The "Single-Bullet Theory" (Common Sense Included At No Extra Charge)
David Von Pein
And Non-Laughable Scenario) ----
If The "Single-Bullet Theory" Isn't Correct, Then What IS The Accurate
Shooting Scenario To Explain The Virtually-Simultaneous Wounding Of
President Kennedy And Governor Connally On 11/22/63?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On November 22nd, 1963, when President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was hit
in the upper back with a 6.5-millimeter full-metal-jacketed bullet
fired by assassin Lee Harvey Oswald (from Oswald's own bolt-action
Mannlicher-Carcano rifle), it marked the beginning of what many, many
people around the world deem to be an "absolutely-impossible
occurrence" -- for that wound on John Kennedy's back was the first
"link" in what is now known as the "Single-Bullet Theory" (with some
conspiracists referring to it as the "Magic-Bullet Theory").
But, in reality, there is no "magic" to this "theory" at all. The
"SBT"
bullet that was fired by Oswald from his sixth-floor Sniper's Perch in
the Texas School Book Depository Building did not have to "zig" and
"zag" all over God's Creation in order to strike both JFK and Texas
Governor John Connally that day in Dallas. That is a provably-wrong
"CT
myth". Connally was seated "inboard" of Kennedy and was seated a few
inches lower in his jump seat than was the President on the back seat.
And the bullet in question did not have to "stop in mid-air" for XX
number of seconds, per what many pro-conspiracy people seem to want to
think. The reactions of the two victims in the Presidential limousine
are completely consistent with one bullet having struck both men at
the
very same point in time. Just watch this real-time video clip (below)
from Abraham Zapruder's home movie a few times back-to-back. After
doing so, it's nearly impossible (IMO) to totally discount the idea
that the two victims are reacting to being hit by gunfire at precisely
the same time. ......
http://users.skynet.be/mar/SBT/Images2/222-262%20full-small.gif
Via my own personal common-sense view re. the subject, the long and
short of this decades-long debate over the accuracy of the "SBT" is
simply this -- It doesn't really matter, in the long run, whether
anybody "believes" the SBT is true and/or doable or not.
Why not? -- Because the hard, physical evidence that exists is telling
us beyond much doubt whatsoever that JFK and Governor Connally WERE,
indeed, wounded simultaneously by way of Bullet "CE399".
Moreover, the current LACK of any other evidence existing to suggest
that the SBT is totally wrong only enhances the likelihood that the
SBT
is probably right.
That is to say, if the SBT is filled with as many holes as most CTers
claim it is, and if JFK and JBC had been hit by other bullets to
explain their "SBT"-like wounds -- then I have a valid question for
CTers .... Where is the evidence for this? Where are these bullets?
Why
were none of these "other bullets" recovered in (or near) EITHER
victim? And THREE disappearing bullets, to boot?!! All going AWOL!
Just...silly.*
* = And some people even go one bullet better than that, theorizing
that Connally was hit twice, rather than just once. So, that theory
would increase the count of "vanishing missiles" to four; which also
boosts such a theory to practically immeasurable levels of
improbability, not to mention "absurdity".
No anti-SBT theorist has come even remotely close to believably
answering those reasonable inquiries I asked above.
As difficult as it is for some people to believe, the sum total of the
evidence (plus just ordinary common sense) is telling us that the
Single-Bullet Conclusion is, indeed, almost certainly the correct
conclusion.
Also -- As hinted previously, by NOT believing the SBT is even vaguely
possible, conspiracy theorists are, by default, believing in an
alternate scenario (ANY alternate scenario; and it doesn't really
matter which "what if?" theory is being postulated) which could ONLY
have been much more bizarre and highly-improbable than that of the
SBT.
So much so, in fact, that only a moron could possibly place any faith
in such pro-conspiracy malarkey over and above the logicality of the
Single-Bullet Theory.
Conspiracists do realize that fact...right? (Or do they? I wonder.)
Why do I say such a bold thing about the anti-SBT stance?
Because......
Lacking the SBT, all of this incredible stuff (somehow) must have
occurred in Dallas in '63:
1.) Three different gunmen sprayed Kennedy and Connally with three
bullets in a way to make it seem like the three bullet holes in the
two
victims could be (falsely) "connected" in such a perfect fashion so
that these wounds could be "explained away" as being caused by one
bullet. (The word "remarkable", alone, can't do justice to this type
of
shooting feat. Terms like "phenomenal", "extraordinary", and
"miraculous" should be added here, too. Not to mention "laughable".)
2.) Two bullets go into JFK and never come out again (despite no hard
substances being hit inside Kennedy's neck or back at all). (All the
X-rays are fakes too...right?)
3.) A separate bullet hit John Connally in his back, even though
Kennedy is situated directly between the shooter and Connally. And,
this "separate", unimpeded bullet somehow starts to tumble while in
flight, having hit nothing during its flight to Mr. Connally's back,
causing an elogated, keyhole-shaped wound on the Governor's back.
4.) Bullet CE399 was "planted" by some unidentified conspirator inside
Parkland Hospital prior to 2:00 PM on 11/22/63....a time which is
simply crazy for the plotters to want to plant any bullets. (Because
they could not possibly have known for certain at that time whether or
not the planted missile would turn out to be superfluous.)
5.) All three "real" bullets (which "fake" a nice "SBT" scenario later
on) magically disappear, never entering the record in the murder case,
and are never seen by anyone (other than "plotters", naturally).
6.) The three gunmen who caused the three wounds (wounds that would
later be turned into the "SBT" by the Warren Commission) all fired
their weapons in perfect synchronization to one another, making it
look
beautiful on the Zapruder Film. Because these THREE separate shots ALL
LOOK LIKE JUST ONE HIT on the Z-Film.
A truly amazing job by those three assassins indeed.
And, somehow, per CTers, believing in all of the above nonsense is
supposedly MORE rational, well-thought-out, fact-based, and (above
all)
reasonable than sticking with the known-to-exist evidence of the
Single-Bullet Theory??
If anyone really believes that this "SBT Alternative" is a more
"reasonable" conclusion than the SBT, medical treatment should be
sought asap.
Footnote -- BTW, it was, in truth, actually the autopsy doctors who
sowed the first seeds of the "SBT", not Arlen Specter and the Warren
Commission. The first hint of the SBT is right there in JFK's Official
Autopsy Report, which states, unambiguously, that the same bullet that
went into President Kennedy's back exited from the front of his
throat.
Therefore, via the autopsy doctors, that bullet is now hanging in
mid-air after coming out of JFK's neck. So -- where could it have
gone?
There are only two possible answers to that question:
1.) The bullet went into John B. Connally's body.
-- Or: --
2.) It struck the interior of the automobile without injuring anyone
in
the car (which would, of course, have caused obvious damage to the
vehicle interior).
Number 2 did not occur (per Robert Frazier of the FBI, who examined
the
limo and found no signs of such bullet damage to the back seats).
Therefore, the ONLY possible answer to the mystery is: the bullet went
into the body of Governor Connally.
How is ANY other scenario possible (without having to use the words
"Everything Was Fixed, Faked, And/Or Fabricated By Unknown
Conspirators")?
~~MARK VII~~
David Von Pein
February 2006
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/88cd14ec6de230eb
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bed05a055b2f4133
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/260403d21ac1e084
tomnln
JBC said he was hit between 231-234 Volume IV page 145.
JBC's Dr's said he was hit at Frame 236. Volume IV page 114.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184381282.5...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
So what?
Keep ignoring these clips, Mr. Kook.....
tomnln
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184394361.6...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
You're welcome, Mega-Kook.
And remember...keep ignoring those Z-Film SBT clips. Never, EVER look
at them. They're toxic.
cromwell
>>>> "JBC said he was hit between 231-234. JBC's Dr's said he was hit at
>>>> Frame 236." <<<
Connolly always said the he was hit by a seperate shot after looking over
his left shoulder. The Zapruder shows not attempt to look over his
shoulder, other than the right shoulder, starting at Z-239. On this issue,
I think many of the points that Ron Helper has raised are correct.
http://www.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/18th_Issue/connally.html
A study of Zapruder convinces me that Connolly was hit at Z337, because you
see the blood splash as the bullet enters his back.
>
> So what?
>
> Keep ignoring these clips, Mr. Kook.....
>
> http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/4540.gif
Grinning at the protest of unbrella man perhaps?
>
> http://users.skynet.be/mar/SBT/Images2/225-226%20Full.gif
>
Turning from facing out of right side of the limo to a look forward.
Z228 - Connolly now showing no signs of being hit by a bullet, sat directly
on the jump seat, looking forward.
Z229 - Same posture as Z228. Connolly's right wrist can now been seen and
the Stetson is emerging from the left. Connolly is moving his Stetson
across his body.
Z230 - Same posture as Z228. Connolly's right hand can now clearly be seen
hold the Stetson in front of his body.
Z231- Same posture as Z228. Connolly's right hand is now further to the
right, holding the Stetson, bringing it to his right side.
Z232 - Same posture as Z228. Connolly's right hand slightly lower, holding
the Stetson.
Z233 -Same posture as Z228. Connolly's right hand slightly lower, holding
Stetson.
Z234 -Same posture as Z228. Connolly's right hand slightly lower, holding
Stetson.
Z239 - Connolly begins the turn to look over his right shoulder.
Sorry, your gif's do not prove there was a shot that hit Connolly. The
Warren Commission didn't seem to think so either.
Geoff.
David Von Pein
Connally never, ever said he looked over his "left shoulder". Why are
you telling this false tale?
Connally also stated, in 1967, that the SBT was "possible". Maybe
CTers should read the following article a few times....and then
abandon the silly notion that John B. Connally HIMSELF was steadfastly
against the notion that one bullet could have wounded both he and JFK:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe
>>> "A study of Zapruder convinces me that Connolly [sic] was hit at Z337, because you see the blood splash as the bullet enters his back." <<<
Oh, for God sake. No such thing is visible.
And at Z337??? After the head shot to JFK??
You really meant to say Z237, I assume. Either frame, though, is
absurdly late in the Z-Film chronology.
>>> "Sorry, your gif's do not prove there was a shot that hit Connolly [sic]. The Warren Commission didn't seem to think so either." <<<
As if the WC had toggling gif clips on the computer to work with in
order to evaluate the film, circa 1964. Get real.
BTW, the WC did arrive at the proper RANGE of Z-Film frames for the
SBT (Z210-Z225). Not bad work at all, considering the technology
available to assess such things back in '64.
cromwell
>>>> "Connolly [sic] always said the he was hit by a seperate [sic] shot
>>>> after looking over his left shoulder.
>
> you telling this false tale?
Because I am a flawed human being, who sometimes makes mistakes. You are
correct. Looked at Connolly's testimony to the Warren Commission. He said
he turned to look over his right shoulder. This action can be seen
happening on the Zapruder film beginning at Z239.
"We had just made the turn, well, when I heard what I thought was a shot. I
heard this noise which I immediately took to be a rifle shot. I
instinctively turned to my right because the sound appeared to come from
over my right shoulder, so I turned to look back over my right shoulder, "
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh4/pdf/WH4_JohnConnally.pdf
>
> Connally also stated, in 1967, that the SBT was certainly "possible".
> Maybe CTers should read this a few times and then abandon the silly
> notion that John B. Connally HIMSELF was steadfastly against the
> notion that one bullet wounded both he and JFK:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe
In which Connolly states,
"The only way that I could ever reconcile my memory of what happened
and what occurred, with respect to the One-Bullet Theory is .... it HAD
to be the SECOND bullet that might have hit us both."
Makes sense except when you watch Zapruder. Connolly looks right over his
shoulder and Kennedy is already reacting to shot and has been since emerging
from the Stemmons sign. The shot that hit Kennedy clearly occured BEFORE
Connolly looked over his right shoulder. Watch the film and tell me
different.
>
>
>
>>>> "A study of Zapruder convinces me that Connolly [sic] was hit at Z337,
>>>> because you see the blood splash as the bullet enters his back." <<<
>
> Oh, for God sake. No such thing is visible.
Yes it is. An anomaly appears at Connolly's back at Z337. It appears only
in this frame and is red in colour. I think this is a blood splash. In the
subsequent frames, Connolly rolls over and signs of the wound can be seen.
http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z337.jpg
>
> And Z337??? After the head shot to JFK??
>
> You meant Z237 I presume. Either frame, though, is absurdly late in
> the Z-Film chronology.
Yes Z337(see above), after the head shot to JFK
Only absurd on the basis of an absurd notion - The SBT.
>
>
>>>> "Sorry, your gif's do not prove there was a shot that hit Connolly
>>>> [sic]. The Warren Commission didn't seem to think so either." <<<
>
> As if the WC had toggling gif clips on the computer to work with in
> order to evaluate the film, circa 1964. Get real.
>
> BTW, the WC did arrive at the proper RANGE of Z-Film frames for the
> SBT (Z210-Z225). Not bad work at all, considering the technology
> available to assess such things back in '64.
>
> http://youtube.com/watch?v=Egvc3TYQ9po
>
You get real! The Commission was mystified by Connolly's lack of reaction
during the frames when Kennedy was hit. YOU say there is a reaction. On
this issue I agree with Commissioners McCloy and Dulles
"Mr. DULLES. But, you would have then the problem you would think if
Connally had been hit at the same time, would have reacted in the same way,
and not reacted much later as these pictures show.
Mr. MCCLOY. That is right.
Mr. DULLES. Because the wounds would have been inflicted.
Mr. MCCLOY. That is what puzzles me.
Mr. DULLES. That is what puzzles me."
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh5/pdf/WH5_Shaneyfelt.pdf
The Warren Commission went onto conclude, contrary to your speculations,
that Governor Connolly underwent a delayed reaction.
Geoff.
David Von Pein
Yes, precisely. Which is just what Mr. Connally does starting at Z164
(after hearing Oswald's first shot, a missed shot, which occurred at
approx. Z160). It's the ONLY "right turn" on the film that matches
anything close to JBC's "first-shot right turn" testimony. To think
that his "first-shot right turn" occurred much later is just silly and
totally ignores way more evidence than you think I'm ignoring.
>>> "The shot that hit Kennedy clearly occured [sic] BEFORE Connolly [sic] looked over his right shoulder. Watch the film and tell me different." <<<
Connally definitely does turn completely around to his right and looks
directly at JFK at a certain point on the film. Everyone can obviously
see him doing this. But everyone with a brain can also see quite
clearly that by the time Connally turns to his right to stare directly
at Jack Kennedy, the Governor has ALREADY BEEN HIT BY A BULLET.
Also: Due to the trauma of being hit by Oswald's bullet at Z224, Mr.
Connally (who we can SEE is looking straight at JFK in post-224
frames) said he never even saw JFK at any point after the gunfire
started.
Kinda odd, huh...since we can see JBC looking straight at JFK? But
it's not quite so strange when we factor in the trauma of the bullet
wound Connally has just suffered. He turns and stares at JFK, but he
later can't remember doing so at all.*
* = Much the same way that Jackie could never remember climbing onto
the trunk of the limousine following the head shot to her husband. It
was blocked out of her memory due to other horrific things happening
to her at that precise moment.
The same explanation (i.e., a spotty memory) can no doubt also be
applied to John Connally's right turn and his looking directly at the
President after being struck at Z224, but afterward not remembering it
happened.
Also -- Connally's own testimony tells us that he shouted "No, no, no"
only AFTER he was hit by a bullet. We can see JBC forming the word
"No" on the Z-Film just after he was hit at Z224. And keep in mind
that nobody in the limo recalls the Governor saying ANYTHING ELSE at
all after the shooting started...except "Oh, no, no, no" and "My God,
they're going to kill us all".
And Connally is obviously moving his lips and forming WORDS just after
being hit at Z224. How do you explain this major problem in your
shooting timeline, Geoff?
BTW, if you start spelling Connally's name correctly, it might improve
your posts. Continually misspelling a person's name (even after being
corrected, which I did with my "sic" insertions previously) is just
plain rude (IMO).
>>> "The Warren Commission went onto conclude, contrary to your speculations, that Governor Connolly [sic] underwent a delayed reaction." <<<
And they ALSO said that the Governor and the President were probably
hit by one bullet between Z-Film frames 210 and 225. And that range
includes the actual SBT frame (Z224). (IMO, that is.)
>>> "An anomaly appears at Connolly's [sic] back at Z337. It appears only in this frame and is red in colour. I think this is a blood splash." <<<
Yes, I've seen it too. And, yes, it's probably blood coming from
Connally's back wound that he sustained at Z224. But so what?
You actually believe Connally was struck after the JFK head shot??
Are you sure your name isn't Gary Myers? I had many arguments with
that Lancer member years ago about this very same insane theory of
Connally not being hit at all until well after Z313 (including the
discussion linked below):
You might also consider this -- If Connally's "They're going to kill
us all" statement IS, in fact, what we're seeing him say as his mouth
is moving on the Z-Film before he collapses (which I believe is ALL
that was said in the limo after the shots, along with Connally's
initial "No, no, no" remark) -- then doesn't THAT fact alone indicate
Connally had been shot well before the head shot?
I.E.: WHY would Connally make this kind of personal statement
(including the words "us all") if someone OTHER than JFK hadn't
already been hit?
I never could convince Gary that such a "Connally Was Shot After Z313"
theory is just plain ridiculous and totally ignores these frames of
the Zapruder Film (below), which are frames depicting Governor
Connally in obvious distress from having just been shot in the
back.....
http://users.skynet.be/mar/SBT/Images2/222-262%20full-small.gif
tomnln
Tell us WHY officer Baker LIED.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184394991.9...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm (top of the page)
JBC's Original Report.
BUSTED AGAIN DAVID
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184413478.3...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
>>>> "Connolly [sic] always said the he was hit by a seperate [sic] shot
>>>> after looking over his left shoulder.
>
> Connally never, ever said he looked over his "left shoulder". Why are
> you telling this false tale?
>
> Connally also stated, in 1967, that the SBT was certainly "possible".
> Maybe CTers should read this a few times and then abandon the silly
> notion that John B. Connally HIMSELF was steadfastly against the
> notion that one bullet wounded both he and JFK:
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe
>
>
>
>>>> "A study of Zapruder convinces me that Connolly [sic] was hit at Z337,
>>>> because you see the blood splash as the bullet enters his back." <<<
>
> Oh, for God sake. No such thing is visible.
>
> And Z337??? After the head shot to JFK??
>
> You meant Z237 I presume. Either frame, though, is absurdly late in
> the Z-Film chronology.
>
>
>>>> "Sorry, your gif's do not prove there was a shot that hit Connolly
tomnln
http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm
JBC's "Original Report"
After the first shot he saw JFK "Slumped".
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184413921....@n2g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
JBC's Original Report to Martin Agronsky.
From his hospital bed.
Long before his WC appearance.
"cromwell" <ste...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:yM2dnV9t3ec...@bt.com...
tomnln
Long before his WC appearance.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184466499.0...@m3g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
President "slump". He obviously got the "slumped" business from
Nellie, and it came out as his own version on TV with Agronsky.
By all accounts, JBC never even SAW Kennedy during the shooting. Never
once. JBC never, ever wavered on this key point. So how could he SEE
him "slump".
JBC was clearly combining his OWN words with those of his wife in the
bedside interview. Nellie pounded her thoughts into JBC's head...and
he didn't want to contradict her. But he did do just that (in a
fashion), in 1967.....
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe
But, naturally, CT-Kooks who WANT Connally hit by a different bullet
will ignore the words "That's possible" (spoken by Connally on TV in
'67 re. the SBT) until the cows come home.
cromwell
>>>> "[Connally said:] "We had just made the turn when I heard what I
>>>> thought was a shot. ... I instinctively turned to my right because the
>>>> sound appeared to come from over my right shoulder, so I turned to
>>>> look back over my right shoulder"." <<<
>
>
> Yes, precisely. Which is just what Mr. Connally does starting at Z164
> (after hearing Oswald's first shot, a missed shot, which occurred at
> approx. Z160). It's the ONLY "right turn" on the film that matches
> anything close to JBC's "first-shot right turn" testimony. To think
> that his "first-shot right turn" occurred much later is just silly and
> totally ignores way more evidence than you think I'm ignoring.
Well I have a copy of the MPI version of the Zapruder movie and I see
nothing in it to indicate shots at this early stage. I'm not denying that
the shooting started at this point, it may have done. But the Zapruder film
is not overly useful in discerning this. At for Connally, a careful
examination shows, that at no point from Z164, does he attempt to look right
over his shoulder. At the very most, through frames Z161 to Z165, Connally
looks from the crowd to his left to his right and maintains this posture
until the limo disappears behind the Stemmons sign. None of the occupants
show any signs of being unduely concerned about shoots. Groden and the HSCA
made some observations about Kennedy reacting to shoots through Z190. I
think this is nonsense also.
There is a further problem with your analysis. If Connally's testimony
dovetails with movements associated with Z164, why in the Warren Commission
analysis of Zapruder, did they only prepare slides from Z171 (CE 885)? The
testimony surrounding these slides, was very clear. When asked about
Kennedy prior to Z210, Shaneyfelt said,
"Mr. SHANEYFELT. He is waving to the crowd, and in some frames it is
obvious 'that he is smiling, you can actually see a happy expression on his
face and his hand-
Mr. DULLES. Which way is he turning, to the left or to the right?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. He is looking toward the crowd to his right during most of
that area, he is looking slightly to his right. His arm is up on the side of
the car and his hand is in a wave, in approximately this position and he
appears to be smiling.
Mr. SPECTOR. What is the latest frame count where, to your eye, it appears
that he is showing no reaction to any possible shot?
Mr. SHANEYFELT. Approximately-1 would like to explain a little bit, that at
frames in the vicinity of 206 to 210 he is obviously still waving, and there
is no marked change. In the area from approximately 200 to 203 he is still,
his hand is still in a
waving posit.ion, 'he is still turned slightly toward the crowd, and there
has been no change in his position that would signify anything occurring
unusual. I see nothing in the frames to arouse my suspicion about his
movements.."
The Commission was interested in Connolly's right turn but this had nothing
to do with Z164. As I have already noted, NO SLIDE WAS PREPARED FOR THIS
FRAME. All of the Commissions deliberations pertaining to Connolly turning
right, pertain to his actions in slides 212-334. In fact, Senator Cooper
directly asks the question, " Would you identify the frame in which Governor
Connally started turning to the right?" to which Shaneyfelt replied,
"Mr. SHANEYFELT. I might say that as-in the motion picture-as the car comes
out from behind the signboard, the Governor is turned slightly to his right
in this manner. This would be in the first frame, in frame 222, he is turned
just slightly to his right, and from there on he turns almost square,
straight on
with the car momentarily, and there is a jerking motion there at one point
in the film about there, at which time he starts to turn this way and
continues to turn."
There are further interventions and the testimony drifts into areas.
Senator Cooper brings it back,
"Senator COOPER. Will you again answer my question which I asked and hasn't
been answered and I say with all respect. in what frame did Governor
Connally begin to turn to the right after he had placed his position
straightforward as you have testified.
Mr. SHANEYFELT. I am sorry. That starts approximately at frames 233 to 234."
http://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh5/pdf/WH5_Shaneyfelt.pdf
There you have it. The Commission associated the right turn, that Connally
refers to in his testimony at frames Z233-234, not Z164, in which they were
not even interested enough to prepare a slide!
>
>
>>>> "The shot that hit Kennedy clearly occured [sic] BEFORE Connolly [sic]
>>>> looked over his right shoulder. Watch the film and tell me different."
>>>> <<<
>
>
> Connally definitely does turn completely around to his right and looks
> directly at JFK at a certain point on the film. Everyone can obviously
> see him doing this. But everyone with a brain can also see quite
> clearly that by the time Connally turns to his right to stare directly
> at Jack Kennedy, the Governor has ALREADY BEEN HIT BY A BULLET.
No he doesn't, not at Frame Z164 and the Warren Commission didn't think so
either, so we can count Cooper and Shaneyfelt, amongst other Commissioners
as brainless!
It is clear that Connally has been hit by a bullet when he turns to look at
the President?! Just exactly what is your notion of clear? During these
frames, Connally's chest and white shirt can 'clearly' be seen. Doesn't it
trouble you that there is not one single speck of blood?! During these
frames, Connally's upper wrist can clearly be seen. Doesn't it trouble you
that there is ABSOLUTELY no sign of any wound at all?! During these frames,
Connally said and he can be seen crying out. Doesn't it trouble you that a
sucking wound of the chest, would have made it difficult for Connally to
breath let alone shout out?! All the Zapruder film shows is Connally
terrified. Connally was not hit.
<snip>nonsensical speculation.
>
> BTW, if you start spelling Connally's name correctly, it might improve
> your posts. Continually misspelling a person's name (even after being
> corrected, which I did with my "sic" insertions previously) is just
> plain rude (IMO).
Couldn't care less about spelling. This is a NG about the JFK conspiracy,
not English grammar. Get lost.
>
>
>
>>>> "The Warren Commission went onto conclude, contrary to your
>>>> speculations, that Governor Connolly [sic] underwent a delayed
>>>> reaction." <<<
>
>
> And they ALSO said that the Governor and the President were probably
> hit by one bullet between Z-Film frames 210 and 225. And that range
> includes the actual SBT frame (Z224). (IMO, that is.)
But you are trying to tell us that a reaction can be seen in Zapruder at
this early stage. THE WARREN COMMISSION DID NOT COME UP WITH SUCH A
FINDING, HENCE THE DELAYED REACTION.
>>>> "An anomaly appears at Connolly's [sic] back at Z337. It appears only
>>>> in this frame and is red in colour. I think this is a blood splash."
>>>> <<<
>
> Yes, I've seen it too. And, yes, it's probably blood coming from
> Connally's back wound that he sustained at Z224. But so what?
>
And what did you post when I first raised this,
> Oh, for God sake. No such thing is visible.
Please use your brain. You have said that this IS probably blood coming
from Connally's wound. But how an earth would blood leaking from a wound be
so apparent on the Zapruder film and why in only one frame. BECAUSE IT HAS
THE APPEARANCE OF A BLOOD SPLASH. Such a thing can be caused by one one
thing - THE ENTRY OF A BULLET.
<snip>irrelevant stuff
Geoff.
David Von Pein
WTF?
So the blood can ONLY be visible at the precise moment of impact (or
very close to it)??
Weird theorizing here. And dead-wrong, of course.
No reasonable person who has studied the Z-Film, coupled with
Connally's testimony, coupled with the WC and HSCA analysis of the
whole event, can possibly believe in such a crackpot theory that has
Connally shot AFTER the head shot to Kennedy. And you're just plain
cuckoo if you truly think JBC was shot at such a time.
David Von Pein
Doesn't it trouble you that GOV. CONNALLY HIMSELF said he was shouting
his statements only AFTER he was hit?
And doesn't it trouble you that the very words he was shouting
indicate
that Connally himself had been hit prior to shouting them -- i.e., "My
God, they're going to kill us all!"
Why would he shout "us all" if a person other than JFK (namely John
Bowden Connally Jr.) had not also been hit by a bullet by that time?
Gov. Connally (paraphrased): "Beyond any doubt, the first shot did not
hit me....then I was hit....and beyond any doubt the third shot did
not hit me."
Connally also always stated that he felt the effects of the head shot
to JFK (i.e., he and Nellie being showered with blood & brain tissue)
only AFTER JBC himself was hit.
cromwell
>>>> "You have said that this IS probably blood coming from Connally's
>>>> wound. But how an earth would blood leaking from a wound be so
>>>> apparent on the Zapruder film and why in only one frame. BECAUSE IT HAS
>>>> THE APPEARANCE OF A BLOOD SPLASH. Such a thing can be caused by one
>>>> one thing - THE ENTRY OF A BULLET." <<<
>
>
> So the blood can ONLY be visible at the precise moment of impact (or
> very close to it)??
>
> Weird theorizing here. And dead-wrong, of course.
It appears in one frame -Z337 - which means it was an event of duration less
than 18th of a second - a splash. Simple.
>
> No reasonable person who has stuidied the Z-Film, coupled with
> Connally's testimony, coupled with the WC and HSCA analysis of the
> whole event, can possibly believe in such a crackpot theory that has
> Connally shot AFTER the head shot to Kennedy. And you're just plain
> cuckoo if you truly think JBC was shot at such a time.
>
You're a bit of a joke mate. Lots of waffle about Z164 when there is
nothing to see, a conclusion backed by the Warren Commission and you post
about reasonable people. Yet you very reasonably describe your opponents as
brainless and plain cuckoo. Down with crackpot theories you exclaim, but
you have absolutely no difficulty clinging to the SBT, which defies both the
evidence and the elementary rule of parsimony. As I see it, you are the
one who have abandoned your rational faculties, in your blind pursuit of
Oswald as the lone gunman.
As I observe it, Governor Connally was wounded after his right turn, after
he sank(or was pulled)into his wifes lap, and after JFK's fatal head wound.
If that underminds your precious SBT -tough!
Geoff.
David Von Pein
A bigger joke than you and your nutty JBC theory, you mean?
Nah...that's not possible.
>>> "You have absolutely no difficulty clinging to the SBT, which defies both the evidence and the elementary rule of parsimony." <<<
The SBT defies no rules of evidence or any other rules for that matter
of any kind. But ALL anti-SBT theories defy many, many rules -- such
as: rules of logic, common sense, physics, ballistics...you name it.
Disappearing bullets...weird suddenly-stopping bullets in JFK's
neck...alignment on 2 men that is perfectly "SBT"-like. Elongated
wound on JBC's back that also matches the SBT scenario. And virtually
no lead fragments of any size found in either victim...which would be
absolutely incredible if MULTIPLE missiles had pierced and travelled
through TWO mens' bodies that day.
Yeah...those anti-SBT theories are the way to go alright. (If you're a
nutcase with no common sense, that is.)
>>> "As I observe it, Governor Connally was wounded after his right turn, after he sank (or was pulled) into his wife's lap, and after JFK's fatal head wound. If that underminds [sic] your precious SBT -tough!" <<<
Somehow I think the SBT will still stand erect even though "Geoff the
Z337 Kook" thinks otherwise.
Based on the official evidence in the John F. Kennedy murder case, all
of the following things are true:
1.) President John F. Kennedy and Texas Governor John B. Connally were
shot by rifle bullets in Dallas' Dealey Plaza on Friday, November 22,
1963.
2.) Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano rifle (Serial Number C2766)
was located inside a building which overlooked the assassination site
(the Texas School Book Depository) when JFK and JBC were being wounded
by gunfire.
3.) A nearly-whole bullet (Warren Commission Exhibit #399) was found
inside the hospital where JFK and JBC were taken after the shooting.
And CE399 was found in a location within the hospital where President
Kennedy was never located prior to the bullet being found by Darrell
Tomlinson. (Nor was JFK's stretcher ever in the area of the hospital
where Tomlinson discovered the bullet.)
4.) Bullet CE399 was positively fired from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle.
5.) Bullet CE399, based on the above points in total, HAD to have been
inside Governor Connally's body on 11/22/63.
6.) A man who looked like Lee Harvey Oswald was seen firing a rifle at
the President's limousine from a southeast corner window on the 6th
Floor of the Book Depository Building. No other gunmen were seen
firing any weapons in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd.
7.) No bullets (or large bullet fragments) were found in the upper
back or neck of John Kennedy's body. And no significant damage was
found inside these areas of JFK's body either.
8.) No bullets (or large bullet fragments) were found inside the body
of Governor Connally after the shooting. The only bullet, anywhere,
that can possibly be connected with Connally's wounds is Bullet CE399.
9.) Given the point in time when both JFK and JBC were first hit by
rifle fire (based on the Abraham Zapruder Film), and given the known
location of Governor Connally's back (entrance) wound, and also taking
into account the individual points made above -- Bullet CE399 had no
choice but to have gone through the body of President Kennedy prior to
entering the back of John B. Connally.
===========================
#1 through #9 above add up to a logical, common-sense short
explanation to the events in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd, 1963
(excluding the head shot that killed President Kennedy).
The nine points above, in my common-sense view, make the Single-Bullet
Theory more than just a "theory" -- it's almost certainly the only
conceivable way that President John F. Kennedy and Texas Governor John
Connally were wounded on Elm Street in Dallas in 1963.
Any alternative theory that must replace the SBT would be a theory
that is replete with far more guesswork and unexplainable occurrences
than the Single-Bullet Theory possesses.
Such an alternative theory must include multiple disappearing bullets,
plus several "SBT"-like coincidences at the same time. Is that very
likely? Or logical? I say it is not.
The Single-Bullet Theory is based on the EVIDENCE in the actual John
F. Kennedy murder case, as investigated by the Commission assigned to
look into the assassination by President Lyndon Johnson.
And the SBT, in addition to being grounded in the known evidence
surrounding the case, is also based on a whole lot of regular,
ordinary common sense as well.
No "Anti-SBT" scenario has ever come close to matching the Warren
Commission's Single-Bullet Conclusion in the "Evidence" department.
Nor has any alternate theory come close to equalling the SBT in the
"Reasonable", "Workable", "Believable", and "Common Sense" categories
as well.
The Single-Bullet Theory FITS.
The Single-Bullet Theory WORKS.
The Single-Bullet Theory is RIGHT.
==========================
"Several factors make it clear that Kennedy and Connally WERE struck
by the same bullet. There's absolutely no evidence of the existence of
any separate bullet hitting Connally." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi; 1986
~~~~~~~~~~
"It's a straight line....it {the SBT} is the only way it COULD have
happened." -- Dale K. Myers; 2004
~~~~~~~~~~
"You call it the theory; I call it the conclusion; it was a theory
until we found the facts; that's why I refer to it as the Single-
Bullet Conclusion." -- Arlen Specter; 1965
cromwell
> Doesn't it trouble you that there is ABSOLUTELY no sign of any wound
> at all?! During these frames, Connally said and he can be seen crying
> out. Doesn't it trouble you that a sucking wound of the chest, would
> have made it difficult for Connally to breath let alone shout out?!"
> <<<
>
> his statements only AFTER he was hit?
>
> that Connally himself had been hit prior to shouting them -- i.e., "My
> God, they're going to kill us all!"
>
> Why would he shout "us all" if a person other than JFK (namely John
>
Don't you get it! Connally COULD NOT have been shouting AFTER he was hit.
Shaw said that the wound through his chest WAS A SUCKING WOUND.
"An extremely unpleasant way to die, a sucking chest wound is caused by a
penetrating injury to the chest which causes the lung (or lungs if you're
particularly unlucky) to collapse and prevents proper respiration.
Someone suffering from a sucking chest wound will gasp for breath, have
difficulty breathing out, and may have a bluish or grayish colour to his
face. The damaged area may or may not make a sucking noise (hence the name)
and bubble frothy blood from the wound."
http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1368953
An open pneumothorax occurs when there is a pneumothorax associated with a
chest wall defect, such that the pneumothorax communicates with the
exterior.
Pathophysiology
During inspiration, when a negative intra-thoracic pressure is generated,
air is entrained into the chest cavity not through the trachea but through
the hole in the chest wall. This is because the chest wall defect is much
shorter than the trachea, and hence provides less resistance to flow. Once
the size of the hole is more than 0.75 times the size of the trachea, air
preferentially enters through the thoracic cavity.
This results in inadequate oxygenation and ventilation, and a progressive
build-up of air in the pleural space. The pneumothorax may tension if a flap
has been created that allows air in, but not out.
Diagnosis
Diagnosis should be made clinically during the primary survey. A wound in
the chest wall is identified that appears to be 'sucking air' into the chest
and may be visibly bubbling - this is diagnostic.
Breathing is rapid, shallow and laboured. There is reduced expansion of the
hemithorax, accompanied by reduced breath sounds and an increased percussion
note. One or all of these signs may not be appreciated in the noisy trauma
room.
http://www.trauma.org/archive/thoracic/CHESTopen.html
It would have been just about possible for Connally to breath. His claim
that he shouted out 'My God, they're going to kill us all' is very good
evidence that he wasn't wounded at this point. During these frames, as
Connally falls(or is pulled)into his wifes lap, his jacket front and white
shirt can be clearly seen. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO SIGN OF ANY BLOOD.
During these frames, Connally's wrist can be clearly seen, holding the
Stetson. THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO SIGN OF ANY BLOOD OR THE WOUND.
If Connally claimed that he spoke his words AFTER he was wounded, he was in
error a)because this is not medically possible b)there is no evidence of his
wounding during these frames in Zapruder.
Geoff.
David Von Pein
And yet we know he did. Why don't you even believe the victim himself
in this critical regard?
BTW, a lung doesn't collapse immediately. It takes a little bit of
time. Why in the world you think JBC would have been rendered
completely mute immediately after being shot is a head-scratcher.
David Von Pein
And yet almost 100% of all people who have ever studied this case
disagree with you....including every single official panel that's ever
investigated the case.
It must be lonely on that Z337 limb, huh? (Esp. a limb so shaky.)
lazu...@webtv.net
they're going to kill us all." For obvious reasons, he would not have
uttered such after hearing only one report. If the second shot allegedly
struck him via the SBT, he wouldn't have heard it, because he was
already hit, and he wouldn't be able to cry out anyway due to his wound,
a "sucking wound" of the chest. Also, if he did cry out the above at
this time, he would have to have known that JFK had been hit by the
first shot, and according to the official story, the first shot missed
everything except the street.
He would not have said "us all", unless he heard at least two shots. If
he was sure JFK had been struck, as he so testified, and he turned to
attempt to see him, then the second shot, which allegedly struck JFK,
could not have been the same bullet which struck him in the back. The
SBT is an invalid explanation of the Connally wounding, as he himself so
claimed. Separate shots hit both men.-----Old Laz
aeffects
> "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote in messagenews:1184509216....@g4g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Mr. Von Pein will be soliciting the folks at .john's any moment now.
Perhaps Rosemary (Bugliosi's secretary) can give him a referral for
assistance....
aeffects
> >>> "You're a bit of a joke mate." <<<
>
> A bigger joke than you and your nutty JBC theory, you mean?
> Nah...that's not possible.
[...]
>
> "It's a straight line....it {the SBT} is the only way it COULD have
> happened." -- Dale K. Myers; 2004
Lest we forget, Dale Myers: "not Single Bullet Theory - Single Bullet
FACT"
LMFAO!
[...]
tomnln
There's the transcript of JBC's FIRST interview.
Read his own words that JFK "Slumped" after the first shot.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184476799.1...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
SEE Above;
JBC's own words from his Original Statement.
"cromwell" <ste...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:FcydnfvShJMvmQfb...@bt.com...
tomnln
Volume IV page 114>>> JBC's Dr., Dr. Shaw, said JBC was hit at Frame 236.
And, Don't forget THIS one>>> http://whokilledjfk.net/you_asked_for_it.htm
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184508535.3...@w3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>>>> "You have said that this IS probably blood coming from Connally's
>>>> wound. But how an earth would blood leaking from a wound be so
>>>> apparent on the Zapruder film and why in only one frame. BECAUSE IT HAS
>>>> THE APPEARANCE OF A BLOOD SPLASH. Such a thing can be caused by one
>>>> one thing - THE ENTRY OF A BULLET." <<<
>
> WTF?
>
> So the blood can ONLY be visible at the precise moment of impact (or
> very close to it)??
>
> Weird theorizing here. And dead-wrong, of course.
>
tomnln
"aeffects" <aeff...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1184520500....@j4g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
Over 90% of Americans believe in Conspiracy.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184513514.4...@k79g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
David Von Pein
I've seen the transcript. But I don't need the transcript...I've got
the interview on tape, so I can see and hear Connally saying......
"The President had slumped..."
Connally never said "I saw the President slump". JBC, as mentioned a
million times for the CTers to ignore, always maintained he NEVER SAW
JFK DURING THE TIME OF THE SHOOTING.
So, in essence, JBC was really the worst eyewitness to JFK's wounding
in DP...because he never saw anything re. JFK's injuries.
Connally's "slumped" remark must have, therefore, come via a second
source...probably Nellie, of course.
David Von Pein
Great. Now it's up to "over 90%". LOL.
By tomorrow, 125% of America will believe in conspiracy, per the
Nutsacks of the world.
David Von Pein
Huh?? Why would this matter?
Most logically, of course, he wouldn't have used the words "us all"
unless a person other than the person the assassin was aiming at (JFK)
had been hit by a bullet.....with that other person, of course, being
the man who said "us all"--John Connally.
>>> "The SBT is an invalid explanation of the Connally wounding, as he himself so claimed. Separate shots hit both men." <<<
Where's the other 1 or 2 bullets then? If a bullet went through JFK,
where did it go, if not into Connally? Where?
And the other anti-SBT option is more absurd (fifty times more absurd
in fact) -- i.e., TWO bullets go into Kennedy but never come out the
other side, leave no damage in his body, and (naturally) both missiles
vanish.
Great theory there.
The SBT is a fact. Live with it, or keep wondering why there are no
other bullets that can be "connected" to those 7 wounds in the two
victims.
===============================================
WHERE IS THE LOGICAL CTer ALTERNATIVE TO THE SBT?:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8ee3ea6cfa4a58c9
===============================================
tomnln
Point out in that transcript where JBC said "Nellie told me so"?
You're STILL a Felon Supporter David.
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184561444.8...@22g2000hsm.googlegroups.com...
tomnln
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1kb2mUdCZG8&mode=related&search
"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1184561515.9...@r34g2000hsd.googlegroups.com...
MSwanberg
I am a good and loyal Texan... so you know what's being said when I
say this.
Sounds to me like Connally doesn't know his ass from a hole in the
ground. His story changes. And it looks like he doesn't know what he
saw from what his wife told him he saw. Or maybe what she saw.
I think we can safely dismiss all of Connally's words and just pretend
the event rendered him comatose.
-Mike