Bush not in Dallas- He is dead

[Cliff Varnell]

20 minutes ago, Jake Hammond said:

I'm really not sure what you are getting at.

The top of your back isn't 4 inches below the bottom of your collar.  Same was true with JFK.

Quote

From what I can tell you are making the normal mistake of assuming that  he was standing up straight with his head back, and that shirt collars wrap horizontally around the neck. 

The shirt collar was worn around his neck and held in place with a knotted tie and button.

Are you denying this?

Quote

 

You then seem to have inserted into my argument that I have said that 4" was sticking up above his collar, or that that would be necessary somehow.

No, 4" of shirt/jacket fabric had to be elevated above the top of his back without pushing up on his jacket collar.

Quote

 

My line through the croft photo is all you need to see. All anyone needs to see really.  I'll bullet point the EVIDENCE for clarity once again. 

 - Fracture on T1

 - hole in shirt , far below where T1 would be, because that's really easy to determine on a slouching middle age man with a stoop and a shirt and tie on from an old photo. 

It's really easy to determine by the visible shirt collar above the top of the jacket collar.

The jacket collar had to be in a normal position, the bottom margin of which rested just above the base of his neck.

It's physically impossible to elevate 4" of clothing fabric entirely above the top of the back without pushing up on the jacket collar.

If it were possible you'd demonstrate it -- but you can't.

Quote

- He must have been shot by a bullet made of cheese from somewhere in Connallys seat, then shot by an invisible bullet on his back which then coincidentally left a mark that lines up with the other injuries to the two men, then John C was hit by a bullet fired from such a position that the trajectory ( between the armpit and wrist) took it through Kennedys neck yet instead of doing that it kindly swerved around the neck so to not interfere with the invisible bullet.

Did I get it right this time ?

 

The autopsists on the night of the autopsy speculated that JFK was hit with a high tech weapon that wouldn't leave any trace in the body or on x-ray.

This technology was developed by civilians working for the US Army Special Operations Division for a covert CIA program called MKNAOMI.

Quote

 P.S The reason JC reacted at exactly the same time was because the two bullets, the cheese and the kind swerving one , were fired at the same time. 

Why are you making stuff up, Jake?

Edited December 15, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[Jake Hammond]

42 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Show us how 4 inches of fabric elevates entirely above the top of the back without pushing up on the jacket collar.

The burden of proof is on you.

 

I just sat down in a jacket and shirt, located T1 and leaned into JFK's position, then looked at the Croft photo. The T1 sinks down and toward the Adams apple and the shirt collar rises above it. Looking at the Croft photo you can see that JFK's collar, which isn't that tall, is actually pushing up his hair line. The point of this is that when you add the bunching SEEN IN THE CROFT PHOTO the hole in the shirt is placed perfectly, if the bullet enters just below or in the lower part of that large crease / bunching YOU SEE IN THE CROFT PHOTO  then the back wound is also perfect. Its strange to me that something so empirical, so objective would be treated as a subjective matter. Especially when the alternative is three magical unicorn bullets.

Quote

The jacket collar had to be in a normal position, the bottom margin of which rested just above the base of his neck.

It's physically impossible to elevate 4" of clothing fabric entirely above the top of the back without pushing up on the jacket collar.

The croft photo along with ten others from the preceding minutes show the collar way up in the hairline, why are you saying what is seen in all the best images we have is false ? 

 And please, what are you talking about when you say 4" above the collar ? The shirt hole is a few inches below the collar line, the shirt and jacket have a 1" gather ( at least) in them in the Croft et al photos, this raises the hole up 2" ( see my line through Croft image if it helps) . Then when you look at how high the collar is up his neck ( pushing into hairline) a rational person can only conclude that everything works. I don't know how more clear it could be. I've done the experiment myself and it works perfectly. I'll do it on a mannequin now and upload the images when my image credit refreshes ( I seem to have maxed it out ). 

 Cheers

Edited December 15, 2018 by Jake Hammond

[Jake Hammond]

Ok, I got the shirt , mannequin and red paint out and if anyone can explain how to refresh my image upload quota I'll end this. It is amazing the difference the angle and bunching makes, I was amazed myself. 

Edited December 15, 2018 by Jake Hammond

[Cliff Varnell]

26 minutes ago, Jake Hammond said:

I just sat down in a jacket and shirt, located T1 and leaned into JFK's position, then looked at the Croft photo.

Leaned in?

What are you talking about?

Quote

The T1 sinks down and toward the Adams apple and the shirt collar rises above it.

Show us how 2 inches of shirt elevates when you lean slightly forward. 

And you're claiming that leaning slightly forward drops the spinal column multiple inches?

You guys always say your clothing behaves in such a manner but you never show it.

Quote

Looking at the Croft photo you can see that JFK's collar, which isn't that tall, is actually pushing up his hair line.

No it isn't.  Here's a photo on Houston St. showing the jacket collar elevated above the top of the shirt collar but not into the hairline.

After that the jacket collar dropped.

Quote

 

The point of this is that when you add the bunching SEEN IN THE CROFT PHOTO the hole in the shirt is placed perfectly, if the bullet enters just below or in the lower part of that large crease / bunching YOU SEE IN THE CROFT PHOTO  then the back wound is also perfect. Its strange to me that something so empirical, so objective would be treated as a subjective matter.

You're claiming that fractions of an inch are multiple inches.

That's why you can't replicate the event -- you just shout your conclusions over and over again.

Show us how you elevate 4" of clothing fabric entirely above the top of the jack without pushing up on the jacket collar.

You can't -- it's impossible.

Quote

Especially when the alternative is three magical unicorn bullets.

No, the alternative is a high tech weapons strike by people associcated with a covert CIA operation.

Quote

The croft photo along with ten others from the preceding minutes show the collar way up in the hairline, why are you saying what is seen in all the best images we have is false ? 

Your characterization is false.

On Houston St. the jacket collar occluded the shirt collar until JFK exchanged pleasantries with Nellie -- then the jacket collar dropped when he leaned back in his seat..

Quote

 And please, what are you talking about when you say 4" above the collar ?

I never said 4" above the collar.  2 inches of shirt fabric and 2 inches of jacket fabric equal 4 inches of clothing fabric that had to be elevated entirely above the top of the back.

Without pushing up on the jacket collar.

The claim is insane.

Quote

 

The shirt hole is a few inches below the collar line, the shirt and jacket have a 1" gather in them in the Croft et al photos, this raises the hole up 2" ( see my line through Croft image if it helps) .

How do you figure the jacket fold in Croft is more than a fraction of an inch?

Quote

 

Then when you look at how high the collar is up his neck ( pushing into hairline) a rational person can only conclude that everything works. I don't know how more clear it could be. I've done the experiment myself and it works perfectly. I'll do it on a mannequin now and upload the images when my image credit refreshes ( I seem to have maxed it out ). 

 Cheers

The shirt collar didn't extend into his hairline.

You're making that up.

[Cliff Varnell]

13 minutes ago, Jake Hammond said:

Ok, I got the shirt , mannequin and red paint out and if anyone can explain how to refresh my image upload quota I'll end this. 

Did you also get the jacket out?

How does the mannequin induce the shirt to move?

You have to show the movement of the shirt, not just make unsupported assumptions.

Edited December 15, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[Jake Hammond]

Like I said, my image upload capacity is maxed out. I have the photo's, I leaned the mannequin to a conservative angle and it was very enlightening. Maybe I'll start a new post when I have figured out the image upload issue to put this to bed. 

Edited December 15, 2018 by Jake Hammond

[Cliff Varnell]

2 minutes ago, Jake Hammond said:

Like I said, my image upload capacity is maxed out. I have the photo's, I leaned the mannequin to a conservative angle and it was very enlightening. Maybe I'll start a new post when I have figured out the image upload issue to put this to bed. 

It never got out of bed.

Your claims about the clothing collars jacked up into the hairline are clearly false.

https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=5985&fullsize=1

[Cory Santos]

3 minutes ago, Jake Hammond said:

Like I said, my image upload capacity is maxed out. I have the photo's, I leaned the mannequin to a conservative angle and it was very enlightening. Maybe I'll start a new post when I have figured out the image upload issue to put this to bed. 

Yes then you can explain why a shot in the back failed to produce any whiplash.

[Jake Hammond]

Just now, Cory Santos said:

Yes then you can explain why a shot in the back failed to produce any whiplash.

And like I asked you before, are you saying that there wasn't a shot to the back ?

[Jake Hammond]

3 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

It never got out of bed.

Your claims about the clothing collars jacked up into the hairline are clearly false.

https://www.jfkassassinationgallery.com/displayimage.php?pid=5985&fullsize=1

LOL , an image taken on Houston St as evidence of the position of a mans collar 30 seconds later on Elm street . The only shot that day I think that shows his collar that low. 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 minute ago, Jake Hammond said:

And like I asked you before, are you saying that there wasn't a shot to the back ?

Secret Service agent Glenn Bennett reported seeing JFK shot in the back immediately before the head shot, "bout 4 inches down from the shoulder."

Bennett nailed the location of both the T3 back wound and the bullet holes in the clothing 4" below the bottom of the collars.

[Jake Hammond]

Just now, Cliff Varnell said:

Secret Service agent Glenn Bennett reported seeing JFK shot in the back immediately before the head shot, "bout 4 inches down from the shoulder."

Bennett nailed the location of both the T3 back wound and the bullet holes in the clothing 4" below the bottom of the collars.

With no whiplash ? Or with ?

[Cliff Varnell]

1 minute ago, Jake Hammond said:

LOL , an image taken on Houston St as evidence of the position of a mans collar 30 seconds later on Elm street . The only shot that day I think that shows his collar that low. 

Are you claiming that both the shirt and jacket collar bobbed up and down multiple inches spontaneously?

Note there is no visible shirt collar in the photo taken less than a minute before the shooting -- the jacket collar dropped after that.

[Cliff Varnell]

1 minute ago, Jake Hammond said:

With no whiplash ? Or with ?

SS SA Bennett didn't say.

The only way there'd be no visible reaction to the back shot would be if JFK were paralyzed.

[Jake Hammond]

1 minute ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Are you claiming that both the shirt and jacket collar bobbed up and down multiple inches spontaneously?

Note there is no visible shirt collar in the photo taken less than a minute before the shooting -- the jacket collar dropped after that.

No, I never said anything f the kind, the two both raised up slightly as the president moved around. This is not a theory it is evidenced in the Croft Photo, also in the Croft photo you can see the shirt over the jacket collar by around 0.5", do you have a specific aversion to the CRoft photo ? Do you know the image I mean ?