in a .22 firing subsonic ammo at a target over 100 feet away. I think you will find humor in that idea, and if you think that is comical wait until you read about subsonic .22 pistol shooting.

The idea of engaging a target over 100 feet away with this type of weapon is ridiculous. It would be ridiculous to consider with even something as substantial as an MP5 suppressed and shooting sub 9mm rounds.

Standard subsonic .22 ammo is 38 grains and about 1050 Fps@ 93 ft lbs This is UNSUPPRESSED.

Why not just shoot with a pellet gun? Walther makes many in the .22 cal range that fire at 1000 fps.

Specifications:

Model: Falcon Hunter

Caliber: .22

Velocity: 1000FPS

Ammo Type: Pellets

Body Components: Polymer Stock with Metal Barrel and Receiver

Overall Length: 49.00 in

Barrel Length: 19.75 in

Barrel Style: Rifled

Fire Mode: Single Shot

Cocking Effort: 45 lbs

Trigger Effort: 5.2 lbs

Trigger Adjust: Single Stage

Action: Break Barrel

Power plant: Spring-piston

Gun Weight: 8.25 lbs

Front Sight: Fiber Optic

I just can not for the life of me picture an assassin with something akin to a pellet gun.

Edited by Mike Williams
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mike, I did notice a mistake in your last critique of Robert's scenario. It is a point on which Robert is absolutely correct.

People did not hear a shot at frame 223/224. People watching Kennedy at the time of the first shot. e.g Woodward, Powers, said he was waving and then jerked to the left as a response to the shot. This happens BEFORE Kennedy goes behind the sign in the Z-film.

As a response to this fact, the HSCA theorized the single-bullet shot hit Kennedy circa frame 190.

It was only through the shenanigans of Lattimer and Posner that the SBT got moved back to 224. In his book Bugliosi plays the WC 210-224 card, and never acknowledges that he presented a photography expert to the jury in his 1986 mock trial, to prove to them Kennedy was hit around 190.

If you're as independent-minded as I suspect you are, you'll break away from the current LNT group-think, and realize that the currently proposed dogma--a first shot miss at 160, SBT at 224, and a head shot at 313, is Malarkey with a capital M.

Who knows? Maybe you'll be the first LNT to come up with a scenario that makes sense?

Pat, I don't know if you've had a chance to view the video or not, but please let let me clarify what I am saying.

When Oswald's rifle was tested by acoustics experts they discovered that it generated a 130 decibel shock wave within a ten foot radius of the bullet and a muzzle blast that to the ears of the limo passengers, would have generated a level ranging from 115-130db, depending on the distance from the rifle. Other high powered rifles are are known to be twice that loud.

That was many times louder than the level that is known to generate visible startle reactions, which is exactly what we see, following the known shot at 312 and the shot at 285, which I have been talking about for many years. But there were no startle reactions at all, prior to 285. People looked around with a "what was that" kind of reaction, but that was much different than the dramatic reactions following those other two shots.

The lack of startle reactions, combined with the large consensus who only heard one early report (which most did not recognize then, as a gunshot) strongly suggests, that the early shots were suppressed. They simply could not have come from Oswald's or any other high powered rifle.

I firmly believe that JFK and Connally were either hit by one bullet at 223, or they were hit almost simultaneously, by a semi-automatic weapon. But whichever it was, nobody heard the shot(s), including John Connally.

JFK had to have been hit at or very close to 223, Pat. His rising arms had nothing to do with reaching up to his neck wound. It was entirely a neurological reaction, which means it had to be VERY fast. His right hand and arm began to rise at 226, which is a perfect match with a shot at 223. That has to trump the subjective recollections of witnesses trying to remember where the limo was when they heard the first shot. I suspect that each of those people actually heard the shot at 160 and it just took a small amount of time to sink in.

Again, even suppressed high power rifle shots are over 100db, using sub sonic ammo. Regular ammo would be much louder.

These shots would have been fully audible in the plaza and heard by many, especially those closest to the shooter. I would also suggest that the dictabelt would certainly have picked these up.

The firearms factoid of suppressed shots is the easiest of myths to disprove.

Mike, I've done a bit of reading on this topic as well, and I think you are incorrect. The sound of a suppressed shot would be lost in the sounds of the cheering crowd and motorcycles. Surprisingly, I found support for this in a most unexpected place...

From chapter 20 at patspeer.com:

"After my study of the eyewitness statements and Zapruder film suggested that at least one burst of shots--the one (or two) shots hitting Kennedy and Connally around frame 224--was not heard by the crowd, I decided to read up on the use of silencers and subsonic ammunition. While some "experts", including the FBI's Robert Frazier in the trial of Clay Shaw, have been dismissive about the use of a silencer on 11-22-63, claiming the shots would still have been heard, they ignore that the use of a silencer still had its advantages. Vincent Bugliosi, in his book Reclaiming History, admits as much. In arguing that Oswald could not have been a hit man, because a hit man would have used a silencer, he unwittingly undercut many of his supporters, who'd been insisting for years that the use of a silencer was impractical and unlikely. On page 1452, Bugliosi quotes an unnamed LAPD firearms expert and asserts that by 1963 silencers were sophisticated enough to reduce the sound of a rifle to nothing louder than "the hitting of a pile of wood with a hammer." Bugliosi's expert said, furthermore, that state-of-the-art silencers at the time "probably wouldn't have even been heard above the background noise of the motorcade and crowd."

Pat,

We do not even with today's technology have silencers that would make a high powered rifle shot sound like hitting a wood pile with a hammer.

There are silencers that can do this, but not with high power rifles. Sub9 configurations, sure, .22 low velocity ammo, sure. High powered rifle ammunition no.

The very best technology we have today can barely make subsonic ammo dampen to 100dB.

This certainly would have been heard.

http://www.sandv.com/downloads/0908rasm.pdf

well, there's the problem, Mike. You're thinking inside the box. Who says the bullet or bullets striking JFK and Connally circa 223 were fired from a high-powered rifle? The CIA's manual on assassinations says a .22 firing subsonic ammunition oughta work just fine.

Pat,

I address the high power rifle because that is what Robert speculates on in his video.

I would suggest a close look at the ballistics involved in a .22 firing subsonic ammo at a target over 100 feet away. I think you will find humor in that idea, and if you think that is comical wait until you read about subsonic .22 pistol shooting.

The idea of engaging a target over 100 feet away with this type of weapon is ridiculous. It would be ridiculous to consider with even something as substantial as an MP5 suppressed and shooting sub 9mm rounds.

Standard subsonic .22 ammo is 38 grains and about 1050 Fps@ 93 ft lbs This is UNSUPPRESSED.

Why not just shoot with a pellet gun? Walther makes many in the .22 cal range that fire at 1000 fps.

Specifications:

Model: Falcon Hunter

Caliber: .22

Velocity: 1000FPS

Ammo Type: Pellets

Body Components: Polymer Stock with Metal Barrel and Receiver

Overall Length: 49.00 in

Barrel Length: 19.75 in

Barrel Style: Rifled

Fire Mode: Single Shot

Cocking Effort: 45 lbs

Trigger Effort: 5.2 lbs

Trigger Adjust: Single Stage

Action: Break Barrel

Power plant: Spring-piston

Gun Weight: 8.25 lbs

Front Sight: Fiber Optic

I just can not for the life of me picture an assassin with something akin to a pellet gun.

Michael, you're pulling the same crap here that you do in the other forum. I NEVER said or even implied that the early shots were fired from a high powered rifle. I said the shots were subsonic and there is no certainty that they came from any kind of rifle.

Why do I have to spend more time untangling your deliberate misrepresentations than I do discussing the issues, when I debate with you??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Michael, we have been through all this before. Even the Warren Commission admitted that most witnesses only heard one early shot and then closely bunched shots at the end.

Actually it was one early shot and then two close shots at the end.

EX. Miss WILLIS. Yes; I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time, and then there were two real fast bullets together.

Therefore, unless you believe that was all there were, then at least one of those early shots went totally unheard. And the one that was heard, wasn't even recognized by most witnesses as a real gunshot. And that makes perfect sense, since we can see that no-one was startled by any of the shots prior to frame 290-291.

I have to tell you. In all the different accounts I have read about the Z film. I have NEVER in my life, heard anyone say that they could not see anyone startled by shots before 290-291. I think I am going to have to hang onto this as another epic quote. I guess you just missed the whole 223 -224 episode?

Anyhow more to the point of your question.

Of course thats all I believe there was. 3 Shots. There is no other ballistic evidence to support any other shots, or shooters.

As for most witnesses not recognizing the first shot. Why would this surprise anyone? It is not like they were going to a trick shooting event. They never expected to hear gunfire. So when one says the first shot did not sound like gunfire, I can easily understand why. This does not take a huge leap into the world of silencers and other subversiveness.

The individuals in the limousine further corroborated that fact. Mrs. Connally for example, was very specific that she only heard one shot, until after she looked back and saw JFK in distress and after he had begun to shout, which is the same thing that Mrs. Kennedy said.

Greer said he heard one "noise" and then no other shots prior to near simultaneous shots at the end.

Kellerman heard one shot and then nothing until a "flurry" at the end of the attack.

Therefore, Michael, if there was more than one early shot, which we both acknowledge, then at least one of them went unheard.

I do not recall acknowledging "more than one early shot", but nice try. Of course the witnesses only heard one shot by this time, that's all that had been fired. Definitely not rocket science.

And finally, as we discussed before, there is no proof that the early shots came from a high powered rifle, or any kind of rifle for that matter. The quiet shots were only fired when the limo was relatively close to the Daltex. This video shows a guy using both a suppressed pistol and a suppressed rifle. And it sounds like the recording level is set normally.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EfPO6cFstTk

So now you are changing your position from a rifle to a pistol. No worries there. The video you posted is of a .22 caliber rifle, and a .22 caliber pistol, neither of which even comes close to representing a High powered rifle that your videos and past comments portray. I suggest before you get to carried away that you check the ballistic properties for the .22 using suppressor equipment, and also consult someone with experience on the insanity of engaging a target in a moving vehicle from an elevated position with a pistol. That prospect is humerus. No assassin in their right mind is going to engage a target at over 100' with a .22 caliber pistol. By the way, I have no recollection of us discussing anything involving a pistol in the past, as you claim. If we had I assure you you would have met with the same reply.

I also find it entertaining to see your theory evolve. But you should be commended for this, as correction is the only way you will ever get the truth.

I have no problem believing that witnesses could have overlooked shots from either of those weapons, especially with the crowd noise and motorcycles.

Again, it is pure ballistic idiocy to think that someone would engage a target with the types of weapons in your video. Especially from an elevated position over 100' away from the target in a moving vehicle.

What IS outrageous, is to imagine that they overlooked the report and shock wave of an unsuppressed, high powered rifle, which would have been many times louder.

Ah the winds of change. Its good to see that some of what I have been teaching you is sinking in. This is a complete reverse from your video in which you adamantly say that the reason no one heard the shots is that the rifle was suppressed. You then go on to tell us in great detail how it would be a disadvantage for someone to Assemble a rifle at the target area. So we know you were talking about a high powered rifle, as you go to great lengths to discuss this.

Had Oswald fired the early shots, Michael, they would have been the loudest of all. The limo passengers would have been severely startled, the Secret Service would have jumped into action immediately, and people would have been screaming and diving to the ground all over Dealey Plaza.

First let me say that in respect to BK I will not use the term Oswald in referencing the shooter. Bill makes a valid point that there is no 100% proof that Oswald was the shooter. I believe the evidence strongly points to Oswald, and Bill knows this. But out of respect for his work I will defer.

I will say that there is strong evidence that an unsuppressed weapon fired ALL the shots.

The reason these shots that you alleged were not heard, is simply because they did not happen.

But alas you are confusing the issue here. First you say that JFK reacted to a shot in Towner. The in the 160 area Jackie is reacting in turning towards JFK. Then you say JFK is reacting to a shot in the late 180's early 190's by grimacing and shielding his face, which he is clearly not doing per the Z film and the Witness testimony. Now you are saying that no one reacted to these shots.

Which is it?

Those early shots could not have been fired by Oswald.

Quite correct, they were not fired by anyone.

For clarification to those that might not understand my position. I believe there are two possibilities. I believe that the first shot fired was in the mid 190's. Hill, Willis, Betzner, and a host of others seems to confirm this. I believe that JBC is hit in the early 230's, and of course the head shot at 313.

I believe this is one scenario.

The next one is very difficult for me to admit. But it is the SBT. I never in my life have thought I would be the one saying that, but in light of recent research, I think it is a viable possibility far more than I ever had before.

For now I am sticking with 3 shots 3 hits, but I am giving the SBT a considerable thought.

Please lets not let this get off into an SBT discussion, there is always another thread for that, I just simply wanted those who do not know to understand my position.

Mike

"Actually it was one early shot and then two close shots at the end."

No Michael, if that's what they had said, then that's what I would have told you. They said the shots were "bunched". Why do you have to distort every honest statement?? Here is the actual wording from the report.

"a substantial majority of the witnesses stated that the shots were not evenly spaced. Most witnesses recalled that the second and third shots were bunched together."

And why are you telling people in this forum that you don't know who was firing the shots from the depository, while you are telling people in jfkassassinationforum.com that it was Oswald??

You seem to have one story for the nutter forums and one for the proconspiracy forums. There's only one set of facts, Michael. They don't change when your audience does.

And I find it unbelievable that you fabricated a totally new "theory" that no-one on EITHER side of this debate believes, just so that you could reduce the difference in the spacing of the shots. You have NO-ONE getting shot at 223. And that makes no sense at all. At the very least, JFK was hit then. His hands and arms began to rise at precisely frame 226. And there is not a neurologist on the planet who will not tell you that such a reaction will not begin within milliseconds of the shock to the vertebrae.

Edited by Robert Harris
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Actually it was one early shot and then two close shots at the end."

No Michael, if that's what they had said, then that's what I would have told you. They said the shots were "bunched". Why do you have to distort every honest statement?? Here is the actual wording from the report.

"a substantial majority of the witnesses stated that the shots were not evenly spaced. Most witnesses recalled that the second and third shots were bunched together."

Um...Robert....Thats exactly what I just said.

And why are you telling people in this forum that you don't know who was firing the shots from the depository, while you are telling people in jfkassassinationforum.com that it was Oswald??

Well I do believe that the evidence shows significantly that Oswald was very likely the shooter. Perhaps you missed the part of my last post that said:"First let me say that in respect to BK I will not use the term Oswald in referencing the shooter. Bill makes a valid point that there is no 100% proof that Oswald was the shooter. I believe the evidence strongly points to Oswald, and Bill knows this. But out of respect for his work I will defer."

You seem to have one story for the nutter forums and one for the proconspiracy forums. There's only one set of facts, Michael. They don't change when your audience does.

See above explanation and read it twice to make sure you understand it. My "story" has not changed.

And I find it unbelievable that you fabricated a totally new "theory" that no-one on EITHER side of this debate believes, just so that you could reduce the difference in the spacing of the shots. You have NO-ONE getting shot at 223. And that makes no sense at all. At the very least, JFK was hit then. His hands and arms began to rise at precisely frame 226. And there is not a neurologist on the planet who will not tell you that such a reaction will not begin within milliseconds of the shock to the vertebrae.

Robert you just told us in the last post you made that "...And that makes perfect sense, since we can see that no-one was startled by any of the shots prior to frame 290-291." Now your telling us you do see a reaction in 223? It looks like you are starting to see the light. Good for you Robert!

I have a hard time believing that after 46 years there would be any "new" theories. I would also suggest that you do a little reading before you say "...that no-one[sic] believes on EITHER side of this debate". I highly doubt you know what everyone believes. I highly doubt at this point that you know what you believe, your theory is changing already. Thats fine. Its the only honorable thing to do when you believe you have made a mistake.

If you believe my theory is all that crazy, perhaps you should look into the theories the FBI and SS had initially. For all I know they may still hold these ideas today. I also do not think it is at all impossible for the rifle to have been fired once in the early 190's and cycled to fire again in the range of 223.

Alvarez, Scott, and Hartman all put the 2nd largest jiggle of the Z film right in the early 190's. A shot in the early 190's also would be timestamped by the Willis Photo in 202, and fits quite well with the statements of Betzner, Brennan, Willis, Towner, and a host of others.

I also would like to ask you if you plan to respond to any other parts of my review of your videos? So far if the silencer issue is all that you have to dispute, and it looks like you are changing your mind on that, then I would tell you that there are still a few more hurdles to get over in reconciling your first two videos.

Not to worry I will give you plenty of time before we move on to parts 3 and 4. There sure are some whoppers in there.

Mike

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...