Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
alt.assassination.jfk
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
Message from discussion Battling Another CTer (Re: "Reclaiming History")
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
curtjester1  
View profile  
 More options Oct 11 2012, 10:45 pm
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk, alt.conspiracy.jfk
From: curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com>
Date: 11 Oct 2012 22:45:54 -0400
Local: Thurs, Oct 11 2012 10:45 pm
Subject: Re: Battling Another CTer (Re: "Reclaiming History")
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
On Oct 11, 11:05 am, Bud <sirsl...@fast.net> wrote:

> On Oct 10, 4:15 pm, curtjester1 <curtjest...@hotmail.com> wrote:

> > On Oct 8, 9:03 pm, John Reagor King <caeru...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> > > This is similar to me.  I'm still waiting, and waiting, and waiting for
> > > just someone, just anyone, to prove, for the first time ever, that more
> > > than 10% of the Dealey Plaza witnesses said that the shots came from
> > > multiple directions.  I have been saying for years that it is less than
> > > 10%.  Only three or four posters here have disputed me in the slightest on
> > > that, yet all they ever do is just say I'm wrong, over and over and over,
> > > but they never make the slightest attempt to come within a million
> > > light-years of proving me to be wrong.  Some of them even stoop to
> > > claiming I said something I've never said, such as claiming that I even
> > > once said "exactly 10%" and ignoring the words "less than" that ALWAYS
> > > precede the percentage in my statements, or claiming the reverse, that I
> > > said "exactly 90%" for the witnesses who said the shots came from a single
> > > direction, while ignoring the words "more than" which almost always
> > > precede "90%" in all my statements about this.- Hide quoted text -

> > First, most people wouldn't get involved with such a question.  What does
> > it prove?  Would it prove anything about a lone gunman or multiple
> > shooters?

>   It wouldn`t "prove" anything.

True.

 It would indicate a single shooting

> location/direction.

It may, but it might also suggest different spots as their answers are
sometimes too general possibly to indicate a precise spot.  Like I said
the TSBD could be the west window or the east window, and it's also close
to the Dal-Tex bulding or the part of the GK closeer to the TSBD.  SO, it
in essence is chasing after tohe wind, with is the gist of my contention
for bringing up the topic.

> > What is meant by direction?

>   It means from where the person was to where the person thought the
> sound came from.

> >  You mean from one building or next
> > to the building?

>   Many indicated a particular building.

See above

> >  How about within one building but different places?
> > Now a real question is, why didn't they ask questions about the sounding
> > of the shots?  Jean Hill offered that the shots she heard sounded like it
> > came from two different weapons.

>   Echoes sound different than the shot.

IF they do, are they part of the shot that people are describing?  Is an
echo different than say a backfire?  Is a backfire a shot, or were they
from vehicles at the time of the shooting?  What about 'firecrackers'?  
Are they shots, backfires, echos, or real firecrackers?  They were
described a lot.

> > Maybe it was a conspiracy not to ask such
> > a necessary question, eh?

>  Why would such a question be necessary?

Because more penetrating questions may have ensued, and possible more
firing experts could come in and way in on what distinguishes sound in
shots.

> >Two different sounding weapons would mean death
> > for a Lone Gunman theory, wouldn't it?

>   Of course not. When a witness offers what something sound like, or
> where they think a sound originated from they are not offering facts,
> only impressions and opinions.

Yes, but if enough were asked and they came up with different sounds
for shots on a more regular basis, wouldn't you think conclusions
could possibly be made?

> >  I surely would have asked it the
> > sounds of firecrackers or backfires were thought of to be shots.  And too
> > when some answers are so ambiguous like the west side of the GK or the
> > west side of the TSBD, couldn't it be thought of two different places as
> > the areas are so close together?  And what about the people that heard two
> > shots?  Are their directions more likely to be off, since the questioner
> > likes a 3 shot theory?

>   Aren`t you likely to dismiss any information that supports a three
> shot theory?

Not necessarily as i wouldn't dismss the people that heard 2 shots because
maybe that's all they heard, or they weren't capable of picking up lesser
sounding fire that some others might have been able to pick out.  And how
would one know that 3 bigger sounding shots might have been a plan for the
shooting teams say to use so the lesser fired weapons wouldn't be picked
up?  Or even silencers.

> > And shouldn't the questioners ask about their gun
> > abilities when taking an oath?  I believe A.J. Millican and Brennan's
> > boss, Speaker were way off offering so many bullets when positioned
> > between the two places that received the most consideration,

>   Speaker wasn`t even in Dealey Plaza.> when they did
> > have a lot of gun experience?  Enough. My two cents.

I believe if correct he was just arriving which was close enough for him
to make his strong opinion made.  Sandy Speaker and A.J. Millican were
interviewed or their interviews were referenced in Crossfire by Marrs.  
You might catch something on the search engine effort.

CJ


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2013 Google