Kennedy Books

[David Von Pein]

FYI---

My website below has been updated with a few new items, including
Clint Hill's new book, "Mrs. Kennedy And Me", coming in April 2012:

http://Kennedy-Books-Videos.blogspot.com/2011/03/kennedy-catalog.html

[David Von Pein]

>>> "I see my book "Elm Street. Oswald a tué Kennedy" (in French)
appears on your list." <<<

Yes. And, in fact, just yesterday I added the link to the USA Amazon
webpage for your book, Francois. (I did have it linked to the Amazon.fr
[French] site. I think perhaps that USA Amazon page is new, because I sure
don't remember it being there when I first created my Kennedy Catalog last
year.)


>>> "An English version of that second edition will be out this very year.
I'm excited about it. (Then you could read it. I'd love to have your
honest opinion about it)." <<<

Yes, I recall that you mentioned that fact in another post a few months
ago. I'd very much like to read your book. Unlike all of the conspiracy
books, I'm quite confident that your lone-assassin book is filled with
"evidence", and not unsupportable theories.

[Anthony Marsh]

Oh, you mean like the Single-Bullet THEORY.
Which version are we up to now? 8,921?

[David Von Pein]

The SBT isn't an unsupportable theory, Anthony. It's a perfectly
reasonable theory that is supported by lots of other evidence.

But, of course, you know that. And you also know that the SBT is by far
the best explanation for the double-man wounding of JFK & JBC. You just
want to argue....as always.

[claviger]

The Aussies proved the SBT beyond any doubt. By contrast your DST
(double shot theory) on the torso wounds has zero proof. A DST on the
head shot is likewise. The closest anyone came is the HSCA but they
determined the GK shot missed entirely, from such short range!

[Anthony Marsh]

On 1/22/2012 9:53 AM, claviger wrote:
> On Jan 21, 3:20 pm, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 1/21/2012 2:25 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>

>>>>>> "I see my book "Elm Street. Oswald a tu? Kennedy" (in French)

>>> appears on your list."<<<
>>
>>> Yes. And, in fact, just yesterday I added the link to the USA Amazon
>>> webpage for your book, Francois. (I did have it linked to the Amazon.fr
>>> [French] site. I think perhaps that USA Amazon page is new, because I sure
>>> don't remember it being there when I first created my Kennedy Catalog last
>>> year.)
>>
>>>>>> "An English version of that second edition will be out this very year.
>>> I'm excited about it. (Then you could read it. I'd love to have your
>>> honest opinion about it)."<<<
>>
>>> Yes, I recall that you mentioned that fact in another post a few months
>>> ago. I'd very much like to read your book. Unlike all of the conspiracy
>>> books, I'm quite confident that your lone-assassin book is filled with
>>> "evidence", and not unsupportable theories.
>>
>> Oh, you mean like the Single-Bullet THEORY.
>> Which version are we up to now? 8,921?
> The Aussies proved the SBT beyond any doubt. By contrast your DST

You know nothing. The Australian tests did not make their bullet go
through a wrist bone. That's how it came out looking so good. In fact
their test confirmed the Humes SBT which has one bullet going through only
JFK's torso and then Connally's torso and then falling out, exactly as the
Australian film shows. Then a second bullet hit the wrist.

> (double shot theory) on the torso wounds has zero proof. A DST on the
> head shot is likewise. The closest anyone came is the HSCA but they

I don't have a DST. I have a MSBT, Modified Single Bullet Theory, very
much like the Humes SBT.

> determined the GK shot missed entirely, from such short range!
>
>
>

What does the grassy knoll shot have to do with the SBT? Some of us
including Tink think that the grassy knoll shot was the only shot to the
head.

>
>
>
>
>
>

[Clubking01]

Beyond any doubt? Go back and watch that simulation again and see how
they hid the exit wound to JFK's front side because it came in
significantly lower that his neck.

[David Von Pein]

>>> "Then a second bullet hit the wrist." <<<

Tony,

If Connally's wrist isn't being struck by a bullet at circa Z224, then
why does Connally's right arm (including his wrist) go flying upward
starting at frame 226 of the Zapruder Film?

http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/109Z225-Z226TogglingClip.gif

http://single-bullet-theory.blogspot.com

[Questionin]

"Anthony Marsh" <anthon...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:4f1c...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...

That can't be possible? Because When the SB hit Connally in the thigh, it
was reflected changed angles again, in reverse motion and hit Kennedy in
the head causing him to appear as though he were shot from the front
because he fell back and to the right. THIS TIME?

[Anthony Marsh]

Whose SBT says that the bullet hit Connally in the thigh? Not sure whose
theory you are describing with a ricochet off the thigh hitting JFK in the
head.

Bouncing off the thigh it wouldn't have had enough energy to penetrate the
skull. Are you thinking about the Australian tests and how their bullet
bounced off the thigh block?

>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

So your theory it that a bullet hitting the wrist causes it to fly up
when it goes through it? Is this another Jet Effect? Why don't you call
it another neuromuscular response? Maybe it depends on where he got hit
and what nerves were excited.
What if he did that at another time as well, does that prove that he was
shot in the wrist at those times as well?

[Anthony Marsh]

You have to remember that they spent a lot on money on that project and
hours of reediting.
What I love the most is when they accidentally debunk what they were
trying to prove.

[David Von Pein]

>>> "So your theory it that a bullet hitting the wrist causes it to fly up when it goes through it? Is this another Jet Effect? Why don't you call it another neuromuscular response? Maybe it depends on where he got hit and what nerves were excited. What if he did that at another time as well, does that prove that he was shot in the wrist at those times as well?" <<<

Keep pretending that Connally's wrist dance means nothing, Tony. And
also keep pretending that the forward movement of JFK's head at the
precise instant of the head shot means nothing too.

Basic garden-variety question for W. Anthony Marsh:

If you had just been hit in the wrist by a rifle bullet, do you think
your wrist (and the arm/hand attached to that wrist) would remain
totally still and stationary after a bullet has just gone through it?
Or do you think you might JERK that arm/hand/wrist around a little bit
in a reflexive (and involuntary) manner?

[Anthony Marsh]

I think it would be knock down, not up.

[markusp]

On Jan 24, 8:59 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:

> also keep pretending that the forward movement of JFK's head at the
> precise instant of the head shot means nothing too.

Apparently then you are of the opinion that a missile striking him
from above & behind moved his head slightly forward. I agree. Do you
get the same conclusion regarding JFK's upper torso moving forward at
the precise instant of Z230?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-hrPPy6fgI&context=C338bbf2ADOEgsToPDskKe-cbwhSh01zB1UqYEvsVG

~Mark

[Anthony Marsh]

On 1/25/2012 10:08 PM, markusp wrote:
> On Jan 24, 8:59 am, David Von Pein<davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> also keep pretending that the forward movement of JFK's head at the
>> precise instant of the head shot means nothing too.
>
> Apparently then you are of the opinion that a missile striking him

> from above& behind moved his head slightly forward. I agree. Do you

> get the same conclusion regarding JFK's upper torso moving forward at
> the precise instant of Z230?
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-hrPPy6fgI&context=C338bbf2ADOEgsToPDskKe-cbwhSh01zB1UqYEvsVG
>
> ~Mark
>

I don't see JFK moving forward at Z-230. Are you thinking that a bullet
hit him then? Where did the bullet go. He hands are up in front of his
throat then.

[markusp]

On Jan 26, 8:47 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 1/25/2012 10:08 PM, markusp wrote:
>
> > On Jan 24, 8:59 am, David Von Pein<davevonp...@aol.com>  wrote:
>
> >> also keep pretending that the forward movement of JFK's head at the
> >> precise instant of the head shot means nothing too.
>
> > Apparently then you are of the opinion that a missile striking him
> > from above&  behind moved his head slightly forward. I agree. Do you
> > get the same conclusion regarding JFK's upper torso moving forward at
> > the precise instant of Z230?
>

> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-hrPPy6fgI&context=C338bbf2ADOEgsToPD...

>
> > ~Mark
>
> I don't see JFK moving forward at Z-230. Are you thinking that a bullet
> hit him then? Where did the bullet go. He hands are up in front of his
> throat then.

The slow motion tends to mask the abrupt forward movement of JFK's upper
torso, which then causes his chin to raise. Starting precisely at Z230,
this movement ends at precisely 234. This movement is appreciable, due in
part to learning that a missile striking a human body will indeed cause it
to move slightly in the same direction. That effect will not be as
pronounced as what Hollywood would have us believe.

So the fleeting movement wasn't even noticed by anyone until Robert Groden
started rotoscoping the film and the resulting stabilization and slow
motion versions showed that something happens to JFK at Z230. I'm not
convinced whatsoever that this is a neuromuscular delay. It sure looks to
me like he gets shot in the back at 230. If that is correct, then
automatic default to conspiracy.

The bullet went in about an inch, lodged there, and worked its way back
out of the wound in the drive to PH, or on the gurney at PH. It was likely
in JFK's shirt, and is known to all of us as CE399. This theory lends at
least a semblance of common sense and rationality, versus any SBT I've
encountered.

In response to your anticipated question of where the shooter would have
been located to issue the frontal throat wound, my answer is, and has
always been, I don't know. Allow me to ask yet another basic question,
Tony:

Is it possible that JFK's throat wound resembled an entry site, but may
not have been caused by a missile? To your knowledge, were there any pens,
or other devices, that may have impaled his throat when he slumped down in
the limo?

~Mark

[bigdog]

On Feb 2, 3:31 pm, markusp <markina...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Jan 26, 8:47 pm, Anthony Marsh <anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 1/25/2012 10:08 PM, markusp wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 24, 8:59 am, David Von Pein<davevonp...@aol.com>  wrote:
>
> > >> also keep pretending that the forward movement of JFK's head at the
> > >> precise instant of the head shot means nothing too.
>
> > > Apparently then you are of the opinion that a missile striking him
> > > from above&  behind moved his head slightly forward. I agree. Do you
> > > get the same conclusion regarding JFK's upper torso moving forward at
> > > the precise instant of Z230?
>
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-hrPPy6fgI&context=C338bbf2ADOEgsToPD...
>
> > > ~Mark
>
> > I don't see JFK moving forward at Z-230. Are you thinking that a bullet
> > hit him then? Where did the bullet go. He hands are up in front of his
> > throat then.
>
> The slow motion tends to mask the abrupt forward movement of JFK's upper
> torso, which then causes his chin to raise. Starting precisely at Z230,
> this movement ends at precisely 234. This movement is appreciable, due in
> part to learning that a missile striking a human body will indeed cause it
> to move slightly in the same direction. That effect will not be as
> pronounced as what Hollywood would have us believe.
>

That is true but it is not the only thing that can cause a body to move.
How do you determine that the slight forward movement is a bullet strike
and not simply the continuation of JFK's reaction to be shot once less
than a half second earlier.

> So the fleeting movement wasn't even noticed by anyone until Robert Groden
> started rotoscoping the film and the resulting stabilization and slow
> motion versions showed that something happens to JFK at Z230.

Anything that has Robert Groden as its source is dubious from the get- go.
Groden is a buffoon. The guy has been milking JFK's assassination for all
it is worth for over 35 years and hasn't contributed one valuable piece of
information. Quite a bit of misinformation however.

> I'm not
> convinced whatsoever that this is a neuromuscular delay. It sure looks to
> me like he gets shot in the back at 230. If that is correct, then
> automatic default to conspiracy.
>

That would be true but since there is no hard evidence of a bullet
strike at Z230, there is no hard evidence of a conspiracy.

> The bullet went in about an inch, lodged there, and worked its way back
> out of the wound in the drive to PH, or on the gurney at PH.

Oh boy, here we go again. What kind of bullet only penetrates an inch into
soft tissue? Jack Ruby's relatively low powered .38 went all the way
through Oswald's abdomen and bulged out his left side. Even if there was
such weak ammunition, why would anyone who was trying to kill JFK use such
an ineffective round?

> It was likely
> in JFK's shirt, and is known to all of us as CE399. This theory lends at
> least a semblance of common sense and rationality, versus any SBT I've
> encountered.
>

If you are claiming it was CE399 that only penetrated that far, you have a
real problem. I've read that the 6.5mm round will penetrate anywhere from
2 to 4 feet of pine board. How is such a round going to stop after only
going one inch into soft tissue. Sorry, that does not compute.

> In response to your anticipated question of where the shooter would have
> been located to issue the frontal throat wound, my answer is, and has
> always been, I don't know.

The problem with your theory is that you can't even give us a
possibility.

> Allow me to ask yet another basic question,
> Tony:
>
> Is it possible that JFK's throat wound resembled an entry site, but may
> not have been caused by a missile? To your knowledge, were there any pens,
> or other devices, that may have impaled his throat when he slumped down in
> the limo?
>

Now there's a stretch!!!

You're working way to hard to avoid the obvious answer. CE399 went through
JFK from back to front, went through JBC from back to front, smashed his
wrist and imbedded in his thigh. Simply. Straight forward. And requires no
suspension of physical laws.

[Anthony Marsh]

Since Connally said he was hit at about Z-230 your argument would
produce a SBT at frame 230.

> The bullet went in about an inch, lodged there, and worked its way back
> out of the wound in the drive to PH, or on the gurney at PH. It was likely

Physically impossible. It is physically impossible to get a M-C bullet out
of the barrel slow enough that it only goes into someone an inch. The
bullet itself is over an inch long. Dr. Forest Chapman tested the idea of
a dud round by underloading a M-C round and the result was that the rifle
blew up in his face. And the WCC ammo was extremely reliable with no
misfires or duds ever.

> in JFK's shirt, and is known to all of us as CE399. This theory lends at
> least a semblance of common sense and rationality, versus any SBT I've
> encountered.
>

Impossible. Just because one theory is stupid doesn't mean that you have
to believe a competing theory which is impossible.

> In response to your anticipated question of where the shooter would have
> been located to issue the frontal throat wound, my answer is, and has
> always been, I don't know. Allow me to ask yet another basic question,
> Tony:
>
> Is it possible that JFK's throat wound resembled an entry site, but may
> not have been caused by a missile? To your knowledge, were there any pens,
> or other devices, that may have impaled his throat when he slumped down in
> the limo?
>

It was a bullet wound. No other object made that hole. He did not strike
any object when he slumped and he had the hole in his throat before his
hands went up in front of his throat. FYI one of the very first theories
was that the bullet which hit the head or a fragment from it exited his
throat.

http://the-puzzle-palace.com/Globe11-23-63.jpg

> ~Mark
>

[Anthony Marsh]

A .22 or a .45.

> through Oswald's abdomen and bulged out his left side. Even if there was
> such weak ammunition, why would anyone who was trying to kill JFK use such
> an ineffective round?

That is only one reason why his theory doesn't work. Also the fact that
he claims it was CE399 which did that, which is physically impossible.
So how did the autopsy doctors explain the shallow wound? Humes
postulated an ice bullet and the FBI looked into that. And then you call
the conspiracy believers kooks?

>
>> It was likely
>> in JFK's shirt, and is known to all of us as CE399. This theory lends at
>> least a semblance of common sense and rationality, versus any SBT I've
>> encountered.
>>
>
> If you are claiming it was CE399 that only penetrated that far, you have a
> real problem. I've read that the 6.5mm round will penetrate anywhere from
> 2 to 4 feet of pine board. How is such a round going to stop after only
> going one inch into soft tissue. Sorry, that does not compute.
>

How do you claim that CE 399 only penetrated Connally's thigh about an inch?

>> In response to your anticipated question of where the shooter would have
>> been located to issue the frontal throat wound, my answer is, and has
>> always been, I don't know.
>
> The problem with your theory is that you can't even give us a
> possibility.
>
>> Allow me to ask yet another basic question,
>> Tony:
>>
>> Is it possible that JFK's throat wound resembled an entry site, but may
>> not have been caused by a missile? To your knowledge, were there any pens,
>> or other devices, that may have impaled his throat when he slumped down in
>> the limo?
>>
>
> Now there's a stretch!!!
>
> You're working way to hard to avoid the obvious answer. CE399 went through
> JFK from back to front, went through JBC from back to front, smashed his
> wrist and imbedded in his thigh. Simply. Straight forward. And requires no
> suspension of physical laws.
>

But you suspend the physical laws to make your case.

[claviger]

Anthony,

> > The Aussies proved the SBT beyond any doubt.  By contrast your DST
> You know nothing. The Australian tests did not make their bullet go
> through a wrist bone. That's how it came out looking so good. In fact
> their test confirmed the Humes SBT which has one bullet going through only
> JFK's torso and then Connally's torso and then falling out, exactly as the
> Australian film shows. Then a second bullet hit the wrist.

What the Aussies proved beyond a doubt is a Carcano 6.5 FMJ penetrated
the torso of the first passenger and tumbled into the next passenger
on a downward path with enough velocity to cause serious wounds on the
second passenger. The 6.5 FMJ ammo they used did this more than once.
That is all they need to prove. Apparently many critics of the SBT
don't believe ANY bullet can wound two people in tandem. Those
skeptics are showing their ignorance of ballistics, as any experienced
hunter or police officer would know. Even softnose bullets have been
known to cause through-and-through wounds to various objects. The
Carcano 6.5 had a reputation for deep penetration wounds, so deep they
come out the other side.

> > (double shot theory) on the torso wounds has zero proof.  A DST on the
> > head shot is likewise.  The closest anyone came is the HSCA but they
> I don't have a DST. I have a MSBT, Modified Single Bullet Theory, very
> much like the Humes SBT.

In the past you proposed a simultaneous two shot theory to explain the
torso wounds to the President and Governor. You argued two shots hit
both passengers within a fraction of a second making it look like only
one shot, claiming both shots came from different windows in the
TSBD. The problem you never explained was where did these bullets end
up and how did the second one avoid the President? Why did the second
bullet cause a keyhole entry wound?

What is a MSBT?

> > determined the GK shot missed entirely, from such short range!
> What does the grassy knoll shot have to do with the SBT? Some of us
> including Tink think that the grassy knoll shot was the only shot to the
> head.

Cyril Wecht claimed a two shot theory on the head wound, to explain
the forward and back movement seen in the Zapruder film. Do you
reject his theory?

[claviger]

As I remember each shot was slightly different, which is to be
expected. The point is all shots completely penetrated the first
dummy and collided with the second dummy. All projectiles tumbled
between dummies. How can anyone argue against the SBT after watching
this scientific field testing? If you think there was no SBT then why
was no bullet found inside the body of the President? The same
question must be answered if you think there were two entry wounds,
throat and back, and no exit wounds on the President.

[markusp]

On Feb 3, 8:02 am, claviger <historiae.fi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you think there was no SBT then why
> was no bullet found inside the body of the President?  The same
> question must be answered if you think there were two entry wounds,
> throat and back, and no exit wounds on the President.

Be careful to avoid entertaining a theory regarding one aspect of this
murder, but then expecting normal results in other areas. For example,
simply disbelieving the SBT by offering a differing version of shot
sequencing, does not mandate discovery of a lodged missile in his body. If
the conspirators could take care of minor details like having the FBI take
over all investigation and evidence, have the SS whisk the body away
illegally, then stack the commission with persons of questionable
character (Dulles, Ford), they certainly would have addressed autopsy
manipulation in some way.

Also, I think one of the autopsy technicians discussed a possible missile
discovery, but that claim is in dispute, and may not have been issued
under oath.

Thanks!
~Mark

[timstter]

Let's make that the single bullet FACT shall we, Marsh.

It's LAUGHABLE in 2012 to still be arguing wacky theories like an FMJ
couldn't transit two bodies.

Try reading up on what the same type FMJ did when it was fired at
Edwin Walker.

Informative Regards,

Tim Brennan
Sydney, Australia
*Newsgroup(s) Commentator*

[Anthony Marsh]

Maybe you didn't notice that their bullet did not hit any wrist.
It is the wrist which is the deal breaker. That's why the doctors said
that Connally's wrist was hit by a different bullet.

> was no bullet found inside the body of the President? The same

The evidence shows that the bullet which hit his back exited his throat.
It does not prove that it hit Connally.

> question must be answered if you think there were two entry wounds,
> throat and back, and no exit wounds on the President.
>
>

Why don't you ask Humes, who thought it was done by an ice bullet?
And you want to rely on a moron like that?

>
>

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/3/2012 9:02 AM, claviger wrote:

> Anthony,
>
>>> The Aussies proved the SBT beyond any doubt. By contrast your DST
>> You know nothing. The Australian tests did not make their bullet go
>> through a wrist bone. That's how it came out looking so good. In fact
>> their test confirmed the Humes SBT which has one bullet going through only
>> JFK's torso and then Connally's torso and then falling out, exactly as the
>> Australian film shows. Then a second bullet hit the wrist.
> What the Aussies proved beyond a doubt is a Carcano 6.5 FMJ penetrated
> the torso of the first passenger and tumbled into the next passenger
> on a downward path with enough velocity to cause serious wounds on the
> second passenger. The 6.5 FMJ ammo they used did this more than once.
> That is all they need to prove. Apparently many critics of the SBT
> don't believe ANY bullet can wound two people in tandem. Those
> skeptics are showing their ignorance of ballistics, as any experienced
> hunter or police officer would know. Even softnose bullets have been
> known to cause through-and-through wounds to various objects. The
> Carcano 6.5 had a reputation for deep penetration wounds, so deep they
> come out the other side.
>

I hope everyone notices that you dare not respond to my point about
their bullet not breaking a wrist bone. You can't. It is the deal
breaker. Even Humes and all the doctors knew that.
THEIR SBT had enough energy to go through both men. But the wrist had to
be hit by a different bullet.
To repeat, I never said and the doctors never said that a
Mannlicher-Carcano bullet can not go clean through two bodies. I have
even said that it is theoretically possible that every element of YOUR
SBT is possible as long as your bullet is CE 567/569. Not CE 399.
Even just hitting the radius will make it mushroom.
Look at the Walker bullet.
When a bullet comes out looking as good as CE 399 it means it is a test
bullet fired into a water trap.
That is only one of the technical errors made in the conspiracy.
I would have test fired the bullet into a pig to make it look more damaged.

>>> (double shot theory) on the torso wounds has zero proof. A DST on the
>>> head shot is likewise. The closest anyone came is the HSCA but they
>> I don't have a DST. I have a MSBT, Modified Single Bullet Theory, very
>> much like the Humes SBT.
> In the past you proposed a simultaneous two shot theory to explain the
> torso wounds to the President and Governor. You argued two shots hit

I never said simultaneous. Unlike you I specified the frames. Kennedy at
Z-210 and Connally at Z-230.

> both passengers within a fraction of a second making it look like only
> one shot, claiming both shots came from different windows in the
> TSBD. The problem you never explained was where did these bullets end

It can't be fractions of a second. The only fractions of a second
between shots on the Dictabelt are at the end during the head shot.

> up and how did the second one avoid the President? Why did the second
> bullet cause a keyhole entry wound?
>

CE903 shows how the second one avoided the President. It went over his
right shoulder as Arlen Specter so expertly demonstrated. See the rod he
is holding? That is the path of the bullet.

http://the-puzzle-palace.com/ce903.jpg

Connally's wound was not a keyhole entry. It was only slightly elongated
because it struck a curved surface.
What do you claim caused the keyhole entry wound you think you see in
the back of JFK's head? Exactly the same dimensions as Connally's back
wound?
How come you are never brave enough to answer MY questions?

[Anthony Marsh]

On 2/3/2012 8:58 PM, timstter wrote:
> On Jan 22, 8:20 am, Anthony Marsh<anthony.ma...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> On 1/21/2012 2:25 PM, David Von Pein wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>> "I see my book "Elm Street. Oswald a tué Kennedy" (in French)
>>> appears on your list."<<<
>>
>>> Yes. And, in fact, just yesterday I added the link to the USA Amazon
>>> webpage for your book, Francois. (I did have it linked to the Amazon.fr
>>> [French] site. I think perhaps that USA Amazon page is new, because I sure
>>> don't remember it being there when I first created my Kennedy Catalog last
>>> year.)
>>
>>>>>> "An English version of that second edition will be out this very year.
>>> I'm excited about it. (Then you could read it. I'd love to have your
>>> honest opinion about it)."<<<
>>
>>> Yes, I recall that you mentioned that fact in another post a few months
>>> ago. I'd very much like to read your book. Unlike all of the conspiracy
>>> books, I'm quite confident that your lone-assassin book is filled with
>>> "evidence", and not unsupportable theories.
>>
>> Oh, you mean like the Single-Bullet THEORY.
>> Which version are we up to now? 8,921?
>
> Let's make that the single bullet FACT shall we, Marsh.
>
> It's LAUGHABLE in 2012 to still be arguing wacky theories like an FMJ
> couldn't transit two bodies.
>

No one said anything like that.
It's ridiculous to see you keep making up strawman arguments every year.

> Try reading up on what the same type FMJ did when it was fired at
> Edwin Walker.
>

It didn't hit him. And you don't know why. I do.

[Clubking01]

To also mention that Connally's thoracic surgeon, Dr. Robert Shaw,
explained that in order to clean and debride (cut away devitalized tissue)
the wound, he had to enlarge it to twice its size.