Conspiracy Theorists v Lone Nutters

[Frank Agbat]

...

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.

...

And rest assured, they are very, very close.

Tom,

So, if I gather correctly, central to your conceptualization is a post-z313 final shot, with all shots coming from behind the limo? I ask this because I've spent some time pondering a post-313 shot. However, it doesn't seem to jibe with the majority of witness testimony, at least on the surface.

What about Tague?

How and when was JBC wounded?

Was the same type of ammo used for all three shots?

Is the z-film, as it exists, unaltered and complete (and, as such, useful as an accurate time line)?

I don't think I'm learning disabled, but I do want to make sure I thorougly understand what you are postulating.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

...

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.

...

And rest assured, they are very, very close.

Tom,

So, if I gather correctly, central to your conceptualization is a post-z313 final shot, with all shots coming from behind the limo? I ask this because I've spent some time pondering a post-313 shot. However, it doesn't seem to jibe with the majority of witness testimony, at least on the surface.

What about Tague?

How and when was JBC wounded?

Was the same type of ammo used for all three shots?

Is the z-film, as it exists, unaltered and complete (and, as such, useful as an accurate time line)?

I don't think I'm learning disabled, but I do want to make sure I thorougly understand what you are postulating.

What about Tague?

As incorrect as our favorite meteorologist is in regards to many things, he is quite correct in this aspect.

The "Tague hit" is a result of one of the lead fragments from the Z312/313 head shot and resulting fragmentation of the bullet.

And, despite what many will attempt to persuade otherwise, this is not that difficult to resolve either, especially when Mr. Tague's testimony as to when he was hit is taken into consideration.

Besides the simple fact that there was only:

A. One intact bullet which ultimately lodged in the back of JFK.

B. One bullet to the top of the head of JFK which subsequently severely fragmented (Z312/313)

C. One bullet which passed through the head of JFK, remained intact, created massive chest and a leg wound to JBC, remaining intact, and then becoming "magic".

How and when was JBC wounded?

Which Wound?

Wrist wound as a result of one of the fragments from the head shot at the second shot/aka Z312/313.

Back, chest, and leg wound as a result of the "magic" bullet/aka third/last/final shot down in front of Mr. Altgens. (30+ feet farther down Elm St. from the impact point of Z312/313.)

Was the same type of ammo used for all three shots?

All, WCC 6.5mm Carcano ammo, fired from the exact same rifle, from the exact same location, by the exact same person.

Is the z-film, as it exists, unaltered and complete (and, as such, useful as an accurate time line)?

No, and No!

This should be quite evident from the long ago information provided in the "Vehicle Speed Analysis" which I allowed JFK Lancer to publish along with the first absolutely irrefutable proof of altered evidence.

(which I have also shared here)

The "selective" extraction of frames of the Z-film, not only makes the Presidential Limo ultimately appear to be travelling at a faster rate of speed than it actually was, but it also eliminates key elements which would correspond to witness testimony as well as creates considerable confusion among researchers.

As example:

Mr. James Altgens clearly describes the blood and tissue that is blown out of the head of JFK, directly towards his (Mr. Altgens) position.

Anyone like to tackle exactly why this is not seen in the Z-film?

Multiple witnesses speak of having observed the vehicle slow considerably after the Z-312/313 head shot.

Some were even under the impression that the vehicle came to a complete stop.

Yet, the current version of the Z-film indicates no such slowing of the Presidential Vehicle during this period.

Anyone like to tackle eactly why this anomaly exists?

There are several other areas which need to be addressed and fully and satisfactorily answered, and those who are working towards this are doing so in the correct methods.

And, although I may frequently "point" to what should be taken a good look at, the final resolution must be their determination.

And yes, I play verbal "charades" such as the "running/jumping" man, and hopefully such games will stimulate others to attempt to at least resolve exactly what the hell it is that I am speaking of.

Who knows what all I have missed, as not unlike most of us humans, blinders often block something which should be totally obvious.

And lastly, and a somewhat new one.

"Double Blinds" are frequently utilized throughout much of the information.

I do believe that once it was found that the "head snap" frames of the Z-film were printed in an out of order sequence in the WC, until found.

Then, when corrected/exposed, we had the rapid "head snap" to the rear.

Which by the way would not be that "rapid" if an additional frame or so were inserted.

Missing frames can speed up vehicles (on film) just as it can speed up human reactions., just as it can make 2.3 or so seconds appear as approximately 1.9 or so seconds.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

...

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.

...

And rest assured, they are very, very close.

Tom,

So, if I gather correctly, central to your conceptualization is a post-z313 final shot, with all shots coming from behind the limo? I ask this because I've spent some time pondering a post-313 shot. However, it doesn't seem to jibe with the majority of witness testimony, at least on the surface.

What about Tague?

How and when was JBC wounded?

Was the same type of ammo used for all three shots?

Is the z-film, as it exists, unaltered and complete (and, as such, useful as an accurate time line)?

I don't think I'm learning disabled, but I do want to make sure I thorougly understand what you are postulating.

What about Tague?

As incorrect as our favorite meteorologist is in regards to many things, he is quite correct in this aspect.

The "Tague hit" is a result of one of the lead fragments from the Z312/313 head shot and resulting fragmentation of the bullet.

And, despite what many will attempt to persuade otherwise, this is not that difficult to resolve either, especially when Mr. Tague's testimony as to when he was hit is taken into consideration.

Besides the simple fact that there was only:

A. One intact bullet which ultimately lodged in the back of JFK.

B. One bullet to the top of the head of JFK which subsequently severely fragmented (Z312/313)

C. One bullet which passed through the head of JFK, remained intact, created massive chest and a leg wound to JBC, remaining intact, and then becoming "magic".

How and when was JBC wounded?

Which Wound?

Wrist wound as a result of one of the fragments from the head shot at the second shot/aka Z312/313.

Back, chest, and leg wound as a result of the "magic" bullet/aka third/last/final shot down in front of Mr. Altgens. (30+ feet farther down Elm St. from the impact point of Z312/313.)

Was the same type of ammo used for all three shots?

All, WCC 6.5mm Carcano ammo, fired from the exact same rifle, from the exact same location, by the exact same person.

Is the z-film, as it exists, unaltered and complete (and, as such, useful as an accurate time line)?

No, and No!

This should be quite evident from the long ago information provided in the "Vehicle Speed Analysis" which I allowed JFK Lancer to publish along with the first absolutely irrefutable proof of altered evidence.

(which I have also shared here)

The "selective" extraction of frames of the Z-film, not only makes the Presidential Limo ultimately appear to be travelling at a faster rate of speed than it actually was, but it also eliminates key elements which would correspond to witness testimony as well as creates considerable confusion among researchers.

As example:

Mr. James Altgens clearly describes the blood and tissue that is blown out of the head of JFK, directly towards his (Mr. Altgens) position.

Anyone like to tackle exactly why this is not seen in the Z-film?

Multiple witnesses speak of having observed the vehicle slow considerably after the Z-312/313 head shot.

Some were even under the impression that the vehicle came to a complete stop.

Yet, the current version of the Z-film indicates no such slowing of the Presidential Vehicle during this period.

Anyone like to tackle eactly why this anomaly exists?

There are several other areas which need to be addressed and fully and satisfactorily answered, and those who are working towards this are doing so in the correct methods.

And, although I may frequently "point" to what should be taken a good look at, the final resolution must be their determination.

And yes, I play verbal "charades" such as the "running/jumping" man, and hopefully such games will stimulate others to attempt to at least resolve exactly what the hell it is that I am speaking of.

Who knows what all I have missed, as not unlike most of us humans, blinders often block something which should be totally obvious.

And lastly, and a somewhat new one.

"Double Blinds" are frequently utilized throughout much of the information.

I do believe that once it was found that the "head snap" frames of the Z-film were printed in an out of order sequence in the WC, until found.

Then, when corrected/exposed, we had the rapid "head snap" to the rear.

Which by the way would not be that "rapid" if an additional frame or so were inserted.

Missing frames can speed up vehicles (on film) just as it can speed up human reactions., just as it can make 2.3 or so seconds appear as approximately 1.9 or so seconds.

Making reference to some document long ago presented and no longer available is reminescent of how the WC operated.

Therefore, one more time.

And please, respect the copyright to this material.

Tom

[Charles Black]

Tom

Please do not attempt to impress me with your FBI acquaintences or your limited understanding of ballistics. You are truly playing with the wrong opponent.

As I have chosen to participate in only a very few forums, and in a limited, and not an occupational manner, I do so for only two reasons. Enjoyment and education ! Since it is obvious that I will receive neither from you, I have chosen to block you out of my participation.

Tom....have you ever considered spending less time

on these forums and a little more time toward creating a life for yourself ?

With you....I am forever through !

Charlie Black

[Frank Agbat]

Tom,

Thank you for providing additional clarity. There are many things in your post that I need to ponder and consider.

[Mark Stapleton]

Tom,

Thank you for providing additional clarity. There are many things in your post that I need to ponder and consider.

A suitably reverent tone for communicating with a towering intellect like Tom's.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom,

Thank you for providing additional clarity. There are many things in your post that I need to ponder and consider.

A suitably reverent tone for communicating with a towering intellect like Tom's.

At least I am not lost in some rabbit hole chasing mythological creatures!

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom

Please do not attempt to impress me with your FBI acquaintences or your limited understanding of ballistics. You are truly playing with the wrong opponent.

As I have chosen to participate in only a very few forums, and in a limited, and not an occupational manner, I do so for only two reasons. Enjoyment and education ! Since it is obvious that I will receive neither from you, I have chosen to block you out of my participation.

Tom....have you ever considered spending less time

on these forums and a little more time toward creating a life for yourself ?

With you....I am forever through !

Charlie Black

With you....I am forever through !

Hopefully, you are a man (or whatever) of your word.

And although my understanding of ballistics; forensics; and pathology may be limited in their scope, and content, at least I know enough to refer all such items to truly qualified persons in these fields.

I do so for only two reasons. Enjoyment and education ! Since it is obvious that I will receive neither from you,

I still await, with great anticipation, some of your analysis work!

Of course, I also am not holding my breath.

And since you apparantly have some mysterious method of analysis which excludes all of the forensic, ballistic, pathological, and physical evidence, I must assume that it comes from a crystal ball.

Therefore, it is most unlikely that you will learn anything from anyone.

Tom....have you ever considered spending less time

on these forums and a little more time toward creating a life for yourself ?

Had one, and it most certainly was a great one at that.

And even now, every now and then I get another good kick in the "A" from it.

At least I do not have to post my wife's (ex) resume in order to buttress up anything!

[Mark Stapleton]

Tom,

Thank you for providing additional clarity. There are many things in your post that I need to ponder and consider.

A suitably reverent tone for communicating with a towering intellect like Tom's.

At least I am not lost in some rabbit hole chasing mythological creatures!

You mean the other shooters? You're right, they are almost mythological.

Don't you think a lone assassin is a slightly risky strategy for the conspirators? I realise you are more of a CT than a LN. I agree with you about the probability of Z-film alteration, although I don't know about that vehicle speed analysis you posted. Like most, I'm dwarfed by your apparent mastery of technical analysis, so you could have stuck any numbers in there for all I know.

Three shots from one location--behind JFK? What about all the witnesses who saw smoke coming from the knoll and fence? Those shots all missed, I assume.

A conspiracy theory utilising a lone assassin? It's too weird.

[Thomas H. Purvis]

Tom,

Thank you for providing additional clarity. There are many things in your post that I need to ponder and consider.

A suitably reverent tone for communicating with a towering intellect like Tom's.

At least I am not lost in some rabbit hole chasing mythological creatures!

You mean the other shooters? You're right, they are almost mythological.

Don't you think a lone assassin is a slightly risky strategy for the conspirators? I realise you are more of a CT than a LN. I agree with you about the probability of Z-film alteration, although I don't know about that vehicle speed analysis you posted. Like most, I'm dwarfed by your apparent mastery of technical analysis, so you could have stuck any numbers in there for all I know.

Three shots from one location--behind JFK? What about all the witnesses who saw smoke coming from the knoll and fence? Those shots all missed, I assume.

A conspiracy theory utilising a lone assassin? It's too weird.

so you could have stuck any numbers in there for all I know.

1. In event that you have (as have I) ordered many, many documents from the National Archives, and thereafter read/reviewed that information which first became public knowledge via me, to Chuck Marler, to end up in Fetzer's book, in regards to the alteration of survey data by the WC, then it is most unlikely that you are abreast of either the information and/or it's significance.

Rest assured, Mr. Healy knows, as do a few others that I am aware of.

A conspiracy theory utilising a lone assassin? It's too weird.

In event you had not noticed, I somewhat enjoy sitting out here on this limb all by myself!

Those shots all missed, I assume.

P.S.

Those shots all missed, I assume.

In event that there were any, then they most assuredly missed everyone in the Presidential Limousine, as well as the limousine itself.

For all that I know, there may have been from 3 to 13 multiple assassins hiding aound Dealy Plaza.

However, each and every one of the wounds incurred by JFK and JBC were created by the three shots which were fired from behind, and above, from the sixth floor window of the TSDB.

Nevertheless, the WC is still a lie in this regards.

[John Simkin]

(64) George Joannides was the CIA case-officer for the members of the Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil (DRE). This is the organization that Lee Harvey Oswald was in contact with in New Orleans in August 1963. This information was kept from the Warren Commission and the House Select Committee for Assassinations. In fact, Joannides was appointed as the CIA's liaison to the HSCA, where he was able to block the committee from seeing declassified documents.

(65) In recent years investigators into the assassination of John F. Kennedy such as G. Robert Blakey, Jefferson Morley, Anthony Summers, John McAdams, John M. Newman, David Kaiser, Michael Kurtz, Oliver Stone, David Talbot, Cyril H. Wecht, David R. Wrone and Gerald Posner have campaigned for the CIA to release the files concerning the activities of Joannides in 1963.

In October, 2006, Judge Richard Leon upheld the CIA's right to block disclosure of records about Joannides's operational activities in August 1963.

[John Simkin]

(66) When Lieutenant J. C. Day, the head of the Dallas police crime unit, arrived on the 6th floor of the Texas School Book Depository, he inspected the rifle suspected of being involved in the assassination of JFK. His behaviour was very strange.

(i) Day did not smell it to determine whether it emitted the odor of gunpowder.

(ii) Day found what he claimed was a palm print on the metal barrel but did not follow normal police regulations by ordering any photographs of the print.

(iii) Day lifted the print from the rifle with Scotch tape in such a way that it left no trace of either the print or the lifting of the print. According to one expert the “FBI crime lab, which had never before in tens of thousands of cases encountered an object that did not contain traces of a print’s having been lifted from it.”

(iv) Day discovered an unfired cartridge in the rifle’s firing chamber, yet failed either to have it photographed or dusted for prints.

(v) Day then walked over to the south-east corner window and seeing the large, three-foot-long paper bag in the corner, wrote on it: “Found next to sixth floor window. May have been used to carry weapon.” Why did he think this? Yet, even though he did, he failed to order the paper bag to be photographed in the place it was found.

Day’s behaviour ensured that if Lee Harvey Oswald had ever appeared in court charged with the assassination of JFK, none of this evidence would have been inadmissible in a court of law.

[Guest Dale Thorn]

The term "head snap" appears here as it has a thousand other places. But I seem to remember Kennedy's upper torso thrown against the back seat rather dramatically. And the torso weighs a lot more than just a head. There have been questions about whether any bullet has that kind of power (.45 ACP, up close maybe?), but a Carcano shooting from behind would not force the torso back like that, regardless of what happened to the head.

[William Kelly]

The term "head snap" appears here as it has a thousand other places. But I seem to remember Kennedy's upper torso thrown against the back seat rather dramatically. And the torso weighs a lot more than just a head. There have been questions about whether any bullet has that kind of power (.45 ACP, up close maybe?), but a Carcano shooting from behind would not force the torso back like that, regardless of what happened to the head.

Although I don't believe it happened, a sudden acceleration of the car would also account for the upper torso to be thrown against the back seat.

- BK

[Guest Dale Thorn]

The term "head snap" appears here as it has a thousand other places. But I seem to remember Kennedy's upper torso thrown against the back seat rather dramatically. And the torso weighs a lot more than just a head. There have been questions about whether any bullet has that kind of power (.45 ACP, up close maybe?), but a Carcano shooting from behind would not force the torso back like that, regardless of what happened to the head.

Although I don't believe it happened, a sudden acceleration of the car would also account for the upper torso to be thrown against the back seat.

- BK

I have wondered about that too, although if you look at where Jackie is, she shows no movement at all while Jack is flung backward.