Thomas Graves Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 (25) According to the JFK Assassinations Records Review Board "well over a million CIA records" relating to JFK's murder have not yet been released. According to NBC (29th September, 1998) these documents will not be declassified until the tear 2017. Why? _______________________________________ Uhhh, "National Security?" (Just kidding) --Thomas _______________________________________ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Simkin Posted October 17, 2006 Author Share Posted October 17, 2006 (63) William C. Sullivan was put in charge of the bureau's in-house investigation into the JFK assassination. The reports written by Sullivan and James Jesus Angleton (CIA) became the basis for the Warren Commission Report. However, it only emerged in his posthumous published autobiography that Sullivan had doubts about the guilt of Lee Harvey Oswald: "Oswald didn't have a record of being an outstanding marksman and yet he hit the president with two shots while his car was moving slowly down the road. His third shot hit Governor Connally. I went to the book depository from which Oswald fired at the president and I looked out the window where he was positioned. I've been around guns all my life and I'm a reasonably good shot, but I must say that that would be quite a task for me. It was, tragically, damn good shooting." Sullivan was also the lead investigator into the assassination of Martin Luther King. In his autobiography he wrote: "I was convinced that James Earl Ray killed Martin Luther King, but I doubt if he acted alone." Is it a coincidence that Sullivan was murdered before he could appear before the House Select Committee on Assassinations? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wim Dankbaar Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 ----- Original Message ----- From: Paul L May To: 'Wim Dankbaar' Sent: Monday, October 09, 2006 3:58 AM Subject: Greetings Hey Wim: How are you and your little bunch of conspiricy misfits? I noted your thread "the assassination of JFK Junior". Hint for you Wim. The word "assassination" only refers to politicians. JFK Jr. was not a politician. Suggest you change that....for correctness purposes. Of course, this is but another of your vast conspiricy issues. I'm curious. Did you ever have a life before you became paranoid? How's your porno case doing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Top Post B., In your travels through this evidence morass, have you run across a date [month,day,year] when the NPIC first evaluated the Zapruder Film? Thanks -- DHealy Pat Speer' wrote: A couple of corrections to Bernice's list... Ford was a congressman in 1963. He never was a Senator. B: Correction, Pat, he was a Congressman... ************************** Pat: He changed the back wound from "back" to "back of the neck" and the report ended up saying "base of the back of the neck." This was probably an innocent mistake in that Ford was not the sharpest tack in the box and was almost undoubtedly basing his impression of the wound on the Rydberg drawings, which depicted the wound at the base of the neck. Bernice : Not innocent IMO....."In editing the initial draft of the Warren Report , Ford moved the the wound In Kennedy's back from a "point slightly below the shoulder to the right of the spine " to " the back of his neck slightly to the right of the spine" . Ford's revision brought the posterior wound in line wiht the Commission's no-conspiracy conclusion, repositioning it to make it consistant with what came to be called " the single bullet theory"..Ford's editing of the Warren Com Report draft dated 6/26/64 ,can be found in the Rankin Papers ,box 26, folder 385 ,NARA. Pat: The real question is why Arlen Specter, who'd seen the back wound on an autopsy photo and knew the Rydberg drawings were incorrect, never tried to have the drawings corrected and said nothing to the commission. And I have an answer to that question: he was an ambitious spineless coward. The head wound wasn't moved till 1968. Bernice : "During Specter's and the commission's "March 16th questioning , Humes repeatedly referred to these drawings ( Ryberg's because they were denied access to the autopsy pictures and X-rays .According to Hume's testimony , the drawings depicted the trajectory of the nonfatal bullet ( CE 399) entering Kennedy's lower neck at a downward angle and exiting his throat in the region of the Adam's Apple.) when describing JFK's neck wounds . When McCloy asked the navy Doctor if the bullet trajectory took " roughly the line which is shown on your Exhibit 385", Hume's succinct response was "Yes, Sir". Even to the medically or forensically untrained eye it is patently obvious that the depciations of JFK's nonfatal wounds presumably produced by bullet CE 399 in photograph Number 12 and CE 385 and CE 386 are hopelessly irreconcilable .There is no way that these separate representations can coexist in the Commission's own permanent record without inviting skepticism of the deepest die. Commissioner Gerald Ford spotted this "eccentricity" in the report's third draft where it asserted , "A bullet entered his back at a point slightly above the shoulder to the right of the spine."..Ford edited the sentence to read, " A bullet entered the back of his neck slightly to the right pf the spine." With just a few facile changes, Ford and the Reediting Committee were satisfied that photograph Number 12, based on Specter's prized autopsy picture ,and Hume's much-exploited drawing's ...stand ins for the best evidence ....were now compatible ans would travel well together. Ford's editing of the Warren Com Report draft dated 6/26/64 ,can be found in the Rankin Papers ,box 26, folder 385 ,NARA ************************************ Pat:The NPIC study was done for the Secret Service. dgh: Pat, do you have a cite re: the NPIC study was done for the Secret Service, [specifically? Or, are you assuming that conclusion from Doug Hornes interview with NPIC employees[/b]. Thanks -- David Healy .. Bernice : "Zapruder Film re NPIC ...also the following from "Breach of Trust.".for information.. "Several days after the assassination the CIA received, from the Secret Service a copy of the Zapruder film. In return for a copy of the film the SS received an analysis of the film from the agency's National Photographic Intelligence Center (NPIC) in Washington. It had the reputation as being the finest photo-interpretation center in the world. The center's interpretation had come to the conclusions, that (1) the first shot had not come from the TSBD.."Sniper’s nest "..And (2) that there had been at LEAST two gunmen in Dealey Plaza shooting at the limo...But the results were supressed..page 6.. The three cartridges found in the TSBD on the 6th floor, corresponded with the time frame dictated within the Zapruder Film...which allows for only three shots from the MC rifle..It took at best a little more than two seconds just to cycle the rifle ,with no leeway factored in for the shooter to keep the scope fixed on the moving target. The manual that accompanied the model determined that all the shooting had occurred within a span of 6.4 to 8.0 seconds. But seeing and having to acknowledge the shot that had hit the curb on the South side of Main St. and wounding, on the cheek, bystander JamesT.Tague..a fourth shot could only be explained by a second gunman, but this was politically unacceptable... ( FBI Manual, Rankin Papers, " Investigation and Evidence"..RG 12, box 8, folder 7.Nara, 14-15.) The FBI chose to ignore the Tague shot, and the wound in the front of JFK's throat...page 99-100 The CIA uncovered critical evidence in the assassination before the government's official version was agreed upon..and before President Johnson appointed the WC..after the SS turned over a copy of the Zapruder film to the CIA, and the NPIC had completed it's analysis ,it had been discovered that the first shot, according to the film, had come Before Zapruder frame 210.....and a second shot at frame # 242, just 1.6 seconds after the first shot. All the WC experts agreed that even the most experienced and skilled gunman would require at least 2.4 seconds..the 1.6 second shot interlude meant there had to be more than one shooter.. Page: 151. (.McKnight’s telephone interview , May 2,2003...with Dino A.Brugioni, the center’s chief analysis who was in charged of the NPICs interpretation of the Zapruder film..( Conclusion that follows are McKnights..not attributed to Brugioni, "When Brugioni turned over to McCone, or Helms the four-photo briefing boards with accompanying memoranda or explanations interpreting the calculations in the document, he had no knowledge of the "Official Truth"..of JFK's assassination that had been decided upon over the weekend..( notes page 406) See also..Philip Melanson, "Hidden Exposure: Cover Up & Intrigue in the CIA's Secret Possession of the Zapruder Film"..The The Third Decade no.1 ( November 84).9. Melanson makes a strong circumstantial case the NPIC received a copy of the Zapruder Film the day after the assassination"... Also see CIA document 1641-450 for NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film..of JFK's assassination These results were pried loose from the CIA by a FOIA request in 82 by Harold Weisberg ..or see Wiesberg's "Photographic Whitewash --Suppressed Kennedy Assassination Pictures"..1967..available at Hood College..pages: 302-303.) The Warren Report held that the first shot could not have been fired before Z..210..Therefore the analysis and results of the FBI and CIA, of the Zapruder film were ignored.... The FBI and Rankin and staff suppressed the findings of the Bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's film. It is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. What the record does show is that the FBI and CIA colluded in the fabrication of a story that the CIA never received a copy of the Zapruder film..until Dec.1964..after the Commission disbanded Hoover told Rankin that in Dec. 64 the CIA requested a copy of the film for training purposes"..pages 151-152.. ( Hoover to Rankin Dec4/64..Copy of letter appears in Wiesberg's , "Photographic Whitewash." page 143..) The three cartridges found in the TSBD on the 6th floor, corresponded with the time frame dictated within the Zapruder Film...which allows for only three shots from the MC rifle..It took at best a little more than two seconds just to cycle the rifle ,with no leeway factored in for the shooter to keep the scope fixed on the moving target. The manual that accompanied the model determined that all the shooting had occurred within a span of 6.4 to 8.0 seconds. But seeing and having to acknowledge the shot that had hit the curb on the South side of Main St. and wounding, on the cheek, bystander JamesT.Tague..a fourth shot could only be explained by a second gunman, but this was politically unacceptable... ( FBI Manual, Rankin Papers, " Investigation and Evidence"..RG 12, box 8, folder 7.Nara, 14-15.) The FBI chose to ignore the Tague shot, and the wound in the front of JFK's throat...page 99-100 The CIA uncovered critical evidence in the assassination before the government's official version was agreed upon..and before President Johnson appointed the WC..after the SS turned over a copy of the Zapruder film to the CIA, and the NPIC had completed it's analysis ,it had been discovered that the first shot, according to the film, had come Before Zapruder frame 210.....and a second shot at frame # 242, just 1.6 seconds after the first shot. All the WC experts agreed that even the most experienced and skilled gunman would require at least 2.4 seconds..the 1.6 second shot interlude meant there had to be more than one shooter.. Page: 151. (.McKnight’s telephone interview , May 2,2003...with Dino A.Brugioni, the center’s chief analysis who was in charged of the NPICs interpretation of the Zapruder film..( Conclusion that follows are McKnights..not attributed to Brugioni, "When Brugioni turned over to McCone, or Helms the four-photo briefing boards with accompanying memoranda or explanations interpreting the calculations in the document, he had no knowledge of the "Official Truth"..of JFK's assassination that had been decided upon over the weekend..( notes page 406) See also..Philip Melanson, "Hidden Exposure: Cover Up & Intrigue in the CIA's Secret Possession of the Zapruder Film"..The The Third Decade no.1 ( November 84).9. Melanson makes a strong circumstantial case the NPIC received a copy of the Zapruder Film the day after the assassination"... Also see CIA document 1641-450 for NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film..of JFK's assassination These results were pried loose from the CIA by a FOIA request in 82 by Harold Weisberg ..or see Wiesberg's "Photographic Whitewash --Suppressed Kennedy Assassination Pictures"..1967..available at Hood College..pages: 302-303.) The Warren Report held that the first shot could not have been fired before Z..210..Therefore the analysis and results of the FBI and CIA, of the Zapruder film were ignored.... The FBI and Rankin and staff suppressed the findings of the Bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's film. It is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. What the record does show is that the FBI and CIA colluded in the fabrication of a story that the CIA never received a copy of the Zapruder film..until Dec.1964..after the Commission disbanded Hoover told Rankin that in Dec. 64 the CIA requested a copy of the film for training purposes..pages 151-152.. ( Hoover to Rankin Dec4/64..Copy of letter appears in Wiesberg's , "Photographic Whitewash." page 143..) *****"" In my ( McKnight’s) conversation with Brugioni , he was absolutely clear that it was over the week-end following the assassination that McCone requested that NPIC submit the Zapruder film to analysis. Brugioni still recalls his shock when he witnessed the Fatal Shot That took off the right side of the President’s Head”. (Notes: page 407) The work of compiling the medical evidence record of the President's autopsy did not require neither the co-operation of the FBI nor the CIA....so in this area of the investigation the Commissions efforts were not impeded nor distorted..by any investigative dishonesties and or cover-ups perpetrated upon such by the agencies..The WC condoned the sanctioned perjury ,connived, at the destruction of the best evidence ,boycotted key witnesses ,and deliberately and knowingly suppressed materials, medical records and legal documents. The massive corruption of the autopsy records was undertaken with one purpose : To ensure that the Medical evidence in the President's assassination was consistent with the Official Government's version of a Lone Assassin.. "The Overwhelming weight of the evidence supports the view that President Kennedy's official autopsy report was Deliberately Falsified to suppress the fact that he was a victim of a conspiracy." "It is a joyless irony that the autopsy of Kennedy's alleged assassin Lee Harvey Oswald ,performed by the Dallas County medical examiner ,Dr..Rose ,was worthy of a President. By comparison. President Kennedy received an autopsy unworthy of even the most unfortunate and unlamented derelict.." page: 153...(For critics and information of the President's autopsy see..... Henry Hurt aptly described JFK's autopsy as "the autopsy of the century" .See Hurt " Reasonable Doubt "..Sylvia Meagher ,"Accessories After The Fact." ..reprint 1992.. David Lifton " Best Evidence" 1981..Harold Weisberg " Post Mortum"..1975..Weisberg's powerful work still remains the most forcefully argued critique of the official autopsy..The official defenders of the President's autopsy whom usually argue that whereas the autopsy had starling deficiencies, it still arrived at the correct and valid conclusions ..such as Gerald Posner.."Case Closed"..1993..David Wobbling "November 22,1963:You are the Jury." 1973..David Belin’s, Wobbling "Final Disclosure"..1988..Denis L.Breo."JFK's Death"..parts 1-3..Journal of the American Medical Association 267 ,no.20 & 268.no.13...and John K. Latimer "Kennedy and Lincoln..Medical and Ballistics Comparisons of Their Assassinations..1980..notes p:407.. "Anticipating the FBI ,the CIA's NPIC ran it's own analysis of the Zaprduer film over the week-end following the assassinations. Like their FBI counterparts , the NPIC interpreteurs established that the first shot came before Oswald could have a clear view of the presidential limo and that there were at least two shooters". p.355 and chapter 6.. "Breach of Trust" ************************ Pat: Burkley's placement of the back wound at the third thoracic level was not confirmed by the Parkland witnesses, as none of the Parkland witnesses, save a nurse many years later, made any statements indicating they even knew of this wound's existence. While Burkley may have simply said third thoracic based upon his own observation, the possibility he saw the face sheet at the autopsy, which places the wound in that area, seems m ore likely. As Burkley spent most of his time with the family, it seems likely he only took a passing glance at Kennedy, and deferred to the face sheet. There is certainly no report of Burkley making a close inspection of the body. When you look at the face sheet it is clear the drawing is inaccurate in the shoulder area. A mark in line with the shoulder is way too far from the head, and a mark the correct distance from the head is way too far above the shoulder. On the night of the autopsy I believe Boswell placed the wound--which was around T-1 T-2, in line with the shoulder. Later, when it became a huge issue, he placed the wound in relation to the head, effecvtively moving the wound onto the neck. A wound at T-1, as acknowledged by the HSCA, is still too low to be in line with a trajectory from the sniper's nest to the throat. As a result I feel the T-3 T-1 dispute is a non-issue. What remains an issue is whether the doctors deliberately lied to Rydberg when he created his drawings depicting the back wound 2 inches higher than T-1. Bernice :Correction....*****It should read Rear Head Wound"****** will correct and add in Head".... B: "Why------was John F .Kennedy’s death certificate---signed by Dr. G. Burkley treated as such... The death certificate sheet headed by the words “summary of the facts related to death “-----Places the President Kennedy’s non-fatal back wound “ in the posterior back at about the level of the Third thoracic vertebrae …Recall that Dr.Burkley wrote the death certificate a day before he had received the Bethesda autopsy report..along with the six copies, before the assassination accounting was manipulated and settled upon….Burkley’s positioning of the Rear Head Wound in the Death Certificate was and is consistent with the Parkland Doctors and Nurses reports of said wounds, along with the Dallas Inquest Report signed on Nov.22/63…the press meeting announcement at Parkland as well as the 15 Doctors,3 Surgery Traumatic Nurses ,Television, radio newspaper reports, eye witnesses ,SS agents, FBI observers and Jacqueline Kennedy". ..The document that was treated like the “plague” to the Commission’s already predetermined conclusions…”one it treated like a poisonous snake”.. ------was John F .Kennedy’s death certificate---signed by Dr. G. Burkley The death certificate sheet headed by the words “summary of the facts related to death “-----Places the President Kennedy’s non-fatal back wound “ in the posterior back at about the level of the Third thoracic vertebrae …Recall that Dr.Burkley wrote the death certificate a day before he had received the Bethesda autopsy report..along with the six copies , before the assassination accounting was manipulated and settled upon….(notes..page 415..For Burkley’s Nov.24/63 ,receipt of the official autopsy report ,see ARRB Master Set of Medical Records.). Burkley’s positioning of the Rear Wound in the Death Certificate was and is consistent with the Parkland Doctors and Nurses reports of said wounds, along with the Dallas Inquest Report signed on Nov.22/63…the press meeting announcement at Parkland as well as the 15 Doctors,3 Surgery Traumatic Nurses ,Television, radio newspaper reports, eye witnesses ,SS agents, FBI observers and Jacqueline Kennedy,, It is not however CONSISTENT with, nor seen in the ZAPRUDER FILM….film, nor the individual frames from such…. The Dallas Inquest Report…and Burkley’s positioning of the rear head wound that was “signed on Nov. 22/63..at 1pm..states, by Theran Ward justice of the peace ,Precinct Nov.2, Dallas County… Under the heading “Findings of the Justice” ,it reports the cause of death as “ two gunshot wounds..” one of which was “near the center of the body and just above the right shoulder .”” Ward’s information comes from Dr .Malcolm Perry, This document also destroys the information that the body was not turned over and was therefore they were unaware of JFK’s back wound.. and that the Parkland emergency team never checked such.. Harold Wiesberg also in a interview with” Dr. Charles Carrico of Parkland ,who reported that he ran his hands down the sides of Kennedy’s body to determine whether there was a large wound in the back . Carrico noted that this was standard operational procedure in all gunshot cases..” (Notes :page 415.”.It should be noted that there are Two Dallas JFK death certificates . The one signed by Theran Ward on November 22/63, it placed the non fatal rear wound “just above the right shoulder “ as sited in the text..A second death certificate signed by Ward on December 6/63..reported that the immediate cause of death was “ multiple gun shots wounds to the head and the neck”….Since the later was issued after the official autopsy report was released the author Gerald McKnight regards this repositioning of the none fatal posterior wound with great suspicion .For copies of these Dallas County death certificates ,see ARRB ,Master Set of Medical Exhibits ,MD 42 and MD 43 ..The HSCA forensic panel chose to site the second Dec.6/63 version od the death certificate in its critique of the official autopsy report because that version was compatible with it’s findings that the report , while sullied by gross errors and deficiencies,had arrived at “correct and valid conclusions”. See HSCA .Mar.79 vol.7,189..see Weisberg interview with Dr. Charles Carrico, Dec. 1/77,Southwestern Medical School ,Univ. Texas ,Harold Weisberg’s autopsy file ,Weisberg archive..”.. John F. Kennedy’s death certificate affected greatly, the Warren Commission’s Weekend conclusions that a lone assassin had shot and killed the President, from the TSBD…so they therefore ignored and suppressed the report on his wounds.The Death Certificate does not appear in the Report, now the 26 Volumes of Hearings and Exhibits….Ignoring it appears that is was his Assassination after all that generated the 914 page investigative report displayed with almost seven thousand footnotes and a “bodyguard” of 26 stout volumes of more than 10 Million Words… A two page death certificate threatened to bring down this astounding, regarded as a respectful officially “sanctioned truths and conclusions is a scenario worthy of George Orwell”.. Pages…6-7-167-8-177-8-9- BOT..McKnight.. ********************************************** B... ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Pat: He changed the back wound from "back" to "back of the neck" and the report ended up saying "base of the back of the neck." This was probably an innocent mistake in that Ford was not the sharpest tack in the box and was almost undoubtedly basing his impression of the wound on the Rydberg drawings, which depicted the wound at the base of the neck.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- One can no more "change" the physical existence of a wound, than they can change the physical existence of other known forms of matter. One can however, in writing, make changes which not unlike much of the WC, tell a truth, yet only confuse. And, since JFK had a "back" wound which was in the vicinity of the C-7/T-1 vertebrae, and he also had a neck wound which was located just in the edge of the hairline, then Ford actually "changed" nothing. Of course it has certainly confused a lot of those who have no full understanding of the bullet wounds incurred by JFK. Might I recommend that one read up on the hairline entry point which struck at the base of the neck and thereafter "tunnelled" upwards* and slanting slightly to the left. P.S. * "upwards" is a relative position and applies only when the head/neck is in the normal vertical position. P.P.S. I do frequently enjoy observing those of the Multiple Assassin/CT persuasion, chase their own tail. Glad you're having fun, Tom, but I get tired reading your long and repetitious posts which lead to an aimless journey into confusion. Do you want to have a crack at any of the non bullet wound questions? There's about 56 so far by my counting. Tom P.P.P.S. Check the tangential bullet entrance hole through the coat of JFK which is located immediately below the point where the collar turn-down is located, and thereafter compare this with the neck/base of neck/edge of hairline entrance wound in the neck of JFK. Just might learn something! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Glad you're having fun, Tom, but I get tired reading your long and repetitious posts which lead to an aimless journey into confusion. Do you want to have a crack at any of the non bullet wound questions? There's about 56 so far by my counting.[/color] --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Might I recommend that you answer the questions for yourself! Then, no matter how ignorant of the facts and asinine the answers which you derive may be, then you will at least have little difficulty in believeng them. 2. Might I further recommend that you either hunt the "ignore" button, or else just stick with those postings which are within your realm of understanding of the facts and physical evidence. Thereby eliminating much of your confusion. Now, for those who continue to search for the answers: The introduction into evidence of the coat worn by JFK was accomplished by good ole "slickie boy" Arlen Specter in much the same manner as was the altered survey data. And, anyone who has not figured out the modus operandi of Arlen Specter, is not likely to resolve too many of the unanswered questions regarding the actual assassination. 1. The coat was entered into evidence during the questioning of Dr. Humes (& Boswell & Finck). 2. The coat had a "note" attached which stated that the superior hole (the second hole up near the collar) was where a comparison sample had been removed by the FBI Lab during testing and examination of the coat. 3. I might add, that the "note" is now one of those items which have also disappeared from the National Archives. 4. The next mention of the superior/second hole in the coat is during the questioning of FBI Agent Frazier, who in reality has no personal and/or direct knowledge as to when or how the hole got there.* *Agent Frazier can be located at: (last accounting I had) 1704 Oak Lane McLean, VA 22101 Tel: 703-533-2877 5. The ONLY Agent of the FBI to admit to a having examined the coat worn by JFK at the time of the assassination, is/was Henry Heiberger.* *In event that anyone has interest in the facts, at risk of continuatiation of Mr. Stapelton's confusion of the subject matter, I will nevertheless repeat the essence of my discussions with FBI Agents Gallagher; Heilman; Heiberger; etc. as regards those persons who actually examined the physical evidence in the JFK Assassination. 6. NO COMPARISON SAMPLE WAS TAKEN AND/OR REMOVED FROM THE COAT WORN BY JFK AT THE TIME OF THE ASSASSINATION. 7. In addition, Laboratory Test/Analysis Sheets were completed for each piece of evidence tested, for each and every specific test which this evidence was submitted to. Therefore, if one is in the "Question" business, then they just may want to question exactly where are the FBI Lab/Test reports for JFK's coat, as well as the coat of JBC, as well as CE399. Lastly, for the most part, even the "basic idiot" who only has a limited understanding of evidence as gained from watching CSI, should recognize the high probability of correlating factors as relates to a hole located in the collar area of JFK's coat, and a bullet entrance into the head which is located directly at the edge of the hairline. For Mr. Healy & Mr. Speer! 1. The reason that no "blowout" is observed in the Z-film is due to the fact that this damage to the rear/occipital area of the skull of JFK did not occur until impact of the third/last/final shot in the assassination shot sequence. 2. The one down in front of Mr. Altgens position. Now, correlate: A. The hole through the coat in the vicinity of the collar. B. The entrance hole in the base of the neck/edge of hairline of JFK, as obseved and documented during the autopsy. C. The "tunnelling" effect of the bullet as it passed through the soft tissue of the base of the neck, to impact in the vicinity of the EOP. D. The EOP entry point and subsequent damage to the tip of the occipital lobe of the brain. E. The dimensions and ultimate angle of penetration through the skull of JFK for the EOP entry. Tom. Boy am I glad that I was never one to fall for the WC's story that the Z312/313 shot was the last shot fired! Where I come from, liars often tend to lie about all things. P.S. For those who continue to repeat rumor, hearsay, innunedo, half-truth, etc; such as that the brain of JFK was not sectioned after having been "fixed". You just may want to go back and do your own homework on this subject as opposed to continueing to believe exactly what you read here. Pat & David! You are on the correct pathway's, hope that you do not veer down the rabbit holes again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Stapleton Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Tom, thanks for the advice. I'll consider it carefully before I disregard it. Before the thread becomes shrouded in a blizzard of entry wound facts and figures, may I just ask if you still believe LHO killed JFK? That's the meat of the thread. A Lone Nutter who is critical of the WC is still a Lone Nutter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 Tom, thanks for the advice. I'll consider it carefully before I disregard it.Before the thread becomes shrouded in a blizzard of entry wound facts and figures, may I just ask if you still believe LHO killed JFK? That's the meat of the thread. A Lone Nutter who is critical of the WC is still a Lone Nutter. 1. A "Lone Assassin" is responsible for having fired the three shots which not only struck JFK, but are responsible for his death and ALL wounds which he incurred. 2. Whoever this "Lone Assassin" was, he most assuredly was not a "Lone Nut". 3. The WC is an intentional misrepresentation and obfuscation of the simple facts of the assassination. 4. This misrepresentation/obfuscation/lie by the WC, has little to do with the facts of the assassination. 5. Arlen Specter's role in misrepsentation of the facts was politically as well as obviously personally motivated. 6. The "Jury" is still out on whether LHO was the one who actually pulled the trigger, or was the designated "rabbit". There is sufficient evidence to support either option. And, time has pretty well erased the capability to resolve either. 7. Whichever the case, LHO was involved up to his neck in this operation, and most probably was in fact the triggerman in a well orchestrated assassination of JFK. 8. Lastly, LHO was most assuredly not "alone" in his preparation and guidance which lead him to Dallas, TX and the TSDB, nor was he a "Lone Nut". 9. And, not unlike Mr. McVey, there are many items which have yet to be revealed as regards LHO and his true associations, as well as how and why the U.S. Government allowed them to "slip" the net and thereafter accomplish their (directed) goals. 10. Lastly, if and when serious and qualified researchers cease to chase mythological beings down the rabbit holes of Alice in Wonderland, they just may ultimately find much of the answers as regards the actual events of 11/22/63 and the subsequent LBJ/WC con-job which has lead many into the "Land of the Lost"! There is no "Magic"! & Politicians, not unlike Magicians, can make things disappear! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mark Valenti Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 I think it's interesting that most of the questions in this thread point to a conspiracy of malfeasance, sabotage or deception after the shooting, not before. ' MV Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pat Speer Posted October 17, 2006 Share Posted October 17, 2006 (edited) To set the record straight, Mark S, Tom is not the only single-assassin conspiracist. John Canal, the author of Silencing the Lone Assassin, who writes on the McAdams newsgroup, believes that Oswald did it, completely alone, but that the Johnson Administration thought there may have been others, and faked mucho evidence to convince the public Oswald acted alone. Recently, when discussing the case with him on the newsgroup, I was put in the position of defending the HSCA forensic pathology panel, by claiming they were merely blind and incompetent, not part of a conspiracy. I tried to point out the irony that a conspiracy theorist was the one arguing against conspiracy, but no one seemed to notice. In lone-nut land, if you think Oswald did it, no matter what else you think, you are one of them, a good guy. If you think there was a conspiracy to shoot Kennedy, on the other hand, you are a wacko, and your sanity and patriotism are immediately suspect. Edited October 17, 2006 by Pat Speer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bernice Moore Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 B., In your travels through this evidence morass, have you run across a date [month,day,year] when the NPIC first evaluated the Zapruder Film? Thanks -- DHealy Hi David: What a morass... Yes, it states, " Late Sunday, November 24th, the Secret Service turned over to the CIA a copy of the Zapruder film. The CIA had a keen interest in the film because the the White House had authorized the agency to conduct it's own in-house investigation. McCone requested that the agency's National Photographic Intelligence Center (NPIC) in Washington D.C. undertake a special rush job on the film. ...page 151...Note # 63.. Note # 63..page 406: G.McNight.." My telephone interview, May 2, 2003, with Dino. A Brugioni, the centre's chief analyst who was in charge of NPIC's interpretation of the Zapruder film . The conclusions that follow are my own and should not be attributed to Mr. Brugioni. When Brugioni turned over to McCone of Helms the four photo briefing boards with accompanying memoranda or explanations including the calculations in the document, he had no knowledge of the official truth of JFK's assassination that had been decided upon over the week-end. See also Philip Melanson, "Hidden Exposure: Cover Up and Intrigue in the CIA's Secret Possession of the Zapruder Film." The Third Decade 1 No.1( November 1984) :9... Melanson makes a strong circumstantial case that the NPIC received a copy of the Zapruder film the day after the assassination." ****************************** Quote:Pat: I have Breach of Trust. What I was getting at is that there is nothing in the CIA files that says "we conclude there was more than one shooter," there is only McKnight's interpretation from the numbers on the NPIC sheets that there was more than one shooter. As the FBI were the ones to test the Carcano, and determine that it needed a minimum of 2.3 seconds between shots, and the SS and/or CIA were the ones to perform the NPIC analysis, there is no reason to assume the NPIC people knew about the 2.3 seconds, and no reason to assume the FBI knew about the NPIC analysis. If the Kennedy assassination shows us anything it's that the compartments of the government do not share information and do not cooperate with each. There is not one evil government; there is a multitude of incompetent and self-serving bureaucracies. The FBI didn't even look at the autopsy report for over a month after the assassination. Reply: Bernice: ( Mr,.McKnight does not say this is his interpretation, he says " the NPIC's analysis showed".. I will look up this document in Mr.Weisberg's book, to see what it says exactly.) see below... But it does say, " the first shot occurred before Z # 210, as both the FBI and the CIA photo analysis determined"..see below ( which he says the NPIC's analysis showed, so it reads that all three , the NPIC, FBI & CIA came up with the first shot coming before Z # 210 ).. The FBI received a copy of the JFK autopsy report on Dec.23rd some 18 days after it turned it's report CD 1,over to the WC ..see Rosen to DeLoach,11/15.1966, FBI JFK Assassination File, 62-109060-NR..) No they did not work together, jealousy, and with the WC, that is obvious....many of their requests, were ignored, and not completed..or so we are led to believe...but with all the leakage of reports, that did seemingly go on, I do have to wonder just how much those at the top did not know?? Perhaps they did not want to work together in this situation, as they did not want the truth released, this way it was all the more confusing, ? imo..B.. *************** "The report on the center's analysis of those terrible six seconds in Dallas was returned to McCone or Richard Helms, the CIA's deputy director of plans, sometime early Monday morning ..The results were presented in tabular frame-interpretation of the Zapruder film, the same historic six feet of film upon which the Commission would rely heavily for it's own version of the Kennedy assassination. NPIC's analysis indicated that the first shot came before Zapruder frame # 210 . In addition, the center's analysis showed that there was a second shot at Z # 242, just 1.6 seconds after the first shot . All of the Commission's firearms experts agreed that even the most experienced and skilled rifleman would require at least 2.4 seconds ( and this was an optimistic estimate) to cycle Oswald's alleged murder weapon. The 1.6 second interlude between the first and second shots could only mean that there had to be more than one shooter in Dealey Plaza." page 151..Note # 64. Note # 64:Pages 406 -407: See CIA document 1641-450 for NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film of JFK's assassination. These results were pried loose from the CIA by a Freedom of Information Act request in 1982 by the assassination researcher Harold Weisberg. Or see Harold Weisberg, "Photographic Whitewash --Suppressed Kennedy Assassination Pictures ( Frederick, Md :Harold Weisberg Publisher, 1967) pges 302-303. "The Warren report held that the first shot could not have been fired before Z # 210. The Commission's reasoning was clear enough. If Oswald had secreted himself on the sixth floor at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository to prepare for his rendezvous with history, he could not have had a clear shot at Kennedy until at least Z # 210. Between frames 166 and 209 , the aforementioned live Oak in full foliage on November 22 would have blocked a view of the presidential limousine from the so called sniper's nest. If the first shot occurred before Z # 210, as both the FBI and the CIA photo analysis determined ,then,according to the Commission's own, construction, Oswald could not have fired it. However, a sniper hidden in one of the buildings on Houston Street, the Dal-Tex Building, for example, would had had a clear shot at kennedy's back anytime between Z # 170 and Z # 210 . Since what should have been unthinkable in the investigation into the murder of President Kennedy became commonplace, it is not surprising that the results of the FBI and the CIA analysis of the Zapruder film were ignored. The FBI Rankin and his staff suppressed the results if the bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's historic film, and it is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. What the record revealed was that the FBI and CIA coluded in fabricating a story that the CIA never received a copy of the Zapruder film until December 1964, after the Commission disbanded .Hoover told Rankinthat in December 1964 the CIA resquested a copy of the film for " training purposes".."..... Pages 151-152 Note # 65. Note # 65 page 407. Hoover to Rankin, December 4, 1964. A copy of this letter appears in Weisberg ,"Photographic Whitewash" p.143 ..In my conversation with Brugioni , he was absolutely clear that it was over the weekend following the assassination that McCone requested that NPIC submit the Zapruder film to analysis. Brugioni still recalls his shock when he witnessed the fatal shot that took off the right side of JFK's head. The former chief analyst for the center relayed the same account to the assassination researcher and author Gus Russo. See Gus Russo " Live by the Sword" The Secret War against Castro and the Death of JFK", ( Baltimore: Bancroft Press, 1998) pages 339 - 340. From Gerald McKnight's "Breach of Trust"..... B.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted October 18, 2006 Share Posted October 18, 2006 (edited) B.,In your travels through this evidence morass, have you run across a date [month,day,year] when the NPIC first evaluated the Zapruder Film? Thanks -- DHealy Hi David: What a morass... Yes, it states, " Late Sunday, November 24th, the Secret Service turned over to the CIA a copy of the Zapruder film. The CIA had a keen interest in the film because the the White House had authorized the agency to conduct it's own in-house investigation. McCone requested that the agency's National Photographic Intelligence Center (NPIC) in Washington D.C. undertake a special rush job on the film. ...page 151...Note # 63.. Note # 63..page 406: G.McNight.." My telephone interview, May 2, 2003, with Dino. A Brugioni, the centre's chief analyst who was in charge of NPIC's interpretation of the Zapruder film . The conclusions that follow are my own and should not be attributed to Mr. Brugioni. When Brugioni turned over to McCone of Helms the four photo briefing boards with accompanying memoranda or explanations including the calculations in the document, he had no knowledge of the official truth of JFK's assassination that had been decided upon over the week-end. See also Philip Melanson, "Hidden Exposure: Cover Up and Intrigue in the CIA's Secret Possession of the Zapruder Film." The Third Decade 1 No.1( November 1984) :9... Melanson makes a strong circumstantial case that the NPIC received a copy of the Zapruder film the day after the assassination." ****************************** Quote:Pat: I have Breach of Trust. What I was getting at is that there is nothing in the CIA files that says "we conclude there was more than one shooter," there is only McKnight's interpretation from the numbers on the NPIC sheets that there was more than one shooter. As the FBI were the ones to test the Carcano, and determine that it needed a minimum of 2.3 seconds between shots, and the SS and/or CIA were the ones to perform the NPIC analysis, there is no reason to assume the NPIC people knew about the 2.3 seconds, and no reason to assume the FBI knew about the NPIC analysis. If the Kennedy assassination shows us anything it's that the compartments of the government do not share information and do not cooperate with each. There is not one evil government; there is a multitude of incompetent and self-serving bureaucracies. The FBI didn't even look at the autopsy report for over a month after the assassination. Reply: Bernice: ( Mr,.McKnight does not say this is his interpretation, he says " the NPIC's analysis showed".. I will look up this document in Mr.Weisberg's book, to see what it says exactly.) see below... But it does say, " the first shot occurred before Z # 210, as both the FBI and the CIA photo analysis determined"..see below ( which he says the NPIC's analysis showed, so it reads that all three , the NPIC, FBI & CIA came up with the first shot coming before Z # 210 ).. The FBI received a copy of the JFK autopsy report on Dec.23rd some 18 days after it turned it's report CD 1,over to the WC ..see Rosen to DeLoach,11/15.1966, FBI JFK Assassination File, 62-109060-NR..) No they did not work together, jealousy, and with the WC, that is obvious....many of their requests, were ignored, and not completed..or so we are led to believe...but with all the leakage of reports, that did seemingly go on, I do have to wonder just how much those at the top did not know?? Perhaps they did not want to work together in this situation, as they did not want the truth released, this way it was all the more confusing, ? imo..B.. *************** "The report on the center's analysis of those terrible six seconds in Dallas was returned to McCone or Richard Helms, the CIA's deputy director of plans, sometime early Monday morning ..The results were presented in tabular frame-interpretation of the Zapruder film, the same historic six feet of film upon which the Commission would rely heavily for it's own version of the Kennedy assassination. NPIC's analysis indicated that the first shot came before Zapruder frame # 210 . In addition, the center's analysis showed that there was a second shot at Z # 242, just 1.6 seconds after the first shot . All of the Commission's firearms experts agreed that even the most experienced and skilled rifleman would require at least 2.4 seconds ( and this was an optimistic estimate) to cycle Oswald's alleged murder weapon. The 1.6 second interlude between the first and second shots could only mean that there had to be more than one shooter in Dealey Plaza." page 151..Note # 64. Note # 64:Pages 406 -407: See CIA document 1641-450 for NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film of JFK's assassination. These results were pried loose from the CIA by a Freedom of Information Act request in 1982 by the assassination researcher Harold Weisberg. Or see Harold Weisberg, "Photographic Whitewash --Suppressed Kennedy Assassination Pictures ( Frederick, Md :Harold Weisberg Publisher, 1967) pges 302-303. "The Warren report held that the first shot could not have been fired before Z # 210. The Commission's reasoning was clear enough. If Oswald had secreted himself on the sixth floor at the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository to prepare for his rendezvous with history, he could not have had a clear shot at Kennedy until at least Z # 210. Between frames 166 and 209 , the aforementioned live Oak in full foliage on November 22 would have blocked a view of the presidential limousine from the so called sniper's nest. If the first shot occurred before Z # 210, as both the FBI and the CIA photo analysis determined ,then,according to the Commission's own, construction, Oswald could not have fired it. However, a sniper hidden in one of the buildings on Houston Street, the Dal-Tex Building, for example, would had had a clear shot at kennedy's back anytime between Z # 170 and Z # 210 . Since what should have been unthinkable in the investigation into the murder of President Kennedy became commonplace, it is not surprising that the results of the FBI and the CIA analysis of the Zapruder film were ignored. The FBI Rankin and his staff suppressed the results if the bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's historic film, and it is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. What the record revealed was that the FBI and CIA coluded in fabricating a story that the CIA never received a copy of the Zapruder film until December 1964, after the Commission disbanded .Hoover told Rankinthat in December 1964 the CIA resquested a copy of the film for " training purposes".."..... Pages 151-152 Note # 65. Note # 65 page 407. Hoover to Rankin, December 4, 1964. A copy of this letter appears in Weisberg ,"Photographic Whitewash" p.143 ..In my conversation with Brugioni , he was absolutely clear that it was over the weekend following the assassination that McCone requested that NPIC submit the Zapruder film to analysis. Brugioni still recalls his shock when he witnessed the fatal shot that took off the right side of JFK's head. The former chief analyst for the center relayed the same account to the assassination researcher and author Gus Russo. See Gus Russo " Live by the Sword" The Secret War against Castro and the Death of JFK", ( Baltimore: Bancroft Press, 1998) pages 339 - 340. From Gerald McKnight's "Breach of Trust"..... B.. As the FBI were the ones to test the Carcano, and determine that it needed a minimum of 2.3 seconds between shots, The Carcano can be operated and fired considerably faster than this. The 2.3 seconds as determined during testing, was considered to be that time necessary for operation and full & accurate target re-acquisition. Since the time between the first shot (pre-Z-210) and the second shot (Z-312/313) was approximately 5.8 to 5.9 seconds, this is a mute point here. The significance of the 2.3 seconds only fully comes into play when it is considered that the third/last/final shot was not fired until some 30+ feet farther down Elm St. than the impact point of the Z-312/313 shot. (Down in front of Mr. Altgens). In this regards, based on the exposed frames of the Z-film, this would indicate that: A. Either the third/last/final shot was fired in considerably less time than the FBI determined 2.3 seconds of operation and target acquisition time. B. A few frames of the Z-film have conveniently disappeared! C*. A second shooter existed! *omitted from initial posting as there was no second shooter. Nevertheless, this does not rule it out as an alternative. Nevertheless, the actions of the WC served their intended purpose, as they kept everyone looking for some magical mysterious shot in between the pre-Z-210 and the Z312/313 shot. Not to mention chasing that mythological multiple assassin creature that disappeared down Alice's rabbit hole. Also, in deletion of the calculated time span past the Z-312/313 to Altgens position, utilizing he 2.3 seconds firing time, anyone who knew no better, would be looking for some third shot well after Clint Hill had mounted the back of the Presidential limo. The "double blind" by the WC masters, of initial failure to print any frames of the Z-film past the Z-334 position, and thus deleting the known photographic evidence of James Altgens position, along with other aspects of the Z-film, virtually secured for history the loss of the mysterious third shot. Unfortunately, "Virtually" does not equate to "Absolute". As a last comment on this, please recall, as previously discussed, a "lefty" can fire a bolt action rifle considerably faster than can a "righty". Therefore, the 2.3 seconds is not fixed in stone. NPIC's analysis indicated that the first shot came before Zapruder frame # 210 . Last time that I checked, Z-204 to Z-206 fell prior to Z-210. And, since this is the location of JFK at the time that the Time Life Survey work and survey plat were generated, sounds good to me. Especially since the infamous "jiggle" analysis of the initially missing/failure to print frames of the Z-film also tend to support this as well. Do believe that one just may have found another "double blind". "The Warren report held that the first shot could not have been fired before Z # 210 Yep! They also told us that Z312/313 was the last shot. Certainly glad that I was never dumb enough to fall for and/or believe anything which they had to say. it is not surprising that the results of the FBI and the CIA analysis of the Zapruder film were ignored. The FBI Rankin and his staff suppressed the results if the bureau's photo interpretation of Zapruder's historic film, and it is not certain whether McCone or Helms ever shared with the Commission the NPIC's analysis of the Zapruder film. They were not totally ignored! JEH & Company made an attempt at damage control when the FBI took charge and thereafter moved/made the third shot disappear and thereafter moved it back to approximately Z-224, in between the Z-210 and Z-313 position. Unfortunately, JEH most probably failed basic math, and his lie was immediately caught, based on the 2.3 seconds/18.3 elapsed frames of the Z-film mode. Therefore, when one xxxx is exposed, one needs to find a more competent xxxx.----Enter the WC and "slickie boy" lawyers. And rest assured, he was good! Edited October 18, 2006 by Thomas H. Purvis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Black Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 No offense to Purvis because I should have learned long ago, to not enter a Purvis thread unless I have at least one hour to devote to that thread ! Perhaps it is some form of attention deficit disorder, but I usually know little more [and sometimes less], at the end of that hour than when I entered. Sometimes I just get confuseder and confuseder ! Charlie Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 No offense to Purvis because I should have learned long ago, to not enter a Purvis thread unless I have at least one hour to devote to that thread !Perhaps it is some form of attention deficit disorder, but I usually know little more [and sometimes less], at the end of that hour than when I entered. Sometimes I just get confuseder and confuseder ! Charlie Black No offense to Purvis because I should have learned long ago, to not enter a Purvis thread unless I have at least one hour to devote to that thread ! The threads are not normally written for those who have little if any knowledge as regards the assassination of JFK. Most, who have actually conducted research, usually catch on considerably faster than in an hour. Sometimes I just get confuseder and confuseder ! From all indications, you were already highly confused when you entered the arena. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analyst Analyst generally is a term for an individual or tool of whom or which the primary function is a deep (emphasis added) examination of a specific, limited area and may mean I personally consider myself more an "analyst" than a true rsearcher. If you were either, then it is most unlikely that you would "just get confuseder and confuseder !" Lastly! I readily admit to frequently playing various verbal versions of "charades". It is found that in so doing, it aids in separation of the "wheat from the chaffe" Upon agreement to post on this forum, I mistakenly assumed that the "Education" stood for person who had thoroughly done their homework and research as regards the subject matter. Instead, I find much of the same nonsense as can be found on virtually any other talk show on the net, and it frequently plays out as if this site were a re-run of JFK Lancer. Were it not for the intelligent and dedicated search for facts, by a few individuals who honestly are working to obtain the facts and truths, what I may or may not have discovered would have remained boxed away and an extremely large percentage of those here (as well as elsewheres) could continue to chase each others tales/tails throughout Alice's myriad of rabbit holes. So, while you and others are getting "confuseder and confuseder" I, on the other hand would be in continual laughter at the human species and what it can be lead to believe once it's basic survival needs have been met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Black Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 (edited) Tom YOUR opinion of what I do or do not know regarding the JFK assassination probably means as little to the other members of the forum as it does to me ! I also don't need your interpretation of the word "analyst" because "I ARE ONE" ! I just find your posts on this subject today as boring as your previous posts on your "twig theory" and your ridiculous "insight" into the Old South social structure. It seems that you know very little of anything that can be scientifically tested ! I don't feel that most members of this forum appreciate what you feel is a "clever" means of beating around the bush, as an effort to attract interest. You call it a "game of charades" ? I call it a waste of time, participating in any subject, in which you are active. I am not going into the specifics because I frankly don't care enough, BUT much of the information "FACTS" that you post are not only inacurate but are purposely misleading. You consider yourself a weapons guru....anyone who has ever fired an MC rifle KNOWS that it is impossible to reacquire a moving target with this scoped rifle in 2.3 seconds and score a hit without divine intervention ! I could continue with some of your ridiculous claims but I don't feel that you are worth the effort ! Charlie Black Edited October 19, 2006 by Charles Black Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 TomYOUR opinion of what I do or do not know regarding the JFK assassination probably means as little to the other members of the forum as it does to me ! I also don't need your interpretation of the word "analyst" because "I ARE ONE" ! I just find your posts on this subject today as boring as your previous posts on your "twig theory" and your ridiculous "insight" into the Old South social structure. It seems that you know very little of anything that can be scientifically tested ! I don't feel that most members of this forum appreciate what you feel is a "clever" means of beating around the bush, as an effort to attract interest. Charlie Black Without doubt, the world eagerly awaits your accurate and factual analysis-----of anything---related to the assassination of JFK. As to your reference to the "twig theory", kindly refer your questions to Mr. James R. Looney, formerly head Firearms & Toolmark Examiner, Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation. Graduate of the FBI Academy and charter member of the AFTE. Or, would you prefer the names of a few former FBI Agents? Although unlikely that you will understand, perhaps some of them can explain to you the simplicity of testing and verification of certain ballistic concepts. Rest assured that nothing would make my day better than for know-nothings of the JFK assassination such as yourself to completely ignore anything posted by myself. Then, considerably less time would have to be expended in explanation to others that you not only know nothing, but have also apparantly never taken the time to attempt to learn anything factual. In that regards, you most certainly could have been correct in regards to your attention (learning) deficient disorder. Someone once stated that a wise man not only knows his limitations, but stays within them as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas H. Purvis Posted October 19, 2006 Share Posted October 19, 2006 TomYOUR opinion of what I do or do not know regarding the JFK assassination probably means as little to the other members of the forum as it does to me ! I also don't need your interpretation of the word "analyst" because "I ARE ONE" ! I just find your posts on this subject today as boring as your previous posts on your "twig theory" and your ridiculous "insight" into the Old South social structure. It seems that you know very little of anything that can be scientifically tested ! I don't feel that most members of this forum appreciate what you feel is a "clever" means of beating around the bush, as an effort to attract interest. You call it a "game of charades" ? I call it a waste of time, participating in any subject, in which you are active. I am not going into the specifics because I frankly don't care enough, BUT much of the information "FACTS" that you post are not only inacurate but are purposely misleading. You consider yourself a weapons guru....anyone who has ever fired an MC rifle KNOWS that it is impossible to reacquire a moving target with this scoped rifle in 2.3 seconds and score a hit without divine intervention ! I could continue with some of your ridiculous claims but I don't feel that you are worth the effort ! Charlie Black You consider yourself a weapons guru....anyone who has ever fired an MC rifle KNOWS that it is impossible to reacquire a moving target with this scoped rifle in 2.3 seconds and score a hit without divine intervention ! I could continue with some of your ridiculous claims but I don't feel that you are worth the effort ! This one certainly warranted it's own response! Actually! I never considered myself so stupid and devoid of the capability of rational thought and deductive reasoning, that I felt that I had to believe what the Warren Commission claimed and stated as the facts and/or sequencing of shots in the assassination. Therefore, it was of no great suprise that it was also found that the time frame from the first shot at approximately Z204/206 until the second shot at approximately Z312/313 was approximately 5.8 to 5.9 seconds of elapsed time. However, as regards the 2.3 seconds/18.3 elapsed frames of the Z-film timing, this does create somewhat of a problem as regards the time frame between the second shot at Z-312/313 and the final and last shot some 30+ feet farther down the road. The only other person known to have resolved this, also has this problem and thus has associated the third/last/final shot with a second assassin. Which certainly holds more merit than does any of the other multiple assassin theories. However, this person has neither taken into consideration nor resolved the issues as relates to the Z-film and exactly how it can appear that the Presidential Limousine appears to be travelling at approximately 11 mph through this last 30+ foot distance, at a time when some witnesses even thought that the vehicle came to a complete stop, and most stated that the vehicle slowed considerably. As soon as Mr. Healy (and a few others) resolve the issues of the "running/jumping man", and some other "double blind" problems, then most of the answers will become apparant even to those who have the learning deficit disorders. And rest assured, they are very, very close. 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