Some Simple Questions About the Single-Bullet Theory

[Charles Blackmon]

All of this should have been obvious to the so-called experts in photo and film analysis on the various government inquiries. So why did they still say that JFK and Connally were both shot by the same bullet? Very strange.

[Michael Griffith]

17 hours ago, Charles Blackmon said:

All of this should have been obvious to the so-called experts in photo and film analysis on the various government inquiries. So why did they still say that JFK and Connally were both shot by the same bullet? Very strange.

Indeed. It is remarkable and revealing that neither the WC nor the HSCA acknowledged, much less discussed, the dramatic Z226-232 sequence when JFK is visibly knocked forward and his hands and elbows are flung forward and upward. At the very least, this sequence is just as obvious as the Z238-246 sequence when Connally's right shoulder is slammed downward, his cheeks puff, and a pained expression appears on his face.

SBT adherents continue to ignore the Z226-232 sequence because it refutes any version of the SBT. The sequence indicates that JFK was hit in Z224, which is when most WC apologists now claim the magic-bullet hit occurred. But, if WC apologists acknowledge the Z226-232 sequence, then they have to explain why Connally's dramatic right-shoulder collapse and cheek puffing do not start until Z238, since they claim he was hit in Z224. (They also have to wish away the clear indications that JFK began to react to a different wound many frames before Z224.)

Speaking of Connally's Z238-246 reaction, his two surgeons studied the Zapruder film and agreed that Connally was hit two to four frames before his reaction:

Dr. Robert Shaw, Connally's chest surgeon, after studying the Zapruder film, concluded that Connally was hit at Z236, "give or take 1 or 2 frames."

Dr. Charles Gregory, Connally's wrist surgeon, after studying the Zapruder film, concluded that Connally was hit between Z234 and Z238.

Of course, Connally himself, the person who actually experienced the wounding, after studying high-quality blowups of the Zapruder film, said he was hit at Z234 and stated he was certain he was not hit before Z231. 

 

Edited June 22, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Pat Speer]

3 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

Indeed. It is remarkable and revealing that neither the WC nor the HSCA acknowledged, much less discussed, the dramatic Z226-232 sequence when JFK is visibly knocked forward and his hands and elbows are flung forward and upward. At the very least, this sequence is just as obvious as the Z238-246 sequence when Connally's right shoulder is slammed downward, his cheeks puff, and a pained expression appears on his face.

SBT adherents continue to ignore the Z226-232 sequence because it refutes any version of the SBT. The sequence indicates that JFK was hit in Z224, which is when most WC apologists now claim the magic-bullet hit occurred. But, if WC apologists acknowledge the Z226-232 sequence, then they have to explain why Connally's dramatic right-shoulder collapse and cheek puffing do not start until Z238, since they claim he was hit in Z224. (They also have to wish away the clear indications that JFK began to react to a different wound many frames before Z224.)

Speaking of Connally's Z238-246 reaction, his two surgeons studied the Zapruder film and agreed that Connally was hit two to four frames before his obvious reaction:

Dr. Robert Shaw, Connally's chest surgeon, after studying the Zapruder film, concluded that Connally was hit at Z236, "give or take 1 or 2 frames."

Dr. Charles Gregory, Connally's wrist surgeon, after studying the Zapruder film, concluded that Connally was hit between Z234 and Z238.

Of course, Connally himself, the person who actually experienced the wounding, after studying high-quality blowups of the Zapruder film, said he was hit at Z234 and stated he was certain he was not hit before Z231. 

When people free their minds from the SBT myth, they can readily see and admit that JFK and Connally were hit at different times and by separate bullets.

The vast majority of LNs do not ignore JFK and JBC's movements as they come out from behind the sign, but claim them as proof they were hit at the same time, Z-224. 

It is JFK's movements before he went behind the sign that have been ignored, and lied about. The HSCA photography panel's conclusions were largely ignored, by LN and CT alike, before I started talking about them a few decades back. In fact, much of what is discussed today along these lines comes from the 50 Reasons for 50 years video Jeff and I put together for Len in 2013.

 

 

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

In fact, much of what is discussed today along these lines comes from the 50 Reasons for 50 years video Jeff and I put together for Len in 2013.

 

 

A travesty which put the back wound at T1.

Ahistorical nonsense.

[Pat Speer]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

A travesty which put the back wound at T1.

Ahistorical nonsense.

Blowing smoke as usual, Cliff. The back wound isn't even mentioned in that video. 

[Michael Griffith]

7 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

 

The vast majority of LNs do not ignore JFK and JBC's movements as they come out from behind the sign, but claim them as proof they were hit at the same time, Z-224. 

Which LNers have discussed JFK's being knocked forward in Z226-232? Who among them has done this? Posner ignores this sequence. Moore ignored it. Bugliosi ignored it. McAdams ignored it. 

Both the WC and the HSCA ignored JFK's being jolted forward in Z226-232. Since they ignored it, they made no effort to explain it.

Incidentally, Posner even ignores the slamming down of Connally's right shoulder--he acknowledges that Connally's cheeks puff in Z238 but claims that Connally's shoulder collapses because Connally turned himself "sharply down and to the right." Yeah, you bet, and JFK jerked his own head back and to the left in Z313. 

It is JFK's movements before he went behind the sign that have been ignored, and lied about. The HSCA photography panel's conclusions were largely ignored, by LN and CT alike, before I started talking about them a few decades back. In fact, much of what is discussed today along these lines comes from the 50 Reasons for 50 years video Jeff and I put together for Len in 2013.

Well, I, for one, have never ignored the HSCA PEP's finding that JFK began to react to being wounded before Z207. I think it is obvious that the PEP was right about JFK's pre-Z207 reaction, and I think the evidence of a Z186-190 shot is compelling. 

 

Edited June 22, 2023 by Michael Griffith

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Pat Speer said:

Blowing smoke as usual, Cliff. The back wound isn't even mentioned in that video. 

You didn’t show Fox 5 in your BlackOp presentation?

Edited June 22, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

My bad!  I stand corrected. A thousand apologies Pat!

It’s this episode at 3:08 for which you need to apologize.

 

[Michael Griffith]

13 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

My bad!  I stand corrected. A thousand apologies Pat!

It’s this episode at 3:08 for which you need to apologize.

 

There was also another reenactment, in Dealey Plaza, where the T2/T3 location was acknowledged. They put a white mark on the back of the JFK stand-in, and the mark was at about T2/T3, in harmony with the rear clothing holes. See the attached photo from the reenactment.

[Michael Griffith]

5 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

There was also another reenactment, in Dealey Plaza, where the T2/T3 location was acknowledged. They put a white mark on the back of the JFK stand-in, and the mark was at about T2/T3, in harmony with the rear clothing holes. See the attached photo from the reenactment.

And here's a video of this reenactment:

LINK

The reenactment was done by the FBI on May 23-23, 1964, in Dealey Plaza. You can see plainly in the video that the white dot on the JFK stand-in's coat is far below the neck, nowhere near C7 or T1, in harmony with the rear clothing holes.

[Charles Blackmon]

2 hours ago, Michael Griffith said:

And here's a video of this reenactment:

LINK

The reenactment was done by the FBI on May 23-23, 1964, in Dealey Plaza. You can see plainly in the video that the white dot on the JFK stand-in's coat is far below the neck, nowhere near C7 or T1, in harmony with the rear clothing holes.

Specter's magic bullet theory came along later I seem to recall. Did they just forget about this reenactment at that point? Who were they trying to fool?

Edited June 23, 2023 by Charles Blackmon

[Cliff Varnell]

4 hours ago, Charles Blackmon said:

Specter's magic bullet theory came along later I seem to recall. Did they just forget about this reenactment at that point? Who were they trying to fool?

The SBT was conceived the night of the autopsy.  The autopsists saw two wounds in soft tissue with no exits and no bullets.  They flashed back to their youths in 1936 — a Dick Tracy strip in The Funnies which featured an “ice bullet” dissolving in the victim’s body.  

Humes asked Sibert and O’Neill if such technology existed.  Sibert called the FBI Lab to find out.  “We have the bullet—“ FBI SA Chuck Killion told Sibert, who told Humes.

That bullet had to account for both wounds.  That was the cover-up assignment.

This was an ad hoc cover-up with different bites at the apple — the Rydberg drawing, Fox 5 autopsy photo, the FBI re-enactment with two different back locations and the final autopsy report with two different back wound locations.

Ironically, it was the FBI who marked the wound in the correct T3 location.

Edited June 23, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Greg Doudna]

1 hour ago, Cliff Varnell said:

The SBT was conceived the night of the autopsy.  The autopsists saw two wounds in soft tissue with no exits and no bullets.  They flashed back to their youths in 1936 — a Dick Tracy strip in The Funnies which featured an “ice bullet” dissolving in the victim’s body.  

Humes asked Sibert and O’Neill if such technology existed.  Sibert called the FBI Lab to find out.  “We have the bullet—“ FBI SA Chuck Killion told Sibert, who told Humes.

That bullet had to account for both wounds.  That was the cover-up assignment.

This was an ad hoc cover-up with different bites at the apple — the Rydberg drawing, Fox 5 autopsy photo, the FBI re-enactment with two different back locations and the final autopsy report with two different back wound locations.

Ironically, it was the FBI who marked the wound in the correct T3 location.

Cliff, there are two main reasons why this ice bullet idea seems not right, apart from nobody ever heard of ice bullets being used in assassinations before.

First, wasn't the whole point of blood-soluble, ice bullets, etc. to conceal that a person had been shot in the first place, a sort of stealth assassination disguising the cause of death? But there is no conceivable argument that the assassins of JFK were attempting to conceal that they shot at him. Hence no motive or reason to use an ice bullet. 

And second, while an ice bullet would in theory account for the autopsists' lack of recovery of a missile inside JFK's body (because the ice melted), it does not account for the shallowness of the wound in the back. How in your ice bullet theory is the wound so shallow, and did not go into the lung?   

[Cliff Varnell]

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Cliff, there are two main reasons why this ice bullet idea seems not right, apart from nobody ever heard of ice bullets being used in assassinations before.

The CIA knew.  The civilians working for the US Army within the CIA project MKNAOMI knew.  One of those civilians briefed the FBI as to the existence of this technology and the possibility of its use in a foreign attack.

http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/church/reports/vol1/pdf/ChurchV1_6_Senseney.pdf

<quote on, emphasis added>

Senseney: And the only thing that I can say is, I just have to suppose that, having been told to maintain the sort of show and tell display of hardware that we had on sort of stockpile for them, these were not items that could be used. They were display items like you would see in a museum, and they used those to show to the agents as well as to the FBI, to acquaint them with possible ways that other people could attack our own people. (pg 163)

Baker: ...There are about 60 agencies of Government that do either intelligence or law enforcement work.

Senseney: I am sure most all of those knew of what we were doing; yes...

...The FBI never used anything. They were only shown so they could be aware of what might be brought into the country. </q>

 

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

First, wasn't the whole point of blood-soluble, ice bullets, etc. to conceal that a person had been shot in the first place, a sort of stealth assassination disguising the cause of death?

It was ‘t meant to be disguised.  It was meant to pin on the Soviets while the US bombed Cuba back into the Stone Age.

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

 

But there is no conceivable argument that the assassins of JFK were attempting to conceal that they shot at him. Hence no motive or reason to use an ice bullet. 

Textbook false flag attack.

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

And second, while an ice bullet would in theory account for the autopsists' lack of recovery of a missile inside JFK's body (because the ice melted), it does not account for the shallowness of the wound in the back. How in your ice bullet theory is the wound so shallow, and did not go into the lung?   

It’s not my ice bullet theory.  The wound was shallow.  Conventional firearms don’t leave shallow wounds in soft tissue.

 

Edited June 23, 2023 by Cliff Varnell

[Pat Speer]

6 hours ago, Charles Blackmon said:

Specter's magic bullet theory came along later I seem to recall. Did they just forget about this reenactment at that point? Who were they trying to fool?

Actually, no. The SBT was proposed to account for the timing of the presumed responses of JFK and JBC in the Z-film. The 5-24-64 re-enactment was performed to see if it could be sold to the public. The chalk mark was placed on the jacket by Specter and SS agent Kelly AFTER they viewed the back wound photo some now claim is fake. After the re-enactment, Specter studied the SBT trajectory up close, while moving the re-enactors around in the limo to try to get the shot to align. He claimed it was close enough. But we have reasons to believe he knew this wasn't so. For one, the photo put into evidence to "show" JFK's back wound and throat wound aligned with JBC's back wound was taken from the front and failed to show the chalk mark on JFK's back, even though there were numerous photos showing JFK from the side, which showed the chalk mark...inches below the trajectory connecting the throat wound and JBC's back wound. For two, Specter began calling the back wound a "back of the neck" or "neck" wound only after being shown the photo proving it to have been a back wound, and continued to play games with the description for the rest of his life. 

This is documented ad nauseum in chapters 10 and 11 of my website, and was the subject of my presentation at the 2014 50th anniversary of the Warren Report Conference. (This was the presentation which drove WC counsel Burt Griffin running from the room.)