Questions

[dalirese...@aol.com]

I have had questions on 11/22/1963 that I have
never seen answered that at one time were a part of the discussion. Maybe
they have been and you can help me. In no particular order, here goes:


1) 48 Mannlicher Carcano vs 45 German Mauser:


Paragraph two of the 11/23/1963 Washington Post, written by Ed Folliard
states "the weapon recovered was 45 German Mauser". Additionally, in 1977
I watched a special from BBC which had the live audio feed by the 3 Dallas
police officers who went up the 6th Floor of the school book depository,
all 3 officers stated, the weapon is a 45 German Mauser, semi automatic.
According the the BBC, all 3 officers were WWII vets, one a Marine Corps
vet and one the 1962 Dallas Police officer of the year. Within 48 hours,
one the officers said he was wrong and the weapon was the 48 Mannlicher
Carcano, the other 2 refuse to change there story and I believe they died
of mysterious circumstance or suicide with 48 months, with the Dallas
police officer of the year before fired for incompetence. This story
rarely is ever discussed any more. WHY? Was it answered?

2) In 1976, I along with 3 of my friends made arrangements on July 22,
1976 to meet with Marion Johnson who was the JFK curator at the National
Archives in DC. ( I am a MD/DC boy) to see first hand the magic bullet
and the Mannlicher Carcano. I do not think one can do that today. He
allowed us to touch both the bullet and rifle. I can not tell you the
emotion that went threw all of us. Here is the point of the story, even Mr
Johnson said, the bullet looks like it was never fired "and I'll leave it
at that" Three years ago, I saw a recent photo of this same bullet that
we all saw and touched in 1976.... the bullet in the photo is NOT THE SAME
ONE! what is going on?

3) Why is not the photo of Oswald and David Ferrie a biger deal than it
should be? If the photo is faked, then fine. If it is not, it shows a flaw
in the Warren Commission, does it not?

4) Was there ever any questions among critical thinking journalists (when
they still had them) after the Warren Report was released that was
bothered by how obvious and refreshing to know that the lone gunman was a
fan of the nations 2 worst nightmares at the time, not one but two, the
Soviet Union and Castro. Meaning, a left wing communist was the killer,
case closed. Yet, when it was clear that there was rift with the CIA and
Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs, a rift between JFK and LBJ and the joint
chiefs on Vietnam and a rift on JFK's clear support on civil rights verse
southern Democrats, that an intelligent man like Oswald would want to
eliminate a president who clearly leaned left politically to the Congress
and the joint chiefs?? Looking back now, this is amazing and makes me
ashamed to be an American!

5) Since the Soviet Union and Nikita K were considered public enemy number
one, here is the most obvious question, I bet nobody has ever asked. Given
that fact, how, how could ANY man who denounced his U.S. citizenship in
1959 be allowed back in the U.S. only 3 years later, let alone AT ALL???

I would be grateful to read your feedback'

Thank you

Del Ali

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/6/2013 7:46 PM, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:
> I have had questions on 11/22/1963 that I have
> never seen answered that at one time were a part of the discussion. Maybe
> they have been and you can help me. In no particular order, here goes:
>
>
> 1) 48 Mannlicher Carcano vs 45 German Mauser:
>
>
> Paragraph two of the 11/23/1963 Washington Post, written by Ed Folliard
> states "the weapon recovered was 45 German Mauser". Additionally, in 1977
> I watched a special from BBC which had the live audio feed by the 3 Dallas
> police officers who went up the 6th Floor of the school book depository,
> all 3 officers stated, the weapon is a 45 German Mauser, semi automatic.

I seriously doubt that. Tell us what the BBC special was. Upload it.
Upload the audio you heard.

> According the the BBC, all 3 officers were WWII vets, one a Marine Corps
> vet and one the 1962 Dallas Police officer of the year. Within 48 hours,
> one the officers said he was wrong and the weapon was the 48 Mannlicher
> Carcano, the other 2 refuse to change there story and I believe they died

You are thinking of Seymour Weitzman. He did not say "48." That makes no
sense. Oswald's rifle was a model 91/38 made in 1940. They stopped
making the 91/38 in 1941.

> of mysterious circumstance or suicide with 48 months, with the Dallas
> police officer of the year before fired for incompetence. This story
> rarely is ever discussed any more. WHY? Was it answered?
>

We have only discussed it 37,913 times and it has been answered already.
Stop reading junk articles from kook websites.

> 2) In 1976, I along with 3 of my friends made arrangements on July 22,
> 1976 to meet with Marion Johnson who was the JFK curator at the National
> Archives in DC. ( I am a MD/DC boy) to see first hand the magic bullet
> and the Mannlicher Carcano. I do not think one can do that today. He
> allowed us to touch both the bullet and rifle. I can not tell you the
> emotion that went threw all of us. Here is the point of the story, even Mr
> Johnson said, the bullet looks like it was never fired "and I'll leave it
> at that" Three years ago, I saw a recent photo of this same bullet that
> we all saw and touched in 1976.... the bullet in the photo is NOT THE SAME
> ONE! what is going on?
>

Yeah some people say pristine or nearly pristine. But only a complete
idiot who knows nothing about bullets could say that "the bullet looks
like it was never fired." The only way that the bullet can get those
grooves on the surface is by being fired. They are not sold with the
grooves already on the bullets. So consider your source.

> 3) Why is not the photo of Oswald and David Ferrie a biger deal than it
> should be? If the photo is faked, then fine. If it is not, it shows a flaw
> in the Warren Commission, does it not?
>

The WC did not care about David Ferrie and did not investigate Clay
Shaw. That only happened later.

> 4) Was there ever any questions among critical thinking journalists (when
> they still had them) after the Warren Report was released that was
> bothered by how obvious and refreshing to know that the lone gunman was a
> fan of the nations 2 worst nightmares at the time, not one but two, the
> Soviet Union and Castro. Meaning, a left wing communist was the killer,
> case closed. Yet, when it was clear that there was rift with the CIA and
> Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs, a rift between JFK and LBJ and the joint
> chiefs on Vietnam and a rift on JFK's clear support on civil rights verse
> southern Democrats, that an intelligent man like Oswald would want to
> eliminate a president who clearly leaned left politically to the Congress
> and the joint chiefs?? Looking back now, this is amazing and makes me
> ashamed to be an American!
>

Immediately the left suspected the right and the right suspected the
Communists.

> 5) Since the Soviet Union and Nikita K were considered public enemy number
> one, here is the most obvious question, I bet nobody has ever asked. Given
> that fact, how, how could ANY man who denounced his U.S. citizenship in
> 1959 be allowed back in the U.S. only 3 years later, let alone AT ALL???
>

We wanted Oswald back as a propaganda victory to prove how bad the
Communists were.

[Canuck]

However, it is odd that Oswald was not required to report to his US Marine Reserve unit or prosecuted for not reporting, as required, when he was released from active duty early to look after his ailing mother. Oswald was given until June, 1960 to contact his Reserve unit, but, of course, didn't do so, as he had left for Russia a few days after visiting his mother in Sept. 1959. - prwhitmey

[Canuck]

On Monday, May 6, 2013 7:43:06 PM UTC-7, Anthony Marsh wrote:

> There was virtually no publicity surrounding Oswald's return, and no reporters greeted him and his family when they arrived by ship in New York, as Oswald anticipated would be the case. The NEW YORK TIMES did not mention Oswald's return (although it had published two brief articles about his defection), but carried numerous articles about both Robert Webster's defection (around the same time as Oswald's) and his return in May, 1962 (a month before Oswald returned). - prwhitmey

[timstter]

On May 7, 12:43 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:

Marsh is quite right on point 5. (Haven't properly read the other
ones! :-)

It was considered a Cold War propaganda coup if a defector gave up on
the USSR and returned to the USA.

There were a number of newspaper stories about even an unimportant
defector like Oswald's return.

Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

*...NOT ONE of the three experts was able to strike the head or the
neck of the target EVEN ONCE.* (Emphasis added).
Mark Lane, Rush to Judgment, page 129, footnoted as: XVII 261-262.

And yet here IS WC XVII 261-262, showing hits to the head...
http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh17/html/WH_Vol17_0144a.htm

X marks the spot where Mark Lane lied!

[mainframetech]

On May 6, 10:43 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:

> On 5/6/2013 7:46 PM, daliresearch2...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > I have had questions on 11/22/1963 that I have
> > never seen answered that at one time were a part of the discussion. Maybe
> > they have been and you can help me. In no particular order, here goes:
>
> >   1) 48 Mannlicher Carcano vs 45 German Mauser:
>
> >   Paragraph two of the 11/23/1963 Washington Post, written by Ed Folliard
> > states "the weapon recovered was 45 German Mauser". Additionally, in 1977
> > I watched a special from BBC which had the live audio feed by the 3 Dallas
> > police officers who went up the 6th Floor of the school book depository,
> > all 3 officers stated, the weapon is a 45 German Mauser, semi automatic.
>
> I seriously doubt that. Tell us what the BBC special was. Upload it.
> Upload the audio you heard.
>
> > According the the BBC, all 3 officers were WWII vets, one a Marine Corps
> > vet and one the 1962 Dallas Police officer of the year. Within 48 hours,
> > one the officers said he was wrong and the weapon was the 48 Mannlicher
> > Carcano, the other 2 refuse to change there story and I believe they died
>
> You are thinking of Seymour Weitzman. He did not say "48." That makes no
> sense. Oswald's rifle was a model 91/38 made in 1940. They stopped
> making the 91/38 in 1941.
>
> > of mysterious circumstance or suicide with 48 months, with the Dallas
> > police officer of the year before fired for incompetence. This story
> > rarely is ever discussed any more. WHY? Was it answered?
>
> We have only discussed it 37,913 times and it has been answered already.
> Stop reading junk articles from kook websites.
>

Roger Craig was the officer who would not change his testimony.
Everyone else changed their testimony and lived a normal happy life
thereafter. Craig had murder attempted on him, and was relieved of
duty and was divorced and finally they said he committed suicide.
There are no 'kook' websites involved in the story. Craig wrote up
his experience and views on the murder and his situation afterwards:
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/WTKaP.html

And yes, Craig was awarded the 'policeman of the year' award a
couple of years before, and he had been promoted 4 times in his
department before the murder. There are differing views in this forum
as to what is true in the case and what was not, as well as whether it
was a conspiracy as the HSCA rules, or a 'lone nut' shooter. You'll
have to watch for that in the answers you get.

> > 2) In 1976, I along with 3 of my friends made arrangements on July 22,
> > 1976 to meet with Marion Johnson who was the JFK curator at the National
> > Archives in DC. ( I am a MD/DC boy)  to see first hand the magic bullet
> > and the Mannlicher Carcano. I do not think one can do that today. He
> > allowed us to touch both the bullet and rifle. I can not tell you the
> > emotion that went threw all of us. Here is the point of the story, even Mr
> > Johnson said, the bullet looks like it was never fired "and I'll leave it
> > at that"  Three years ago, I saw a recent photo of this same bullet that
> > we all saw and touched in 1976.... the bullet in the photo is NOT THE SAME
> > ONE! what is going on?
>
> Yeah some people say pristine or nearly pristine. But only a complete
> idiot who knows nothing about bullets could say that "the bullet looks
> like it was never fired." The only way that the bullet can get those
> grooves on the surface is by being fired. They are not sold with the
> grooves already on the bullets. So consider your source.
>

I don't know what they did with the bullet you saw, but I can show
you a picture of the one they say is the 'magic' bullet. That is the
bullet that went through 2 people 7 times, including hitting 2 bones
on Connally, and came away with hardly any damage. Here's the
picture:
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg

If you look carefully at the bullets in the picture, first you see
CE399 the 'magic' bullet, and then next to it you see CE572, a test
bullet. See how similar the first and second bullets are? Then take
a look at CE856 at the right. That bullet was fired into the wrist
bone of a cadaver, similar to only one of the bones the 'magic' bullet
hit. Not too similar to each other.

Or they wanted to pump him to see what he may have learned, and to
advertise that he chose America after one look at the USSR.

>
>
> > I would be grateful to read your feedback'
>
> > Thank you
>

> > Del Ali-

[dalirese...@aol.com]

> I appreciate the quick responses and I have several responses to your responses.

First of all,I have the Washington Post Herald (at the time herald was still used) with Folliard's quote. i assume your question pertained to the BBC broadcast. If it included my reference to the Post, then you sir are calling me a liar and then we have a problem and I will then view you on the same level as Gerald Posner. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, that you only meant the BB broadcast, you still did not answer the Folliard quote.

Now, as far as the BBC television broadcast, I will locate it, but let me tell you, your charge is serious, because you are implying that the BBC falsely faked a police audio. If this is case, it should be brought out. I fear once I find it and send it, you will say it is a fraud. As far as the officers go, either one was the 1962 Dallas police officer of the year or he was not, either 2 of them dies within 48 months or they did not. If the did not and the BBC story can be proven wrong, show me the proof
The bigger question is, why do you deem something junk and then deem a low life like Posner the gospel? I want to know the truth and have an open mind and this site does not appear too be a good start. show me proof?

> > 2) In 1976, I along with 3 of my friends made arrangements on July 22,
>
> > 1976 to meet with Marion Johnson who was the JFK curator at the National
>
> > Archives in DC. ( I am a MD/DC boy) to see first hand the magic bullet
>
> > and the Mannlicher Carcano. I do not think one can do that today. He
>
> > allowed us to touch both the bullet and rifle. I can not tell you the
>
> > emotion that went threw all of us. Here is the point of the story, even Mr
>
> > Johnson said, the bullet looks like it was never fired "and I'll leave it
>
> > at that" Three years ago, I saw a recent photo of this same bullet that
>
> > we all saw and touched in 1976.... the bullet in the photo is NOT THE SAME
>
> > ONE! what is going on?
>
> >
>
>
>
> Yeah some people say pristine or nearly pristine. But only a complete
>
> idiot who knows nothing about bullets could say that "the bullet looks
>
> like it was never fired." The only way that the bullet can get those
>
> grooves on the surface is by being fired. They are not sold with the
>
> grooves already on the bullets. So consider your source.
>

> Sure, my source were 3 other witnesses and the curator of rifle and bullet who is a distinguished WWII vet. I think he is believable and to call him an idiot, says a lot about this site

>
> > 3) Why is not the photo of Oswald and David Ferrie a biger deal than it
>
> > should be? If the photo is faked, then fine. If it is not, it shows a flaw
>
> > in the Warren Commission, does it not?
>
> >
>
>
>
> The WC did not care about David Ferrie and did not investigate Clay
>
> Shaw. That only happened later.
>

> fair enough and I accept the answer that the Warren Commission did not pursue this, I guess the question that is open is why?

>
> > 4) Was there ever any questions among critical thinking journalists (when
>
> > they still had them) after the Warren Report was released that was
>
> > bothered by how obvious and refreshing to know that the lone gunman was a
>
> > fan of the nations 2 worst nightmares at the time, not one but two, the
>
> > Soviet Union and Castro. Meaning, a left wing communist was the killer,
>
> > case closed. Yet, when it was clear that there was rift with the CIA and
>
> > Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs, a rift between JFK and LBJ and the joint
>
> > chiefs on Vietnam and a rift on JFK's clear support on civil rights verse
>
> > southern Democrats, that an intelligent man like Oswald would want to
>
> > eliminate a president who clearly leaned left politically to the Congress
>
> > and the joint chiefs?? Looking back now, this is amazing and makes me
>
> > ashamed to be an American!
>
> >
>
>
>
> Immediately the left suspected the right and the right suspected the
>
> Communists.
>
>
>
> > 5) Since the Soviet Union and Nikita K were considered public enemy number
>
> > one, here is the most obvious question, I bet nobody has ever asked. Given
>
> > that fact, how, how could ANY man who denounced his U.S. citizenship in
>
> > 1959 be allowed back in the U.S. only 3 years later, let alone AT ALL???
>
> >
>
>
>
> We wanted Oswald back as a propaganda victory to prove how bad the
>
> Communists were.
>

> One major flaw in your statement that "We wanted Oswald back as a propaganda victory to prove how bad the
>> Communists were".
>
If this were true, then the American people would have heard through all news sources, well before JFK's death on the nightly news that a young marine returned back home to US after living in the Soviet Union. Propaganda is for the citizen's to see and read about. Why was not Oswald returning a news story in 1962?? I think the statement is debunked as it makes no sense since NO propaganda of Oswald returning ever surfaced until after 11/22/63
>
> > Del Ali
>
> >

[John McAdams]

On 7 May 2013 12:47:25 -0400, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:

>On Monday, May 6, 2013 10:43:06 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 5/6/2013 7:46 PM, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:

>>=20
>>=20

>> Stop reading junk articles from kook websites.

>>=20
>> I appreciate the quick responses and I have several responses to your res=
>ponses.=20
>
>First of all,I have the Washington Post Herald (at the time herald was stil=
>l used) with Folliard's quote. i assume your question pertained to the BBC =
>broadcast. If it included my reference to the Post, then you sir are callin=
>g me a liar and then we have a problem and I will then view you on the sam=
>e level as Gerald Posner. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, that you onl=

>y meant the BB broadcast, you still did not answer the Folliard quote.
>

Look . . . the media were saying all kinds of thing early on, and a
lot of it was wrong. A lot of it *must* have been wrong since it
contradicted a lot of other stuff the media were reporting.

Do you have any idea how many *different* descriptions of the rifle
the media were reporting early on?

Here is a list from my book:

<Quote on>

First press accounts quoted various members of the Dallas police force as
saying the assassin?s weapon was a .30-caliber Enfield and a 7.65mm
Mauser. One Secret Service man said he thought the weapon was an ?Army or
Japanese rifle? of .25 caliber. The same accounts reported that the rifle
was found on the second floor of the building by a window, in the
fifth-floor staircase, by an open sixth-floor window, and hidden behind
boxes and cases on the second or sixth floors.13

Of course, we can add a couple. A report on Dallas Police Radio stated the
?weapon looked like a 30-30 rifle or some type of Winchester.?14 And NBC
reported that ?the weapon that was used to kill the President? was a
?British .303 rifle with a telescopic sight.?15 All these are in addition
to the rifle that was later identified as a 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano
recovered in the depository.

<End Quote>

>Now, as far as the BBC television broadcast, I will locate it, but let me t=
>ell you, your charge is serious, because you are implying that the BBC fals=
>ely faked a police audio. If this is case, it should be brought out. I fear=
> once I find it and send it, you will say it is a fraud. As far as the offi=
>cers go, either one was the 1962 Dallas police officer of the year or he wa=
>s not, either 2 of them dies within 48 months or they did not. If the did n=
>ot and the BBC story can be proven wrong, show me the proof =20
> The bigger question is, why do you deem something junk and then deem a low=
> life like Posner the gospel? I want to know the truth and have an open min=
>d and this site does not appear too be a good start. show me proof?=20

The Alyea film shows a Mannlicher-Carcano being recovered in the
Depository.

>>=20
>> One major flaw in your statement that "We wanted Oswald back as a propaga=
>nda victory to prove how bad the=20
>>> Communists were".
>> =20
>If this were true, then the American people would have heard through all ne=
>ws sources, well before JFK's death on the nightly news that a young marine=
> returned back home to US after living in the Soviet Union. Propaganda is f=
>or the citizen's to see and read about. Why was not Oswald returning a news=
> story in 1962?? I think the statement is debunked as it makes no sense sin=

>ce NO propaganda of Oswald returning ever surfaced until after 11/22/63

I don't know about "propaganda," but his return had made several
papers.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/prouty2.txt

..John

--
The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

[John McAdams]

On 6 May 2013 19:46:23 -0400, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:

>
>3) Why is not the photo of Oswald and David Ferrie a biger deal than it
>should be? If the photo is faked, then fine. If it is not, it shows a flaw
>in the Warren Commission, does it not?
>

No, it does not.

I doesn't actually show that Ferrie knew Oswald, just that they were
in the same CAP unit at the same time.

In fact, even before the photo came out (in 1993) there were plenty of
good witnesses who put Oswald in Ferrie's unit. The HSCA interviewed
them.

But none of those witnesses reported any kind of relationship between
Ferrie and Oswald.

[John McAdams]

On 6 May 2013 19:46:23 -0400, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:

>

>4) Was there ever any questions among critical thinking journalists (when
>they still had them) after the Warren Report was released that was
>bothered by how obvious and refreshing to know that the lone gunman was a
>fan of the nations 2 worst nightmares at the time, not one but two, the
>Soviet Union and Castro. Meaning, a left wing communist was the killer,
>case closed. Yet, when it was clear that there was rift with the CIA and
>Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs, a rift between JFK and LBJ and the joint
>chiefs on Vietnam and a rift on JFK's clear support on civil rights verse
>southern Democrats, that an intelligent man like Oswald would want to
>eliminate a president who clearly leaned left politically to the Congress
>and the joint chiefs??

JFK didn't lean left as much as you think.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/stjohn.htm

More importantly, Kennedy's administration was actively trying to
overthrow Castro, and even to kill him.

Since Oswald was a fan of Castro, he might well have viewed himself as
the protector of the "revolution" in Cuba.

>Looking back now, this is amazing and makes me
>ashamed to be an American!
>

Then go live somewhere else, or quit whining!

[John McAdams]

On 6 May 2013 19:46:23 -0400, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:

>

>5) Since the Soviet Union and Nikita K were considered public enemy number
>one, here is the most obvious question, I bet nobody has ever asked. Given
>that fact, how, how could ANY man who denounced his U.S. citizenship in
>1959 be allowed back in the U.S. only 3 years later, let alone AT ALL???
>

He was still a U.S. citizen. He was also viewed as "trouble" by both
the U.S. State Department and the Soviets.

From the U.S. side, letting back into the country seemed a safer thing
to do that having him stay in the USSR, and perhaps cause
embarrassment or an international incident.

>I would be grateful to read your feedback'
>

Are you sure about that?

[claviger]

Del Ali

In no way was CE 399 a "pristine" bullet. Look up the definition of
pristine. Some CTs familiar with rifles and bullets immediately
realized this bullet had been fired through a rifle and hit something
that caused it to deform. Perhaps it was fired into a water tank or
cotton wadding, or some other material so it could be retrieved intact
and placed at the Hospital ER area. Some even believe it was fired
through CE139 so it would further implicate LHO.

One problem there is how would the conspirators know which hospital
the President would be rushed to? The nurses at Parkland thought a
downtown hospital would be first choice should something happen to
anyone in the motorcade, such as a wounded SS agent or bystander.

Hunters are well aware of the hazards caused by through and through
wounds. Hunting bullets are unjacketed soft-nose bullets to prevent
total penetration, and yet it happens anyway. A military FML
projectile would have double the capability of maximum penetration.
The Carcano ammunition was famous for deep penetration which is why
this type ammo was used for Big Game hunting in Africa.




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory

[Sandy McCroskey]

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/prouty2.txt
<quote on>

"defected to the Soviet Union in 1959"

This was reported along with the Petrulli/Webster defections in The
Washington Post, 11/01/59, The Washington Evening Star, 11/25/59 and The
New York Times, 11/01/59.

"returned to the United States in 1962"

Reported in The Washington Post, 06/09/62 with additional notes that
a total of three Americans had returned home. Besides Oswald, Webster
returned as an immigrant in May, 1962 and david Johnson returned with his
wife and twin sons within a week of his defection.

</quote off>

[Bill Clarke]

In article <c0ecb822-bd22-4593...@z14g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
mainframetech says...

>
>On May 6, 10:43=A0pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 5/6/2013 7:46 PM, daliresearch2...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> > I have had questions on 11/22/1963 that I have

>> > never seen answered that at one time were a part of the discussion. May=

>be
>> > they have been and you can help me. In no particular order, here goes:
>>

>> > =A0 1) 48 Mannlicher Carcano vs 45 German Mauser:
>>
>> > =A0 Paragraph two of the 11/23/1963 Washington Post, written by Ed Foll=
>iard
>> > states "the weapon recovered was 45 German Mauser". Additionally, in 19=
>77
>> > I watched a special from BBC which had the live audio feed by the 3 Dal=
>las
>> > police officers who went up the 6th Floor of the school book depository=
>,
>> > all 3 officers stated, the weapon is a 45 German Mauser, semi automatic=

>.
>>
>> I seriously doubt that. Tell us what the BBC special was. Upload it.
>> Upload the audio you heard.
>>

>> > According the the BBC, all 3 officers were WWII vets, one a Marine Corp=
>s
>> > vet and one the 1962 Dallas Police officer of the year. Within 48 hours=

>,
>> > one the officers said he was wrong and the weapon was the 48 Mannlicher

>> > Carcano, the other 2 refuse to change there story and I believe they di=

>ed
>>
>> You are thinking of Seymour Weitzman. He did not say "48." That makes no
>> sense. Oswald's rifle was a model 91/38 made in 1940. They stopped
>> making the 91/38 in 1941.
>>
>> > of mysterious circumstance or suicide with 48 months, with the Dallas
>> > police officer of the year before fired for incompetence. This story
>> > rarely is ever discussed any more. WHY? Was it answered?
>>
>> We have only discussed it 37,913 times and it has been answered already.
>> Stop reading junk articles from kook websites.
>>
> Roger Craig was the officer who would not change his testimony.
>Everyone else changed their testimony and lived a normal happy life
>thereafter. Craig had murder attempted on him, and was relieved of
>duty and was divorced and finally they said he committed suicide.
>There are no 'kook' websites involved in the story. Craig wrote up
>his experience and views on the murder and his situation afterwards:
>http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/WTKaP.html
>
> And yes, Craig was awarded the 'policeman of the year' award a
>couple of years before, and he had been promoted 4 times in his
>department before the murder. There are differing views in this forum
>as to what is true in the case and what was not, as well as whether it
>was a conspiracy as the HSCA rules, or a 'lone nut' shooter. You'll
>have to watch for that in the answers you get.
>
>
>> > 2) In 1976, I along with 3 of my friends made arrangements on July 22,

>> > 1976 to meet with Marion Johnson who was the JFK curator at the Nationa=
>l
>> > Archives in DC. ( I am a MD/DC boy) =A0to see first hand the magic bull=

>et
>> > and the Mannlicher Carcano. I do not think one can do that today. He
>> > allowed us to touch both the bullet and rifle. I can not tell you the

>> > emotion that went threw all of us. Here is the point of the story, even=
> Mr
>> > Johnson said, the bullet looks like it was never fired "and I'll leave =
>it
>> > at that" =A0Three years ago, I saw a recent photo of this same bullet t=
>hat
>> > we all saw and touched in 1976.... the bullet in the photo is NOT THE S=

>AME
>> > ONE! what is going on?
>>
>> Yeah some people say pristine or nearly pristine. But only a complete
>> idiot who knows nothing about bullets could say that "the bullet looks
>> like it was never fired." The only way that the bullet can get those
>> grooves on the surface is by being fired. They are not sold with the
>> grooves already on the bullets. So consider your source.
>>
>
> I don't know what they did with the bullet you saw, but I can show
>you a picture of the one they say is the 'magic' bullet. That is the
>bullet that went through 2 people 7 times, including hitting 2 bones
>on Connally, and came away with hardly any damage. Here's the
>picture:
>http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg
>
> If you look carefully at the bullets in the picture, first you see
>CE399 the 'magic' bullet, and then next to it you see CE572, a test
>bullet. See how similar the first and second bullets are? Then take
>a look at CE856 at the right. That bullet was fired into the wrist
>bone of a cadaver, similar to only one of the bones the 'magic' bullet
>hit. Not too similar to each other.

One thing at a time. Marsh is correct, the bullets received those
striation marks from being fired. So all these bullets were shot out of
the barrel of a rifle.

As for the damage to the bullet, as I've often stated you cannot replicate
bullet wounds and damage to the bullet within a normal statistical
analysis. There are simply too many variables that make such efforts very
difficult.

Bill Clarke

[John Fiorentino]

Differences in the bullets is because the comparison is Apples and
Oranges.

If you fire a bullet from a Carcano *directly* at a cadaver wrist you will
not produce a bullet like CE 399.

CE 399 was significantly slowed in its passage through JFK and JBC.

I suggest you read "Kennedy and Lincoln" by Dr. J. K. Lattimer, which
explains all of this in detail.

John F.



"Bill Clarke" <Bill_...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:kmbjk...@drn.newsguy.com...

[Bill Clarke]

In article <5189...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, John Fiorentino says...

>
>Differences in the bullets is because the comparison is Apples and
>Oranges.
>
>If you fire a bullet from a Carcano *directly* at a cadaver wrist you will
>not produce a bullet like CE 399.
>
>CE 399 was significantly slowed in its passage through JFK and JBC.
>
>I suggest you read "Kennedy and Lincoln" by Dr. J. K. Lattimer, which
>explains all of this in detail.
>
>John F.

Thanks. I've been needing something to read and that sounds like a good
one.

Bill Clarke

[mainframetech]

On May 7, 3:38 pm, claviger <historiae.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Del Ali
>
> In no way was CE 399 a "pristine" bullet.  Look up the definition of
> pristine.  Some CTs familiar with rifles and bullets immediately
> realized this bullet had been fired through a rifle and hit something
> that caused it to deform. Perhaps it was fired into a water tank or
> cotton wadding, or some other material so it could be retrieved intact
> and placed at the Hospital ER area.  Some even believe it was fired
> through CE139 so it would further implicate LHO.
>

I doubt that CE399 was present at the time of the setting of the phony
bullet at Parkland. Any bullet with a pointed nose would do. Later when
there were test bullets in the hands of the FBI, they had all the bullets
they needed to replace the phony with a real bullet from Oswald's rifle.
As we know, 4 men rejected the CE399 bullet they were shown later as one
they couldn't identify. As we know, one man even made it clear that the
bullet he first found was pointy nosed and not round nosed as the MC
bullets were. A giveaway for the phony CE399 being replaced with an MC
bullet. As to pristine, it's true, the 'magic' bullet wasn't pristine, it
was slightly bent and flattened and missing a bit of material at the tail
end. Just exactly like the CE572 test bullet right next to it in this
picture:

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg

Incidentally, the bullet on the right (CE856) was fired at the wrist
bone of a cadaver, just like the 'magic' bullet hit Connally's wrist bone
(among other bones and things). The 'magic' bullet was more magic than
originally thought...:)

> One problem there is how would the conspirators know which hospital
> the President would be rushed to?  The nurses at Parkland thought a
> downtown hospital would be first choice should something happen to
> anyone in the motorcade, such as a wounded SS agent or bystander.
>

See above. It wasn't necessary to know which hospital.

> Hunters are well aware of the hazards caused by through and through
> wounds. Hunting bullets are unjacketed soft-nose bullets to prevent
> total penetration, and yet it happens anyway.  A military FML
> projectile would have double the capability of maximum penetration.
> The Carcano ammunition was famous for deep penetration which is why
> this type ammo was used for Big Game hunting in Africa.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory

Chris

[mainframetech]

On May 7, 3:41 pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <c0ecb822-bd22-4593-88a9-1e4ad1a7c...@z14g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,

Bill, if you're talking to me, I've never said that the bullets CE399
and the 2 fragments from the limo front seat didn't go through the MC
rifle. I believe they did. The problem is WHEN did they go through it.
See the previous post to see an explanation of how to replace bullets in
custody with test bullets from the MC rifle.

And do you believe that if you fired 10 bullets into a water tank, that
none of them would look like another one? I doubt that.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On May 7, 4:56 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net> wrote:
> Differences in the bullets is because the comparison is Apples and
> Oranges.
>
> If you fire a bullet from a Carcano *directly* at a cadaver wrist you will
> not produce a bullet like CE 399.
>
> CE 399 was significantly slowed in its passage through JFK and JBC.
>

Let's have a look at the path of the magic bullet. I'm using a
path described in:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory#Theorized_path_of_the_bullet_CE399

Here's what it says in part:

"nicked President Kennedy's tie-knot on its upper left side. Upon clearing
the tie-knot the bullet had slowed to about 1,500 feet per second (457
m/s) and had started to tumble, traveled the 25.5 inches (650 mm) between
President Kennedy and Governor Connally, impacted and entered Connally's
back just below and behind his right armpit creating an 8 millimeter by 15
millimeter elliptical wound,...according to Connally, the impact of the
bullet was very forceful."

Now that describes the impacting of Connally's rib that was 'shattered'
and had an impact that he knew was "forceful" at 1500 ft/ sec. The rib
was hit earlier in the path. Are you going to say that that shattered rib
caused NO damage to the CE399 bullet like the bullet fired at a wrist
bone? Granted that the bullet would have been slowed down before the
wrist was hit, by going through 2 people 7 times and hitting 2 bones, but
really. To be just like a test bullet after all that? Naah.

> I suggest you read "Kennedy and Lincoln" by Dr. J. K. Lattimer, which
> explains all of this in detail.
>
> John F.
>

> "Bill Clarke" <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
>
> news:kmbjk...@drn.newsguy.com...
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <c0ecb822-bd22-4593-88a9-1e4ad1a7c...@z14g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,

> > Bill Clarke-

[Canuck]

On Tuesday, May 7, 2013 10:50:42 AM UTC-7, John McAdams wrote:
> On 6 May 2013 19:46:23 -0400, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
> >3) Why is not the photo of Oswald and David Ferrie a biger deal than it
>
> >should be? If the photo is faked, then fine. If it is not, it shows a flaw
>
> >in the Warren Commission, does it not?
>
> >
>
>
>
> No, it does not.
>
>
>
> I doesn't actually show that Ferrie knew Oswald, just that they were
> in the same CAP unit at the same time.
>
>

The photo shows Oswald and Ferrie at a barbecue, suggesting they knew each
other when Oswald was a teenager. Several friends of Oswald testified tha
t Oswald had briefly been a member of Ferrie's CAP unit around 1955.
When Ferrie was interviewed by the Secret Service shortly after the
assassination, he referred to Oswald as a "psycho". On Feb. 13, 1964 in a
restaurant at the Winnipeg International Airport, a man later identified
as Ferrie by Winnipeg businessman Richard Giesbrecht, overheard him and
another man discussing the assassination. "Ferrie" wondered why a man
named Isaacs had gotten involved with a "psycho like Oswald". See my
third article on the subject "The Winnipeg Airport Incident Revisited" at:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/winnipeg.htm (two earlier articles, one
extensively updated, appear at http://kenrahn.com/JFK/JFK.html (scroll
down left side to "the critics" and then my name). - Peter R. Whitmey

[Anthony Marsh]

Their idea is that the bullet slowed down enough that it was not damaged
by hitting the wrist. But they have to carefully lie about the speeds to
get it to work.
Read Sturdivan's book for the ugly details or find my commentary on the
Wayback Machine.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/7/2013 6:59 PM, mainframetech wrote:

What I'd like to see you do is come up with a theory that they were all
fired a few days before the assassination, then collected, loaded into
sabots and planted in the limo on the day of the assassination by firing
them from a rifle with a larger bore.

BTW, have you seen Henry Hurt's bullet which WAS fired into a barrel of
water?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/7/2013 6:58 PM, mainframetech wrote:
> On May 7, 3:38 pm, claviger <historiae.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Del Ali
>>
>> In no way was CE 399 a "pristine" bullet. Look up the definition of
>> pristine. Some CTs familiar with rifles and bullets immediately
>> realized this bullet had been fired through a rifle and hit something
>> that caused it to deform. Perhaps it was fired into a water tank or
>> cotton wadding, or some other material so it could be retrieved intact
>> and placed at the Hospital ER area. Some even believe it was fired
>> through CE139 so it would further implicate LHO.
>>
> I doubt that CE399 was present at the time of the setting of the phony
> bullet at Parkland. Any bullet with a pointed nose would do. Later when
> there were test bullets in the hands of the FBI, they had all the bullets
> they needed to replace the phony with a real bullet from Oswald's rifle.
> As we know, 4 men rejected the CE399 bullet they were shown later as one
> they couldn't identify. As we know, one man even made it clear that the
> bullet he first found was pointy nosed and not round nosed as the MC
> bullets were. A giveaway for the phony CE399 being replaced with an MC
> bullet. As to pristine, it's true, the 'magic' bullet wasn't pristine, it
> was slightly bent and flattened and missing a bit of material at the tail
> end. Just exactly like the CE572 test bullet right next to it in this
> picture:
>

Why don't you just go ahead and claim that ALL the evidence is fake?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/7/2013 4:56 PM, John Fiorentino wrote:
> Differences in the bullets is because the comparison is Apples and Oranges.
>
> If you fire a bullet from a Carcano *directly* at a cadaver wrist you
> will not produce a bullet like CE 399.
>
> CE 399 was significantly slowed in its passage through JFK and JBC.
>
> I suggest you read "Kennedy and Lincoln" by Dr. J. K. Lattimer, which
> explains all of this in detail.
>
> John F.
>

More nonsense.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/7/2013 3:38 PM, claviger wrote:
> Del Ali
>
> In no way was CE 399 a "pristine" bullet. Look up the definition of
> pristine. Some CTs familiar with rifles and bullets immediately
> realized this bullet had been fired through a rifle and hit something
> that caused it to deform. Perhaps it was fired into a water tank or
> cotton wadding, or some other material so it could be retrieved intact
> and placed at the Hospital ER area. Some even believe it was fired
> through CE139 so it would further implicate LHO.
>
> One problem there is how would the conspirators know which hospital
> the President would be rushed to? The nurses at Parkland thought a

Maybe they had a police scanner. Sam Pate said he was keeping track of the
motorcade progress on channel 2 of his police radio. Maybe they followed
the motorcade racing to Parkland Hospital just to deliver the coup de
grace if needed.

Maybe they were listening to the SS channel, but we'll never know if
Parkland is mentioned by name unless the government releases ALL the
tapes.

> downtown hospital would be first choice should something happen to
> anyone in the motorcade, such as a wounded SS agent or bystander.
>

Which downtown hospital are you thinking about? The one next to the
Hyatt or the Adolfus?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/7/2013 1:55 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 6 May 2013 19:46:23 -0400, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:
>
>>
>> 4) Was there ever any questions among critical thinking journalists (when
>> they still had them) after the Warren Report was released that was
>> bothered by how obvious and refreshing to know that the lone gunman was a
>> fan of the nations 2 worst nightmares at the time, not one but two, the
>> Soviet Union and Castro. Meaning, a left wing communist was the killer,
>> case closed. Yet, when it was clear that there was rift with the CIA and
>> Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs, a rift between JFK and LBJ and the joint
>> chiefs on Vietnam and a rift on JFK's clear support on civil rights verse
>> southern Democrats, that an intelligent man like Oswald would want to
>> eliminate a president who clearly leaned left politically to the Congress
>> and the joint chiefs??
>
> JFK didn't lean left as much as you think.
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/stjohn.htm
>

I am sick of your revisionism. JFK was proud to call himself a Liberal.
You are trying to justify your extreme rightwing views by calling JFK an
extreme rightwinger.

> More importantly, Kennedy's administration was actively trying to
> overthrow Castro, and even to kill him.
>
> Since Oswald was a fan of Castro, he might well have viewed himself as
> the protector of the "revolution" in Cuba.
>

As if Castro would be proud of him starting WWIII and causing the
incineration of Cuba?

>
>> Looking back now, this is amazing and makes me
>> ashamed to be an American!
>>
>
> Then go live somewhere else, or quit whining!
>

You don't look cute in a hardhat.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/7/2013 1:50 PM, John McAdams wrote:
> On 6 May 2013 19:46:23 -0400, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:
>
>>
>> 3) Why is not the photo of Oswald and David Ferrie a biger deal than it
>> should be? If the photo is faked, then fine. If it is not, it shows a flaw
>> in the Warren Commission, does it not?
>>
>
> No, it does not.
>
> I doesn't actually show that Ferrie knew Oswald, just that they were
> in the same CAP unit at the same time.
>

Correct. It doesn't prove that Ferrie KNEW Oswald in the Biblical sense.
Not even sharing the same pup tent proves that.

But Ferrie was scare to death by the rumor that Oswald had his library
card.

> In fact, even before the photo came out (in 1993) there were plenty of
> good witnesses who put Oswald in Ferrie's unit. The HSCA interviewed
> them.
>

That was not confirmed by the photo. Just that Ferrie was in a different
chapter and visiting to give a lecture. We don't have the photo of them
kissing.

> But none of those witnesses reported any kind of relationship between
> Ferrie and Oswald.
>

Sure, sure. Just like you guys said that Clay Shaw did not have any kind
of relationship with the CIA. How many times do you think we will fall
for your stories?

[Anthony Marsh]

I don't claim that Folliard is lying. I'd just like to see you upload it
so that I can read it for myself to figure out what the context is and
what he thinks he meant.

> Now, as far as the BBC television broadcast, I will locate it, but let me tell you, your charge is serious, because you are implying that the BBC falsely faked a police audio. If this is case, it should be brought out. I fear once I find it and send it, you will say it is a fraud. As far as the officers go, either one was the 1962 Dallas police officer of the year or he was not, either 2 of them dies within 48 months or they did not. If the did not and the BBC story can be proven wrong, show me the proof
> The bigger question is, why do you deem something junk and then deem a low life like Posner the gospel? I want to know the truth and have an open mind and this site does not appear too be a good start. show me proof?
>

I don't care which particular BBS special it was. But if you don't have
any skills to upload it maybe you can remember the name of it so that I
can watch it myself. Maybe it wasn't really BBC but just played on BBC.
Maybe it was the History Channel show The Men Who Killed Kennedy which
aired on the BBC before it was shown in America. But which episode of 9?

I'd have to get out my old VHS tapes and watch all 9 episodes.

For future reference I was attacking Posner even before his book came
out. I spotted him a mile away.

Which police audio are you talking about? You mean the DPD tape with the
shots on it? I believe it is real. There is one kook who does claim it
was faked.

Next time you read a kook website, post the URL here and ask us to
explain it to you.

[Bill Clarke]

In article <d40803aa-3492-42c6...@m4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
mainframetech says...
>
>On May 7, 3:41=A0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> In article <c0ecb822-bd22-4593-88a9-1e4ad1a7c...@z14g2000vba.googlegroups=

>.com>,
>> mainframetech says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On May 6, 10:43=3DA0pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >> On 5/6/2013 7:46 PM, daliresearch2...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> >> > I have had questions on 11/22/1963 that I have

>> >> > never seen answered that at one time were a part of the discussion. =
>May=3D
>> >be
>> >> > they have been and you can help me. In no particular order, here goe=
>s:
>>
>> >> > =3DA0 1) 48 Mannlicher Carcano vs 45 German Mauser:
>>
>> >> > =3DA0 Paragraph two of the 11/23/1963 Washington Post, written by Ed=
> Foll=3D
>> >iard
>> >> > states "the weapon recovered was 45 German Mauser". Additionally, in=
> 19=3D
>> >77
>> >> > I watched a special from BBC which had the live audio feed by the 3 =
>Dal=3D
>> >las
>> >> > police officers who went up the 6th Floor of the school book deposit=
>ory=3D
>> >,
>> >> > all 3 officers stated, the weapon is a 45 German Mauser, semi automa=
>tic=3D

>> >.
>>
>> >> I seriously doubt that. Tell us what the BBC special was. Upload it.
>> >> Upload the audio you heard.
>>

>> >> > According the the BBC, all 3 officers were WWII vets, one a Marine C=
>orp=3D
>> >s
>> >> > vet and one the 1962 Dallas Police officer of the year. Within 48 ho=
>urs=3D
>> >,
>> >> > one the officers said he was wrong and the weapon was the 48 Mannlic=
>her
>> >> > Carcano, the other 2 refuse to change there story and I believe they=
> di=3D
>> >ed
>>
>> >> You are thinking of Seymour Weitzman. He did not say "48." That makes =

>no
>> >> sense. Oswald's rifle was a model 91/38 made in 1940. They stopped
>> >> making the 91/38 in 1941.
>>

>> >> > of mysterious circumstance or suicide with 48 months, with the Dalla=

>s
>> >> > police officer of the year before fired for incompetence. This story
>> >> > rarely is ever discussed any more. WHY? Was it answered?
>>

>> >> We have only discussed it 37,913 times and it has been answered alread=

>y.
>> >> Stop reading junk articles from kook websites.
>>

>> > =A0 Roger Craig was the officer who would not change his testimony.

>> >Everyone else changed their testimony and lived a normal happy life

>> >thereafter. =A0Craig had murder attempted on him, and was relieved of

>> >duty and was divorced and finally they said he committed suicide.

>> >There are no 'kook' websites involved in the story. =A0Craig wrote up

>> >his experience and views on the murder and his situation afterwards:
>> >http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/WTKaP.html
>>

>> > =A0 And yes, Craig was awarded the 'policeman of the year' award a

>> >couple of years before, and he had been promoted 4 times in his

>> >department before the murder. =A0There are differing views in this forum

>> >as to what is true in the case and what was not, as well as whether it

>> >was a conspiracy as the HSCA rules, or a 'lone nut' shooter. =A0You'll

>> >have to watch for that in the answers you get.
>>

>> >> > 2) In 1976, I along with 3 of my friends made arrangements on July 2=
>2,
>> >> > 1976 to meet with Marion Johnson who was the JFK curator at the Nati=
>ona=3D
>> >l
>> >> > Archives in DC. ( I am a MD/DC boy) =3DA0to see first hand the magic=
> bull=3D

>> >et
>> >> > and the Mannlicher Carcano. I do not think one can do that today. He

>> >> > allowed us to touch both the bullet and rifle. I can not tell you th=
>e
>> >> > emotion that went threw all of us. Here is the point of the story, e=
>ven=3D
>> > Mr
>> >> > Johnson said, the bullet looks like it was never fired "and I'll lea=
>ve =3D
>> >it
>> >> > at that" =3DA0Three years ago, I saw a recent photo of this same bul=
>let t=3D
>> >hat
>> >> > we all saw and touched in 1976.... the bullet in the photo is NOT TH=
>E S=3D

>> >AME
>> >> > ONE! what is going on?
>>
>> >> Yeah some people say pristine or nearly pristine. But only a complete
>> >> idiot who knows nothing about bullets could say that "the bullet looks
>> >> like it was never fired." The only way that the bullet can get those
>> >> grooves on the surface is by being fired. They are not sold with the
>> >> grooves already on the bullets. So consider your source.
>>

>> > =A0 I don't know what they did with the bullet you saw, but I can show
>> >you a picture of the one they say is the 'magic' bullet. =A0That is the

>> >bullet that went through 2 people 7 times, including hitting 2 bones

>> >on Connally, and came away with hardly any damage. =A0Here's the
>> >picture:
>> >http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg
>>
>> > =A0 If you look carefully at the bullets in the picture, first you see

>> >CE399 the 'magic' bullet, and then next to it you see CE572, a test

>> >bullet. =A0See how similar the first and second bullets are? =A0Then tak=
>e
>> >a look at CE856 at the right. =A0That bullet was fired into the wrist

>> >bone of a cadaver, similar to only one of the bones the 'magic' bullet

>> >hit. =A0Not too similar to each other.
>>
>> One thing at a time. =A0Marsh is correct, the bullets received those
>> striation marks from being fired. =A0So all these bullets were shot out o=

>f
>> the barrel of a rifle.
>>

>> As for the damage to the bullet, as I've often stated you cannot replicat=

>e
>> bullet wounds and damage to the bullet within a normal statistical
>> analysis. There are simply too many variables that make such efforts very
>> difficult.
>>
>> Bill Clarke
>
> Bill, if you're talking to me, I've never said that the bullets CE399
>and the 2 fragments from the limo front seat didn't go through the MC
>rifle. I believe they did. The problem is WHEN did they go through it.
>See the previous post to see an explanation of how to replace bullets in
>custody with test bullets from the MC rifle.
>
> And do you believe that if you fired 10 bullets into a water tank, that
>none of them would look like another one? I doubt that.
>
>Chris
>

I doubt that too. With the water tank you have removed many of the variables.
It doesn't matter where you hit the target (it is all the same water) and the
bullet goes through a uniform medium, the water. The range is all the same.I
would expect your 10 bullets in the water tank would look much the same.

I should have been more clear. I was referring to bullet wounds in an animal
and the different path the bullet takes to and through the animal. Hard to
replicate that, especially at different ranges and a moving target.

Bill Clarke

[Bill Clarke]

In article <5189ac99$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...

My god Marsh! Is this some of Sam's crap about slightly used .264 bullets being
used?

Bill Clarke

[Bill Clarke]

In article <5189b440$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...

>
>On 5/7/2013 1:55 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>> On 6 May 2013 19:46:23 -0400, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 4) Was there ever any questions among critical thinking journalists (when
>>> they still had them) after the Warren Report was released that was
>>> bothered by how obvious and refreshing to know that the lone gunman was a
>>> fan of the nations 2 worst nightmares at the time, not one but two, the
>>> Soviet Union and Castro. Meaning, a left wing communist was the killer,
>>> case closed. Yet, when it was clear that there was rift with the CIA and
>>> Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs, a rift between JFK and LBJ and the joint
>>> chiefs on Vietnam and a rift on JFK's clear support on civil rights verse
>>> southern Democrats, that an intelligent man like Oswald would want to
>>> eliminate a president who clearly leaned left politically to the Congress
>>> and the joint chiefs??
>>
>> JFK didn't lean left as much as you think.
>>
>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/stjohn.htm
>>
>
>I am sick of your revisionism. JFK was proud to call himself a Liberal.
>You are trying to justify your extreme rightwing views by calling JFK an
>extreme rightwinger.

Today JFK would be known as a moderate Republican. Deal with it Marsh.

JFK was no Teddy, thank god.

Bill Clarke

[mainframetech]

On May 7, 11:23 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 5/7/2013 6:59 PM, mainframetech wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 7, 4:56 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net> wrote:
> >> Differences in the bullets is because the comparison is Apples and
> >> Oranges.
>
> >> If you fire a bullet from a Carcano *directly* at a cadaver wrist you will
> >> not produce a bullet like CE 399.
>
> >> CE 399 was significantly slowed in its passage through JFK and JBC.
>
> >     Let's have a look at the path of the magic bullet.  I'm using a
> > path described in:

> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory#Theorized_path_of_t...

>
> >     Here's what it says in part:
>
> > "nicked President Kennedy's tie-knot on its upper left side. Upon clearing
> > the tie-knot the bullet had slowed to about 1,500 feet per second (457
> > m/s) and had started to tumble, traveled the 25.5 inches (650 mm) between
> > President Kennedy and Governor Connally, impacted and entered Connally's
> > back just below and behind his right armpit creating an 8 millimeter by 15
> > millimeter elliptical wound,...according to Connally, the impact of the
> > bullet was very forceful."
>
> >     Now that describes the impacting of Connally's rib that was 'shattered'
> > and had an impact that he knew was "forceful" at 1500 ft/ sec.  The rib
> > was hit earlier in the path.  Are you going to say that that shattered rib
> > caused NO damage to the CE399 bullet like the bullet fired at a wrist
> > bone?  Granted that the bullet would have been slowed down before the
> > wrist was hit, by going through 2 people 7 times and hitting 2 bones, but
> > really.  To be just like a test bullet after all that?  Naah.
>
> Their idea is that the bullet slowed down enough that it was not damaged
> by hitting the wrist. But they have to carefully lie about the speeds to
> get it to work.

Yes Marsh, that's why I added the earlier impact of the bullet into
the rib. It's a bone and it was hit by the 'magic' bullet at an
appreciable speed and should have been marked accordingly, yet, next
to nothing shows on the bullet! And STILL the problem of that bullet
failing identification by 4 people that supposedly saw it and handled
it earlier. And one who said the bullet he handled was pointy nosed
and not round nosed. I keep mentioning these things because often no
one seems to notice them or allow the logic to seep in.

Chris

[mainframetech]

> water?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The idea of firing test bullets before the murder was mentioned by a
few folks I seem to recall, but what a complication to have test
bullets in advance and then have to spot them around here and there.

I like better the idea that the FBI and other agencies would
quickly get control of all evidence and be in a position to do almost
anything necessary to fulfill the scenario of the 'lone nut' (and we
know of many transgressions of theirs with witnesses).

That evidence like the 'pointy nosed' bullet at Parkland could
readily be replaced by a test bullet from the MC rifle which the FBI
would get quickly. Frazier was in charge at the FBI for receiving
items of evidence, though there is some argument as to whether he
should have been doing that job at all. He was in a good position to
replace the 'pointy nosed' bullet, and also he was one of the people
who went to the White House garage in the middle of the night and
found 2 bullet fragments that later were also found to match the MC
rifle. Were the 2 fragments also recorded then and replaced later
too? Or were they a legitimate bad shot from the TSBD into the
chromed crosspiece of the limo which broke apart and plopped into the
front seat area?

Chris

[mainframetech]

On May 7, 11:26 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 5/7/2013 6:58 PM, mainframetech wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 7, 3:38 pm, claviger <historiae.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Del Ali
>
> >> In no way was CE 399 a "pristine" bullet.  Look up the definition of
> >> pristine.  Some CTs familiar with rifles and bullets immediately
> >> realized this bullet had been fired through a rifle and hit something
> >> that caused it to deform. Perhaps it was fired into a water tank or
> >> cotton wadding, or some other material so it could be retrieved intact
> >> and placed at the Hospital ER area.  Some even believe it was fired
> >> through CE139 so it would further implicate LHO.
>
> >    I doubt that CE399 was present at the time of the setting of the phony
> > bullet at Parkland.  Any bullet with a pointed nose would do. Later when
> > there were test bullets in the hands of the FBI, they had all the bullets
> > they needed to replace the phony with a real bullet from Oswald's rifle.
> > As we know, 4 men rejected the CE399 bullet they were shown later as one
> > they couldn't identify.  As we know, one man even made it clear that the
> > bullet he first found was pointy nosed and not round nosed as the MC
> > bullets were.  A giveaway for the phony CE399 being replaced with an MC
> > bullet.  As to pristine, it's true, the 'magic' bullet wasn't pristine, it
> > was slightly bent and flattened and missing a bit of material at the tail
> > end.  Just exactly like the CE572 test bullet right next to it in this
> > picture:
>
> Why don't you just go ahead and claim that ALL the evidence is fake?
>

Because I don't believe it was all fake. And I wouldn't 'claim' it,
I would state it and produce my backup for it. The evidence says that
JFK was hit in the right temple by a bullet that then passed through
his head and caused a large hole to be made in the rear of the head,
in the occipital area. All the evidence (witness statements) say so,
and few say otherwise. Evidence of a frontal shot. Billy Hargis at
the left rear of the limo was sprayed with blood and brain matter, and
Floyd Boring stated that a piece of bloody bone and brain matter was
found in the rear well of the 'Queen Mary', the following car for the
SS. All evidence saying a shot from the front. On and on the parade
of evidence saying 'conspiracy'. Even the manipulation of some of the
evidence says 'conspiracy' too.

[mainframetech]

On May 7, 11:36 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 5/7/2013 3:38 PM, claviger wrote:
>
> > Del Ali
>
> > In no way was CE 399 a "pristine" bullet.  Look up the definition of
> > pristine.  Some CTs familiar with rifles and bullets immediately
> > realized this bullet had been fired through a rifle and hit something
> > that caused it to deform. Perhaps it was fired into a water tank or
> > cotton wadding, or some other material so it could be retrieved intact
> > and placed at the Hospital ER area.  Some even believe it was fired
> > through CE139 so it would further implicate LHO.
>
> > One problem there is how would the conspirators know which hospital
> > the President would be rushed to?  The nurses at Parkland thought a
>
> Maybe they had a police scanner. Sam Pate said he was keeping track of the
> motorcade progress on channel 2 of his police radio. Maybe they followed
> the motorcade racing to Parkland Hospital just to deliver the coup de
> grace if needed.
>
> Maybe they were listening to the SS channel, but we'll never know if
> Parkland is mentioned by name unless the government releases ALL the
> tapes.
>
> > downtown hospital would be first choice should something happen to
> > anyone in the motorcade, such as a wounded SS agent or bystander.
>

There are a lot of maybes there and it isn't necessary to bother
with getting a bullet in advance and trying to guess where you will
have to put it. Simply get any bullet and put it where you need to,
such as at PH and be done with it (too bad a mistake was made as to
where to seed the bullet). Since the FBI gets all the evidence in a
major case like this, they can replace the bullet later when test
bullets from the MC rifle are obtained. As proof of the replacement,
there was the 4 people that refused to identify the CE399 bullet
later, and one said the original bullet was not round nosed, it was
pointy nosed. Clear suggestion of replacement. Why would someone
forget the shape of the bullet that killed the president if they
handled it?

[mainframetech]

No seasoned politician would ever believe that the assassination
would lead to WW3. It's a foolish notion. If that was ever said by a
politician, it was for effect, not fact. And add on that Oswald had
nothing against Kennedy as per Marina's testimony:
":Mr. RANKIN. Did he ever say anything about President Kennedy?
Mrs. OSWALD. No. At least---I was always interested in President
Kennedy and had asked him many times to translate articles in a
newspaper or magazine for me, and he always had something good to say.
He translated it, but never did comment on it. At least in Lee's
behavior---from Lee's behavior I cannot conclude that he was against
the President, and therefore the thing is incomprehensible to me."

"always had something good to say" is what she said. We don't know
if she was lying, since she did a lot of that at various times, but
at the beginning she was more looking out for number one and allowing
as how she didn't know much of Oswald's wanderings.

>
>
> >> Looking back now, this is amazing and makes me
> >> ashamed to be an American!
>
> > Then go live somewhere else, or quit whining!
>
> You don't look cute in a hardhat.
>
>
>
> > .John
>
> > --
> > The Kennedy Assassination Home Page
> >http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm

Chris

[curtjester1]

On May 6, 7:46 pm, daliresearch2...@aol.com wrote:
> I have had questions on 11/22/1963 that I have

> never seen answered that at one time were a part of the discussion. Maybe

> they have been and you can help me. In no particular order, here goes:
>

>  1) 48 Mannlicher Carcano vs 45 German Mauser:
>

>  Paragraph two of the 11/23/1963 Washington Post, written by Ed Folliard
> states "the weapon recovered was 45 German Mauser". Additionally, in 1977
> I watched a special from BBC which had the live audio feed by the 3 Dallas
> police officers who went up the 6th Floor of the school book depository,
> all 3 officers stated, the weapon is a 45 German Mauser, semi automatic.
> According the the BBC, all 3 officers were WWII vets, one a Marine Corps
> vet and one the 1962 Dallas Police officer of the year. Within 48 hours,

> one the officers said he was wrong and the weapon was the 48 Mannlicher

> Carcano, the other 2 refuse to change there story and I believe they died

> of mysterious circumstance or suicide with 48 months, with the Dallas
> police officer of the year before fired for incompetence. This story
> rarely is ever discussed any more. WHY? Was it answered?
>

> 2) In 1976, I along with 3 of my friends made arrangements on July 22,

> 1976 to meet with Marion Johnson who was the JFK curator at the National
> Archives in DC. ( I am a MD/DC boy)  to see first hand the magic bullet

> and the Mannlicher Carcano. I do not think one can do that today. He
> allowed us to touch both the bullet and rifle. I can not tell you the

> emotion that went threw all of us. Here is the point of the story, even Mr
> Johnson said, the bullet looks like it was never fired "and I'll leave it
> at that"  Three years ago, I saw a recent photo of this same bullet that
> we all saw and touched in 1976.... the bullet in the photo is NOT THE SAME

> ONE! what is going on?
>

The best thing one can do in the enormity of the JFK case is to not
accept anything at face value, because you will find all sorts of
'official stories' to personal favorite theories. If I want a
question answered or a discussion on a topic, i hit the 'search group'
in this or any other google jfk group. You can find an enormous
amount of discussion and usually posted links. The same for any
search engine.

On the 'pristine bullet' one would have to ask, who did it hit, and
what fragmentation was left behind, remove, how much would be lost
from the bullet travelling through the barrell of the rifle, etc.

Here are a few snippets I have collected from the most widely looked
at event in that chain, the wounding of Connally and the events
surrounding that:

http://www.reocities.com/CapitolHill/parliament/3997/842.html
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5648
http://whokilledjfk.net/single_bullet.htm
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022222298
http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm

CJ

> 3) Why is not the photo of Oswald and David Ferrie a biger deal than it
> should be? If the photo is faked, then fine. If it is not, it shows a flaw
> in the Warren Commission, does it not?
>

> 4)  Was there ever any questions among critical thinking journalists (when
> they still had them) after the Warren Report was released that was
> bothered by how obvious and refreshing to know that the lone gunman was a
> fan of the nations 2 worst nightmares at the time, not one but two, the
> Soviet Union and Castro. Meaning, a left wing communist was the killer,
> case closed. Yet, when it was clear that there was rift with the CIA and
> Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs, a rift between JFK and LBJ and the joint
> chiefs on Vietnam and a rift on JFK's clear support on civil rights verse
> southern Democrats, that an intelligent man like Oswald would want to
> eliminate a president who clearly leaned left politically to the Congress

> and the joint chiefs?? Looking back now, this is amazing and makes me

> ashamed to be an American!
>

> 5) Since the Soviet Union and Nikita K were considered public enemy number
> one, here is the most obvious question, I bet nobody has ever asked. Given
> that fact, how, how could ANY man who denounced his U.S. citizenship in
> 1959 be allowed back in the U.S. only 3 years later, let alone AT ALL???
>

> I would be grateful to read your feedback'
>
> Thank you
>
> Del Ali

[Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)]

On May 7, 6:58 pm, mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 7, 3:38 pm, claviger <historiae.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:> Del Ali
>
> > In no way was CE 399 a "pristine" bullet.  Look up the definition of
> > pristine.  Some CTs familiar with rifles and bullets immediately
> > realized this bullet had been fired through a rifle and hit something
> > that caused it to deform. Perhaps it was fired into a water tank or
> > cotton wadding, or some other material so it could be retrieved intact
> > and placed at the Hospital ER area.  Some even believe it was fired
> > through CE139 so it would further implicate LHO.
>
>   I doubt that CE399 was present at the time of the setting of the phony
> bullet at Parkland.  Any bullet with a pointed nose would do. Later when
> there were test bullets in the hands of the FBI, they had all the bullets
> they needed to replace the phony with a real bullet from Oswald's rifle.
> As we know, 4 men rejected the CE399 bullet they were shown later as one
> they couldn't identify.  As we know, one man even made it clear that the
> bullet he first found was pointy nosed and not round nosed as the MC
> bullets were.  A giveaway for the phony CE399 being replaced with an MC
> bullet.  As to pristine, it's true, the 'magic' bullet wasn't pristine, it
> was slightly bent and flattened and missing a bit of material at the tail
> end.  Just exactly like the CE572 test bullet right next to it in this
> picture:
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg

So your theory is they both planted a bullet at Parkland that wasn't
directly traceable to Oswald's rifle initially AND then swapped it later
for a bullet that was traceable to Oswald's weapon?

Is that your final answer?

Hilarious.

The number of problems with that theory are many:

Why would they plant a bullet at Parkland not knowing at that time whether
any bullets were missing from any of the victims? Why would they plant a
bullet not traceable to Oswald -- were they trying to EXPOSE the
conspiracy by establishing two weapons were used? Why didn't they simply
plant a bullet at Parkland that was traceable to Oswald to begin with? Why
go through this song-and-dance routine where they both plant and then
later swap a bullet?

You're aware that eyewitness testimony is unreliable, right, and that
building a case solely around the aberrant eyewitness testimony isn't
going to get you closer to a solution, especially if it means throwing out
all the hard evidence collected in the case, right? If you're not aware of
this, consider yourself told.

Hank

[claviger]

On May 7, 5:59 pm, mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 7, 4:56 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net> wrote:
>
> > Differences in the bullets is because the comparison is Apples and
> > Oranges.
>
> > If you fire a bullet from a Carcano *directly* at a cadaver wrist you will
> > not produce a bullet like CE 399.
>
> > CE 399 was significantly slowed in its passage through JFK and JBC.
>
>    Let's have a look at the path of the magic bullet.  I'm using a

> path described in:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory#Theorized_path_of_t...

>
>    Here's what it says in part:
>
> "nicked President Kennedy's tie-knot on its upper left side. Upon clearing
> the tie-knot the bullet had slowed to about 1,500 feet per second (457
> m/s) and had started to tumble, traveled the 25.5 inches (650 mm) between
> President Kennedy and Governor Connally, impacted and entered Connally's
> back just below and behind his right armpit creating an 8 millimeter by 15
> millimeter elliptical wound,...according to Connally, the impact of the
> bullet was very forceful."
>
>    Now that describes the impacting of Connally's rib that was 'shattered'
> and had an impact that he knew was "forceful" at 1500 ft/ sec.  The rib
> was hit earlier in the path.  Are you going to say that that shattered rib
> caused NO damage to the CE399 bullet like the bullet fired at a wrist
> bone?  Granted that the bullet would have been slowed down before the
> wrist was hit, by going through 2 people 7 times and hitting 2 bones, but
> really.  To be just like a test bullet after all that?  Naah.

The important part you left out, the bullet was tumbling when it slammed
into Connally's rib, the first hard bone this projectile made impact with.
It must have been sideways to bend the bullet lengthwise as it did. The
scientific field testing done in Australia and captured on film with a
high speed camera, proved every projectile tumbled as it continued on a
downward trajectory when it made exit from the first human surrogate
figure.

[claviger]

On May 7, 2:38 pm, claviger <historiae.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Del Ali
>
> In no way was CE 399 a "pristine" bullet.  Look up the definition of
> pristine.  Some CTs familiar with rifles and bullets immediately
> realized this bullet had been fired through a rifle and hit something
> that caused it to deform. Perhaps it was fired into a water tank or
> cotton wadding, or some other material so it could be retrieved intact
> and placed at the Hospital ER area.  Some even believe it was fired
> through CE139 so it would further implicate LHO.
>

> One problem there is how would the conspirators know which hospital
> the President would be rushed to?  The nurses at Parkland thought a

> downtown hospital would be first choice should something happen to
> anyone in the motorcade, such as a wounded SS agent or bystander.
>

> Hunters are well aware of the hazards caused by through and through
> wounds. Hunting bullets are unjacketed soft-nose bullets to prevent
> total penetration, and yet it happens anyway.  A military FML
> projectile would have double the capability of maximum penetration.
> The Carcano ammunition was famous for deep penetration which is why
> this type ammo was used for Big Game hunting in Africa.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory

6.5mm Rifle Cartridges - CHUCKHAWKS.COM
http://www.chuckhawks.com/6-5mm_rifle_cartridges.htm - 12k - similar
pagesIt is what allows 6.5mm bullets to get deep inside of even large
animals, ... shot they are adequate for game from the size of the
smaller African antelope and ...

6.5mm Cartridge Family - CHUCKHAWKS.COM
http://www.chuckhawks.com/6-5mm_family.htm - 13k - similar pagesChuck
Hawks shares information about the North American 6.5mm (.264) ... For
most big game hunting, the 6.5mm cartridges are probably at their best
with ... bullets that will easily penetrate to the vitals of any CXP2
game animal, they ... used to harvest practically every game animal in
the world, including African elephants!

Shooting the "Other" 6.5mm's - CHUCKHAWKS.COM
http://www.chuckhawks.com/other_6-5mm.htm - 19k - similar pages6.5mm (.
264) bullets are available in a multitude of styles and weights
suitable for everything from varmints to all but the heaviest big
game. ... round nosed bullets, they have also killed their fair share
of moose, polar bear, African lion ... killed some very large animals
with his 6.5 Mannlicher, including a coastal brown bear.

[Anthony Marsh]

You managed to hit most of the kook Web sites, but where is Spartacus
and Prisonplanet?

[mainframetech]

On May 8, 9:23 am, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <d40803aa-3492-42c6-9d74-19bc96853...@m4g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

True. But easy to determine that the bullet gets mushroomed at the fore
tip in a goodly number of 10 shots into bone. If a bullet hits a bone
straight enough to 'shatter' the bone, you might assume that some
mushrooming would occur. At the least the CE399 would look a bit more
mussed than a test bullet like in the case of CE572 as in the picture:

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

LBJ did. That was the reason he cited for starting the cover-up. He used
it as blackmail to get people to serve on the Warren Commission.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/8/2013 9:27 AM, mainframetech wrote:

Why don't you just claim that ALL the evidence is fake?

[Anthony Marsh]

You never produce backup. Only bullshit.

> JFK was hit in the right temple by a bullet that then passed through
> his head and caused a large hole to be made in the rear of the head,

SHow me your trajectory to cause that.

> in the occipital area. All the evidence (witness statements) say so,
> and few say otherwise. Evidence of a frontal shot. Billy Hargis at
> the left rear of the limo was sprayed with blood and brain matter, and
> Floyd Boring stated that a piece of bloody bone and brain matter was
> found in the rear well of the 'Queen Mary', the following car for the
> SS. All evidence saying a shot from the front. On and on the parade
> of evidence saying 'conspiracy'. Even the manipulation of some of the
> evidence says 'conspiracy' too.

Just the head exploding in all directions does not tell you where the
bullet came from.

[Anthony Marsh]

> The idea of firing test bullets before the murder was mentioned by a
> few folks I seem to recall, but what a complication to have test
> bullets in advance and then have to spot them around here and there.
>
> I like better the idea that the FBI and other agencies would
> quickly get control of all evidence and be in a position to do almost
> anything necessary to fulfill the scenario of the 'lone nut' (and we
> know of many transgressions of theirs with witnesses).
>

You like the idea of resorting to claims of fakery when you can handle
the real evidence.

[Anthony Marsh]

So if CE 399 did not hit Connally, which bullet(s) did? Show it/them to
me.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/8/2013 9:24 AM, Bill Clarke wrote:
> In article <5189b440$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...
>>
>> On 5/7/2013 1:55 PM, John McAdams wrote:
>>> On 6 May 2013 19:46:23 -0400, dalirese...@aol.com wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> 4) Was there ever any questions among critical thinking journalists (when
>>>> they still had them) after the Warren Report was released that was
>>>> bothered by how obvious and refreshing to know that the lone gunman was a
>>>> fan of the nations 2 worst nightmares at the time, not one but two, the
>>>> Soviet Union and Castro. Meaning, a left wing communist was the killer,
>>>> case closed. Yet, when it was clear that there was rift with the CIA and
>>>> Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs, a rift between JFK and LBJ and the joint
>>>> chiefs on Vietnam and a rift on JFK's clear support on civil rights verse
>>>> southern Democrats, that an intelligent man like Oswald would want to
>>>> eliminate a president who clearly leaned left politically to the Congress
>>>> and the joint chiefs??
>>>
>>> JFK didn't lean left as much as you think.
>>>
>>> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/stjohn.htm
>>>
>>
>> I am sick of your revisionism. JFK was proud to call himself a Liberal.
>> You are trying to justify your extreme rightwing views by calling JFK an
>> extreme rightwinger.
>
> Today JFK would be known as a moderate Republican. Deal with it Marsh.
>

Garbage. You are trying to justify your extreme rightwing views. Even
Ronald Reagan would be thrown out of the Tea Party.

[Anthony Marsh]

I don't know about Sam. I was just offering the idea to help him make
his theory more bizarre.
Jerry Robertson proposed that the conspirators would plant Oswald .268
fired bullets in the limo by firing them from a larger bore rifle like a
.30-06 using sabots. I have a couple of his samples. I explained to him
over a weekend why the idea is impractical.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/8/2013 9:23 AM, Bill Clarke wrote:

The marks on the jacket might differ slightly from shot to shot
depending on how much fouling it created. Remember that the WCC ammo
uses the entire depth of the groove.

[mainframetech]

On May 8, 5:34 pm, "Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)"

Easy answers. Though I'm glad I've helped you toward hilarity...:)

Remember that the FBI would get ALL evidence in the case as soon as
possible. They also knew they had to frame the patsy by connecting his
rifle to the crime of murder. The bullet is the best way to do that
because they knew the rifle was linked to Oswald.

Since the body had to be in their hands (and was stolen away from the
Dallas Medical Examiner almost at gunpoint to avoid any other autopsy and
assure they had it in their control), any bullet that stayed in the body
could be left there (it appears that 2 bullets DID stay in the body, from
the back wound and the throat wound). With many shooters there were bound
to be injuries that could be attributed to a bullet that fell out of a
wound (it happens), and they could control the autopsy results (as indeed
they did) to appear that a bullet did damage and was missing. A lot of
words, but a simple plan. A good idea, but don't you think there was
something funny about the bullet being found on the wrong stretcher at
Parkland that was used by little Ronnie Fuller, as per Josiah Thompson?
A mistake made by the person that had to drop the bullet.

Since all bullets would be in the hands of the FBI soonest after the
murder, they CE399 bullet, which was NEVER seen near the body of JFK or
Connally, was tucked away until a test bullet became available, which was
known would happen when the rifle was found and taken into custody.

The evidence for this replacement is the use of the wrong stretcher to
drop off the bullet, the clean appearance of a bullet that went through 2
bodies 7 times, including hitting 2 bones, the uncanny look of the CE399
like a test bullet next to it, the refusal to identify the bullet by 4 men
that had handled it (one even saying that the bullet was originally pointy
nosed, not round nosed like the MC ammo).

The evidence above is much more straightforward than the Single Bullet
Theory. In fact, if you think about it, if you were told the tale of the
SBT before you heard of the JFK murder, you would laugh your head off.
There's the hilarity for you.

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

Which bone? You mean the curved rib bone? Seen any "straight" rib bone
lately?

> http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg
>
> Chris
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Is that all you got? Lazy! I expected 100 references. Get back to work.

[Anthony Marsh]

On 5/8/2013 7:06 PM, claviger wrote:

No, it wasn't. That is a WC lie.

> into Connally's rib, the first hard bone this projectile made impact with.
> It must have been sideways to bend the bullet lengthwise as it did. The

Nonsense. It entered at an angle and struck a curved surface.
The entrance wound was only 1.5 cm long. Not the length of the bullet.

> scientific field testing done in Australia and captured on film with a
> high speed camera, proved every projectile tumbled as it continued on a
> downward trajectory when it made exit from the first human surrogate
> figure.
>

The Australia tests were a hoax. Their bullet did not do everything that
the SBT requires.

>

[Anthony Marsh]

That's only his backup theory.

> Hilarious.
>
> The number of problems with that theory are many:
>
> Why would they plant a bullet at Parkland not knowing at that time whether
> any bullets were missing from any of the victims? Why would they plant a

They knew there was a bullet missing because they intentionally missed
with one shot.
Remember, the FBI said three shots, three hits, no misses.

> bullet not traceable to Oswald -- were they trying to EXPOSE the
> conspiracy by establishing two weapons were used? Why didn't they simply
> plant a bullet at Parkland that was traceable to Oswald to begin with? Why

Before the shooting? Isn't that a little risky if someone finds it
before the shooting? Like setting off the explosives in the World Trade
Center before the planes hit them?

> go through this song-and-dance routine where they both plant and then
> later swap a bullet?
>

Maybe the conspirators were tripping over each other planting evidence
or needing to replant incorrectly planted evidence.
"Hey, I thought you taped the door open. Guess I'd better go back and
tape it again."

[Bill Clarke]

In article <cc20d24d-c424-4b2d...@gb2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
mainframetech says...
>
>On May 8, 9:23=A0am, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> In article <d40803aa-3492-42c6-9d74-19bc96853...@m4g2000vbb.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> mainframetech says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On May 7, 3:41=3DA0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> >> In article <c0ecb822-bd22-4593-88a9-1e4ad1a7c...@z14g2000vba.googlegro=
>ups=3D
>> >.com>,
>> >> mainframetech says...
>>
>> >> >On May 6, 10:43=3D3DA0pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> w=

>rote:
>> >> >> On 5/6/2013 7:46 PM, daliresearch2...@aol.com wrote:
>>
>> >> >> > I have had questions on 11/22/1963 that I have

>> >> >> > never seen answered that at one time were a part of the discussio=
>n. =3D
>> >May=3D3D
>> >> >be
>> >> >> > they have been and you can help me. In no particular order, here =
>goe=3D
>> >s:
>>
>> >> >> > =3D3DA0 1) 48 Mannlicher Carcano vs 45 German Mauser:
>>
>> >> >> > =3D3DA0 Paragraph two of the 11/23/1963 Washington Post, written =
>by Ed=3D
>> > Foll=3D3D
>> >> >iard
>> >> >> > states "the weapon recovered was 45 German Mauser". Additionally,=
> in=3D
>> > 19=3D3D
>> >> >77
>> >> >> > I watched a special from BBC which had the live audio feed by the=
> 3 =3D
>> >Dal=3D3D
>> >> >las
>> >> >> > police officers who went up the 6th Floor of the school book depo=
>sit=3D
>> >ory=3D3D
>> >> >,
>> >> >> > all 3 officers stated, the weapon is a 45 German Mauser, semi aut=
>oma=3D
>> >tic=3D3D
>> >> >.
>>
>> >> >> I seriously doubt that. Tell us what the BBC special was. Upload it=

>.
>> >> >> Upload the audio you heard.
>>

>> >> >> > According the the BBC, all 3 officers were WWII vets, one a Marin=
>e C=3D
>> >orp=3D3D
>> >> >s
>> >> >> > vet and one the 1962 Dallas Police officer of the year. Within 48=
> ho=3D
>> >urs=3D3D
>> >> >,
>> >> >> > one the officers said he was wrong and the weapon was the 48 Mann=
>lic=3D
>> >her
>> >> >> > Carcano, the other 2 refuse to change there story and I believe t=
>hey=3D
>> > di=3D3D
>> >> >ed
>>
>> >> >> You are thinking of Seymour Weitzman. He did not say "48." That mak=
>es =3D

>> >no
>> >> >> sense. Oswald's rifle was a model 91/38 made in 1940. They stopped
>> >> >> making the 91/38 in 1941.
>>

>> >> >> > of mysterious circumstance or suicide with 48 months, with the Da=
>lla=3D
>> >s
>> >> >> > police officer of the year before fired for incompetence. This st=

>ory
>> >> >> > rarely is ever discussed any more. WHY? Was it answered?
>>

>> >> >> We have only discussed it 37,913 times and it has been answered alr=
>ead=3D

>> >y.
>> >> >> Stop reading junk articles from kook websites.
>>

>> >> > =3DA0 Roger Craig was the officer who would not change his testimony=

>.
>> >> >Everyone else changed their testimony and lived a normal happy life

>> >> >thereafter. =3DA0Craig had murder attempted on him, and was relieved =

>of
>> >> >duty and was divorced and finally they said he committed suicide.

>> >> >There are no 'kook' websites involved in the story. =3DA0Craig wrote =

>up
>> >> >his experience and views on the murder and his situation afterwards:
>> >> >http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/WTKaP.html
>>

>> >> > =3DA0 And yes, Craig was awarded the 'policeman of the year' award a

>> >> >couple of years before, and he had been promoted 4 times in his

>> >> >department before the murder. =3DA0There are differing views in this =
>forum
>> >> >as to what is true in the case and what was not, as well as whether i=
>t
>> >> >was a conspiracy as the HSCA rules, or a 'lone nut' shooter. =3DA0You=

>'ll
>> >> >have to watch for that in the answers you get.
>>

>> >> >> > 2) In 1976, I along with 3 of my friends made arrangements on Jul=
>y 2=3D
>> >2,
>> >> >> > 1976 to meet with Marion Johnson who was the JFK curator at the N=
>ati=3D
>> >ona=3D3D
>> >> >l
>> >> >> > Archives in DC. ( I am a MD/DC boy) =3D3DA0to see first hand the =
>magic=3D
>> > bull=3D3D
>> >> >et
>> >> >> > and the Mannlicher Carcano. I do not think one can do that today.=
> He
>> >> >> > allowed us to touch both the bullet and rifle. I can not tell you=
> th=3D
>> >e
>> >> >> > emotion that went threw all of us. Here is the point of the story=
>, e=3D
>> >ven=3D3D
>> >> > Mr
>> >> >> > Johnson said, the bullet looks like it was never fired "and I'll =
>lea=3D
>> >ve =3D3D
>> >> >it
>> >> >> > at that" =3D3DA0Three years ago, I saw a recent photo of this sam=
>e bul=3D
>> >let t=3D3D
>> >> >hat
>> >> >> > we all saw and touched in 1976.... the bullet in the photo is NOT=
> TH=3D
>> >E S=3D3D

>> >> >AME
>> >> >> > ONE! what is going on?
>>

>> >> >> Yeah some people say pristine or nearly pristine. But only a comple=
>te
>> >> >> idiot who knows nothing about bullets could say that "the bullet lo=
>oks
>> >> >> like it was never fired." The only way that the bullet can get thos=
>e
>> >> >> grooves on the surface is by being fired. They are not sold with th=

>e
>> >> >> grooves already on the bullets. So consider your source.
>>

>> >> > =3DA0 I don't know what they did with the bullet you saw, but I can =
>show
>> >> >you a picture of the one they say is the 'magic' bullet. =3DA0That is=

> the
>> >> >bullet that went through 2 people 7 times, including hitting 2 bones

>> >> >on Connally, and came away with hardly any damage. =3DA0Here's the
>> >> >picture:
>> >> >http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg
>>
>> >> > =3DA0 If you look carefully at the bullets in the picture, first you=

> see
>> >> >CE399 the 'magic' bullet, and then next to it you see CE572, a test

>> >> >bullet. =3DA0See how similar the first and second bullets are? =3DA0T=
>hen tak=3D
>> >e
>> >> >a look at CE856 at the right. =3DA0That bullet was fired into the wri=
>st
>> >> >bone of a cadaver, similar to only one of the bones the 'magic' bulle=
>t
>> >> >hit. =3DA0Not too similar to each other.
>>
>> >> One thing at a time. =3DA0Marsh is correct, the bullets received those
>> >> striation marks from being fired. =3DA0So all these bullets were shot =
>out o=3D

>> >f
>> >> the barrel of a rifle.
>>

>> >> As for the damage to the bullet, as I've often stated you cannot repli=
>cat=3D

>> >e
>> >> bullet wounds and damage to the bullet within a normal statistical

>> >> analysis. There are simply too many variables that make such efforts v=
>ery
>> >> difficult.
>>
>> >> Bill Clarke
>>
>> > =A0Bill, if you're talking to me, I've never said that the bullets CE39=

>9
>> >and the 2 fragments from the limo front seat didn't go through the MC

>> >rifle. =A0I believe they did. =A0The problem is WHEN did they go through=

> it.
>> >See the previous post to see an explanation of how to replace bullets in
>> >custody with test bullets from the MC rifle.
>>

>> > =A0And do you believe that if you fired 10 bullets into a water tank, t=
>hat
>> >none of them would look like another one? =A0I doubt that.
>>
>> >Chris
>>
>> I doubt that too. =A0With the water tank you have removed many of the var=
>iables.
>> It doesn't matter where you hit the target (it is all the same water) and=
> the
>> bullet goes through a uniform medium, the water. =A0The range is all the =

>same.I
>> would expect your 10 bullets in the water tank would look much the same.
>>

>> I should have been more clear. =A0I was referring to bullet wounds in an =
>animal
>> and the different path the bullet takes to and through the animal. =A0Har=

>d to
>> replicate that, especially at different ranges and a moving target.
>>
>> Bill Clarke
>
> True. But easy to determine that the bullet gets mushroomed at the fore
>tip in a goodly number of 10 shots into bone. If a bullet hits a bone
>straight enough to 'shatter' the bone, you might assume that some
>mushrooming would occur. At the least the CE399 would look a bit more
>mussed than a test bullet like in the case of CE572 as in the picture:
>
>http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg
>
>Chris

Could be but I kinda doubt it. The full metal jacket bullet is designed
NOT to mushroom. The FMJ purposefully omits or avoids the design features
that make a soft point bullet mushroom (which is desirable in a hunting
bullet).

That way it is more humane when they shoot you in whatever military
operation is going on at the time. Pretty damn kind of them, don't you
think.

Bill Clarke

[mainframetech]

A nice theory, but it's made wrong by facts. Here's a description
from Dr. Shaw:

"Dr. Robert Shaw described the wound on Connally's back as "a small
wound of entrance, roughly elliptical in shape, and approximately a
cm. and a half in its longest diameter, in the right posterior
shoulder, which is medial to the fold of the axilla".
The bullet entered just at the edge of the scapula and followed the
fifth rib, shattering the last 10 cm of the rib before exiting on the
right side of his chest just below the right nipple."
From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory

So the bullet (tumbling or not) didn't go in sideways or even close
to sideways, and in an inch or two, it didn't tumble sideways either.

Chris

[mainframetech]

As I said before you commented: "If that was ever said by a
politician, it was for effect, not fact." And as you usefully pointed
out "He used it as blackmail to get people to serve on the Warren
Commission." Proving the concept was used for "effect" to gain an
objective.

[mainframetech]

Hmm. Sounds like your essays.

> > JFK was hit in the right temple by a bullet that then passed through
> > his head and caused a large hole to be made in the rear of the head,
>
> SHow me your trajectory to cause that.
>

So you admit that there was indeed a small hole at the temple
hairline? Good, that will make the rest simpler.

Given the position of JFK's head at the moment of the impact
(remember that the film has been messed with), his head was slightly
pointing down. A shot was fired from the GK and hit the right temple
then passed through the head to the rear of the head (occiput), taking
with it much brain, blood, and bone matter, leaving a large exit hole
the 'size of an orange' seen by 40 or more people, including Clint
Hill who was right there behind the president and coming up to the
limo.

> > in the occipital area.  All the evidence (witness statements) say so,
> > and few say otherwise.  Evidence of a frontal shot.  Billy Hargis at
> > the left rear of the limo was sprayed with blood and brain matter, and
> > Floyd Boring stated that a piece of bloody bone and brain matter was
> > found in the rear well of the 'Queen Mary', the following car for the
> > SS.  All evidence saying a shot from the front.  On and on the parade
> > of evidence saying 'conspiracy'.  Even the manipulation of some of the
> > evidence says 'conspiracy' too.
>
> Just the head exploding in all directions does not tell you where the
> bullet came from.
>

Sorry, won't do. The head did NOT explode in ALL directions.
Here's Marilyn Willis who saw the head shot and she described the head
being hit as blowing backwards:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc7ZYzbyNV8

As well, we have the vast majority of the flying debris going back
and somewhat to the left. Bobby Hargis who was in that position was
doused with blood, brain and bone, and as per Floyd Boring a piece of
bloody bone landed in the 'Queen Mary' (the following SS car). These
and many other events say the head shot came from the front.

>
>
> >>>http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg
>
> >>>      Incidentally, the bullet on the right (CE856) was fired at the wrist
> >>> bone of a cadaver, just like the 'magic' bullet hit Connally's wrist bone
> >>> (among other bones and things).  The 'magic' bullet was more magic than
> >>> originally thought...:)
>
> >>>> One problem there is how would the conspirators know which hospital
> >>>> the President would be rushed to?  The nurses at Parkland thought a
> >>>> downtown hospital would be first choice should something happen to
> >>>> anyone in the motorcade, such as a wounded SS agent or bystander.
>
> >>>     See above.  It wasn't necessary to know which hospital.
>
> >>>> Hunters are well aware of the hazards caused by through and through
> >>>> wounds. Hunting bullets are unjacketed soft-nose bullets to prevent
> >>>> total penetration, and yet it happens anyway.  A military FML
> >>>> projectile would have double the capability of maximum penetration.
> >>>> The Carcano ammunition was famous for deep penetration which is why
> >>>> this type ammo was used for Big Game hunting in Africa.
>

So you've contradicted yourself. First you say "Hunting bullets
are unjacketed" then you say "The Carcano ammunition was famous for

deep penetration which is why
this type ammo was used for Big Game hunting in Africa."

Make up your mind.

> >>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory
>
Chris

[mainframetech]

Nope. I like the idea of resorting to evidence of fakery, as I've
shown here, and you have avoided it by not discussing it. And note:
I'm not making a 'claim', I'm making a statement about evidence which
points out certain actions of people. The facts surrounding CE399 all
point to it being a fake.

[Anthony Marsh]

Further, the Hague Accords mandated that FMJ bullets be used in warfare
to provide for clean kills and prevent unnecessary suffering. This was
in reaction to Britain using Dum-Dum bullets against tribesmen. They are
similar to hollow points and were designed specifically to cause
horrifying wounds.

[mainframetech]

Now don't show a lack of common sense. Do you think a bullet from
some other rifle (not an MC) would be left lying around in the limo
for anyone to find and prove there was a conspiracy? However, they
did find some fragments under Nellie's jump seat, If I remember
correctly. They could be from anything.

[mainframetech]

Notice how your question allows you to avoid getting into the debate
about whether the CE399 should have been squashed more?

Now, the amount of 'squashing' CE399 received equals the test bullet
next to it. If it had gone through the 7 hits (2 of which were bone)
then should have more damage to it than it did.

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg
>
Chris

[mainframetech]

True. The hole the bullet made proves that it was not sideways when
it hit Connally, it was almost end on.

[Anthony Marsh]

It is physically impossible to have a shallow wound in the back or
throat with the WCC ammo.

> to be injuries that could be attributed to a bullet that fell out of a
> wound (it happens), and they could control the autopsy results (as indeed
> they did) to appear that a bullet did damage and was missing. A lot of
> words, but a simple plan. A good idea, but don't you think there was
> something funny about the bullet being found on the wrong stretcher at
> Parkland that was used by little Ronnie Fuller, as per Josiah Thompson?
> A mistake made by the person that had to drop the bullet.
>

He dropped it where he saw the bloody sheets, think it had been the
Preident's stretcher.

[mainframetech]

Use your head. They knew that the FBI would get complete control of
all evidence and so they could do anything with evidence they wanted.
If necessary they could lose it (note how many pieces of evidence they
have lost up to now), or they could do the replacement like with
CE399.

>
> They knew there was a bullet missing because they intentionally missed
> with one shot.
> Remember, the FBI said three shots, three hits, no misses.
>
> > bullet not traceable to Oswald -- were they trying to EXPOSE the
> > conspiracy by establishing two weapons were used? Why didn't they simply
> > plant a bullet at Parkland that was traceable to Oswald to begin with? Why
>

By planting a bullet at Parkland AFTER the murder they could avoid
the problem of it being found before the right time. Even though it
was not from Oswald's gun, it would go directly to the FBI and no one
would know where it came from. After being replaced with a real
bullet from the MC rifle, all was well, and the fake could be disposed
of.

> Before the shooting? Isn't that a little risky if someone finds it
> before the shooting? Like setting off the explosives in the World Trade
> Center before the planes hit them?
>

That plan worked.

> > go through this song-and-dance routine where they both plant and then
> > later swap a bullet?
>

Why both? Not necessary.

> Maybe the conspirators were tripping over each other planting evidence
> or needing to replant incorrectly planted evidence.
> "Hey, I thought you taped the door open. Guess I'd better go back and
> tape it again."
>
>

Apparently you haven't understood what was being said. If you do,
then argue logically why it wouldn't work. Otherwise You adding to
the hilarity. Only one conspirator was needed to leave a bullet in
Parkland after the murder.

>
> > You're aware that eyewitness testimony is unreliable, right, and that
> > building a case solely around the aberrant eyewitness testimony isn't
> > going to get you closer to a solution, especially if it means throwing out
> > all the hard evidence collected in the case, right? If you're not aware of
> > this, consider yourself told.
>
> > Hank

Sorry. You have your theories as to how to solve the crime, and I
have mine. If you have eyewitness testimony that duplicates each
other, you have corroboration, a stronger parcel of evidence.
However, if evidence has been faked, you have a much harder job trying
to prove it and get it discarded, so there are problems both ways.
Even worse if you have a conspirator listening to all the things you
find wrong and going around behind you fixing the mistakes you
uncover.

Chris

[mainframetech]

On May 9, 12:30 am, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <cc20d24d-c424-4b2d-be18-24c652083...@gb2g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,

However, they DO mushroom if they hit something full on, and perhaps
almost head on as in the test bullet into a cadaver in the example
photo (CE856):
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg

We might also want to look over CE567 and CE569, the fragments from
the limo front seat, which they say also came from the MC. It got
pretty mashed up for a FMJ bullet. That's if it went through
people...if it didn't go through people, there are some bullets
missing after all that people damage. 7 separate hits on 2 people.

I don't mind arguing these points, but when you step back and look
over this whole thing, it becomes clear (at least to me) that there is
just too much that has to be accepted to allow this to be a 'lone nut'
hit.

[Bill Clarke]

In article <518b1120$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...

So you are of the opinion that a tumbling bullet ALWAYS hits the target at it's
full length? Well it doesn't, Marsh. Think about this a bit. Every foot (or
less) the tumbling bullet travels it is at a new angle. Bingo!

Bill Clarke

[Bill Clarke]

In article <518abdd5$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...

What was your problem with the sabot? Remington once used to sell a 30-06 sabot
round commercially. The sabot was the most accurate round we had for the 105
main gun on the M60 tank.

Bill Clarke

[claviger]

Sounds like your theory of what Frazier said about the rifle.

> Here's a description
> from Dr. Shaw:
>
> "Dr. Robert Shaw described the wound on Connally's back as "a small
> wound of entrance, roughly elliptical in shape, and approximately a
> cm. and a half in its longest diameter, in the right posterior
> shoulder, which is medial to the fold of the axilla".
> The bullet entered just at the edge of the scapula and followed the
> fifth rib, shattering the last 10 cm of the rib before exiting on the
> right side of his chest just below the right nipple."
> From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory
>
>    So the bullet (tumbling or not) didn't go in sideways or even close
> to sideways, and in an inch or two, it didn't tumble sideways either.

What part of "roughly elliptical in shape" did you not understand? A
nose-on entry wound makes a round hole. Are you saying it is not a fact
that all bullets in the Aussie testing caught on camera did not tumble?
Even if a bullet wobbles because tight spin is gone from drilling through
soft tissue it affects rotation. Are you saying the bullet that hit
Connally was a separate bullet from the one that wounded the President in
the back?! If so, where did the Connally bullet come from and what kind
of bullet was it? How did that sniper get in position and get away after
firing this shot without being heard or seen??

[curtjester1]

On May 8, 9:26 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 5/8/2013 9:29 AM, curtjester1 wrote:

>
>
>
>
>
> > On May 6, 7:46 pm, daliresearch2...@aol.com wrote:
> >> I have had questions on 11/22/1963 that I have

> >> never seen answered that at one time were a part of the discussion. Maybe

> >> they have been and you can help me. In no particular order, here goes:
>

> >>   1) 48 Mannlicher Carcano vs 45 German Mauser:
>

> >>   Paragraph two of the 11/23/1963 Washington Post, written by Ed Folliard
> >> states "the weapon recovered was 45 German Mauser". Additionally, in 1977
> >> I watched a special from BBC which had the live audio feed by the 3 Dallas
> >> police officers who went up the 6th Floor of the school book depository,
> >> all 3 officers stated, the weapon is a 45 German Mauser, semi automatic.
> >> According the the BBC, all 3 officers were WWII vets, one a Marine Corps
> >> vet and one the 1962 Dallas Police officer of the year. Within 48 hours,

> >> one the officers said he was wrong and the weapon was the 48 Mannlicher

> >> Carcano, the other 2 refuse to change there story and I believe they died

> >> of mysterious circumstance or suicide with 48 months, with the Dallas
> >> police officer of the year before fired for incompetence. This story
> >> rarely is ever discussed any more. WHY? Was it answered?
>

> >> 2) In 1976, I along with 3 of my friends made arrangements on July 22,

> >> 1976 to meet with Marion Johnson who was the JFK curator at the National
> >> Archives in DC. ( I am a MD/DC boy)  to see first hand the magic bullet

> >> and the Mannlicher Carcano. I do not think one can do that today. He
> >> allowed us to touch both the bullet and rifle. I can not tell you the

> >> emotion that went threw all of us. Here is the point of the story, even Mr
> >> Johnson said, the bullet looks like it was never fired "and I'll leave it
> >> at that"  Three years ago, I saw a recent photo of this same bullet that
> >> we all saw and touched in 1976.... the bullet in the photo is NOT THE SAME

> >> ONE! what is going on?
>

> > The best thing one can do in the enormity of the JFK case is to not
> > accept anything at face value, because you will find all sorts of
> > 'official stories' to personal favorite theories.  If I want a
> > question answered or a discussion on a topic, i hit the 'search group'
> > in this or any other google jfk group.  You can find an enormous
> > amount of discussion and usually posted links.  The same for any
> > search engine.
>
> > On the 'pristine bullet' one would have to ask, who did it hit, and
> > what fragmentation was left behind, remove, how much would be lost
> > from the bullet travelling through the barrell of the rifle, etc.
>
> > Here are a few snippets I have collected from the most widely looked
> > at event in that chain, the wounding of Connally and the events
> > surrounding that:
>
> >http://www.reocities.com/CapitolHill/parliament/3997/842.html
> >http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=5648
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/single_bullet.htm
> >http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022222298
> >http://whokilledjfk.net/catch_of_the_day.htm
>
> You managed to hit most of the kook Web sites, but where is Spartacus
> and Prisonplanet?
>
>
>
> > CJ
>
> >> 3) Why is not the photo of Oswald and David Ferrie a biger deal than it
> >> should be? If the photo is faked, then fine. If it is not, it shows a flaw
> >> in the Warren Commission, does it not?

>
> >> 4)  Was there ever any questions among critical thinking journalists (when
> >> they still had them) after the Warren Report was released that was
> >> bothered by how obvious and refreshing to know that the lone gunman was a
> >> fan of the nations 2 worst nightmares at the time, not one but two, the
> >> Soviet Union and Castro. Meaning, a left wing communist was the killer,
> >> case closed. Yet, when it was clear that there was rift with the CIA and
> >> Kennedy after the Bay of Pigs, a rift between JFK and LBJ and the joint
> >> chiefs on Vietnam and a rift on JFK's clear support on civil rights verse
> >> southern Democrats, that an intelligent man like Oswald would want to
> >> eliminate a president who clearly leaned left politically to the Congress

> >> and the joint chiefs?? Looking back now, this is amazing and makes me

> >> ashamed to be an American!
>

> >> 5) Since the Soviet Union and Nikita K were considered public enemy number
> >> one, here is the most obvious question, I bet nobody has ever asked. Given
> >> that fact, how, how could ANY man who denounced his U.S. citizenship in
> >> 1959 be allowed back in the U.S. only 3 years later, let alone AT ALL???
>
> >> I would be grateful to read your feedback'
>
> >> Thank you
>
> >> Del Ali

I was afraid he would be inundated with kooks within the thread so I
gave him some options. Perhaps you have some more authoritative
sites? Thanks for including a couple more.

CJ

[Anthony Marsh]

No, it doesn't when it strikes a curved surface such as the armpit.

> that all bullets in the Aussie testing caught on camera did not tumble?

No. Their test was very carefully designed to cause a tumbling bullet.
They simply lied about Connally's back wound.

> Even if a bullet wobbles because tight spin is gone from drilling through
> soft tissue it affects rotation. Are you saying the bullet that hit
> Connally was a separate bullet from the one that wounded the President in
> the back?! If so, where did the Connally bullet come from and what kind

Could have been.

> of bullet was it? How did that sniper get in position and get away after
> firing this shot without being heard or seen??
>

How did Oswald get into position and get away with firing a shot without
being heard of seen? Was the second person on the sixth floor just an
observer or was he also a shooter?

>
>
>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

The sabot theory for shooting a WCC Carcano bullet is not practical.
In almost all cases the bullet is slightly shorter than the sabot. But a
WCC Carcano bullet would be much longer than the sabot. Loading into the
chamber would be risky. Travel down the bore would be risky. The firing
rifle might not have the correct rate of twist to stabilize the long
heavy bullet, which may cause it to yaw and wobble in flight.
Similar to the problem with firing shorter bullets in the Carcanos with
progressive gain twist.
And the bullet does not grab the grooves and may be unstable going down
the barrel.

[Anthony Marsh]

Use your head. How did they even know the FBI would get involved.
Assassinating the President was not a Federal crime. The Dallas
authorities would be in charge. And if the DPD could not even identify
the Walker bullet how would they identify the Parkland bullet? They
might call it a Mauser bullet and look for people who bought Mauser bullets.

> all evidence and so they could do anything with evidence they wanted.
> If necessary they could lose it (note how many pieces of evidence they
> have lost up to now), or they could do the replacement like with
> CE399.

When you're stuck, just claim that ALL the evidence is fake.

>>
>> They knew there was a bullet missing because they intentionally missed
>> with one shot.
>> Remember, the FBI said three shots, three hits, no misses.
>>
>>> bullet not traceable to Oswald -- were they trying to EXPOSE the
>>> conspiracy by establishing two weapons were used? Why didn't they simply
>>> plant a bullet at Parkland that was traceable to Oswald to begin with? Why
>>
> By planting a bullet at Parkland AFTER the murder they could avoid
> the problem of it being found before the right time. Even though it
> was not from Oswald's gun, it would go directly to the FBI and no one
> would know where it came from. After being replaced with a real
> bullet from the MC rifle, all was well, and the fake could be disposed
> of.
>
>
>> Before the shooting? Isn't that a little risky if someone finds it
>> before the shooting? Like setting off the explosives in the World Trade
>> Center before the planes hit them?
>>
> That plan worked.
>

Not sure what you mean. Are you saying that they set off explosives in
the Twin Towers before the planes hit?

>>> go through this song-and-dance routine where they both plant and then
>>> later swap a bullet?
>>
> Why both? Not necessary.
>
>> Maybe the conspirators were tripping over each other planting evidence
>> or needing to replant incorrectly planted evidence.
>> "Hey, I thought you taped the door open. Guess I'd better go back and
>> tape it again."
>>
>>
> Apparently you haven't understood what was being said. If you do,
> then argue logically why it wouldn't work. Otherwise You adding to
> the hilarity. Only one conspirator was needed to leave a bullet in
> Parkland after the murder.

You're not trying hard enough.

>
>>
>>> You're aware that eyewitness testimony is unreliable, right, and that
>>> building a case solely around the aberrant eyewitness testimony isn't
>>> going to get you closer to a solution, especially if it means throwing out
>>> all the hard evidence collected in the case, right? If you're not aware of
>>> this, consider yourself told.
>>
>>> Hank
>
> Sorry. You have your theories as to how to solve the crime, and I
> have mine. If you have eyewitness testimony that duplicates each
> other, you have corroboration, a stronger parcel of evidence.

Forget the witnesses. Concentrate on the physical evidence.

[Anthony Marsh]

Only if you require it to do all the damage that the SBT proposes.

> Now, the amount of 'squashing' CE399 received equals the test bullet
> next to it. If it had gone through the 7 hits (2 of which were bone)
> then should have more damage to it than it did.
>

No, not equal.

> http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg
>>
> Chris
>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

No, stop misrepresenting what I said. I said the bullet hit the forehead
just above the right eye. Not the temple.

> Given the position of JFK's head at the moment of the impact
> (remember that the film has been messed with), his head was slightly
> pointing down. A shot was fired from the GK and hit the right temple
> then passed through the head to the rear of the head (occiput), taking
> with it much brain, blood, and bone matter, leaving a large exit hole
> the 'size of an orange' seen by 40 or more people, including Clint
> Hill who was right there behind the president and coming up to the
> limo.
>

Lots of babbling. No diagrams.

>>> in the occipital area. All the evidence (witness statements) say so,
>>> and few say otherwise. Evidence of a frontal shot. Billy Hargis at
>>> the left rear of the limo was sprayed with blood and brain matter, and
>>> Floyd Boring stated that a piece of bloody bone and brain matter was
>>> found in the rear well of the 'Queen Mary', the following car for the
>>> SS. All evidence saying a shot from the front. On and on the parade
>>> of evidence saying 'conspiracy'. Even the manipulation of some of the
>>> evidence says 'conspiracy' too.
>>
>> Just the head exploding in all directions does not tell you where the
>> bullet came from.
>>
> Sorry, won't do. The head did NOT explode in ALL directions.
> Here's Marilyn Willis who saw the head shot and she described the head
> being hit as blowing backwards:
>

Blood and brains went everywhere, in all directions.

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc7ZYzbyNV8
>
> As well, we have the vast majority of the flying debris going back
> and somewhat to the left. Bobby Hargis who was in that position was

No, that is not true. On the Zapruder film you can see the trails of
debris leaving the top of the head and going up and slihgtly forward and
to the left.

> doused with blood, brain and bone, and as per Floyd Boring a piece of
> bloody bone landed in the 'Queen Mary' (the following SS car). These
> and many other events say the head shot came from the front.
>
>>
>>
>>>>> http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg
>>
>>>>> Incidentally, the bullet on the right (CE856) was fired at the wrist
>>>>> bone of a cadaver, just like the 'magic' bullet hit Connally's wrist bone
>>>>> (among other bones and things). The 'magic' bullet was more magic than
>>>>> originally thought...:)
>>
>>>>>> One problem there is how would the conspirators know which hospital
>>>>>> the President would be rushed to? The nurses at Parkland thought a
>>>>>> downtown hospital would be first choice should something happen to
>>>>>> anyone in the motorcade, such as a wounded SS agent or bystander.
>>
>>>>> See above. It wasn't necessary to know which hospital.
>>
>>>>>> Hunters are well aware of the hazards caused by through and through
>>>>>> wounds. Hunting bullets are unjacketed soft-nose bullets to prevent
>>>>>> total penetration, and yet it happens anyway. A military FML
>>>>>> projectile would have double the capability of maximum penetration.
>>>>>> The Carcano ammunition was famous for deep penetration which is why
>>>>>> this type ammo was used for Big Game hunting in Africa.
>>
> So you've contradicted yourself. First you say "Hunting bullets
> are unjacketed" then you say "The Carcano ammunition was famous for
> deep penetration which is why
> this type ammo was used for Big Game hunting in Africa."
>
> Make up your mind.
>

You are replying to someone else.

>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory
>>
> Chris
>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

He actually believed it, as he made clear in his private conversations.

[mainframetech]

On May 9, 5:28 pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <518b112...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...

How can that be, since the tumbling of any one bullet isn't going to
be exactly the same speed as other bullets tumbling? And since the
entry wound in Connally's back was almost circular (elliptical), the
bullet was not sideways or near sideways at time of entry, and to
"shatter" 10 cm. (about 4 inches, I believe) of a rib it didn't simply
'graze' the rib or glance off it, it hit it pretty solidly.

[Bill Clarke]

In article <518bac5c$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...

Another one mostly right. I'm proud of you Marsh. But it wasn't so much to
provide "clean kills" as it was to stop the horrible wounding that resulted from
Dum-Dums and the like. Easier to patch up a soldier with a clean wound that one
that has blown most the soldier away.

Bill Clarke

[mainframetech]

Aww. And I thought you were a 'gun nut'. Are you unaware that a
load may be faulty and not fire a bullet very fast and it will
penetrate only to a shallow depth? Really old ammunition might do
something similar. Here's some training:
http://tinyurl.com/chqehlk

If you do further checking into JFK's back wound and the autopsy
experience of probing it, you may then see what can happen with a
faulty cartridge. Go to the following link and examine page 4:
http://jfklancer.com/Sibert-ONeill.html
It says: "Dr. Humes probed this wound with his finger and concluded
that the missile had only traveled a short distance because he could
feel the end of the track with his finger."

They never found the bullet because it had been removed in the 1st
'secret' autopsy before the 8:00pm autopsy. Same for the throat entry
wound which was not connected to the back wound.

> > to be injuries that could be attributed to a bullet that fell out of a
> > wound (it happens), and they could control the autopsy results (as indeed
> > they did) to appear that a bullet did damage and was missing.  A lot of
> > words, but a simple plan.  A good idea, but don't you think there was
> > something funny about the bullet being found on the wrong stretcher at
> > Parkland that was used by little Ronnie Fuller, as per Josiah Thompson?
> > A mistake made by the person that had to drop the bullet.
>
> He dropped it where he saw the bloody sheets, think it had been the
> Preident's stretcher.
>

And that mistake gives us evidence of falsifying evidence. That and
the other ridiculous oddities about the 'magic' bullet (CE399) show
clearly that the bullet was a fake. One guy actually remembers that
the bullet found on the wrong stretcher was "pointy nosed", and not
round nosed like the MC bullets. The FBI records at one point
actually have 2 CE399 bullets in existence at the same time! And with
all this faking, what does that suggest to the average person? That
someone is fooling around and trying to cover up something.

[mainframetech]

I don't have a 'theory' about what Frazier said. You can go to the
WC testimony and you will find every word I attribute to him is there,
and the same for Ronald Simmons, who also testified for the FBI.

> > Here's a description
> > from Dr. Shaw:
>
> > "Dr. Robert Shaw described the wound on Connally's back as "a small
> > wound of entrance, roughly elliptical in shape, and approximately a
> > cm. and a half in its longest diameter, in the right posterior
> > shoulder, which is medial to the fold of the axilla".
> > The bullet entered just at the edge of the scapula and followed the
> > fifth rib, shattering the last 10 cm of the rib before exiting on the
> > right side of his chest just below the right nipple."
> > From:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory
>
> >    So the bullet (tumbling or not) didn't go in sideways or even close
> > to sideways, and in an inch or two, it didn't tumble sideways either.
>
> What part of "roughly elliptical in shape" did you not understand?  A
> nose-on entry wound makes a round hole.  Are you saying it is not a fact
> that all bullets in the Aussie testing caught on camera did not tumble?

I said nothing about any Aussie testing. I'm using the doctor's
description of the wound to show that the bullet entered Connally at a
time when it was NOT sideways to his body, or even near sideways, bit
almost straight on. And in the inch or two (probably less) to hit the
rib, it couldn't tumble into a sideways position so that the bullet
would have a gentle flattening and slight bending in it. It hit more
closely to straight on and hit hard as Connally said it did. All this
is to point out that the bullet should have had much more damage than
what was done to the test bullet next to it in the picture:
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg

> Even if a bullet wobbles because tight spin is gone from drilling through
> soft tissue it affects rotation.  Are you saying the bullet that hit
> Connally was a separate bullet from the one that wounded the President in
> the back?!  If so, where did the Connally bullet come from and what kind
> of bullet was it?  How did that sniper get in position and get away after
> firing this shot without being heard or seen??

Aside from the more ridiculous aspects of the SBT, since there were
so many bullets flying around DP that day, all those shooters found a
way to get away. And when you have a 'patsy', it relieves the
pressure to get away, since the public was told the guilty party was
found.

Other probable sites for a shooter would be the top of any of the
buildings along Houston street in the area of Elm street, the Dal-Tex
building, especially a 2nd floor window, either of the Grassy Knolls,
a boxcar on the RR tracks (there were 4 there that day), and many
more.

Can you ignore all the bullet impacts on the pavement and on the
grass, the hits on JFK and Connally, the hit on the headpiece of the
limo? How many bullets and evidence do you need to be convinced that
you've been led astray by the WC and the perpetrators of this
conspiracy?

Chris

[Anthony Marsh]

A long bullet like the Carcano will leave an elliptical entrance wound
when it hits a curved surface like Connally's armpit.

>
>> Even if a bullet wobbles because tight spin is gone from drilling through
>> soft tissue it affects rotation. Are you saying the bullet that hit
>> Connally was a separate bullet from the one that wounded the President in
>> the back?! If so, where did the Connally bullet come from and what kind
>> of bullet was it? How did that sniper get in position and get away after
>> firing this shot without being heard or seen??
>
> Aside from the more ridiculous aspects of the SBT, since there were
> so many bullets flying around DP that day, all those shooters found a
> way to get away. And when you have a 'patsy', it relieves the
> pressure to get away, since the public was told the guilty party was
> found.
>

They had an easy way to get away by using official Secret Service
identification.

[Anthony Marsh]

As I said before, about 100 time, the WCC ammo was extremely reliable,
with no duds or short rounds or misfires. When Chapman tried to underload
some WCC rounds to produce a velocity low enough to barely penetrate the
rifle blew up. It is physically impossible. The WCC ammo was not "really
old." It was made in 1954. You are making up crap.

> If you do further checking into JFK's back wound and the autopsy
> experience of probing it, you may then see what can happen with a
> faulty cartridge. Go to the following link and examine page 4:
> http://jfklancer.com/Sibert-ONeill.html
> It says: "Dr. Humes probed this wound with his finger and concluded
> that the missile had only traveled a short distance because he could
> feel the end of the track with his finger."
>

Humes was incompetent and all he proved was how small the wound was and
how big his finger was.

> They never found the bullet because it had been removed in the 1st
> 'secret' autopsy before the 8:00pm autopsy. Same for the throat entry
> wound which was not connected to the back wound.
>

So now you want to be a Liftonite?

>>> to be injuries that could be attributed to a bullet that fell out of a
>>> wound (it happens), and they could control the autopsy results (as indeed
>>> they did) to appear that a bullet did damage and was missing. A lot of
>>> words, but a simple plan. A good idea, but don't you think there was
>>> something funny about the bullet being found on the wrong stretcher at
>>> Parkland that was used by little Ronnie Fuller, as per Josiah Thompson?
>>> A mistake made by the person that had to drop the bullet.
>>
>> He dropped it where he saw the bloody sheets, think it had been the
>> Preident's stretcher.
>>
> And that mistake gives us evidence of falsifying evidence. That and

Yeah, stop preaching to the choir.

> the other ridiculous oddities about the 'magic' bullet (CE399) show
> clearly that the bullet was a fake. One guy actually remembers that
> the bullet found on the wrong stretcher was "pointy nosed", and not
> round nosed like the MC bullets. The FBI records at one point

Never rely on witnesses.

> actually have 2 CE399 bullets in existence at the same time! And with
> all this faking, what does that suggest to the average person? That
> someone is fooling around and trying to cover up something.

Of course they are trying to cover up something. But that does not
justify you guessing at things and calling them facts.

[Anthony Marsh]

The rule was not adopted to make the work of the surgeons easier.
It was to stop unnecessary suffering. Clean kills.

> Bill Clarke
>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

Elliptical is not circular. The wound was elongated. 1.5 cm long.

[Bill Clarke]

In article <bbeef3ce-434b-4d1c...@a6g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,
mainframetech says...

>
>On May 9, 5:28=A0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> In article <518b112...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On 5/8/2013 7:06 PM, claviger wrote:
>> >> On May 7, 5:59 pm, mainframetech <mainframet...@yahoo.com> wrote:

>> >>> On May 7, 4:56 pm, "John Fiorentino" <jefiorent...@optimum.net> wrote=

>:
>>
>> >>>> Differences in the bullets is because the comparison is Apples and
>> >>>> Oranges.
>>

>> >>>> If you fire a bullet from a Carcano *directly* at a cadaver wrist yo=

>u will
>> >>>> not produce a bullet like CE 399.
>>
>> >>>> CE 399 was significantly slowed in its passage through JFK and JBC.
>>

>> >>> =A0 =A0 Let's have a look at the path of the magic bullet. =A0I'm usi=
>ng a
>> >>>path described
>> >>>in:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory#Theorized_path_of=
>_t...
>>
>> >>> =A0 =A0 Here's what it says in part:
>>
>> >>> "nicked President Kennedy's tie-knot on its upper left side. Upon cle=
>aring
>> >>> the tie-knot the bullet had slowed to about 1,500 feet per second (45=
>7
>> >>> m/s) and had started to tumble, traveled the 25.5 inches (650 mm) bet=
>ween
>> >>> President Kennedy and Governor Connally, impacted and entered Connall=
>y's
>> >>> back just below and behind his right armpit creating an 8 millimeter =
>by 15
>> >>> millimeter elliptical wound,...according to Connally, the impact of t=
>he
>> >>> bullet was very forceful."
>>
>> >>> =A0 =A0 Now that describes the impacting of Connally's rib that was '=
>shattered'
>> >>> and had an impact that he knew was "forceful" at 1500 ft/ sec. =A0The=
> rib
>> >>> was hit earlier in the path. =A0Are you going to say that that shatte=

>red rib
>> >>> caused NO damage to the CE399 bullet like the bullet fired at a wrist

>> >>> bone? =A0Granted that the bullet would have been slowed down before t=
>he
>> >>> wrist was hit, by going through 2 people 7 times and hitting 2 bones,=
> but
>> >>> really. =A0To be just like a test bullet after all that? =A0Naah.
>>
>> >> The important part you left out, the bullet was tumbling when it slamm=

>ed
>>
>> >No, it wasn't. That is a WC lie.

>> >> into Connally's rib, the first hard bone this projectile made impact w=
>ith.
>> >> It must have been sideways to bend the bullet lengthwise as it did. =
>=A0The

>>
>> >Nonsense. It entered at an angle and struck a curved surface.
>> >The entrance wound was only 1.5 cm long. Not the length of the bullet.
>>

>> So you are of the opinion that a tumbling bullet ALWAYS hits the target a=
>t it's
>> full length? =A0Well it doesn't, Marsh. =A0Think about this a bit. =A0Eve=
>ry foot (or
>> less) the tumbling bullet travels it is at a new angle. =A0Bingo!

>>
> How can that be, since the tumbling of any one bullet isn't going to
>be exactly the same speed as other bullets tumbling?

If you fired 10 rounds from a rifle and measured their velocity you would
probably get 10 different velocities. However, the differences in these
10 velocities would be statistically insignificant as far as making the
bullets tumble the same. The tumbling from a set of rounds I've seen on
paper targets were mostly at the same angle (give or take a little) when
they hit the paper. I've seen different sets of rounds hit the paper from
a slight angle all the way to an almost full length. This tumbling was
caused when I destabilized the bullet by attempting to make it go too
fast.

Now if you are talking about the bullet tumbling after it has left the
first target (JFK's body) you are in a different ball game. And again I
say you can not replicate these wounds in vivo.

Bill Clarke

[Hank Sienzant (AKA Joe Zircon)]

On May 9, 12:26 am, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:

> That's only his backup theory.
>

> > Hilarious.
>
> > The number of problems with that theory are many:
>
> > Why would they plant a bullet at Parkland not knowing at that time whether
> > any bullets were missing from any of the victims? Why would they plant a
>

> They knew there was a bullet missing because they intentionally missed
> with one shot.

Hilarious theory. I hope it's not yours. If they intentionally missed with
one shot, that bullet shouldn't be found on a stretcher in Parkland
Hospital, should it? If they then planted a bullet at Parkland, that
bullet wouldn't match up with any of the wounds on any of the victims and
it certainly couldn't be explained by a miss in Dealey Plaza.

Try again, because the theory you suggest above makes absolutely no sense.

> Remember, the FBI said three shots, three hits, no misses.
>

> > bullet not traceable to Oswald -- were they trying to EXPOSE the
> > conspiracy by establishing two weapons were used? Why didn't they simply
> > plant a bullet at Parkland that was traceable to Oswald to begin with? Why
>

> Before the shooting? Isn't that a little risky if someone finds it
> before the shooting? Like setting off the explosives in the World Trade
> Center before the planes hit them?

Straw argument. The argument advanced above was that the bullet found at
Parkland was planted there after the shooting, and then swapped for a
different bullet later. I am suggesting there was no need to do this, as
they could have just planted the final bullet initially, instead of
planting a different bullet and having to swap it. No one is suggesting
anything was planted before the shooting.

Try to avoid straw arguments, as they are logical fallacies, and reveal
you have no substantive rebuttal points to make.

>
> > go through this song-and-dance routine where they both plant and then
> > later swap a bullet?
>

> Maybe the conspirators were tripping over each other planting evidence
> or needing to replant incorrectly planted evidence.
> "Hey, I thought you taped the door open. Guess I'd better go back and
> tape it again."

Why would they plant incorrectly planted evidence (i.e., a bullet that
didn't trace back to Oswald's gun?)

As I asked before and you avoided, by planting bullets that were traceable
to different weapons that would reveal the conspiracy, wouldn't it?

Conspirators tripping over each other doesn't sound like a conspiracy that
could be hidden for 50 years.

[Bill Clarke]

In article <518c7581$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu>, Anthony Marsh says...

Why did I ask. Must have been another senior citizen moment.

Bill Clarke

[Anthony Marsh]

Yes, generalities.

> caused when I destabilized the bullet by attempting to make it go too
> fast.
>

Either too fast or too slow for the designed rate of spin.

[mainframetech]

"roughly elliptical" is oval. If it had gone in lengthwise in the
air, it would leave a larger very elongated hole. The size of the
hole is also a telling fact that it wasn't hitting him lengthwise.
From there the rest above is easy to determine. But if you want to go
further, 4 inches of rib were "shattered" and Connally said he was hit
hard by that bullet when it went into his back, so it had to hit the
rib with a good firm impact. That should have some some more damage
to the bullet that looked like a test bullet and almost new.

Chris

[John Fiorentino]

Bill:

Do yourself a favor. Get a copy of Kennedy and Lincoln.

Dr. Lattimer even performed tests to duplicate the bullet traversing JFK
and Connally.

The bullet traveling through JFK caused it to yaw, thus the wound seen on
JBC's back.

Arguing with Marsh is futile. Even he doesn't know what he means most of
the time.

John F.





"Bill Clarke" <Bill_...@newsguy.com> wrote in message
news:kmj7m...@drn.newsguy.com...

[mainframetech]

It was easy for Oswald to get away since he wasn't anywhere near
the 6th floor. He was down near the bottom floor and near the exits
front or back. The evidence shows that he went out the front and into
a Nash Rambler station wagon. 5-6 people stated that. If someone
shot from the 6th floor, it wasn't Oswald.

Chris

[mainframetech]

A logic error, but I'll fix it. Consider that there were conspirators
high up enough in government to have some control of things when the
bullets were fired. They could easily see to it that the FBI would get
there and take over the investigation, and the local cops would
immediately turn over whatever the FBI wanted, which would be everything.
No problem at all.

>
> > all evidence and so they could do anything with evidence they wanted.
> > If necessary they could lose it (note how many pieces of evidence they
> > have lost up to now), or they could do the replacement like with
> > CE399.
>
> When you're stuck, just claim that ALL the evidence is fake.
>

Good thing I'm not stuck then...:) And I do not 'claim' as you do. I
make statements and then back them up, if necessary. I also do NOT think
that ALL evidence is fake, only some of it, like CE399.

>
>
>
>
> >> They knew there was a bullet missing because they intentionally missed
> >> with one shot.
> >> Remember, the FBI said three shots, three hits, no misses.
>
> >>> bullet not traceable to Oswald -- were they trying to EXPOSE the
> >>> conspiracy by establishing two weapons were used? Why didn't they simply
> >>> plant a bullet at Parkland that was traceable to Oswald to begin with? Why
>
> >     By planting a bullet at Parkland AFTER the murder they could avoid
> > the problem of it being found before the right time.  Even though it
> > was not from Oswald's gun, it would go directly to the FBI and no one
> > would know where it came from.  After being replaced with a real
> > bullet from the MC rifle, all was well, and the fake could be disposed
> > of.
>
> >> Before the shooting? Isn't that a little risky if someone finds it
> >> before the shooting? Like setting off the explosives in the World Trade
> >> Center before the planes hit them?
>
> >    That plan worked.
>
> Not sure what you mean. Are you saying that they set off explosives in
> the Twin Towers before the planes hit?
>

Nope. They planted incendiaries and explosives in advance, and
waited for the plane crashes so they could set off the controlled
demolition, so that the suckers would think the demolition was part of
the crashes.

> >>> go through this song-and-dance routine where they both plant and then
> >>> later swap a bullet?
>
> >    Why both?  Not necessary.
>

Yes, necessary. They needed a bullet from Oswald's rifle to be sure to
lay the blame on him, but it was so much easier to get the rifle when the
crime had been committed and the rifle was found and given to the FBI.
Why go through a lot of skullduggery to try and get the rifle while Oswald
was still alive and might catch them at it and screw things up? But the
bullet had to be found after the murder, not before, or it wouldn't be
part of the evidence against Oswald. They know that after the president
was killed, any bullet found in the same hospital where he was worked on
would be saved and wind up with the FBI.

This whole little plot was simpler than the one where they HAD to get
control of the body and get it into Walter Reed hospital where I bet they
had everything set up. But Mrs. Kennedy wanted Bethesda so a lot of fast
shuffling had to be done as per the chatter on the plane radio to get set
up at Bethesda, and the multiple deliveries and autopsies.

> >> Maybe the conspirators were tripping over each other planting evidence
> >> or needing to replant incorrectly planted evidence.
> >> "Hey, I thought you taped the door open. Guess I'd better go back and
> >> tape it again."
>
> >    Apparently you haven't understood what was being said.  If you do,

> > then argue logically why it wouldn't work.  Otherwise You're adding to

> > the hilarity.  Only one conspirator was needed to leave a bullet in
> > Parkland after the murder.
>
> You're not trying hard enough.
>
>
>
> >>> You're aware that eyewitness testimony is unreliable, right, and that
> >>> building a case solely around the aberrant eyewitness testimony isn't
> >>> going to get you closer to a solution, especially if it means throwing out
> >>> all the hard evidence collected in the case, right? If you're not aware of
> >>> this, consider yourself told.
>
> >>> Hank
>
> >      Sorry.  You have your theories as to how to solve the crime, and I
> > have mine.  If you have eyewitness testimony that duplicates each
> > other, you have corroboration, a stronger parcel of evidence.
>
> Forget the witnesses. Concentrate on the physical evidence.
>

Both types are evidence as far as I'm concerned.

[mainframetech]

Equal enough. If you don't think so, then say what you think is not
equal unless you're afraid to debate it. I think that one of the
reasons you intentionally don't give any info when you pop out those
little quickies. The description and photo show them both with slight
bends, with slight flattening, and with some material missing from the
tail end. Speak up if you don't think so and say what is not the
same, so we can assume they are indeed equal.

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg

Chris

[mainframetech]

March, look at what I said. You're so busy looking at your own words
that you didn't read mine. My comment was couched as a question, which
you could have easily said it wasn't so instead of the tack you took.
Just another lesson in behaving as a normal person when in company. I
have the testimony of Tom Robinson (among others) that the small hole was
in the hairline on the right temple. If that doesn't match YOUR
understanding, give your idea and any backup for it, if you have any.

> >     Given the position of JFK's head at the moment of the impact
> > (remember that the film has been messed with), his head was slightly
> > pointing down.  A shot was fired from the GK and hit the right temple
> > then passed through the head to the rear of the head (occiput), taking
> > with it much brain, blood, and bone matter, leaving a large exit hole
> > the 'size of an orange' seen by 40 or more people, including Clint
> > Hill who was right there behind the president and coming up to the
> > limo.
>
> Lots of babbling. No diagrams.
>

Well, other than your usual insulting blather, that's right. Are you
incapable of forming an image in your mind? Take the image and figure it
out. I'm sure everyone else that wanted to has already done it. Stop
stalling.

>
> >>> in the occipital area.  All the evidence (witness statements) say so,
> >>> and few say otherwise.  Evidence of a frontal shot.  Billy Hargis at
> >>> the left rear of the limo was sprayed with blood and brain matter, and
> >>> Floyd Boring stated that a piece of bloody bone and brain matter was
> >>> found in the rear well of the 'Queen Mary', the following car for the
> >>> SS.  All evidence saying a shot from the front.  On and on the parade
> >>> of evidence saying 'conspiracy'.  Even the manipulation of some of the
> >>> evidence says 'conspiracy' too.
>
> >> Just the head exploding in all directions does not tell you where the
> >> bullet came from.
>
> >    Sorry, won't do.  The head did NOT explode in ALL directions.
> > Here's Marilyn Willis who saw the head shot and she described the head
> > being hit as blowing backwards:
>
> Blood and brains went everywhere, in all directions.
>

Says who? YOU? How about someone that was there? Bobby Hargis the
cycle cop that was behind and to the left that got bathed in blood, brains
and bone? Clint Hill that saw the wounds up close and was hit with some
of the same debris? Floyd Boring in the 'Queen Mary'? C'mon, tell us
where all the material went? As we know a small amount was forced forward
by the impact of the frontal hit, but most of the material including
brains went out the back through the large hole that over 40 people saw.
Most of the mess in the limo was blood from bleeding.

> >https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qc7ZYzbyNV8
>
> >     As well, we have the vast majority of the flying debris going back
> > and somewhat to the left.  Bobby Hargis who was in that position was
>
> No, that is not true. On the Zapruder film you can see the trails of
> debris leaving the top of the head and going up and slihgtly forward and
> to the left.
>

Yes, that is true. What you see, even in the phony version of the Z-
film is the cloud of red mist coming out then flying up and back as
the limo appears to move forward. Most of the debris went to the back
and the left, as Mrs. Kennedy proves by going there to retrieve a bit
of brain and bone. She didn't look around in the limo seating area,
that's for sure.

You really need to refresh your views on these elements that you've
argued about for years. Prove to yourself that they all mean all the
same things they used to, since new evidence and information has come
to the case. The Z-film has been faked and it wasn't even that good a
job, at least for today's experts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AAtEdEaXBtQ

I'm replying to whoever said it. Let them take it on, unless you
want a shot at it. Your name was on the post and there were no gt
symbols on your comments.

>
> >>>>>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_bullet_theory
>
Chris

[mainframetech]

LOL! And you believe that an expert politician would not lie in his
'private communications'? LBJ knew that his communications were recorded
everywhere he went, and his letters would all end up in his library.
Which communications do you think were really private? The ones where he
talked to his secretaries while he was sitting on the commode In the
presidential bathroom?

[mainframetech]

Or his back like the doctor described above. I don't remember
anyone mentioning his armpit.

>
>
> >> Even if a bullet wobbles because tight spin is gone from drilling through
> >> soft tissue it affects rotation.  Are you saying the bullet that hit
> >> Connally was a separate bullet from the one that wounded the President in
> >> the back?!  If so, where did the Connally bullet come from and what kind
> >> of bullet was it?  How did that sniper get in position and get away after
> >> firing this shot without being heard or seen??
>
> >    Aside from the more ridiculous aspects of the SBT, since there were
> > so many bullets flying around DP that day, all those shooters found a
> > way to get away.  And when you have a 'patsy', it relieves the
> > pressure to get away, since the public was told the guilty party was
> > found.
>
> They had an easy way to get away by using official Secret Service
> identification.
>

Yes, among other methods, that may have been used. We also have the
story of Ed Hoffman that the WC faithful try to denigrate. He was told
to shut up by the FBI and he did for a while. When he finally talked,
they said he must be lying because why didn't he tell his story the
day it happened. Actually, that was the day he spoke to the FBI! We
also have the story of the detective (Tom Tilson) that saw Jack Ruby
leaving the scene with a package that he put in his car and drove away
from the triple underpass:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lx0VXD7LMxU

>
>
> >     Other probable sites for a shooter would be the top of any of the
> > buildings along Houston street in the area of Elm street, the Dal-Tex
> > building, especially a 2nd floor window, either of the Grassy Knolls,
> > a boxcar on the RR tracks (there were 4 there that day), and many
> > more.
>
> >    Can you ignore all the bullet impacts on the pavement and on the
> > grass, the hits on JFK and Connally, the hit on the headpiece of the
> > limo?  How many bullets and evidence do you need to be convinced that
> > you've been led astray by the WC and the perpetrators of this
> > conspiracy?
>

I'm waiting for a comment on all the bullet strikes on the pavements
and grass...

Chris

[mainframetech]

To correct you again, it was not quite 100 times, and not to me, and I'm
not "making up crap". I'm finding it hard to understand why you insist on
the WCC ammo being used. You sound like a WC believer that has to go to
the MC rifle and its ammo only. And that NO other shooter In the whole
world was in DP that day shooting what each thought was their favorite
ammo. Any of which may have had the failure I taught you about. You also
didn't consider the tree that might have slowed a bullet down along its
way to JFK.

> >    If you do further checking into JFK's back wound and the autopsy
> > experience of probing it, you may then see what can happen with a
> > faulty cartridge.  Go to the following link and examine page 4:
> >http://jfklancer.com/Sibert-ONeill.html
> >     It says: "Dr. Humes probed this wound with his finger and concluded
> > that the missile had only traveled a short distance because he could
> > feel the end of the track with his finger."
>
> Humes was incompetent and all he proved was how small the wound was and
> how big his finger was.
>

Well, you seem now to be unfamiliar with the doings of this case at
the autopsy. I had thought you knew this case and so I left out some
of the proof that the back wound was a very short track:
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=222832#

Look over the link above to the testimony of James Jenkins, assistant
at Bethesda at one of the autopsies. He saw the autopsists probe the back
wound with a probe and a finger and both showed through to the front but
didn't break the pleura, which protected the lungs. It proved that the
back wound didn't go all the way through. The bullet that should have
been there was missing, but so was the one that should have been in the
neck entry wound. There were very few points when the bullets could have
been extracted from the body, but you can be sure they didn't want ANY
bullets in that body that didn't come from the MC rifle.

> >     They never found the bullet because it had been removed in the 1st
> > 'secret' autopsy before the 8:00pm autopsy.  Same for the throat entry
> > wound which was not connected to the back wound.
>
> So now you want to be a Liftonite?
>

I'm interested in facts and common sense, not labels. Labels seem to be
your mode of operation, but not mine. Are you interested in the
statements of the people that assisted in the autopsy, who had been told
to shut up earlier in their careers before the law made all the info open?
Or do you just not care about any evidence?

> >>> to be injuries that could be attributed to a bullet that fell out of a
> >>> wound (it happens), and they could control the autopsy results (as indeed
> >>> they did) to appear that a bullet did damage and was missing.  A lot of
> >>> words, but a simple plan.  A good idea, but don't you think there was
> >>> something funny about the bullet being found on the wrong stretcher at
> >>> Parkland that was used by little Ronnie Fuller, as per Josiah Thompson?
> >>> A mistake made by the person that had to drop the bullet.
>
> >> He dropped it where he saw the bloody sheets, think it had been the
> >> Preident's stretcher.
>
> >    And that mistake gives us evidence of falsifying evidence.  That and
>
> Yeah, stop preaching to the choir.
>

Choir? I haven't a clue what YOU think happened to JFK. What
little I have heard is that it's weird though. You're welcome to tell
me anytime, but I doubt you will.

> > the other ridiculous oddities about the 'magic' bullet (CE399) show
> > clearly that the bullet was a fake.  One guy actually remembers that
> > the bullet found on the wrong stretcher was "pointy nosed", and not
> > round nosed like the MC bullets.  The FBI records at one point
>
> Never rely on witnesses.
>

LOL! And yet you seem to, like the ones that told you and everyone
else that the sniper weapon was a MC rifle.

I'll give you a piece of wisdom. never rely on hard evidence when
the FBI is involved. The evidence changes and you get suckered into
believing it forever. Can't get yourself extracted from it...:)

> > actually have 2 CE399 bullets in existence at the same time!  And with
> > all this faking, what does that suggest to the average person?  That
> > someone is fooling around and trying to cover up something.
>
> Of course they are trying to cover up something. But that does not
> justify you guessing at things and calling them facts.
>

I've presented much back up. You've presented next to nothing, and
haven't even explained your scenario of the crime. I don't understand how
you can embarrass yourself that way. And I surmise based on facts, I
don't just guess. I make it clear when I'm using evidence and when I'm
figuring from evidence.

[mainframetech]

Yep. The bullet was 1.18 inches long, while the hole in Connally was
.59 inches. The hole was half the size of the length of the bullet.
Ring a bell yet?

[mainframetech]

On May 10, 4:51 pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <bbeef3ce-434b-4d1c-b497-91f0420ed...@a6g2000vbf.googlegroups.com>,

It just doesn't matter if the wound can be replicated. We have the
doctor's statement about the wound...1.5 centimeters elliptical shape.
Because of that shape and size, it's clear that the bullet wasn't
lengthwise to the body when it hit Connally. The size of the hole was
less than half the size of the bullet length. The bullet hit the back and
went into the rib and "shattered" 4 inches of the rib by hitting it hard,
from what Connally said, yet that bullet which had to be almost pointing
toward had no chance to tumble enough to get lengthwise to the rib and
just graze it so there would be a little bend in the bullet. And still
having hit the rib like a powerful rock, it got no damage on itself
compared to the test bullet alongside it in the picture!

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/5/5e/Photo_hsca_ex_294.jpg

Chris