Guest Richard Bittikofer Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 And proof that JFK's jacket had fallen and his shirt collar was exposed on Elm St. at Z186... See the Houston St. segment of the Nix film as shown on Unsolved History and you can WATCH his jacket fall. Richard, the SBT requires that 3 inches of JFK's shirt and 3 inches of JFK's jacket were "bunched up" entirely above C7 at the base of his neck. And yet his jacket collar fell readily to a normal position toward the base of his neck. You realize, of course, that it is physically impossible for disparate, concrete objects to occupy the same physical space at the same time. So how did the jacket collar and the 6 inches of bunched up clothing occupy the same physical space at the base of JFK's neck at the same time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Richard Bittikofer Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 (edited) Cliff,the photo you posted shows me nothing. I can't see anything. Do you have a better photo. Thanks Edited December 6, 2006 by Richard Bittikofer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Cliff,the photo you posted shows me nothing. I can't make see anything. Do you have a better photo. Thanks You can't see the white band at the base of JFK's neck? Okay, try this one taken a few seconds earlier, also on Elm St... http://www.jfk-online.com/Towner.mpg That's JFK's shirt collar exposed at the back of his neck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Richard Bittikofer Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Cliff,the photo you posted shows me nothing. I can't make see anything. Do you have a better photo. Thanks You can't see the white band at the base of JFK's neck? Okay, try this one taken a few seconds earlier, also on Elm St... http://www.jfk-online.com/Towner.mpg That's JFK's shirt collar exposed at the back of his neck. Yes, indeed I do see the white shirt collar showing on the left hand side of JFK's neck. Remember he had his right arm resting on the upper part of the limo and waving. With that movement,right arm on limo +waving should raise the level of the right side of the jacket and shirt.Bullet entered to the right of the midline of the spine..the film I just viewed,is well before the back wound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Cliff,the photo you posted shows me nothing. I can't make see anything. Do you have a better photo. Thanks You can't see the white band at the base of JFK's neck? Okay, try this one taken a few seconds earlier, also on Elm St... http://www.jfk-online.com/Towner.mpg That's JFK's shirt collar exposed at the back of his neck. Yes, indeed I do see the white shirt collar showing on the left hand side of JFK's neck. Well, keep looking and you'll see that JFK's shirt collar is visible at the back of his neck on Elm St., as well. He was shot less than two inches right of midline and his shirt collar shows at the nape of his neck. Remember he had his right arm resting on the upper part of the limo and waving. And that caused his clothing to split down the middle, the right side riding up three inches and the left side remaining in a normal position? With that movement,right arm on limo +waving should raise the level of the right side of the jacket and shirt. Please share with us your methodology for determining that 3 inches of JFK's jacket and 3 inches of his shirt rode up in tandem in ANY of the motorcade photos. Hell, you couldn't replicate that event using both hands to pull... Bullet entered to the right of the midline of the spine..the film I just viewed,is well before the back wound. Again, the Elm St. photos show JFK's exposed shirt collar at the back of his neck -- and the wound was less than two inches right of midline. Forget the evidence, Richard -- just declare your belief in the SBT a religious faith and maybe you'll get a tax exemption. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Richard Bittikofer Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 (edited) Tax exemption! Not in the good old USA!!!!!! Come on Cliff, be realistic, no one can accept the fact that a man making $1.25 an hour, was in the 6th floor window of the TSBD ,killed the President of the United States! Simple homicide. Oswald did it and he did it alone. Jack White believes there was between 8-12 shots fired! All those people in Dealey Plaza and no one hit!! Talk about bullets zigging and zagging!! Edited December 6, 2006 by Richard Bittikofer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Tax exemption! Not in the good old USA!!!!!! Come on Cliff, be realistic, no one can accept the fact that a man making $1.25 an hour, was in the 6th floor window of the TSBD ,killed the President of the United States! Simple homicide. Oswald did it and he did it alone. Jack Whte believes there was between 8-12 shots fired! All those people in Dealey Plaza and no one hit!! Talk about bullets zigging and zagging!! No one hit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Richard Bittikofer Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 (edited) Tax exemption! Not in the good old USA!!!!!! Come on Cliff, be realistic, no one can accept the fact that a man making $1.25 an hour, was in the 6th floor window of the TSBD ,killed the President of the United States! Simple homicide. Oswald did it and he did it alone. Jack White believes there was between 8-12 shots fired! All those people in Dealey Plaza and no one hit!! Talk about bullets zigging and zagging!! No one hit? Cliff.Oswald hit. Edited December 6, 2006 by Richard Bittikofer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Richard Bittikofer Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Disprove me! Change my mind! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Richard Bittikofer Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Cliff, well after the Towner Film> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Cliff, well after the Towner Film> Same old non sequitar... The Single Bullet Theory requires JFK's clothing to have hiked up 3 inches. The Croft photo shows folds in the jacket. Therefore, JFK's clothing hiked up 3 inches. Btw, the Towner film ends around Z140. That's a bit more than a second before Croft. Betzner #3 was taken after Croft and shows the visible shirt collar, whether Richard B. is capable of seeing it or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Richard Bittikofer Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Cliff, well after the Towner Film> Same old non sequitar... The Single Bullet Theory requires JFK's clothing to have hiked up 3 inches. The Croft photo shows folds in the jacket. Therefore, JFK's clothing hiked up 3 inches. Btw, the Towner film ends around Z140. That's a bit more than a second before Croft. Betzner #3 was taken after Croft and shows the visible shirt collar, whether Richard B. is capable of seeing it or not. Cliff. I am 57 yars old. I want to believe there was a conspiracy.Look at the first day evidence. The morning when LHO left Ruth Paine's house. It all adds up.!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawn Meredith Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 [quote name='Cliff Varnell' date='Dec 6 2006, 05:52 AM' post='83949'] Cliff, well after the Towner Film> Same old non sequitar... The Single Bullet Theory requires JFK's clothing to have hiked up 3 inches. The SBT also requires that this bullet hang in mid air more than a second before going on to cause the wounds sustained by the Governor. Absurd. Dawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JL Allen Posted December 6, 2006 Share Posted December 6, 2006 Which Z-frame is it that corresponds to the Croft photo? Thanks. 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