François Carlier Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 7 hours ago, David Von Pein said: Same here. But my one minute of baseball video from 1973 hasn't yet attracted a single scout. I'm beginning to wonder if it's part of a widespread conspiracy plot to keep me out of the big leagues forever. (Maybe I should ask John Armstrong about that.) 👍 I have watched the video. Though I myself have never played baseball, nor have ever understood the game, I was saying to myself : "To think that this little kid would later become the dean of all Warren report experts and common sense defenders !"😉 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cory Santos Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 Oh it is exquisite is it not? The crème de la crème. I think I will check ebay to see if I can find a poster to hang in my room! Yes, a tribute to common sense! So fashionable also- wait, Cliff, besides lance in his banana man outfit, you are the fashion expert, would you agree this is fashionable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
François Carlier Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 18 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: 7. Or the trail of particles that Humes wrote about which he said went from the bottom of the skull in the rear to the top connecting that trail? Except that when Jeremy Gunn showed him the x ray in the archives today, and asked him if he saw that, Humes said, no its not there. May I ask you, Mister DiEugenio, was James Humes part of the conspiracy ? Or wasn't he ? Did he lie about his findings ? Yes, or no ? In your example, did Humes try to expose the conspiracy by clearly admitting that there was something fishy going on ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 IMO Dr Humes obeyed his orders and did and said what was required of him in the presence of the Gold Braid brigade conducting the autopsy. e.g. "Don't follow the track of the bullet as the family wouldn't like it' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Mitcham Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 (edited) 16 hours ago, David Von Pein said: No, the bullet entered the UPPER part of JFK's head, just exactly as this autopsy photo proves.... Wanna look at a picture?.... http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lLWqbNL8Zgo/UYraEfUOHfI/AAAAAAAAuis/RtjG5B8TugM/s1600/JFK_Autopsy_Photo_BOH.jpg "Entered the upper part of the head", and exited where, Dave? Just interested to know exactly where you think the bullet went in and then came out. Surely with your skills and experience, you have a photo or sketch showing showing what you mean. Even a couple of arrows on the photo you have provided, would be sufficient. Edited October 13, 2018 by Ray Mitcham Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 16 hours ago, David Von Pein said: No, the bullet entered the UPPER part of JFK's head, just exactly as this autopsy photo proves.... Wanna look at a picture?.... http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-lLWqbNL8Zgo/UYraEfUOHfI/AAAAAAAAuis/RtjG5B8TugM/s1600/JFK_Autopsy_Photo_BOH.jpg Nobody from the autopsy ever recognized the red spot as anything significant. Most suggested that it could be clotted blood. Boswell explained that it could indeed be A wound, but not THE wound. See here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/25200-i-was-a-teenage-jfk-conspiracy-freak/?do=findComment&comment=386609 And here for more info: https://www.reddit.com/r/AlternativeHistory/comments/9mrjri/multiple_shooters_in_the_jfk_assassination/ Hair could be covering the real wound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, Ray Mitcham said: Just interested to know exactly where you think the bullet went in and then came out. The photos in the composite below should suffice. Hopefully, the "obvious" won't escape you here.... Edited October 13, 2018 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 (edited) DVP knows the sketchiness of specifying one or more specific exit points. Too parietal and the skull photos make zero anatomical sense. Too frontal and the pathologists kept it secret. Edited October 13, 2018 by Micah Mileto Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Zartman Posted October 13, 2018 Share Posted October 13, 2018 (edited) On 10/12/2018 at 5:49 PM, David Von Pein said: Of course not. Why are you suggesting such a silly thing? When did I ever even hint at such a ridiculous belief? Please show me. Sure. On 10/12/2018 at 5:18 AM, Ray Mitcham said: If Tague was hit by the third bullet as suggested by the Warren report, it must have been a fourth shot which blew the hole in the President's head. Or are they suggesting that the third shot hit his head then may have then ricoched to hit Tague? On 10/12/2018 at 5:22 AM, David Von Pein said: Yes, of course that's what the WC was suggesting. I've suggested it in the past as well --- although I still favor the first [missed] shot striking the Main Street curb and Tague. The Commission, however, wasn't suggesting that the WHOLE head-shot bullet went on to possibly strike Tague. Merely a fragment of that bullet. (And remember that more than half of that bullet was never recovered.) ? It seems like you're saying that the shot that hit also produced a fragment that made a mark on the curb near Tague and then bounced and hit Tague on the face, but that shot was the shot that the WC called a missed shot, wasn't it? Edited October 13, 2018 by Denny Zartman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted October 14, 2018 Share Posted October 14, 2018 (edited) 16 minutes ago, Denny Zartman said: It seems like you're saying that the shot that hit also produced a fragment that made a mark on the curb near Tague and then bounced and hit Tague on the face, but that shot was the shot that the WC called a missed shot, wasn't it? Read Page 117 of the WCR again. The WC did not specifically say which shot missed. Edited October 14, 2018 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Zartman Posted October 14, 2018 Share Posted October 14, 2018 13 minutes ago, David Von Pein said: Read Page 117 of the WCR again. The WC did not specifically say which shot missed. I don't get what you're trying to say. I'm not saying anything about which shot missed. It seems like you're saying that the shot that hit JFK in the head also produced a fragment that made a mark on the curb near Tague and then bounced and hit Tague on the face? You think a fragment from the headshot went on to strike the curb and Tague, in addition to another shot that missed entirely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Mileto Posted October 14, 2018 Share Posted October 14, 2018 43 minutes ago, Denny Zartman said: I don't get what you're trying to say. I'm not saying anything about which shot missed. It seems like you're saying that the shot that hit JFK in the head also produced a fragment that made a mark on the curb near Tague and then bounced and hit Tague on the face? You think a fragment from the headshot went on to strike the curb and Tague, in addition to another shot that missed entirely? The official story can be two or three shots, right? With the third shell casing being a chamber plug and the third loud report being the reverberation from the head shot? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Von Pein Posted October 14, 2018 Share Posted October 14, 2018 (edited) 2 hours ago, Denny Zartman said: I don't get what you're trying to say. I'm saying it's my belief that the shot that hit Tague COULD have been EITHER the first (missed) shot OR a fragment from the THIRD (head) shot. There's no possible way to determine with 100% certainty which of those two shots struck the curb and Tague. It's always been a guessing game. And always will be. Edited October 14, 2018 by David Von Pein Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted October 14, 2018 Share Posted October 14, 2018 22 hours ago, François Carlier said: 👍 I have watched the video. Though I myself have never played baseball, nor have ever understood the game, I was saying to myself : "To think that this little kid would later become the dean of all Warren report experts and common sense defenders !"😉 What does baseball, and a video of it from 1973, have to do with the Assassination of the President of the United States of America on November 22, 1963? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Zartman Posted October 14, 2018 Share Posted October 14, 2018 3 hours ago, David Von Pein said: I'm saying it's my belief that the shot that hit Tague COULD have been EITHER the first (missed) shot OR a fragment from the THIRD (head) shot. There's no possible way to determine with 100% certainty which of those two shots struck the curb and Tague. It's always been a guessing game. And always will be. Okay. I suppose I just misunderstood you. It sounded like you believed Tague was hit by a fragment from the third head shot and that there was no first missed shot. 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