Corbett v. Rossley II

[bigdog]

I've just been contacted by Anton Batey regarding another debate with Tom
Rossley in conjunction with the 48th anniversary of the assassination. The
previous one was prerecorded and I am assuming the same will be true for
this one, so at this time I don't know when it will be recorded or when it
will air. When I know more, I will pass it on. I hope Tom is feeling
better. He did say over on acj earlier this year that he had suffered a
mild stroke but was in recovery. He hasn't posted as proflicly as he used
to either here or on acj. I am sincere in saying I hope he will be in top
form.

[jas]

Bring it on.

[David Von Pein]

Here's the first debate--from exactly one year ago:

http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/jfk-assassination-debate.html

I hope to get a chance to add the files to "Debate #2" to that webpage
too. The more LN common sense that I can post on my sites, the better
I like it.

Thanks, bigdog.

[tom...@cox.net]

Just greturned from outta state & found a message from Anton. I called him
& set up another debate with Corbett for his Wednesday evening.

jas <lle...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Nov 19, 5:11=A0pm, bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I've just been contacted by Anton Batey regarding another debate with
> > Tom Rossley in conjunction with the 48th anniversary of the

> > assassination. Th=

> e
> > previous one was prerecorded and I am assuming the same will be true
> > for this one, so at this time I don't know when it will be recorded or

> > when i=

> t
> > will air. When I know more, I will pass it on. I hope Tom is feeling
> > better. He did say over on acj earlier this year that he had suffered a
> > mild stroke but was in recovery. He hasn't posted as proflicly as he
> > used to either here or on acj. I am sincere in saying I hope he will be
> > in top form.
>
> Bring it on.

--
-------------------- http://NewsReader.Com/ --------------------
Usenet Newsgroup Service $9.95/Month 30GB

[tom...@cox.net]

tHE KID HAS NEVER FELT BETTER...YOU'LL FINDD OUT wEDNESDAY EVENING.

[bigdog]

On Nov 20, 11:14 pm, tom...@cox.net wrote:
> tHE KID HAS NEVER FELT BETTER...YOU'LL FINDD OUT wEDNESDAY EVENING.
>

Good to hear that, Tom. Bring your A game.

[bigdog]

Corbett v. Rossley II has been recorded. Anton Batey told me he would have
it up on his website soon. There is some editting that needs to be done,
as there were several instances where we had long silences while Tom
looked up a quote I asked for and once again, I had a phone problem
halfway through and had to call back in. It was more of the same. I'll let
everyone judge for themselves how each of us did. As anyone who has
listened to Tom in the past knows, he loves to interrupt you before you
are able to make your point, but that's just Tom being Tom. At one point I
did ask him if he wanted to just deliver a monologue. One thing he did
establish is that he has a far greater knowledge of the details of 26
volumes than I do, which is a point I would have conceded from the start.
I have never offered myself as an expert on that work. To me, that is
reference material. It is not something that needs to be memorized. I have
said before I am a skeptic of the CTs. It is never my intent to get into a
game of 20 questions with them. What I try to do is challenge them to make
their case, rather than ripping the WC. Everyone can judge how
successfully I was able to do that.

[David Von Pein]

http://JFK-Archives.blogspot.com/2010/11/jfk-assassination-debate.html

Regarding the 11/23/2011 debate between John Corbett & Tom Rossley:

John Corbett (bigdog) made a pile of mincemeat (appropriate for the
Thanksgiving holiday) out of Thomas Rossley. It was just a beautiful
job of hacking a conspiracy theorist to pieces, John. I loved it.

I especially enjoyed it when several of John's points were followed by
dead silence from Rossley (which, in itself, is a miracle, since Tom
never seems to want to keep quiet). Those pregnant pauses spoke
volumes. For even Tom R. was speechless and lacking an answer to many
of John's valid and cogent points.

Well done, bigdog.

BTW, regarding the point Rossley brought up during the debate about
the two bullet shells that were photographed on a table:

Rossley knows full well what the answer to that "mystery" is -- and
the answer is:

Captain Will Fritz retained one of the three TSBD shells in his
office. Therefore, only two of the three shells were sent to the FBI,
with the third one remaining in Dallas. This is fully explained in an
affidavit filled out by Captain Fritz himself on June 9, 1964 (linked
below):

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/fritz2.htm

Here's what Fritz said:

"I kept the hulls in an envelope in my possession and later
turned them over to C. N. Dhority of the Homicide Bureau and
instructed him to take them to Lt. Day of the Identification Bureau. I
told Detective Dhority that after these hulls were checked for prints
to leave two of them to be delivered to the FBI and to bring one of
them to my office to be used for comparison tests here in the office,
as we were trying to find where the cartridges had been bought. When
Detective Dhority returned from the Identification Bureau, he returned
the one empty hull which I kept in my possession. Several days later,
I believe on the night of November 27, Vince Drain of the FBI called
me at home about one o'clock in the morning and said that the
Commission wanted the other empty hull and a notebook that belonged to
Oswald. I came to the office and delivered these things to the FBI. We
have Mr. James P. Hosty's receipt for these items in our report."

Footnote -- Fritz has to be incorrect about the "Commission" (and I
assume he was talking about the Warren Commission there) wanting the
shell on Nov. 27. The WC wasn't even formed until Nov. 29, of course.
So Fritz probably merely meant that the FBI investigators in
Washington wanted to examine the third shell (which they ultimately
did, of course, and concluded that all three shells had been fired in
Oswald's C2766 MC rifle).

[pdoherty76]

Were you listening to the same debate as me?

Rossley absolutely humiliated and destroyed Corbett.

Here was one particularly telling exchange:

Corbett: "It was routine for the State Dept to lend money to american
citizens to get them home"

Rossley: "Name one."

Corbett: "Ah...erm...erm..OK."

Corbett was out of his depth. Rossley knows the material too well and
he knows the lies of the WCR cheerleaders even better.

[wgroom]

On Nov 20, 9:14 pm, tom...@cox.net wrote:
> tHE KID HAS NEVER FELT BETTER...YOU'LL FINDD OUT wEDNESDAY EVENING.
>

Good to see ol' Tom coming around! Be sure to get that JBC jacket
hole and the look from the sixth floor to show how ridiculous the SBT
is!

wg (CJ)

[David Von Pein]

>>> "Corbett was out of his depth. Rossley knows the material too well and
he knows the lies of the WCR cheerleaders even better." <<<

Yeah, right. Rossley's the guy who wants listeners to entertain the
possibility that John Connally wasn't shot through the wrist until AFTER
the Z313 head shot. (That's how honest Tom Rossley is. I doubt even HE
truly believes such total nonsense, but that won't stop him from saying it
was a possibility on a radio show.)

And Rossley is also the stellar researcher who wants to mislead people
into thinking that Connally was shot by possibly up to THREE different
bullets.

And he uses Dr. Shaw to make his case of more than one bullet hitting JBC,
even though the BEST version of Dr. Shaw's beliefs came in his live TV
press conference just hours after the assassination, when he says that
"the Governor was struck by just one bullet" and (later) "we feel this is
all one bullet".

[Sandy McCroskey]

I didn't see the debate, but from what I've heard Rossley's technique in
them is the same as here: change the subject, carpet-bomb with irrelevant
details, blatantly contradict himself and blithely claim victory.

So what if Corbett didn't know the *name* of a US citizen who had gotten a
repatriation loan? Does that prove he was wrong about the State Department
issuing such loans? Not at all. I'm not sure it's entirely "routine," but
it certainly wasn't out of the question.

photos.state.gov/libraries/korea/.../faqs_for_potential_evacuees.pdf

In extreme circumstances, a destitute American wishing to return to the
U.S. may qualify for a repatriation loan. The conditions for making such
loans are stringent, and your passport will be limited until you repay the
loan.

www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr/programs/RepManual.pdf

/sm

[HistorianDetective]

I'm not convinced that both you and Rossley know much about anything
regarding Repatriation. Obviously the both of you have never heard of the
"United States (U.S.) Repatriation Program".

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/orr/programs/repatriation.htm

"The U.S. Repatriation Program (Program) was established in 1935 under
Section 1113 of the Social Security Act (Assistance for U.S. Citizens
Returned from Foreign Countries) to provide temporary assistance to U.S.
citizens and their dependents who were overseas and in need of assistance.
"

If you are trying to make something sinister out of Oswald's loan then go
for it. It was not uncommon back then. It is not uncommon now. If there
was something sinister, I'm confident that they wouldn't have left such a
vast paper trail regarding the loan and more likely than not, just handed
him the money "under the table" without any loan repayment obligation.

JM/HD

[bigdog]

> he knows the lies of the WCR cheerleaders even better.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Anton Batey interjected to change the subject before I was able to
answer that question and that was what I said OK to.

The following is from the US State Department website:

"Departure assistance is expensive. U.S. law 22 U.S.C. 2671(b) (2) (A)
requires that any departure assistance be provided “on a reimbursable
basis to the maximum extent practicable.” This means that evacuation
costs are ultimately your responsibility; you will be asked to sign a
form promising to repay the U.S. government. "

[pdoherty76]

In a press conference the doctors said the bullet was still imbedded in
Connally's left thigh. What happened to that bullet given that the magic
one was found loose on a stretcher.

Rossley has a point. How exactly did JC continue to hold the hat when his
wrist was shattered?

JC always maintained he was hit by a different bullet to JFK and so did
his wife and at least one other witness.

[Chuck Schuyler]

On Nov 25, 10:12 pm, pdoherty76 <pdohert...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 26, 2:05 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > >>> "Corbett was out of his depth. Rossley knows the material too well and
>
> > he knows the lies of the WCR cheerleaders even better." <<<
>
> > Yeah, right. Rossley's the guy who wants listeners to entertain the
> > possibility that John Connally wasn't shot through the wrist until AFTER
> > the Z313 head shot. (That's how honest Tom Rossley is. I doubt even HE
> > truly believes such total nonsense, but that won't stop him from saying it
> > was a possibility on a radio show.)
>
> > And Rossley is also the stellar researcher who wants to mislead people
> > into thinking that Connally was shot by possibly up to THREE different
> > bullets.
>
> > And he uses Dr. Shaw to make his case of more than one bullet hitting JBC,
> > even though the BEST version of Dr. Shaw's beliefs came in his live TV
> > press conference just hours after the assassination, when he says that
> > "the Governor was struck by just one bullet" and (later) "we feel this is
> > all one bullet".
>
> In a press conference the doctors said the bullet was still imbedded in
> Connally's left thigh.  What happened to that bullet given that the magic
> one was found loose on a stretcher.

This is exactly why people like you should be the last ones to investigate
even a Nancy Drew mystery. You've got people "planting" bullets without
the slightest clue as to whether additional bullets from the shooters are
going to show up. How silly.

>
> Rossley has a point.  How exactly did JC continue to hold the hat when his
> wrist was shattered?

Are you denying the Z film shows Connally holding on to his hat?
Sheesh!

>
> JC always maintained he was hit by a different bullet to JFK and so did
> his wife and at least one other witness.

Not true. In the early 90s, Connally said he was open to the idea that
he was struck by the same bullet that exited Kennedy's throat.

Grab some bench, you just struck out again.

[David Von Pein]

>>> "How exactly did JC continue to hold the hat when his wrist was
shattered?" <<<

So you, too, must think JBC was hit in the wrist WAY WAY after Z230- Z240,
because he's STILL HOLDING that hat in many post-Z230 frames in the
Z-Film.

I guess this "Couldn't Have Possibly Held Onto His Hat" myth is yet
another CT myth in a long such line of myths that refuses to die--even
with a FILMED record to prove the CTers wrong.

Mind-boggling.

[pdoherty76]

You didn't answer my question. How did he continue to hold the hat
when a bullet had just shattered his wrist?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 11/25/2011 9:05 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
>
>>>> "Corbett was out of his depth. Rossley knows the material too well and
> he knows the lies of the WCR cheerleaders even better."<<<
>
> Yeah, right. Rossley's the guy who wants listeners to entertain the
> possibility that John Connally wasn't shot through the wrist until AFTER
> the Z313 head shot. (That's how honest Tom Rossley is. I doubt even HE
> truly believes such total nonsense, but that won't stop him from saying it
> was a possibility on a radio show.)
>
> And Rossley is also the stellar researcher who wants to mislead people
> into thinking that Connally was shot by possibly up to THREE different
> bullets.
>

The first SBT came from the doctors led by Humes who said that the first
bullet hit Kennedy and then went though Connally's chest and the second
bullet hit Connally's wrist. Some kooks, eh?

> And he uses Dr. Shaw to make his case of more than one bullet hitting JBC,
> even though the BEST version of Dr. Shaw's beliefs came in his live TV
> press conference just hours after the assassination, when he says that
> "the Governor was struck by just one bullet" and (later) "we feel this is
> all one bullet".
>

So you believe him when he says that the bullet is still in the
Governor's thigh and will be removed later?

[Anthony Marsh]

I think you should counter with the WC defender myth that the shot hitting
his wrist forced his hand to latch onto the hat. Try to diagram the nerve
paths affected.

[Anthony Marsh]

Not if they intentionally missed with one shot to allow for the additional
bullet. So, where did YOUR missed shot go? Show it to me. Maybe you forgot
that the FBI, the doctors and the WC originally said three shots, three
hits. So show me all three bullets.

>>
>> Rossley has a point. How exactly did JC continue to hold the hat when his
>> wrist was shattered?
>
>
> Are you denying the Z film shows Connally holding on to his hat?
> Sheesh!
>
>>
>> JC always maintained he was hit by a different bullet to JFK and so did
>> his wife and at least one other witness.
>
> Not true. In the early 90s, Connally said he was open to the idea that
> he was struck by the same bullet that exited Kennedy's throat.
>

Not true. That was a hypothetical question, not what he believed.

[John McAdams]

On 26 Nov 2011 10:55:37 -0500, pdoherty76 <pdohe...@googlemail.com>
wrote:

Let me see if I understand you:

You are going to say that Connally could not have held his hat,
notwithstanding clear photographic evidence that he did?

Want an explanation?

Check this:

JFK held his hat all the way to Parkland:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/nellie.txt

The bullet severed a sensory, not a motor nerve:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/wecht.txt

(You'll have to scroll down.)

People have held things after injuries much worse than Connally
suffered.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm#holdhat

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 20 Nov 2011 13:38:13 -0500, David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com>
wrote:

I'm listening right now, and Rossley is claiming that John Connally
was part of the conspiracy, wanting the route to go down Elm Street in
front of the Depository.

So Connally, knowing about the conspiracy, sat right in front of
Kennedy.

.John
--------------
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[bigdog]

Why ask how when we know he did? He's still holding his hat at Z330.

> JC always maintained he was hit by a different bullet to JFK and so did
> his wife and at least one other witness.

He believed that because he had been led to believe JFK was hit by the
first shot. He knew he was hit by the second shot. It follows that if
JFK was also hit by the second shot, they were both hit by the second
shot. We see JBC react to the sound of the first shot at Z164 when he
snaps his head to his right. JFK continues waving to the crowd until
he disappears from view. He showed no signs of being struck by the
bullet. His first visible reaction is at Z226 when he suddenly jerks
his arms upward, the same frame JBC's right arm jerks upward.

Would you care to address these points or do you want to fall back on
the same old stale arguments from years gone by.

[Mitch Todd]

Why do you believe that he couldn't have done so?

Due disclosure: I broke my left fibula ten years ago while mountain
climbing. After the initial intense surge of pain, I was able to walk
normally, although I could feel the snick-snick-snick when the broken
edges of the bone made contact with each other. I could wiggle my toes and
flex my foot easily, too.

BTW, Nellie noted that he held his hat all the way to Parkland. You're not
implying that he was shot at the hospital,are you?

[pdoherty76]

On Nov 26, 4:31 pm, John McAdams <john.mcad...@marquette.edu> wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2011 10:55:37 -0500, pdoherty76 <pdohert...@googlemail.com>

Nellie also claims that JC was hit by a different bullet than JFK.
Are you going to be selective about what statements of hers you
believe? Colour me surprised.

[pdoherty76]

On Nov 26, 9:25 pm, "Mitch Todd" <recipien...@gmail.com> wrote:

Nellie said he was hit my a different bullet than JFK. You believe
her don't you?

[jas]

On Nov 26, 2:31 pm, pdoherty76 <pdohert...@googlemail.com> wrote:

>
> > (You'll have to scroll down.)
>
> > People have held things after injuries much worse than Connally
> > suffered.
>
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm#holdhat
>
> > .John
> > --------------http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
>
> Nellie also claims that JC was hit by a different bullet than JFK.
> Are you going to be selective about what statements of hers you
> believe?  Colour me surprised.

Nellie was caught up in the confusion of the moment and was obviously
mistaken, the way lots of people are when they are part of a sudden,
frightening, traumatic event.

Reporters also called Oswald "Lee Harold Oswald" too, that doesn't
means the latter was a different person.

[Chuck Schuyler]

Why don't you play show-and-tell for a change? Show that "they"
deliberately missed with one shot. Show me Frank Bender's modified,
silencer equiped Carcano. Show me all the bullets you claim zipped around
Dealey Plaza that afternoon.

>
>
>
> >> Rossley has a point.  How exactly did JC continue to hold the hat when his
> >> wrist was shattered?
>
> > Are you denying the Z film shows Connally holding on to his hat?
> > Sheesh!
>
> >> JC always maintained he was hit by a different bullet to JFK and so did
> >> his wife and at least one other witness.
>
> > Not true. In the early 90s, Connally said he was open to the idea that
> > he was struck by the same bullet that exited Kennedy's throat.
>
> Not true. That was a hypothetical question, not what he believed.

*sigh* I accurately noted that he was open to the idea. From Case Closed,
page 333, Connally speaking about the so-called 'Magic Bullet' in a May,
1992 telephone interview with author Gerald Posner: "It may very well be
that Mrs. Connally was mistaken about seeing the President raise his arms
after the first shot. That might have been after the second shot. And if
that is true, it would make it all [the Warren Commission Report
conclusions on the shot in question] very, very consistent. The first
bullet could've missed us both. The third bullet definitely only hit him.
Based upon the angles, the second bullet, which went through his neck,
could've gone through my back. The second bullet could have hit both of
us."

Sounds to me like Connally may---may---have changed his mind.

[Chuck Schuyler]

What answer would you accept?

[bigdog]

> believe?  Colour me surprised.- Hide quoted text -
>

Of course we are selective in what statements we accept and reject. Some
of what Nellie said, such as JBC continuing to hold his hat, is supported
by the film evidence. Other statements of hers are at odds with what we
see in the film. Why would you assume that everything a witness tells us
must either be all right or all wrong. It's not as if it is an all or
nothing proposition.

[Herbert Blenner]

On Nov 25, 9:05 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "Corbett was out of his depth. Rossley knows the material too well and
>
> he knows the lies of the WCR cheerleaders even better." <<<
>
> Yeah, right. Rossley's the guy who wants listeners to entertain the
> possibility that John Connally wasn't shot through the wrist until AFTER
> the Z313 head shot. (That's how honest Tom Rossley is. I doubt even HE
> truly believes such total nonsense, but that won't stop him from saying it
> was a possibility on a radio show.)

Doctor Gregory, the surgeon who repaired the wrist, raised the possibility
that a fragment from the head shot caused both wounds of Connally’s
wrist. So are you going to lambast Dr. Gregory as a true believer in
total nonsense?


Herbert

[Mitch Todd]

I figure that Nellie was much more experienced and qualified to know
exactly when someone was holding their hat than exactly when someone was
shot. She maintained that he said "Oh, no, no, no" before he was shot. Her
husband was equally adamant that it was after.

That being said, I asked you a simple question: why do you believe that
Connally would not have been able to hold his hat?

[bigdog]

On Nov 26, 10:50 pm, jas <lle...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Reporters also called Oswald "Lee Harold Oswald" too, that doesn't
> means the latter was a different person.

Wait a minute!!! I think you've stumbled onto something. There really
were two Oswalds. :)

[Anthony Marsh]

On 11/26/2011 11:31 AM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 26 Nov 2011 10:55:37 -0500, pdoherty76<pdohe...@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 26, 5:36 am, David Von Pein<davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "How exactly did JC continue to hold the hat when his wrist was
>>>
>>> shattered?"<<<
>>>
>>> So you, too, must think JBC was hit in the wrist WAY WAY after Z230- Z240,
>>> because he's STILL HOLDING that hat in many post-Z230 frames in the
>>> Z-Film.
>>>
>>> I guess this "Couldn't Have Possibly Held Onto His Hat" myth is yet
>>> another CT myth in a long such line of myths that refuses to die--even
>>> with a FILMED record to prove the CTers wrong.
>>>
>>> Mind-boggling.
>>
>> You didn't answer my question. How did he continue to hold the hat
>> when a bullet had just shattered his wrist?
>
> Let me see if I understand you:
>
> You are going to say that Connally could not have held his hat,
> notwithstanding clear photographic evidence that he did?
>
> Want an explanation?
>
> Check this:
>
> JFK held his hat all the way to Parkland:
>

Well that was very gallant of JFK to hold Connally's hat all the way to
Parkland! For a dead man!! Dead men usually aren't that polite,
especially after you've shot them in the head!!!
WC defenders love to lambaste conspiracy believers for making typos, but
of course they never admit that they also make typos. They're perfect
and all their opponents are idiots.

[pdoherty76]

Pull the other one. Nellie, John Connally himself and at least one
other witness (the name escapes me) says they were shot by different
bullets.

Remember, all we have to go on is the Z film and the limo went behind
a road sign for a crucial portion of that. The people who were there
had a much better view than we did. JC in particular would know when
he was shot.

[Anthony Marsh]

No, because he heard the first shot, turned and saw that JFK had been
hit and then was hit by the next shot which he did not hear.

[jas]

Except that doesn't work because we already know the bullet that
exited Connally's torso from rear to front was the one that wounded
his wrist.

Just like Wecht's 2 bullets hitting JFK's head at the same time --
it's an opinion, not evidence.

[Anthony Marsh]

Because you can't answer my questions you answer the questions with a
question.

[Anthony Marsh]

No, not the WC defenders. They will still support the original doctors
no matter what kooky things they say. Like Humes and his ice bullet. DVP
and most WC defenders are not even aware of the SBT proposed by Humes
and the other doctors. Because the WC did not include it in their report.

> Herbert

[bigdog]

> he was shot.- Hide quoted text -
>

When Nellie heard the second shot she turned to look at JFK and realized
he had been hit. She began this turn before Z250. Because she was looking
at him, she was unaware her husband had also been hit. She doesn't turn
her attention toward JBC until around Z290 and this is probably when she
realized he had been hit as well and from that moment on her full
attention was on him. Because she didn't realize he had been hit until
after she had seen JFK was hit, she had the impression they were hit at
different times. It seems inconceivable to me that she would turn back
toward JFK once she realized her own husband had been seriously wounded.

Nellie did not have a better view of the shooting than we do. The primary
target was behind her and her own husband was in her peripheral vision.
Because she was so close to both of them, she couldn't look at both of
them at the same time. The Zapruder film gives us several advantages over
what she and any of the other close up witnesses saw. The Z-film has
perfect recall. It's version of the events is the same every time we view
it. It allows us to view the event as many times as we choose which allows
us to pick up on details we might have missed in previous viewings. We can
zoom in on the occupants of the limo and modern technology allows us to
enhance the film by stablizing the images. Viewing the Z-film gives us one
other huge advantage over every witness in DP. We are not caught off guard
by what happened. We know what is going to happen and we know what to look
for.

[Anthony Marsh]

You can't prove that and the doctors did not believe that.

[Anthony Marsh]

Maybe Oswald was a generic CIA cover name like Knight. Or like the Jason
Bourne movies.

[Anthony Marsh]

She said she SAW that JFK had been hit and then she HEARD the shot which
hit her husband. If that second shot just after the one which hit
Kennedy did not hit Connally, what did it hit?

> Nellie did not have a better view of the shooting than we do. The primary

Yes, she did. She was a lot closer.

[pdoherty76]

Argument from incredulity again.

[Herbert Blenner]

I am not the least bit surprised that James has attempted to divert
attention from the blunder made by David Von Pein.

Source:

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh4/html/WC_Vol4_0068b.htm

Mr. SPECTER. Well. if you assume that the trajectory through the
President’s head was represented by the path of a 6.5mm. bullet which
fragmented upon striking the skull, both the rear and again the top.
is it possible that a fragment coming at the rate of 2,000 feet per
second from the distance of approximately 160 to 250 feet to have
produced a fragment that then proceeded to strike the Governor’s wrist
and inflict the damage which you have heretofore described?
Dr. GREGORY. I think it is plausible that the bullet having struck the
President’s head, may have broken into more than one fragment. I think
you apprised me of the fact that it did, in fact disperse into a
number of fragments, and they took tangential directions from the
original path apparently.
Mr. SPECTER. Assuming the fact that the autopsy surgeon presented for
the record a statement that the fragments moved forward into the
vicinity of the President’s right eye, as the diagram shows, that
there were approximately 40 star-like fragments running on a line
through the head on the trajectory, and that there was substantial
fragmentation of the bullet as it passed through the head, what is
your view about that?
Dr. GREGORY. I think it is possible that a fragment from that
particular missile may have escaped and struck the Governor’s right
arm.
End of quotation.

I would say that DVP owes Rossley a retraction and an apology.

Herbert

[David Von Pein]

>>> "I would say that DVP owes Rossley a retraction and an apology." <<<

I think I'll pass on issuing those two things, Herb. And that's because
Tom Rossley's theory about Connally not being shot in the wrist until
after Z313 (and Rossley actually says it was possibly after Z330, per the
radio debate of 11/23/11), was being based on Rossley's belief that
Connally couldn't possibly have held his hat after his wrist was
shattered.

But Rossley knows full well (or he should know) about Nellie Connally's
statements regarding the fact that JBC did hold onto his Stetson all the
way to Parkland.

So, unless Mr. Rossley thinks that John Connally STILL hadn't been hit in
the wrist by the time the limo got to Parkland, then my previous
comments/sarcasm aimed at Mr. Rossley are still quite valid, accurate, and
appropriate.

[Anthony Marsh]

Do you also attack the doctors who think that Connally's wrist was hit by
a separate bullet because the angles did not line up correctly? I have yet
to see an article from you debunking the Humes et al SBT. Do you endorse
the changing of the Connally wrist wounds on the diagram from entrance to
exit and vice versa. Do you see a bullet hole in Connally's hat?

[Herbert Blenner]

On Nov 28, 10:33 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "I would say that DVP owes Rossley a retraction and an apology." <<<
>
> I think I'll pass on issuing those two things, Herb. And that's because
> Tom Rossley's theory about Connally not being shot in the wrist until
> after Z313 (and Rossley actually says it was possibly after Z330, per the
> radio debate of 11/23/11), was being based on Rossley's belief that
> Connally couldn't possibly have held his hat after his wrist was
> shattered.

I concede the advantage of lambasting someone for reasons other than those
that were originally stated. When challenged you can simply step around
the issues. You wrote, “Yeah, right. Rossley's the guy who wants

listeners to entertain the possibility that John Connally wasn't shot
through the wrist until AFTER the Z313 head shot. (That's how honest Tom
Rossley is. I doubt even HE truly believes such total nonsense, but that

won't stop him from saying it was a possibility on a radio show.) ”

So now, I will amend my earlier statement. I think that DVP owes Rossley a
retraction and an apology for misrepresenting their position.

Herbert