But what is nearly as funny as someone's putting forth the notion of a remote-control device on the president's back brace? Wait, there's more: this person also claims that said device was detonated by the driver... "to fake a forward motion"! Aha! And the driver (but of course, now this all makes perfect sense) was the real assassin!
What could be more side-splittingly hilarious, more surreally absurd, than someone's asserting that there was "no shot at all" between Z-frames 312/313?!
That even beats certain Truthers' "no planes" theory.
I have to hand it to the satirical genius who thought it all up... and who should now step out from behind the pseudonym and take a bow.
I have spent a considerable amount of time devoted to answering the question of whether or not Specter lied in order to push the single-bullet theory.
Here is part of the discussion of this troubling question contained in chapter 10 at patspeer.com.
On 12-8-77, when testifying before the HSCA in executive session, Specter made at least five separate references to a wound on the back of Kennedy's neck. He never once described this wound as being on Kennedy's back. This was remarkable, moreover, seeing as the HSCA had added two of Specter's old Warren Commission memos into his testimony...which made at least five separate references to this wound...as a wound on Kennedy's back.
Yes, it's true. Specter had routinely described this wound as a back wound prior to his being shown a photo confirming it to have been a back wound, and then and only then began describing it as a neck wound.
Well, that's about as red as a red flag can get.
That Specter wasn't exactly telling the truth, the whole truth, as he'd solemnly sworn to do, moreover, is confirmed by something left out of his testimony. When asked about one of the Warren Commission memos introduced during his testimony, in which he'd asserted "The Commission should determine with certainty" that "there are no major variations between the films and the artist's drawings", he explained that he'd believed "it was highly desirable for the X-rays and photographs to be viewed" at that time, in order "to corroborate the testimony of the autopsy surgeons." He then added "I was overruled on the request..."
Incredibly, he never admitted being shown the photo of Kennedy's back.
Nor was he ever asked about it... Apparently, Kenneth Klein, who'd conducted Specter's testimony, had failed to do his homework.
Or maybe there was more to it. Klein, born in Specter's home town of Philadelphia, had been hired to work for the HSCA by its original Chief Counsel, Richard Sprague, who'd worked for Specter in the Philadelphia District Attorney's Office. Many years later, for that matter, Klein went to work for Jenner and Block, the Chicago law firm of Specter's colleague on the Warren Commission, Albert Jenner.
And that's not the only curious tie between Specter and the committee. Specter's son, Shanin, just so happened to be Pennsylvania Congressman Robert Edgar's assistant on the committee. Edgar, while a liberal Democrat, was the Congressman from Pennsylvania's Seventh District, on the outskirts of Philadelphia, where the moderate Republican Specter had recently served as District Attorney, and was preparing a run for Governor. Edgar would proceed to author a dissent from the committee's report, in which he claimed its conclusion of a probable conspiracy was unjustified, and credit Specter's son Shanin and Warren Commission counsel David Belin for their assistance.
Specter and Edgar traveled in the same circles and almost certainly knew each other.
Or maybe all this means nothing. In 1986, Edgar left congress to run against Specter for U.S. Senator.
In any event, if Klein and Edgar had been on a mission to protect Specter's reputation, they were not entirely successful...because something seriously shocking happened the next year-- something that should have marked the end of Specter's political career... On 9-7-78, Dr. Michael Baden, the spokesman for the HSCA Forensic Pathology Panel, testified that from studying the autopsy photos the panel had concluded Kennedy's torso wound to have been--cut to the sound of Specter saying "oh crap"--not only not on Kennedy's neck, where Specter had long claimed it to have been, but on his back below the level of his throat wound.
Congressman Edgar was present for this testimony. His assistant, Specter's son, Shanin, may also have been present. The questions asked Baden by--you guessed it, Kenneth Klein--had been prepared in advance. This suggests, then, that Klein knew well in advance that Baden was gonna undercut the foundation for Specter's single-bullet theory, and that Edgar--and almost certainly his assistant, Specter's son, Shanin--knew this as well.
Let's recall here that Specter had once suggested that if this wound were below Kennedy's throat wound, well, then the autopsy surgeons were guilty of perjury.
So...does Specter call a press conference after Baden's testimony, and demand Humes, Boswell, and Finck be indicted for perjury?
No, of course not.
And does Klein call Specter to the stand and ask him to explain why, for nearly 15 years, he'd been calling a wound he'd known to have been on Kennedy's back a wound on the back of his neck?
No, of course not.
And that's not even the worst of it. If Specter had at this time come forward and said "Wow, that wound really was on Kennedy's back; I apologize for any confusion caused by my earlier descriptions of the wound," he might have escaped with a smidgen of credibility.
But instead he doubled down.
Yep, in an unbelievably suspicious move, not only has Specter failed to specify in his subsequent statements and articles that the doctors had been mistaken about the back wound location depicted on the Rydberg drawings--or apologize for his own misleading statements about this wound's location--but he's continued--up till this day--to make claims about its location that are demonstrably false...and continued to claim even that the bullet creating this wound entered between two strap muscles on the back of Kennedy's neck.
It's sad but true... After becoming a U.S. Senator in 1980, Specter made very few public statements regarding the assassination. With the success of Oliver Stone's 1991 film JFK, however, he was no longer afforded this luxury. This led him to publish a response to the film in the 1-5-92 Philadelphia Inquirer. As one might expect, his response was filled with errors and misleading claims. Perhaps the worst of these, moreover, was this one: "The movie mangles the facts on the single-bullet theory. The House assassinations committee, very critical of the Warren Commission on other matters, confirmed the single-bullet theory."
Well, this, of course, was smoke, and toxic smoke at that. Specter had previously claimed the back wound was above the throat wound, and that, if it was not, the autopsy surgeons were perjurers. The HSCA pathology panel had then determined that the back wound was in fact below the throat wound. With one exception, they'd concluded as well that the single-bullet theory was viable, should Kennedy have been leaning sharply forward when struck. Specter then seized upon this second conclusion, which in fact dismantles his single-bullet theory, as "confirmation" of the theory he'd proposed, and pushed upon the commission--entailing that the back wound was well above the throat wound.
And that was just the beginning of Specter's '92 campaign. On 5-12-92, Specter appeared before the Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs, urging that it pass a bill he'd co-authored, requiring federal agencies release as many JFK assassination-related documents as possible, and the creation of the ARRB. (His appearance can be found online in the C-Span Video Library.) He urged "Let the facts be disclosed" and said, of his famous single-bullet theory, that he believed it had been "upheld" by subsequent investigations, and would withstand further scrutiny. He then added "If it isn't, so be it; let someone come along and disprove it." He failed to acknowledge that the central beam around which his theory had been constructed had long since been disproved.
Should one think this was Specter turning over a new leaf, however, one would be wrong. It was, to the discerning eye, yet another of his smoke screens, designed to hide his own failure to properly investigate the case. During this testimony he repeatedly complained that the Warren Commission did not have access to the autopsy photos and x-rays. He said this was because "The wishes of the Kennedy family prevailed in not having those available even to the commissioners or to the staff" and that "They were not permitted to see them because there was a sense that they might come into the public domain."
This apparently came as a surprise to the Committee. As a result, a number of follow-up questions were asked on this issue. Under subsequent questioning by Sen. Carl Levin, Specter admitted that Warren himself "may have been shown the photographs. I have reason to believe he did see them privately." He then injected "but that was my area of responsibility." He never mentioned that he, too, had been shown a photograph.
Well, I'll be. Specter was once again blowing smoke. His 4-30-64 memo to J. Lee Rankin, published by the HSCA in 1978, had revealed "When Inspector Kelly talked to Attorney General Kennedy, he most probably did not fully understand all the reasons for viewing the films. According to Inspector Kelly, the Attorney General did not categorically decline to make them available, but only wanted to be satisfied that they were really necessary. I suggest that the Commission transmit to the Attorney General its reasons for wanting the films and the assurances that they will be viewed only by the absolute minimum number of people from the Commission for the sole purpose of corroborating (or correcting) the artist's drawings, with the film not to become a part of the Commission's records."
And not only that. Earl Warren's memoirs, in which he'd admitted viewing the photos, had been available to the public since 1977. So why was Specter, fifteen
...
On Monday, October 15, 2012 2:48:59 PM UTC-5, pjsp...@AOL.COM wrote:
Wes Liebeler characterized Specter as being very focused on everything that would bolster his pet theory. Liebler's context was in such a way that Liebeler thought Specter's theory became the center of attention, and not the murder of JFK.
Arlen Specter was a shrewd, intelligent man. He was good at being a lawyer. RIP!
The AARB interviews with FBI agents Sibert and O'Meill show how Specter had no use for their observations, which did not help neither his "wound placement," nor the SBT.
> On Monday, October 15, 2012 2:48:59 PM UTC-5, pjsp...@AOL.COM wrote:
> Wes Liebeler characterized Specter as being very focused on everything
> that would bolster his pet theory. Liebler's context was in such a way
> that Liebeler thought Specter's theory became the center of attention, and
> not the murder of JFK.
> Arlen Specter was a shrewd, intelligent man. He was good at being a
> lawyer. RIP!
Hey man, he was just doing his job. Trying to prevent WWIII. When he looked at the Zapruder film carefully and the autopsy photos he realized it was a conspiracy. So for the good of the country he had to invent the SBT to preserve the illusion of one shooter.
Of course all this ignores the fact that if Specter hadn't come up with the single bullet theory someone else would have eventually done so anyway, given that it is even more implausible to believe that there were separate shots which entered his throat and his back with neither of them exiting even though neither of them struck any bone directly to slow them down enough to not exit, than it is to believe that simply one is an entrance and one is an exit for the same bullet. To not accept furthermore that the throat wound was an exit ignores the obvious fact that the bullet that entered Connally's back did not enter nose first, because of the elongated entry. Unless the bullet strikes or passes through something else first, it is extremely implausible for Connally to be hit by a bullet that is already obviously tumbling prior to hitting him if his body is the first thing it hits after being fired.
On top of that we have Connally's own statements which remained unchanged during his life that he turned to his right first upon hearing the first shot, and that it was in the midst of a turn to look in the other direction, the left, when he felt himself to be hit only halfway to that turn, right at the point when he was facing straight forward.
This is precisely when we plainly see him jerk violently in the Zapruder film, which is also precisely when we see JFK jerk violently; the motions of both men begin at exactly the same instant, Z226. And that is precisely when Connally has just turned from his right to facing forward, exactly as he said. As the only surviving victim of the shooting (besides James Tague) one would think Connally would know better than anyone else exactly when he was hit.
All this would have eventually been noticed sooner or later, especially after the film became widely available.
> But what is nearly as funny as someone's putting forth the notion of a > remote-control device on the president's back brace? Wait, there's more: > this person also claims that said device was detonated by the driver... > "to fake a forward motion"! Aha! And the driver (but of course, now this > all makes perfect sense) was the real assassin!
Oh that's not all. He's said that Connally was holding a soda bottle, but later changed that to Connally putting a gun in his pocket, but then later changed that to Connally withdrawing the gun to shoot JFK.
The mind that could conceive of all this must be of brilliant comedic talents indeed.
> What could be more side-splittingly hilarious, more surreally absurd, > than someone's asserting that there was "no shot at all" between > Z-frames 312/313?!
> That even beats certain Truthers' "no planes" theory.
> I have to hand it to the satirical genius who thought it all up... and > who should now step out from behind the pseudonym and take a bow.
> The AARB interviews with FBI agents Sibert and O'Meill show how Specter
> had no use for their observations, which did not help neither his "wound
> placement," nor the SBT.
On Monday, October 15, 2012 9:58:33 PM UTC-7, John Reagor King wrote:
> Of course all this ignores the fact that if Specter hadn't come up with
> the single bullet theory someone else would have eventually done so
> anyway, given that it is even more implausible to believe that there
> were separate shots which entered his throat and his back with neither
> of them exiting even though neither of them struck any bone directly to
> slow them down enough to not exit, than it is to believe that simply one
> is an entrance and one is an exit for the same bullet. To not accept
> furthermore that the throat wound was an exit ignores the obvious fact
> that the bullet that entered Connally's back did not enter nose first,
> because of the elongated entry. Unless the bullet strikes or passes
> through something else first, it is extremely implausible for Connally
> to be hit by a bullet that is already obviously tumbling prior to
> hitting him if his body is the first thing it hits after being fired.
> On top of that we have Connally's own statements which remained
> unchanged during his life that he turned to his right first upon hearing
> the first shot, and that it was in the midst of a turn to look in the
> other direction, the left, when he felt himself to be hit only halfway
> to that turn, right at the point when he was facing straight forward.
> This is precisely when we plainly see him jerk violently in the Zapruder
> film, which is also precisely when we see JFK jerk violently; the
> motions of both men begin at exactly the same instant, Z226. And that
> is precisely when Connally has just turned from his right to facing
> forward, exactly as he said. As the only surviving victim of the
> shooting (besides James Tague) one would think Connally would know
> better than anyone else exactly when he was hit.
> All this would have eventually been noticed sooner or later, especially
> after the film became widely available.
You're missing something. The FBI and Secret Service both investigated the case, and studied the films, and came to conclude there had been three separate hits. Connally believed this. Johnson believed this. Many of those thinking Oswald acted alone believed this.
Without Specter's input, it seems pretty clear the WC would have just rubber-stamped the work of the FBI and Secret Service. The SBT, which may have crossed someone's mind years later, then, would have been seen as a challenge to the "official" story and rejected as unscientific by many of those currently defending it to the death.
Just think about it. The SBT may have been Mark Lane's theory, if Specter hadn't beat him to it.
Of course, Lane would have had it coming from the other direction, deflecting off Connally's rib, tumbling out his back, and then smacking the President on his throat. LOL.
> Of course all this ignores the fact that if Specter hadn't come up with
> the single bullet theory someone else would have eventually done so
> anyway, given that it is even more implausible to believe that there
I doubt that. I think even you could dream up a three shots, three hits scenario to salvage the FBI report. For example, you could find ONE FRAME before 210 when there is a clear shot underneath the tree.
And newer tests would show that the rifle COULD be fired that quickly.
> were separate shots which entered his throat and his back with neither
> of them exiting even though neither of them struck any bone directly to
> slow them down enough to not exit, than it is to believe that simply one
How do you know they didn't hit any bone? Don't you remember Dr. Perry's theory? All you have to do is keep the autopsy Top Secret out of privacy concerns for the Kennedy family and keep the autopsy report secret and kill the autopsy doctors. Quite easy.
> is an entrance and one is an exit for the same bullet. To not accept
> furthermore that the throat wound was an exit ignores the obvious fact
> that the bullet that entered Connally's back did not enter nose first,
> because of the elongated entry. Unless the bullet strikes or passes
You are assuming things which do not have to be as you assume.
> through something else first, it is extremely implausible for Connally
> to be hit by a bullet that is already obviously tumbling prior to
> hitting him if his body is the first thing it hits after being fired.
I guess you've never shot a rifle and never heard of keyholing. What about Posner's Magic Twig theory?
> On top of that we have Connally's own statements which remained
> unchanged during his life that he turned to his right first upon hearing
> the first shot, and that it was in the midst of a turn to look in the
> other direction, the left, when he felt himself to be hit only halfway
> to that turn, right at the point when he was facing straight forward.
Yes, Connally never believed in the SBT. Thank you for reminding us of that FACT.
> This is precisely when we plainly see him jerk violently in the Zapruder
> film, which is also precisely when we see JFK jerk violently; the
> motions of both men begin at exactly the same instant, Z226. And that
> is precisely when Connally has just turned from his right to facing
> forward, exactly as he said. As the only surviving victim of the
> shooting (besides James Tague) one would think Connally would know
> better than anyone else exactly when he was hit.
> All this would have eventually been noticed sooner or later, especially
> after the film became widely available.
> On Monday, October 15, 2012 9:58:33 PM UTC-7, John Reagor King wrote:
>> Of course all this ignores the fact that if Specter hadn't come up with
>> the single bullet theory someone else would have eventually done so
>> anyway, given that it is even more implausible to believe that there
>> were separate shots which entered his throat and his back with neither
>> of them exiting even though neither of them struck any bone directly to
>> slow them down enough to not exit, than it is to believe that simply one
>> is an entrance and one is an exit for the same bullet. To not accept
>> furthermore that the throat wound was an exit ignores the obvious fact
>> that the bullet that entered Connally's back did not enter nose first,
>> because of the elongated entry. Unless the bullet strikes or passes
>> through something else first, it is extremely implausible for Connally
>> to be hit by a bullet that is already obviously tumbling prior to
>> hitting him if his body is the first thing it hits after being fired.
>> On top of that we have Connally's own statements which remained
>> unchanged during his life that he turned to his right first upon hearing
>> the first shot, and that it was in the midst of a turn to look in the
>> other direction, the left, when he felt himself to be hit only halfway
>> to that turn, right at the point when he was facing straight forward.
>> This is precisely when we plainly see him jerk violently in the Zapruder
>> film, which is also precisely when we see JFK jerk violently; the
>> motions of both men begin at exactly the same instant, Z226. And that
>> is precisely when Connally has just turned from his right to facing
>> forward, exactly as he said. As the only surviving victim of the
>> shooting (besides James Tague) one would think Connally would know
>> better than anyone else exactly when he was hit.
>> All this would have eventually been noticed sooner or later, especially
>> after the film became widely available.
> You're missing something. The FBI and Secret Service both investigated the case, and studied the films, and came to conclude there had been three separate hits. Connally believed this. Johnson believed this. Many of those thinking Oswald acted alone believed this.
> Without Specter's input, it seems pretty clear the WC would have just rubber-stamped the work of the FBI and Secret Service. The SBT, which may have crossed someone's mind years later, then, would have been seen as a challenge to the "official" story and rejected as unscientific by many of those currently defending it to the death.
Variations of the Single Bullet Theory crossed the minds of some reporters and some doctors late that afternoon.
> Just think about it. The SBT may have been Mark Lane's theory, if Specter hadn't beat him to it.
I'd like to see the WC defenders explain the exact shooting sequence without any damn stinkin SBT.
And BTW the HSCA proved conspiracy and also had its own SBT. There was a competition to see how much more the HSCA could lie than the WC to sell its SBT.
Baden won with his lean theory.
> Of course, Lane would have had it coming from the other direction, > deflecting off Connally's rib, tumbling out his back, and then smacking > the President on his throat. LOL.
It that any more ridiculous than Dr. Perry's theory of the throat shot blowing out the back of JFK's head?
"pjspe...@AOL.COM" <pjspe...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Monday, October 15, 2012 9:58:33 PM UTC-7, John Reagor King wrote:
> > Of course all this ignores the fact that if Specter hadn't come up with > > the single bullet theory someone else would have eventually done so > > anyway, given that it is even more implausible to believe that there > > were separate shots which entered his throat and his back with neither > > of them exiting even though neither of them struck any bone directly to > > slow them down enough to not exit, than it is to believe that simply one > > is an entrance and one is an exit for the same bullet. To not accept > > furthermore that the throat wound was an exit ignores the obvious fact > > that the bullet that entered Connally's back did not enter nose first, > > because of the elongated entry. Unless the bullet strikes or passes > > through something else first, it is extremely implausible for Connally > > to be hit by a bullet that is already obviously tumbling prior to > > hitting him if his body is the first thing it hits after being fired.
> > On top of that we have Connally's own statements which remained > > unchanged during his life that he turned to his right first upon hearing > > the first shot, and that it was in the midst of a turn to look in the > > other direction, the left, when he felt himself to be hit only halfway > > to that turn, right at the point when he was facing straight forward.
> > This is precisely when we plainly see him jerk violently in the Zapruder > > film, which is also precisely when we see JFK jerk violently; the > > motions of both men begin at exactly the same instant, Z226. And that > > is precisely when Connally has just turned from his right to facing > > forward, exactly as he said. As the only surviving victim of the > > shooting (besides James Tague) one would think Connally would know > > better than anyone else exactly when he was hit.
> > All this would have eventually been noticed sooner or later, especially > > after the film became widely available.
> You're missing something. The FBI and Secret Service both investigated the > case, and studied the films, and came to conclude there had been three > separate hits. Connally believed this. Johnson believed this. Many of those > thinking Oswald acted alone believed this.
Oh no, I'm not missing that, as I've been aware of it for many years.
That was an *early* conclusion. I do not believe for a moment that that conclusion would have stood up very long under close scrutiny once the Zapruder film became widely available to the general public and could be compared by many more people than ever before to Connally's statements about the shooting.
> Without Specter's input, it seems pretty clear the WC would have just > rubber-stamped the work of the FBI and Secret Service.
Possibly so. But my point in the article to which you were here responding, and is still the same point in this present article that I'm now typing, is that *sooner* or *later* this conclusion would have *eventually* have come to be seen as seriously flawed by many people after the film became widely available to the general public, even if that had not happened until many years after the WC issued its conclusions.
> The SBT, which may > have crossed someone's mind years later, then, would have been seen as a > challenge to the "official" story and rejected as unscientific by many of > those currently defending it to the death.
I don't see how it is even slightly "unscientific." The elongated entry in Connally's back alone proves that the bullet was tumbling, which would be extremely unlikely if the bullet had not struck something or gone through something prior to entering his back. And quite obviously, passing through something else first would slow down the velocity of the bullet significantly prior to it entering Connally's back, and there is quite obviously nothing even slightly "unscientific" about that assertion either.
> Just think about it. The SBT may have been Mark Lane's theory, if Specter > hadn't beat him to it.
> Of course, Lane would have had it coming from the other direction, deflecting > off Connally's rib, tumbling out his back, and then smacking the President on > his throat. LOL.
Which would also be a conclusion that would not stand up at all well under close scrutiny, and would be woefully *unscientific*. The bullet would have to be fired from somewhere near the floorboard to go up through Connally's torso, since the wound in his chest was quite a bit lower than the wound in his back. It would also fail to explain why the bullet would suddenly *stop* tumbling upon entering JFK, since both his throat wound and his back wound were almost perfectly circular. That bullet would have to be at least a thousand times more "magical" than the wildest assertions that have ever been made about the single bullet fired from the SN.
Btw, Mr. Speer, I have been waiting for two weeks for you to reply to my reply to you in "Anthony Marsh says I can't do this ;-). On October 2 you said this to me in that thread:
"FWIW, Chapters 5 thru 9 at patspeer.com is far and way the largest collection of witness statements yet assembled. I don't specifically break them down by the perceived direction of the shots, except briefly in the last chapter, where I note that the vast majority of witnesses standing in front of the TSBD thought the last shot came from west of their location."
The following day I noted to you that you seemed to be implying that all these witnesses meant that *only* the last shot came from west of their location, yet when I read through all your quotations of any such witnesses in all of those chapters on your site, I failed to find a quote of even one such witness specifically saying that it was only the final shot that came from the west. In a second reply I posted to you in that thread today, I have said that for the past two weeks I have continued to look every day at all of those chapters on your website, and have still not located an instance of you quoting a single one of them saying that it was only the last shot that came from the west.
Were you not implying that this "vast majority" meant that ONLY the last shot came from west of their location? Because what I have found when reading what they actually said was that the vast majority thought ALL the shots had come from west of their location.
> In article <bda93db2-b35b-4d09-9668-bf37842350f8@googlegroups.com>,
> "pjspe...@AOL.COM" <pjspe...@aol.com> wrote:
>> On Monday, October 15, 2012 9:58:33 PM UTC-7, John Reagor King wrote:
>>> Of course all this ignores the fact that if Specter hadn't come up with
>>> the single bullet theory someone else would have eventually done so
>>> anyway, given that it is even more implausible to believe that there
>>> were separate shots which entered his throat and his back with neither
>>> of them exiting even though neither of them struck any bone directly to
>>> slow them down enough to not exit, than it is to believe that simply one
>>> is an entrance and one is an exit for the same bullet. To not accept
>>> furthermore that the throat wound was an exit ignores the obvious fact
>>> that the bullet that entered Connally's back did not enter nose first,
>>> because of the elongated entry. Unless the bullet strikes or passes
>>> through something else first, it is extremely implausible for Connally
>>> to be hit by a bullet that is already obviously tumbling prior to
>>> hitting him if his body is the first thing it hits after being fired.
>>> On top of that we have Connally's own statements which remained
>>> unchanged during his life that he turned to his right first upon hearing
>>> the first shot, and that it was in the midst of a turn to look in the
>>> other direction, the left, when he felt himself to be hit only halfway
>>> to that turn, right at the point when he was facing straight forward.
>>> This is precisely when we plainly see him jerk violently in the Zapruder
>>> film, which is also precisely when we see JFK jerk violently; the
>>> motions of both men begin at exactly the same instant, Z226. And that
>>> is precisely when Connally has just turned from his right to facing
>>> forward, exactly as he said. As the only surviving victim of the
>>> shooting (besides James Tague) one would think Connally would know
>>> better than anyone else exactly when he was hit.
>>> All this would have eventually been noticed sooner or later, especially
>>> after the film became widely available.
>> You're missing something. The FBI and Secret Service both investigated the
>> case, and studied the films, and came to conclude there had been three
>> separate hits. Connally believed this. Johnson believed this. Many of those
>> thinking Oswald acted alone believed this.
> Oh no, I'm not missing that, as I've been aware of it for many years.
> That was an *early* conclusion. I do not believe for a moment that that
> conclusion would have stood up very long under close scrutiny once the
> Zapruder film became widely available to the general public and could be
> compared by many more people than ever before to Connally's statements
> about the shooting.
Oh, you mean like 100 years later? How about the autopsy report? How well would that have stood up if the NYT had published the autopsy photos the next week?
>> Without Specter's input, it seems pretty clear the WC would have just
>> rubber-stamped the work of the FBI and Secret Service.
> Possibly so. But my point in the article to which you were here
> responding, and is still the same point in this present article that I'm
> now typing, is that *sooner* or *later* this conclusion would have
> *eventually* have come to be seen as seriously flawed by many people
> after the film became widely available to the general public, even if
> that had not happened until many years after the WC issued its
> conclusions.
Duh! Long after anyone cares or can do anything about it. That is the whole damn point of a conspiracy. So what if Canada admitted that it assassinated Lincoln? No one cares. The purpose of a cover-up is to change current events into ancient history. So what if we have absolute proof that Nero started the fire?
>> The SBT, which may
>> have crossed someone's mind years later, then, would have been seen as a
>> challenge to the "official" story and rejected as unscientific by many of
>> those currently defending it to the death.
> I don't see how it is even slightly "unscientific." The elongated entry
> in Connally's back alone proves that the bullet was tumbling, which would
> be extremely unlikely if the bullet had not struck something or gone
> through something prior to entering his back. And quite obviously,
No, it doesn't. What you just said is scientific nonsense.
What did your bullet go through before hitting JFK's head and causing what you think it an elogated wound exactly as long as Connally's? You guys will never answer that because you know you would come up empty.
> passing through something else first would slow down the velocity of the
> bullet significantly prior to it entering Connally's back, and there is
> quite obviously nothing even slightly "unscientific" about that assertion
> either.
>> Just think about it. The SBT may have been Mark Lane's theory, if Specter
>> hadn't beat him to it.
>> Of course, Lane would have had it coming from the other direction, deflecting
>> off Connally's rib, tumbling out his back, and then smacking the President on
>> his throat. LOL.
> Which would also be a conclusion that would not stand up at all well under
> close scrutiny, and would be woefully *unscientific*. The bullet would
> have to be fired from somewhere near the floorboard to go up through
> Connally's torso, since the wound in his chest was quite a bit lower than
> the wound in his back. It would also fail to explain why the bullet would
You don't know the exact angle do you? So you misrepresent the evidence confident that no one can correct you since you never made a clear claim. But if ever figure out the angle someone could fire a contact shot aimed only slightly upwards to produce that angle.
> suddenly *stop* tumbling upon entering JFK, since both his throat wound
> and his back wound were almost perfectly circular. That bullet would have
> to be at least a thousand times more "magical" than the wildest assertions
> that have ever been made about the single bullet fired from the SN.
It's very hard to dream up a backwards SBT. I've never seen anyone ever attempt it. But maybe you could diagram what it would look like.
> Btw, Mr. Speer, I have been waiting for two weeks for you to reply to my
> reply to you in "Anthony Marsh says I can't do this ;-). On October 2 you
> said this to me in that thread:
> "FWIW, Chapters 5 thru 9 at patspeer.com is far and way the largest
> collection of witness statements yet assembled. I don't specifically break
> them down by the perceived direction of the shots, except briefly in the
> last chapter, where I note that the vast majority of witnesses standing in
> front of the TSBD thought the last shot came from west of their location."
> The following day I noted to you that you seemed to be implying that all
> these witnesses meant that *only* the last shot came from west of their
> location, yet when I read through all your quotations of any such
> witnesses in all of those chapters on your site, I failed to find a quote
> of even one such witness specifically saying that it was only the final
> shot that came from the west. In a second reply I posted to you in that
> thread today, I have said that for the past two weeks I have continued to
> look every day at all of those chapters on your website, and have still
> not located an instance of you quoting a single one of them saying that it
> was only the last shot that came from the west.
> Were you not implying that this "vast majority" meant that ONLY the last
> shot came from west of their location? Because what I have found when
> reading what they actually said was that the vast majority thought ALL the
> shots had come from west of their location.
> > On Monday, October 15, 2012 9:58:33 PM UTC-7, John Reagor King wrote:
> > > Of course all this ignores the fact that if Specter hadn't come up with
> > > the single bullet theory someone else would have eventually done so
> > > anyway, given that it is even more implausible to believe that there
> > > were separate shots which entered his throat and his back with neither
> > > of them exiting even though neither of them struck any bone directly to
> > > slow them down enough to not exit, than it is to believe that simply one
> > > is an entrance and one is an exit for the same bullet. To not accept
> > > furthermore that the throat wound was an exit ignores the obvious fact
> > > that the bullet that entered Connally's back did not enter nose first,
> > > because of the elongated entry. Unless the bullet strikes or passes
> > > through something else first, it is extremely implausible for Connally
> > > to be hit by a bullet that is already obviously tumbling prior to
> > > hitting him if his body is the first thing it hits after being fired.
> > > On top of that we have Connally's own statements which remained
> > > unchanged during his life that he turned to his right first upon hearing
> > > the first shot, and that it was in the midst of a turn to look in the
> > > other direction, the left, when he felt himself to be hit only halfway
> > > to that turn, right at the point when he was facing straight forward.
> > > This is precisely when we plainly see him jerk violently in the Zapruder
> > > film, which is also precisely when we see JFK jerk violently; the
> > > motions of both men begin at exactly the same instant, Z226. And that
> > > is precisely when Connally has just turned from his right to facing
> > > forward, exactly as he said. As the only surviving victim of the
> > > shooting (besides James Tague) one would think Connally would know
> > > better than anyone else exactly when he was hit.
> > > All this would have eventually been noticed sooner or later, especially
> > > after the film became widely available.
> > You're missing something. The FBI and Secret Service both investigated the
> > case, and studied the films, and came to conclude there had been three
> > separate hits. Connally believed this. Johnson believed this. Many of those
> > thinking Oswald acted alone believed this.
> Oh no, I'm not missing that, as I've been aware of it for many years.
> That was an *early* conclusion. I do not believe for a moment that that
> conclusion would have stood up very long under close scrutiny once the
> Zapruder film became widely available to the general public and could be
> compared by many more people than ever before to Connally's statements
> about the shooting.
That's my point. It would have stood up for a few years, before the public got wise. Then the government would have been forced to come up with a new theory. But, in the meantime, until it became "official," assuming it would have become "official", the SBT would have been seen as a challenge to the Johnson Administration's credibility, and denounced by the same people who so ardently embraced it.
This is precisely what happened, BTW, with the moving head wounds and ever-changing time for the SBT. The government tossed off some stuff, waited for it to be successfully called into question, then tossed off more stuff.
> > Without Specter's input, it seems pretty clear the WC would have just
> > rubber-stamped the work of the FBI and Secret Service.
> Possibly so. But my point in the article to which you were here
> responding, and is still the same point in this present article that I'm
> now typing, is that *sooner* or *later* this conclusion would have
> *eventually* have come to be seen as seriously flawed by many people
> after the film became widely available to the general public, even if
> that had not happened until many years after the WC issued its
> conclusions.
And my point is that those detecting these flaws would have been denounced and hounded by the FBI, just as the early critics of the WC were denounced and hounded by the FBI. A bit ironic, don't you think?
> > have crossed someone's mind years later, then, would have been seen as a
> > challenge to the "official" story and rejected as unscientific by many of
> > those currently defending it to the death.
> I don't see how it is even slightly "unscientific." The elongated entry
> in Connally's back alone proves that the bullet was tumbling, which would
> be extremely unlikely if the bullet had not struck something or gone
> through something prior to entering his back.
As pointed out by Tony, the head wound entrance was purportedly just as elongated, and yet no one claims that bullet hit something first. You neglect as well that Dr. Shaw insisted that the bullet hitting Connally had not hit something first. In other words, there is nothing to suggest the bullet striking Connally first struck Kennedy beyond your hopes and dreams. Not exactly scientific.
> And quite obviously,
> passing through something else first would slow down the velocity of the
> bullet significantly prior to it entering Connally's back, and there is
> quite obviously nothing even slightly "unscientific" about that assertion
> either.
Wrong. Olivier had no idea what kind of bullet hit Connally, so his supposition the bullet would have to have been slowed to do so little damage was misleading at best.
> > Just think about it. The SBT may have been Mark Lane's theory, if Specter
> > hadn't beat him to it.
> > Of course, Lane would have had it coming from the other direction, deflecting
> > off Connally's rib, tumbling out his back, and then smacking the President on
> > his throat. LOL.
> Which would also be a conclusion that would not stand up at all well under
> close scrutiny, and would be woefully *unscientific*. The bullet would
> have to be fired from somewhere near the floorboard to go up through
> Connally's torso, since the wound in his chest was quite a bit lower than
> the wound in his back. It would also fail to explain why the bullet would
> suddenly *stop* tumbling upon entering JFK, since both his throat wound
> and his back wound were almost perfectly circular. That bullet would have
> to be at least a thousand times more "magical" than the wildest assertions
> that have ever been made about the single bullet fired from the SN.
> Btw, Mr. Speer, I have been waiting for two weeks for you to reply to my
> reply to you in "Anthony Marsh says I can't do this ;-). On October 2 you
> said this to me in that thread:
> "FWIW, Chapters 5 thru 9 at patspeer.com is far and way the largest
> collection of witness statements yet assembled. I don't specifically break
> them down by the perceived direction of the shots, except briefly in the
> last chapter, where I note that the vast majority of witnesses standing in
> front of the TSBD thought the last shot came from west of their location."
> The following day I noted to you that you seemed to be implying that all
> these witnesses meant that *only* the last shot came from west of their
> location, yet when I read through all your quotations of any such
> witnesses in all of those chapters on your site, I failed to find a quote
> of even one such witness specifically saying that it was only the final
> shot that came from the west. In a second reply I posted to you in that
> thread today, I have said that for the past two weeks I have continued to
> look every day at all of those chapters on your website, and have still
> not located an instance of you quoting a single one of them saying that it
> was only the last shot that came from the west.
> Were you not implying that this "vast majority" meant that ONLY the last
> shot came from west of their location? Because what I have found when
> reading what they actually said was that the vast majority thought ALL the
> shots had come from west of their location.
When you read the statements and testimony of the witnesses, it's clear that very few of them had a strong sense of where the first sound came from and that their impression of direction was derived from the last burst of sounds or shots.
If, however, you'd like to believe everyone had an immediate grasp of where the loud bursts were coming from, please explain why the majority of those in front of the TSBD thought the shots came from their right, when the HSCA's psycho-acoustics tests showed that it was easy to tell a shot from above and behind them from a shot from their right.
The photo of JFK's killer is available on my website. There are three different versions of the same original photo that has been cropped for greater clarity of the person seen. The address:
> The photo of JFK's killer is available on my website. There are three > different versions of the same original photo that has been cropped > for greater clarity of the person seen. The address:
"pjspe...@AOL.COM" <pjspe...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 17, 2012 6:50:12 PM UTC-7, John Reagor King wrote:
> > In article <bda93db2-b35b-4d09-9668-bf37842350f8@googlegroups.com>,
> > "pjspe...@AOL.COM" <pjspe...@aol.com> wrote:
> > > On Monday, October 15, 2012 9:58:33 PM UTC-7, John Reagor King wrote:
> > > > Of course all this ignores the fact that if Specter hadn't come up with > > > > the single bullet theory someone else would have eventually done so > > > > anyway, given that it is even more implausible to believe that there > > > > were separate shots which entered his throat and his back with neither > > > > of them exiting even though neither of them struck any bone directly to > > > > slow them down enough to not exit, than it is to believe that simply > > > > one > > > > is an entrance and one is an exit for the same bullet. To not accept > > > > furthermore that the throat wound was an exit ignores the obvious fact > > > > that the bullet that entered Connally's back did not enter nose first, > > > > because of the elongated entry. Unless the bullet strikes or passes > > > > through something else first, it is extremely implausible for Connally > > > > to be hit by a bullet that is already obviously tumbling prior to > > > > hitting him if his body is the first thing it hits after being fired.
> > > > On top of that we have Connally's own statements which remained > > > > unchanged during his life that he turned to his right first upon > > > > hearing > > > > the first shot, and that it was in the midst of a turn to look in the > > > > other direction, the left, when he felt himself to be hit only halfway > > > > to that turn, right at the point when he was facing straight forward.
> > > > This is precisely when we plainly see him jerk violently in the > > > > Zapruder > > > > film, which is also precisely when we see JFK jerk violently; the > > > > motions of both men begin at exactly the same instant, Z226. And that > > > > is precisely when Connally has just turned from his right to facing > > > > forward, exactly as he said. As the only surviving victim of the > > > > shooting (besides James Tague) one would think Connally would know > > > > better than anyone else exactly when he was hit.
> > > > All this would have eventually been noticed sooner or later, especially
> > > > after the film became widely available.
> > > You're missing something. The FBI and Secret Service both investigated > > > the > > > case, and studied the films, and came to conclude there had been three > > > separate hits. Connally believed this. Johnson believed this. Many of > > > those > > > thinking Oswald acted alone believed this.
> > Oh no, I'm not missing that, as I've been aware of it for many years.
> > That was an *early* conclusion. I do not believe for a moment that that > > conclusion would have stood up very long under close scrutiny once the > > Zapruder film became widely available to the general public and could be > > compared by many more people than ever before to Connally's statements > > about the shooting.
> That's my point. It would have stood up for a few years, before the public > got wise.
Your point is invalid. What at least *some* of the public got wise to *after* the Zapruder film became much more widely available than ever before, most especially with it appearing in the movie "JFK," and later being released on the MPI video, and then becoming easily viewed on the Internet, is that JFK and Connally both jerk violently at precisely the same instant. Also what they could become wise to is the absolute *fact* that Connally almost *always* said that he turned to the right *first*, and then, just as he was about halfway through a turn to the left, but only got as far as facing about straight forward, that's exactly when he felt himself to be hit. And it is precisely when he faces forward after being continuously turned to the right for many frames, that we see him jerk violently. Many more of the general public than ever before can now also see on the Internet many postings on many different websites of CE 399 shown from the base, and obviously severely flattened, demolishing the obvious myth or factoid that the bullet was "nearly pristine" or other similar hogwash. With the advent of the Internet many more people than ever before were also able to read for themselves what Connally *really* said about when he was hit, and could see for themselves how it matches the Zapruder film to absolute perfection.
> Then the government would have been forced to come up with a new > theory. But, in the meantime, until it became "official," assuming it > would have become "official", the SBT would have been seen as a challenge > to the Johnson Administration's credibility, and denounced by the same > people who so ardently embraced it.
The Johnson administration's credibility, or lack of it, is irrelevant to what I said. Sooner or later, whether it was before or after Johnson's presidency, or even before or after his death, people would have eventually started to notice how perfectly Connally's statements match the instant when he and JFK are plainly seen in the film to jerk violently at precisely the same instant. It happens at the exact instant when Connally turns his head forward, just as he said.
> This is precisely what happened, BTW, with the moving head wounds and > ever-changing time for the SBT.
The only reason there was an "ever-changing time" for the SBT is that both the WC and the HSCA failed to come down firmly on exactly when in the film it happens. The WC especially failed to watch the film nearly enough times. But now that the film is available to us in much clearer versions than the WC or HSCA ever had the opportunity to see, it is plain as day that both men jerk violently starting at exactly the same instant, frame 226. I alone have probably seen the film more times than anyone in the WC or HSCA did, and I'm hardly unique in that regard. I would think you've seen it more times than they did too.
> The government tossed off some stuff, > waited for it to be successfully called into question, then tossed off > more stuff.
Sure, but the obvious fallacies in what they tossed off would still have eventually been noticed.
> > > Without Specter's input, it seems pretty clear the WC would have just > > > rubber-stamped the work of the FBI and Secret Service.
> > Possibly so. But my point in the article to which you were here > > responding, and is still the same point in this present article that I'm > > now typing, is that *sooner* or *later* this conclusion would have > > *eventually* have come to be seen as seriously flawed by many people > > after the film became widely available to the general public, even if > > that had not happened until many years after the WC issued its > > conclusions.
> And my point is that those detecting these flaws would have been denounced > and hounded by the FBI, just as the early critics of the WC were denounced > and hounded by the FBI. A bit ironic, don't you think?
Oh? I've never been denounced and hounded by the FBI, or any government agency. Neither have the vast majority of people I've seen say that the FBI's initial conclusions about three separate hits were wrong.
> > > The SBT, which may > > > have crossed someone's mind years later, then, would have been seen as a > > > challenge to the "official" story and rejected as unscientific by many of > > > those currently defending it to the death.
> > I don't see how it is even slightly "unscientific." The elongated entry > > in Connally's back alone proves that the bullet was tumbling, which would > > be extremely unlikely if the bullet had not struck something or gone > > through something prior to entering his back.
> As pointed out by Tony, the head wound entrance was purportedly just as > elongated,
Excuse me, purported by whom, exactly? I cannot at this moment think of even *one* person who claimed that the entrance in his head was elongated. Please quote such a person, along with the original source, who said that.
> and yet no one claims that bullet hit something first.
Since the entrance in JFK's head wasn't elongated, that is not surprising.
> You > neglect as well that Dr. Shaw insisted that the bullet hitting Connally > had not hit something first.
Please quote him verbatim, along with the original source, saying exactly that. I'm looking right now at him saying exactly the *opposite* to the WC:
**********
Mr. SPECTER - Dr. Shaw, assume if you will certain facts to be true in hpyothetical form, that is, that the President was struck in the upper portion of the back or lower portion of the neck with a 6.5-mm. missile passing between the strap muscles of the President's neck, proceeding through a facia channel striking no bones, not violating the pleural cavity, and emerging through the anterior third of the neck, with the missile having been fired from a weapon having a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,000 feet per second, with the muzzle being approximately 160 to 250 feet from the President's body; that the missile was a copper jacketed bullet. Would it be possible for that bullet to have then proceeded approximately 4 or 5 feet and then would it be possible for it to have struck Governor Connally in the back and have inflicted the wound which you have described on the posterior aspect of his chest, and also on the anterior aspect of his chest? Dr. SHAW - Yes. Mr. SPECTER - And what would your reason be for giving an
...
In article <ed3aa513-74d4-46a6-943b-1015e9957d36@googlegroups.com>,
charles wallace <chas112...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The photo of JFK's killer is available on my website. There are three > different versions of the same original photo that has been cropped > for greater clarity of the person seen. The address:
Yes, you posted that before on 9-27, and I notice you still have not replied to my extensive critique of that that I posted on 10-5 in direct reply to you, so here it is again:
You make some statements on that page that I find to be quite curious.
"At approximately 12:23 PM B. R. Williams is at the sixthfloor SE corner window of the TSBD according to the witness testimony of Arnold Rowland, and also Oswald is looking out the doorway of the domino room on the first floor. While eating his cheese sandwich he sees Harold Norman and Junior Jarman come in the back door turn their backs to him going to the western elevator to go to the fifth floor. DPD Captain Will Fritz's notes confirm this."
I have recently re-read Fritz's notes, and I do not recall him claiming that Oswald specifically said he saw Jarman and Norman come in the back door and turn their backs to him. Perhaps I just missed that? Please quote verbatim from Fritz's notes where he says Oswald told him this. I only recall Fritz saying that he saw the two men at some point during lunch.
"I contend Oswald then goes to the front of the TSBD eating an apple. He is out front standing behind Bill Shelley finishing his lunch and sees the excitement. Again this is confirmed by Fritz's testimony and notes. Could I have made an error? Of course, I could have the place where he ate the apple and the cheese sandwich reversed."
Har. Nothing of the sort is "confirmed" by Fritz's testimony and notes.
Fritz said Oswald claimed that he was *inside* the building when the motorcade passed by and did not go outside until *afterward* to go talk to William Shelley across the street. And where are you getting Oswald standing behind Shelley from? I do hope you are not one of those people who "still believes" that that is Oswald instead of Billy Lovelady this many decades after that silly myth was conclusively debunked. Or are you referring to some other person in the photographs? I've never seen anyone in those photographs who looks even remotely like Oswald. I never did even think that Lovelady looked all that much like Oswald, although others have said they do.
Below this, when talking about the Dillard and Murray photos, you say,
"Upon close examination of this figure in the window, it appears that it is a white male, Caucasian, approximately 35 years old."
Good lordy, how on earth can you, or any other human, possibly come even remotely close to attributing an *age* to that extremely blurry and grainy image, which might or might not even be a person?
Then further down:
"This is a cropped photo showing the shooter. Can you see him?
No, I honestly can't.
"A face circled cropping of the shooter appears on down the web page. Or if you go to the address
Yeah, and in the original black and white, I can't even tell there's anyone there. In your yellow highlighted version, it appears to me that you simply chose a spot to put that in arbitrarily. And you're getting all sorts of things like age and race from THAT? Even in your highlighted version no facial features can be made out at all. Can't even tell if it's a man or woman, if it really is someone there. This is awfully meager evidence.
Further down:
"The first shot is fired at approximately Zapruder frame number 180-181. This is the shot that Governor Connally hears."
It is? Strange then that this conflicts directly with what Connally actually said. He said he heard a shot and turned to his right to look for the source of the sound. His head plainly turns to the right no later than Z165 and remains continuously facing right all the way to when he disappears behind the sign. When he emerges from behind the sign his head is still turned to the right for a few more frames. He said he turned to the right *after* he heard the shot, not *before* he heard the shot. You've got him hearing the shot *after* he turned to the right, which is exactly the opposite of what he said.
In the sentences immediately following what I quoted above you say this was the shot that hit JFK in the back only, but that he didn't necessarily think it to be different from his normal back pain. You also say that this bullet penetrated only a little way. But nowhere do you explain why it would penetrate such a short distance, "no more than a little finger's depth," when it had not yet struck anything hard enough, such as bone, to penetrate much farther in.
In the next paragraph:
"The second shot is from the grassy knoll and strikes JFK in the throat. This occurs at approximately Zapruder frame number 199-200. This bullet's fragments were reported by autopsy x-ray technician Jerrol Custer to have been seen on an x-ray that is now missing. I postulate a small .22 caliber hollow nose short lead bullet and subsonic velocity. The autopsy doctors did not know of this bullet entry during its procedures. After the autopsy, the autopists learned from Parkland Hospital's Dr. Perry about the small throat wound that was obscured by the tracheostomy performed to assist the President's breathing. All Parkland Hospital medical personnel that saw this wound thought that it was one of entrance. I speculate that this projectile was fired from one of the two barrels of a hunter's 'over and under' rifle. The shooter is behind the small concrete wall on the grassy knoll to JFK's right front. JFK unmistakably reacts to these first two shots at Z225."
So you have JFK waiting to react to both shots until Z225. Strange.
And again, nowhere here do you explain why a frontal shot to his throat would not exit the other side of the body when it didn't strike any bone to slow it down enough not to exit.
Next paragraph:
"The third shot strikes Governor Connally. It is from the Texas School Book Depository shooter. It enters his back and exits his chest. The bullet lodges itself in JBC's thigh at approximately Zapruder frame number 228-229. It is lost at Parkland Hospital during the efforts to save JBC's life. JBC thought the bullet was found by a nurse in Trauma Room no.2. The shot occurs as JFK is in full reaction to his wounds. Connally's wife, Nellie says she turned upon hearing noise and saw the President with his hands up towards his throat, then her husband John was hit. JBC reacts visibly at Zapruder frame number 237 to 238 with his cheeks puffing out with air from his pierced collapsing lung. Oswald's rifle scope was misaligned to shoot high and to the right."
Interesting that you make no mention that Connally begins to jerk violently at almost exactly the same frame you give above for the beginning of JFK's visible reaction. Really it's Z226 rather than Z225 for both men, but that's trivial. But I'm not going to believe you or anyone else who says they "don't see" the flip of Connally's hat that clearly begins no later than Z226.
Now let's get into the next paragraph:
"The fourth shot hits JFK in the head at Zapruder frame number 312-313. It is from the grassy knoll. It deflects upon entry towards JFK's right. Its fragments are mostly lost to the left rear of the limousine causing reports of a bullet striking the street."
Wrong. Obviously. Not nearly all reports of a bullet striking the street were associated with that shot. Virgie Rachley Baker, for example, said she saw something strike the street with the *first* shot.
And the bullet deflected upon entry to JFK's right? You mean right back toward the shooter? Yet you say the fragments mostly went to the left rear? You are contradicting yourself.
Three sentences later:
"All witnesses to the head wound said there was a large opening in the rear of JFK's head."
No, they did not "all" say that, but the majority of them did. However, most of them also said it was in the *right* rear of his head. What on earth is a shot from the *right* front doing exiting the *right* rear of his head. Wouldn't it exit the *left* rear of his head?
Of course that hole in the right rear of his head wasn't caused by a bullet exiting anyway, as I have explained many times.
Oh, and I love the first sentence in the next paragraph:
"The final shot is from the TSBD at approximately Zapruder frame number 322-323 and it strikes JBC in the wrist."
Sorry, I don't remember Connally ever saying that he felt a separate strike to his wrist. Also by Z322 Nellie has pulled him down in the seat. Strange that you make no mention of how a trajectory from the TSBD to his wrist would work at this point. Wouldn't his wrist be too low in the car by then to be hit by a shot from there?
Let's keep going:
"The grassy knoll shooter is shown in Mary Moorman's photo and named "Badge Man" but is really much closer in my opinion than behind the stockade fence."
Objection. The grassy knoll shooter is *allegedly* shown in that photo.
It has never come anywhere even remotely close to being conclusively proven that there is really a person there. You also fail to mention how none of the witnesses in that area ever said that any single shot sounded much louder and closer than the other shots.
"He is positioned in "Black Dog Man's" location behind the low concrete wall. BM is BDM. He used a hunter's 'over and under' rifle (a .22 caliber
...
