REVIEW -- "JFK: Beyond The Magic Bullet" (From "The Discovery Channel")

276 views
Skip to first unread message

David Von Pein

unread,
Mar 11, 2007, 7:09:18 AM3/11/07
to
"UNSOLVED HISTORY -- JFK: BEYOND THE MAGIC BULLET"
(THE DISCOVERY CHANNEL)

THE CLOSEST WE'RE LIKELY TO EVER GET TO A PERFECT DUPLICATION
OF THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY.....

http://shopping.discovery.com/product-56798.html

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

The cable television network "The Discovery Channel" aired the
documentary program "JFK: Beyond The Magic Bullet" in November 2004, a
very impressive John F. Kennedy assassination-related program which
set out to attempt to duplicate (with all possible accuracy) the
controversial "Single-Bullet Theory"; and it's a program which
hammered one or two more nails into the "conspiracy" coffin.

The more and more time that passes, the firmer and more solidified the
"Lone Assassin" position becomes with respect to JFK's murder in
Dallas on November 22, 1963; while the "It Was A Conspiracy" side
makes no headway whatsoever, with zero tests like that of The
Discovery Channel's "SBT" test being performed to prove the conspiracy
buffs are correct. Nor do we ever see any computer simulations for the
"CT" side to "prove" their case for conspiracy (a la Dale Myers'
exacting animation project, which, like the "Magic Bullet" program,
goes a long way toward proving the SBT is a truism).

Several impressive things supporting the overall doability of the SBT
scenario came out of the "Beyond The Magic Bullet" program.....such as
the "log" test (with a bullet being fired into a solid block of wood).
The test bullet looked absolutely perfect after being dug out of
several feet of wood.

And, of course, the actual SBT re-creation itself....which proved
beyond any doubt that a WCC, 6.5mm, FMJ, Mannlicher-Carcano bullet
exactly like "CE399" (the actual bullet from the JFK case in 1963)
could, indeed, take a very similar path through two "bodies", and then
emerge in pretty decent shape....as we can see here:

http://216.122.129.112/dc/user_files/6735.jpg

The Discovery Channel test bullet was more damaged than CE399, but IMO
the test proved a very important thing -- it proved that a bullet like
Oswald's 399 could go through two bodies, do a lot of damage, and NOT
BE BROKEN UP AT ALL.

The test bullet, just like 399, emerged PERFECTLY WHOLE (i.e., not
fragmented at all). It's all in ONE PIECE. It's flattened more than
399, sure....but certainly not banged all to hell like Dr. Cyril Wecht
seems to think a bullet like 399 would HAVE to have been if it went
through the bodies of both Jack Kennedy and John Connally and caused
seven wounds; and the "test" bullet caused an extra (2nd) rib fracture
within the John Connally mock-up "body" during the re-creation as
well.

The nose portion of the test bullet wasn't flattened at all either,
which is an important factor, indicating almost certainly it took a
similar path through John Connally's "mock" torso in the test, just as
CE399 most-likely took through JBC's real torso in 1963 -- indicating
a bullet that smashed into most of the hard objects that it hit in a
BACKWARD, END-FIRST manner, thereby keeping the nose undamaged.

And another impressive part of the "Magic Bullet" broadcast was the
ending sequence which had a doctor giving his erroneous opinion that
the damage he had just seen in the X-rays from the re-creation almost
certainly must have been caused "by more than just one bullet".

When proven wrong in this multi-bullet belief, the Los Angeles doctor
was genuinely surprised. (Do CTers think that he's a "CT plant"
too...only feigning "surprise" when confronted with the test results
to further the notion of the SBT?)

Another point I'd like to make regarding the "Beyond The Magic Bullet"
re-creation (with respect to Connally's thigh wound)......

Many CTers like to point out (with some glee) that the "test" bullet
in the Discovery Channel re-creation/simulation didn't penetrate the
surrogate "thigh wound" of JBC. Instead, the test bullet struck the
simulated thigh and then immediately bounced off into the grass.

But it's very, very possible that a similar occurrence DID happen with
the real John Connally on 11/22/63 -- that is to say:

It's quite possible (given the nearly-"spent" condition of Bullet
CE399 at the time it struck Connally's leg) that CE399 did not remain
in his thigh for any length of time at all. Perhaps it immediately
came out of that shallow leg wound and then simply fell down into
Connally's pants leg....where it remained until later falling out of
the clothing onto his stretcher inside Parkland Hospital.

But the main point I want to make about the "bouncing off the thigh"
test bullet vs. the real bullet that struck Connally on November 22nd
is.....

If CE399 did, in fact, pop out of JBC's thigh just after entering his
leg, it would have had virtually NO CHOICE but to remain in Connally's
pants leg (unless CTers want to theorize that the bullet miraculously
exited JBC's leg by way of the very same small hole in his pants where
it entered).

Sure, the bullet could have conceivably found its way down to the
bottom of JBC's pants-leg opening and dropped out into the car
immediately. But a reasonable person researching the case knows that
that scenario did not happen....because if it had occurred, a bullet
would have been found in the car that could equate to Connally's
wounds.

In my opinion, it's very likely that that bullet (CE399) almost
immediately fell out of JBC's leg after striking the thigh, and it
remained in his pants leg until after he was wheeled into the
hospital.

Such a scenario would also (in a small way at the very least) explain
why there was no trace evidence left on 399....due to the fact that it
was never "buried" in a victim for any length of time
whatsoever....thereby making it less likely for trace evidence to have
accumulated on the missile.

All-in-all....that Discovery Channel broadcast did an amazing job at
replicating the damage path and general characteristics of CE399. The
test bullet exited the JFK mock body much lower than the real 399 did
in '63, true. I certainly cannot deny this obvious difference. But we
must keep in mind that a PERFECT re-creation can never be fully
achieved, with every single "human" nuance accounted for (since only
mock torsos were utilized in the re-creation).

With some unavoidable limitations in mind, the SBT re-creation done by
the Australian team of JFK researchers in early October of 2004 is as
close to the real event that I believe we're likely to ever see. And
the results most certainly do not debunk the likelihood of the Single-
Bullet Conclusion. To the contrary -- the results of that re-creation
enhance the viability of the Warren Commission's one-bullet conclusion
greatly.

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

ADDITIONAL COMMENTS RE. "JFK: BEYOND THE MAGIC BULLET":

Prominent JFK assassination researchers Vincent Bugliosi and Dale
Myers both put in appearances in the Discovery Channel "Beyond The
Magic Bullet" documentary.

Myers convincingly demonstrates the rock-solid validity of the Single-
Bullet Theory, via portions of his Emmy Award-winning 3D computer
animation of the assassination ("Secrets Of A Homicide: The JFK
Assassination").

"It's a straight line....it's the only way it COULD have happened." --
Dale K. Myers ....

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2kEh3Kgwhk0

Bugliosi, in his only appearance in a JFK documentary of this nature
(that I am aware of; not taking into account his appearance as the
prosecuting attorney in the 1986 TV Docu-Trial, "On Trial: Lee Harvey
Oswald"), provides a few tidbits of general information throughout the
early stages of the program.

I would have enjoyed hearing a lot more from Vince and Dale during
this documentary program, but their on-screen time is not very
prolonged...but intriguing nonetheless.

Here are some verbatim quotes spoken by Vincent Bugliosi during the
"Beyond The Magic Bullet" program:

"The American people are simply misinformed. They think they know what
happened; but there's an enormous amount of material in this case they
have no idea about." -- VB

~~~~~

"If, in fact, the bullet that passed through Kennedy did NOT go on and
hit Connally, then the bullet that DID hit Connally, by definition,
would have had to have been a separate bullet from a second gunman.
Why? Because Kennedy and Connally were hit virtually at the same time.
And with Oswald's single-shot, bolt-action rifle, it would have been
absolutely impossible for him to squeeze off two rounds within a split-
second of each other." -- VB

~~~~~

That last Vince Bugliosi quote above goes a long way, in my opinion,
toward debunking the "Anti-SBT/Pro-Lone Gunman" theory put forth by
Mark Fuhrman in his 2006 book "A Simple Act Of Murder", which is a
theory of Mr. Fuhrman's that DOES indeed have Oswald performing a non-
SBT solo act and doing what Vince has said (via the above quote) is
"absolutely impossible".

I agree 100% with Mr. Bugliosi -- it was "absolutely impossible" for
Lee Harvey Oswald to wound JFK and John Connally with separate
bullets, given the Zapruder Film timeline of the event.

The Single-Bullet Theory is still fully intact....and always will be
in my opinion. It's the "best evidence" in the case for what actually
happened to President Kennedy and Governor Connally on November 22,
1963.

http://hometheaterforum.com/htf/showpost.php?p=2360150&postcount=271

David Von Pein
December 2004
October 2006
November 2006
March 2007

luthie...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 11, 2007, 9:15:06 AM3/11/07
to
The current debate is very much like the the debate on the single
bullet theory. It centers around the question whether the impossible
trajectory of that bullet is possible after all. Which takes away from
the much more important reasons to blow it out of the water, namely:

1) The bullet fragments retrieved from Connolly's wrist weighed much
more than what the "magic bullet" had lost from its original weight.

2) No bullet penetrated Kennedy's neck

3) No bullet in recorded history has ever caused 7 wounds, penetrating
and shattering bones in the process, and emerged in the un-deformed
condition of the magic bullet.

4) It is simply impossible that one bullet causing such damage,
emerges in almost pristine condition, while the other one, the one in
Kennedy's head, purportedly from the same rifle, explodes in a
thousand fragments.

Wim Dankbaar
da...@xs4all.nl

Wim Dankbaar is a 44-year-old father of two in The Netherlands. For
the last four years he has been actively involved in a project to
gather and present new evidence in the JFK assassination ... evidence
that proves that the official story is a fraud and that the Kennedy
killing was a conspiracy with the knowledge and consent of the highest
powers in US government.


What is the basis for Dankbaar's assertion that the CIA and and anti-
Castro elements were behind the assassination?

Dankbaar: This becomes very clear for everyone who studies the known
evidence thoroughly. Both the CIA, or maybe I should say the hawks in
the CIA, and the anti Castro cubans, who were trained by the CIA, had
the means and the motives to kill Kennedy. But they did it in
partnership with some key figures in the US Government and Big
Business in Texas, as well as a few leaders in Organized Crime. These
last three groups had equally strong motives to rid themselves of
Kennedy, and even stronger means to pull it off. The fact of the
matter is that it was an ordinary but hidden coup d'etat, to take over
the US government and reverse the policies of Kennedy. Policies that
were detested by all of these groups. These groups had already found
each other long before 1963.

They were in bed together. The most visible proof of that, is their
efforts to assassinate Fidel Castro. The groups involved in that are
the exact same groups that I have mentioned, this is a proven and
public fact now, and they are the exact same people that ended up
killing Kennedy. They were very much intertwined, and probably still
are. Now if you want to put faces to these devils of power, you could
best divide them first into a 3 level hierarchy. High level, mid level
and operational level. The high level is the select group of
conspirators, you may think of Lyndon Johnson, J. Edgar Hoover, George
and Prescott Bush, Allen Dulles, oil barons Clint Murchison and H. L.
Hunt, crime bosses Santo Trafficante, Sam Giancana and Carlos
Marcello. It was actually a wider group than that, but it is difficult
to pinpoint them all. After all, in a cover-up you have to work with
circumstantial evidence, unless someone breaks the secrecy with a
public confession.

The mid-level was the planning cadre, the managers, the puppet masters
directing the pawns and the actual shooters. Two of those managers,
the CIA calls them controllers, were E. Howard Hunt and his partner
David Atlee Phillips. They are both legends in Covert Operations. Guy
Banister in New Orleans is another example. The CIA also used assets
to assist with the operational side. Philip Twombly for example, a
very unknown name, was instrumental in providing the fake secret
service badges that were made for the executives in Dealey Plaza. He
was also in Dallas that day, as was Nixon, their cover was the Pepsi
Cola bottling convention. So this mid group organizes the actual
operation. They direct the shooters and their spotters. They are the
operational level. And it is important to understand that these
shooters do not necessarily have to know about each other's
participation. That is what the CIA calls compartimentalization. They
only take orders from their direct boss, they are not being told who
else is involved in the operation, just to follow orders. This works
horizontally and vertically in the organization. Even the mid level
people do not have to know all the people at the top. One man to take
the orders from is enough. For example, if Howard Hunt gets his orders
from Dulles, he doesn't have to know that Dulles planned it with Nixon
and Johnson. And Nixon and Johnson don't need to know the identities
of the shooters. So at the top the conspiracy is rather closely held,
although many people are used. The ground rules are CIA only, maximum
security, non-attributability, plausible denial, need to know basis,
no written communication. Another ground rule is "What you don't know
can't hurt anybody." Interestingly, this rule is also applied by a
control of the mass media, who hardly ever report on the JFK
assassination, unless it is something nutty or disinformation, but the
real critics of the official version are not given a voice by US
media.

Only Oliver Stone was able to break through this wall with his much
attacked movie JFK, which presented a more believable scenario,
however still without naming the names.
If you want names in the operational level I can tell you that Charles
Nicoletti and James Files were two of the shooters. They were both
under orders from Sam Giancana, the mafia boss of Chicago. John
Roselli, another lieutenant of Giancana, was also there, but as a
spotter, he did not shoot. Of these names I am absolutely sure, based
on the detailed confession of James Files, who claims he fired the
fatal headshot from the grassy knoll. Why he is credible is too
detailed to explain here, I do that in my book 'Files on JFK.' He says
that his boss Charles Nicoletti fired from the Daltex building behind
Kennedy. His knowledge does not go further than that, which shows the
compartimentalization again. Of course there were also shooters in the
Texas schoolbook building, and possibly other locations like the roof
of the Records building, but I don't know their identities beyond any
doubt. I have strong indications though that both David Sanchez
Morales and Richard Cain were shooters in the Book Depository. Richard
Cain was another hitman for Sam Giancana with strong CIA ties and
Morales was a husky looking Mexican-Indian with very dark complection,
who developed a reputation as best CIA assassin for Latin American. He
was also very close with David Atlee Phillips and he was the Chief of
Operations of the CIA station in Miami which trained the Cuban exiles
for raids against Castro. The boss of that station was Ted Shackley,
an associate of George Bush, which connection is later formalized when
Bush becomes CIA director and appoints Shackley as his Deputy Director
Operations. Interestingly, James Files says that he was recruited for
the CIA by David Atlee Phillips on a recommendation of Ted Shackley.
Furthermore I know that Luis Posada Carriles and Orlando Bosch were on
Dealey Plaza.

Was Oswald the assassin of JFK?

Dankbaar: No, of course not. Oswald was a CIA agent who was cleverly
setup as the patsy by his superiors David Atlee Phillips and Guy
Banister in New Orleans. It appears that George Demohrenschildt, an
oil geologist who knew all the Texan oil tycoons, including Bush, was
also handling Oswald in Dallas. Anyway, I am positive that Phillips
made Oswald believe that he was playing the part of the hero, trying
to infiltrate the assassination plot in order to inform on it and thus
in order to prevent it. It is only at the last moment that Oswald
realized he was just a patsy, as he said himself. This is also why he
was at the right time in the right place. He cooperated, hoping up to
the last moment that he could prevent the assassination. He was
actually an admirer of Kennedy for his civil rights and anti-
segregation policies. But he was also the perfect patsy. Through his
staged defection to Russia, which was in fact a covert mission
supported by the CIA, he already looked like a communist and he
smelled like a communist. This was reinforced with his pro Castro
cover and Fair Play for Cuba Committee, which he also did under
direction of the CIA. Lee Harvey loved to be a double agent and
infiltrate the other side. But the truth is that he was very strongly
anti-Castro. I do know that he participated in at least one of the
plans to kill Castro. Funny enough Oswald misspeaks in one of his
radio interviews. He says that in Russia he" was at all times under
the protection of the US Government." Then he quickly corrects
himself, saying that he did not mean to say that but that he "held at
all times contacts with the American Embassy in Moscow"

No, Oswald was the opposite of the assassin of JFK, and this is
perhaps the greatest injustice of all. Although the media and
government mouthpieces are still trying to brainwash the public with
the lone-nut-assassin-lie, there is not a shred of evidence to place
him on the 6th floor with that old rifle, let alone firing it, let
alone hitting JFK. This is even clear for those who read the Warren
Report, there is enough evidence in there to vindicate him, but they
knew that the average American is not going to plough through those 26
volumes, so just repeating its "conclusion" through the media was
enough to accomplish the mission. Certainly at that time when
Americans still trusted their government.

Oswald would have been vindicated if he would have gone to trial. He
would also have blown the lid of the conspiracy. Therefore he could
not be allowed to live. It is obvious that something went wrong in the
plan. They did not plan for him to be captured and alive in custody.
So Jack Ruby, who was Giancana's man in Dallas and also worked for
Carlos Marcello and Santo Trafficante, was hastily selected to finish
the job. He had to, disobeying an order in the mob is not an option.

How long took the investigation that you have been directing?

Dankbaar: That depends on when you start counting, I have been
interested in it since 1988. From that time I have read books, watched
documentaries and such. But I have become actively involved when I
learned about the confession of James Files, which was only 4 years
ago.

Who financed your investigation?

Dankbaar: Myself, but I have to say I that am building on the work and
testimonies of others, most of those have invested at great personal
cost, financially, emotionally or both. Without these people my work
would not have been possible. Jim Garrison and Joe West are just a few
of those people. The late Joe West is the man who found James Files
and persuaded him to confess, although Joe West did not live to hear
it himself. Jim Garrsion was the one and only public official to take
on the conspiracy and try to bring the guilty to justice. If we would
have man like that today , with what we know today, the American
public would quickly learn the ugly truth. But unfortunately, so far
there does not seem to be a man like Jim Garrison. They should make a
statue for him, maybe next to Kennedy's grave or in front of the White
House.

What is the evidence for the involvement of Bush senior?

Dankbaar: He is connected to all the main players. It is a matter of
common sense and circumstancial evidence. I do not know if that
evidence would be enough for a conviction, but right now the problem
is more that the public does not know about that evidence, because
they are not informed of it. To me that clearly shows there is no real
freedom of press in America, that is just a cheap myth. What can be
proven without any doubt is that Bush lied about not being in the CIA
in 1963. A declassified document written by J. Edgar Hoover shows that
he was in contact with Hoover about the Kennedy assassination,
specifically about the reaction of the cuban exile community in Miami.
Hoover names him as "George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency."
It is further logical that Bush would be informed on the Cuban exiles
because there are several sources that claim he helped finance the Bay
of Pigs invasion and actively recruited people for it. There he made
his friends in the exile community. One example is Felix Rodriguez,
who is Luis Posada's buddy and takes credit for killing Che Guevara.

Common sense also tells you that someone with no experience, is
appointed director of the CIA. But Bush wants us to believe the
opposite. Although he seems to have insulated himself preety well,
there is a wealth of evidence that puts him in the middle of all the
players. Like he was good friends with Oswald's best friend in Dallas,
George Demohrenschildt. But he was also very close to Nixon and
Dulles, who did not only plan the Bay of the pigs, but are also better
known suspects in the Kennedy conspiracy. Nixon would not do anything
without the knowledge of Bush because he thanked his political career
to Prescott Bush. Prescott Bush had installed Nixon as VP under
Eisenhower, and he and Gerald Ford were also fundraisers for Nixon's
campaign against Kennedy. Nixon lost to Kennedy by complete surprise
of the Bushes, for they did not know that Kennedy had made a deal with
Giancana to rig the elections in Illinois and Virginia. Had that not
happened, their men would have become President. Ford and Dulles were
both appointed by Johnson on the Warren Commission, no doubt to
control the cover-up from there. They were the two most active
members. And both were fierce Kennedy enemies, and strong friends of
Nixon and the Bushes. I mean Dulles had been FIRED by Kennedy. Dulles
hated the man. How could you honestly have Dulles and Ford investigate
the man's murder? The Warren Commission was a complete farce to hide
the truth and to convict the patsy in the eyes of the public.

Are all the files declassified now, or is there still information that
is withheld?

Dankbaar: There are still a lot of documents classified. That fact
alone is indication that the Warren Commission was a lie to satisfy
the American Public. Because if Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone nut
they said he was, there is no valid reason to keep the files locked.
If the Warren Commission was correct, national security would not be
endangered with the disclosure of that information. They need to lock
the files to keep the real truth hidden.

On what do you base your claims that George Bush, Posada Carriles and
Orlando Bosch were in Dallas the day that JFK was murdered?

Dankbaar: On documents and witness testimonies. A declassified
document tells that Bush will be in Dallas on the day of the
assassination. It's about a phone call from Bush to the FBI in
Houston . In that phone call, Bush himself says he will be in Dallas
and asks to keep the information confidential. It's funny that we have
that in black and white and Bush does not recall where he was, while
every normal citizen does. Another declassified FBI document proves
that he was high up in the CIA in 1963, in relation to the "misguided
anti-Castro Cubans." In that document Bush is being informed about
their reaction to the Kennedy assassination. it's funny again that
Bush himself has always denied that he was in the CIA before becoming
director of the Agency. That was already a bit hard to believe, but
this document proves the lie.

As for the others, I have several sources that place both Posada and
Bosch in Dallas that day.
Is there a connection Posada-Bush?

Dankbaar: Lots of connections. But they are not so visible, because
they are secret and not exactly advertised on CNN. The Posada-Bush
connections root back all the way to the Bay of Pigs. That is when
they became acquainted. Not only with Posada but with many other
members of Operation 40, because Bush was the creator of Operation 40
with Dulles and Nixon. Because Operation 40 was very secret and
illegal, these friendships are covert, but it is no secret that the
Bush family is friends with the Cuban exile community in Florida. Jeb
Bush is the Governor there, he has the support of all the anti-Castro
leaders. Do you remember the Florida recount for the 2000 elections?
It is no surprise it happened there and ended in Bush's favor. The
most visible friendship of Bush is the one with Felix Rodriguez. Felix
Rodriguez is a direct associate of Posada, both are Bay of Pigs
veterans and members of Operation 40. Remember the Cuban airline
bombing in 1976? This was the year that Bush was CIA director. For
this atrocity, Bosch and Posada were convicted in Caracas . After
Posada's escape from prison in 1985, he turns up in el Salvador, to
work with Felix Rodriguez in another secret operation. It became known
as Iran-Contra. It was weapons-supplies to Nicaragua and Iran,
financed with drugs trafficking. This operation was also led by George
Bush, who was vice president then. Maybe you recall that Carter lost
the election to Reagan and Bush? Right after that, the American
hostages in Iran were released. This was because Bush had made a
secret deal with the Ayatollah Khomeini in Paris to postpone the
release of the hostages, so that Carter could not profit from that. In
return Iran would get weapons. This event is known as "The October
surprise", because the release of the hostages was such a surprise to
the public, but not for Bush, because it was all staged. That's how
Bush became vice president.

And if you look at Bosch, Posada's accomplice in the airline bombing,
who was still in jail in Caracas, he is released in 1987 after a
diplomatic negotiation led by Jeb Bush. And when his father becomes
President, Bosch receives a presidential pardon. Once you study this
history, a clear pattern emerges. A pattern that the Bush guides and
protects the terrorists and assassins of Operation 40, some of whom
killed president Kennedy.

Also, a direct supervisor of Posada and Rodriguez was Ted Shackley.
Shackley and Bush were very close since the Bay of Pigs. In 1976, when
Bush became CIA director, he appointed Shackley as his deputy director
Operations. The current CIA director, Porter Goss, also worked under
Ted Shackley in Operation 40. There are a lot more connections, but
suffice to say that Bush senior is a puppet master behind the scenes.
The spider in the web. Very insulated in secrecy, but very deadly.

What is your analysis of the refusal to extradite Posada Carriles to
Venezuela?

Dankbaar: Posada is the holder of many secrets, the disclosure of
which would be disastrous for Bush. Posada himself has said this
publicly. This is why Posada gets this protection, and this is why he
cannot be extradited to Venezuela. The Bush administration is
therefore in an extremely embarrassing situation. A hot potato that
they can't swallow. The best thing that could happen for them is that
Posada simply dies of old age. I can hardly see a good solution. They
can't extradite him, and they can't release him, for that would create
an international protest. So far the outcry is mainly coming from
Castro and Chavez, and my advise to them would be to keep the pressure
on. I am actually surprised that Castro is not exploiting the Kennedy
connection more. After all, it is his own former girl friend Marita
Lorenz, who implicated Bosch and other Operation 40 members in the
Kennedy murder. The American media pay little attention to his
outrage, because they are controlled by Big Business and because he is
just the communist dictator, an enemy of the United States. And Chavez
is his puppet. What they say is just propaganda. That is the image
painted of them. If Castro would simply say that Bush is protecting
the killers of JFK, it would be all over the news, also in the United
States. That would shake the world awake on what's playing here. And
that is what Castro wants, if I am not mistaken. He wants the world to
see the hypocrisy of the Posada asylum case and the War on Terror. But
I am not sure if he sees that he could unleash a scandal bigger than
Watergate.

Anyway, I hope he reads this (laughs).

Wim Dankbaar
da...@xs4all.nl
www.jfkmurdersolved.com

luthie...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 11, 2007, 9:28:12 AM3/11/07
to
A commonly used UPI photo was selected by the Vancouver Sun to
accompany an excerpt from columnist George Fetherling's reference book
on assassinations (A Biographical Dictionary Of The World's
Assassins), which appeared in the April 12, 2001 edition ("By Blade,
Bullet, and Bomb"). This particular photo was part of the FBI's
initial investigation of the tragic events of November 22, 1963,
surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas,
Texas. The photo was taken from the sixth-floor window of the Texas
School Book Depository through a four-power telescopic gun sight,
showing a light-colored convertible, with two people in the front seat
and two in the back. According to the caption below the photo, this
was "approximately what John F. Kennedy's assassin saw...when the first
shot was fired."

However, the vehicle used by the FBI was only a four-seater,
unlike the presidential limousine, which had two smaller jump seats
installed, slightly lower in height, between the front and back row,
where Governor Connally and his wife sat. Since JFK's own car was part
of the evidence being examined, it could not be used for the
reenactment, but presumably the FBI felt that the vehicle they used
was good enough. For some reason, they also did not appear to wonder
what kind of view of both Kennedy and Connally the assassin really had
from his location, given the fact that a large tree in full bloom
initially obscured his view as the Lincoln convertible drove down Elm
St. after making a sharp turn off Houston St. In addition, a Cadillac
convertible was directly behind JFK's vehicle, with Secret Service
agents standing on the running boards on either side, which might also
have impaired the assassin's view momentarily.

As later divulged, the FBI was under orders from Assistant
Attorney-General Nicholas Katzenbach (filling in for a grieving Robert
Kennedy) to achieve several objectives, most important of which was to
convince the public that Oswald was the lone assassin. However, there
was an initial problem related to an apparent throat wound, which the
Parkland Hospital doctors and nurses all believed was one of entry. It
had been described by Dr. Carrico in a November 22 medical report as a
"small penetrating wound" and by Dr. Perry to UPI as "an entrance
wound below his Adam's apple." When Perry was asked by a St. Louis
Dispatch reporter how Oswald could have fired that shot from above and
behind the President, he speculated that possibly JFK had turned
around in his seat in order to be struck in the throat.

It was easy to confirm or reject the Dallas doctor's suggestion,
since the assassination had been filmed in its entirety by local
dressmaker, Abraham Zapruder, whose home movie was examined by both
the Secret Service and the FBI on November 23, during negotiations
that resulted in the sale of the film to LIFE magazine, with copies
going to both agencies. A decision was made by TIME/LIFE not to allow
the footage to be shown on television that weekend, likely because of
the shocking image of JFK being struck in the head, along with the
bizarre reaction of Jackie Kennedy, who began crawling onto the back
of the vehicle, obviously in a state of panic, as she apparently
attempted to retrieve part of her husband's skull, while a Secret
Service agent climbed onboard to protect her from possible further
gunfire.

Instead, LIFE published small black and white frames in their
next issue, and for the subsequent Memorial Edition, included several
large color frames, none of which showed JFK turning around.
Nevertheless, a junior reporter for LIFE (Paul Mandel, who died in
1965 at a young age) repeated Dr. Perry's suggestion as fact, even
though he had watched the Zapruder film (referred to as an "8
millimeter film" by the reporter). In his article dealing with some of
the questions surrounding what had occurred in Dallas, he described
how the film "shows the President turning his body far around to the
right as he waves to someone in the crowd. His throat is exposed-
towards the sniper's nest-just before he clutches it."

Although this statement was a total fabrication, LIFE has so far
published Mandel's article four times altogether, first in their Dec.
6, 1963, issue, followed by the Memorial Edition a week later, which
was republished in November 1988 as well as November 2003 with no
correction made, or any explanation provided to its readers. Nor was
this blatant lie referred to in a book on the history of LIFE magazine
published in the mid-1980s by a former editor, Loudon Wainwright
(father of the singer). I spoke to Mr. Wainwright by phone in 1987
after reading his book, as well as to Richard Stolley, who had
negotiated the Zapruder film purchase for TIME/LIFE, having written to
both of them earlier, but neither one was aware of Mandel's
explanation. Clearly, the evidence suggested that JFK had been shot
from at least two different directions, but the need to convince the
general public that a lone assassin carried out the shooting was
paramount.

NEWSWEEK magazine also reported on the FBI's conclusions in
their December 23, 1963 issue, with a similar summary, except for the
suggestion that the throat wound was "perhaps an exit wound" (which
months later would be the Warren Commission's conclusion, as part of
their "single bullet theory"). A week later both TIME and NEWSWEEK
summarized the results of JFK's autopsy, which had been conducted at
Bethesda Naval Hospital in Maryland on the night of November 22, even
though it should have taken place at Parkland Hospital in Dallas.
However, the body had been forcibly removed by the Secret Service from
Parkland against the coroner's wishes, allegedly at gunpoint. JFK's
back wound was initially described by the media as being "six inches
below the collar line," consistent with a bullet hole through both his
jacket and his shirt. In addition, a Secret Service report written by
one of the agents on the follow-up car stated: "I saw a shot hit the
Boss about 4 inches down from the right shoulder."

Both TIME and NEWSWEEK reported that the throat wound had been
caused by the third shot, which had exploded upon impact, causing a
fragment to be "deflected downward, passing through the throat," a
highly speculative suggestion indeed. NEWSWEEK added that a whole
bullet found at Parkland "probably dropped out of the President's
body" while doctors were trying to save him. There was no mention of
any missed shot, however, which had struck the sidewalk, with
particles of concrete hitting a bystander in the cheek.

The Associated Press published a "coffee table" book entitled
The Torch Is Passed just in time for Christmas, which included
numerous and now-famous photos (such as the Altgens photo taken from
in front of the motorcade as both JFK and Connally react to being
shot), as well as a photo of the Kennedys and Gov. Connally sitting
side-by-side, which must have confused many readers (taken earlier in
the day during JFK's visit to nearby Ft. Worth). The following
statement was made in regard to the assassination itself:

"The President probably never heard the shot or knew what hit
him. It was a piece of metal a little thinner than an ordinary pencil.
It struck him in the back, penetrating two or three inches. He was
struck as he turned to his right to wave. His hands snapped up
reflexively to his throat. Wordlessly, he slumped over toward his
wife, who was sitting on his left in the back seat.

"In the jumpseat ahead, Gov. John Connally turned and a second
bullet caught him in the back, passing through, struck his right wrist
and lodged in his thigh. The third and last shot hit the back of the
President's head about ear-level, as he was bowed forward." No mention
is made of an apparent entry wound in the throat, nor the missed shot,
nor JFK's rapid backward movement upon being hit in the head.

By the end of the year, with the formation of the Warren
Commission, the combination of a missed shot, the rapidity of the two
shots that struck JFK and Connally in their backs, the apparent throat
wound and violent backwards movement of JFK after the head shot, all
were creating a problem, if the entire shooting was to be pinned on
Oswald . It should also be noted that the Dallas Police inventory list
had only included two spent shells retrieved from the sixth floor and
one of two photos taken at the scene, indeed, showed two casings. A
third one, also found on the floor, but not forwarded to the FBI by
the Dallas police chief for several days, had a dent in it, unlike the
others.

In addition, the rifle was originally identified separately by
two knowledgeable members of the Dallas Sheriff's department as being
a Mauser. One of the assistant sheriffs had, in fact, owned a rifle
shop for many years. Shortly thereafter, it was announced that the
rifle was actually a much inferior Italian-made 1939 Mannlicher-
Carcano. No more was said about the Mauser, but suspicion was growing
in regard to the "evidence" being accumulated, as reflected in several
magazine articles questioning what really transpired on Nov. 22, 1963
(especially a lengthy article written by lawyer and former New York
State congressman Mark Lane, published in a British left-wing magazine
after he was turned down by U.S. magazine publishers.)

Bud

unread,
Mar 11, 2007, 10:22:47 AM3/11/07
to

luthie...@yahoo.com wrote:
> The current debate is very much like the the debate on the single
> bullet theory. It centers around the question whether the impossible
> trajectory of that bullet is possible after all. Which takes away from
> the much more important reasons to blow it out of the water, namely:
>
> 1) The bullet fragments retrieved from Connolly's wrist weighed much
> more than what the "magic bullet" had lost from its original weight.

Kook factoid.

> 2) No bullet penetrated Kennedy's neck

A bullet exited it.

> 3) No bullet in recorded history has ever caused 7 wounds, penetrating
> and shattering bones in the process, and emerged in the un-deformed
> condition of the magic bullet.

You`ve examined all the bullets in recorded history, have you?

> 4) It is simply impossible that one bullet causing such damage,
> emerges in almost pristine condition, while the other one, the one in
> Kennedy's head, purportedly from the same rifle, explodes in a
> thousand fragments.

Are you saying that two different bullets, under different
conditions, reacted differently?


<SNIP>

YoHarvey

unread,
Mar 11, 2007, 10:27:24 AM3/11/07
to
On Mar 11, 9:28 am, "luthier4l...@yahoo.com" <luthier4l...@yahoo.com>
wrote:

To believe Wim Dankbaar on anything is to
believe Santa Claus exists. Dankbaar, the
father of the James Files scenario is OUT TO
MAKE A PROFIT on the book and DVD sales
of his story. Allan Eaglesham has recently
published findings that the bullet shell Files
claims to have "bitten" and left on the knoll
was manufactured later than 1971. So much
for Dankbaar and his credibility.

luthie...@yahoo.com

unread,
Mar 11, 2007, 10:51:39 AM3/11/07
to
LOL
alot of kids still believe in santa claus
but i thought id throw it out there...

> published findings ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


jimh...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 12:21:37 PM2/11/13
to

jimh...@gmail.com

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 12:24:30 PM2/11/13
to
> > I did not write that shit.
The whole Magic Bullet show was a farce is more in line with how I feel.

Walt

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 2:06:24 PM2/11/13
to
Von Pea Brain believes in the old axiom..... If you don't have the
ability to dazzle em with you're brillance then overwhelm them with
bullshit.

He's really dumped a load in this post...... Are you saying that Von
Pea Brain attributed statements to you that you never made?

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 2:19:41 PM2/11/13
to
In article <1173622967.1...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Bud says...
Bud, I've told them and I've told them; bullets can do some very strange things
when they hit flesh, muscle and bone.

You can not replicate, statistically true, the results of a bullet hitting a
man. That should end the discussion.

Bill Clarke

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 6:32:02 PM2/11/13
to
In article <kfbg8...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
However Billy... you should be able to produce an undeformed bullet that has
broken wrist bones...

Why can't you do it?

Why, with the entire power of the U.S. Government at their beck and call, was
the Warren Commission unable to produce an example?


--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ben Holmes
Learn to Make Money with a Website - http://www.burningknife.com

Walt

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 7:07:39 PM2/11/13
to
On Feb 11, 1:19 pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Bud says...
While it's true that "bullets can do some very strange things when
they hit flesh, muscle and bone." one thing they can't do is remain in
nearly pristine condition. Particularly on the nose of the
bullet..... LBJ's SBRC tried and tried like the big bad wolf trying
to blow down the little pigs brick house, but they COULD NOT produce a
single bullet that was not deformed on the nose of the bullet... and
just an elementary knowledge of mallable metals will explain WHY they
couldn't produce a single bullet like CE 399. The bullets were made
from very soft and mallable metals that become even more mallable when
heated. Lead and copper flow very easily when they are heated, lead
will actually become liquid at a mere 625 degrees F. When a hot soft
metal bullet strikes a solid surface that bullet will become
deformed. There simply isn't anyway around that fact.







>
> Bill Clarke

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 8:56:43 PM2/11/13
to
In article <cb4dc067-457e-4a86...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
Walt says...
>
>On Feb 11, 1:19=A0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Bud s=
>ays...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >luthier4l...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> The current debate is very much like the the debate on the single
>> >> bullet theory. It centers around the question whether the impossible
>> >> trajectory of that bullet is possible after all. Which takes away from
>> >> the much more important reasons to blow it out of the water, namely:
>>
>> >> 1) The bullet fragments retrieved from Connolly's wrist weighed much
>> >> more than what the "magic bullet" had lost from its original weight.
>>
>> > Kook factoid.
>>
>> >> 2) No bullet penetrated Kennedy's neck
>>
>> > A bullet exited it.
>>
>> >> 3) No bullet in recorded history has ever caused 7 wounds, penetrating
>> >> and shattering bones in the process, and emerged in the un-deformed
>> >> condition of the magic bullet.
>>
>> > You`ve examined all the bullets in recorded history, have you?
>>
>> >> 4) It is simply impossible that one bullet causing such damage,
>> >> emerges in almost pristine condition, while the other one, the one in
>> >> Kennedy's head, purportedly from the same rifle, explodes in a
>> >> thousand fragments.
>>
>> > Are you saying that two different bullets, under different
>> >conditions, reacted differently?
>>
>> Bud, I've told them and I've told them; bullets can do some very strange =
>things
>> when they hit flesh, muscle and bone.
>>
>> You can not replicate, statistically true, the results of a bullet
>> hitting a man. That should end the discussion.


Only for cowards...

You can fire bullets at any velocity you care to... as long as you *break* wrist
bones... then try to duplicate CE399.

It's never been done.


>bullets can do some very strange things when they hit flesh, muscle
>and bone.
>
>While it's true that "bullets can do some very strange things when
>they hit flesh, muscle and bone." one thing they can't do is remain in
>nearly pristine condition. Particularly on the nose of the
>bullet..... LBJ's SBRC tried and tried like the big bad wolf trying
>to blow down the little pigs brick house, but they COULD NOT produce a
>single bullet that was not deformed on the nose of the bullet... and
>just an elementary knowledge of mallable metals will explain WHY they
>couldn't produce a single bullet like CE 399. The bullets were made
>from very soft and mallable metals that become even more mallable when
>heated. Lead and copper flow very easily when they are heated, lead
>will actually become liquid at a mere 625 degrees F. When a hot soft
>metal bullet strikes a solid surface that bullet will become
>deformed. There simply isn't anyway around that fact.


Oh, I'm sure that Billy knows quite well that a bullet that travels *slow
enough* not to be deformed will not break bone - and that if it travels fast
enough to break bone - it *will* be deformed.

He's just too much of a coward to admit it.



>> Bill Clarke

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 11:09:46 PM2/11/13
to
In article <kfbv1...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
I've yet to see an "un-deformed bullet", Benny. I'm going to guess that you
will claim CE 399 is a "un-deformed" bullet which would once again show what a
silly shit you are.

Bill Clarke

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 11:15:16 PM2/11/13
to
>On Feb 11, 1:19=A0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Bud s=
>ays...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >luthier4l...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> The current debate is very much like the the debate on the single
>> >> bullet theory. It centers around the question whether the impossible
>> >> trajectory of that bullet is possible after all. Which takes away from
>> >> the much more important reasons to blow it out of the water, namely:
>>
>> >> 1) The bullet fragments retrieved from Connolly's wrist weighed much
>> >> more than what the "magic bullet" had lost from its original weight.
>>
>> > =A0 =A0Kook factoid.
>>
>> >> 2) No bullet penetrated Kennedy's neck
>>
>> > =A0 =A0A bullet exited it.
>>
>> >> 3) No bullet in recorded history has ever caused 7 wounds, penetrating
>> >> and shattering bones in the process, and emerged in the un-deformed
>> >> condition of the magic bullet.
>>
>> > =A0 You`ve examined all the bullets in recorded history, have you?
>>
>> >> 4) It is simply impossible that one bullet causing such damage,
>> >> emerges in almost pristine condition, while the other one, the one in
>> >> Kennedy's head, purportedly from the same rifle, explodes in a
>> >> thousand fragments.
>>
>> > =A0 =A0Are you saying that two different bullets, under different
>> >conditions, reacted differently?
>>
>> Bud, I've told them and I've told them; bullets can do some very strange =
>things
>> when they hit flesh, muscle and bone.
>>
>> You can not replicate, statistically true, the results of a bullet hittin=
>g a
>> man. =A0That should end the discussion.
>
>bullets can do some very strange things when they hit flesh, muscle
>and bone.
>
>While it's true that "bullets can do some very strange things when
>they hit flesh, muscle and bone." one thing they can't do is remain in
>nearly pristine condition. Particularly on the nose of the
>bullet..... LBJ's SBRC tried and tried like the big bad wolf trying
>to blow down the little pigs brick house, but they COULD NOT produce a
>single bullet that was not deformed on the nose of the bullet... and
>just an elementary knowledge of mallable metals will explain WHY they
>couldn't produce a single bullet like CE 399. The bullets were made
>from very soft and mallable metals that become even more mallable when
>heated. Lead and copper flow very easily when they are heated, lead
>will actually become liquid at a mere 625 degrees F. When a hot soft
>metal bullet strikes a solid surface that bullet will become
>deformed. There simply isn't anyway around that fact.

I agree Walt if the point of the bullet was the first thing to strike flesh,
muscle and bone. But if the bullet was tumbling, as I believe it was, this
could account for the point not being damaged.

Bill Clarke

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 11, 2013, 11:27:36 PM2/11/13
to
In article <kfc7g...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
You're really worried about your courage, aren't you Benny. You should be.
Every bully, and you are one, I've known has been a coward.

>You can fire bullets at any velocity you care to... as long as you *break*
>wrist bones... then try to duplicate CE399.
>
>It's never been done.

That is your goofy opinion. It was done once by CE 399. The fact that it
hasn't been duplicated as you claim only enforces my view that you can't
replicate what a bullet does. Not to any significant statistical confidence.
Now do you understand?

>>bullets can do some very strange things when they hit flesh, muscle
>>and bone.
>>
>>While it's true that "bullets can do some very strange things when
>>they hit flesh, muscle and bone." one thing they can't do is remain in
>>nearly pristine condition. Particularly on the nose of the
>>bullet..... LBJ's SBRC tried and tried like the big bad wolf trying
>>to blow down the little pigs brick house, but they COULD NOT produce a
>>single bullet that was not deformed on the nose of the bullet... and
>>just an elementary knowledge of mallable metals will explain WHY they
>>couldn't produce a single bullet like CE 399. The bullets were made
>>from very soft and mallable metals that become even more mallable when
>>heated. Lead and copper flow very easily when they are heated, lead
>>will actually become liquid at a mere 625 degrees F. When a hot soft
>>metal bullet strikes a solid surface that bullet will become
>>deformed. There simply isn't anyway around that fact.
>
>
>Oh, I'm sure that Billy knows quite well that a bullet that travels *slow
>enough* not to be deformed will not break bone - and that if it travels fast
>enough to break bone - it *will* be deformed.

You got a reference for this one?


>He's just too much of a coward to admit it.

Not really Benny. I disagree with you. You're talking about the wrist bone of
a man, not a bull moose. Wouldn't take much to break a wrist bone of a man.

Bill Clarke

Bud

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 6:01:09 AM2/12/13
to
On Feb 11, 6:32 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <kfbg8d0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Bud says...
>
How do you suppose they could go about replicating this event?

There was a good faith attempt made on "Beyond the Magic Bullet"
which got amazingly similar results to what the SBT requires

Bud

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 6:02:48 AM2/12/13
to
On Feb 11, 8:56 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <cb4dc067-457e-4a86-a3a2-65735c1b6...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
CE399 is deformed. You just lie and say it isn`t.

Bud

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 6:07:09 AM2/12/13
to
On Feb 11, 11:27 pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <kfc7gr01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <cb4dc067-457e-4a86-a3a2-65735c1b6...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
The bone that was broken in Connally`s body is actually number three
on the list of most commonly broken bones...

http://health.howstuffworks.com/diseases-conditions/musculoskeletal/5-most-commonly-broken-bones3.htm


> Bill Clarke

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 9:34:21 AM2/12/13
to
In article <kfcfa...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
Trying to claim that there's no difference between CE399 and *ANY* bullet that
has broken bone is a foolish endeavor that only a dishonest coward would try.

Run coward, run!!


>>Why can't you do it?
>>
>>Why, with the entire power of the U.S. Government at their beck and call, was
>>the Warren Commission unable to produce an example?


Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 9:37:16 AM2/12/13
to
In article <kfcgb...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
The fact that you're too stupid to be able to refute this is all the reference I
need.

If *you* need more, try reading expert testimony in the volumes...


>>He's just too much of a coward to admit it.
>
>Not really Benny. I disagree with you. You're talking about the wrist bone of
>a man, not a bull moose. Wouldn't take much to break a wrist bone of a man.


And yet Billy, you *STILL* can't produce a counter-example.

Coward, aren't you?

Walt

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 10:46:07 AM2/12/13
to
On Feb 11, 10:27 pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <kfc7gr01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <cb4dc067-457e-4a86-a3a2-65735c1b6...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
Bill, Governor Connally's wrist wasn't simply "broken" it was
SHATTERED. The lower end of the radius bone was shattered by a bullet.
The radius bone is the larger of the two bones that make up the bone
structure of the lower arm.
John Connally was a large boned man so that radius bone would have
been a large dense bone.

Are you really prepared to commit to the idea that the "magic
bullet" (CE 399 ) could have shattered that dense bone and then
remained in the ALMOST UNdeformed condition it is seen in in the
photograph? The photo of the bullet shows a bullet that hasn't struck
any solid surface. We can know for a FACT that the bullet that
SHATTERED Connally's wrist broke into several pieces because one of
those pieces struck Connally's thigh and burrowed it's way clear down
to the femur bone of his upper leg.

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 11:53:28 AM2/12/13
to
In article <kfdjt...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
But I didn't say "ANY" bullet that has broken bone. Matter of fact I didn't
even mention other bullets did I dickhead? No, I didn't but you don't mind
lying for the cause. And remember you lying sack of shit that we are talking
about wrist bones of a man here.

I'll go slow for you here Benny. I claim CE 399 is deformed. Now you'd have to
compare it to "ANY" bullet that had never been fired to determine if CE 399 was
deformed. Now do you understand?


>Run coward, run!!

I didn't run from men much more lethal than your infantile ass. I certainly
won't be running from the likes of you.

Bill Clarke

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 12:00:29 PM2/12/13
to
In article <kfdk2...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
Nice try, Marsh.


>>>He's just too much of a coward to admit it.
>>
>>Not really Benny. I disagree with you. You're talking about the wrist bone of
>>a man, not a bull moose. Wouldn't take much to break a wrist bone of a man.
>
>
>And yet Billy, you *STILL* can't produce a counter-example.
>
>Coward, aren't you?

You simple shit, you haven't produced the first example. You just pulled your
opinion out of your ass as posted it as fact. It is not fact until you prove
it.

Now Benny, you probably didn't get to attend the class on counter-attacks but
before you can counter-attack there has to first be an attack. Now do you
understand.

Bill Clarke

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 12:21:42 PM2/12/13
to
In article <63808849-bb78-474d...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
Walt says...
>
>On Feb 11, 10:27=A0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> In article <kfc7gr01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >In article <cb4dc067-457e-4a86-a3a2-65735c1b6...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups=
>.com>,
>> >Walt says...
>>
>> >>On Feb 11, 1:19=3DA0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> >>> In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, B=
>ud s=3D
>> >>ays...
>>
>> >>> >luthier4l...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >>> >> The current debate is very much like the the debate on the single
>> >>> >> bullet theory. It centers around the question whether the impossib=
>le
>> >>> >> trajectory of that bullet is possible after all. Which takes away =
>from
>> >>> >> the much more important reasons to blow it out of the water, namel=
>y:
>>
>> >>> >> 1) The bullet fragments retrieved from Connolly's wrist weighed mu=
>ch
>> >>> >> more than what the "magic bullet" had lost from its original weigh=
>t.
>>
>> >>> > Kook factoid.
>>
>> >>> >> 2) No bullet penetrated Kennedy's neck
>>
>> >>> > A bullet exited it.
>>
>> >>> >> 3) No bullet in recorded history has ever caused 7 wounds, penetra=
>ting
>> >>> >> and shattering bones in the process, and emerged in the un-deforme=
>d
>> >>> >> condition of the magic bullet.
>>
>> >>> > You`ve examined all the bullets in recorded history, have you?
>>
>> >>> >> 4) It is simply impossible that one bullet causing such damage,
>> >>> >> emerges in almost pristine condition, while the other one, the one=
> in
>> >>> >> Kennedy's head, purportedly from the same rifle, explodes in a
>> >>> >> thousand fragments.
>>
>> >>> > Are you saying that two different bullets, under different
>> >>> >conditions, reacted differently?
>>
>> >>> Bud, I've told them and I've told them; bullets can do some very stra=
>nge =3D
>> >>things
>> >>> when they hit flesh, muscle and bone.
>>
>> >>> You can not replicate, statistically true, the results of a bullet
>> >>> hitting a man. That should end the discussion.
>>
>> >Only for cowards...
>>
>> You're really worried about your courage, aren't you Benny. =A0You should=
> be.
>> Every bully, and you are one, I've known has been a coward.
>>
>> >You can fire bullets at any velocity you care to... as long as you *brea=
>k*
>> >wrist bones... then try to duplicate CE399.
>>
>> >It's never been done.
>>
>> That is your goofy opinion. =A0It was done once by CE 399. =A0The fact th=
>at it
>> hasn't been duplicated as you claim only enforces my view that you can't
>> replicate what a bullet does. =A0Not to any significant statistical confi=
>dence.
>> Now do you understand?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >>bullets can do some very strange things when they hit flesh, muscle
>> >>and bone.
>>
>> >>While it's true that "bullets can do some very strange things when
>> >>they hit flesh, muscle and bone." one thing they can't do is remain in
>> >>nearly pristine condition. =A0 Particularly on the nose of the
>> >>bullet..... =A0LBJ's SBRC tried and tried like the big bad wolf trying
>> >>to blow down the little pigs brick house, but they COULD NOT produce a
>> >>single bullet that was not deformed on the nose of the bullet... =A0and
>> >>just an elementary knowledge of mallable metals will explain WHY they
>> >>couldn't produce a single bullet like CE 399. =A0 The bullets were made
>> >>from very soft and mallable metals that become even more mallable when
>> >>heated. =A0 Lead and copper flow very easily when they are heated, lead
>> >>will actually become liquid at a mere 625 degrees F. =A0When a hot soft
>> >>metal bullet strikes a solid surface that bullet will become
>> >>deformed. =A0 There simply isn't anyway around that fact.
>>
>> >Oh, I'm sure that Billy knows quite well that a bullet that travels *slo=
>w
>> >enough* not to be deformed will not break bone - and that if it travels =
>fast
>> >enough to break bone - it *will* be deformed.
>>
>> You got a reference for this one?
>>
>> >He's just too much of a coward to admit it.
>>
>> Not really Benny. =A0I disagree with you. =A0You're talking about the wri=
>st bone of
>> a man, not a bull moose. =A0Wouldn't take much to break a wrist bone of a=
> man.
>>
>> Bill Clarke
>
>Bill, Governor Connally's wrist wasn't simply "broken" it was
>SHATTERED. The lower end of the radius bone was shattered by a bullet.
>The radius bone is the larger of the two bones that make up the bone
>structure of the lower arm.
>John Connally was a large boned man so that radius bone would have
>been a large dense bone.
>
>Are you really prepared to commit to the idea that the "magic
>bullet" (CE 399 ) could have shattered that dense bone and then
>remained in the ALMOST UNdeformed condition it is seen in in the
>photograph? The photo of the bullet shows a bullet that hasn't struck
>any solid surface. We can know for a FACT that the bullet that
>SHATTERED Connally's wrist broke into several pieces because one of
>those pieces struck Connally's thigh and burrowed it's way clear down
>to the femur bone of his upper leg.

I probably wouldn't bet the farm on it either way, Walt, and your arguments are
certainly solid. But remember we are talking about a slow round that is FMJ.
And I wonder about the deformed base of CE399.

Bill Clarke

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 12:23:27 PM2/12/13
to
In article <ea3cbeca-0bcf-42ba...@j9g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
Bud says...
>
>On Feb 11, 8:56=A0pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <cb4dc067-457e-4a86-a3a2-65735c1b6...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> Walt says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Feb 11, 1:19=3DA0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> >> In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Bu=
>d s=3D
>> >ays...
>>
>> >> >luthier4l...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> >> The current debate is very much like the the debate on the single
>> >> >> bullet theory. It centers around the question whether the impossibl=
>e
>> >> >> trajectory of that bullet is possible after all. Which takes away f=
>rom
>> >> >> the much more important reasons to blow it out of the water, namely=
>:
>>
>> >> >> 1) The bullet fragments retrieved from Connolly's wrist weighed muc=
>h
>> >> >> more than what the "magic bullet" had lost from its original weight=
>.
>>
>> >> > Kook factoid.
>>
>> >> >> 2) No bullet penetrated Kennedy's neck
>>
>> >> > A bullet exited it.
>>
>> >> >> 3) No bullet in recorded history has ever caused 7 wounds, penetrat=
>ing
>> >> >> and shattering bones in the process, and emerged in the un-deformed
>> >> >> condition of the magic bullet.
>>
>> >> > You`ve examined all the bullets in recorded history, have you?
>>
>> >> >> 4) It is simply impossible that one bullet causing such damage,
>> >> >> emerges in almost pristine condition, while the other one, the one =
>in
>> >> >> Kennedy's head, purportedly from the same rifle, explodes in a
>> >> >> thousand fragments.
>>
>> >> > Are you saying that two different bullets, under different
>> >> >conditions, reacted differently?
>>
>> >> Bud, I've told them and I've told them; bullets can do some very stran=
>ge =3D
>> >things
>> >> when they hit flesh, muscle and bone.
>>
>> >> You can not replicate, statistically true, the results of a bullet
>> >> hitting a man. That should end the discussion.
>>
>> Only for cowards...
>>
>> You can fire bullets at any velocity you care to... as long as you *break=
>* wrist
>> bones... then try to duplicate CE399.
>>
>> It's never been done.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >bullets can do some very strange things when they hit flesh, muscle
>> >and bone.
>>
>> >While it's true that "bullets can do some very strange things when
>> >they hit flesh, muscle and bone." one thing they can't do is remain in
>> >nearly pristine condition. =A0 Particularly on the nose of the
>> >bullet..... =A0LBJ's SBRC tried and tried like the big bad wolf trying
>> >to blow down the little pigs brick house, but they COULD NOT produce a
>> >single bullet that was not deformed on the nose of the bullet... =A0and
>> >just an elementary knowledge of mallable metals will explain WHY they
>> >couldn't produce a single bullet like CE 399. =A0 The bullets were made
>> >from very soft and mallable metals that become even more mallable when
>> >heated. =A0 Lead and copper flow very easily when they are heated, lead
>> >will actually become liquid at a mere 625 degrees F. =A0When a hot soft
>> >metal bullet strikes a solid surface that bullet will become
>> >deformed. =A0 There simply isn't anyway around that fact.
>>
>> Oh, I'm sure that Billy knows quite well that a bullet that travels *slow
>> enough* not to be deformed will not break bone - and that if it travels f=
>ast
>> enough to break bone - it *will* be deformed.
>
> CE399 is deformed. You just lie and say it isn`t.
>

There it is Benny. You just lie.

Bill Clarke

Walt

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 1:58:31 PM2/12/13
to
On Feb 12, 11:21 am, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <63808849-bb78-474d-97cf-d60867b2c...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
Bill,.....A "slow round" is just a figment of your imagination. I'm
absolutely sure that you know that a 160 grain round nosed bullet
traveling slow enough to remain nearly undeformed could not shatter a
large adult male's wrist and in the process of shattering the large
dense lower radius bone, have a large and heavy piece of the bullet
fly off and puncture the man's trousers, skin, fat and muscle of his
upper leg and come to rest beside the femur bone in his leg.

A 160 grain FMJ round nose bullet has to be traveling fast ( perhaps a
minimum of 1200fps) to do the damage that was inflicted on Connally.


I can't understand why you're accepting the silly idea that CE 399 is
the bullet that inflicted all of those wounds? I'm absolutely sure
that you're much smarter than to believe that silliness.

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 3:07:27 PM2/12/13
to
In article <kfds2...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
Actually, you can't.

That's your problem.

You can't produce a *SINGLE* example that shows that what is alleged for CE399
is even possible.



>No, I didn't but you don't mind
>lying for the cause.


No moron, I've *NEVER* stated that you've even *TRIED* to produce an example
bullet that looks like CE399 and yet has broken bone.

You *CAN'T* do it. So why would you think I *had* stated that you did?


>And remember you lying sack of shit that we are talking
>about wrist bones of a man here.


You can't produce even a *SINGLE* sentence by me that says otherwise, moron.


>I'll go slow for you here Benny. I claim CE 399 is deformed. Now you'd have to
>compare it to "ANY" bullet that had never been fired to determine if CE 399 was
>deformed. Now do you understand?



You're toying with language... so tell us stupid, just what word would you use
to differentiate CE399's condition with that of *ANY* bullet that has broken
bone?

Run coward... run!!



>>Run coward, run!!
>
>I didn't run from men much more lethal than your infantile ass. I certainly
>won't be running from the likes of you.


And yet, you do every single day. As merely one example, my Mark Lane series...
but there are many other posted series that you've refused to respond to.

Coward, aren't you?


>Bill Clarke
>
>
>>>>Why can't you do it?
>>>>
>>>>Why, with the entire power of the U.S. Government at their beck and call, was
>>>>the Warren Commission unable to produce an example?


Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 3:10:50 PM2/12/13
to
In article <kfdsf...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
Cat got your tongue coward? Where's your refutation?



>>>>He's just too much of a coward to admit it.
>>>
>>>Not really Benny. I disagree with you. You're talking about the wrist bone of
>>>a man, not a bull moose. Wouldn't take much to break a wrist bone of a man.
>>
>>
>>And yet Billy, you *STILL* can't produce a counter-example.
>>
>>Coward, aren't you?
>
>You simple shit, you haven't produced the first example.


The "first" example, moron; is the one foisted on everyone by the Warren
Commission...

You *are* aware that they claim that CE399 shattered five inches of rib, then
Connally's wrist, right?

So where's the example of a bullet that has merely broken a wrist, yet come out
looking like CE399?

Why can't you produce it coward?


>You just pulled your
>opinion out of your ass as posted it as fact. It is not fact until you prove
>it.


It's *proven* by your inability to refute it.


>Now Benny, you probably didn't get to attend the class on counter-attacks but
>before you can counter-attack there has to first be an attack. Now do you
>understand.
>
>Bill Clarke

Moron, aren't you Billy?

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 3:17:35 PM2/12/13
to
In article <kfdtq...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
You pretend that CE399 has the same description as a bullet which *has* provably
broken bone - rather dishonest of you, isn't it coward?

Bud

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 3:42:13 PM2/12/13
to
On Feb 12, 3:07 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <kfds2801...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <kfdjtd0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>In article <kfcfaa02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>In article <kfbv1i01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>>>In article <kfbg8d0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>>>In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Bud
> >>says...
>
Words have meanings.

>so tell us stupid, just what word would you use
> to differentiate CE399's condition with that of *ANY* bullet that has broken
> bone?

It`s a lie to call "undeformed". You need to find a word to describe
CE399 that isn`t a lie.

> Run coward... run!!

Lie liar, lie!

Bud

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 3:46:16 PM2/12/13
to
http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/9/90/Photo_hsca_ex_84.jpg

Now look at this bullet and imagine how hard you would have to hit
it with a hammer to deform it like it is...

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Marsh/Ballistics/ce399.gif

Now tell me that if you hit Connally`s wrist with a hammer with the
same force it would take to deform CE399 you couldn`t break the bones
seen in this x-ray.

Walt

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 6:06:07 PM2/12/13
to
Don't have to imagine......I've reproduced that bullet a long time ago
and it only took a light tap with a hammer to bend the rear of the
bullet as it seen in the photo. I could probably reproduce another
one simply by stepping on iy with a shoe that hard leather soles.
You don't seem to kmow how mallable copper and lead are.


>
>  http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Marsh/Ballistics/ce399.gif
>
>   Now tell me that if you hit Connally`s wrist with a hammer with the
> same force it would take to deform CE399 you couldn`t break the bones
> seen in this x-ray.


Absolutely would NOT break any bones...it would probably hurt like
hell and make a bruise but the energy expended would NOT break any
bones.....AND a bullet didn't merely "BREAK" the lower end of the
radius bone, it SHATTERED it.

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 12, 2013, 11:58:51 PM2/12/13
to
In article <kfe7d...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
You stupid shit I have repeatedly said you can't replicate bullet conduct to a
statistical level. That means dumbo that you shouldn't be surprised if I can't
replicate CE 399. But you are surprised. Because you are a stupid shit.

Bill Clarke

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 12:01:09 AM2/13/13
to
In article <kfe7k...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
Where is your evidence that what you claim is true? No where! Suck on that
Benny.

Bill Clarke

Bill Clarke

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 12:08:34 AM2/13/13
to
In article <kfe80...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
What does that have to do with you claiming that CE 399 is not deformed?
Nothing. I just love it when you sink to Marsh's level and have to spin away
from the subject to cover your lying sorry ass.

Bud

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 2:35:09 AM2/13/13
to
You are, of course, full of shit. You can stand on a lead dipsy all
day long and not deform it. And it`s a copper alloy, not copper. There
is no way a light tap of a hammer is going to distort the shape of a
bullet like CE399 is.

Bud

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 2:49:30 AM2/13/13
to
On Feb 13, 12:01 am, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <kfe7ka02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <kfdsfd01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>In article <kfdk2s0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>>In article <kfcgbo02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>>In article <kfc7gr01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>>>>In article <cb4dc067-457e-4a86-a3a2-65735c1b6...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
I`d love to see Ben support this claim he made...

" "Bud" can't admit that *NO* bullet which has broken bones looks
*anything* like CE399... "

It seems the retard is claiming to have seen every bullet that has
ever broken bone.

Walt

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 9:15:58 AM2/13/13
to
If you were a ration and honest person I'd send you a couple of those
bullets so you could see for yourself that it only takes a light tap
with a hammer to bend the rear end of the bullet as it is seen in the
photo CE 399.

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 12:27:20 PM2/13/13
to
In article <kff6i...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
Of course you can stupid.

It's not exactly rocket science to impact the same ammo at any velocity you
believe will work on a cadaver's wrist, and illustrate similar damage to a
wrist, with a bullet that *looks* like CE399.

The problem, of course, is that any bullet traveling *fast* enough to smash bone
will also quite distinctly show damage on the bullet.



>That means dumbo that you shouldn't be surprised if I can't
>replicate CE 399. But you are surprised. Because you are a stupid shit.


Coward, aren't you?


>Bill Clarke
>
>
>
>>>No, I didn't but you don't mind
>>>lying for the cause.
>>
>>
>>No moron, I've *NEVER* stated that you've even *TRIED* to produce an example
>>bullet that looks like CE399 and yet has broken bone.
>>
>>You *CAN'T* do it. So why would you think I *had* stated that you did?
>>
>>
>>>And remember you lying sack of shit that we are talking
>>>about wrist bones of a man here.
>>
>>
>>You can't produce even a *SINGLE* sentence by me that says otherwise, moron.


Dead silence.


>>>I'll go slow for you here Benny. I claim CE 399 is deformed. Now you'd have
to
>>>compare it to "ANY" bullet that had never been fired to determine if CE 399
was
>>>deformed. Now do you understand?
>>
>>
>>
>>You're toying with language... so tell us stupid, just what word would you use
>>to differentiate CE399's condition with that of *ANY* bullet that has broken
>>bone?
>>
>>Run coward... run!!


And indeed, the coward ran again. No response to the question, eh Billy?

Why the cowardice, Billy? You *know* that your running away merely helps *my*
case, don't you?



>>>>Run coward, run!!
>>>
>>>I didn't run from men much more lethal than your infantile ass. I certainly
>>>won't be running from the likes of you.
>>
>>
>> And yet, you do every single day. As merely one example, my Mark Lane
>> series... but there are many other posted series that you've refused
>> to respond to.
>>
>>Coward, aren't you?



Judging from Billy's refusal to answer, the answer must be "yes".



>>>Bill Clarke
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>Why can't you do it?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Why, with the entire power of the U.S. Government at their beck and call,
was
>>>>>>the Warren Commission unable to produce an example?
>>
>>
>


Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 12:29:03 PM2/13/13
to
In article <kff6m...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
>In article <kfe7k...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>>In article <kfdsf...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>>>
>>>In article <kfdk2...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>>>
>>>>In article <kfcgb...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>>>>>
>>>>>In article <kfc7g...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In article <cb4dc067-457e-4a86-a3a2-
65735c...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
Even if *you* are too gutless to read expert testimony, a good start for any
lurkers is all the doctors involved in the case... read what they say.

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 12:30:34 PM2/13/13
to
In article <kff74...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
>In article <kfe80...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>>In article <kfdtq...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>>>
>>>In article <ea3cbeca-0bcf-42ba-8754-
d2e4a8...@j9g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
Had you the courage to answer the question, the answer to *this* would be self-
evident.

Run coward... run!


>Nothing. I just love it when you sink to Marsh's level and have to spin away
>from the subject to cover your lying sorry ass.
>
>Bill Clarke


The one running is you, Billy. Why can't you answer?



>>>>> He's just too much of a coward to admit it.
>>>>>
>>>>> >> Bill Clarke
>>
>>
>


Walt

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 12:38:14 PM2/13/13
to
On Feb 12, 10:58 pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <kfe7dv02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <kfds2801...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>In article <kfdjtd0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>>In article <kfcfaa02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>>In article <kfbv1i01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>>>>In article <kfbg8d0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>>>>In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Bud
> >>>says...
>
Bill, Are you aware that LBJ's SBRC tried mightyly to replicate CE
399. Your position seems to be that it can't be done and anybody who
would try is a fool...... I agree.....

But, I believe that idea applies only to CE 399. I'd bet that I
could replicate a FMJ bullet that I fired into a sand pile without
much trouble.... Or if I fired a FMJ bullet into the end of a 16"
diameter pine log, I'd bet it wouldn't take many shots to produce
another just like the original. The fly in the buttermilk in the
example of CE 399 is that it's impossible to start with.....The data
given is not true. I could replicate CE 399 very easily by firing a
FMJ bullet into a water trap ( in fact I've done that) But theres no
way in hell I could replicate CE 399 by firing a FMJ bullet into
anything more solid tjan soft pine. Why,Hells fire...... Houdini
himself couldn't replicate CE 399 if he used the parameters set up by
LBJ's Warren Commission.

I suggest that desperate times require desperate measures.....and LBJ
was DESPERATE......Because his buddy Hoover had his agents burning
boxes of ammo in an effort to get just ONE bullet that would look like
CE 399.

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 12:52:15 PM2/13/13
to
In article <41f9a944-72fa-46e5...@z4g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
Walt says...
>
>On Feb 12, 10:58=A0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> In article <kfe7dv02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> >In article <kfds2801...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>>
>> >>In article <kfdjtd0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>> >>>In article <kfcfaa02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>>
>> >>>>In article <kfbv1i01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>> >>>>>In article <kfbg8d0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>>
>> >>>>>>In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>,=
> Bud
>> >>>says...
>>
>> >>>>>>>luthier4l...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >>>>>>>> The current debate is very much like the the debate on the singl=
>e
>> >>>>>>>> bullet theory. It centers around the question whether the imposs=
>ible
>> >>>>>>>> trajectory of that bullet is possible after all. Which takes awa=
>y from
>> >>>>>>>> the much more important reasons to blow it out of the water, nam=
>ely:
>>
>> >>>>>>>> 1) The bullet fragments retrieved from Connolly's wrist weighed =
>much
>> >>>>>>>> more than what the "magic bullet" had lost from its original wei=
>ght.
>>
>> >>>>>>> =A0 =A0Kook factoid.
>>
>> >>>>>>>> 2) No bullet penetrated Kennedy's neck
>>
>> >>>>>>> =A0 =A0A bullet exited it.
>>
>> >>>>>>>> 3) No bullet in recorded history has ever caused 7 wounds, penet=
>rating
>> >>>>>>>> and shattering bones in the process, and emerged in the un-defor=
>med
>> >>>>>>>> condition of the magic bullet.
>>
>> >>>>>>> =A0 You`ve examined all the bullets in recorded history, have you=
>?
>>
>> >>>>>>>> 4) It is simply impossible that one bullet causing such damage,
>> >>>>>>>> emerges in almost pristine condition, while the other one, the o=
>ne in
>> >>>>>>>> Kennedy's head, purportedly from the same rifle, explodes in a
>> >>>>>>>> thousand fragments.
>>
>> >>>>>>> =A0 =A0Are you saying that two different bullets, under different
>> >>>>>>>conditions, reacted differently?
>>
>> >>>>>>Bud, I've told them and I've told them; bullets can do some very st=
>range
>> >>>things
>> >>>>>>when they hit flesh, muscle and bone.
>>
>> >>>>>>You can not replicate, statistically true, the results of a bullet =
>hitting a
>> >>>>>>man. =A0That should end the discussion.
>>
>> >>>>>>Bill Clarke
>>
>> >>>>>However Billy... you should be able to produce an undeformed bullet =
>that has
>> >>>>>broken wrist bones...
>>
>> >>>>I've yet to see an "un-deformed bullet", Benny. =A0I'm going to guess=
> that you
>> >>>>will claim CE 399 is a "un-deformed" bullet which would once again sh=
>ow what a
>> >>>>silly shit you are.
>>
>> >>>>Bill Clarke
>>
>> >>>Trying to claim that there's no difference between CE399 and *ANY* bul=
>let that
>> >>>has broken bone is a foolish endeavor that only a dishonest coward wou=
>ld try.
>>
>> >>But I didn't say "ANY" bullet that has broken bone. Matter of fact I di=
>dn't
>> >>even mention other bullets did I dickhead?
>>
>> >Actually, you can't.
>>
>> >That's your problem.
>>
>> >You can't produce a *SINGLE* example that shows that what is alleged for=
> CE399
>> >is even possible.
>>
>> You stupid shit I have repeatedly said you can't replicate bullet conduct=
> to a
>> statistical level. =A0That means dumbo that you shouldn't be surprised if=
> I can't
>> replicate CE 399. =A0But you are surprised. =A0Because you are a stupid s=
>hit.
>>
>> Bill Clarke
>
>
>
>Bill, Are you aware that LBJ's SBRC tried mightyly to replicate CE
>399. Your position seems to be that it can't be done and anybody who
>would try is a fool...... I agree.....


Ah! But Billy isn't arguing that it can't be done because IT'S PHYSICALLY NOT
POSSIBLE FOR A BULLET TO REMAIN UNDEFORMED AFTER SHATTERING BONE... he's trying
to argue that CE399 *did* do what the Warren Commission claimed, and we simply
can't replicate the precise factors that gave us CE399 with it's alleged
history.

Billy's simply a dishonest coward... I'm sure that he *does* know enough about
ballistics to know he's lying.



>But, I believe that idea applies only to CE 399. I'd bet that I
>could replicate a FMJ bullet that I fired into a sand pile without
>much trouble.... Or if I fired a FMJ bullet into the end of a 16"
>diameter pine log, I'd bet it wouldn't take many shots to produce
>another just like the original. The fly in the buttermilk in the
>example of CE 399 is that it's impossible to start with.....The data
>given is not true. I could replicate CE 399 very easily by firing a
>FMJ bullet into a water trap ( in fact I've done that) But theres no
>way in hell I could replicate CE 399 by firing a FMJ bullet into
>anything more solid tjan soft pine. Why,Hells fire...... Houdini
>himself couldn't replicate CE 399 if he used the parameters set up by
>LBJ's Warren Commission.
>
>I suggest that desperate times require desperate measures.....and LBJ
>was DESPERATE......Because his buddy Hoover had his agents burning
>boxes of ammo in an effort to get just ONE bullet that would look like
>CE 399.
>>
>>
>>
>> >>No, I didn't but you don't mind
>> >>lying for the cause.
>>
>> >No moron, I've *NEVER* stated that you've even *TRIED* to produce an exa=
>mple
>> >bullet that looks like CE399 and yet has broken bone.
>>
>> >You *CAN'T* do it. So why would you think I *had* stated that you did?
>>
>> >>And remember you lying sack of shit that we are talking
>> >>about wrist bones of a man here.
>>
>> >You can't produce even a *SINGLE* sentence by me that says otherwise, mo=
>ron.
>>
>> >>I'll go slow for you here Benny. I claim CE 399 is deformed. Now you'd =
>have to
>> >>compare it to "ANY" bullet that had never been fired to determine if CE=
> 399 was
>> >>deformed. Now do you understand?
>>
>> >You're toying with language... so tell us stupid, just what word would y=
>ou use
>> >to differentiate CE399's condition with that of *ANY* bullet that has br=
>oken
>> >bone?
>>
>> >Run coward... run!!
>>
>> >>>Run coward, run!!
>>
>> >>I didn't run from men much more lethal than your infantile ass. =A0I ce=
>rtainly
>> >>won't be running from the likes of you.
>>
>> >And yet, you do every single day. As merely one example, my Mark Lane se=
>ries...
>> >but there are many other posted series that you've refused to respond to=
>.
>>
>> >Coward, aren't you?
>>
>> >>Bill Clarke
>>
>> >>>>>Why can't you do it?
>>
>> >>>>>Why, with the entire power of the U.S. Government at their beck and =
>call, was
>> >>>>>the Warren Commission unable to produce an example?
>


Walt

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 1:11:23 PM2/13/13
to
On Feb 13, 11:52 am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <41f9a944-72fa-46e5-94a8-f01767ad9...@z4g2000vbz.googlegroups.com>,
Ben, I'm sorry, but I simply can't conceive of a person who is able
to write cohereant messages who would truely believe that???
Anybody who would actually believe that the "precise factors" have to
be in place before the test can be considered valid should be confined
to a rubber walled room....... because that idea surely is insane.
If you carry that idea to the nth degree the test could only be valid
if you place JFK and Connally back in the Lincoln and then shoot them.

Bud

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 1:49:16 PM2/13/13
to
Why do you keep saying that only the rear of CE399 is bent?

Bud

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 1:51:42 PM2/13/13
to
On Feb 13, 12:27 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <kff6ib0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >In article <kfe7dv02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>In article <kfds2801...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>In article <kfdjtd0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>>>In article <kfcfaa02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>>>In article <kfbv1i01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>>>>>In article <kfbg8d0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>>>>>In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, Bud
> >>>>says...
>
I think Posner did this. He figured out how much energy a bullet
would lose going through Kennedy`s neck and then fired it into a
cadaver wrist bone. I`ll have to look into this. Is Case Closed
online?

> The problem, of course, is that any bullet traveling *fast* enough to smash bone
> will also quite distinctly show damage on the bullet.

CE399 shows distinct damage.

Bud

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 1:52:29 PM2/13/13
to
On Feb 13, 12:29 pm, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
> In article <kff6ml0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >In article <kfe7ka02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>In article <kfdsfd01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>In article <kfdk2s0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>>>In article <kfcgbo02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>
> >>>>>In article <kfc7gr01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>
> >>>>>>In article <cb4dc067-457e-4a86-a3a2-
>
> 65735c1b6...@z9g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>,
Why ask them, they don`t have training in the proper field.

Bud

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 1:57:59 PM2/13/13
to
I suppose if someone were really interested in replicating this
event they would either place cadavers or possibly bones encased in
ballistic get and fire a shot where the bullet entered Kennedy and
check where the bullet struck, what it struck and what condition it
was in afterwards. Wait a minute, that was done. This is what the
bullet from that attempt looked like...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_6kYzhJGqq2M/TCSJBpkip9I/AAAAAAAAEaI/DZaqiArxuzE/s400/SBT+Test+Bullet.jpg

Bud

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 1:59:03 PM2/13/13
to
Then why don`t you tell us how it could be done?

Ben Holmes

unread,
Feb 13, 2013, 2:29:48 PM2/13/13
to
In article <a8972c46-9142-4164...@cd3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
Walt says...
>
>On Feb 13, 11:52=A0am, Ben Holmes <ad...@burningknife.com> wrote:
>> In article <41f9a944-72fa-46e5-94a8-f01767ad9...@z4g2000vbz.googlegroups.=
>com>,
>> Walt says...
>>
>> >On Feb 12, 10:58=3DA0pm, Bill Clarke <Bill_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> >> In article <kfe7dv02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>> >> >In article <kfds2801...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>>
>> >> >>In article <kfdjtd0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>> >> >>>In article <kfcfaa02...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>>
>> >> >>>>In article <kfbv1i01...@drn.newsguy.com>, Ben Holmes says...
>>
>> >> >>>>>In article <kfbg8d0...@drn.newsguy.com>, Bill Clarke says...
>>
>> >> >>>>>>In article <1173622967.118950.281...@t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.co=
>m>,=3D
>> > Bud
>> >> >>>says...
>>
>> >> >>>>>>>luthier4l...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>>> The current debate is very much like the the debate on the si=
>ngl=3D
>> >e
>> >> >>>>>>>> bullet theory. It centers around the question whether the imp=
>oss=3D
>> >ible
>> >> >>>>>>>> trajectory of that bullet is possible after all. Which takes =
>awa=3D
>> >y from
>> >> >>>>>>>> the much more important reasons to blow it out of the water, =
>nam=3D
>> >ely:
>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> 1) The bullet fragments retrieved from Connolly's wrist weigh=
>ed =3D
>> >much
>> >> >>>>>>>> more than what the "magic bullet" had lost from its original =
>wei=3D
>> >ght.
>>
>> >> >>>>>>> =3DA0 =3DA0Kook factoid.
>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> 2) No bullet penetrated Kennedy's neck
>>
>> >> >>>>>>> =3DA0 =3DA0A bullet exited it.
>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> 3) No bullet in recorded history has ever caused 7 wounds, pe=
>net=3D
>> >rating
>> >> >>>>>>>> and shattering bones in the process, and emerged in the un-de=
>for=3D
>> >med
>> >> >>>>>>>> condition of the magic bullet.
>>
>> >> >>>>>>> =3DA0 You`ve examined all the bullets in recorded history, hav=
>e you=3D
>> >?
>>
>> >> >>>>>>>> 4) It is simply impossible that one bullet causing such damag=
>e,
>> >> >>>>>>>> emerges in almost pristine condition, while the other one, th=
>e o=3D
>> >ne in
>> >> >>>>>>>> Kennedy's head, purportedly from the same rifle, explodes in =
>a
>> >> >>>>>>>> thousand fragments.
>>
>> >> >>>>>>> =3DA0 =3DA0Are you saying that two different bullets, under di=
>fferent
>> >> >>>>>>>conditions, reacted differently?
>>
>> >> >>>>>>Bud, I've told them and I've told them; bullets can do some very=
> st=3D
>> >range
>> >> >>>things
>> >> >>>>>>when they hit flesh, muscle and bone.
>>
>> >> >>>>>>You can not replicate, statistically true, the results of a bull=
>et =3D
>> >hitting a
>> >> >>>>>>man. =3DA0That should end the discussion.
>>
>> >> >>>>>>Bill Clarke
>>
>> >> >>>>>However Billy... you should be able to produce an undeformed bull=
>et =3D
>> >that has
>> >> >>>>>broken wrist bones...
>>
>> >> >>>>I've yet to see an "un-deformed bullet", Benny. =3DA0I'm going to =
>guess=3D
>> > that you
>> >> >>>>will claim CE 399 is a "un-deformed" bullet which would once again=
> sh=3D
>> >ow what a
>> >> >>>>silly shit you are.
>>
>> >> >>>>Bill Clarke
>>
>> >> >>>Trying to claim that there's no difference between CE399 and *ANY* =
>bul=3D
>> >let that
>> >> >>>has broken bone is a foolish endeavor that only a dishonest coward =
>wou=3D
>> >ld try.
>>
>> >> >>But I didn't say "ANY" bullet that has broken bone. Matter of fact I=
> di=3D
>> >dn't
>> >> >>even mention other bullets did I dickhead?
>>
>> >> >Actually, you can't.
>>
>> >> >That's your problem.
>>
>> >> >You can't produce a *SINGLE* example that shows that what is alleged =
>for=3D
>> > CE399
>> >> >is even possible.
>>
>> >> You stupid shit I have repeatedly said you can't replicate bullet cond=
>uct=3D
>> > to a
>> >> statistical level. =3DA0That means dumbo that you shouldn't be surpris=
>ed if=3D
>> > I can't
>> >> replicate CE 399. =3DA0But you are surprised. =3DA0Because you are a s=
>tupid s=3D
>> >hit.
>>
>> >> Bill Clarke
>>
>> >Bill, Are you aware that LBJ's SBRC tried mightyly to replicate CE
>> >399. =A0 Your position seems to be that it can't be done and anybody who
>> >would try is a fool...... I agree.....
>>
>> Ah! But Billy isn't arguing that it can't be done because IT'S
>> PHYSICALLY NOT POSSIBLE FOR A BULLET TO REMAIN UNDEFORMED AFTER
>> SHATTERING BONE... he's trying to argue that CE399 *did* do what
>> the Warren Commission claimed, and we simply can't replicate the
>> precise factors that gave us CE399 with it's alleged history.
>
>Ben, I'm sorry, but I simply can't conceive of a person who is able
>to write cohereant messages who would truely believe that???

Yep... the problem you have, Walt - is that you're imagining a world of
intelligent and HONEST people.

Once Billy admits that CE399 is not consistent with the alleged wounds created,
he's either going to have to present an alternative theory that still doesn't
require any more bullets, or he's going to have to admit that Mark Lane is
right, and he's wrong.

And Billy's too dishonest to go that route... his faith is worth more to him
than his character.


>Anybody who would actually believe that the "precise factors" have to
>be in place before the test can be considered valid should be confined
>to a rubber walled room....... because that idea surely is insane.
>If you carry that idea to the nth degree the test could only be valid
>if you place JFK and Connally back in the Lincoln and then shoot them.


Billy is just illustrating his well-known cowardice and dishonesty... nothing
more.

The Warren Commission had more than enough 'horsepower' to provide examples of
bullets that had shattered bone, yet remained nearly pristine and *ALMOST
UNDEFORMED* (to quote Mark Lane)... and I'm quite sure that they tried.


>> Billy's simply a dishonest coward... I'm sure that he *does* know enough
>> about ballistics to know he's lying.
>>
>> >But, I believe that idea applies only to CE 399. =A0 I'd bet that I
>> >could replicate a FMJ bullet that I fired into a sand pile without
>> >much trouble.... =A0Or if I fired a FMJ bullet into the end of a 16"
>> >diameter pine log, I'd bet it wouldn't take many shots to produce
>> >another just like the original. =A0The fly in the buttermilk in the
>> >example of CE 399 is that it's impossible to start with.....The data
>> >given is not true. =A0 I could replicate CE 399 very easily by firing a
>> >FMJ bullet into a water trap ( in fact I've done that) But theres no
>> >way in hell I could replicate CE 399 by firing a FMJ bullet into
>> >anything more solid tjan soft pine. Why,Hells fire...... Houdini
>> >himself couldn't replicate CE 399 if he used the parameters set up by
>> >LBJ's Warren Commission.
>>
>> >I suggest that desperate times require desperate measures.....and LBJ
>> >was DESPERATE......Because his buddy Hoover had his agents burning
>> >boxes of ammo in an effort to get just ONE bullet that would look like
>> >CE 399.
>>
>> >> >>No, I didn't but you don't mind
>> >> >>lying for the cause.
>>
>> >> >No moron, I've *NEVER* stated that you've even *TRIED* to produce an =
>exa=3D
>> >mple
>> >> >bullet that looks like CE399 and yet has broken bone.
>>
>> >> >You *CAN'T* do it. So why would you think I *had* stated that you did=
>?
>>
>> >> >>And remember you lying sack of shit that we are talking
>> >> >>about wrist bones of a man here.
>>
>> >> >You can't produce even a *SINGLE* sentence by me that says otherwise,=
> mo=3D
>> >ron.
>>
>> >> >>I'll go slow for you here Benny. I claim CE 399 is deformed. Now you=
>'d =3D
>> >have to
>> >> >>compare it to "ANY" bullet that had never been fired to determine if=
> CE=3D
>> > 399 was
>> >> >>deformed. Now do you understand?
>>
>> >> >You're toying with language... so tell us stupid, just what word woul=
>d y=3D
>> >ou use
>> >> >to differentiate CE399's condition with that of *ANY* bullet that has=
> br=3D
>> >oken
>> >> >bone?
>>
>> >> >Run coward... run!!
>>
>> >> >>>Run coward, run!!
>>
>> >> >>I didn't run from men much more lethal than your infantile ass. =3DA=
>0I ce=3D
>> >rtainly
>> >> >>won't be running from the likes of you.
>>
>> >> >And yet, you do every single day. As merely one example, my Mark Lane=
> se=3D
>> >ries...
>> >> >but there are many other posted series that you've refused to respond=
> to=3D
>> >.
>>
>> >> >Coward, aren't you?
>>
>> >> >>Bill Clarke
>>
>> >> >>>>>Why can't you do it?
>>
>> >> >>>>>Why, with the entire power of the U.S. Government at their beck a=
>nd =3D