Re: Question for Andrew Mason
Robert Harris
<e8d019ff-d084-4f38...@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
bigdog <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On May 30, 2:31?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <fa1147e9-b6a1-44fa-87f2-38ac55102...@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ?bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > On May 29, 12:02?am, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > In article
> > > > <ec6b4368-72c4-47c2-926b-fae5beb47...@s21g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > > > ?bigdog <jecorbett1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > > > I know I am kicking a dead horse here. Under your non-SBT, LN
> > > > > scenario,
> > > > > you have Oswald shooting Connally in the back with the second shot
> > > > > sometime after Z250, well after just about everyone else has him
> > > > > shot. I
> > > > > can't remember exactly which frame you think the shot came at but my
> > > > > recollection is you had it coming somewhere in the Z265- Z270 time
> > > > > frame.
> > > > > Correct me if I am wrong. In any event, you have a real problem with
> > > > > this
> > > > > shot coming anytime post Z250. By Z250, Connally has rotated his
> > > > > shoulders
> > > > > so far to the right that they are approximately parallel to the side
> > > > > of
> > > > > the limo.
> >
> > > > Andrew and I went through this same thing, years ago. I even posted
> > > > stills
> > > > from frames then, in which JBC was turned more than 90 degrees to his
> > > > right and almost far enough to see JFK.
> >
> > > > There was indeed, a shot fired between 223 and 312 however, but it
> > > > didn't
> > > > hit Connally or JFK. It missed the limo and went on the strike the Main
> > > > St
> > > > pavement, where it shattered, sending a piece of lead to strike the
> > > > curb
> > > > and a small piece of debris to hit James Tague.
> >
> > > > I hope you will take the time to carefully examine this video. It will
> > > > explain in detail, exactly what happened and why you can be certain
> > > > that
> > > > this shot really was fired,
> >
> > > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ql6VqZDiC6s
> >
> > > > Robert Harris
> >
> > > Well, a shot between Z223 and Z313 is theoretically possible and the WC
> > > allowed for such a shot in a second shot miss scenario but such a shot
> > > would not have come at Z285. This would mean all three shots were fired
> > > in
> > > under 5 seconds which is still withing the WC window of 4.8 to 5.6
> > > seconds
> > > (for a second shot miss). Few modern LNs give much credence to the second
> > > shot miss, even though it is a theoretical possibility. A much stronger
> > > case has been made for a first shot miss, also a possibility according to
> > > the WCR. Most LNs today accept that as the most likely scenario.
> >
> > > I viewed your video an am no persuaded for your arguments for a missed
> > > shot at Z285. You make the same mistake Andrew makes. You accept witness
> > > recollections as fact without seeing how those recollections mesh with
> > > the
> > > physical evidence and the Zapruder film.
> >
> > Then you must have been watching some other video.
> >
> > In mine, it is preposterously obvious, that every nonvictim in the limo
> > reacted in perfect unison with each other and with Zapruder's reaction
> > as identified by Dr. Alvarez.
> >
>
> You should re-read Alvarez. A gunshot is just one of the things that can
> cause a jiggle of the camera.
Of course.
So are you suggesting that it was just a coincidence that every
nonvictim in the limo reacted at the same instant that Zapruder did?
> It is not the only thing. There is a
> widespread consensus that there were three shots but we have more than 3
> jiggles of Zapruder's camera.
You need to practice what you preach, and read Alvarez's paper on this
subject.
He did not base his conclusions on the discovery of individual, blurred
frames, but on series of blurred frames, in increments of 1/3rd of a
second, or about 6 frames each.
You will see EXACTLY that pattern following both 312 and 285.
> A jiggle does not indicate a shot. Only the
> possibility of a shot. There is nothing that happens at Z285 that is
> obvious of a gunshot. That is your imagination at work.
Those reactions are not the product of my imagination and you know it.
Neither are the statements of the people who reacted then, who described
what they heard and when.
>
> > It is the fact that the witness statements mesh perfectly with those
> > visible reactions, that eliminates all possible doubt, that they were
> > startled by a gunshot then.
> >
> Only to someone with an active imagination.
Bullshit.
Nellie thought her husband was hit by that same shot.
Read her testimony and then watch her, as she finally realizes that JBC
was shot.
Did you even bother to watch the video??
Do the same with Jackie. Watch as she turns back to her right, thinking
JFK was "receiving a bullet".
Greer said he was turned around when the second shot was fired, and he
felt it's "concussion". When did he turn around, BD?? And why did he say
the second and third were nearly simultaneous???
And even you must know about Kellerman's "flurry of shells" that came into
the car, at exactly the instant that he was ducking and shielding his ear
with his right hand.
Don't tell me this is my fucking imagination.
The problem here is not imagination, it is stonewall denial.
Robert Harris
bigdog
I see no evidence of any sudden, simultaneous reactions by the nonvictims
at Z285 or its immediate aftermath. What I see are a series of reactions
by these people which began well before Z285 and continued afterward.
There people were looking around trying to figure out what the hell was
going on. There is no evidence of an event at Z285.
> > It is not the only thing. There is a
> > widespread consensus that there were three shots but we have more than 3
> > jiggles of Zapruder's camera.
>
> You need to practice what you preach, and read Alvarez's paper on this
> subject.
>
> He did not base his conclusions on the discovery of individual, blurred
> frames, but on series of blurred frames, in increments of 1/3rd of a
> second, or about 6 frames each.
>
> You will see EXACTLY that pattern following both 312 and 285.
>
Is it your position that a 6 frame jiggle could only occur after a
gunshot?
> > A jiggle does not indicate a shot. Only the
> > possibility of a shot. There is nothing that happens at Z285 that is
> > obvious of a gunshot. That is your imagination at work.
>
> Those reactions are not the product of my imagination and you know it.
>
> Neither are the statements of the people who reacted then, who described
> what they heard and when.
>
And like Andrew, you treat these recollections as infallible.
>
>
> > > It is the fact that the witness statements mesh perfectly with those
> > > visible reactions, that eliminates all possible doubt, that they were
> > > startled by a gunshot then.
>
> > Only to someone with an active imagination.
>
> Bullshit.
>
> Nellie thought her husband was hit by that same shot.
>
> Read her testimony and then watch her, as she finally realizes that JBC
> was shot.
>
> Did you even bother to watch the video??
>
> Do the same with Jackie. Watch as she turns back to her right, thinking
> JFK was "receiving a bullet".
>
> Greer said he was turned around when the second shot was fired, and he
> felt it's "concussion". When did he turn around, BD?? And why did he say
> the second and third were nearly simultaneous???
>
> And even you must know about Kellerman's "flurry of shells" that came into
> the car, at exactly the instant that he was ducking and shielding his ear
> with his right hand.
>
None of these is corroborated by hard evidence. If a flurry of shells
was coming into the car, why didn't they find a flurry of bullets.
> Don't tell me this is my fucking imagination.
>
"fucking" was your adjective. I'm telling you it is your imagination.
> The problem here is not imagination, it is stonewall denial.
>
I will continue to deny fairy tales.
> Robert Harris- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
David Von Pein
>>> "If a flurry of shells was coming into the car, why didn't they find a flurry of bullets." <<<
Of course, as anyone with half a brain cell can easily figure out, Roy
Kellerman's "flurry of shells came into the car" testimony can easily
be reconciled within the "LN" scenario: Kellerman merely heard the
effects of the bullet that hit President Kennedy in the head (a bullet
that was fired, of course, from the 6th Floor of the TSBD by Lee
Oswald).
Kellerman undoubtedly heard the two bullet fragments [CE567 and CE569]
striking the chrome topping and the windshield of the limousine.
Kellerman was sitting right next to this activity in the front of the
car, and to him it sounded like a "flurry of shells" or "flurry of
shots" coming into the car. (Kellerman said both of those
things--"flurry of shells" and "flurry of shots"--during his Warren
Commission testimony.)
It makes total sense that Kellerman would, indeed, have possibly
thought a "flurry of shells" or a "flurry of shots" (i.e., more than
one "shell" or "shot") came "into the car".
What would ANY of us have thought if we had heard what Roy Kellerman
heard while sitting right next to the places where bullet fragments
were clanking against the front parts of the automobile during the
period of time when bullets were flying around Dealey Plaza?
Would you have thought the clanking of bullets in the front part of
the car was merely the result of bullet FRAGMENTS striking the
automobile?
Or would you possibly have thought that multiple ADDITIONAL bullets
(or "shells") were being fired into the car?
If it were me, I think I'd probably be inclined to think the latter.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/kellerma.htm
Footnote:
Secret Service Agent Roy H. Kellerman is an excellent "LN" type of
witness overall, btw.
Naturally, the conspiracy clowns of the world want to twist and mangle
Kellerman's words to fit their preconceived ideas of a multi-gun
conspiracy. And the kooks try to do the exact same thing with other
assassination witnesses as well, with Lee Bowers being a good example.
Bowers is actually a very good "LN" witness overall, despite the
conspiracy theorists' constant attempts to turn him into a witness who
saw somebody murdering the President from the Grassy Knoll:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/5134c7856e820d92
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/a1679ed2383e9f22
Robert Harris
<6feb04e0-1efa-46c3...@p4g2000vba.googlegroups.com>,
David Von Pein <davev...@aol.com> wrote:
> >>> "If a flurry of shells was coming into the car, why didn't they find a
> >>> flurry of bullets." <<<
>
> Of course, as anyone with half a brain cell can easily figure out, Roy
> Kellerman's "flurry of shells came into the car" testimony can easily
> be reconciled within the "LN" scenario: Kellerman merely heard the
> effects of the bullet that hit President Kennedy in the head (a bullet
> that was fired, of course, from the 6th Floor of the TSBD by Lee
> Oswald).
David, that is just pathetic.
Bullet fragments hitting glass or chrome do NOT sound like gunshots. And
Kellerman was absolutely, indisputably, talking about gunshots. He also
described the final shots as MUCH closer together than the early ones.
And when asked if he heard only two shots at the end, he replied, "at
least".
You should try reading his testimony, instead of distorting it.
And then watch him at that instant, ducking and shielding his face with
his left hand.
Did you watch the video - ALL of it??
Robert Harris
--
To get random signatures put text files into a folder called �Random Signatures� into your Preferences folder.
Robert Harris
<97b3c6db-a737-4435...@x6g2000vbg.googlegroups.com>,
bigdog <jecorb...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jun 1, 9:43?pm, Robert Harris <reharr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <e8d019ff-d084-4f38-b99d-db81d0ee4...@b1g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > You ?need to practice what you preach, and read Alvarez's paper on this
> > subject.
> >
> > He did not base his conclusions on the discovery of individual, blurred
> > frames, but on series of blurred frames, in increments of 1/3rd of a
> > second, or about 6 frames each.
> >
> > You will see EXACTLY that pattern following both 312 and 285.
> >
>
> Is it your position that a 6 frame jiggle could only occur after a
> gunshot?
Nope, somebody could have tossed a hand grenade and provoked similar
reactions, though not the "concussion" that Greer felt, from the shock
wave of the passing bullet.
>
> > > A jiggle does not indicate a shot. Only the
> > > possibility of a shot. There is nothing that happens at Z285 that is
> > > obvious of a gunshot. That is your imagination at work.
> >
> > Those reactions are not the product of my imagination and you know it.
> >
> > Neither are the statements of the people who reacted then, who described
> > what they heard and when.
> >
>
> And like Andrew, you treat these recollections as infallible.
No, that's why I compared their testimonies with their visible reactions
in the film. The match was perfect.
>
> >
> >
> > > > It is the fact that the witness statements mesh perfectly with those
> > > > visible reactions, that eliminates all possible doubt, that they were
> > > > startled by a gunshot then.
> >
> > > Only to someone with an active imagination.
> >
> > Bullshit.
> >
> > Nellie thought her husband was hit by that same shot.
> >
> > Read her testimony and then watch her, as she finally realizes that JBC
> > was shot.
> >
> > Did you even bother to watch the video??
> >
> > Do the same with Jackie. Watch as she turns back to her right, thinking
> > JFK was "receiving a bullet".
> >
> > Greer said he was turned around when the second shot was fired, and he
> > felt it's "concussion". When did he turn around, BD?? And why did he say
> > the second and third were nearly simultaneous???
> >
> > And even you must know about Kellerman's "flurry of shells" that came into
> > the car, at exactly the instant that he was ducking and shielding his ear
> > with his right hand.
> >
>
> None of these is corroborated by hard evidence. If a flurry of shells
> was coming into the car, why didn't they find a flurry of bullets.
The shot at 285 missed and went on to cause Tague's minor wound. The final
shot passed through the already devastated part of the head and blew out
the broken skull in the upper rear of the head.
There were three shots fired within the final two seconds of the attack.
Haven't you watch the videos on this subject yet?
>
> > Don't tell me this is my fucking imagination.
> >
>
> "fucking" was your adjective. I'm telling you it is your imagination.
>
> > The problem here is not imagination, it is stonewall denial.
> >
>
> I will continue to deny fairy tales.
"fairy tales" are are easily refuted, but you will not address a single
argument I presented.
Robert Harris
Andrew Mason
Why would you assume this "concussion" was from a shock wave and not from
the bullet striking the frame of the windshield and denting it - about 12
inches from Greer's right ear? How could that not have created a sound?
Why do you think the shot was at z285 when Greer said he turned around
immediately after the shot? He turns around at z277-280.
Andrew Mason
Robert Harris
Andrew Mason <a.m...@sasktel.net> wrote:
It probably did make some kind of noise.
But Greer was talking about what he perceived to be the SECOND shot that
day, with a near simultaneous shot to follow,
"The second one didn't sound any different much than the first one but I
kind of got, by turning around, I don't know whether I got a little
concussion of it, maybe when it hit something or not.."
He obviously, was not talking about a result of the shot that followed.
>
> Why do you think the shot was at z285 when Greer said he turned around
> immediately after the shot? He turns around at z277-280.
Come on Andrew - THINK!
He did not hear a shot, then turn around and THEN feel the "concussion".
He was turned around at the time he heard the shot. And he had turned just
1-2 seconds prior to 285.
Robert Harris