Three Magic Bullets
lazu...@webtv.net
leaving a lead smear, and then disappearing into thin air.
Magic Bullet number two makes an entrance wound in JFK's upper back
which is unusually larger than the exit wound in his throat, then it
changes directions and hits JBC just below the right armpit, damages the
fifth rib, and blasts a two inch hole while exiting JBC's chest,
carrying much blood and other tissue with it, also making a large jagged
hole in JBC's shirt, yet magically leaving a perfectly round little exit
hole in his jacket, and looking identical to the entrance hole in JBC's
left pantleg. Then it manages to burrow backwards two inches into JBC's
thigh, depositing a fragment on the femur (which is still deposited
there to this day), and defying the odds of flesh closing in around it,
the natural reaction of the body, the bullet worms its way back out the
wound it created. Then it did a disappearing act, only to reappear on a
stretcher in te hospital hallway sometime later, to be discovered and
identified as a pointed nosed bullet, was pocketed, like all important
evidence, and somehow made its way to the FBI lab, where it
transmogrified into a MC bullet with a blunt nose, our beloved CE399. If
that ain't a true Magic Bullet, I can't dream a better one up, or can I?
How about the next one?
Magic Bullet number three performs, not like a metal jacketed bullet
such as the other MC rounds. After striking the rear of JFK's cranium,
and as soon as it penetrates this single layer of bone it fragments
severely. Now recall that CE 399 supposedly shattered the radius of JBC,
the radius being one of the densest bones in the body, but hardly got a
scrape out of that collision. Now, this third bullet unaccountably
breaks up, something FMJ bullets are designed specifically NOT TO DO
This bullet not only braks up into at least six fragments, two of tem
quite large, and ending up in the front compartment of the limo, but it
also mysteriously left a trail of tiny particles in the brain seen on X
ray and likened to a "snowstorm". No FMJ in recorded history has ever
demonstrated that peculiarity, acting exactly like an exploding bullet!
So, this may be the most magical bullet of all. The LN Bull-istics of
the Official Fairy Tale. Read 'em and weep--- for the insanity of it
all.
Grizzlie Antagonist
an established fact.
But Loseruli actually is one for three -- and if he were a major league
hitter, this would be a phenomenal performance.
lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
> Bullet number one fragments (how no one knows) before striking a curb,
> leaving a lead smear, and then disappearing into thin air.
>
> Magic Bullet number two makes an entrance wound in JFK's upper back
> which is unusually larger than the exit wound in his throat, then it
> changes directions and hits JBC just below the right armpit, damages the
> fifth rib, and blasts a two inch hole while exiting JBC's chest,
> carrying much blood and other tissue with it, also making a large jagged
> hole in JBC's shirt, yet magically leaving a perfectly round little exit
> hole in his jacket, and looking identical to the entrance hole in JBC's
> left pantleg. Then it manages to burrow backwards two inches into JBC's
> thigh, depositing a fragment on the femur (which is still deposited
> there to this day), and defying the odds of flesh closing in around it,
> the natural reaction of the body, the bullet worms its way back out the
> wound it created. Then it did a disappearing act, only to reappear on a
> stretcher in te hospital hallway sometime later, to be discovered and
> identified as a pointed nosed bullet, was pocketed, like all important
> evidence, and somehow made its way to the FBI lab, where it
> transmogrified into a MC bullet with a blunt nose, our beloved CE399. If
> that ain't a true Magic Bullet, I can't dream a better one up, or can I?
> How about the next one?
Every word is either a lie or a misleading half-truth. Par for the
course. Take another toke on your joint and gaze again at the Che
Guevara poster on your wall, Woodstock.
> Magic Bullet number three performs, not like a metal jacketed bullet
> such as the other MC rounds. After striking the rear of JFK's cranium,
> and as soon as it penetrates this single layer of bone it fragments
> severely. Now recall that CE 399 supposedly shattered the radius of JBC,
> the radius being one of the densest bones in the body, but hardly got a
> scrape out of that collision. Now, this third bullet unaccountably
> breaks up, something FMJ bullets are designed specifically NOT TO DO
Stop it! I can't STAND agreeing with you. And what's more, you're
telling the TRUTH, for once. You're a conspiracy theorist, and your
credo is that every word out of your mouth has to be a lie.
> This bullet not only braks up into at least six fragments, two of tem
> quite large, and ending up in the front compartment of the limo
Well, you see, Loseruli, now you know what happened to the first bullet
-- or at least a portion of it -- that you say must have "disappeared
into thin air".
> but it
> also mysteriously left a trail of tiny particles in the brain seen on X
> ray and likened to a "snowstorm". No FMJ in recorded history has ever
> demonstrated that peculiarity, acting exactly like an exploding bullet!
STOP IT, I say! You're making too much sense to be a CT.
> So, this may be the most magical bullet of all. The LN Bull-istics of
> the Official Fairy Tale. Read 'em and weep--- for the insanity of it
> all.
And now you have to ask yourself -- who was the only individual in DP
KNOWN to have wielded a weapon capable of firing a disintegrating,
fragmenting bullet?
lazu...@webtv.net
"#1 did not disappear into thin air..."
Oh, you have found it? Better tell the authorities. It's been missing
for over forty years.
"..and the single bullet scenario is an established fact.'
The SBT does not even rise to the level of a theory. It is really a
hypothesis founded upon supposition, presumption, and pseudoscience. It
has been refuted at every juncture in the bullet's journey, from the
rifle, and it's position, to it's kooky journey through two men and
finally coming to rest on a stretcher, which might not even have been
JBC's gurney. You can't prove any single part of the BST. So be a good
loser and pick up your marbles, put them back in your head, and go home.
Grizzlie Antagonist
lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
> Griz countered with his usual brilliance:
> "#1 did not disappear into thin air..."
>
> Oh, you have found it? Better tell the authorities. It's been missing
> for over forty years.
Actually, you found it. You stated exactly what happened to it in your
opening post. And now it looks as though you lost it again. Dumbass!
> "..and the single bullet scenario is an established fact.'
>
> The SBT does not even rise to the level of a theory.
That's right; it's an established fact.
Yeah, and bumblebees are theoretically unable to fly. Fortunately for
them, they don't understand the laws of aerodynamics so they fly
anyway.
Go ahead and cite all the theory that you want. It's been proven that
one bullet struck two men. So I'm not worried about your contention
that it couldn't have happened. Go to Havana, happy hippy, and smoke a
joint with Fidel. Just make sure that you don't sail off the edge of
the world with all of the other anti-single-bullet-cranial-rectal
implant cases.
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/single_bullet.htm
<lazu...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:22623-44C...@storefull-3233.bay.webtv.net...
Ben Holmes
lazu...@webtv.net says...
>
>Griz countered with his usual brilliance:
>"#1 did not disappear into thin air..."
>
>Oh, you have found it? Better tell the authorities. It's been missing
>for over forty years.
>
>"..and the single bullet scenario is an established fact.'
>
>The SBT does not even rise to the level of a theory. It is really a
>hypothesis founded upon supposition, presumption, and pseudoscience.
Ouch!! Well stated!
lazu...@webtv.net
like a danger to society. I hate to say it, but schizoid does come to
mind when reading your drivel. And you really should do something about
that beard phobia. You might try meditating in front of a picture of
Jesus. If that doesn't work you can always take a flying you- know- what
at a swinging light socket. Cheers!
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Griz, I hope your attendants don't let you go out at night. You appear
> like a danger to society. I hate to say it, but schizoid does come to
> mind when reading your drivel. And you really should do something about
> that beard phobia. You might try meditating in front of a picture of
> Jesus.
How many millions of people do you want to kill in order to avenge JFK,
communist?
Phil Ossofee
I've never known what to make of the richochet that struck Tague, the
lone nutters say it was a fragment from the headshot, though it's just a
guess. Something from the Mark Fuhrman book he focused on was the dent
above the chrome windshield that sure looks like a full bullet hit
there, if so how the hell does a fragment then fly over the car
completely another 150 feet or so to hit Tague? Phil D.
Bud
lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
> Bullet number one fragments (how no one knows) before striking a curb,
> leaving a lead smear, and then disappearing into thin air.
Leaving one to wonder how you can declare it a bullet.
> Magic Bullet number two makes an entrance wound in JFK's upper back
> which is unusually larger than the exit wound in his throat,
As measured by....?
> then it
> changes directions and hits JBC just below the right armpit, damages the
> fifth rib, and blasts a two inch hole while exiting JBC's chest,
> carrying much blood and other tissue with it, also making a large jagged
> hole in JBC's shirt, yet magically leaving a perfectly round little exit
> hole in his jacket, and looking identical to the entrance hole in JBC's
> left pantleg.
What would be the kook conclusion to these widely different looking
holes in the clothing? Why, three different bullets, of course.
> Then it manages to burrow backwards two inches into JBC's
> thigh, depositing a fragment on the femur (which is still deposited
> there to this day), and defying the odds of flesh closing in around it,
> the natural reaction of the body, the bullet worms its way back out the
> wound it created.
Apparently this is not unheard of, I saw looking for bullets and
fragments in clothes and bedding mentioned in a emergency room
guidelines thingy somewhere. I`ll try to find and produce it (if I can
remember where I saw it).
> Then it did a disappearing act, only to reappear
You believe that if a tree falls in the forest, and nobody is there
to hear it, it doesn`t make a sound, don`t you?
> on a
> stretcher in the hospital hallway sometime later, to be discovered and
> identified as a pointed nosed bullet,
I suppose you can provide quotes from all the people who handled
that bullet saying that CE399 is not the bullet they saw, right? I know
Tomlinson said it looked like the bullet he found. He was first, was it
switched between him and the hospital security officer?
> was pocketed, like all important
> evidence, and somehow made its way to the FBI lab, where it
> transmogrified into a MC bullet with a blunt nose, our beloved CE399.
Well, that is a kookified version of reality.
> If
> that ain't a true Magic Bullet, I can't dream a better one up, or can I?
> How about the next one?
>
> Magic Bullet number three performs, not like a metal jacketed bullet
> such as the other MC rounds. After striking the rear of JFK's cranium,
> and as soon as it penetrates this single layer of bone it fragments
> severely.
Doesn`t reality suck? Isn`t it better to conclude that all the FMJ
fragments found inside the limo were planted? Shouldn`t you find
reasons to disregard all the physical evidence, so that you can make up
any kooky scenario you see fit?
> Now recall that CE 399 supposedly shattered the radius of JBC,
> the radius being one of the densest bones in the body, but hardly got a
> scrape out of that collision. Now, this third bullet unaccountably
> breaks up, something FMJ bullets are designed specifically NOT TO DO
Yah, the Titanic was specifically designed not to sink, and we all
know what happened there.
> This bullet not only breaks up into at least six fragments, two of them
> quite large, and ending up in the front compartment of the limo, but it
> also mysteriously left a trail of tiny particles in the brain seen on X
> ray and likened to a "snowstorm". No FMJ in recorded history has ever
> demonstrated that peculiarity, acting exactly like an exploding bullet!
> So, this may be the most magical bullet of all. The LN Bull-istics of
> the Official Fairy Tale. Read 'em and weep--- for the insanity of it
> all.
Are you gaining on the tail?
Bud
Ben Holmes wrote:
> In article <22623-44C...@storefull-3233.bay.webtv.net>,
> lazu...@webtv.net says...
> >
> >Griz countered with his usual brilliance:
> >"#1 did not disappear into thin air..."
> >
> >Oh, you have found it? Better tell the authorities. It's been missing
> >for over forty years.
> >
> >"..and the single bullet scenario is an established fact.'
> >
> >The SBT does not even rise to the level of a theory. It is really a
> >hypothesis founded upon supposition, presumption, and pseudoscience.
>
> Ouch!! Well stated!
Yah, Ben, give us the kook version of JFK wounds. A bullet entered
his back one inch? A bullet struck his trachea, of all things, and
ranged downward? And why would anyone believe that nonsense? Because
Perry said something like this in an interview once (did he dissect
this bullet path?). So, of all the medical evidence available, Ben
latches onto the worst piece available, and makes that the foundation
of his conjecture. Sure, kooks are really trying to figure this thing
out, they aren`t just throwing enough shit in the game, so that any
stupid shit they propose seems reasonable.
lazu...@webtv.net
In regard to the curb strike you asked:
"Leaving one to wonder how you can declare it a bullet."
Are you questioning the Holy Book, the WR?
They pronounced it a bullet, or rather a fragment from a bullet which
went off into the wild blue yonder. It had to be only a lead fragment
from a bullet because there was a lead smear on the curb, no copper
trace, which would be the case if it were a jacketed round.
And regarding the "unusual" size of the holes in JFK's back and throat,
you asked:
"As measured by....?"
You don't know the evidence, do you? Look at the posterior body chart on
the Autopsy Face Sheet, and you will see the back wound, placed at about
T3 (not in the neck), and a notation with an arrow pointing to the
wound, reading "7X4mm". Now, re: the throat wound, it was stated by Dr.
Perry and others to be "approximately 5mm".. So the unheard of happene
in this case, the entrance hole is larger than the exit hole!!! Dontcha
love it?
Makes one think that they're both entrance holes, doesn't it?
lazu...@webtv.net
awhile around here, instead of having to swat LN flies all the time.
Phil, you raised a good point about the dent in the chrome above the
windshield. Because of its size and configuration, that had to be a
whole bullet which made this dent. And a fragment from it could not have
had enough momentum to travel in an arc to strike the curb. No, I
believe the two large fragments found in the front compartment,
representing in part the nose and tail of a bullet are most likely one
and the same as the chrome strike. Whether or not those two fragments
also resulted from one of the headshots is a question that is up for
grabs.
cdddraftsman
( SBF ) , There's very little controvery here . If you take all the
weak parts of any theory , you'll end up with a weak answer . That's
what you've done here , like I've noticed in all Cter's posts , books ,
articles , etc. for the past 40 years . We are just dying for you to
present the results of your firing tests , are you going to post them
anytime soon ? If this is too simple a task for a person of your
caliber , perhaps you'd like to tackle Prof. Rahns ' Physics of the
head snap '
http://karws.gso.uri.edu/JFK/Scientific_topics/Physics_of_head_shot/Physics_of_the_head_shot.html
Don't tell me your not good at math , ballistics and forensics ? .
.............Tom Lowry
lazu...@webtv.net
"A bullet struck his trachea, of all things and ranged downward?"
I'm sure Ben can give you the particulars of Perry's comments, I'm sure,
but he certainly noted a tracheal tear on its right side, denoting the
passage of a missile, while he was attempting to install the tracheotomy
tube. Obviously, there was no need to dissect any further. The Parkland
doctors considered the throat wound an entrance, and they surmised that
the missile struck the spine and ranged downward into the body.
Interestingly enough, as you should know by now, if you only have a
smattering of knowledge of the medical evidence, that Custer, Xray tech
at Bethesda, called the autopsy docs' attention to several small
fragments at the mid-cervical level on Xray. He was told to mind hs own
business. That particular full- cervical Xray is now conveniently
missing! The mid-cervical level, C3,4, &5 cannot be seen on any of the
extant films.
Kooky, eh what? But in my estimation suspicious as hell!
Bud
lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
> Unlike you, Bud, I'll answer YOUR questions;
>
> In regard to the curb strike you asked:
> "Leaving one to wonder how you can declare it a bullet."
>
> Are you questioning the Holy Book, the WR?
> They pronounced it a bullet, or rather a fragment from a bullet
You said "bullet". Now, it`s a magic fragment.
> which
> went off into the wild blue yonder. It had to be only a lead fragment
> from a bullet because there was a lead smear on the curb, no copper
> trace, which would be the case if it were a jacketed round.
>
> And regarding the "unusual" size of the holes in JFK's back and throat,
> you asked:
>
> "As measured by....?"
>
> You don't know the evidence, do you? Look at the posterior body chart on
> the Autopsy Face Sheet, and you will see the back wound, placed at about
> T3 (not in the neck), and a notation with an arrow pointing to the
> wound, reading "7X4mm". Now, re: the throat wound, it was stated by Dr.
> Perry and others to be "approximately 5mm".
And, being a kook, you don`t realize that by saying the word
"approximately", it likely means he didn`t actually measure it. What
would Perry have guessed to be the size of the back wound?
> So the unheard of happene
> in this case, the entrance hole is larger than the exit hole!!!
As measured by.....?
> Dontcha
> love it?
> Makes one think that they're both entrance holes, doesn't it?
On what did Perry base his assessment that the throat wound was
made by a bullet on?
tomnln
At the above posted site you will find the Official Records on the "SBT".
WHY would you reference a professor who FORBIDS/REFUSES to debate on the
JFK Assassination in front of his class.
Giving a Failing grade to any student who disagrees with him.
In effect Stealing Tuition money from American Youth?
See below Professor Ken Rahn's Refusal to give his class their money's
worth.
==========================================================================
I think this one is worth it's weight in Platinum.
"tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote in message
>> news:c5gpg.22679$8q.18503@dukeread08...
>> > Talking about "Possibilities".
>> >
>> > What are the possibilities of you & I Debating this subject (Live) in
>> front of your Class???
>>
>> Zero. AFRAID TO DEBATE?
>> > What I have in mind is a series of multiple hours sessions.
>>
>> No way. That would be like giving the semester to you.
Rahn passes on a chance to educate me?
>> > It would be a Great opportunity for your students to Really get they're
>> > Money's worth.
>>
>> Hardly!
Rahn has NO Intention to give his students their money's worth?
>> Ken Rahn
==========================================================================
"cdddraftsman" <cdddra...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1153584726.8...@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Dr's at Parkland Hospital handle an average of 1271 gunshot cases per year
in 1963.
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1153590548....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
lazu...@webtv.net
put them where they might do some good. But be sure to twist back and to
the left when inserting.
lazu...@webtv.net
"On what dd Perry base his assessment that the throat wound was made by
a bullet on?"
He based his assessment on the appearance of the wound. It was small and
round, just like many bullet holes he had observed in several years of
medical practice. Do you still think it might have been a stab wound?
Who might be the stabber, and when? Or what instrument in the limo
might have accidentally been the culprit? Not only are you hitting rock
bottom with this stupidity, but are you possibly feebly aware of the
fact that you're contradicting LN Gospel, that the throat wound was a
bullet's exit for its entrance wound in the back? Shame on you for this
heresy. Off to the stake for you!
Bud
lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
> Bud asked in broken English:
>
> "On what dd Perry base his assessment that the throat wound was made by
> a bullet on?"
>
> He based his assessment on the appearance of the wound. It was small and
> round, just like many bullet holes he had observed in several years of
> medical practice.
All round small wounds are bullet holes? There aren`t other types
of wounds that can appear as bullet wounds, certain types of puncture
wounds? In the history of emergency room cases, do you think there has
ever been case where a doctor intially took a wound to be a gunshot
wound, but later it was determined to be a stab wound? Or, what was
considered to be a stab wound was later determined to be caused by a
bullet? If a doctor originally thought he was treating a stab wound,
and found a bullet, would he leave it, and continue to treat the wound
as a stab wound, sticking to his first assessment?
> Do you still think it might have been a stab wound?
Nothing to do with the point I`m making. You are choosing to view
what Perry said in a certain light. I`m confusing the matter so that I
can render his observation useless to your arguments. I`m surprised you
don`t recognize the methodology.
> Who might be the stabber, and when?
Nothing Perry need concern himself with when he declared this a
bullet wound. But, certainly Jackie had motive and opportunity. JFK`s
head was leaned down on her lap, a quick thrust of a knitting needle
and who would be the wiser? Perhaps this explains why the autopsy was
rushed, and the decision made not to dissect the wound. It`s all
falling into place now...
> Or what instrument in the limo
> might have accidentally been the culprit?
Are you suggesting that Perry examined the limo to see what could
cause this wound when he declared it a bullet wound?
> Not only are you hitting rock
> bottom with this stupidity,
Since when are CTers so adverse to a little conjecture about the
evidence?
> but are you possibly feebly aware of the
> fact that you're contradicting LN Gospel, that the throat wound was a
> bullet's exit for its entrance wound in the back?
I`m always open to new ideas. I like this "Jackie with a knitting
needle" idea more and more. Especially that since this wound wasn`t
dissected, it can`t be disproven.
> Shame on you for this
> heresy. Off to the stake for you!
I think it`s you on the spit.
lazu...@webtv.net
wound with a knitting needle" theory is the worst theory I've heard in
my 42 years of studying this case. In fact, I was studying ths case
while you were still kicking the inside of your test tube at the Langley
lab.. Besides that, you are one sick SOB! Now go back to sleep,
oblivious to reality in your LN stupor. Happy nightmares. Your worst
nightmare, the TRUTH.
Bud
lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
> Sorry to break this to you, Bud-dud, but your "Jackie made the throat
> wound with a knitting needle" theory is the worst theory I've heard in
> my 42 years of studying this case.
So, you`ve expressed your dislike of it. Next, maybe for can try
refuting it with the much vaunted evidence. If you can`t, then it is
esablished as true, or so I`m led to believe by what I read around
here.
> In fact, I was studying ths case
> while you were still kicking the inside of your test tube at the Langley
> lab.
Typical of CT to resort to insults when an LN talks about the
evidence.
>. Besides that, you are one sick SOB! Now go back to sleep,
> oblivious to reality in your LN stupor. Happy nightmares. Your worst
> nightmare, the TRUTH.
If what I said was untrue, why were you unable to refute it using
the evidence?
tomnln
Grizzlie says Hickey shot JFK
You say JFK was stabbed.
A Loser by any other name is STILL a Loser.
Why don't you read the Official WCR? HERE
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1153598503.0...@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
lazu...@webtv.net
"Jackie stabbed him in the throat" nonsense, you have to believe that CE
399 came out the hole in which Jackie stabbed her husband!!? I hope you
have your hip waders on when you type this load of BS. I would throw you
a line, but you're not worth soiling a perfectly good rope. Is it up to
your ears yet?.
You can lead a lone nutter to the truth, but you can't make him think.
Bud
tomnln wrote:
> ATTA BOY BUD;
>
> Grizzlie says Hickey shot JFK
> You say JFK was stabbed.
I don`t see you doing any harm to that contention.
> A Loser by any other name is STILL a Loser.
Any other name than what? Tom Rossley?
> Why don't you read the Official WCR? HERE
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/
This is a kooksite. Why does it say on it that JFK fired Walker,
when Walker resigned, NUTBAG?
tomnln
Quote from the LN's Spokesman.
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1153608542.6...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Bud
tomnln wrote:
> JFK WAS "STABBED" HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Laughter from beyond the grave. If I want to talk to you, I`ll hold
a seance.
> Quote from the LN's Spokesman.
Mockery isn`t refutation.
Bud
lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
> Bud-brain, in order to maintain your LN beliefs, plus your asinine
> "Jackie stabbed him in the throat" nonsense, you have to believe that CE
> 399 came out the hole in which Jackie stabbed her husband!!?
When you admit your inability to refute my contention that Jackie
stabbed JFK with a knitting needle with the evidence, then we can move
on to how that reality reflects on other evidence.
> I hope you
> have your hip waders on when you type this load of BS. I would throw you
> a line, but you're not worth soiling a perfectly good rope. Is it up to
> your ears yet?.
>
> You can lead a lone nutter to the truth, but you can't make him think.
You kooks don`t seem to do so well when the tables are turned.
lazu...@webtv.net
way somebody is paying for a whole lot of nothing. What a shame,
probably our own tax dollars at work too!
You guys remind me of the disoriented seagull who flies in
ever-diminishing circles until eventually he flies up his own asshole.
It seems you have finally reached your destination..
Sorry about that, but how befitting!
Anthony Marsh
> Ben Holmes wrote:
>> In article <22623-44C...@storefull-3233.bay.webtv.net>,
>> lazu...@webtv.net says...
>>> Griz countered with his usual brilliance:
>>> "#1 did not disappear into thin air..."
>>>
>>> Oh, you have found it? Better tell the authorities. It's been missing
>>> for over forty years.
>>>
>>> "..and the single bullet scenario is an established fact.'
>>>
>>> The SBT does not even rise to the level of a theory. It is really a
>>> hypothesis founded upon supposition, presumption, and pseudoscience.
>> Ouch!! Well stated!
>
> Yah, Ben, give us the kook version of JFK wounds. A bullet entered
> his back one inch? A bullet struck his trachea, of all things, and
> ranged downward? And why would anyone believe that nonsense? Because
> Perry said something like this in an interview once (did he dissect
Dr. Perry never said anything like that. He did not even know about the
back wound. It was Humes who guessed that the back wound was shallow.
Anthony Marsh
> Nice post,now you mean to tell me we have 3 of these magic bullets Laz?
> I've never known what to make of the richochet that struck Tague, the
> lone nutters say it was a fragment from the headshot, though it's just a
Except for Posner's crowd which says it came from a miss which hit a
Magic Twig that tore off the jacket.
Bud
lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
> Are you loony nutters getting paid by the word or the shovelful? Either
> way somebody is paying for a whole lot of nothing. What a shame,
> probably our own tax dollars at work too!
Whats all this about? Weren`t you one of the ones calling on LN to
discuss the evidence? It seems that Perry observations are an important
part of kook conclusions. But I asked you a few questions about them,
and you go off on this spiel.
> You guys remind me of the disoriented seagull who flies in
> ever-diminishing circles until eventually he flies up his own asshole.
> It seems you have finally reached your destination..
> Sorry about that, but how befitting!
So, your position is that Perry determined it to be a bullet wound
by the foolproof method of observing that the wound was small and
round, is that about it? You realize that much of what you kooks write
might appear rational with only a cursory examination, right?
lazu...@webtv.net
like what Dr. Perry said, or question his professional opinion, take it
up with him. If I were a mind-reader, when concentrating on your
mental abilities, I'm sure all I'd get is a blank screen.
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Nice post,now you mean to tell me we have 3 of these magic bullets Laz?
Of course. Loser would never lie to you. Never mind his long scraggly
hair, his unkempt beard, the poster of Che Guevara hung in his
dormitory, his hammer and sickle T and the rock cocaine in his dresser.
Loser is interested in only the truth. So from now on, whenever Loser
issues a pronunciamento, you don't have to follow him like a puppy dog
wagging your tail and say, "Really Loser? Really?" like you did in
this cheesy post. Just take his word for everything.
> I've never known what to make of the richochet that struck Tague, the
> lone nutters say it was a fragment from the headshot, though it's just a
> guess. Something from the Mark Fuhrman book he focused on was the dent
> above the chrome windshield that sure looks like a full bullet hit
> there, if so how the hell does a fragment then fly over the car
> completely another 150 feet or so to hit Tague? Phil D.
Perhaps, Donahue thought, Tague's wound was caused by a piece of the
fracture bullet that sailed over the presidential limousine at a
diminished velocity, struck the curb, then ricocheted back up again.
This scenario made sense, particularly since a chemical analysis of the
gash on the curb by the FBI revealed traces of lead and antimony, but
no copper. The absence of copper, according to the Commission,
precluded the possibility that the curb mark was made by an
unmutilated, full-metal-jacketed Carcano round, since the Carcano's
jacket was made of copper.
However, the Commission said nothing about the possibility of the curb
mark being made by a mutilated Carcano round. One of the two fragments
found in the front seat consisted of a bullet base and its shredded
copper jacket. Therefore, it seemed plausible to Donahue that the
piece that flew over the car consisted only of a portion of the lead
core. This would explain the absence of copper on the concrete.
- Mortal Error, Bonar Menninger (St. Martin's Press, 1992), pp.
75-6
David VP
Zoooooooooom!!!!!
Right over Laz's head, without him (her?) ever having felt the breeze
of Bud's irony-filled post.
Laz apparently doesn't realize that since that wound in the President's
throat was never dissected and was totally obliterated by Perry via the
trach -- that the "Jackie With A Knitting Needle In The Conservatory"
... er ... make that "In The Limo" (wrong game, sorry) can NEVER be
totally DISPROVEN.
That wound is an "unknown" in many people's (CTer's) orbs, so that
makes ANY theory "possible".
This "Anything's Possible" approach should be right up the CT-Kook's
alley(ies) -- since they engage this method of "research" time and time
again re. the events of November 22nd, 1963.
I've got an "alternate" Jackie theory to toss into the blender ---
Instead of Bud's knitting needle, let's make the weapon a very sharp
pointed end of a rose stem (taken from the pretty bouquet presented to
the First Lady at Love Field).
This "Rose Kills Kennedy" theory makes sense, too, because the murder
weapon WAS POSITIVELY AVAILABLE TO MRS. KENNEDY WHILE RIDING IN THE
MOTORCADE ON 11/22.
No "knitting needle" was ever discovered...that's a point against Bud's
version. But there WERE roses handy...and Jackie was a very good
gardener -- and she could sharpen those stems (to lethal levels of
pointedness) like nobody else in the business; I've got witnesses!
Bud
David VP wrote:
> >>> "Sorry to break this to you, Bud-dud, but your "Jackie made the throat wound with a knitting needle" theory is the worst theory I've heard in my 42 years of studying this case." <<<
>
>
> Zoooooooooom!!!!!
>
> Right over Laz's head, without him (her?) ever having felt the breeze
> of Bud's irony-filled post.
>
> Laz apparently doesn't realize that since that wound in the President's
> throat was never dissected and was totally obliterated by Perry via the
> trach -- that the "Jackie With A Knitting Needle In The Conservatory"
> ... er ... make that "In The Limo" (wrong game, sorry) can NEVER be
> totally DISPROVEN.
>
> That wound is an "unknown" in many people's (CTer's) orbs, so that
> makes ANY theory "possible".
>
> This "Anything's Possible" approach should be right up the CT-Kook's
> alley(ies) -- since they engage this method of "research" time and time
> again re. the events of November 22nd, 1963.
Yah, I like to throw theories out that I know the kooks won`t like.
I put one out that JFK arranged to have himself killed. It fits all the
kook evidence, but they don`t like where that theory leads, so they
disregard it.
> I've got an "alternate" Jackie theory to toss into the blender ---
> Instead of Bud's knitting needle, let's make the weapon a very sharp
> pointed end of a rose stem (taken from the pretty bouquet presented to
> the First Lady at Love Field).
I was thinking along those lines (just didn`t think a rose thick
enough). I also was thinking something secreted in the bouquet. But the
"rose theory" presents another possibility, that it wasn`t deliberate
on Jackie`s part, and that JFK impaled himself thrashing around. But, I
don`t think they were roses, anyway.
> This "Rose Kills Kennedy" theory makes sense, too, because the murder
> weapon WAS POSITIVELY AVAILABLE TO MRS. KENNEDY WHILE RIDING IN THE
> MOTORCADE ON 11/22.
>
> No "knitting needle" was ever discovered...that's a point against Bud's
> version.
Yah, but as I pointed out, she wasn`t searched for weapons. And the
creating of this wound need not be something caught on the Z-film, it
could have occurred anytime on the way to Parkland.
> But there WERE roses handy...and Jackie was a very good
> gardener -- and she could sharpen those stems (to lethal levels of
> pointedness) like nobody else in the business; I've got witnesses!
Hmmm, was a toxicity report done on JFK? If not, we can punch up
the plot with some poison on the "roses".
David VP
Yeah, that exact thought also crossed my mind (are we the "same"
person, as many CTers think/fear?? LOL).....
And that very thought re. the rigidity of a rose stem is exactly why I
added this to my last post (for "stabbing" effect, you see):
"...And she {Jackie} could sharpen those stems (to lethal levels of
pointedness) like nobody else in the business..."
>>> "But, I don't think they were roses, anyway." <<<
Sure look like roses to me. ......
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/jackie-love.JPG
And upon re-examining the above photo -- I'm just wondering what
potentially-lethal weapons Jacqueline could have had concealed in that
lovely handbag of hers?? Hmmmm. A small pistol perhaps (like Jack
Ruby's...maybe Ruby's gun itself; that would explain the mysterious
"45-60 degree" angle of the back wound)? A short-handled axe possibly?
Or maybe a hangman's noose?
It should be looked into (both the bag and these theories, too). ;)
>>> "Was a toxicity report done on JFK? If not, we can punch up the plot with some poison on the "roses"." <<<
True. And what about "thorns"?? They can be deadly if placed properly.
~wink~
And then we've also got that "dog in the middle of the seat" that
Jackie had with her (per Jean Hill, whose word is taken as Scripture by
many a-CT-Kook. It could be that the white poodle chomped a hole in
JFK. And...just maybe...the beast caused the fatal head wound somehow
as well.
Stranger things HAVE happened (well, on Planet Kook they have anyway).
:)
Bud
Does Perry saying the wound in JFK`s throat looked like an entry
bullet hole make that opinion a fact? Kooks seem to proceed as if it
were.
> If you don't
> like what Dr. Perry said,
It`s not a matter of liking what he said, it a matter of
viewing what he said in the right context.
> or question his professional opinion,
He said it looked like a bullet entry wound. Was this opinion based
on scientific analysis, an in-depth study of the wound? He took no
further tests to confirm that opinion, wouldn`t that be a necessary
step to make a positive determination? Just looking at a wound is an
imperfect way to determine precise facts about that wound, looks can be
deceiving, and many things can create wounds that are round. Certainly,
he wasn`t tasked at the time to note and explore characteristics of
this wound, but to make efforts to save JFK`s life.
> take it
> up with him.
You kooks represent what he said to be something it is not. That is
an issue I am taking up with you.
> If I were a mind-reader, when concentrating on your
> mental abilities, I'm sure all I'd get is a blank screen.
That seems to be all you get when I take you one step off one of
your kook squalking points, into an area where you are required to
think for yourself.
Bud
tomnln wrote:
> It's called "Experience" Bud;
> Dr's at Parkland Hospital handle an average of 1271 gunshot cases per year
> in 1963.
How many of those were FMJ? The vast majority of gunshot wounds are
caused by handguns. And, your 1271 figure is meaningless to this
discussion if you don`t establish how many of these Perry was involved
with treating. Now, run along back to the cemetery, Nutsack, adults are
talking here.
lazu...@webtv.net
You ridicule CT's, and then you come up with the most outlandish
theories your fiendish minds can conjure up. Well, you're only
entertaining each other. The rest of us know what you really are, and it
ain't pretty, and I wouldn't want to step in it, smell it, look at it,
much less read it day in and day out.
David VP
No "Von Pain" too??? I'm hurt. Really hurt.
~sniffle~
>>> "You ridicule CT's, and then you come up with the most outlandish theories your fiendish minds can conjure up." <<<
Zooooom!! (Again.)
Laz needs some help recognizing "irony".....
http://webster.com/dictionary/irony
And "satire" too.....
http://webster.com/dictionary/satire
"SATIRE" = "Trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and
discredit vice or folly."
~~~~~~~
Even when it's POINTED OUT to CT-Kooks, they fail to recognize it.
So I guess Laz might need help with this word too.....
http://webster.com/dictionary/stupid
>>> "The rest of us know what you really are, and it ain't pretty, and I wouldn't want to step in it, smell it, look at it, much less read it day in and day out." <<<
But you'll do it anyway...right?
Tell me, is there a tall, burly gentleman who looks a little like
"Lurch" from "The Addams Family" holding a meat cleaver above your
head, forcing you to read (and respond to) the LNers' posts on this
Google board?
There must be, it seems. Otherwise why would you do it, unless your
life is being threatened, right? Glutton for LN punishment perhaps?
geev...@yahoo.com
figure Lurch had anything to do with it?
David VP
Oh, you mean "Professor Barnhardt" from 1951's outstanding sci-fi drama
"The Day The Earth Stood Still"?? .....
www.movieprop.com/tvandmovie/reviews/earthstoodstillscientist11.jpg
I'm not sure what Barnhardt's stance is re. the JFK case (or Lurch).
But I *do* know that he is experimenting with atomic energy and has
"several thousand questions" to ask "Klaatu", the alien from another
planet who arrived in Washington at 3:47 PM EST in a saucer-shaped
craft that travels in excess of 4,000 MPH outside the Earth's
atmosphere.
It's quite possible, btw, that Klaatu's arrival on Earth was somehow
"connected" with the "plot" to assassinate future President Kennedy 12
years after Klaatu (aka "Mr. Carpenter") landed in that baseball field
unannounced.
More on Klaatu's mission here:
Anthony Marsh
> tomnln wrote:
>> It's called "Experience" Bud;
>
>> Dr's at Parkland Hospital handle an average of 1271 gunshot cases per year
>> in 1963.
>
> How many of those were FMJ? The vast majority of gunshot wounds are
> caused by handguns. And, your 1271 figure is meaningless to this
> discussion if you don`t establish how many of these Perry was involved
> with treating. Now, run along back to the cemetery, Nutsack, adults are
> talking here.
>
You seem confused here. Handgun bullets are often FMJ as well. I think
what you mean is how many were Mannlicher-Carcano bullets. I'd wager not
many.
tomnln
In Bud's Homosexual World Suppositories are referred to as "SPEED BUMPS".
No wonder Bud Never returned to my Live Audio Chat Room where we can
transfer
any evidence/testimony Instantly.
I have a Live Audio Chat Room on www.paltalk.com
Download & Use for FREE.
Once Logged on select Social Issues.
Scroll down to room called "Who Killed John F. Kennedy?"
I start between 8-9 pm e.s.t. EVERY NITE.
We can transfer files to one another Instantly.
ANY Exhibits of Evidence, ANY Testimony from WC/HSCA Volumes.
Look forward to seeing you there.
tomnln
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1153656737.0...@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
David VP
...And speaking of Nutsacks!
(We were, weren't we?)
tomnln
I have to decide if a "DOCTOR" is correct?
I have to decide if a HOMO is correct?
this shouldn't take long at all.
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1153655355....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Anthony Marsh
And I would remind you that one of the fragments found in the limo was
only the base portion of the jacket. Its lead core had been entirely
squeezed out. It could be that lead core which hit the curb. Not
necessarily from the head shot.
If you think the head shot was caused by an AR-15 then tell us what left
the two large fragments found in the front seat.
tomnln
"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:efSdnVF6ULR9R1_Z...@comcast.com...
> Phil Ossofee wrote:
>> Nice post,now you mean to tell me we have 3 of these magic bullets Laz?
>> I've never known what to make of the richochet that struck Tague, the
>> lone nutters say it was a fragment from the headshot, though it's just a
> Except for Posner's crowd which says it came from a miss which hit a Magic
> Twig that tore off the jacket.
When I bought Posner's "Case Closed" it came with a bottle of Pepsi to wash
down that BS with.
==========================================================================
tomnln
Nobody does.
Even the WCR Defenders. That's why they never address evidence/testimony.
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1153652920.3...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1153655330.0...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Even the LN's see Plausibility in Everything OTHER than the WCR.
<lazu...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:1438-44C...@storefull-3237.bay.webtv.net...
tomnln
Feel Free.
Here are Official Records from the WCR which you Endorse.
http://whokilledjfk.net/
Familiarize yourself with them.
"David VP" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1153681879.6...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Grizzlie Antagonist
What did I just say or rather, what did I just quote Donahue/Menninger
as having just said?
> Not
> necessarily from the head shot.
Indeed, not necessarily from the head shot.
> If you think the head shot was caused by an AR-15 then tell us what left
> the two large fragments found in the front seat.
The first missed shot.
lazu...@webtv.net
forgettable.
Bud
Anthony Marsh wrote:
> Bud wrote:
> > tomnln wrote:
> >> It's called "Experience" Bud;
> >
> >> Dr's at Parkland Hospital handle an average of 1271 gunshot cases per year
> >> in 1963.
> >
> > How many of those were FMJ? The vast majority of gunshot wounds are
> > caused by handguns. And, your 1271 figure is meaningless to this
> > discussion if you don`t establish how many of these Perry was involved
> > with treating. Now, run along back to the cemetery, Nutsack, adults are
> > talking here.
> >
>
> You seem confused here.
Well, thats what we have you for, Tony, to clarify things.
<snicker>
> Handgun bullets are often FMJ as well.
What percentage of bullet wounds would they account for?
> I think
> what you mean is how many were Mannlicher-Carcano bullets. I'd wager not
> many.
No, I meant that most handgun ammo is soft tipped, at least the
bullets I`ve seen,
but I`m no expert on guns or ammo.
Bud
tomnln wrote:
> Apparently Bud confuses a FMJ with a Suppository.
No he doesn`t, they taste completely different.
> In Bud's Homosexual World Suppositories are referred to as "SPEED BUMPS".
That would be your hemorrhoids, you sexy senior citizen. How I
long to crack open your ass cheeks like some musty old tome, and insert
my "bookmark", if you know what I mean.
> http://whokilledjfk.net/
>
> No wonder Bud Never returned to my Live Audio Chat Room where we can
> transfer
> any evidence/testimony Instantly.
A voice like Satan himself emitted from my computer. I hastily beat
a retreat, deleted the Paltalk program, hung a crucifix over my
speaker, and washed my keyboard in holy water.
> I have a Live Audio Chat Room on www.paltalk.com
It`s worth a visit, occassionally a Grizzlie wanders in and mauls
Tom. Worth waiting for through the endless hours of tedium.
> Download & Use for FREE.
>
>
>
> Once Logged on select Social Issues.
>
> Scroll down to room called "Who Killed John F. Kennedy?"
Click on the name "Oswald"...
> I start between 8-9 pm e.s.t. EVERY NITE.
Sad but true.
> We can transfer files to one another Instantly.
I`ll bet we can, you old deviant.
> ANY Exhibits of Evidence, ANY Testimony from WC/HSCA Volumes.
>
>
>
> Look forward to seeing you there.
Bring "Nails" and her hammer, we`ll make it a party.
David VP
Phewww! Take it easy on crackin' open the "cheeks", Bud!
I'm downwind, for God's sake!
Bud
tomnln wrote:
> DECISIONS? DECISIONS? DECISIONS?
>
> I have to decide if a "DOCTOR" is correct?
> I have to decide if a HOMO is correct?
>
> this shouldn't take long at all.
(this from a guy who takes 45 minutes to count his nuts)
Don`t think too hard, I heard of a Russian chess player who did, and
his head exploded.
Bud
tomnln wrote:
> "Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:efSdnVF6ULR9R1_Z...@comcast.com...
> > Phil Ossofee wrote:
> >> Nice post,now you mean to tell me we have 3 of these magic bullets Laz?
> >> I've never known what to make of the richochet that struck Tague, the
> >> lone nutters say it was a fragment from the headshot, though it's just a
> ==========================================================================
> > Except for Posner's crowd which says it came from a miss which hit a Magic
> > Twig that tore off the jacket.
>
> When I bought Posner's "Case Closed" it came with a bottle of Pepsi to wash
> down that BS with.
Pepsi masks the taste of bull excrement, does it, Tom? The things
you learn on farm-sex sites.
(Thank God for Tom,and his god-given talent for being the
straight man. I eagerly await the rejoiner which will leave him wide
open for further ridicule.)
Bud
geev...@yahoo.com wrote:
> How does that professor who likes to use big words and strange writing
> figure Lurch had anything to do with it?
"satire" and "irony" are big words to you, GV?
Bud
tomnln wrote:
> I "KNEW" that you did NOT believe the WCR's Theory Bud;
Wrong, like most of the things you claim to know.
> Nobody does.
Some Buddy does.
> Even the WCR Defenders. That's why they never address evidence/testimony.
Funny, you and the other CT seem to be skirting the question I
keep asking that directly relates to the evidence. By what means did
Perry determine JFK`s throat wound to be a bullet entry wound?
Bud
tomnln wrote:
> Faggots always discuss male anatomy.
I oughta scratch your eyes out for that, you crusty old homophobe.
Bud
David VP wrote:
> >>> "I was thinking along those lines (just didn't think a rose thick enough)." <<<
>
>
> person, as many CTers think/fear?? LOL).....
>
> And that very thought re. the rigidity of a rose stem is exactly why I
> added this to my last post (for "stabbing" effect, you see):
>
> pointedness) like nobody else in the business..."
>
>
> >>> "But, I don't think they were roses, anyway." <<<
>
Yah, they definately are. I think she handed those off to Nellie or
the SS. When the shooting started, she had asters (or so I`m told), a
member of the chrysanthemum family. You can see them in the picture of
the bloody limo backseat (I couldn`t find any large enough to make them
out. Lancer has small pictures, and the one I linked to before that had
a very large photo was on Marsh`s site, and that link seems to no
longer work). In any case, if this link works, you can see the flowers
to the left of Connally...
http://www.barryschool.net/jfk-in-car.gif
> And upon re-examining the above photo -- I'm just wondering what
> potentially-lethal weapons Jacqueline could have had concealed in that
> lovely handbag of hers?? Hmmmm. A small pistol perhaps (like Jack
> Ruby's...maybe Ruby's gun itself; that would explain the mysterious
> "45-60 degree" angle of the back wound)? A short-handled axe possibly?
> Or maybe a hangman's noose?
Looks to me that that bag could conceal a disassembled
Mannlicher-Carcano. How about a hatpin from the pillbox hat?
> It should be looked into (both the bag and these theories, too). ;)
>
>
> >>> "Was a toxicity report done on JFK? If not, we can punch up the plot with some poison on the "roses"." <<<
>
> True. And what about "thorns"?? They can be deadly if placed properly.
> ~wink~
>
> And then we've also got that "dog in the middle of the seat" that
> Jackie had with her (per Jean Hill, whose word is taken as Scripture by
> many a-CT-Kook. It could be that the white poodle chomped a hole in
> JFK. And...just maybe...the beast caused the fatal head wound somehow
> as well.
>
> Stranger things HAVE happened (well, on Planet Kook they have anyway).
> :)
It is difficult to top kook theories when it comes to being
ridiculous.
lazu...@webtv.net
know:
"By what means did Perry determine JFK's throat wound to be a bullet
entry wound?"
This is for your eyes only, Bud---unless you can read this with your
ears. Now pay attention!
Dr. Perry determined it was an entry wound by its APPEARANCE. THE SAME
WAY THAT HUMES ET AL DETERMINED THE BACK WOUND WAS AN ENTRANCE WOUND.
Practically every doctor at Parkland who got a good look at the throat
wound, deemed it to be an entrance wound------because it looked like one
to them, and they'd seen hundreds of 'em.
Drs. Carrico, Clark, McClelland, and others all thought it was an
entrance wound. It had none of the characteristics of an exit wound.
So, if you believe the autopsists' determination that the back wound was
an entrance, why dismiss the Parkland Drs' determination, when the
latter were much more familar with gunshot wounds than Humes ever
dreamed of having?
Shoo now, you're bothering me.
David VP
Maybe because of all that OTHER STUFF that came later that positively
indicates Perry was wrong about that wound.
Things like:
No bullets inside JFK.
No major damage in JFK's neck that would account for a bullet stopping
there.
The way the wounds on both JFK & JBC line up, making the SBT a
probability.
The JFK tie and shirt threads, which were all pushed outward.
The probable tumbling bullet that hit Connally, indicating it hit JFK
first.
The fact that you're a CT-Kook and I'm not.
And the fact that I'm right and you're wrong, mainly because you're a
CT-Kook and I'm not.
Those last two I like the best of any of the above reasons.
Bud
lazuli...@webtv.net wrote:
> Although Bud has already been informed many times, he still wants to
> know:
>
> "By what means did Perry determine JFK's throat wound to be a bullet
> entry wound?"
>
> This is for your eyes only, Bud---unless you can read this with your
> ears. Now pay attention!
>
> Dr. Perry determined it was an entry wound by its APPEARANCE.
And as we know, looks can be deceiving.If this link works, you will
see a bullet exit wound that looks a lot like a stab wound...
http://library.med.utah.edu/WebPath/FORHTML/FOR022.html
Do you think a docter can look at a rash, and tell exactlly the cause?
Anything from an allergic reaction, to skin cancer to leprosy is
possible, along with hundreds of other possible causes. Further testing
would alway trump first impressions.
> THE SAME
> WAY THAT HUMES ET AL DETERMINED THE BACK WOUND WAS AN ENTRANCE WOUND.
Whole different set of circumstances, isn`t it? In Perry`s case his
primary concern is treating wounds, and in Hume`s case, it`s examining
them.
> Practically every doctor at Parkland who got a good look at the throat
> wound, deemed it to be an entrance wound------because it looked like one
> to them, and they'd seen hundreds of 'em.
Yah, thanks for helping me with my case. By far, the most common
gunshot wounds are by bullets that flatten out, not many they would see
would be rifle rounds that keep their shape. If 99% of the gunshots
wounds they see are blown out on the exit, when the rare ammo that
doesn`t derform is used, the exit would would be bound to be different
than what they see most of the time, thus increasing the chance of a
faulty diagnosis.
> Drs. Carrico, Clark, McClelland, and others all thought it was an
> entrance wound. It had none of the characteristics of an exit wound.
Because unchracteristic ammunition was used to make that wound.
Like you kooks like to point out, CE399 was in very good shape.
> So, if you believe the autopsists' determination that the back wound was
> an entrance, why dismiss the Parkland Drs' determination, when the
> latter were much more familar with gunshot wounds than Humes ever
> dreamed of having?
For the two reasons I just gave. The autopists primary task was to
gather information about the wounds. Perry`s primary task was to treat
his patient.
And the familiarity of Parkland doctors to gunshot wounds can work
against them when they observe a gunshot wound made by unusual ammo.
Like you quoted the nurse saying (from memory) that the wound wasn`t
blown out like most of the exit wounds she had seen. Likely that the
exit wounds she was used to seeing were those produced by soft pointed
handgun ammo. It was an apple that looked like the oranges they were
used to seeing.
> Shoo now, you're bothering me.
This thinking shit sucks, huh?
lazu...@webtv.net
11/22/63 that the wound was ABOVE the shirt collar and just below the
thyroid cartilage (Adams Apple). He told the WC that the bullet
penetrated just above the top of the tie and therefore above the shirt
collar. The nick in the tie and the slits in the shirt had no lead or
other residues to indicate the passage of a bullet, and were most likely
made by the nurse's scalpel when hastilly cutting the tie and removing
the shirt. Dr. Carrico himself disputed the official contention that the
tie and shirt marks were made by a bullet. He said that prior to the
removal of shirt and tie, he saw no damage whatsoever to either item.
tomnln
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1153694481.2...@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Tell us how you identify AUIDS Lesions???
Then Debunk these Official Records of the WCR. http://whokilledjfk.net/
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1153709056.5...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Parkland handles an avge od 1271 gunshot wounds per year.
How many gunshot wounds have Humes/Boswell experienced????
"Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
news:1153694307.3...@i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
>
> tomnln wrote:
>> "Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
>> news:efSdnVF6ULR9R1_Z...@comcast.com...
>> > Phil Ossofee wrote:
>> >> Nice post,now you mean to tell me we have 3 of these magic bullets
>> >> Laz?
>> >> I've never known what to make of the richochet that struck Tague, the
>> >> lone nutters say it was a fragment from the headshot, though it's just
>> >> a
>> ==========================================================================
>> > Except for Posner's crowd which says it came from a miss which hit a
>> > Magic
>> > Twig that tore off the jacket.
>>
>> When I bought Posner's "Case Closed" it came with a bottle of Pepsi to
>> wash
>> down that BS with.
> Pepsi masks the taste of bull excrement, does it, Tom? The things
> you learn on farm-sex sites.
>
> (Thank God for Tom,and his god-given talent for being the
> straight man. I eagerly await the rejoiner which will leave him wide
> open for further ridicule.)
You ain't doing too good Bud. Look at your score card.
AND, that's because you don't even TRY to address Evidence/Testimony any
more.
*************************************************************************************
tomnln
>
> tomnln wrote:
>> DECISIONS? DECISIONS? DECISIONS?
>>
>> I have to decide if a "DOCTOR" is correct?
>> I have to decide if a HOMO is correct?
>>
>> this shouldn't take long at all.
> (this from a guy who takes 45 minutes to count his nuts)
That's called "Macho" Princess.
When are you gonna address the WCR Official Reports here?
http://whokilledjfk.net/
=====================================================================
Bud
> Why don't you stick to your area of Expertise?
>
> Tell us how you identify AUIDS Lesions???
I suppose I could say that I`ve identified you for some time, but
that would be too easy, as would be making fun of your spelling. No, I
guess I have no response.
Bud
> EXPERIENCE BUD;
So, if any questions arise concerning sheep, you`d be the one to
ask.
> Parkland handles an avge od 1271 gunshot wounds per year.
Thats well over 3 a day. It`s a wonder all their gurneys didn`t
have bullets on them.
> How many gunshot wounds have Humes/Boswell experienced????
Are you asking how many times they have been shot? I don`t see why
that would be relevant, some doctors deliver babies without ever giving
birth themselves.
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Why don't you stick to your area of Expertise?
>
> Tell us how you identify AUIDS Lesions???
NUTSACK!
Bud
tomnln wrote:
> "Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
> news:1153693292.1...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > tomnln wrote:
> >> DECISIONS? DECISIONS? DECISIONS?
> >>
> >> I have to decide if a "DOCTOR" is correct?
> >> I have to decide if a HOMO is correct?
> >>
> >> this shouldn't take long at all.
> ====================================================================
> > (this from a guy who takes 45 minutes to count his nuts)
>
> That's called "Macho" Princess.
Is that your nickname in South Windsor? Is that your CB "handle"? Do
you have vanity plates with that name on them?
Anthony Marsh
>>>> "If you believe the autopsists' determination that the back wound was an entrance, why dismiss the Parkland Drs' determination..." <<<
>
> Maybe because of all that OTHER STUFF that came later that positively
> indicates Perry was wrong about that wound.
>
> Things like:
>
> No bullets inside JFK.
>
Not definitive. A bullet could have fallen out.
> No major damage in JFK's neck that would account for a bullet stopping
> there.
>
There does not have to be major damage in order for a bullet to stop in
the neck.
> The way the wounds on both JFK & JBC line up, making the SBT a
> probability.
>
The way their bodies were line up, making any SBT impossible.
> The JFK tie and shirt threads, which were all pushed outward.
>
> The probable tumbling bullet that hit Connally, indicating it hit JFK
> first.
>
No evidence of tumbling.
RicBi...@aol.com
Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
> #1 did not disappear into thin air, and the single bullet scenario is
> an established fact.
Yeah, this from a guy who believes that, although Lee Harvey Oswald was
trying to kill JFK, there were actually two riflemen that day, LHO and
a Secret Service agent. And it was the *Secret Service* guy who
actually killed JFK! Go figure. Tell the lurkers, Grizzlie, are these
two shooters "an established fact", too? ;-)
- /< /\ /> -
RicBi...@aol.com
Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
> Anthony Marsh wrote:
> > And I would remind you that one of the fragments found in the limo was
> > only the base portion of the jacket. Its lead core had been entirely
> > squeezed out. It could be that lead core which hit the curb.
> What did I just say or rather, what did I just quote Donahue/Menninger
> as having just said?
So tell us Grizzlie, is your version of the crime exactly the same as
Bonar Menninger's? If not, please tell us the exact sequence of the
shots, including the fatal head shot from Hickey's AR-15, the direction
for each shot (including Oswald's), the corresponding Zapruder frame
for each shot, and where each bullet finally can to rest. Also, how
many shots were fired that day? Four? Three from LHO and one from
Hickey?
If your theory of the assassination *is* exactly the same as
Menninger's don't bother, I can simply read "Mortal Error".
Thanks in advance.
RicBi...@aol.com
Bud wrote:
>Yah, Ben, give us the kook version of JFK wounds.
Would a "kook version of JFK wounds" include one caused by an AR-15
fired by a Secret Service agent? A simple yes or no will do. ;-)
Thanks in advance for your reply.
RicBi...@aol.com
Bud wrote:
> Sure, kooks are really trying to figure this thing
> out, they aren`t just throwing enough shit in the game, so that any
> stupid shit they propose seems reasonable.
Would the idea of a Secret Service agent shooting the President fall
into the category of "any stupid shit they propose" that "seems
reasonable"? Thanks in advance for your opinion.
Anthony Marsh
> Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> Bud wrote:
>>> tomnln wrote:
>>>> It's called "Experience" Bud;
>>>> Dr's at Parkland Hospital handle an average of 1271 gunshot cases per year
>>>> in 1963.
>>> How many of those were FMJ? The vast majority of gunshot wounds are
>>> caused by handguns. And, your 1271 figure is meaningless to this
>>> discussion if you don`t establish how many of these Perry was involved
>>> with treating. Now, run along back to the cemetery, Nutsack, adults are
>>> talking here.
>>>
>> You seem confused here.
>
> Well, thats what we have you for, Tony, to clarify things.
> <snicker>
>
>> Handgun bullets are often FMJ as well.
>
> What percentage of bullet wounds would they account for?
72%.
Depends also if you are counting each entrance wound as a separate wound
or merely each person as a separate case. In one case you might have a
single rifle or shotgun wound, but in another there could be dozens of
bullet wounds in one person from a handgun.
>
>> I think
>> what you mean is how many were Mannlicher-Carcano bullets. I'd wager not
>> many.
>
> No, I meant that most handgun ammo is soft tipped, at least the
> bullets I`ve seen,
> but I`m no expert on guns or ammo.
>
Many handgun bullets are FMJ and many rifle bullets are not FMJ. It is
not an either/or situation.
>>>> "Bud" <sirs...@fast.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:1153590548....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>>>>> lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
>>>>>> Unlike you, Bud, I'll answer YOUR questions;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In regard to the curb strike you asked:
>>>>>> "Leaving one to wonder how you can declare it a bullet."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are you questioning the Holy Book, the WR?
>>>>>> They pronounced it a bullet, or rather a fragment from a bullet
>>>>> You said "bullet". Now, it`s a magic fragment.
>>>>>
>>>>>> which
>>>>>> went off into the wild blue yonder. It had to be only a lead fragment
>>>>>> from a bullet because there was a lead smear on the curb, no copper
>>>>>> trace, which would be the case if it were a jacketed round.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And regarding the "unusual" size of the holes in JFK's back and throat,
>>>>>> you asked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "As measured by....?"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You don't know the evidence, do you? Look at the posterior body chart on
>>>>>> the Autopsy Face Sheet, and you will see the back wound, placed at about
>>>>>> T3 (not in the neck), and a notation with an arrow pointing to the
>>>>>> wound, reading "7X4mm". Now, re: the throat wound, it was stated by Dr.
>>>>>> Perry and others to be "approximately 5mm".
>>>>> And, being a kook, you don`t realize that by saying the word
>>>>> "approximately", it likely means he didn`t actually measure it. What
>>>>> would Perry have guessed to be the size of the back wound?
>>>>>
>>>>>> So the unheard of happene
>>>>>> in this case, the entrance hole is larger than the exit hole!!!
>>>>> As measured by.....?
>>>>>
>>>>>> Dontcha
>>>>>> love it?
>>>>>> Makes one think that they're both entrance holes, doesn't it?
>>>>> On what did Perry base his assessment that the throat wound was
>>>>> made by a bullet on?
>>>>>
>
RicBi...@aol.com
Bud wrote:
> lazu...@webtv.net wrote:
> > Bullet number one fragments (how no one knows) before striking a curb,
> > leaving a lead smear, and then disappearing into thin air.
>
> Leaving one to wonder how you can declare it a bullet.
Bud, does it bother you when your fellow "Viking" Mr. Antagonist's
AR-15 bullet disappears into thin air, too? Or is that idea kooky too?
RicBi...@aol.com
David VP wrote:
> This "Anything's Possible" approach should be right up the CT-Kook's
> alley(ies) -- since they engage this method of "research" time and time
> again re. the events of November 22nd, 1963.
>
> I've got an "alternate" Jackie theory to toss into the blender ---
> Instead of Bud's knitting needle, let's make the weapon a very sharp
> pointed end of a rose stem (taken from the pretty bouquet presented to
> the First Lady at Love Field).
>
> This "Rose Kills Kennedy" theory makes sense, too, because the murder
> weapon WAS POSITIVELY AVAILABLE TO MRS. KENNEDY WHILE RIDING IN THE
> MOTORCADE ON 11/22.
Does the Secret-Service-guy-shot-JFK scenario fit "right up the
CT-Kook's alley(ies)" too? Thanks in advance for your reply.
David VP
Not "a" (single) bullet. The CTers need TWO bullets falling out of
JFK's body and both getting lost to make their silliness work.
And the CT-Kooks also need still ANOTHER bullet to go into the AWOL
File too -- Connally's bullet. Because everybody knows that no CTer can
trust that it was CE399. Right? So now we're up to a minimum of three
missing missiles.
November 22nd was one lucky day indeed for that Patsy Squad. What with
wounds on two victims that line up so nicely that they fool Specter &
Company; and having every unwanted bullet doing a vanishing act
immediately after the assassination. Re-mark-able! (And remarkable that
anyone can actually BUY such crap too.)
>>> "There does not have to be major damage in order for a bullet to stop in the neck." <<<
Better DOUBLE that reasoning (again). CTers need this stuff to happen
TWICE remember.
Do high-velocity bullets normally stop after just a two-inch journey
into a victim? And within a victim who suffers no bony damage inside of
him whatsoever? (TIMES TWO BULLETS DOING THIS!?)
No better time than this for a big ol' -----> LOL!
>>> "The way their bodies were lined up, making any SBT impossible." <<<
And you measured the exact distance between JFK and Connally yourself,
did ya?? And you also measured the exact pivot angle of Connally's turn
when he was hit, did ya??
Where exactly are those measurements located in the official report?
I'd like to see the verification of that for sure.
>>> "No evidence of tumbling." <<<
No? LOL.
There's only the fact that we've got an oval-shaped (15mm) wound on
JBC's back, and the fact that the condition of CE399 (which was inside
JBC, the kooks' analysis not counting as much as they think) certainly
indicates "tumbling" every step of that bullet's way through Governor
Connally's body.
Plus -- Better check out that "Beyond The Magic Bullet" documentary one
more time too (and get your pause button ready) -- because in that
program, the bullet exiting Kennedy's mock torso can be SEEN "tumbling"
in mid-air after leaving the JFK body.
Sure, that wasn't the REAL John Kennedy body -- but shouldn't that
re-creation count for SOMETHING?
Or is that whole Discovery Channel SBT re-creation test to be trashed
-- just because rabid CTers say it should be trashed?
Walt
Phil Ossofee wrote:
> Nice post,now you mean to tell me we have 3 of these magic bullets Laz?
> I've never known what to make of the richochet that struck Tague, the
> lone nutters say it was a fragment from the headshot, though it's just a
> above the chrome windshield that sure looks like a full bullet hit
> there, if so how the hell does a fragment then fly over the car
> completely another 150 feet or so to hit Tague? Phil D.
the Mark Fuhrman book he focused on was the dent
> above the chrome windshield that sure looks like a full bullet hit
I haven't seen Mark F's book, but if he says that the dent in the
chrome molding appears to be from a hit by a full bullet......I would
agree with him ( one of the few things I would agree with him about)
That dent appears to have been made by a large slow moving ( low
penetration bullet ) like a .45 acp bullet. JFK's head explodes like
it was struck by a large slow moving hard hitting bullet like a .45acp.
Walt
Walt
Grizzlie Antagonist
RicBi...@aol.com wrote:
> Hi Grizzlie,
>
> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>
> > Anthony Marsh wrote:
>
> > > And I would remind you that one of the fragments found in the limo was
> > > only the base portion of the jacket. Its lead core had been entirely
> > > squeezed out. It could be that lead core which hit the curb.
>
> > What did I just say or rather, what did I just quote Donahue/Menninger
> > as having just said?
>
> So tell us Grizzlie, is your version of the crime exactly the same as
> Bonar Menninger's? If not, please tell us the exact sequence of the
> shots, including the fatal head shot from Hickey's AR-15, the direction
> for each shot (including Oswald's), the corresponding Zapruder frame
> for each shot, and where each bullet finally can to rest. Also, how
> many shots were fired that day? Four? Three from LHO and one from
> Hickey?
Three altogether: two plus one.
> If your theory of the assassination *is* exactly the same as
> Menninger's don't bother, I can simply read "Mortal Error".
>
> Thanks in advance.
Pretty much so. However, some of Donahue's conclusions are not central
to the main thesis of "Mortal Error". Donahue concludes a first missed
shot at Z186. There's some indications that the first missed shot came
sooner than that, but this wouldn't be central to Donahue's main
thesis.
Donahue concludes a single bullet strike at Z237-238. I think that the
argument is compelling, but others think that the single bullet strike
occurs earlier at Z223-224. Either way, it's not central to the main
thesis.
Yes, I find the argument for an accidental head shot from Hickey
compelling for reasons set forth in Mortal Error, and I would encourage
you, as I have encouraged others to read it.
lazu...@webtv.net
You appear to agree with Donahue in this weird assertion. Then, JFK's
raising of his hands towards his throat as he emerges from behind the
sign at Z224, and showing obvious signs of distress, is due to a
separate strike? The time differential is less than a second. How can
LHO be the culprit for both shots?
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Griz sez: "Donahue concludes a single bullet strike at Z237-38..."
>
> You appear to agree with Donahue in this weird assertion.
At Z237, Kennedy's body pitches forward and his closed fists come up
toward his neck. Connally's reaction is also the most dramatic at
Z237-8 and the slope of his shoulder drops suddently.
> Then, JFK's
> raising of his hands towards his throat as he emerges from behind the
> sign at Z224, and showing obvious signs of distress, is due to a
> separate strike? The time differential is less than a second. How can
> LHO be the culprit for both shots?
JFK is responding to the earlier first shot miss - the bullet strikes
the pavement behind the limo and bullet fragments land on the outer
table of his skull. Kellerman hears him remark, "My God, I am hit".
Anthony Marsh
>>>> "A bullet could have fallen out." <<<
>
>
> Not "a" (single) bullet. The CTers need TWO bullets falling out of
> JFK's body and both getting lost to make their silliness work.
>
No, conspiracy theorists do not need any bullet to fall out of JFK's
body. But YOU WC kooks need CE 399 to fall out of Connally's body.
> And the CT-Kooks also need still ANOTHER bullet to go into the AWOL
> File too -- Connally's bullet. Because everybody knows that no CTer can
> trust that it was CE399. Right? So now we're up to a minimum of three
> missing missiles.
>
I can trust CE 399 as long as it doesn't have to do what YOU claim it did.
> November 22nd was one lucky day indeed for that Patsy Squad. What with
> wounds on two victims that line up so nicely that they fool Specter &
> Company; and having every unwanted bullet doing a vanishing act
> immediately after the assassination. Re-mark-able! (And remarkable that
> anyone can actually BUY such crap too.)
>
Lucky that they found a bullet which supposedly injured the President on
some little kid's stretcher.
>
>>>> "There does not have to be major damage in order for a bullet to stop in the neck." <<<
>
>
> Better DOUBLE that reasoning (again). CTers need this stuff to happen
> TWICE remember.
>
Again, try to stick to the facts.
> Do high-velocity bullets normally stop after just a two-inch journey
> into a victim? And within a victim who suffers no bony damage inside of
> him whatsoever? (TIMES TWO BULLETS DOING THIS!?)
>
Who is talking about high-velocity bullets? Do you know from personal
experience that only high-velocity bullets were fired in the Kennedy
assassination? Tell us what the exact muzzle velocity was for each and
every shot and prove it with documents. BTW, please explain how a bullet
hits Connally's thigh and only penetrates an inch or so and then falls
out. You just said such a thing is physically impossible.
> No better time than this for a big ol' -----> LOL!
>
>
>>>> "The way their bodies were lined up, making any SBT impossible." <<<
>
>
> And you measured the exact distance between JFK and Connally yourself,
> did ya?? And you also measured the exact pivot angle of Connally's turn
> when he was hit, did ya??
>
Yes, and yes.
> Where exactly are those measurements located in the official report?
> I'd like to see the verification of that for sure.
>
I have not issued an official report.
>
>>>> "No evidence of tumbling." <<<
>
>
> No? LOL.
>
> There's only the fact that we've got an oval-shaped (15mm) wound on
> JBC's back, and the fact that the condition of CE399 (which was inside
> JBC, the kooks' analysis not counting as much as they think) certainly
> indicates "tumbling" every step of that bullet's way through Governor
> Connally's body.
>
No, nothing indicates tumbling. You are confused.
> Plus -- Better check out that "Beyond The Magic Bullet" documentary one
> more time too (and get your pause button ready) -- because in that
> program, the bullet exiting Kennedy's mock torso can be SEEN "tumbling"
> in mid-air after leaving the JFK body.
>
That's nice, but they fudged the data.
> Sure, that wasn't the REAL John Kennedy body -- but shouldn't that
> re-creation count for SOMETHING?
>
That and $5.00 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.
> Or is that whole Discovery Channel SBT re-creation test to be trashed
> -- just because rabid CTers say it should be trashed?
>
Yes.
lazu...@webtv.net
reason for JFK's hands raising and clenching at 224-5 is a reaction to
the missed first shot. At what Z frame do you think this shot occurred?
RicBi...@aol.com
Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
> RicBi...@aol.com wrote:
> > So tell us Grizzlie, is your version of the crime exactly the same as
> > Bonar Menninger's? If not, please tell us the exact sequence of the
> > shots, including the fatal head shot from Hickey's AR-15, the direction
> > for each shot (including Oswald's), the corresponding Zapruder frame
> > for each shot, and where each bullet finally can to rest. Also, how
> > many shots were fired that day? Four? Three from LHO and one from
> > Hickey?
>
> Three altogether: two plus one.
How do you (and Menniger) account for the three empty shells in the
sniper's nest? A shell that was shot previously and ejected before the
shooting started? I guess the two plus one means two from the MC and
one from the AR-15? The throat shot, the SBT shot and the head shot,
right? Which bullet caused Tague's wounds?
> Donahue concludes a single bullet strike at Z237-238. I think that the
> argument is compelling, but others think that the single bullet strike
> occurs earlier at Z223-224. Either way, it's not central to the main
> thesis.
This is the Single Bullet theory shot? What about Conally's lapel flip
in frame 224? Just to be clear, your (and Menniger's) SBT is different
from the WC's SBT, which is different from Posner's SBT, which, in turn
is different from Jim Moore's ("Conspiracy of One") SBT. Any idea how
many SBT's are floating around out there? ;-)
I take it you and Bud and David VP disagree of which SBT is the correct
one, right?
RicBi...@aol.com
RicBiss...@aol.com wrote:
> The throat shot, the SBT shot and the head shot,
> right?
Sorry for the confusion. Of course I meant, the *missed* shot, the
SBT, etc...
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Hi Grizzlie,
>
> Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
>
> > RicBi...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > > So tell us Grizzlie, is your version of the crime exactly the same as
> > > Bonar Menninger's? If not, please tell us the exact sequence of the
> > > shots, including the fatal head shot from Hickey's AR-15, the direction
> > > for each shot (including Oswald's), the corresponding Zapruder frame
> > > for each shot, and where each bullet finally can to rest. Also, how
> > > many shots were fired that day? Four? Three from LHO and one from
> > > Hickey?
> >
> > Three altogether: two plus one.
>
> How do you (and Menniger)
Not Menninger, but Donahue, who died in 2000. I've spoken with
Menninger, and I don't believe that he has ever regarded himself as
anything but Donahue's chronicler. I don't think that Menninger has
any firm opinion about this one way or the other.
> account for the three empty shells in the
> sniper's nest? A shell that was shot previously and ejected before the
> shooting started?
Yes. One of them had a dent. It was presumably not used to fire a
bullet that day.
> I guess the two plus one means two from the MC and
> one from the AR-15? The throat shot, the SBT shot and the head shot,
> right? Which bullet caused Tague's wounds?
The throat shot IS the SBT. The missed shot, the SBT, and the head
shot.
The missed shot - the first one - caused Tague's wounds and superficial
damage to JFK. When he responds in Z224, he is not responding to an
actual direct bullet strike but to having been hit with debris from the
bullet that missed.
> > Donahue concludes a single bullet strike at Z237-238. I think that the
> > argument is compelling, but others think that the single bullet strike
> > occurs earlier at Z223-224. Either way, it's not central to the main
> > thesis.
>
> This is the Single Bullet theory shot? What about Conally's lapel flip
> in frame 224?
Yes. The "lapel flip" is just an optical illusion, I suppose.
> Just to be clear, your (and Menniger's) SBT is different
> from the WC's SBT, which is different from Posner's SBT, which, in turn
> is different from Jim Moore's ("Conspiracy of One") SBT. Any idea how
> many SBT's are floating around out there? ;-)
I don' t know; probably just two. It's either Z223-Z224 or Z237-238.
Certainly, there are not nearly as many SBT's as conspiracy theories,
I'm sure.
Your premise isn't completely incorrect. There is disagreement on the
timing of the SBT. If the two men were in position to receive the
wounds from a single shot for 13-14 frames - a period of about 3/4 of a
second - then I guess there can be disagreement on when it happens.
But you're not completely correct either. Moore's SBT doesn't differ
from Donahue's. Both agree that it was 237-238. I understand that
Posner and the WC say 223-224.
Actually, given that Moore and Donahue both did their own separate
investigation (both books came out at about the same time, and neither
references the other), their conclusions about the first two shots are
remarkably similar.
If they really did come to their conclusion independently, that in and
of itself might be compelling.
> I take it you and Bud and David VP disagree of which SBT is the correct
> one, right?
I know that DVP and I have argued about it, and I assume that Bud also
believes in the Warren Commission's version, which does differ from
Donahue's.
> Thanks in advance.
>
That's OK, but really, considering the variety and multiplicity of
conspiracy theories, I really don't seem anything wrong with a 3/4
second difference about when the single bullet strike happens.
David VP
No. But from "common sense" evaluation, I'm fairly confident of that
fact.
Why in the devil would any person shooting at the President utilize
anything BUT high-powered guns and high-velocity missiles to shoot at
him with?
Did they NOT want to kill him AQAP (i.e., As Quickly As Possible)? If
not...why not?
As Bud and I have said previous here (and it still applies) -- Per some
CTers (who seem to think that JFK was pelted with multiple
low-velocity, pansy-ass, do-nothing bullets), these assassins would
have probably have had just as much luck killing their target if they'd
have started throwing stones at the guy...or were using water
pistols...or "dodge balls" (remember playing that in gym class?).
>>> "BTW, please explain how a bullet hits Connally's thigh and only penetrates an inch or so and then falls out." <<<
1.) Bullet hits Connally's thigh.
2.) Bullet falls out of Connally's thigh.
Voila!!
Why is this the miracle of the ages? Obviously, per the SBT which I
advocate, that bullet was pert-near completely spent when it reached
JBC's leg. Hence, a very shallow wound. Hence, the bullet could easily
become dislodged at any point after 399 entered said leg area.
You weren't really serious with this lame question. Were you?
Grizzlie Antagonist
> Thanks, Griz for a civil response. Okay, you're suggesting that the
> reason for JFK's hands raising and clenching at 224-5 is a reaction to
> the missed first shot.
Which missed first shot still showered him with hot metal, after
striking Elm Street. So he HAS been struck ("My God, I am hit") but
only superficially.
> At what Z frame do you think this shot occurred?
Probably Z186. He could have actually started to react as soon as Z204
- one second later when the limo goes behind the Stemmons Freeway sign
and we can't see the passengers very well. To me, there seems to be
somewhat of a dramatic change in JFK's posture between Z204 and Z205.
We can't see them at all after Z207. It could have taken a second or
more for the missed shot to strike the pavement, fly into the air and
shower JFK with debris.
lazu...@webtv.net
"That bullet was pert-near completely spent when it reached JBC's leg.
Hence, a very shallow wound. Hence, the bullet could easily become
dislodged at any point after 399 entered said leg area."
Dave, there's a big problem with your "shallow wound" theory. Have you
seen the Xray of JBC's thigh? It clearly shows a small fragment next to
the femur. If this fragment were as shallow as you claim the wound was,
it would have been easily retrieved by Dr. Shaw, but it was left in his
leg, and is there to this day. The femur inthe medial thigh is roughly
two inches below the skin surface, underneath a large muscle and thick
fascia. So whatever bullet, or fragment, which struck the leg was not by
any means nearly spent.