Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

The SBT And The Significance Of "CE903"

49 views
Skip to first unread message

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 26, 2007, 5:16:37 AM3/26/07
to
THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY AND THE IMPORTANCE OF WARREN COMMISSION
EXHIBIT #903:

==================================================

As can be seen in Warren Commission Exhibit #903 (linked below), the
"Single-Bullet Theory" trajectory works just fine. In fact, it works
absolutely perfectly. Which would be virtually impossible if MULTIPLE
bullets had actually done the damage to the two victims (JFK & John
Connally) that the Warren Commission said was very likely caused by
only one single bullet (CE399).

And the pointer/rod in Exhibit 903 is just where the autopsy photo of
John Kennedy's back shows the wound to be located, with the exit wound
exactly at the "tie knot" via CE903, just exactly where JFK sustained
damage from the flight of a bullet. .....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg

And look at the angle -- DOWNWARD (17 DEGREES), FROM BACK TO FRONT.
Without a doubt.

Also: When CTers attempt to use the "opposite angle" photo to CE903,
which shows Arlen Specter holding the rod a little above where he is
holding it in CE903 itself....

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Evidence/Mag_Bull.jpg

....the CTers who claim that something is "fishy" or "misleading" are
doing so without ever having determined exactly WHAT THAT OTHER PHOTO
IS, and for what exact purpose it was taken, etc.*

* = Oh, I know it was taken the same day as CE903....but it's unfair
to say that it depicts the WC's SBT trajectory precisely, because it
is NOT an official Warren Commission exhibit like CE903.

Let's listen to the testimony of the man who took the photo we see in
CE903 (Lyndal Shaneyfelt).....

ARLEN SPECTER -- "I now hand you a photograph which has been marked as
Commission Exhibit No. 903 and ask you if you know who the
photographer was?"

LYNDAL L. SHANEYFELT -- "Yes; I took this photograph."

MR. SPECTER -- "When was that photograph taken?"

MR. SHANEYFELT -- "It was taken Sunday afternoon, May 24, 1964."

MR. SPECTER -- "Is there a white string which is apparent in the
background of that photograph?"

MR. SHANEYFELT -- "That is correct."

MR. SPECTER -- "What is the angle of declination of that string?"

MR. SHANEYFELT -- "That string was placed along the wall by the
surveyor at an angle of 17 degrees-43'-30''." ....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

MR. SPECTER -- "Did the surveyor make that placement in your
presence?"

MR. SHANEYFELT -- "He did."

MR. SPECTER -- "Were the stand-ins for President Kennedy and Governor
Connally positioned in the same relative positions as those occupied
by President Kennedy and Governor Connally depicted in the Zapruder
films?"

MR. SHANEYFELT -- "Yes; these positions were approximately the
position of the President and Governor Connally in the Zapruder films
in the area around frame 225 as they go behind the signboard and as
they emerge from the signboard."

MR. SPECTER -- "Was the rod which is held in that photograph
positioned at an angle as closely parallel to the white string as it
could be positioned?"

MR. SHANEYFELT -- "Yes."

MR. SPECTER -- "And through what positions did that rod pass?"

MR. SHANEYFELT -- "The rod passed through a position on the back of
the stand-in for the President at a point approximating that of the
entrance wound, exited along about the knot of the tie or the button
of the coat or button of the shirt, and the end of the rod was
inserted in the entrance hole on the back of Governor Connally's coat
which was being worn by the stand-in for Governor Connally."

MR. SPECTER -- "And was Governor Connally's stand-in seated in the
position where the point of exit would have been below the right
nipple at the approximate point described by Governor Connally's
doctors?"

MR. SHANEYFELT -- "That is correct."

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/shaneyf2.htm

--------------------------------

Anti-SBT conspiracy theorists simply cannot fight the "SBT perfection"
that exists in CE903....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

As mentioned by Shaneyfelt in his WC testimony, the stand-in
representing Governor Connally is wearing the same jacket that JBC
wore on 11/22/63....and that pointer/rod being held by Mr. Specter,
which is coming out of JFK's tie knot, is being placed right into the
exact bullet hole in that jacket in CE903.

CE903 shows:

1.) Downward (back-to-front) angle of the bullet path (17 degrees) =
Perfect.

2.) Upper-back JFK wound = Perfect.

3.) JFK exit wound at tie knot = Perfect.

4.) Entry wound on JBC's back = Perfect (with Specter's metal rod
being jammed into the same hole on JBC's exact jacket where a bullet
just happened to penetrate Connally's suit jacket on 11/22/63, by
gosh!).

5.) Exit wound on JBC's chest (under right nipple) = Perfect via CE903
as well.

Sum Total.....

No "zig-zag" path.
No "magic" bullet.
No "SBT conspiracy".

In short: CE903 = S.B.T. PERFECTION!

~MARK VII~

--------------------------------

PAGE 107 OF THE WARREN COMMISSION REPORT:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wr/html/WCReport_0066a.htm

--------------------------------

MORE ON THE SIGNIFICANCE OF CE903:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bf3ae3c6c0993e13

--------------------------------

AND A QUOTE FROM THE MAN WHO IS "RECLAIMING HISTORY":

"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 Bugliosi

http://www.amazon.com/Reclaiming-History-Assassination-President-Kennedy/dp/0393045250/ref=cm_lmf_tit_1_rdssss1/002-2065385-6525668

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/cfb02505fe1534df

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 28, 2007, 12:31:13 AM3/28/07
to
A CTer UTTERED:

>>> "ASSUMING that the positions, size and shape of the stand-ins are true, can you prove or show that the approach angle or angle of incidence depicted by CE903 works with a shot originating from the SN?" <<<

DVP NOW UTTERS:

Why bother? You wouldn't believe it anyway. Would you?

Most hardline CTers wouldn't believe the SBT even if they were able to
somehow SEE CE399 crashing through both bodies in super-duper slo-mo.

An apple must resemble a banana to the majority of CTers.

IOW -- A goodly number of conspiracists simply will not utilize common
sense IN CONJUNCTION with the admittedly-imprecise-to-the-millimeter
measurements required to irrevocably PROVE what you need LNers to
prove re. the SBT's flight path.

Since CTers ignore the "SUM TOTAL" of pro-SBT evidence, such a sum
total becomes meaningless to an anti-SBT CTer. And I can only shake my
head in utter amazement and bewilderment when I encounter such
ignorance (daily).

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 12, 2007, 11:24:20 PM4/12/07
to
TONY MARSH UTTERED:

>>> "The second photo {the reverse-angle pic similar to CE903} is also an official WC document, isn't it?" <<<

DAVID VON PEIN NOW RETORTS:

I haven't the foggiest. Have you?

Anyway, it's obviously NOT meant to represent the "official WC SBT
trajectory". CE903 performs that task...and very, very nicely.


>>> "I fail to see your point. The only difference is that the second photo was taken from the opposite side. Same alignment, same men, same clothes, same rod, same Specter." <<<

It's not the same "alignment" at all. Why you think it is the same is
a mystery I cannot resolve. The reverse-angle picture has the bullet
entering higher (and, of course, exiting higher) on the JFK stand-in.
The bullet is exiting at CHIN level; not the "tie knot" (which is
precisely where CE903 shows the actual JFK exit wound in the
throat)....

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Evidence/Mag_Bull.jpg

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

>>> "CE 903 does not even depict the WC's SBT trajectory precisely, unless you think the bullet missed Kennedy and went over his right shoulder as the rod does." <<<


And you would have preferred the JFK stand-in be sacrificed in order
to gain such precision, huh?

<chuckles warmly>

If we move the rod/pointer just a tad to Specter's left in CE903
(instead of keeping the rod in the "over-the-shoulder" position we
find the pointer in)....where would a bullet wound be located, Tony?

Would such a positioning of Specter's metal rod place that bullet
wound "over the shoulder"? Or would it place the wound IN THE CENTER
OF THE STAND-IN'S UPPER BACK (just where JFK was struck)? .....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

CE903 is PERFECT for the Single-Bullet Theory. Perfect in every way.
(The sacrificing, via impaling, of the man substituting for John F.
Kennedy on May 24, 1964, notwithstanding.)

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 15, 2007, 2:33:26 AM4/15/07
to
>>> "It is exactly the same as CE 903; just taken from the opposite side." <<<

You must be blind then....because there's no way that pointer (in the
opposite-angle photograph in the garage) is in the same position as in
CE903. Why you think it is shall remain a mystery evidently. ~shrug~

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/pages/WH_Vol18_0055b.jpg

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/Evidence/Mag_Bull.jpg


>>> "It is not intended to duplicate the WC's SBT. It is intended to deceive." <<<

Who the hell knows WHAT it's meant to convey? You certainly don't. Nor
do I. It's not an official WC exhibit; CE903 is. And Shaneyfelt
testified with respect to 903, not the "too high on the neck"
alternate version.

So, the point is really moot all the way around. (Except to CTers who
want a conspiracy, of course.)


>>> "Wrong. The rod is in exactly the same position." <<<

Bullshit. Get some new glasses. The "CT" brand you've got now aren't
working properly.


>>> "BTW, Kennedy's wound was NOT in the center of the upper back." <<<

Yes, it was. Pretty darn close to the center of the back at any rate.
Just a tad to the right of dead-center to be exact. (Get those new
glasses asap. Your eyesight is getting even worse now it would
appear.) .....

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg

jim....@fuse.net

unread,
May 19, 2007, 11:05:02 AM5/19/07
to
On Mar 26, 5:16 am, "David Von Pein" <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY AND THE IMPORTANCE OF WARREN COMMISSION
> EXHIBIT #903:
>
> ==================================================
>
> As can be seen in Warren Commission Exhibit #903 (linked below), the
> "Single-Bullet Theory" trajectory works just fine. In fact, it works
> absolutely perfectly. Which would be virtually impossible if MULTIPLE
> bullets had actually done the damage to the two victims (JFK & John
> Connally) that the Warren Commission said was very likely caused by
> only one single bullet (CE399).
>
> And the pointer/rod in Exhibit 903 is just where the autopsy photo of
> John Kennedy's back shows the wound to be located, with the exit wound
> exactly at the "tie knot" via CE903, just exactly where JFK sustained
> damage from the flight of a bullet. .....
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0...
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0...
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0...
> http://www.amazon.com/Reclaiming-History-Assassination-President-Kenn...
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/cfb02505fe1534df


David, how bizarre your idea of perfection is. What CE 903 shows
clearly is the bullet tract working on the Connally stand in which you
claim is "perfect" but Specter is showing us that the bullet actually
is missing the president't back completely. Thus showing us exactly
what happened in Dealey Plaza without the self serving interpretations
from a "buff" who is in serious denial about what the facts are. The
set up in CE903 is nothing more than a failed attempt to make a trick
photo seem plausible. Placing a string on a wall behind the car (ten
feet or more} and attempting to make the viewer believe when these
angles (the one on the wall and the one on the rod} line up that's
good enough proof of how both men were wounded by the same bullet.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. Lets take another look at
some real empirical evidence about the SBT shot which has been shown
many times on the Discovery Channel. When the Australian research
team produced what they considered to be a perfect set up for a
recreation of the shooting in Dealey Plaza we all saw when the shot
was fired it went into the back of the JFK dummy torso and out the
front and on into th Govenor Connally dummy torso. Like the Specter
set up to prove the viability of the Single Bullet Theory, the
Australians were trying their best to prove the Single Bullet Theory
was how the shooting was done. When the Australian research team's
marksman fired the shot we could all see where the bullet went in
JFK's back and out the front of JFK's chest, nowhere near the wound
location on the front of JFK's neck. Proving empirically there is no
basis for the Single Bullet Theory in fact. All this time it was just
a figment of Specter's imagination. You have gone to great verbose
lengths to support your theory of the case which is based on your
belief in the SBT but once again have failed to do so. This happens
over and over with you because you assume anything "official" has to
be the truth. Yours is one of the most serious cases of brainwash
I've ever encountered on on this NG. Regards, Jim

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
May 19, 2007, 12:05:52 PM5/19/07
to
>>> "But Specter is showing us that the bullet actually is missing the president's back completely." <<<

So, I guess you expected Specter to SKEWER the Kennedy stand-in for
the sake of the photograph? Is that it?

Obviously (and why I even have to explain this to anyone is beyond all
belief), if the pointer that Specter is holding is moved just a little
toward the JFK stand-in's back (which is where the real JFK was hit by
a bullet that most certainly went clean through him), the 17-degree
downward angle is still correct and the SBT is still fully intact.

But, since Arlen Specter decided to be a nice guy and not shoot the
stand-in in the back with a real bullet and possibly kill the poor
man, some allowances had to be made to APPROXIMATE the RIGHT-to-LEFT
horizontal trajectory (just slightly) for the CE903 photograph.

But the HEIGHT of that pointer Specter is holding is just perfect for
the SBT to work, because it is at the height of the JFK back wound.
Denying that fact only makes CTers look foolish.

Plus: Consider the fact that the CE903 photo was taken without Mr.
Specter having the benefit of seeing the autopsy photos of JFK at all.
Shouldn't that be telling the "GERALD FORD MOVED THE WOUND" crowd
something important here? If not....why not?

CE903 = Utter SBT Perfection (even without Specter skewering a man for
the benefit of the photograph):

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0055b.htm

Now...tell me that pointer isn't precisely the proper height to match
the wound in this picture:

http://www.jfklancer.com/photos/autopsy_slideshow/images/BE5_HI.jpg


>>> "When the Australian research team's marksman fired the shot we could all see where the bullet went in JFK's back and out the front of JFK's chest, nowhere near the wound location on the front of JFK's neck. Proving empirically there is no basis for the Single Bullet Theory in fact." <<<

As if every single nuance of the SBT and CE399 (which was a bullet
fired by Oswald through a LIVING, BREATHING HUMAN BEING, not a dummy
torso) could be mimicked to the Nth degree. Get real. And grow some
CS&L.

The Australian test in Oct. 2004 is a good and reasonably-accurate
example of the inner workings of the SBT....e.g., the test bullet took
a generally-similar path to 399, did about the same damage in the two
"victims" while taking this path (hitting ALL the major pieces of the
torsos that WERE, indeed, affected by the real 399 bullet in '63! A
very important point here!), tumbled into the JBC back (just like
399), and emerged INTACT, just like 399. The test bullet was a bit
more damaged...but it ended up COMPLETELY WHOLE AND UNFRAGMENTED.

I want to know the odds of THREE separate shots (and guns) being able
to do what many CTers said the 3 guns did in '63 to JFK & JBC....and
yet (41 years later) have a team of researchers Down Under being able
to come ANYWHERE NEAR the same holes in the TWO bodies with just a
SINGLE BULLET -- and have that bullet emerge completely intact (like
399 did).

You couldn't calculate the odds here. It's so unlikely and utterly
improbable that three guns could have mimicked even a HALFWAY DECENT
SBT, I think I can safely use the word "impossible" to describe that
ridiculous multi-bullet CT version of the event, without fear of
embarrassment.

"BEYOND THE MAGIC BULLET":
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/69758897e673c5a2

>>> "Yours is one of the most serious cases of brainwash I've ever encountered on this NG." <<<

I've been brainwashed by the truth...and by common sense re. the SBT.
That's the only "brainwashing" that I've encountered re. this case.

You, OTOH, are a different story. You must believe, being an anti-
SBTer, that a bullet either went through Kennedy and then disappeared
into thin air (which, as Vince B. said recently, is the true "magic
bullet" in this case; "The conspiracy theorists have the ONLY magic
bullet in this case"--VB)....or....

You must believe in something far more fanciful than 60 SBTs combined--
i.e., the theory that THREE bullets replace the SBT/399 bullet in this
case. And then all of those bullets magically disappeared as well (if
399 is a "plant"...which virtually all CTers believe). Right or wrong?

Either option above is a conclusion that is many times sillier than is
the wholly-logical SBT.

But, naturally, you'll stick to your anti-SBT guns and refuse to use
any common sense when evaluating the SUM TOTAL of evidence in the
case....correct?

You'd rather isolate and speculate.

I, however, would prefer to evaluate the logical SUM TOTAL of the
evidence (with that sum total including what's NOT on the table
too...i.e., NO OTHER BULLETS IN EVIDENCE EXCEPT 399 with respect to
the SBT wounds).

And while evaluating this totality of evidence (and missing evidence),
I always ask myself: Is it truly logical and believable to think that
up to THREE separate--and vanishing!-- bullets (from three different
guns as well, given the close timing here) did this damage that the WC
says was done by CE399?

Can you guess what my answer to that last question always is?


http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0b30398a449c05b7

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bb22792c022c5a2e


0 new messages