Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Evolution of the Single Bullet Theory
352 views
Skip to first unread message
bigdog
Jun 20, 2019, 10:13:07 PM6/20/19
to
With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
they could not be certain that the fragments found in the limo came from
one bullet, given the amount of material recovered, that seems probable.
Perhaps they were thrown off by the existence of three spent shells
indicating there were three shots. But with only two recovered bullets, it
seems unlikely that a bullet fired from the TSBD into either victim would
not have remained inside the limo somewhere.
It is my understanding that the SBT began to dawn on the WC staff lawyers
after looking at the Z-film and realizing that the reactions of JFK and
JBC to being shot came to close together to have come separate shots from
a bolt action rifle and the SS recreations in Dealey Plaza showed that JFK
and JBC were in perfect alignment at the time JFK was first hit.
Does anyone have any more definitive information as to when and why the
SBT was first raised as a possible scenario? I am primarily interested in
when the idea first came to the staff and who first raised it. I know the
SBT has often been attributed to Arlen Specter but my readings tell me it
was more of a collaborative effort.
considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
they could not be certain that the fragments found in the limo came from
one bullet, given the amount of material recovered, that seems probable.
Perhaps they were thrown off by the existence of three spent shells
indicating there were three shots. But with only two recovered bullets, it
seems unlikely that a bullet fired from the TSBD into either victim would
not have remained inside the limo somewhere.
It is my understanding that the SBT began to dawn on the WC staff lawyers
after looking at the Z-film and realizing that the reactions of JFK and
JBC to being shot came to close together to have come separate shots from
a bolt action rifle and the SS recreations in Dealey Plaza showed that JFK
and JBC were in perfect alignment at the time JFK was first hit.
Does anyone have any more definitive information as to when and why the
SBT was first raised as a possible scenario? I am primarily interested in
when the idea first came to the staff and who first raised it. I know the
SBT has often been attributed to Arlen Specter but my readings tell me it
was more of a collaborative effort.
David Von Pein
Jun 21, 2019, 8:54:49 PM6/21/19
to
Anthony Marsh
Jun 21, 2019, 9:06:12 PM6/21/19
to
On 6/20/2019 10:13 PM, bigdog wrote:
> With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
> considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
> and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
That is NOT true. They only recovered 1 whole bullet and several
> With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
> considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
> and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
fragments. Their original working theory was that JFK was hit first in the
back, then Connally was hit in the bcack then JFK was hit in the head. If
they had published that instead of their SBT you would be defending it and
attacking anyone who said there was a miss.
> they could not be certain that the fragments found in the limo came from
> one bullet, given the amount of material recovered, that seems probable.
> Perhaps they were thrown off by the existence of three spent shells
> indicating there were three shots. But with only two recovered bullets, it
> seems unlikely that a bullet fired from the TSBD into either victim would
> not have remained inside the limo somewhere.
>
shots, especially the 3 men only 10 feet below the gun.
> It is my understanding that the SBT began to dawn on the WC staff lawyers
> after looking at the Z-film and realizing that the reactions of JFK and
> JBC to being shot came to close together to have come separate shots from
> a bolt action rifle and the SS recreations in Dealey Plaza showed that JFK
> and JBC were in perfect alignment at the time JFK was first hit.
>
have been hit after frame 241. But no one was foolish enough to claim
that JFK was hit before he went behind the sign. Then the shooting tests
suggested that it the shooter could not get off 2 shots betweem 210 and
241.
> Does anyone have any more definitive information as to when and why the
> SBT was first raised as a possible scenario? I am primarily interested in
> when the idea first came to the staff and who first raised it. I know the
> SBT has often been attributed to Arlen Specter but my readings tell me it
> was more of a collaborative effort.
>
But I believe that there were some witnesses and pundits who suggested
it was possible that weekend. With Connally sitting to the left of JFK,
it seems impossible for him to get hit by a bullet which misses JFK.
Ramon F Herrera
Jun 22, 2019, 8:32:32 PM6/22/19
to
Do you trust ANY of the Eleven Studies of the shooting?
It is only now, and in this forum, that somebody has had the eyes open
(and the mouth closed), since the first modern, pretending to be science
study in 1992.
Correct?
Millions were watching an nobody saw anything. If they did, nobody said
anything.
Right?
Why exactly do you trust any of the studies, when they have made
fraudulent claims, EVERY one of them?
Would you trust anything done from now on by a university(ies) of your
choice? The availability of extremely precise laser measurements has
expanded dramatically. Price down, quality up.
Do you think that in addition to the JFK aficionados -fanatics who will
not move an inch- it is important that other millions of people see, for
the first time a study based on SCIENCE?
David: You have stated that you support the best universities entering
the case, for the first time since the tragedy. Which university would
you entrust with leading the work on this? What kind of support do you
offer in addition to "you don't need my permission"?
-Ramon
JFK Numbers
================================
See below the Eleven Fraudulent Studies, 8 LN and 3 CT. They all LIED,
among other things by making up the limo dimension/location/speed to the
convenience of their preordained results.
This is one of the best examples:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mkXKLwho48s
(not to mention Dale "I will bring the contents of my hard disk to my
grave" Myers, aka The Egyptian Pharaoh)
The Infamous Eleven lied and we (well, not me personally) swallowed
their claims like Linda Lovelace.
=======================================
(1) 1992, "ABA Mock Trial of Lee Harvey Oswald", Sponsor: American Bar
Association, Engineering: Spectus Technologies and Failure Analysis.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoTuApu0QvQ&t=8s
(2) 1993, "Case Closed", Author: Gerald Posner, Sq.
http://www.jfknumbers.org/~ramon/jfk/The-Miraculous-Bullet.png
(3) 1998, "The Secret KGB JFK Assassination Files", Sponsor: Associated
Television International, Implementation: Anthony Larry Paul, Heinz
Thummel, Certification: None.
[Shooting Study]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5JDhi4URds
[Full Video]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VJV4xMKEaM
(4) 2003, "The Kennedy Assassination - Beyond Conspiracy", Sponsor: ABC,
Implementation: Dale Myers, Certifying Company: Known to Exist. Unable
to locate.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSBXW1-VGmM
(5) 2008, "Inside the Target Car", Sponsor: Gary Mack/The Sixth Floor
Museum, Implementation: Michael Yardley, Adelaide T&E Systems (Military
Contractor). Certified by: None
[Shooting Only - Part 1]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6RU0pEGchfY
[Shooting Only - Part 2]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Syp_OulWRzw
[Full Video]
https://mega.nz/#!4TJBXKDY!L83yFpJXDUUDj8MnHqyytZkVU15XTmd8Xf0Jq6cSK6A
(6) 2011, "JFK: The Lost Bullet", Sponsor: National Geographic,
Implementation: Max Holland, Larry Sturdivan. Certification: Max Holland.
https://mega.nz/#!ZOQmQACJ!toW3b7h0GuehFoNR44n-5WvlTJvwuU4VSdiaYHlzSSw
(7) 2013, "JFK: The Smoking Gun", Sponsor: Discovery Channel,
Implementation: Colin McLaren and Bonar Menninger, Certifying Persons:
Colin McLaren and Bonar Menninger.
https://mega.nz/#!5f4i0CqK!g8sinhSSleMn0UsdRX5Xc7pFUPC_ebaW1KJgq-1YD6U
(8) 2013, "JFK Assassination: The Definitive Guide". Sponsor: History
Channel, Implementation: Professor Tom Stone, Dallas, Certifying Person:
Tom Stone.
[Model Only]
https://mega.nz/#!UHJHQSaC!u-Apl52YfOil_6yuN1CmHTpIlN9deC9UpWvLrKlweVA
[Full Video]
https://mega.nz/#!tOAFHI5D!KSd-pqoUJROJ5Jc_kl2s_kGdx_qoj6BDMnR4H30e02Q
(9) 2013, "PBS Nova - Cold Case JFK", Sponsor: PBS, Engineering: Leica
Geosystems and Scientific Analysis. Certifying Authorities: Luke and
Mike Haag.
[Model Only]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XWW2G3rSWM
[Full Program]
https://mega.nz/#!kORxiI4D!ry5ZJZQ3DAMYX_iqld8Oxd2Zuik-2KMood0FyoWnzgM
(10) 2018, Orr-Schnapft Model, Sponsor: John Orr, Engineering: Knott
Lab, Certifying Company: Knott Lab.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bH_r1uDCa88&t=137s
(11) 2018, Knott Labs Model, Engineering: Angelos Leiloglou, Certifying
Company: Knott Lab.
https://knottlab.com/news/angelos-leiloglou-interviewed-about-jfk-assassination-and-single-bullet-theory
https://knottlab.com/team/angelos-leiloglou
(12) JFK Numbers. In progress. Sponsor: Ramon F Herrera, Engineering,
Ramon F. Herrera. Certification: You.
http://www.dealey-plaza.org/this-government-as-promised
bigdog
Jun 22, 2019, 8:38:14 PM6/22/19
to
On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 9:06:12 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 6/20/2019 10:13 PM, bigdog wrote:
> > With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
> > considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
> > and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
>
> That is NOT true. They only recovered 1 whole bullet and several
> fragments. Their original working theory was that JFK was hit first in the
> back, then Connally was hit in the bcack then JFK was hit in the head. If
> they had published that instead of their SBT you would be defending it and
> attacking anyone who said there was a miss.
>
I would support any finding that is supported by evidence. The SBT is. The
> On 6/20/2019 10:13 PM, bigdog wrote:
> > With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
> > considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
> > and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
>
> That is NOT true. They only recovered 1 whole bullet and several
> fragments. Their original working theory was that JFK was hit first in the
> back, then Connally was hit in the bcack then JFK was hit in the head. If
> they had published that instead of their SBT you would be defending it and
> attacking anyone who said there was a miss.
>
three hit scenario is not.
> > they could not be certain that the fragments found in the limo came from
> > one bullet, given the amount of material recovered, that seems probable.
>
> More than just probable. Likely.
>
prob·a·ble
[ˈpräbəb(ə)l]
ADJECTIVE
likely to be the case or to happen.
"it is probable that the economic situation will deteriorate further" · [more]
synonyms
likely · most likely · odds-on · expected · to be expected · anticipated · predictable · foreseeable · ten to one · presumed · potential · credible · quite possible · possible · feasible · [more]
> > Perhaps they were thrown off by the existence of three spent shells
> > indicating there were three shots. But with only two recovered bullets, it
> > seems unlikely that a bullet fired from the TSBD into either victim would
> > not have remained inside the limo somewhere.
> >
>
> Perhaps they were influenced by all the witesses who said they heard 3
> shots, especially the 3 men only 10 feet below the gun.
>
hit twice and JBC once, at first that seemed to fit nicely with the three
separate hit scenario. Closer examination told them that wasn't the case.
> > It is my understanding that the SBT began to dawn on the WC staff lawyers
> > after looking at the Z-film and realizing that the reactions of JFK and
> > JBC to being shot came to close together to have come separate shots from
> > a bolt action rifle and the SS recreations in Dealey Plaza showed that JFK
> > and JBC were in perfect alignment at the time JFK was first hit.
> >
>
> That was part of it, plus the doctors who said that Connally could not
> have been hit after frame 241.
> But no one was foolish enough to claim
> that JFK was hit before he went behind the sign.
They said he was hit at Z190.
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/6prW9G4g8D4
[quote on]
5) Acoustical evidence and blur analysis.--The committee performed two
other scientific tests that addressed the question of the direction and
timing of the bullets that struck the President. First, it contracted
with acoustical consultants for an analysis of a tape recording of a
radio transmission made at the time of the assassination. The experts
decided there were four shots on the recording. (48) The first, second
and fourth came from the Texas School Book Depository behind the
President, the third came from the grassy knoll to the right front of
the President. Taking the shot to the President's head at frame 312 as
the last of the four shots, and thus as a possible base point,5 it was
possible to correlate the other sounds identified as probable gunfire
with the Zapruder film.(49) Since the acoustical
4) There is no scientific method for determining the elapsed time between
when a shot hits and when a person visibly reacts. Different people
have different reaction times; moreover, a person's reaction time often
depends on where he has been hit.
5) The committee considered using frame 328 as a possible base point. In
this analysis, the head shot occurring at frame 312 would, according to
the acoustics results, have originated from the grassy knoll. This
alternative, however, was rejected.
Page 47
consultants concluded that the two earliest shots came from the
depository, the shots (or at least their shock waves) would have reached
the limousine at between frames 157 and 161 and frames 188 and 191. When
coupled with the photographic evidence showing a reaction by President
Kennedy beginning in the vicinity of frame 200, it appeared that he was
first struck by a bullet at approximately frame 190.6
[quote off]
bigdog
Jun 22, 2019, 8:38:31 PM6/22/19
to
On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 8:54:49 PM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
> https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-652.html
Good information, David, but I am curious as to how early in the process
the SBT became apparent to them and what was the primary reason they began
moving in that direction. Do we have any documentation that sheds light on
that. As Bugliosi pointed out, once all the factors are known, a child
could have figured it out.
> https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/02/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-652.html
Good information, David, but I am curious as to how early in the process
the SBT became apparent to them and what was the primary reason they began
moving in that direction. Do we have any documentation that sheds light on
that. As Bugliosi pointed out, once all the factors are known, a child
could have figured it out.
David Emerling
Jun 23, 2019, 2:55:08 PM6/23/19
to
On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 8:06:12 PM UTC-5, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 6/20/2019 10:13 PM, bigdog wrote:
> > With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
> > considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
> > and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
>
> That is NOT true. They only recovered 1 whole bullet and several
> fragments. Their original working theory was that JFK was hit first in the
> back, then Connally was hit in the back then JFK was hit in the head. If
> On 6/20/2019 10:13 PM, bigdog wrote:
> > With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
> > considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
> > and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
>
> That is NOT true. They only recovered 1 whole bullet and several
> fragments. Their original working theory was that JFK was hit first in the
> they had published that instead of their SBT you would be defending it and
> attacking anyone who said there was a miss.
The Warren Commission inherited the FBI report. Of course, the FBI report
> attacking anyone who said there was a miss.
was put together rather hastily. It was completed in December, just WEEKS
after the assassination. So, it's understandable if they didn't get every
detail correct.
The FBI did not have a missed shot. One shot hit Kennedy. One shot hit
Connally. The final shot hit Kennedy.
It didn't take long for the Warren Commission to reject that shooting
sequence, however. To their credit, they did not adopt the FBI conclusions
without verifying things independently.
David Emerling
Memphis, TN
Steve M. Galbraith
Jun 23, 2019, 7:49:07 PM6/23/19
to
That is, JFK and Connally were hit by separate bullets. They didn't even
consider, at least their report didn't, of a single bullet theory
explanation.
How did they miss something obvious?
FBI summary report:
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10402#relPageId=8
Steve M. Galbraith
Jun 23, 2019, 7:49:30 PM6/23/19
to
detail.
It's a pretty significant difference from the WC's conclusion, isn't it?
Anthony Marsh
Jun 24, 2019, 11:24:02 AM6/24/19
to
Anthony Marsh
Jun 24, 2019, 11:24:42 AM6/24/19
to
On 6/22/2019 8:38 PM, bigdog wrote:
> On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 9:06:12 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
>> On 6/20/2019 10:13 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>> With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
>>> considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
>>> and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
>>
>> That is NOT true. They only recovered 1 whole bullet and several
>> fragments. Their original working theory was that JFK was hit first in the
>> back, then Connally was hit in the bcack then JFK was hit in the head. If
>> they had published that instead of their SBT you would be defending it and
>> attacking anyone who said there was a miss.
>>
>
> I would support any finding that is supported by evidence. The SBT is. The
You guys can't even agree on just one SBT. Not much of a theory when you
>> On 6/20/2019 10:13 PM, bigdog wrote:
>>> With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
>>> considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
>>> and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
>>
>> That is NOT true. They only recovered 1 whole bullet and several
>> fragments. Their original working theory was that JFK was hit first in the
>> back, then Connally was hit in the bcack then JFK was hit in the head. If
>> they had published that instead of their SBT you would be defending it and
>> attacking anyone who said there was a miss.
>>
>
> I would support any finding that is supported by evidence. The SBT is. The
can't specify anything exact.
> three hit scenario is not.
>
>>> they could not be certain that the fragments found in the limo came from
>>> one bullet, given the amount of material recovered, that seems probable.
>>
>> More than just probable. Likely.
>>
>
> Is there a difference between those two, Mr. Smarty Pants?
>
> prob??a??ble
> [??pr??b??b(??)l]
>
> ADJECTIVE
> likely to be the case or to happen.
> "it is probable that the economic situation will deteriorate further" ?? [more]
> ADJECTIVE
> likely to be the case or to happen.
>
> synonyms
> likely ?? most likely ?? odds-on ?? expected ?? to be expected ?? anticipated ?? predictable ?? foreseeable ?? ten to one ?? presumed ?? potential ?? credible ?? quite possible ?? possible ?? feasible ?? [more]
>
>
>>> Perhaps they were thrown off by the existence of three spent shells
>>> indicating there were three shots. But with only two recovered bullets, it
>>> seems unlikely that a bullet fired from the TSBD into either victim would
>>> not have remained inside the limo somewhere.
>>>
>>
>> Perhaps they were influenced by all the witesses who said they heard 3
>> shots, especially the 3 men only 10 feet below the gun.
>>
>
> Yes they had ample reason to believe there were three shots and with JFK
> hit twice and JBC once, at first that seemed to fit nicely with the three
> separate hit scenario. Closer examination told them that wasn't the case.
>
That's what both the WC and Hoover thought. Three shots, three hits, no
>
>>> Perhaps they were thrown off by the existence of three spent shells
>>> indicating there were three shots. But with only two recovered bullets, it
>>> seems unlikely that a bullet fired from the TSBD into either victim would
>>> not have remained inside the limo somewhere.
>>>
>>
>> Perhaps they were influenced by all the witesses who said they heard 3
>> shots, especially the 3 men only 10 feet below the gun.
>>
>
> Yes they had ample reason to believe there were three shots and with JFK
> hit twice and JBC once, at first that seemed to fit nicely with the three
> separate hit scenario. Closer examination told them that wasn't the case.
>
misses. Nice and neat.
>>> It is my understanding that the SBT began to dawn on the WC staff lawyers
>>> after looking at the Z-film and realizing that the reactions of JFK and
>>> JBC to being shot came to close together to have come separate shots from
>>> a bolt action rifle and the SS recreations in Dealey Plaza showed that JFK
>>> and JBC were in perfect alignment at the time JFK was first hit.
>>>
>>
>> That was part of it, plus the doctors who said that Connally could not
>> have been hit after frame 241.
>
> How would the doctors know such a thing?
Don't you know anything about this case?
>
>> But no one was foolish enough to claim
>> that JFK was hit before he went behind the sign.
>
> The HSCA and their acoustical analysts whom you put so much faith in were.
> They said he was hit at Z190.
>
writing to them to point out that error.
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/6prW9G4g8D4
>
> [quote on]
>
> 5) Acoustical evidence and blur analysis.--The committee performed two
> other scientific tests that addressed the question of the direction and
> timing of the bullets that struck the President. First, it contracted
> with acoustical consultants for an analysis of a tape recording of a
> radio transmission made at the time of the assassination. The experts
> decided there were four shots on the recording. (48) The first, second
> and fourth came from the Texas School Book Depository behind the
> President, the third came from the grassy knoll to the right front of
> the President. Taking the shot to the President's head at frame 312 as
> the last of the four shots, and thus as a possible base point,5 it was
> possible to correlate the other sounds identified as probable gunfire
> with the Zapruder film.(49) Since the acoustical
>
of the shots places a shot from behind hitting JFK in the back at frame
209/210 and then the next shot hitting Connally at frame 230.
> 4) There is no scientific method for determining the elapsed time between
> when a shot hits and when a person visibly reacts. Different people
> have different reaction times; moreover, a person's reaction time often
> depends on where he has been hit.
>
> 5) The committee considered using frame 328 as a possible base point. In
> this analysis, the head shot occurring at frame 312 would, according to
> the acoustics results, have originated from the grassy knoll. This
> alternative, however, was rejected.
>
> Page 47
>
> consultants concluded that the two earliest shots came from the
> depository, the shots (or at least their shock waves) would have reached
> the limousine at between frames 157 and 161 and frames 188 and 191. When
> coupled with the photographic evidence showing a reaction by President
> Kennedy beginning in the vicinity of frame 200, it appeared that he was
> first struck by a bullet at approximately frame 190.6
>
Anthony Marsh
Jun 24, 2019, 11:25:06 AM6/24/19
to
theory was that JFK was hit at frame 210, Connally hit at frame 230 and
the head shot at frame 313.
April 27, 1964
MEMORANDUM
TO: J. Lee Rankin
FROM: Norman Redlich
The purpose of this memorandum is to explain the reasons why certain
members of the staff feel that it is important to take certain on-site
photographs in connection with the location of the approximate points at
which the three bullets struck the occupants of the Presidential
limousine.
Our report presumably will state that the President was hit by the first
bullet, Governor Connally by the second, and the President by the third
and fatal bullet. The report will also conclude that the bullets were
fired by one person located in the sixth floor southeast corner window
of the TSBD building.
As our investigation now stands, however, we have not shown that these
events could possibly have occurred in the manner suggested above. All
we have is a reasonable hypothesis which appears to be supported by the
medical testimony but which has not been checked out against the
physical facts at the scene of the assassination.
Our examination of the Zapruder films shows that the fatal third shot
struck the President at a point which we can locate with reasonable
accuracy on the ground. We can do this because we know the exact frame
(no. 313) in the film at which the third shot hit the President and we
know the location of the photographer. By lining up fixed objects in the
movie frame where this shot occurs we feel that we have determined the
approximate location of this shot. This can be verified by a photo of
the same spot from the point where Zapruder was standing.
We have the testimony of Governor and Mrs. Connally that the Governor
was hit with the second bullet at a point which we probably cannot fix
with precision. We feel we have established, however, with the help of
medical testimony, that the shot which hit the Governor did not come
after frame 240 on the Zapruder film. The governor feels that it came
around 230, which is certainly consistent with our observations of the
film and with the doctor's testimony. Since the President was shot at
frame 313, this would leave a time of at least 4 seconds between the two
shots, certainly ample for even an inexperienced marksman.
Prior to our last viewing of the films with Governor Connally we had
assumed that the President was hit while he was concealed behind the
sign which occurs between frames 215-225. We have expert testimony to
the effect that a skilled marksman would require a minimum 2 seconds
between shots with this rifle. Since the camera operates at 18 1/3
frames per second, there would have to be a minimum of 40 frames between
shots.
It is apparent, therefore, that if Governor Connally was hit even as
late as frame 240, the President would have to have been hit no later
than frame 190 and probably even earlier. We have not yet examined the
assassination scene to determine whether the assassin in fact could have
shot the President prior to frame 190. We could locate the position on
the ground which corresponds to this frame and it would then be our
intent to establish by photography that the assassin could have fired
the first shot at the President prior to this point. Our intention is
not to establish the point with complete accuracy, but merely to
substantiate the hypothesis which underlies the conclusions that Oswald
was the sole assassin.
> David Emerling
> Memphis, TN
>
Anthony Marsh
Jun 24, 2019, 11:27:51 AM6/24/19
to
On 6/23/2019 2:55 PM, David Emerling wrote:
Pamela Brown
Jun 24, 2019, 11:28:29 AM6/24/19
to
suppressed as a result, once James Tague was entered into the mix.
Pamela Brown
ss100x.com
BT George
Jun 24, 2019, 11:47:02 PM6/24/19
to
analyze the Z film or consider the realistic capabilities of the only
weapon found in Dealy Plaza. Everything about their work suggests trying
to please J. Edgar by "quickly" investigating and solving the case. This
was so glaringly obvious to the WC that they realized they had to conduct
their own (much more thorough) investigation.
...Which is why claims that these men sat down to simply "rubber stamp"
what had already been decided by the DPD and FBI rings hollow.
BT George
Jun 25, 2019, 11:28:00 AM6/25/19
to
bigdog
Jun 25, 2019, 11:31:07 AM6/25/19
to
got them thinking. The had three spent shells, a consensus of witnesses
saying three shots, and two men being hit by a combined three shots. While
at first glance that would indicate no misses, why didn't somebody ask the
obvious question? Why were there only two recovered bullets? It's not as
if there was anyplace for those bullets to go after striking the two men.
Anthony Marsh
Jun 25, 2019, 11:32:05 AM6/25/19
to
was no copper from the jacket found in the mark, only lead.'I think the
fragment could have been from the middle of the bullet that broke up and
left 2 large pieces in the limo or even the lead code squeezed out of the
base fragment which was only the jacket.
bigdog
Jun 25, 2019, 11:33:09 AM6/25/19
to
On Monday, June 24, 2019 at 11:24:42 AM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> On 6/22/2019 8:38 PM, bigdog wrote:
> > On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 9:06:12 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >> On 6/20/2019 10:13 PM, bigdog wrote:
> >>> With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
> >>> considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
> >>> and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
> >>
> >> That is NOT true. They only recovered 1 whole bullet and several
> >> fragments. Their original working theory was that JFK was hit first in the
> >> back, then Connally was hit in the bcack then JFK was hit in the head. If
> >> they had published that instead of their SBT you would be defending it and
> >> attacking anyone who said there was a miss.
> >>
> >
> > I would support any finding that is supported by evidence. The SBT is. The
>
> You guys can't even agree on just one SBT. Not much of a theory when you
> can't specify anything exact.
>
> > three hit scenario is not.
> >
>
> I can believe in a modified Single Bullet Theory.
>
> >>> they could not be certain that the fragments found in the limo came from
> >>> one bullet, given the amount of material recovered, that seems probable.
> >>
> >> More than just probable. Likely.
> >>
> >
> > Is there a difference between those two, Mr. Smarty Pants?
>
> Yes, there is. Study probability.
Likely and probable are synonyms of each other. Both are adjectives. Now
> On 6/22/2019 8:38 PM, bigdog wrote:
> > On Friday, June 21, 2019 at 9:06:12 PM UTC-4, Anthony Marsh wrote:
> >> On 6/20/2019 10:13 PM, bigdog wrote:
> >>> With the advantage of hindsight, it seems to me the SBT should have been
> >>> considered early on in the investigation process. JFK had been shot twice
> >>> and JBC once but they had only recovered two bullets. While it is true
> >>
> >> That is NOT true. They only recovered 1 whole bullet and several
> >> fragments. Their original working theory was that JFK was hit first in the
> >> back, then Connally was hit in the bcack then JFK was hit in the head. If
> >> they had published that instead of their SBT you would be defending it and
> >> attacking anyone who said there was a miss.
> >>
> >
> > I would support any finding that is supported by evidence. The SBT is. The
>
> You guys can't even agree on just one SBT. Not much of a theory when you
> can't specify anything exact.
>
> > three hit scenario is not.
> >
>
> I can believe in a modified Single Bullet Theory.
>
> >>> they could not be certain that the fragments found in the limo came from
> >>> one bullet, given the amount of material recovered, that seems probable.
> >>
> >> More than just probable. Likely.
> >>
> >
> > Is there a difference between those two, Mr. Smarty Pants?
>
> Yes, there is. Study probability.
you want to throw the noun probability into the mix.
>
> >
> > prob??a??ble
> > [??pr??b??b(??)l]
> >
> > ADJECTIVE
> > likely to be the case or to happen.
> > "it is probable that the economic situation will deteriorate further" ?? [more]
> >
> > synonyms
> > likely ?? most likely ?? odds-on ?? expected ?? to be expected ?? anticipated ?? predictable ?? foreseeable ?? ten to one ?? presumed ?? potential ?? credible ?? quite possible ?? possible ?? feasible ?? [more]
> >
> >
> >>> Perhaps they were thrown off by the existence of three spent shells
> >>> indicating there were three shots. But with only two recovered bullets, it
> >>> seems unlikely that a bullet fired from the TSBD into either victim would
> >>> not have remained inside the limo somewhere.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Perhaps they were influenced by all the witesses who said they heard 3
> >> shots, especially the 3 men only 10 feet below the gun.
> >>
> >
> > Yes they had ample reason to believe there were three shots and with JFK
> > hit twice and JBC once, at first that seemed to fit nicely with the three
> > separate hit scenario. Closer examination told them that wasn't the case.
> >
>
> That's what both the WC and Hoover thought. Three shots, three hits, no
> misses. Nice and neat.
>
least made someone wonder. Apparently it made the WC staff wonder. After
looking at the Z-film, seeing the Dealey Plaza recreation and the
alignment of JFK and JBC, the SBT became clear to them. It's the only
explanation that makes sense.
> >>> It is my understanding that the SBT began to dawn on the WC staff lawyers
> >>> after looking at the Z-film and realizing that the reactions of JFK and
> >>> JBC to being shot came to close together to have come separate shots from
> >>> a bolt action rifle and the SS recreations in Dealey Plaza showed that JFK
> >>> and JBC were in perfect alignment at the time JFK was first hit.
> >>>
> >>
> >> That was part of it, plus the doctors who said that Connally could not
> >> have been hit after frame 241.
> >
> > How would the doctors know such a thing?
>
> By examining his position and lining up the wounds.
> Don't you know anything about this case?
>
you cite what the doctors actually said rather than giving us your spin on
it?
> >
> >> But no one was foolish enough to claim
> >> that JFK was hit before he went behind the sign.
> >
> > The HSCA and their acoustical analysts whom you put so much faith in were.
> > They said he was hit at Z190.
> >
>
> Which is why I pointed out their foolishness. I don't remember you
> writing to them to point out that error.
you ever stop to think that if they were that foolish, maybe they were
wrong about there being a fourth shot?
>
> > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/6prW9G4g8D4
> >
> > [quote on]
> >
> > 5) Acoustical evidence and blur analysis.--The committee performed two
> > other scientific tests that addressed the question of the direction and
> > timing of the bullets that struck the President. First, it contracted
> > with acoustical consultants for an analysis of a tape recording of a
> > radio transmission made at the time of the assassination. The experts
> > decided there were four shots on the recording. (48) The first, second
> > and fourth came from the Texas School Book Depository behind the
> > President, the third came from the grassy knoll to the right front of
> > the President. Taking the shot to the President's head at frame 312 as
> > the last of the four shots, and thus as a possible base point,5 it was
> > possible to correlate the other sounds identified as probable gunfire
> > with the Zapruder film.(49) Since the acoustical
> >
>
> They ere falsely wedded to the head shot coming from behind. My match up
> of the shots places a shot from behind hitting JFK in the back at frame
> 209/210 and then the next shot hitting Connally at frame 230.
>
forensic medical examiner who has seen the evidence has concluded that.
But we are supposed to believe your conclusions over theirs. Just one
question. Why?
> > 4) There is no scientific method for determining the elapsed time between
> > when a shot hits and when a person visibly reacts. Different people
> > have different reaction times; moreover, a person's reaction time often
> > depends on where he has been hit.
> >
>
> You can't just make up whatever silly time frame you want.
>
> > 5) The committee considered using frame 328 as a possible base point. In
> > this analysis, the head shot occurring at frame 312 would, according to
> > the acoustics results, have originated from the grassy knoll. This
> > alternative, however, was rejected.
> >
>
> That was their mistake.
>
have straightened them all out.
> > Page 47
> >
> > consultants concluded that the two earliest shots came from the
> > depository, the shots (or at least their shock waves) would have reached
> > the limousine at between frames 157 and 161 and frames 188 and 191. When
> > coupled with the photographic evidence showing a reaction by President
> > Kennedy beginning in the vicinity of frame 200, it appeared that he was
> > first struck by a bullet at approximately frame 190.6
> >
>
> Physically impossible. We would have seen JFK react.
>
> > [quote off]
only way they could fit the medical evidence to the acoustical evidence.
That should have made them question the validity of the acoustical
evidence. Had they done that, they might have come up with the right
answer. Three shots all from the TSBD.
bigdog
Jun 25, 2019, 11:33:36 AM6/25/19
to
shots/three hits scenario. The Dealey Plaza recreation was the final piece
of the puzzle. It showed that JFK and JBC were in perfect alignment for a
shot from the TSBD and that a bullet exiting JFK's throat couldn't have
missed JBC.
bigdog
Jun 25, 2019, 11:34:00 AM6/25/19
to
To this day there is no consensus as to which shot caused his injury. Some
hold to it being a ricochet are fragment from the missed first shot and
others that it was a fragment from the head shot.
bigdog
Jun 26, 2019, 12:04:14 AM6/26/19
to
the FBI for forensic analysis, for key pieces of evidence they got second
opinions from other crime labs. The SBT is the cornerstone of the lone
assassin theory. Without it, there would have to have been two assassins.
The WC didn't get very much wrong, but they were absolutely wrong when
they said the SBT was not vital to the finding that Oswald was the lone
assassin. He couldn't have done it alone without hitting JFK and JBC with
the same bullet. They were hit almost simultaneously and reacted
simultaneously. A bolt action rifle could not have done that.
19efppp
Jun 26, 2019, 4:49:04 PM6/26/19
to
Steve M. Galbraith
Jun 27, 2019, 11:50:42 AM6/27/19
to
On Wednesday, June 26, 2019 at 12:04:14 AM UTC-4, bigdog wrote:
autopsy report. Instead, they used the Sibert and O'Neil report which
didn't mention the throat wound as being an exit wound. The autopsy
doctors, specifically Hume, didn't realize the throat was an exit wound
until the next day after contacting Perry. So the S&O report didn't
include that fact and the FBI didn't know it.
Read the S&O report: nowhere does it mention the autopsy doctors
"connecting" the back wound to the throat. It doesn't even mention them
theorizing or discussing the possibility. Granted the autopsy doctors
didn't have the Z film; and the FBI did.
Nowhere in the FBI report does it mention where the bullet that hit JFK in
the back ended up. Kind of a large omission.
Anthony Marsh
Jun 27, 2019, 9:52:53 PM6/27/19
to
that the throat wound was an ENTRANCE.
Please try again later after you sober up from the 4th of July party.
> Read the S&O report: nowhere does it mention the autopsy doctors
> "connecting" the back wound to the throat. It doesn't even mention them
> theorizing or discussing the possibility. Granted the autopsy doctors
> didn't have the Z film; and the FBI did.
>
> Nowhere in the FBI report does it mention where the bullet that hit JFK in
> the back ended up. Kind of a large omission.
>
grouch...@gmail.com
Jun 28, 2019, 3:36:01 PM6/28/19
to
they probed the back wound, they couldn't get far.
The bullet worked its way back out and was found at Parkland.
bigdog
Jun 29, 2019, 4:51:13 PM6/29/19
to
significant.
> The bullet worked its way back out and was found at Parkland.
Anthony Marsh
Jun 29, 2019, 7:57:21 PM6/29/19
to
significant penetrating power and can not just stop in the body.
Steve M. Galbraith
Jun 30, 2019, 1:46:39 PM6/30/19
to
On Friday, June 28, 2019 at 3:36:01 PM UTC-4, grouch...@gmail.com wrote:
distance? Why would assassins use such a bullet that only penetrated a
short distance?
Where was this bullet found? The orderly (Tomlinson) who found a bullet on
a stretcher said it was "around 1:00" when he discovered it. JFK was still
in the ER and still on the stretcher at that time. The bullet that was
found, it seems to me, couldn't have come from JFK's stretcher.
Of course, these times are almost off by minutes.
bigdog
Jul 1, 2019, 11:37:15 AM7/1/19
to
after JFK was pronounced dead and the ER team had left the room, it would
have taken quite a while for the body to be cleaned up and a casket to
arrive before the body could be taken off the gurney and placed in the
casket so even if Tomlinson's estimate is off, the bullet he found could
not have come from JFK's body. There will still be those who argue CE399
was planted, but this fact pretty much is the death knell for the theory
that the bullet fell out of JFK's back.
Oh, if only Chris/mainframetech were still around. I'd love to see his
response to this. He was a determined advocate for the theory that the
bullet in the back only penetrated a short distance and fell out.
Unfortunately his sudden departure from this newsgroup makes me fear the
worst.
Anthony Marsh
Jul 1, 2019, 7:51:12 PM7/1/19
to
foorball player in Charlestown. He lived with that bullet in his torso for
years.
> Where was this bullet found? The orderly (Tomlinson) who found a bullet on
> a stretcher said it was "around 1:00" when he discovered it. JFK was still
> in the ER and still on the stretcher at that time. The bullet that was
> found, it seems to me, couldn't have come from JFK's stretcher.
>
> Of course, these times are almost off by minutes.
>
Bullet Theory. Try again.
David Von Pein
Jul 2, 2019, 11:30:31 AM7/2/19
to
the bullet was found by [Darrell] Tomlinson. Never. Nor was JFK's body
ever in that area down the hall from Trauma Room 1.
Kennedy remained in ER-1 the whole time he was in Parkland. So it is
physically impossible for any bullet from Kennedy's stretcher to magically
appear down the hall.
And if you think the bullet was picked up in Trauma Room No. 1 and then
deposited on a stretcher down the hall...ask yourself: What the [heck]
for??!!
Why on Earth would anyone even have the slightest desire to do something
stupid like that? If there was actually a REAL bullet from LHO's gun that
fell out of Kennedy's back (which there wasn't of course, I'm merely
playing the silly "conspiracy theory" game for a moment here), then why
would anybody bent on framing Oswald want to tamper with such great
evidence that was already right THERE near Kennedy's own body and on HIS
stretcher, in order to place it on a different stretcher down the hall?
That's just nuts all around.
Plus: Even if some moron plotter thought it was a good idea to move the
bullet, why plant it on the WRONG stretcher down the hall...or even on
Connally's own stretcher? Why not plant it IN THE LIMO WHERE JFK WAS SHOT
(which would nicely accompany CE567 and CE569, the fragments also from
Rifle #C2766)?
Did any of the so-called "plotters" have a working brain on November
22nd?"
-- David Von Pein; December 4, 2007
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/oUOTe_wuCro/Je3jLiGIvf0J
Related Links:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/11/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-76.html
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-829.html
BOZ
Jul 2, 2019, 5:15:20 PM7/2/19
to
Von Pein's website.
bigdog
Jul 2, 2019, 10:37:29 PM7/2/19
to
Steve M. Galbraith
Jul 3, 2019, 11:36:02 AM7/3/19
to
On Tuesday, July 2, 2019 at 11:30:31 AM UTC-4, David Von Pein wrote:
"If there was actually a REAL bullet from LHO's gun that fell out of
Kennedy's back (which there wasn't of course, I'm merely playing the silly
"conspiracy theory" game for a moment here), then why would anybody bent
on framing Oswald want to tamper with such great evidence that was already
right THERE near Kennedy's own body and on HIS stretcher, in order to
place it on a different stretcher down the hall? That's just nuts all
around. "
go with this) then JFK's throat/neck wound was caused by a separate
bullet. I.e., another shooter. That indicates conspiracy.
So the conspiracists would want to hide that "fallen out" bullet to
prevent exposure of another shooters. Or have him placed with JC's
stretcher to point to a single bullet causing both JFK's and JC's wounds.
Shorter me: there would be a incentive to hide that bullet from being
traced to JFK. Since it could only be traced to him and not also to JC.
Anthony Marsh
Jul 3, 2019, 5:19:29 PM7/3/19
to
So THAT's why they call it the Magic Bullet. It could WALK.
> And if you think the bullet was picked up in Trauma Room No. 1 and then
> deposited on a stretcher down the hall...ask yourself: What the [heck]
> for??!!
>
what the Hades you are babbling about. {that slipped past the Cockney
filter!]
You need to use more punctuation as a tribute to Rossley!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
> Why on Earth would anyone even have the slightest desire to do something
> stupid like that? If there was actually a REAL bullet from LHO's gun that
> fell out of Kennedy's back (which there wasn't of course, I'm merely
conspirators KNEW that ammo would go through the victims like a hot knife
through butter and would NEVER be recovered, so they had to PLANT a whole
bullet which could be ballistically linked to Oswald's rifle. Did you ever
read the sabot theory?
> playing the silly "conspiracy theory" game for a moment here), then why
> would anybody bent on framing Oswald want to tamper with such great
> evidence that was already right THERE near Kennedy's own body and on HIS
If you are going to frame a guy you have to use his rifle and his
ammunition. Remember when the cops said it was a Mauser? Hoow long did
that last? Did Oswald own a Mauser?
> stretcher, in order to place it on a different stretcher down the hall?
> That's just nuts all around.
>
WRONG stretcher.
> Plus: Even if some moron plotter thought it was a good idea to move the
brilliant job they did in the Castro assassination plots!
> bullet, why plant it on the WRONG stretcher down the hall...or even on
conspiracy kook you could say that the bullet started on JFK's stretcher
and got bumped onto Ronnie Fuller's stretcher whe the two stretchers were
next to each other in the elevator.
I invented the WILD MISS theory to have CE 399 miss JFK and hit little
Ronnie Fuller a mile away!
> Connally's own stretcher? Why not plant it IN THE LIMO WHERE JFK WAS SHOT
> (which would nicely accompany CE567 and CE569, the fragments also from
> Rifle #C2766)?
>
> Did any of the so-called "plotters" have a working brain on November
> 22nd?"
>
caught breaking into the Watergate.
Anthony Marsh
Jul 3, 2019, 5:19:45 PM7/3/19
to
Is that how it works in SCIENCE?
Are there hundreds of theories about gravity?
What do YOU like about DVP's theory that you can't find in any other?
Anthony Marsh
Jul 3, 2019, 9:37:45 PM7/3/19
to
Anthony Marsh
Jul 3, 2019, 9:42:56 PM7/3/19
to
> "conspiracy theory" game for a moment here), then why would anybody bent
> on framing Oswald want to tamper with such great evidence that was already
> right THERE near Kennedy's own body and on HIS stretcher, in order to
> place it on a different stretcher down the hall? That's just nuts all
> around. "
>
> If the bullet that hit JFK in the back did fall out (it didn't but let's
> go with this) then JFK's throat/neck wound was caused by a separate
> bullet. I.e., another shooter. That indicates conspiracy.
>
> So the conspiracists would want to hide that "fallen out" bullet to
> prevent exposure of another shooters. Or have him placed with JC's
> stretcher to point to a single bullet causing both JFK's and JC's wounds.
>
> Shorter me: there would be a incentive to hide that bullet from being
> traced to JFK. Since it could only be traced to him and not also to JC.
>
>
DNA?
bigdog
Jul 3, 2019, 9:46:16 PM7/3/19
to
that a bullet had fallen out of JFK's back. If somehow they had knowledge
of that. Then the problem is what to do about the bullet that entered the
throat? Did they know it didn't exit? Where was it? How did they get at
it? Did they know they had two bullets that made very shallow entries? Why
would they try to kill JFK using such weak ammo? Every question that the
CTs answer raises five more.
David Von Pein
Jul 3, 2019, 9:47:49 PM7/3/19
to
down the hall must have had knowledge of the bullet hole in JFK's throat
before the bullet was moved. And that bullet hole in the throat was almost
immediately obliterated via the tracheotomy done by Dr. Perry.
So that means we would need to find out exactly who had access to Trauma
Room No. 1 in the very first minutes after JFK was brought into the
hospital. (And even most CTers don't think that one of Kennedy's doctors
was trying to frame Oswald. So it must be a non-doctor who did the alleged
transporting of the bullet in this make-believe scenario.)
But most CTers don't want to be bothered with the "Who Knew What--And
When?" details. They just go right to "The Bullet Was Definitely Planted
On The Stretcher".
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/09/was-all-of-this-evidence-planted.html
David Von Pein
Jul 3, 2019, 9:48:32 PM7/3/19
to
the original....
https://groups.google.com/d/msg/alt.conspiracy.jfk/oUOTe_wuCro/Je3jLiGIvf0J
>
> You need to use more punctuation as a tribute to Rossley!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> > Why on Earth would anyone even have the slightest desire to do something
> > stupid like that? If there was actually a REAL bullet from LHO's gun that
> > fell out of Kennedy's back (which there wasn't of course, I'm merely
>
> Well if you ask a stupid question expect a stupid answer. How about the
> conspirators KNEW that ammo would go through the victims like a hot knife
> through butter and would NEVER be recovered, so they had to PLANT a whole
> bullet which could be ballistically linked to Oswald's rifle. Did you ever
> read the sabot theory?
>
> > playing the silly "conspiracy theory" game for a moment here), then why
> > would anybody bent on framing Oswald want to tamper with such great
> > evidence that was already right THERE near Kennedy's own body and on HIS
>
Not true. There are other ballistics items linking the shooting to Oswald
--- e.g., the 3 bullet shells in the Sniper's Nest and the 2 large bullet
fragments in the front seat of the limo.
But from the perspective of an alleged conspiracy and cover-up, we again
need to ask --- WHO KNEW WHAT? AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT?
>
> If you are going to frame a guy you have to use his rifle and his
> ammunition. Remember when the cops said it was a Mauser? Hoow long did
> that last? Did Oswald own a Mauser?
>
> > stretcher, in order to place it on a different stretcher down the hall?
> > That's just nuts all around.
> >
>
> I think that's kinda a tipoff that it's planted when it's found on the
> WRONG stretcher.
>
the stretchers again....
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-829.html
> > Plus: Even if some moron plotter thought it was a good idea to move the
>
> Hey, that's not a nice way to talk about the CIA. Look at what a
> brilliant job they did in the Castro assassination plots!
>
> > bullet, why plant it on the WRONG stretcher down the hall...or even on
>
> conspiracy kook you could say that the bullet started on JFK's stretcher
> and got bumped onto Ronnie Fuller's stretcher [when] the two stretchers were
> next to each other in the elevator.
>
Not even the most dedicated CTer could use such an argument.
>
Why not?
Because JFK's stretcher was never in an elevator prior to the time when
the bullet was first discovered by Tomlinson. Kennedy's stretcher was
always on the first floor during that critical time period.
BOZ
Jul 4, 2019, 9:00:33 AM7/4/19
to
seriously as a researcher. I would destroy you in a public debate.
BOZ
Jul 4, 2019, 9:56:46 AM7/4/19
to
Anthony Marsh
Jul 4, 2019, 10:36:51 PM7/4/19
to
Maybe they were intended to all be misses, only to frame Oswald.
> But from the perspective of an alleged conspiracy and cover-up, we again
> need to ask --- WHO KNEW WHAT? AND WHEN DID THEY KNOW IT?
>
>
>
>>
>> If you are going to frame a guy you have to use his rifle and his
>> ammunition. Remember when the cops said it was a Mauser? Hoow long did
>> that last? Did Oswald own a Mauser?
>>
>>> stretcher, in order to place it on a different stretcher down the hall?
>>> That's just nuts all around.
>>>
>>
>> I think that's kinda a tipoff that it's planted when it's found on the
>> WRONG stretcher.
>>
>
> You need to study Darrell Tomlinson's ever-changing statements regarding
> the stretchers again....
>
> http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/10/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-829.html
>
>
>
>
>>> Plus: Even if some moron plotter thought it was a good idea to move the
>>
>> Hey, that's not a nice way to talk about the CIA. Look at what a
>> brilliant job they did in the Castro assassination plots!
>>
>>> bullet, why plant it on the WRONG stretcher down the hall...or even on
>>
>> OK, how would Ruby [know] it was the wrong stretcher? If you are a dedicated
>> conspiracy kook you could say that the bullet started on JFK's stretcher
>> and got bumped onto Ronnie Fuller's stretcher [when] the two stretchers were
>> next to each other in the elevator.
>>
>
> Not even the most dedicated CTer could use such an argument.
>
You think a conspiracy is too complicated. Tet you never object to the
CIA's most ridiculous conspiracies. Exploding sea shells? Exploding
cigar. A pill that makes his beard fall out.
Perfectly normal to you.
> Why not?
>
> Because JFK's stretcher was never in an elevator prior to the time when
> the bullet was first discovered by Tomlinson. Kennedy's stretcher was
> always on the first floor during that critical time period.
>
Some kook came up with a theory that one bullet went through both men.
Anthony Marsh
Jul 4, 2019, 10:37:25 PM7/4/19
to
the files. You are always evasive and never back up your claims.
BOZ
Jul 5, 2019, 7:43:08 PM7/5/19
to
BOZ
Jul 5, 2019, 7:43:16 PM7/5/19
to
Steve M. Galbraith
Jul 5, 2019, 11:14:59 PM7/5/19
to
pulled any of this off we end up in a conspiracy rabbit hole.
We can't even get them to answer as how they planted Oswald's rifle in the
nest. Forget about dozen and one other questions. The complexity of what
they argue occurred is dizzying.
"They" did this and "they" did that. How did "they" do this? Answer: they
just did.
bigdog
Jul 6, 2019, 10:15:01 PM7/6/19
to
assassination. It is inevitably a house of cards. It's much easier to just
snipe at the WC. It requires no actual evidence and no critical thinking.
Mark
Jul 6, 2019, 10:17:25 PM7/6/19
to
No evidence given; "they just did."
That pretty much sums it up. Mark
0 new messages