Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Jake Hammond said:

... was there a black blob added at the rear of the head to hide the rear blow out ? Yes I think there was. 

Which must mean they "blacked out" the back of Clint Hill's head in the Z-Film too. (Is that a likely scenario? I guess some CTers must think it is likely.)

More....

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2015/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-895.html

Edited by David Von Pein
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, Jake Hammond said:

Cters as people like yourself and in a lesser way myself have done so . I mean I’d like Sandy for example to suggest a timeline of shots, where they cane from and what the damage was . There is just no positivity from that side of the fence. It’s all scoffing and inferences ... 

 

Jake,

Here are the reasons I can't have a positive attitude about your theory:

1. You think that the shirt will bunch up the way you say it will. I'd like to see that demonstrated.

2. But more importantly, there are a still a number of problems with the magic bullet theory. One of those is that bullet couldn't have hit both JFK and Connally. How do I know that? Because Dale Myers produced a video that shows how the bullet would hit both guys. Problem is, he had to move Connally to get it to work. Of course Myers didn't admit to that, but he was caught  Gil Jesus has a good video exposing Myers' lie. (For some reason that video seems to be missing. I can't find it.)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, David Von Pein said:

Agreed.

Not one thing that i posted  is scoffing or inferences.  It is all direct evidence or testimony.  If you characterize it as such then its because neither you nor DVP nor FC t want to deal with it. So let me post it again.

Above he says both the photos and x rays were authenticated.  And he relies on the HSCA for that, even though we just showed him how the HSCA completely misrepresented their own evidence on this point.  And then both Baden and Blakey said they did not recall seeing those witness statements.(The Assassinations, edited by James DiEugenio and Lisa Pease, pp. 273-76)

:please

Now let us proceed to repeat something I already stated and that somehow the Von Pein, FC, TP crowd ignores.  FC  distorted it out of its actual meaning, par for the course with him.

In the HSCA volumes it says that they could not find the original autopsy camera with which to do a comparison photo for authenticity purposes. (HSCA Vol 6, p 226 FN 1) 

As I noted above, the HSCA already misrepresented the evidence on the issue by saying the Bethesda witnesses saw something completely different than the Parkland witnesses.  As Gary notes, they also misrepresented this camera evidence.  Because they did find the camera.  But Blakey sent it back saying it could not be the correct one.  Because it could not match the pictures to this camera. Hmm. Now there is a way out of this and that is to claim the camera lens and shutter had changed. But we cannot determine that is the case since the HSCA deep sixed the actual notations on this experiment. (The Assassinations, edited by Jim DIEugenio and Lisa Pease, p. 280)

Again, none of these people were aware of this?  That book has been out there for 15 years.

As per the x rays, I mean this is ludicrous. The 6.5 mm fragment did not show up on the original x rays.  But it did show up for the Ramsey Clark panel. The particle trail in the rear of the skull rising upward was reported by Humes in his report.  To his chagrin, before the ARRB, he had to admit its not there now.(The JFK Assassination: The Evidence Today pp. 151-54) And these guys do their Lt Frank Drebin impersonation on this one. Plus there is the Mantik densitometer readings, which they also ignore. (Inside the ARRB Volume 2, by Doug Horne,  pp. 543-62)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this guy really asking us to present a shooting scenario?

How is that possible with an autopsy as bad as this one?

Even Baden said it is the exemplar as far as bad autopsies go.

Without the back wound dissected how can one determine directionality or if the wound transited?  You cannot.

Without the brain sectioned and tracked, again how can one determine the pathway or if there was only one bullet?

Anyone who ways they can is again is simply urinating in the wind. 

Your side is stuck with the Single Bullet Fantasy, an idea that was based on nothing more than expediency.  As Belin and Ball wrote as early as January 1964.  They were stuck with a particular three bullet scenario, one with which Hoover never agreed, nor did the CIA agree with it.   And it has been demolished seven ways to Sunday in about a dozen different ways since.  Until today, Robert Wagner, a VB clone and Oswald did it advocate, won't even come near it.  And anyone who uses Dale Myers in this dispute should have their head examined. Bob Harris and Pat Speer and Mili Cranor have demolished his work many times over.

Click here https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/dale-myers-an-introduction

Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m the last person entitled to bitch about hijacking a thread but is there any way legitimate students of the case (you know who you are) could take your fake debates with single bullet fraudsters to some other thread?       

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Jake,

Here are the reasons I can't have a positive attitude about your theory:

1. You think that the shirt will bunch up the way you say it will. I'd like to see that demonstrated.

2. But more importantly, there are a still a number of problems with the magic bullet theory. One of those is that bullet couldn't have hit both JFK and Connally. How do I know that? Because Dale Myers produced a video that shows how the bullet would hit both guys. Problem is, he had to move Connally to get it to work. Of course Myers didn't admit to that, but he was caught  Gil Jesus has a good video exposing Myers' lie. (For some reason that video seems to be missing. I can't find it.)

 

Sandy, you’re wasting your time with this guy.  You can post all the evidence and logic in the world and he’ll never acknowledge it — ever.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I’m the last person entitled to bitch about hijacking a thread but is there any way legitimate students of the case (you know who you are) could take your fake debates with single bullet fraudsters to some other thread?       

 

Oh yeah, sorry about that Cliff. I thought I was on the other thread. They look the same if you don't  read the title.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s what I’d wager (if such a thing were possible) was the shooting sequence based on the preponderance of evidence:

1) Shot to JFK’s throat with blood soluble paralytic from Black Dog Man at Z190.

2) Shot to his back with blood soluble toxin from Dal-Tex Building around Z280.

3) Triangulation of head shots from 3 different locations Z312-3.

Only responses from legitimate researchers welcome.

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Rich Pope said:

I'm not sure what you consider me to be...However, I just cannot believe that a young man with no more than an 8th grade education, who was a terrible shot using a rifle in poor condition could circumvent Dallas law enforcement as well as the Secret Service to kill the president.  I don't think the title of this thread should be boycott-the-nutters but rather, boycott the intellectually dishonest.  

You’re cool with me, Rich.

You’re right — boycott the intellectually dishonest!

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Here’s what I’d wager (if such a thing were possible) was the shooting sequence based on the preponderance of evidence:

1) Shot to JFK’s throat with blood soluble paralytic from Black Dog Man at Z190.

2) Shot to his back with blood soluble toxin from Dal-Tex Building around Z280.

3) Triangulation of head shots from 3 different locations Z312-3.

Only responses from legitimate researchers welcome.

 

Oh yeah, I forgot about Black Dog Man. I was wondering where a shot to the throat could have come from.

What do you see at Z190 and Z280 that makes you think those shots occurred then?

When do you think Connally got shot?

Many said they heard "boom   <pause>   boom   boom."  The timing of the shots you speculate on does follow that pattern.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Oh yeah, I forgot about Black Dog Man. I was wondering where a shot to the throat could have come from.

What do you see at Z190 and Z280 that makes you think those shots occurred then?

The statement of Phil Willis that he took his fifth photo (Z202) in a startle response to a gunshot; the contemporaneous notes of Secret Service SA Glenn Bennett timing the back shot right before the head shot/s.

Just now, Sandy Larsen said:

When do you think Connally got shot?

Good question for which I don’t have a good answer.

Just now, Sandy Larsen said:

Many said they heard "boom   <pause>   boom   boom."  The timing of the shots you speculate on does follow that pattern.

 

Indeed...

Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Ron Ecker said:

The Umbrella Man. (For all we know Black Dog Man was actually a black dog.)

 

 

Rosemary Willis described both UM and BDM as “conspicuous” people.  She told the HSCA that UM seemed preoccupied with opening or closing his umbrella, whereas BDM disappeared in the next instance after a shot.  The HSCA analyzed Willis 5 and determined it was a person holding an object with a distinct straight line feature.

A shot to the throat from BDM would have required significant deflection, however.

If I could lay a wager on it, I’d bet UM was the eccentric protester Louis Witt...

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...