The Single Bullet Theory??
Robert Harris
Whether you are a supporter or a critic of the SBT, you need to understand
the origin of the bullet which fell from Governor Connally's thigh. For
years, critics have disputed the theory, arguing that:
1. The trajectory for such a shot was not consistent with Oswald's
position.
2. The condition of the bullet and the lack of human tissue or blood
suggests that it did not inflict major damage in two victims.
3. The chain of possession for CE399 was not confirmed.
As it turned out, each of those arguments was absolutely correct. And the
simple fact is, that the bullet which actually fell from the Governor's
leg was NOT CE-399.
That fact was proven by every person (outside of the FBI) who handled the
stretcher bullet, and by every person who came in contact with the real
bullet - including the Governor of Texas, the Dallas District Attorney, a
Texas ranger, Gov. Connally's top aide, and the nurse who recovered the
bullet.
This video, which I recently uploaded to my website, explains all of that
in detail, and includes proof that critical evidence was altered by the
FBI. The resolution is a bit sharper than the Youtube version and it is
not broken into two parts, which I had to do to stay within Youtube's time
restraints.
http://jfkhistory.com/ce399f/ce399f.mov
My personal opinion, based on the reactions of the victims and
considerable work with the angles involved, is that one bullet did indeed,
pass through JFK and Gov Connally, but it did NOT come from the alleged
sniper's nest in the TSBD.
It came from the third floor of the Daltex building, where Jim Braden, the
only professional criminal to be apprehended that day, was discovered. I
believe it was HIS bullet that the nurse at Parkland hospital recovered.
Robert Harris
WhiskyJoe
> 1. The trajectory for such a shot was not
> consistent with Oswald's position.
If this is true, why do prominent CTers
repeated produce false diagrams of the
path of the SBT bullet?
In the 1978 Dr. Wecht presented the following
diagram to the HSCA:
http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/html/HSCA_Vol1_0173a.htm
In 1990, in the book "High Treason", Harrison,
Livingstone, Groden has the following diagram:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm
http://www.geocities.com/verisimus101/sbt.htm
And most well known by far, in the movie "JFK",
we have the diagram, in bold lines:
http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100sbt.html
All these diagrams are false, they show the
horizontal angle from Oswald's nest being
25 to 35 degrees away from the "6 o'clock"
position when it was really 5 to 10 degrees.
They generally show Connally straight in front
of JFK when he was really 6 inches inboard
of JFK. Clearly these changes were made to
cause the bullet to miss Connally, so they
do not have to deal with the difficult
question, if the SBT is false, why didn't
Connally get hit by two bullets? And more
importantly, I think, big lies work best.
It just does not seem reasonable that Dr. Wecht
would produce a false diagram and receive heavy
criticism for it, then later the same mistake is
repeated in "High Treason" and again they receive
heavy criticism and the same "mistake" is again
made in the movie "JFK".
Clearly, these diagrams, with the alignment of
the wounds being way off, is a very effective
lie. That's why this lie has been used again
and again and again.
If the alignment of the wounds were off, why do
CTers go with false diagrams? Wouldn't they
produce diagrams showing the real angles?
Logically, one can figure out that the geometry
for the SBT is good, because CTers lie about
so often. Logically, one can figure out that
the other anti SBT arguments are false, because
if they had any valid arguments, they would not
include any anti SBT arguments using obvious lies.
Logically, one can figure out all the CT
arguments are invalid, because if they had one
real good argument, they wouldn't tack on any
obviously false ones.
Anthony Marsh
>> 1. The trajectory for such a shot was not
>> consistent with Oswald's position.
>
> If this is true, why do prominent CTers
> repeated produce false diagrams of the
> path of the SBT bullet?
>
> In the 1978 Dr. Wecht presented the following
> diagram to the HSCA:
>
> http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/html/HSCA_Vol1_0173a.htm
>
> In 1990, in the book "High Treason", Harrison,
> Livingstone, Groden has the following diagram:
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm
> http://www.geocities.com/verisimus101/sbt.htm
>
> And most well known by far, in the movie "JFK",
> we have the diagram, in bold lines:
>
> http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100sbt.html
>
> All these diagrams are false, they show the
> horizontal angle from Oswald's nest being
> 25 to 35 degrees away from the "6 o'clock"
> position when it was really 5 to 10 degrees.
We've been over this dozens of times, yet you continue to peddle your
fiction. Of course the conspiracy diagrams are wrong because they try to
start with the WC assumptions and then ridicule them.
> They generally show Connally straight in front
> of JFK when he was really 6 inches inboard
> of JFK. Clearly these changes were made to
You've swallowed Dale Myers fiction and you know it is wrong. Six inches
is not enough to allow a SBT. The bullet already goes 5 inches to the left
after exiting Kennedy's throat and Connally's wound was about eight inches
to the right of his midline. So Connally needs to be at least 13 inches to
the left of JFK, not just 6.
> cause the bullet to miss Connally, so they
> do not have to deal with the difficult
> question, if the SBT is false, why didn't
> Connally get hit by two bullets? And more
> importantly, I think, big lies work best.
>
> It just does not seem reasonable that Dr. Wecht
> would produce a false diagram and receive heavy
> criticism for it, then later the same mistake is
> repeated in "High Treason" and again they receive
> heavy criticism and the same "mistake" is again
> made in the movie "JFK".
>
> Clearly, these diagrams, with the alignment of
> the wounds being way off, is a very effective
> lie. That's why this lie has been used again
> and again and again.
>
> If the alignment of the wounds were off, why do
> CTers go with false diagrams? Wouldn't they
> produce diagrams showing the real angles?
>
I have and others have.
> Logically, one can figure out that the geometry
> for the SBT is good, because CTers lie about
> so often. Logically, one can figure out that
> the other anti SBT arguments are false, because
> if they had any valid arguments, they would not
> include any anti SBT arguments using obvious lies.
We know it doesn't work because the WC had to lie to get it to work.
WhiskyJoe
> We've been over this dozens of times, yet you
> continue to peddle your fiction. Of course the
> conspiracy diagrams are wrong because they try
> to start with the WC assumptions and then
> ridicule them.
But that is just the sort of lie they would
tell you if they were lying to you. If the
major CTers are using the big lie technique,
they would present a false diagram as the
truth. And then, when the lie was found out,
declare they only meant to ridicule the SBT.
If the geometry of the wounds are out of
alignment, then all they would need to do
is show the true positions of JFK and
Connally, with the bullet coming from the
correct angle. And that is exactly what they
would have done, if they had the truth on
their side.
Their repetitive use of false diagrams show that
the wounds do line up with the sniper's nest.
> You've swallowed Dale Myers fiction and you
> know it is wrong. Six inches is not enough
> to allow a SBT. The bullet already goes
> 5 inches to the left after exiting Kennedy's
> throat and Connally's wound was about eight
> inches to the right of his midline.
> So Connally needs to be at least 13 inches
> to the left of JFK, not just 6.
If you are right and Myers is wrong, why didn't
Connally end up with two wounds in his back?
One from the bullet that only struck Connally,
in the right armpit, and the other that exited
JFK's throat, which, according to you, should
miss Connally's right armpit by 7 inches and
hit him in the center of the back.
I would urge anyone to look at the anti SBT
diagrams:
http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/html/HSCA_...
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm
http://www.geocities.com/verisimus101/sbt.htm
http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100sbt.html
And then look at a pro SBT diagram,
like the one at:
about a fifth of the way down, labeled
"Single Bullet", and then study maps of
Dealey Plaza or visit Dealey Plaza to judge
for oneself which diagram looks the most
accurate.
Would you not urge others to do so?
Robert Harris
<d731547c-12eb-4f50...@v15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
WhiskyJoe <jr...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > 1. The trajectory for such a shot was not
> > consistent with Oswald's position.
>
> If this is true, why do prominent CTers
> repeated produce false diagrams of the
> path of the SBT bullet?
You need to ask them that.
These old school critics are wrong about a LOT of things which I am not
interested in being held accountable for.
In this particular case, they were correct in principle, but exaggerated
the angles.
Robert Harris
Anthony Marsh
>> We've been over this dozens of times, yet you
>> continue to peddle your fiction. Of course the
>> conspiracy diagrams are wrong because they try
>> to start with the WC assumptions and then
>> ridicule them.
>
> But that is just the sort of lie they would
> tell you if they were lying to you. If the
> major CTers are using the big lie technique,
> they would present a false diagram as the
> truth. And then, when the lie was found out,
> declare they only meant to ridicule the SBT.
Very few conspiracy believers have diagrammed their own versions of the
shooting sequence sans SBT. Almost all of the earliest researchers were
focused only on criticizing the WC.
> If the geometry of the wounds are out of
> alignment, then all they would need to do
> is show the true positions of JFK and
> Connally, with the bullet coming from the
> correct angle. And that is exactly what they
> would have done, if they had the truth on
> their side.
>
That's exactly what I have done and you have not refuted it.
> Their repetitive use of false diagrams show that
> the wounds do line up with the sniper's nest.
>
Please explain that. If you claim they got all the details wrong then how
could the wounds possibly line up correctly? Are you claiming that the
wounds always line up no matter how they are depicted? Bugliosi's SBT
bouncing off the wrist is the same as Vaughan's SBT going through the
wrist? The WC never issued its own official SBT diagram. So there are as
many SBT diagrams as there are WC defenders and the HSCA had its own. So
you think the SBT will work at all frames regardless of the changing
angles. Not much of a theory when it always works no matter what the data.
>> You've swallowed Dale Myers fiction and you
>> know it is wrong. Six inches is not enough
>> to allow a SBT. The bullet already goes
>> 5 inches to the left after exiting Kennedy's
>> throat and Connally's wound was about eight
>> inches to the right of his midline.
>> So Connally needs to be at least 13 inches
>> to the left of JFK, not just 6.
>
> If you are right and Myers is wrong, why didn't
> Connally end up with two wounds in his back?
I am right and your question is nonsense. You can not refute what I just
said. The FACT is that the bullet continues to 5 inches to the left and
Connally's wound was about 8 inches to the right of his midline. So add
those two together and Connally's midline MUST be at least 13 inches to
the left of JFK's. If not then the SBT falls apart.
> One from the bullet that only struck Connally,
> in the right armpit, and the other that exited
> JFK's throat, which, according to you, should
> miss Connally's right armpit by 7 inches and
> hit him in the center of the back.
>
Illogical. I am not saying the bullet exiting JFK's throat must hit
Connally.
> I would urge anyone to look at the anti SBT
> diagrams:
>
> http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/html/HSCA_...
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm
>
> http://www.geocities.com/verisimus101/sbt.htm
>
> http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100sbt.html
>
> And then look at a pro SBT diagram,
> like the one at:
>
> http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2009/01/kennedy-assassination-magic-bullet-theory-versus-single-bullet-fact.html
>
Fun, but that is not an official WC diagram.
If you are going to offer that as an official diagram you can agree is
100% accurate then you are shooting yourself in the thumb. I urge everyone
to look carefully at your cartoon.
http://frankwarner.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451cd3769e201156fbfc82f970c-500wi
He has the SBT hit Connally in the THUMB, not in the wrist. Is that your
theory? That Connally was hit in the thumb? Is that the mystery word I've
been looking for all these years? Thumb? Then which other bullet hit
Connally's wrist? What a joke.
BTW, look carefully at what he claims is a conspiracy diagram. It is not.
He lies. He kludged up a fantasy of what a conspiracy diagram WOULD look
like, but he made a couple of errors which tip us off. He rants about the
conspiracy believers showing Connally directly in front of Kennedy, but
then his base diagram has the Connally jump seat the required 6 inches to
the left of Kennedy. So then how does he get Connally directly in front of
Kennedy? He simply lies and draws Connally seated way over to the right
hanging his butt over the right side of the jump seat, which NO conspiracy
author has ever diagrammed. In short he is a liar. And an idiot. You
should be ashamed to present his cartoon as a fact.
http://frankwarner.typepad.com/.a/6a00d83451cd3769e201156fbfc775970c-500wi
> about a fifth of the way down, labeled
> "Single Bullet", and then study maps of
> Dealey Plaza or visit Dealey Plaza to judge
> for oneself which diagram looks the most
> accurate.
>
Maps? You wanna talk about map? I have the best map of Dealey Plaza. I
am the guy who corrected the HSCA. I have shared it with everyone who is
interested in the truth. Even some WC defenders have used my map.
> Would you not urge others to do so?
>
You can lead a horse to water . . .
Raymond
> In article
> <d731547c-12eb-4f50-b08b-f5ea354c8...@v15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
By now, anyone interested in the JFK coup, knows that the Warren
Commission concluded that three shots were fired from the Texas School
Book Depository. Allegedly, the first shot missed completely and no
fragments were recovered. Not sure again, they said that the second shot
hit JFK in the back, exited through his neck, went through John Connally,
and ended up on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital. It became known as the
Magic Bullet (C.E. 399). Finally, a third shot became the fatal bullet
that hit JFK in the head. According to students , who agree with the
Warren fable, much of this bullet was recovered in the limousine and in
the body of the President. The only fragment recovered from the Magic
Bullet was found in the Governor.
But for now, let's just deal with the weight of 399. Forget about the
tale of its journey to the hospital and its discovery.
CE 399 , when recovered, weighed in at 158.6 grains. We do not know the
weight of the bullet before firing, so we don't know how much of the slug
is missing.
"FBI Firearm's Expert, Robert Frazier weighed three 6.5 mm caliber
bullets chosen at random and found them to weigh 160.85, 161,5 and 161.1
grains. WC Vol.III, page 430 . Is it possible that CE 399, weighing 158.6
grains, did not have any weight loss?"
Now before someone informs us that there cannot use mm's and calibers
together, that's correct. The WC may not know the difference.
For anyone interested on how to convert inches to mm's, multiply by 25.4
To convert mm's to inches , multiply by .0394
example:
6.5 mm
X.0394
_____________
0.2561 caliber
HSCA Answer-
"All bullet weights are approximate. Due to the manufacturing
tolerances, it is not possible to determine weight loss without knowing
the actual weight prior to firing. Characteristically, some weight is lost
from a combination of friction, pressure and heat resulting from the
firing process. Impact/ penetration damage may also cause some weight
loss."
ISSUE A-4
"I feel that there would be some difficulty explaining all wounds as
being inflicted by bullet exhibit 399 without causing more in the way of
loss of substance to the bullet or deformation of the bullet."-- Dr.
Robert Shaw, WC Hearings, Vol. IV, page 114.
If we are willing to agree that the original bullet weighed 161 grains,
we must believe that only 2.4 grains are missing. That means that if more
than 2.4 grains was in Connally, it was not from CE 399, the alleged
second shot.
According to Robert Frazier, "no more than three or four grains could be
missing from CE 399 and there did not necessarily have to be any weight
loss to the bullet."
There were eight fragment specimens recovered from the Dallas shooting.
Only one of these ( CE 842-Q9 ) was recivered from Connally. It weighed
0.5 grains and had to come from 399. And since none of the copper outer
skin of 399 was missing and the FBI tested the 0.5 grain fragment for
copper , we can only conclude that the fragment somehow came from the
inner core of the bullet.
There is another problem with the Connally fragments. Dr. Robert Shaw,
the surgeon that operated on the Governor, told the Warren Wizards that he
believed that more than three grains were in the wrist alone.
Audrey Bell, the operating room nurse, stated that there were four or
five fragments " anywhere from three to four millimeters in length and a
couple of millimeters wide. " These fragments disappeared at the autopsy.
In addition, what happened to the fragment found in Connally's leg wound?
Also, there was a fragment in the governor's chest that was never
recovered, He died with fragments still in his body that may have weighed
more than the alleged two or three missing grains from 399, a bullet
described as pristine or near pristine, and the Wizards also say: "The
Governor's wrist would was not caused by a pristine bullet." ( p.94 ).
Only because 399 was found at Parkland did the Warrens have to explain
its part in the drama. They didn't know if it was the bullet that hit JFK
and Connally anymore than any of us do. They didn't know for sure if a
shot missed (WR p.111) They didn't know for sure if the fragments in the
car came from the JFK/ Connally hit or from the head shot. With their
unprofessional logic, they guessed that they came from the head shot. ..
since a shot missed and 399 was from JFK/JC, ergo, the frags had to come
from the head shot. Yet, they weren't sure about the two fragments found
in the car: "The heavier fragment was a portion of a bullet's nose and a
lighter fragment consisted of a bullet's base portion." Then, "The two
fragments were both mutilated and it was not possible to determine from
the fragments themselves whether they comprised the base and nose of one
bullet or of two separate bullets."
If one shot missed the car and one was found complete at Parkland, how
could anyone believe that the fragment nose and base could have come from
separate shots.
Finally, or at least for now:
The HSCA Analysis /Comments Example # 2:
"CE 399 has been termed the miracle bullet because of the feats
attributed to it. The WC never did a test that simulated all of the wounds
but rather simulated each wound independently. The only way to test 399's
believability is to simulate all seven wounds. This is possible. On the
other hand, establishing the facts surrounding the discovery etc. will be
more difficult if not impossible.
"So, basically, what I'm saying is that there are some things that can
be done now and other areas that need to be checked out at least. Let's
get this things delineated and get at it."
--- HSCA Archives documents
pjsp...@aol.com
inches inboard, as proven by the schematics. Sure, Thomas Kelley lied
to the WC and said it was 6 inches inboard, and, sure, Bugliosi
repeated this in his book, but that doesn't make it true. Heck, even
Dale Myers now admits the seat was only 2 1/2 inches inboard and that
his movement of the seat 6 inches inboard in Beyond Conspiracy and
Beyond the Magic Bullet was not in accordance with the facts. (Myers
insists Connally was 6 inches inboard on a seat that was only 2 1/2
inches inboard, and that he showed the seat 6 inches inboard on his
animation "for clarity". And black is white...)
On Sep 20, 7:53 pm, WhiskyJoe <jr...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > 1. The trajectory for such a shot was not
> > consistent with Oswald's position.
>
> If this is true, why do prominent CTers
> repeated produce false diagrams of the
> path of the SBT bullet?
>
> In the 1978 Dr. Wecht presented the following
> diagram to the HSCA:
>
> http://historymatters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol1/html/HSCA_...
>
> In 1990, in the book "High Treason", Harrison,
> Livingstone, Groden has the following diagram:
>
> http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htmhttp://www.geocities.com/verisimus101/sbt.htm
bigdog
> On Sep 22, 7:11 pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <d731547c-12eb-4f50-b08b-f5ea354c8...@v15g2000prn.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > WhiskyJoe <jr...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > > > 1. The trajectory for such a shot was not
> > > > consistent with Oswald's position.
>
> > > If this is true, why do prominent CTers
> > > repeated produce false diagrams of the
> > > path of the SBT bullet?
>
> > You need to ask them that.
>
> > These old school critics are wrong about a LOT of things which I am not
> > interested in being held accountable for.
>
> > In this particular case, they were correct in principle, but exaggerated
> > the angles.
>
> > Robert Harris
>
> By now, anyone interested in the JFK coup, knows that the Warren
> Commission concluded that three shots were fired from the Texas School
> Book Depository. Allegedly, the first shot missed completely and no
> fragments were recovered. Not sure again, they said that the second shot
> hit JFK in the back, exited through his neck, went through John Connally,
> and ended up on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital.
That is what happened but that is not what the WC concluded. The WC came
to no conclusion as to which of the three shots missed. They simply came
to a finding that the JFK was first hit in the back by a bullet that
exited from his throat and passed through JBC. According to the WC, that
could have been either the first or second shot. The head shot could have
been either the second or third shot.
> It became known as the
> Magic Bullet (C.E. 399). Finally, a third shot became the fatal bullet
> that hit JFK in the head. According to students , who agree with the
> Warren fable, much of this bullet was recovered in the limousine and in
> the body of the President. The only fragment recovered from the Magic
> Bullet was found in the Governor.
>
I find it amusing you call the WCR a fable but you are completely ignorant
about one of its basic findings. You don't even know what it said. But for
a CT, that is not a bogie, that is a par. Here's a suggestion. You don't
even have to buy a copy of the WCR. The entire report is available online
for free. Why don't you read it sometime and find out what it said for
yourself instead of letting others tell you what it said.
Why would you quote a medical doctor about a question of ballistics?
He is a layman in that area.
> If we are willing to agree that the original bullet weighed 161 grains,
> we must believe that only 2.4 grains are missing. That means that if more
> than 2.4 grains was in Connally, it was not from CE 399, the alleged
> second shot.
> According to Robert Frazier, "no more than three or four grains could be
> missing from CE 399 and there did not necessarily have to be any weight
> loss to the bullet."
>
> There were eight fragment specimens recovered from the Dallas shooting.
> Only one of these ( CE 842-Q9 ) was recivered from Connally. It weighed
> 0.5 grains and had to come from 399. And since none of the copper outer
> skin of 399 was missing and the FBI tested the 0.5 grain fragment for
> copper , we can only conclude that the fragment somehow came from the
> inner core of the bullet.
>
> There is another problem with the Connally fragments. Dr. Robert Shaw,
> the surgeon that operated on the Governor, told the Warren Wizards that he
> believed that more than three grains were in the wrist alone.
>
Did he weigh them or did he guess?
> Audrey Bell, the operating room nurse, stated that there were four or
> five fragments " anywhere from three to four millimeters in length and a
> couple of millimeters wide. " These fragments disappeared at the autopsy.
>
> In addition, what happened to the fragment found in Connally's leg wound?
>
> Also, there was a fragment in the governor's chest that was never
> recovered, He died with fragments still in his body that may have weighed
> more than the alleged two or three missing grains from 399, a bullet
> described as pristine or near pristine, and the Wizards also say: "The
> Governor's wrist would was not caused by a pristine bullet." ( p.94 ).
>
It is taken as an act of faith by the CTs that the fragments removed from
Connally weighed more than what was missing from CE399 but it is nothing
but guess work. In order to prove that, you would have to know the weight
of the original bullet before being fired, the weight of it when it was
recovered, and the weight of the fragments. You only know one of those
three.
> Only because 399 was found at Parkland did the Warrens have to explain
> its part in the drama. They didn't know if it was the bullet that hit JFK
> and Connally anymore than any of us do. They didn't know for sure if a
> shot missed (WR p.111) They didn't know for sure if the fragments in the
> car came from the JFK/ Connally hit or from the head shot. With their
> unprofessional logic, they guessed that they came from the head shot. ..
> since a shot missed and 399 was from JFK/JC, ergo, the frags had to come
> from the head shot. Yet, they weren't sure about the two fragments found
> in the car: "The heavier fragment was a portion of a bullet's nose and a
> lighter fragment consisted of a bullet's base portion." Then, "The two
> fragments were both mutilated and it was not possible to determine from
> the fragments themselves whether they comprised the base and nose of one
> bullet or of two separate bullets."
>
> If one shot missed the car and one was found complete at Parkland, how
> could anyone believe that the fragment nose and base could have come from
> separate shots.
>
> Finally, or at least for now:
>
> The HSCA Analysis /Comments Example # 2:
> "CE 399 has been termed the miracle bullet because of the feats
> attributed to it. The WC never did a test that simulated all of the wounds
> but rather simulated each wound independently. The only way to test 399's
> believability is to simulate all seven wounds. This is possible. On the
> other hand, establishing the facts surrounding the discovery etc. will be
> more difficult if not impossible.
>
In recent years, an Australian research team did just that. They simulated
all 7 wounds and ended up with a bullet very similar to CE399.
> "So, basically, what I'm saying is that there are some things that can
> be done now and other areas that need to be checked out at least. Let's
> get this things delineated and get at it."
>
> --- HSCA Archives documents- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
WhiskyJoe
>> They generally show Connally straight in front
>> of JFK when he was really 6 inches inboard
>> of JFK.
> Come now, WhiskyJoe... 6 inches inboard?
> The jump seat was 2 1/2 inches inboard,
> as proven by the schematics. Sure, Thomas
> Kelley lied to the WC and said it was
> 6 inches inboard, and, sure, Bugliosi
> repeated this in his book, but that doesn't
> make it true. Heck, even Dale Myers now
> admits the seat was only 2 1/2 inches
> inboard and that his movement of the
> seat 6 inches inboard in Beyond Conspiracy
> and Beyond the Magic Bullet was not in
> accordance with the facts. (Myers insists
> Connally was 6 inches inboard on a seat
> that was only 2 1/2 inches inboard, and
> that he showed the seat 6 inches inboard
> on his animation "for clarity". And black
> is white...)
Yes, 6 inches inboard. Connally was a full
6 inches inboard of JFK. The jumpseat may
only be 2.5 inches inboard, but that is
neither here nor there.
In constructing a SBT diagram, it's no more
important to position the seats correctly
than it is to show the correct locations
of the ashtrays. It's only important to
position JFK and Connally correctly
relative to each other. However, I have not
seen a diagram that miss positions the
jumpseat.
Looking at the Dave Powers film:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Js3Qg6mVs
The width of a human head is about 8 inches.
Questions:
Is it not clear that Connally's head is
almost a head width inboard of JFK's head?
Is it not clear that Connally was 6 inches
inboard of JFK's, just as Myers has said
all along?
Just as LNers have said all along?
Given the Dave Powers film, what relevance
is it that Connally's jumpseat is only 2.5
inches inboard?
And by the way, no, I do not know that Myers
has admitted that he misplaced Connally nor
the jumpseat. That is your claim. But I have
never seen him admit that but instead strongly
denies it.
Raymond
In order to accept the Warren commission report, one must accept the
single bullet theory. .... The first shot is expected to have been a
miss. ...
The physical and other evidence examined by the Commission compels the
conclusion that at least two shots were fired. As discussed
previously, the nearly whole bullet discovered at Parkland Hospital
and the two larger fragments found in the Presidential automobile,
which were identified as coming from the assassination rifle, came
from at least two separate bullets and possibly from three.336 The
most convincing evidence relating to the number of shots was provided
by the presence on the sixth floor of three spent cartridges which
were demonstrated to have been fired by the same rifle that fired the
bullets which caused the wounds. It is possible that the assassin
carried an empty shell in the rifle and fired only two shots, with the
witnesses hearing multiple noises made by the same shot. Soon after
the three
Page 111
empty cartridges were found, officials at the scene decided that three
shots were fired, and that conclusion was widely circulated by the
press. The eyewitness testimony may be subconsciously colored by the
extensive publicity given the conclusion that three shots were fired.
Nevertheless, the preponderance of the evidence, in particular the
three spent cartridges, led the Commission to conclude that there were
three shots fired.
THE SHOT THAT MISSED
From the initial findings that (a) one shot passed through the
President's neck and then most probably passed through the Governor's
body, (b) a subsequent shot penetrated the President's head, (c) no
other shot struck any part of the automobile, and (d) three shots were
fired, it follows that one shot probably missed the car and its
occupants. The evidence is inconclusive as to whether it was the
first, second, or third shot which missed.
The First Shot
If the first shot missed, the assassin perhaps missed in an effort to
fire a hurried shot before the President passed under the oak tree, or
possibly he fired as the President passed under the tree and the tree
obstructed his view. The bullet might have struck a portion of the
tree and been completely deflected. On the other hand, the greatest
cause for doubt that the first shot missed is the improbability that
the same marksman who twice hit a moving target would be so inaccurate
on the first and closest of his shots as to miss completely, not only
the target, but the large automobile.
Some support for the contention that the FIRST SHOT MISSED is found in
the statement of Secret Service Agent Glen A. Bennett, stationed in
the right rear seat of the President's follow-up car, who heard a
sound like a firecracker as the motorcade proceeded down Elm Street.
At that moment, Agent Bennett stated:
... I looked at the back of the President. I heard another firecracker
noise and saw that shot hit the President about four inches down from
the right shoulder. A second shot followed immediately and hit the
right rear high of the President's head.337
Substantial weight may be given Bennett's observations. Although his
formal statement was dated November 23, 1963, his notes indicate that
he recorded what he saw and heard at 5:30 p.m., November 1963, on the
airplane en route back to Washington, prior to the autopsy, when it
was not yet known that the President had been hit in the back.338 It
is possible, of course, that Bennett did not observe the hole in the
President's back, which might have been there immediately after the
first noise.
Page 112
Governor Connally's testimony supports the view that the FIRST SHOT
MISSED, because he stated that he heard a shot, turned slightly to his
right, and, as he started to turn back toward his left, was struck by
the second bullet.
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
Raymond
What is the title of the tome that bigdog has published for our
study'?
bigdog obviously is the final authority on the JFK assassination and
we
should all be conscious of that fact.
Sorry bigdog if I did not read your conclusion on the series of shots
or I woud have been more
careful to write what I did write. . From now on, I will consult you
before I foolishly attempt another post
on the murder of Kennedy..
Notice that I said ALLEGEDLY:
ALLEGEDLY, the first shot missed completely and no
fragments were recovered. Not sure again, they said that the second
shot
hit JFK in the back, exited through his neck, went through John
Connally,
and ended up on a stretcher at Parkland Hospital.
RE The head shot could have been either the second or third shot
Your source for that statement please.It seems that everyone agrees
that
the head shot was the final shot
Read The Fourth Decade, Volume 4, Issue 5
From Houston Street to the Overpass,
by M.A. Moyer & R.F. Gallagher
http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=520086
It would be senseless to argue that there was not an explosive
"report" from the Knoll, and a careful analyses of testimonies
clearly
indicates that it was the first "report" of three such sounds, but it
was not necessarily from a rifle. No one saw a weapon fired. And
there
was no physical evidence of such a shot. Witnesses did report seeing
and smelling smoke on the Knoll
In previous posts, I suggested that the first "report" was a
diversionary pistol shot fired into the air by Jim Brading to draw
attention away from the TSBD's shooter, thus the reason for the extra
cartridge found on the floor along with the other two that had
resulted from the shots at the motorcade.
Jim Braden was at the Cabana Motel that was visited by Jack Ruby on
Thursday night. He also ALLEGEDLY went to see the same oil people
that
Jack delivered a young lady to see . They were both in the same
building PROBABLY at about the same time.
Jim had his picture taken down by the underpass after the shooting.
(See Groden's picture book). Did you ever read his affidavit? Jim
Braden (Brading) said he was walking down Elm Street trying to GET A
CAB when he heard someone say that the President had been shot. He
then "Walked UP AMONG THE PEOPLE." Jim had lived in Dallas at one
time
and knew, like everyone else, that walking down Elm Street was not
the
place to get a cab. Main Street, by the Adolphus Hotel, or at the
Greyhound Bus Station was where smart folks went for a cab. Even Lee
Oswald went to the bus station to get his cab to Oak Cliff.
Besides the three casings, 76.7% of the witnesses said that three
shots were fired. Thirty-five (33.7%) said the shots came from the
Knoll and fifty-six (53.8%) said the TSBD. I personally believe that
both were right.
It is hard to imagine that one third of the witnesses were wrong when
they reported shots from the Grassy Knoll. What is more interesting
is
what they said.
SS Agent Clinton Hill said that the second and third shots sounded
alike. they had a different sound..."than the first sound I heard."
Sam Holland; "...I definitely saw a puff of smoke and heard the
report from under the trees."
Frank Reilly:... "at the park where all the shrubs is up
there...up the slope."
James Simmons:... " Fumes of smoke near the embankment."
Austin Miller:..."there is a little plaza on the hill...who threw
the firecracker or whatever it was."
Clemon Johnson:... " white smoke was observed by the pavilion."
Mary Woodward, Maggie Brown, Auretia Lorenzo, Ann Donaldson: All
on the sidewalk said they heard a horrible . "ear-shattering noise
coming from behind us and a little to our right."
John Chism: ..." by the Stemmons sign, I looked behind me,"
Marion Chism;... "It came from behind us."
Ammett Hudson:.. "The shots that I heard definitely came from
behind and above me." He was sitting on the steps on the Knoll.
Ronald Fisher:..." from just west of the TSBD."
Jean Hill: " I frankly thought they were coming from the Knoll."
Others that reported shots from the Knoll: Charles Brehm, Roy
Truly, Virgil Campbell, Mrs. Alvin Hopson, Mrs. Chas. Davis, Dorthy
Ann Garner, Steven Wilson, Otis Williams, Victoria Adams, Billy
Lovelady, Danny Arce, Wesley Frazier, James Jarman, Roger Craig, J.
E. Decker, James Jarman, Harry Weatherford, and many more names can
be
added to the list.
And the Warren Commission had the gall to say all the shots... were
fired from the sixth-floor within the TSBD... "There is no credible
evidence that the shots were fired ... from any other location." WR
19 However, they also said that it was possible that only two shots
were fired from the sixth floor with the shooter carrying an empty
shell in the weapon. Page 110-111 WR
Most people say three. Supposedly, one (the first) shot missed, one
shot hit JFK in the neck, passed through Connally and became the
alleged magic-bullet. And the third was the fatal shot that hit the
president in the head.
The Warren Wizards said: "The consensus among the witnesses at the
scene was that three shots were fired. However, some heard only two
shots. The most convincing evidence relating to the number of shots
was provided by the presence on the sixth floor of three spent
cartridges. This led the Commission to conclude that there were three
shots...." WR 110-111. (One cartridge was dented on the lip CE
534)
I would like to see anyone duplicate the dented lip on CE 534 by
ejecting a fired shell or even by stepping on it. It also had three
sets of markings on its base that were not present on the other two
casings and it lacked the chambering marks of the murder weapon.
(Hoover)
I have seen similar damage to casings that had been dry fired. When a
casing lacks a projectile and it is quickly slammed forward into the
breech of the barrel, it will sometimes fail to enter the barrel and
hit the outer rim of the barrel entrance causing damage to the neck
of
the casing similar to CE 534.
But, later they said, "The physical and other evidence examined by
the
Commission compels the conclusion that AT LEAST TWO SHOTS WERE
FIRED... It is possible that the assassin carried an EMPTY SHELL IN
THE RIFLE and fired only two shots ...." WR 110-111
Summing up. One shot ALLEGEDLY missed the car completely and there is
no record
of recovering any of its remains. One shot ALLEGEDLY passed through
Kennedy and Connally and magically remained near pristine and ended
up
at Parkland Hospital. And the final shot hit the president in the
head
There is no doubt about the third shot hitting the head.
---- R.F. Gallagher AKA RAYMOND
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -
What we know is that JFK was as far right in his seat as he could go.
His right arm rested on the side of the car. While the jump seat may
have only been 2.5 inches inboard, it is unlikely JBC would have only
been that far inboard. It is likely that he would have sat centered in
the jump seat, so the center line of the jump seat is the important
point of reference. However, that is not the final answer. JBC was
rotated to his right and it is only natural for someone who is seated
and attempting to look over their right shoulder to lean slightly to
their left as they do this. Anyone who doubts that can try it for
themselves. If, as many CTs claim, JBC was not far enough inboard to
make the SBT work, than we should have expected the bullet to hit JBC
somewhere farther to the left than it actually did, Why didn't that
happen? In order to have the bullet completely miss JBC, you have to
have a real magic bullet. Tony Marsh has given us his. He has the
bullet traveling upward as it exits JFK's throat and going over the
top of JBC. Any other magic bullet theories that anyone would like to
offer?
Anthony Marsh
We don't know ANY of the three. And you ASSuME that the Connally
fragments came from CE 399 without any proof of it.
No, they didn't. They TRIED.
Anthony Marsh
> Come now, WhiskyJoe... 6 inches inboard? The jump seat was 2 1/2
> inches inboard, as proven by the schematics. Sure, Thomas Kelley lied
> to the WC and said it was 6 inches inboard, and, sure, Bugliosi
> repeated this in his book, but that doesn't make it true. Heck, even
> Dale Myers now admits the seat was only 2 1/2 inches inboard and that
> his movement of the seat 6 inches inboard in Beyond Conspiracy and
> Beyond the Magic Bullet was not in accordance with the facts. (Myers
> insists Connally was 6 inches inboard on a seat that was only 2 1/2
> inches inboard, and that he showed the seat 6 inches inboard on his
> animation "for clarity". And black is white...)
>
Very, very close, but that 2-1/2 inches inboard is in ADDITION to the
right side of the limo near Connally being 3=1/2 inches more to the left
than the right edge of the back seat. That gives you the 5 inches inboard
of JFK's position.
And that's only the seat. If Myers had then played around with moving
Connally over to the left in the jump seat by 8 inches he'd have some
chance of getting away with it.
Anthony Marsh
The WC was never definite about the shooting sequence. They laid out all
three sequences. They tended to dismiss the idea that the last shot
missed. One of the first scenarios seriously considered was that the
second shot missed. But the WC originally thought like the FBI that all
three shots hit.
> RE The head shot could have been either the second or third shot
> Your source for that statement please.It seems that everyone agrees
> that
> the head shot was the final shot
>
Almost every WC defender. I do not. Others do not.
> Read The Fourth Decade, Volume 4, Issue 5
> From Houston Street to the Overpass,
> by M.A. Moyer& R.F. Gallagher
>
> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?absPageId=520086
>
> It would be senseless to argue that there was not an explosive
> "report" from the Knoll, and a careful analyses of testimonies
> clearly
> indicates that it was the first "report" of three such sounds, but it
> was not necessarily from a rifle. No one saw a weapon fired. And
> there
> was no physical evidence of such a shot. Witnesses did report seeing
> and smelling smoke on the Knoll
It is not necessary to actually SEE a weapon being fired to know that a
shot was fired.
Hundreds heard shots being fired and yet did not see the weapon firing them.
Do you mean you the poster or does that me the author of the article. If
you would like to see it in person that can be arranged.
> I have seen similar damage to casings that had been dry fired. When a
> casing lacks a projectile and it is quickly slammed forward into the
> breech of the barrel, it will sometimes fail to enter the barrel and
> hit the outer rim of the barrel entrance causing damage to the neck
> of
> the casing similar to CE 534.
>
Exactly. It is caused by trying to reload too quickly and as a result
the rifle jammed between shots 2 and 3.
> But, later they said, "The physical and other evidence examined by
> the
> Commission compels the conclusion that AT LEAST TWO SHOTS WERE
> FIRED... It is possible that the assassin carried an EMPTY SHELL IN
> THE RIFLE and fired only two shots ...." WR 110-111
>
> Summing up. One shot ALLEGEDLY missed the car completely and there is
> no record
> of recovering any of its remains. One shot ALLEGEDLY passed through
> Kennedy and Connally and magically remained near pristine and ended
> up
> at Parkland Hospital. And the final shot hit the president in the
> head
> There is no doubt about the third shot hitting the head.
>
Yes, there is. The last shot from the TSBD missed Kennedy because his
head had been blown back by the shot from the grassy knoll less than a
second before.
Anthony Marsh
May be? You admit that you don't know the exact dimensions.
That's why you're babbling about them here.
You still don't get it. Myers tripped over his own feet. When people
talk about Connally being DIRECTLY in front of JFK they are not talking
vaguely about Connally being somewhere in front of JFK. They mean
Connally's midline was in line with Kennedy's midline. So Myers depicts
that false idea and then moves Connally over to the left by 6 inches.
But 6 inches won't do it. The bullet leaving Kennedy will travel 5
inches to the left and Connally's wound was 8 inches to the right of his
midline. So he needs 13 inches, not 6.
> In constructing a SBT diagram, it's no more
> important to position the seats correctly
> than it is to show the correct locations
> of the ashtrays. It's only important to
> position JFK and Connally correctly
> relative to each other. However, I have not
> seen a diagram that miss positions the
> jumpseat.
>
That's what the charges are about the conspiracy diagrams.
> Looking at the Dave Powers film:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Js3Qg6mVs
>
> The width of a human head is about 8 inches.
>
Oh really?
Anthony Marsh
Correct. The right side of his torso was against the inside edge of the
door.
> His right arm rested on the side of the car. While the jump seat may
Yes.
> have only been 2.5 inches inboard, it is unlikely JBC would have only
Of course you don't know what the inboard means. It does not mean 2.5
inches farther to the left than Kennedy. It means a space of 2.5 inches
between the jump seat and the edge of the door. But the door sticks into
the car by almost 3.5 inches next to Connally's jump seat in order to
house the lap robes. That gives you a total of almost 6 inches that the
jump seat edge is to the left of the right side of Kennedy's torso. That's
the 6 inches that Dale Myers is talking about. He forgot that you'd also
need to move Connally over to his left on the seat by 7-8 inches to get
the bullet to hit his right armpit.
> been that far inboard. It is likely that he would have sat centered in
> the jump seat, so the center line of the jump seat is the important
> point of reference. However, that is not the final answer. JBC was
Sitting in the middle of the jump seat won't do it. The jump seat is 20.5
inches wide and the wound is 8 inches to the right of his midline. That
only adds a couple of inches to Dale Myers' 6 inches and the bullet
already went 5 more inches to the left after leaving his throat by the
time it gets to Connally. And Kennedy's midline (throat) is almost 8
inches already to the left of the side of the seat. You can mark the
inches on two strips of paper and compare them to see how they don't line
up.
> rotated to his right and it is only natural for someone who is seated
> and attempting to look over their right shoulder to lean slightly to
> their left as they do this. Anyone who doubts that can try it for
> themselves. If, as many CTs claim, JBC was not far enough inboard to
> make the SBT work, than we should have expected the bullet to hit JBC
> somewhere farther to the left than it actually did, Why didn't that
No, it shows that the bullet did not continue going downward.
> happen? In order to have the bullet completely miss JBC, you have to
> have a real magic bullet. Tony Marsh has given us his. He has the
> bullet traveling upward as it exits JFK's throat and going over the
> top of JBC. Any other magic bullet theories that anyone would like to
> offer?
>
I didn't say top. I said go over.
Anthony Marsh
Did you read Fuhrman's book? He has that bullet hitting the chrome
topping. I tend to doubt it, but need to test it.
WhiskyJoe
Hello Bigdog
> What we know is that JFK was as far right
> in his seat as he could go. His right arm
> rested on the side of the car. While the
> jump seat may have only been 2.5 inches
> inboard, it is unlikely JBC would have
> only been that far inboard. It is likely
> that he would have sat centered in the
> jump seat, so the center line of the
> jump seat is the important point of
> reference.
Yes. But we don't have to just speculate that
Connally may have been seated away from the
right edge of the seat. We can observe that
directly in the Dave Powers film:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Js3Qg6mVs
This clearly shows that Connally was seated
almost a head width inboard of JFK,
six inches.
> However, that is not the final answer.
> JBC was rotated to his right and it is
> only natural for someone who is seated
> and attempting to look over their right
> shoulder to lean slightly to their left
> as they do this. Anyone who doubts that
> can try it for themselves.
Yes. And Connally's torso being rotated to
his right is something we can see in the
Zapruder film as he emerges from behind
the sign. And this rotation will do two
things:
1) His spine will be moved about 3 inches
(roughly) further to the left than is he
just faced straight ahead.
2) His right armpit will be about 3 inches
closer to his spine (as seen from Oswald's
angle) than it is if he just faced straight
ahead.
CTers like to forget that a rotation of
about 37 degrees of Connally's torso will
move the right armpit about 6 inches to
the left, not 3 inches.
And, yes, as you pointed out, Connally
could very well have leaned to his left
a bit to look over his right shoulder.
The CTers would never have resorted to
the Big Lie diagrams, like that seen in
the movie JFK, if the true positions of
JFK and Connally did not give them some
real problems.
> If, as many CTs claim, JBC was not far
> enough inboard to make the SBT work,
> than we should have expected the bullet
> to hit JBC somewhere farther to the left
> than it actually did, Why didn't that
> happen?
Bingo. If the CTers "Small Lie" diagrams are
correct, why doesn't Connally have two wounds
in his back? One from the bullet that just
hit him and the other from the bullet that
went through JFK's neck? Even using as big
as lie as they think they can get away with,
the JFK neck bullet should continue on to
hit Connally in the center of his back.
And, of course, the answer is one of the
following:
A) Bullet deflections are not allowed to
make the SBT work, but are allowed to make
the TBT (Two Bullet Theory) work.
Or:
B) JFK's neck wounds were caused by two
different bullets. And it was a coincidence
that they both just happened to hit on
opposite sides of the neck. And neither
penetrated very far so neither caused an
exit wound even though such bullets would
be inherently less lethal and less accurate
(since low speed bullets are implied).
And neither bullet showed up in the autopsy
X-rays but that's no problem since it is our
standard CT policy to ignore the autopsy
results when ever we need to.
Peter Fokes
> it is our
>standard CT policy to ignore the autopsy
>results when ever we need to.
So you include yourself by using the word, "our"?
How delightful! Ignore away!
I don't profess to be an autopsy expert, nor to have spent eons of
time examining the remnants those kinda pro but semi-pro autopists
left us to ponder in perpetuity.
I believe there is almost unanimity among fellow travellers that they
could have done a better job.
Of course, the true believers in the WC engage in daily cat fights
over the meaning of the autopsy results. Sometimes vicious. Often
with ad hominem galore.
Whatever Connally's location, he and his wife had firm ideas on the
shot pattern. Very firm.
Regards,
Peter Fokes,
Toronto
bigdog
Connally's firm idea is that the second shot is the one that hit him. He
didn't believe the SBT because he believed, like lots of folks, that the
WC concluded the SB was the first shot. The WC of course came to no such
conclusion and allowed for the possibility that the SB was the second
shot, which of course it was. I believe later on, JBC was approached with
the question whether he could accept the SBT if it was the second shot and
I believe he allowed that it was possible. It would not only be possible,
it would be a certainty. If JFK was hit by the second shot and JBC was hit
by the second shot, they were both hit by the same shot. Not exactly
rocket science.
bigdog
throat traveling on a slightly downward, and slightly right-to-left
trajectory. JBC was sitting slightly below and slightly to the left of
JFK. JBC was directly in the line of fire. It would have been a miracle if
the bullet had missed him.
tomnln
"bigdog" <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:19353cc7-ac56-4463...@1g2000vbm.googlegroups.com...
JBC said he saw the President "Slumped" after the First shot".
Anthony Marsh
Not only that, but Connally emphasized that he had time to react and did
not hear the shot which hit him. There were only two shots that he heard,
the first and the last.
Anthony Marsh
> The geometry for the SBT is quite simple. A bullet went through JFK's
The geometry for a SBT is quite complex. You need to have Connally know
exactly when and where to twist into a complex position at the precise
moment so that the bullet can hit his right armpit.
> throat traveling on a slightly downward, and slightly right-to-left
You ASSuME that the bullet continued on a downward trajectory. But if it
had then it could not have exited the throat where the wound was because
the back wound was at the same level as the throat wound.
> trajectory. JBC was sitting slightly below and slightly to the left of
And you ignore the fact that JBC was slightly taller than JFK. Just as
Dale Myers did. Slightly to the left is not enough. He has to be a whole
13 inches to the left. Myers said 6 inches. 6 is not the same as 13.
> JFK. JBC was directly in the line of fire. It would have been a miracle if
> the bullet had missed him.
>
Less of a miracle than your Magic Bullet.
Anthony Marsh
>
> Hello Bigdog
>
>> What we know is that JFK was as far right
>> in his seat as he could go. His right arm
>> rested on the side of the car. While the
>> jump seat may have only been 2.5 inches
>> inboard, it is unlikely JBC would have
>> only been that far inboard. It is likely
>> that he would have sat centered in the
>> jump seat, so the center line of the
>> jump seat is the important point of
>> reference.
>
> Yes. But we don't have to just speculate that
> Connally may have been seated away from the
> right edge of the seat. We can observe that
> directly in the Dave Powers film:
>
Wow, you could figure that out yourself? You didn't need us conspiracy
believers telling you exactly that and diagramming it for you 100 times.
Well, we're making progress. So you think that the SBT happened at that
frame of the Dave Powers film? Or that Connally stay exactly in the
position and never moved?
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Js3Qg6mVs
>
> This clearly shows that Connally was seated
> almost a head width inboard of JFK,
> six inches.
>
Almost? Six inches doesn't do it. Can't you pay attention for even one
second? The BULLET goes 5 inches from Kennedy's midline to his left.
Six inches would make the bullet hit only 1 inch to the right of
Connally's midline. His actual wound was 8 inches to the right of
Connally's midline.
>> However, that is not the final answer.
>> JBC was rotated to his right and it is
>> only natural for someone who is seated
>> and attempting to look over their right
>> shoulder to lean slightly to their left
>> as they do this. Anyone who doubts that
>> can try it for themselves.
>
> Yes. And Connally's torso being rotated to
> his right is something we can see in the
> Zapruder film as he emerges from behind
> the sign. And this rotation will do two
> things:
>
> 1) His spine will be moved about 3 inches
> (roughly) further to the left than is he
> just faced straight ahead.
>
Guesswork. Prove it. Diagram it.
> 2) His right armpit will be about 3 inches
> closer to his spine (as seen from Oswald's
> angle) than it is if he just faced straight
> ahead.
>
How can Connally move his armpit closer to his spine? Is he a Hoodini?
> CTers like to forget that a rotation of
> about 37 degrees of Connally's torso will
> move the right armpit about 6 inches to
> the left, not 3 inches.
Connally testified that he was facing forward when he was hit. And he
specified frame Z-230 when we can SEE that he was facing forward.
>
> And, yes, as you pointed out, Connally
> could very well have leaned to his left
> a bit to look over his right shoulder.
>
> The CTers would never have resorted to
> the Big Lie diagrams, like that seen in
> the movie JFK, if the true positions of
> JFK and Connally did not give them some
> real problems.
>
You don't know what the true positions were.
>> If, as many CTs claim, JBC was not far
>> enough inboard to make the SBT work,
>> than we should have expected the bullet
>> to hit JBC somewhere farther to the left
>> than it actually did, Why didn't that
>> happen?
>
> Bingo. If the CTers "Small Lie" diagrams are
> correct, why doesn't Connally have two wounds
> in his back? One from the bullet that just
Silly, are you arguing that Connally MUST have been shot twice if the
SBT is incorrect?
> hit him and the other from the bullet that
> went through JFK's neck? Even using as big
> as lie as they think they can get away with,
> the JFK neck bullet should continue on to
> hit Connally in the center of his back.
>
You can't prove that.
It's what's WRONG with the SBT. The wounds don't line up.
> And, of course, the answer is one of the
> following:
>
> A) Bullet deflections are not allowed to
> make the SBT work, but are allowed to make
> the TBT (Two Bullet Theory) work.
>
Well, WC defenders are supposed to say that deflections are not allowed.
Most want a perfectly straight line trajectory. That is the ideal. Some
do show deflections.
> Or:
>
It's never an either/or.
bigdog
> "bigdog" <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> - Show quoted text -
Connally said he could not see the President when he first looked over
his shoulder and the Z-film shows that. JBC was not turned far enough
to his right until after he had been shot. At Z270 we see him turn
almost completely around where he could have seen JFK. There is no
frame prior to JBC being shot where he could have seen JFK slumping so
we know he saw that after he was shot.
tomnln
JBC said he saw the President "Slumped" after the First shot".
JBC said he saw the President "Slumped" after the First shot".
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4b083ee7$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
bigdog
> On 11/21/2009 12:07 PM, bigdog wrote:
>
> > The geometry for the SBT is quite simple. A bullet went through JFK's
>
> The geometry for a SBT is quite complex. You need to have Connally know
> exactly when and where to twist into a complex position at the precise
> moment so that the bullet can hit his right armpit.
>
receive the bullet and he didn't need to know anything. He simply
needed to be in the position he was.
> > throat traveling on a slightly downward, and slightly right-to-left
>
> You ASSuME that the bullet continued on a downward trajectory. But if it
> had then it could not have exited the throat where the wound was because
> the back wound was at the same level as the throat wound.
>
If that were true, the bullet would have been fired from street level.
> > trajectory. JBC was sitting slightly below and slightly to the left of
>
> And you ignore the fact that JBC was slightly taller than JFK. Just as
> Dale Myers did.
I believe JBC was about 3 inches taller than JFK but much of that
would have been negated by the fact they were in a sitting position.
That would eliminate the difference in the length of their lower
bodies. The difference in the sitting height would have been minimal.
> Slightly to the left is not enough. He has to be a whole
> 13 inches to the left. Myers said 6 inches. 6 is not the same as 13.
>
If that were true, the bullet would have hit JBC near his spine. Why
didn't that happen?
> > JFK. JBC was directly in the line of fire. It would have been a miracle if
> > the bullet had missed him.
>
> Less of a miracle than your Magic Bullet.
You have proposed at least two magic bullets.
WhiskyJoe
> I believe JBC was about 3 inches taller than
> JFK but much of that would have been negated
> by the fact they were in a sitting position.
> That would eliminate the difference in the
> length of their lower bodies. The difference
> in the sitting height would have been minimal.
I think JBC was about 1.5 inches taller.
JBC was 6' 2" and JFK was 6' 0.5".
Your point, which is not made very often,
about the difference in the sitting height
being minimal almost certainly correct.
JFK's seat being 3 inches higher than JBC's
seat would mean that the top of JFK's head
would have been about 3 inches higher than
JBC's, or maybe 2.5 inches. This is because
the difference in heights of people is mostly
caused, for most people, by the difference
in their leg lengths. The length of the torso,
neck and head of an average tall person is not
much greater than that of an average short
person. But the length of the legs are
greatly different.
So, JFK's head would not be just 1.5 inches
higher than JBC because JFK's seat was 3.0
inches higher but JBC was 1.5 inches taller.
Instead, JFK's head would be about 2.5 to 3.0
inches higher than JBC. And this can be most
clearly seen in the Dave Powers film:
tomnln
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:4b08caae$1...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
WhiskyJoe
>> This clearly shows that Connally was seated
>> almost a head width inboard of JFK,
>> six inches.
> Almost? Six inches doesn't do it.
I am inclined to think that Six inches does
do it for the following reasons.
* Anti SBT diagrams generally don't show
Connally six inches inboard of JFK, despite
the fact the pictures of the motorcade,
most easily seen in the Dave Powers film,
show Connally six inches inboard of JFK.
If six inches wasn't a problem for CTers,
why don't the Anti SBT diagrams show the
truth and have Connally six inches inboard
of JFK?
* Earlier in this thread, P. J. Speare tried
to imply that Connally was only 2.5 inches
inboard of JFK, because Connally's jumpseat
was only 2.5 inches inboard. He did not reply
to me when I pointed out that the Dave Powers
film clearly shows Connally is 6 inches
inboard of JFK.
Apparently, for some reason, CTers do seem
to be reluctant to admit that Connally was
6 inches inboard of JFK. So again, 6 inches
does seem to be enough.
And finally, in the second diagram freely
made available by Frank Warner, below:
It shows the SBT works just fine with Connally
just 6 inches inboard of JFK. You insist it
has to be 7 or 8 inches, but 6 inches is all
that is needed.
**************************************************
And, as a final point, if you are right about
the 7 or 8 inches needed, than that means that
when JFK was wounded in the neck, the trajectory
of that bullet came within 1 or 2 inches of
lining up with the wound Connally received
later near the right armpit. Doesn't that seem
to be a coincidence? Indeed, isn't that
coincidence absurd? Has one ever seen an
Anti SBT diagram which shows the SBT theory
is impossible because the JFK wound trajectory
will miss Connally's back wound by 2 inches?
And, of course, why didn't Connally have two
wounds 1 or 2 inches apart, one for the bullet
that went through JFK and one for the bullet
that only struck Connally?
**************************************************
And as a final question, will you state for
all time how much you think the JFK neck
bullet would miss Connally's back wound?
Is it the JFK bullet would hit 2 inches
too far to the left and 3 inches too far
below Connally's back wound?
I'm just concerned that this week you may
argue Connally's position is off by 1 or 2
inches and next week you will argue 6 or 8.
It would be good to get this pinned down.
And where is the Anti SBT diagram, top down
view, similar to Frank Warner's diagram,
which shows the path the bullet would have
to take for the SBT to work. Were is that
diagram that CTers are willing to defend?
Anthony Marsh
>
>> I believe JBC was about 3 inches taller than
>> JFK but much of that would have been negated
>> by the fact they were in a sitting position.
>> That would eliminate the difference in the
>> length of their lower bodies. The difference
>> in the sitting height would have been minimal.
>
> I think JBC was about 1.5 inches taller.
> JBC was 6' 2" and JFK was 6' 0.5".
>
> Your point, which is not made very often,
> about the difference in the sitting height
> being minimal almost certainly correct.
Well, I never said minimal. I was only pointing out that Myers lied
about this.
> JFK's seat being 3 inches higher than JBC's
> seat would mean that the top of JFK's head
> would have been about 3 inches higher than
> JBC's, or maybe 2.5 inches. This is because
> the difference in heights of people is mostly
> caused, for most people, by the difference
> in their leg lengths. The length of the torso,
False and you have no basis in fact to make such a claim.
Of course because you are a WC defender, you do not know it, but the
Secret Service had taken all these factors into consideration when they
reconstructed the positions of Kennedy and Connally in 1964.
They knew that Connally was taller than Kennedy and unlike you they did
not ASSuME that all the difference is in the legs. They noted that
Connally was more high waisted and the overall difference was about 1.5
inches.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/kelley1.htm
Mr. SPECTER. What was the height of President Kennedy?
Mr. KELLEY. He was 72 1/2 inches.
Mr. SPECTER. And were you present when a man was placed in the same
position in the Secret Service followup car as that in which President
Kennedy sat in the Presidential car when the tests were simulated on May
24th of this year?
Mr. KELLEY. I was.
Mr. SPECTER. Do you know the name of that individual?
Mr. KELLEY. He was an FBI agent by the name of James W. Anderton.
Mr. SPECTER. And what was the height of Mr. Anderton?
Mr. KELLEY. He was 72 1/2 inches.
Mr. SPECTER. Do you know the height of Governor Connally?
Mr. KELLEY. Governor Connally was 6 foot 4.
Mr. SPECTER. Was that the height of the Governor himself or the
Governor's stand-in?
Mr. KELLEY. It was my understanding that Governor Connally was--6
foot 2, I guess. The Governor's stand-in, Mr. Doyle Williams, was 6 foot 4.
Mr. SPECTER. Were you present when those two individuals were
seated in the Secret Service followup car?
Mr. KELLEY. Yes, sir.
Mr. SPECTER. And what adjustment was made, if any, so that the
relative positions of those two men were the same as the positioning of
President Kennedy and Governor Connally on November 22, 1963?
Mr. KELLEY. The officials at Hess Eisenhardt, who have the original
plans of the President's car, conducted a test to ascertain how high
from the ground a person 72 1/2 inches would be seated in this car
before its modification. And
132
Page 133
it was ascertained that the person would be 52.78 inches from the
ground--that is, taking into consideration the flexion of the tires, the
flexion of the cushions that were on the car at the time.
Mr. SPECTER. When you say 52.78 inches, which individual would that be?
Mr. KELLEY. That would be the President.
Mr. SPECTER. And what part of his body?
Mr. KELLEY. The top of the head would be 52.78 inches from the
ground. When Mr. Anderton was placed in the followup car, it was found
that the top of his head was 62 inches from the ground. There was an
adjustment made so that there would be--- the stand-in for Governor
Connally would be in relatively the same position, taking into
consideration the 3-inch difference in the jump seat and the 2-inch
difference in his height.
Mr. SPECTER. Considering the 3-inch difference in the jump
seat--and I believe it would be an inch and a half difference in height
between President Kennedy and Governor Connally--how much higher, then,
approximately, was President Kennedy sitting than the Governor on
November 22?
Mr. KELLEY. I am not----
Mr. SPECTER. Would the President have been about an inch and half
higher than the Governor on the day of the assassination?
Mr. KELLEY. The day of the assassination, yes.
Mr. SPECTER. And were----
The CHAIRMAN. Wouldn't the height of these men depend upon the
length of their torso?
Mr. KELLEY. Well----
The CHAIRMAN. You have some people who are shortwaisted, some
people who are longwaisted. I don't know which either of these men were
who were of the same height. But I know there is a lot of difference in
men. We sometimes see the--a man who looks large sitting down, when he
stands up he is small, because he has a long torso, and vice versa.
Mr. KELLEY. Of course the relative positions are apparent from the
films that were taken at the time of the assassination. It would be, of
course, that judgment---and it would have to be a judgment. But I think
the films indicate there was just about that much difference in their
height when both were seated.
> neck and head of an average tall person is not
> much greater than that of an average short
> person. But the length of the legs are
> greatly different.
>
> So, JFK's head would not be just 1.5 inches
> higher than JBC because JFK's seat was 3.0
> inches higher but JBC was 1.5 inches taller.
> Instead, JFK's head would be about 2.5 to 3.0
> inches higher than JBC. And this can be most
> clearly seen in the Dave Powers film:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Js3Qg6mVs
>
Wrong.
Several films and photos have been analyzed and the difference is about
1.5 inches. So, guess who is the only person to accurately diagram the
height difference of 1.5 inches. Not Dale Myers. Not YOU.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/limo.gif
Anthony Marsh
> On Nov 21, 11:28 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony_ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 11/21/2009 12:07 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>
>>> The geometry for the SBT is quite simple. A bullet went through JFK's
>>
>> The geometry for a SBT is quite complex. You need to have Connally know
>> exactly when and where to twist into a complex position at the precise
>> moment so that the bullet can hit his right armpit.
>>
> Ridiculous argument. JBC was not trying to get into a position to
> receive the bullet and he didn't need to know anything. He simply
> needed to be in the position he was.
>
>>> throat traveling on a slightly downward, and slightly right-to-left
>>
>> You ASSuME that the bullet continued on a downward trajectory. But if it
>> had then it could not have exited the throat where the wound was because
>> the back wound was at the same level as the throat wound.
>>
> If that were true, the bullet would have been fired from street level.
>
Wrong. Again, you ASSuME a perfectly straight line trajectory.
>>> trajectory. JBC was sitting slightly below and slightly to the left of
>>
>> And you ignore the fact that JBC was slightly taller than JFK. Just as
>> Dale Myers did.
>
> I believe JBC was about 3 inches taller than JFK but much of that
> would have been negated by the fact they were in a sitting position.
You believe. You don't know. You guess. You refuse to learn.
> That would eliminate the difference in the length of their lower
> bodies. The difference in the sitting height would have been minimal.
>
Yes. 1.5 inches is minimal. Exact distances do not matter to you.
Your imaginary 3 inches taller would have placed Connally higher in his
seat than Kennedy before the adjustment was made by Myers to lower the
seat three inches. But Myers shows them at exactly the same height.
>> Slightly to the left is not enough. He has to be a whole
>> 13 inches to the left. Myers said 6 inches. 6 is not the same as 13.
>>
> If that were true, the bullet would have hit JBC near his spine. Why
> didn't that happen?
>
Because the bullet deflected up and out the throat and over Connally's
shoulder.
>>> JFK. JBC was directly in the line of fire. It would have been a miracle if
>>> the bullet had missed him.
>>
>> Less of a miracle than your Magic Bullet.
>
> You have proposed at least two magic bullets.
>
Such shots happen all the time.
>
WhiskyJoe
> They knew that Connally was taller than
> Kennedy and unlike you they did not ASSuME
> that all the difference is in the legs.
> They noted that Connally was more high
> waisted and the overall difference was
> about 1.5 inches.
If Connally was higher waisted than JFK than
that means he's taller because of his longer
legs. So the upper body heights would be
similar.
In any case, just as you claim the horizontal
alignment was off by 1 or 2 inches, as much
as you currently feel you can get away with,
you also claim the vertical alignment was
off by 1 or 2 inches. If you are correct,
it's amazing the bullet trajectory through
JFK's throat just happens, by sheer coincidence
ends up striking within 1 or 2 inches of
where Connally would later be hit by a separate
bullet. And no explanation on how Connally
did not end up with two entrance wounds in
his back except that the bullet deflected
upward over a foot to clear the windshield.
So a one or two inch deflection is not
allowed in order to allow the Single Bullet
Theory to work but a deflection of over a
foot is allowed to allow the Two Bullet
Theory to work.
bigdog
JFK's back on a downward tracjectory. Bullet levels off as it passes
through JFK's neck. ("because the back wound was at the same level as
the throat wound."). Then the bullet changes directions again and
"deflected up and out the throat and over Connally's shoulder." (You
didn't say which shoulder).
> >>> JFK. JBC was directly in the line of fire. It would have been a miracle if
> >>> the bullet had missed him.
>
> >> Less of a miracle than your Magic Bullet.
>
> > You have proposed at least two magic bullets.
>
> Such shots happen all the time.
Well I have maintained for years that any alternatives to the SBT
require magic bullets. Thank you for confirming that.
Anthony Marsh
Again, stop misinterpreting what I said. It is quite simple. The bullet
deflected upwards when it hit the tip of the T-1 vertebra which it
fractured.
Anthony Marsh
>
>> They knew that Connally was taller than
>> Kennedy and unlike you they did not ASSuME
>> that all the difference is in the legs.
>> They noted that Connally was more high
>> waisted and the overall difference was
>> about 1.5 inches.
>
> If Connally was higher waisted than JFK than
> that means he's taller because of his longer
> legs. So the upper body heights would be
> similar.
>
> In any case, just as you claim the horizontal
> alignment was off by 1 or 2 inches, as much
> as you currently feel you can get away with,
You continue to make up stuff from your imagination that I never said.
I did not say the horizontal alignment was off by 1 or 2 inches. I said
Myers has it as 6 inches while the actual needed distance is 13 inches.
That is a difference of 7 inches, not 1 or 2.
> you also claim the vertical alignment was
> off by 1 or 2 inches. If you are correct,
> it's amazing the bullet trajectory through
> JFK's throat just happens, by sheer coincidence
> ends up striking within 1 or 2 inches of
> where Connally would later be hit by a separate
> bullet. And no explanation on how Connally
What are you mumbling about? It is not 1 or 2 inches.
> did not end up with two entrance wounds in
> his back except that the bullet deflected
> upward over a foot to clear the windshield.
He did not have two back wound because the bullet exiting Kennedy's
throat missed him.
Any bullet hitting anyone in the limo NEEDS to deflect upwards to hit
the chrome topping.
> So a one or two inch deflection is not
> allowed in order to allow the Single Bullet
Your one or two inch difference is not correct.
You can't have the bullet deflect in mid air.
Anthony Marsh
>
>>> This clearly shows that Connally was seated
>>> almost a head width inboard of JFK,
>>> six inches.
>
>> Almost? Six inches doesn't do it.
>
> I am inclined to think that Six inches does
> do it for the following reasons.
>
>
> * Anti SBT diagrams generally don't show
> Connally six inches inboard of JFK, despite
> the fact the pictures of the motorcade,
> most easily seen in the Dave Powers film,
> show Connally six inches inboard of JFK.
>
I'll tell you again. Even granting you the six inches you want does not
do it.
> If six inches wasn't a problem for CTers,
> why don't the Anti SBT diagrams show the
> truth and have Connally six inches inboard
> of JFK?
>
Why is it that my diagrams always show Connally's jump seat several
inches to the left of Kennedy's right armpit?
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/limo.gif
Exactly how many inches does my diagram show?
> * Earlier in this thread, P. J. Speare tried
> to imply that Connally was only 2.5 inches
> inboard of JFK, because Connally's jumpseat
> was only 2.5 inches inboard. He did not reply
> to me when I pointed out that the Dave Powers
> film clearly shows Connally is 6 inches
> inboard of JFK.
>
Connally is not the jump seat. You are talking about Connally's HEAD,
not the right edge of the jump seat. Apples and oranges.
> Apparently, for some reason, CTers do seem
> to be reluctant to admit that Connally was
> 6 inches inboard of JFK. So again, 6 inches
> does seem to be enough.
>
Apparently you have no way to measure the pixels on my diagram.
The problem is not just the jump seat. You can't move the jump seat any
farther to the left.
> And finally, in the second diagram freely
> made available by Frank Warner, below:
>
> http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2009/01/kennedy-assassination-magic-bullet-theory-versus-single-bullet-fact.html
>
How many times are you going to trot out this monstrosity and embarrass
poor Mr. Free Frank? It is HIGHLY inaccurate and it shows the bullet
hitting Connally's thumb, not his wrist. Do you believe that?
> It shows the SBT works just fine with Connally
> just 6 inches inboard of JFK. You insist it
> has to be 7 or 8 inches, but 6 inches is all
> that is needed.
>
It's garbage and if you are citing it as accurate it reflects badly on you.
> **************************************************
>
> And, as a final point, if you are right about
> the 7 or 8 inches needed, than that means that
> when JFK was wounded in the neck, the trajectory
> of that bullet came within 1 or 2 inches of
> lining up with the wound Connally received
No.
> later near the right armpit. Doesn't that seem
> to be a coincidence? Indeed, isn't that
> coincidence absurd? Has one ever seen an
> Anti SBT diagram which shows the SBT theory
> is impossible because the JFK wound trajectory
> will miss Connally's back wound by 2 inches?
>
False. The difference is not 2 inches. It is 7 inches.
13-6=7.
> And, of course, why didn't Connally have two
> wounds 1 or 2 inches apart, one for the bullet
> that went through JFK and one for the bullet
> that only struck Connally?
>
>
Because the bullet leaving Kennedy missed Connally.
> **************************************************
>
> And as a final question, will you state for
> all time how much you think the JFK neck
> bullet would miss Connally's back wound?
> Is it the JFK bullet would hit 2 inches
> too far to the left and 3 inches too far
> below Connally's back wound?
>
It's not my theory. I am criticizing the Dale Myers presentation showing
the moving of the jump seat 6 inches to the left. You need more than
just moving the jump seat to line up the wounds.
> I'm just concerned that this week you may
> argue Connally's position is off by 1 or 2
> inches and next week you will argue 6 or 8.
> It would be good to get this pinned down.
>
I did not argue that Connally's position is off by 1 or 2 inches. My
diagram shows their relative positions. And I have always said that some
type of SBT is theoretically possible, but that no one has produced one
which works yet. And they never will if they keep believing junk like the
Free Frank diagram.
> And where is the Anti SBT diagram, top down
> view, similar to Frank Warner's diagram,
> which shows the path the bullet would have
> to take for the SBT to work. Were is that
> diagram that CTers are willing to defend?
>
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/limo.gif
bigdog
I didn't misrepresent what you said. I quoted you directly. You said
"because the back wound was at the same level as the throat wound." If the
entrance and exit wounds were at the same level, the bullet was not
traveling upward when it transited JFK's neck. It was traveling level. If
it was traveling level, it would have to deflect a second time to pass
over JBC and the windshied. Face it. Your theory requires a very magical
bullet.
Anthony Marsh
No, it wasn't. Maybe you didn't have geometry in high school. Maybe you
skipped high school. A straight line is not the only way to get from
point A to point B.
> it was traveling level, it would have to deflect a second time to pass
> over JBC and the windshied. Face it. Your theory requires a very magical
> bullet.
>
It requires basic geometry.
bigdog
>
> - Show quoted text -
Nice dodge. No explaination of how you square you contradictory claims
that the entrance and exit wounds were on the same level and that the
bullet deflected upward after glancing off the vertabra. You've
painted yourself into a corner with your own words. As the old adage
goes, "give a man enough rope...".
WhiskyJoe
> You continue to make up stuff from your
> imagination that I never said. I did not
> say the horizontal alignment was off by
> 1 or 2 inches. I said Myers has it as
> 6 inches while the actual needed distance
> is 13 inches. That is a difference of
> 7 inches, not 1 or 2.
Than you are speaking nonsense. The second,
"Straight line" diagram, which is freely
available, in the following website:
Shows that you don't need Connally 13 inches
inboard of JFK. You only need him inboard
by 6 inches.
And if this diagram is off, don't just say
it's off. What causes it to be off by
7 inches? Is the angle of the bullet off?
Back up what you say with a map or a picture,
something.
Anthony Marsh
>
>> You continue to make up stuff from your
>> imagination that I never said. I did not
>> say the horizontal alignment was off by
>> 1 or 2 inches. I said Myers has it as
>> 6 inches while the actual needed distance
>> is 13 inches. That is a difference of
>> 7 inches, not 1 or 2.
>
> Than you are speaking nonsense. The second,
> "Straight line" diagram, which is freely
> available, in the following website:
>
> http://frankwarner.typepad.com/free_frank_warner/2009/01/kennedy-assassination-magic-bullet-theory-versus-single-bullet-fact.html
>
> Shows that you don't need Connally 13 inches
> inboard of JFK. You only need him inboard
> by 6 inches.
>
Again, why do you embarrass yourself and poor old Free Frank by citing
that diagram?
> And if this diagram is off, don't just say
> it's off. What causes it to be off by
> 7 inches? Is the angle of the bullet off?
>
I have said it's off, several times. It is not only wrong, it is
fraudulent. And it has the bullet going through Connally's THUMB. Guess
you didn't look too carefully and missed that.
> Back up what you say with a map or a picture,
> something.
>
I have, several times, but you refuse to look.
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/limo.gif
This is getting rather tedious.
You demand that I show you something.
Then I show you that something.
Then you refuse to look at that something.
Then claim that I never show you that something.
Then you demand that I show you something.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
claviger
> > You continue to make up stuff from your
> > imagination that I never said. I did not
> > say the horizontal alignment was off by
> > 1 or 2 inches. I said Myers has it as
> > 6 inches while the actual needed distance
> > is 13 inches. That is a difference of
> > 7 inches, not 1 or 2.
>
> Than you are speaking nonsense. The second,
> "Straight line" diagram, which is freely
> available, in the following website:
>
>
> Shows that you don't need Connally 13 inches
> inboard of JFK. You only need him inboard
> by 6 inches.
>
> And if this diagram is off, don't just say
> it's off. What causes it to be off by
> 7 inches? Is the angle of the bullet off?
>
> Back up what you say with a map or a picture,
> something.
There is not a hunter, soldier, or any other rifleman I know who
doubts the SBT. They all have seen soft-nosed hunting bullets
penetrate through the rib cage of a full size game animal and come out
the other side. Military FMJ bullets are designed to drill through the
target, not mushroom. The Carcano FMJ projectile did exactly what it
was designed to do. It was a medium size, high-velocity rifle bullet
well known for maximum penetration. The advantage on the battlefield
is it was capable of wounding enemy soldiers hiding behind wooden
fences, poles, and walls. It could also penetrate more than one enemy
soldier in a group with one shot. The bullet was manufactured with a
thick jacket which prevented disintegration. Therefore it performed by
design as a humane missile according to international law. The by-
product of the design was maximum penetration, which it was well known
for among weapons experts and big game hunters.
However, even FMJ bullets can sometimes fail when hitting hard bone.
They have been known to split, causing the lead core to fragment,
usually in larger size pieces. The ultra high-velocity smaller FMJ
projectiles are subject to extreme thermal loads from barrel friction
which can cause jacket failure after impact with hard objects. The
M-16 bullet has a reputation for high incidence of shattering when
hitting bone. For this reason there is an organized effort to have it
declared a frangible bullet and banned by international law.
WhiskyJoe
>> And if this diagram is off, don't just say
>> it's off. What causes it to be off by
>> 7 inches? Is the angle of the bullet off?
> I have said it's off, several times. It is
> not only wrong, it is fraudulent. And it
> has the bullet going through Connally's
> THUMB. Guess you didn't look too carefully
> and missed that.
I don't care what it shows after the bullet
passes through Connally's torso. Most everyone
agrees the bullet curved downward through
Connally's torso to hit his thigh. It could
easily curve left or right. And no one knows
exactly where his right hand and left thigh
was anyway. All I care about is the alignment
from Oswald's rifle, through JFK's wounds to
Connally's back wound. If that lines up, then
I am confidence that this is no coincidence
and the SBT is true.
Your diagram, on the other hand, is a joke:
http://the-puzzle-palace.com/limo.gif
Why not draw a long straight line starting at
the edge of the diagram going through JFK's
wounds and ending at Connally's back. That
way, we can measure the angle to see if it
matches reality.
Where is a serious Anti SBT diagram?
And why do you have Connally facing straight
forward. That error alone moves Connally's
right armpit several inches to the right.
As can be seen in Frame 223: Connally's torso
is almost facing straight toward Mr. Zapruder.
Connally is turned significantly to the right.
Anthony Marsh
Penetration is not the dispute. The WCC ammo is well capable of the
penetration required. The two biggest problems are the alignment of the
two men, and having to make all those wounds and still come out looking
so good.
> was designed to do. It was a medium size, high-velocity rifle bullet
Not high-velocity. And it was a carry over from WWI.
> well known for maximum penetration. The advantage on the battlefield
> is it was capable of wounding enemy soldiers hiding behind wooden
> fences, poles, and walls. It could also penetrate more than one enemy
> soldier in a group with one shot. The bullet was manufactured with a
The goal of warfare has NEVER been to injury as many enemy soldiers as
possible with only one shot. That is a ridiculous idea.
> thick jacket which prevented disintegration. Therefore it performed by
> design as a humane missile according to international law. The by-
> product of the design was maximum penetration, which it was well known
> for among weapons experts and big game hunters.
>
> However, even FMJ bullets can sometimes fail when hitting hard bone.
> They have been known to split, causing the lead core to fragment,
> usually in larger size pieces. The ultra high-velocity smaller FMJ
> projectiles are subject to extreme thermal loads from barrel friction
> which can cause jacket failure after impact with hard objects. The
> M-16 bullet has a reputation for high incidence of shattering when
> hitting bone. For this reason there is an organized effort to have it
> declared a frangible bullet and banned by international law.
>
Not led by the US though.
The US is starting to get more interested in non-lead ammunition.
>
>