DALE MYERS, "2.5 INCHES", AND THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY

224 views
Skip to first unread message

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 18, 2008, 3:54:34 AM4/18/08
to


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7f8d9865c0151610

>>> "His [Dale K. Myers'] animation deceptively depicts an under-sized Connally model on a seat 3.5 inches further from the door than the seat occupied by the flesh and bone Connally, and that, when these mistakes are corrected, the bullet exiting Kennedy's neck strikes Connally in the middle of his back." <<<


Pat Speer's 3.5-inch differential regarding the jump-seat measurement
is (as is usually the case with conspiracy theorists) a lot of "to-do"
about nothing.

Why?

Because even if John Connally's jump seat was, indeed, located only
2.5 inches from the right door of the limousine (and apparently that
might very well be the accurate measurement, based on the diagram
linked below)*, the bullet that went clear through President Kennedy's
body and positively "made its exit through the anterior surface of the
neck" (a quote from the "Summary" of JFK's official Autopsy Report)
was a bullet that had no choice but to strike either John Connally's
body or the interior of the limousine (given the bullet's downward
trajectory which was taking it right toward the middle of the
vehicle).

And since we know that the bullet did not strike the limo's interior,
and we know it also didn't hit any OTHER (non-JBC) victim(s) in the
car....what other choice is there? The bullet, regardless of exact
jump-seat placement in relation to the car's right-hand door (whether
it be 6 inches or 2.5 inches), HAD TO HAVE HIT JOHN B. CONNALLY AFTER
IT LEFT KENNEDY'S NECK. It is THE only reasonable conclusion.

* = When we look at the following two schematics of the 1961
Presidential Lincoln limousine (the top one being an animated
schematic-type image that can be found at Dale Myers' excellent
wesite; scroll down a little bit to find it), we can see that
Connally's jump seat is definitely "inboard" of the back seat on which
JFK was sitting when the assassination occurred (and from photos, it's
also fairly clear that JFK was sitting just about as FAR RIGHT on that
seat as humanly possible, probably to make it easier to put his arm up
on the window ledge and wave at the big crowds in Dallas, which is a
"Far Right" determination that shouldn't be overlooked either, because
it places Kennedy as far to the RIGHT of Connally's jump seat as would
be humanly possible--per some of the pictures taken on 11/22/63).....

http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/models.htm


http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee290/JFK22NOV63/figure2.jpg

.....And per the schematic in the bottom link above, the jump seat on
the right side of the limo was "2.50 inches" from the right door (and
the left jump seat was "2.25 inches" from the left door).

And when we COMPARE the above two charts, we find that they are
IDENTICAL with respect to the distance between the right door and John
Connally's jump seat. (They sure look identical to me anyway.)


Main point being: Dale K. Myers is not trying to pull the wool over
anyone's eyes at all. He's got the schematic (in animated form) right
there on his website for all to see...i.e., the schematic that he used
for his computer model, which was then laid on top of the Zapruder
Film to form Dale's completed 3D model of the assassination.

And the Single-Bullet Theory WORKS and FITS perfectly, based on that
schematic that can be found right on Dale's website. (And even though
there aren't any detailed measurements that are readable on Dale's
animated version of the schematic of the limousine, we can, as I
mentioned, compare Mr. Myers' chart to the larger Hess & Eisenhardt
limo chart that I also linked above (which does include the
measurements), and we can toggle between the two charts and see that
the distance between the inside of the right door and the right-hand
jump seat is just about as identical as you can get in both of those
charts/schematics (by way of "eyeballing" the two charts anyway).

Dale K. Myers' exacting animation project ("Secrets Of A Homicide") is
a great achievement in animation, IMO. And it's a project that Mr.
Myers deserves the right to be very proud of. His animation model has
virtually proven the doability, viability, workability, and (above
all) the PROBABILITY of the Single-Bullet Theory.

And, in my view, even the most hardened anti-SBT conspiracy theorist
would be wise to take a good long look at Mr. Myers' website and his
animation project (and buy the DVD of the 2003 ABC-TV documentary "The
Kennedy Assassination--Beyond Conspiracy", which is a program that
includes several clips from Dale's animation). And it should be
blatantly obvious that Myers has done his homework here....and has
gone to extreme measures to ensure accuracy within his animation
project.


Let me ask the following question one more time (I've made this
inquiry in the past as well, without receiving any satisfactory answer
from any anti-SBT conspiracy theorist):


If the animation project authored by Dale K. Myers is dead-wrong in
its depiction of the Single-Bullet Theory as being a one-bullet
scenario that is not only POSSIBLE, but very, very likely a rock-solid
FACT in all respects, then I want to know HOW in this wide world of
ours it would have been even remotely possible for Dale Myers to have
stuck THAT CLOSE TO THE REAL EVIDENCE in the case and to have produced
a BOGUS animation (as CTers believe he has done) that comes so
incredibly CLOSE to what a true and NON-BOGUS animation would have
looked like?

To clarify what I mean by that --- The depiction of the victims (JFK &
JBC) in Myers' animation (along with the general configuration of the
limo and of Dealey Plaza and of the TSBD and of Elm Street, etc.) are
certainly NOT so far "out of whack" that any CTer can look at it and
say this: "Myers is full of shit here! He doesn't have this model even
CLOSE to being accurate in any way!"


So, even if the anti-SBT crowd wants to nitpick about the size of John
Connally's head in Dale's 3D model, or about the height of the limo's
crossbar seen in the animation.....those same CTers haven't a leg to
stand on when it comes to the big-ticket question that no conspiracist
has EVER been able to reconcile--and that question is:

If the SBT is only a wet dream of "WC shills" (et al), then how in the
world did multiple gunmen firing multiple bullets (usually at least
THREE missiles, per CTer accounts) into the bodies of two victims
manage to MIMIC A PERFECT (or damn near perfect-looking) SINGLE-BULLET
EVENT with those multiple bullets?

I'm still waiting for a single SBT-hating conspiracy theorist to
logically and believably answer the above question.

In short.....the Single-Bullet Theory makes a whole bunch of (common)
sense. (Especially when placed up against ANY alternate scenario that
might be used to try and knock it down.)

David Von Pein
April 18, 2008

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

www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com


www.JFKFiles.com


www.amazon.com/DVP-REVIEW-OF-2003-ABC-SPECIAL/review/R3PUIEO2KQJYFP


www.amazon.com/DVP-REVIEW-OF-2003-ABC-SPECIAL/review/RRZZFH5PKSW23


www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/a7cf61c59d09bc05


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

aeffects

unread,
Apr 18, 2008, 1:39:17 PM4/18/08
to
you aren't going to save Myer's....

btw, did you get Pat's permission to repost that? Gotta keep a close
tab on you copy & paste arteeeeeeests....

YoHarvey

unread,
Apr 18, 2008, 10:25:17 PM4/18/08
to


Healy? What did you do with all that money you earned at Silicon
Valley? Damn obvious you didn't spend it on your own education or a
decent place for your family? Remember, we have pictures of that slum
you currently reside in. Even daughter Chandra is laughing at
you :-).

Gil Jesus

unread,
Apr 18, 2008, 10:41:18 PM4/18/08
to
"2.5 inches" beats YoHarvey by 2 inches.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 18, 2008, 11:01:38 PM4/18/08
to
On Apr 18, 10:41 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
> "2.5 inches" beats YoHarvey by 2 inches.

You should know Jesus, you're an expert on little boys pee pees

tomnln

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 1:08:21 AM4/19/08
to

"Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:118cb3c2-4572-4aa7...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

> "2.5 inches" beats YoHarvey by 2 inches.

Yo(Momma)Harvey's told me the Same Thing".


HAHAHAHAHAHA

tomnln

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 1:11:11 AM4/19/08
to

<justm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ec9f0c3b-12d4-4fb1...@b1g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...

On Apr 18, 10:41 pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
> "2.5 inches" beats YoHarvey by 2 inches.

You should know Jesus, you're an expert on little boys pee pees


We've never known your wife to lie, Yo(Momma)Harvey.


She said that's why she Replaced you with a DILDO.

ps;
You keep Runnin from these>>>

http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm

http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm

tomnln

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 1:19:41 AM4/19/08
to


> "Gil Jesus" <gjj...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:118cb3c2-4572-4aa7...@8g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
> "2.5 inches" beats YoHarvey by 2 inches.



Yo(Momma)Harvey's Wife told me the Same Thing".


HAHAHAHAHAHA

Gil Jesus

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 6:27:11 AM4/19/08
to
On Apr 18, 11:01�pm, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Apr 18, 10:41�pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > "2.5 inches" beats YoHarvey by 2 inches.
>
> You should know Jesus, you're an expert on little boys pee pees


Joey,

If you had 1/2 inch less, you'd have 2 bellybuttons.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 7:08:01 AM4/19/08
to

Chico? Being a female I have 10 times the balls your do. My life
wasn't/isn't the life of a coward and failure such as yours. See if
mommy will buy you a blowup male doll for Xmas...it will keep you from
waking up so cranky every morning.

Burly...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 9:55:00 AM4/19/08
to
On Apr 19, 6:27 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:

So, now,Gil Jesus, who posts Christian links, as well as posts at
them, is talking about genitalia. Unbelievable. Stop making a mockery
out of Christianity, Gil Jesus.

justm...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 11:57:24 AM4/19/08
to

Burly? This is the real Gil Jesus, he failed at being a Christian too.
Just one failure after another...ask his mother LOL

aeffects

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 12:23:19 PM4/19/08
to
On Apr 19, 8:57 am, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>

wrote:
> On Apr 19, 9:55 am, BurlyGu...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 19, 6:27 am, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Apr 18, 11:01�pm, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
>
> > > > On Apr 18, 10:41�pm, Gil Jesus <gjjm...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> > > > > "2.5 inches" beats YoHarvey by 2 inches.
>
> > > > You should know Jesus, you're an expert on little boys pee pees
>
> > > Joey,
>
> > > If you had 1/2 inch less, you'd have 2 bellybuttons.
>
> > So, now,Gil Jesus, who posts Christian links, as well as posts at
> > them, is talking about genitalia. Unbelievable. Stop making a mockery
> > out of Christianity, Gil Jesus.
>
> Burly? This is the real Gil Jesus, he failed at being a Christian too.
> Just one failure after another...ask his mother LOL

I see clam-dip has been let out of its cage early this morning....
we'll jusst let he/she/it sit by its compiter screen all day long
(with baited breath) LMFAO

justm...@gmail.com

unread,
Apr 19, 2008, 12:39:18 PM4/19/08
to
> (with baited breath) LMFAO- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

See the intelligence of Healy at:
www.rossleysignorance.wetpaint.com

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 20, 2008, 12:23:57 AM4/20/08
to


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7f8d9865c0151610/8855c9462dce1f86?#8855c9462dce1f86


DVP SAID:

>>> "And per the schematic in the bottom link above, the jump seat on the right side of the limo was "2.50 inches" from the right door (and the left jump seat was "2.25 inches" from the left door)." <<<

TONY MARSH SAID:

>>> "Huh? Why would there be any difference? Why not symmetry?" <<<


DVP NOW UTTERS:

LOL. Beats me. Go ask the HSCA, or somebody from Hess & Eisenhardt.

Are you saying that this HSCA exhibit showing the limo chart is fake
or incorrect in some way? If not, what's your point?:


http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0028b.htm


>>> "The SBT cannot work at all if you think Myers is correct about the MIDLINES being a difference of 6 inches." <<<


Bullshit.

Myers' SBT works perfectly...because it's so obviously true.

Bullet CE399 exited JFK's throat. We know that. That is a fact--beyond
any and all doubt (except to rabid CTers).

And we know that that bullet coming out of Kennedy was heading
downward at an angle of approximately 17.43 degrees (or 20.11 degrees
downward based on CE895, which depicts the trajectory from the 6th-
Floor window to the limo at Zapruder frame 225, with the 3-degree
slope of the road being factored in):


http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0052b.htm

Therefore, that bullet almost certainly HAD to have done one of two
things -- either hit John Connally in the back or hit the limousine.

It didn't hit the limousine. We know that. Therefore, it struck John
Connally.

So incredibly simple...yet so amazingly complicated when a CTer gets
ahold of the very same information.

Allow me to quote Tom Canning of NASA (at 2 HSCA 192):


"The bullet {that exited JFK's throat} would have had to have
been substantially deflected by passing through the President in order
to miss the Governor. It seems almost inevitable that the Governor
would be hit with the alinements that we have found." -- Thomas
Canning; 09/12/78

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol2/html/HSCA_Vol2_0098b.htm


>>> "How did the FBI, SS and the WC itself before May 1964 come to the conclusion of three shots, three hits with Kennedy and Connally being hit by separate bullets? There was no need for any damn stinkin SBT." <<<


I've often asked myself that same question, Tony. The FBI and SS,
prior to the 5/24/64 re-creation of the shooting, should still have
been able to see the probability of only one bullet (CE399) hitting
both victims. But, they obviously did not see it (until May '64).

Why didn't they see it? Beats me. But, anyway, the SBT (based on what
we NOW know) is probably the most OBVIOUSLY-TRUE scenario connected to
the whole JFK murder case. (Plus the obviousness of Lee Oswald's guilt
in two murders on Nov. 22.)

>>> "Been there, done that." <<<


Not nearly good enough (evidently) -- because the Single-Bullet Theory
is still the obviously-correct scenario for the simultaneous wounding
of President Kennedy and Governor Connally in Dealey Plaza, Dallas,
Texas, on 11/22/63 AD.

~Mark VII~

Sorry, Tony. But common sense will always trump bullet-vanishing
conjecture put forth by conspiracy promoters. And that fact was never
truer than with respect to the assassination sub-topic of the Single-
Bullet Theory.

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


"The single-bullet theory...{is} so obvious that a child could
author it." .... .... "The "single-bullet THEORY" is an obvious
misnomer. Though in its incipient stages it was but a theory, the
indisputable evidence is that it is now a proven FACT, a wholly
supported conclusion. .... No sensible mind that is also informed can
plausibly make the case that the bullet that struck President Kennedy
in the upper right part of his back did not go on to hit Governor
Connally." -- Vincent T. Bugliosi; Via the pages of 2007's "Reclaiming
History: The Assassination Of President John F. Kennedy"


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

tomnln

unread,
Apr 20, 2008, 12:26:36 AM4/20/08
to
Hey Gil;
 
Did justme MISS another opportunity tyo address evidence/testimont?>>>
 
 
 

tomnln

unread,
Apr 20, 2008, 12:43:21 AM4/20/08
to
YIPPEE;
YOU MENTIONED ME AGAIN.
 
Gives me Another chance to reply.
 
THESE oughtta put a few more Wrinkles in your CUNT>>>
 
 
 

aeffects

unread,
Apr 20, 2008, 2:08:10 PM4/20/08
to
On Apr 19, 9:23 pm, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7f8d9...

>
> DVP SAID:
>
> >>> "And per the schematic in the bottom link above, the jump seat on the right side of the limo was "2.50 inches" from the right door (and the left jump seat was "2.25 inches" from the left door)." <<<
>
> TONY MARSH SAID:
>
> >>> "Huh? Why would there be any difference? Why not symmetry?" <<<
>
> DVP NOW UTTERS:
>
> LOL. Beats me. Go ask the HSCA, or somebody from Hess & Eisenhardt.
>
> Are you saying that this HSCA exhibit showing the limo chart is fake
> or incorrect in some way? If not, what's your point?:
>
> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA...

>
> >>> "The SBT cannot work at all if you think Myers is correct about the MIDLINES being a difference of 6 inches." <<<
>
> Bullshit.
>
> Myers' SBT works perfectly...because it's so obviously true.

and how does it work Myers cartoon "perfectly"? If you know it works
perfectly, then please explain how Myers got the Z-film source
imagery. Why not demonstrate a bit of expertise while your flapping
your lips, er, fingertips.... I doubt oler Vinne da Bug has the answer
son, so you're on your own here.....


> Bullet CE399 exited JFK's throat. We know that. That is a fact--beyond
> any and all doubt (except to rabid CTers).
>
> And we know that that bullet coming out of Kennedy was heading
> downward at an angle of approximately 17.43 degrees (or 20.11 degrees
> downward based on CE895, which depicts the trajectory from the 6th-
> Floor window to the limo at Zapruder frame 225, with the 3-degree
> slope of the road being factored in):
>

> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh18/html/WH_Vol18_0...


>
> Therefore, that bullet almost certainly HAD to have done one of two
> things -- either hit John Connally in the back or hit the limousine.
>
> It didn't hit the limousine. We know that. Therefore, it struck John
> Connally.
>
> So incredibly simple...yet so amazingly complicated when a CTer gets
> ahold of the very same information.
>
> Allow me to quote Tom Canning of NASA (at 2 HSCA 192):
>
> "The bullet {that exited JFK's throat} would have had to have
> been substantially deflected by passing through the President in order
> to miss the Governor. It seems almost inevitable that the Governor
> would be hit with the alinements that we have found." -- Thomas
> Canning; 09/12/78
>

> http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol2/html/HSCA...

Gil Jesus

unread,
Apr 20, 2008, 6:46:13 PM4/20/08
to
On Apr 20, 12:26�am, "tomnln" <tom...@cox.net> wrote:

>
> Hey Gil;
>
> Did justme MISS another opportunity tyo address evidence/testimont?>>>
>
> http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm
>

> http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm


Tom:

Ask Joey Justme how many volumes of the WC has he read ?

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

aeffects

unread,
Apr 21, 2008, 2:07:53 AM4/21/08
to
> >>> "You know that Bugliosi praises Lifton for his research abilities and that his criticism of Lifton stems from his unorthodox conclusions." <<<
>
> IMO, Vince is far too kind to Mr. Lifton and his "research
> abilities" (especially when we consider the insane theory that was
> spawned and endorsed by Lifton via his "research"). VB must have been
> in a super-good mood the day he wrote the nice things that he penned
> in his book about Mr. Lifton.

compared to whose research abilities, son, your's? ROTFLMFAO....
your's are non-existent -- Hell if it wans't for Bugliosi and hos
ghost writers you'd be plum shit out of luck... You couldn't even sign
a blank post to this board.....

Oh shit this is too funny, Von Pein a researcher.... LMMotherFAO......


> But Bugliosi also gets down to the bottom-line brass tacks of the
> matter when he makes these statements about David L.:
>
> "One theory that perhaps "takes the cake" is set forth by
> conspiracy author David Lifton in his book "Best Evidence". .... Out
> of his 747 pages, {Lifton} unbelievably devotes no more than 6 or 7
> full pages, if that, to Oswald. .... One could safely say that David
> Lifton took folly to an unprecedented level. And considering the
> monumental foolishness of his colleagues in the conspiracy community,
> that's saying something." -- VB; Pages 1057, 1058, and 1066 of
> "RH" (c.
> 2007)
>
> >>> "You know that neither Bugliosi nor Myers has come forward denying Lifton's account of their "partnership". So, what's not to believe?" <<<
>
> I guess Rosemary's word (below) isn't nearly good enough, huh?:
>
> www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/0e979f2e0dcef694
>
> >>> "Is David Lifton innately unreliable? Has he ever been caught in a big fat fib, such as the fib told by Myers? If so, please tell us about it." <<<
>
> Trick question, Pat?
>
> Well, okay, I'll bite.....
>
> "About two years after 'Best Evidence' was published, I in fact
> realized there was a much more significant moment in time for getting
> the body out of the coffin, and that was the brief period when the
> coffin was already aboard the plane, and the entire Kennedy party was
> down on the tarmac. And today, that is when I think that event
> actually occurred. How they got the body off the plane is another
> matter." -- David S. Lifton; November 15, 1997

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 21, 2008, 2:13:18 AM4/21/08
to


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7f8d9865c0151610/7721a31e5bbb4eaf?#7721a31e5bbb4eaf

>>> "You know that Bugliosi praises Lifton for his research abilities and that his criticism of Lifton stems from his unorthodox conclusions." <<<


IMO, Vince is far too kind to Mr. Lifton and his "research
abilities" (especially when we consider the insane theory that was
spawned and endorsed by Lifton via his "research"). VB must have been
in a super-good mood the day he wrote the nice things that he penned
in his book about Mr. Lifton.

But Bugliosi also gets down to the bottom-line brass tacks of the


matter when he makes these statements about David L.:


"One theory that perhaps "takes the cake" is set forth by
conspiracy author David Lifton in his book "Best Evidence". .... Out
of his 747 pages, {Lifton} unbelievably devotes no more than 6 or 7
full pages, if that, to Oswald. .... One could safely say that David
Lifton took folly to an unprecedented level. And considering the
monumental foolishness of his colleagues in the conspiracy community,
that's saying something." -- VB; Pages 1057, 1058, and 1066 of
"RH" (c.2007)


>>> "You know that neither Bugliosi nor Myers has come forward denying Lifton's account of their "partnership". So, what's not to believe?" <<<


I guess Rosemary's word (below) isn't nearly good enough, huh?:


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/0e979f2e0dcef694


Plus: Vince fully acknowledges Dale Myers' "noteworthy writing
contributions" -- right there at the top of Page 1515 of "Reclaiming
History" -- up front and in black-and-white for all to see. So there's
nothing to "deny" at all. Vince is TELLING his readers that a portion
of the book's writing was contributed by Dale K. Myers. And other
portions by Fred Haines.

>>> "Is David Lifton innately unreliable? Has he ever been caught in a big fat fib, such as the fib told by Myers? If so, please tell us about it." <<<

Trick question, Pat?

Well, okay, I'll bite.....

"About two years after 'Best Evidence' was published, I in fact
realized there was a much more significant moment in time for getting
the body out of the coffin, and that was the brief period when the
coffin was already aboard the plane, and the entire Kennedy party was
down on the tarmac. And today, that is when I think that event
actually occurred. How they got the body off the plane is another
matter." -- David S. Lifton; November 15, 1997


Oh, and then there's this more-recent "big fat fib" (which is a total
lie that I've yet to hear Lifton retract):

"I read the sections {of Vincent Bugliosi's book} on Garrison
this morning, and there’s absolutely no question in my mind that the
hundred-page section on Garrison {it's actually 90 pages, to be exact}
was written by Patricia Lambert. Now, whether Bugliosi entered with
his blue pencil and changed some paragraphs or did some editing--no
question about it--it was written by her. I’m telling you that I know
writing styles--it’s like a fingerprint when you do this stuff and I
recognize the writing style and I certainly recognize the writing
style of somebody I’ve known for twenty-five years and who did
editorial work with me and for me." -- David S. Lifton; May 24, 2007


Do you need a larger example of a "big fat fib" uttered by Mr. Lifton
than the one displayed above regarding Ms. Lambert (especially after
reading Pat Lambert's July 2007 response to the charge made by Lifton
in a link I provided earlier)?

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 21, 2008, 2:29:34 AM4/21/08
to

>>> "If it wans't [sic] for Bugliosi and hos [sic] ghost writers {,} you'd be plum shit out of luck." <<<

Only 3 errors in that one sentence, Healy. Good man.


The kook's last rant was spoken as if I didn't already know of (and
was posting about) Oswald's sole guilt years before VB's book hit the
streets (like the post below, from Summer 2003):


www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=3&topic_id=17758

Looks like Healy needs a bigger needle (to inject a larger dose of
drugs). He woke up an hour early today.

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 21, 2008, 3:49:19 AM4/21/08
to

www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx2EVM9S6FB1V2K/1/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=6&asin=0393045250&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx1CTAEO765WK2O#Mx1CTAEO765WK2O

www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx2EVM9S6FB1V2K/1/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=7&asin=0393045250&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx2UTJH6TLOPRQR#Mx2UTJH6TLOPRQR


It does look as though Dale Myers slides that jump seat inboard way
more than 2.5 inches on the 2004 Magic Bullet program, yes. No doubt
about that.

Should I toss out the SBT's doability due to this discrepancy in
Myers' seat-sliding? No way. Because it's obvious to any reasonable
researcher that any bullet exiting JFK's throat where it did and
heading toward the center of the car would have HAD to hit EITHER the
limo (which it didn't; no holes, no damage, no other non-JBC victims
hit) or it would have to hit Connally, which it so obviously did.

If the bullet exiting Kennedy didn't hit Connally, then CTers need to
reconcile a second bullet striking JBC in a place where he COULD NOT
HAVE BEEN HIT, since in order to have been hit there, the bullet would
need to first go through the person sitting behind him.

Addendum....

Whether Dale Myers has his working model set for a "6-inch" inboard
jump seat or a 2.5-inch one, I am not really sure. But the schematic
on his site seems to be identical to the HSCA exhibit in Vol. 2 of the
HSCA hearings.

I'm still not fully convinced one way or the other regarding the exact
jump-seat measurement. Thomas Kelley said "6 inches" without
hesitation (or at least I imagine he wasn't "hedging" on that
answer...although, of course, when seeing a quote in PRINT, it's a
little difficult to know how it was truly uttered AUDIBLY when he said
it). But Kelley said 6 inches for that jump-seat measurement...and I'd
think he would know, being a SS Inspector.

But, then too, there's the HSCA exhibit--fully readable in HSCA Vol.
#2--which says 2.50 inches for that jump-seat inboard measurement. And
that comes (supposedly) from the body draft of the car from
Cincinnati's Hess & Eisenhardt Co., which is a pretty unimpeachable
source I would think.

If people want to toss out the SBT because of this 3.5-inch
discrepancy regarding the jump-seat measurements, they are just silly
to do so.

FACT: A bullet went through Kennedy and came out his throat. It didn't
stay in him.

FACT: The bullet was heading downward toward Connally in the limo when
it came out of JFK.

FACT: Connally was hit by just ONE bullet on 11/22/63.

FACT: No whole bullets or large fragments were found inside JBC.

FACT: CE399 (from Oswald's gun) was found on a stretcher in Parkland.
And the stretcher of JBC was the only possible candidate for having
CE399 on it--or ANY bullet (unless somebody wants to somehow prove
that Ronnie Fuller, who was the patient on the only other stretcher in
that hallway, was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald's MC rifle on 11/22/63;
and I kinda doubt that that little coincidence took place on the same
day when JFK and Connally were also being shot by Oswald's gun and
taken to the same hospital as Fuller).

FACT: The limo was not damaged by the bullet which exited JFK's neck.

FACT: The only other object, besides the limo itself, that could have
intercepted that bullet is the body of John Connally.

Simple math here. But for conspiracy theorists, it's like building the
Pyramids.

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 21, 2008, 3:57:39 AM4/21/08
to


www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx2EVM9S6FB1V2K/1/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=8&asin=0393045250&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx2DHWBJ9KDHLJX#Mx2DHWBJ9KDHLJX


www.amazon.com/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx2EVM9S6FB1V2K/1/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=9&asin=0393045250&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx2EYVKLRI8FLKV#Mx2EYVKLRI8FLKV

>>> "Given a series of FACTS that are far from facts, one can propose almost anything." <<<

Which is just what CTers have done throughout the last 45 years, to be
sure.

But the reality is (like it or not) that every single one of the
"FACTS" I talked about earlier can be backed up (and has been backed
up) with official citations and source material...you know that Pat.
Do I really need to list every citation for those "FACTS" (e.g., the
autopsy report, Dr. Shaw, Robert Frazier, Tom Canning, the HSCA
photographic panel, etc.)?*

* = And that includes the substantiation of CE399 as THE REAL
STRETCHER BULLET. It was deemed THE REAL STRETCHER BULLET by BOTH
Government panels (the WC and the HSCA). They didn't toss it aside and
dismiss it. They accepted it as the REAL bullet that caused all of
JFK's and JBC's injuries (sans the head wounds to JFK).

Two more common-sense SBT evaluations and opinions:


"The bullet {that exited JFK's throat} would have had to have
been substantially deflected by passing through the President in order
to miss the Governor. It seems almost inevitable that the Governor
would be hit with the alinements that we have found." -- Thomas

Canning; 1978


http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol2/html/HSCA_Vol2_0098b.htm


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


"Our own view on the evidence is that it is difficult to
believe the Single-Bullet Theory. But, to believe the other theories
is even MORE difficult. If the Governor's wounds were caused by a
separate bullet, then we must believe that a bullet passed through the
President's neck, emerged at high velocity on a course that was taking
it directly into the middle of the automobile, and then vanished
without a trace.

"Or, we can complicate matters even further--as some do--by
adding a second assassin, who fires almost simultaneously with Oswald
and whose bullet travels miraculously a trajectory identical with
Oswald's and that second assassin, too, vanishes without a trace.

"Difficult to believe as the Single-Bullet Theory may be, it
seems to be the LEAST difficult of all those that are available.

"In the end, like the Commission, we {CBS News} are persuaded
that a single bullet wounded both President Kennedy and Governor
Connally." -- Walter Cronkite; CBS News; 1967


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


TEXT EXCERPTS FROM THE 1967 CBS-TV SPECIAL, "THE WARREN REPORT":
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/6b2a00b13bdc81ae

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


Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 23, 2008, 4:47:25 AM4/23/08
to
THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY IN ACTION:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/88cd14ec6de230eb

WHERE'S THE LOGICAL CONSPIRACY-ORIENTED ALTERNATIVE TO THE SBT?:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/8ee3ea6cfa4a58c9

MORE SBT TALK (WITH A LARGE DOSE OF COMMON SENSE INCLUDED):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d16a5df97cccb32c

YET ANOTHER SINGLE-BULLET THEORY ESSAY:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c19abd308e0026e1

STILL MORE SINGLE-BULLET CONVERSATION (FOR GOOD MEASURE):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/284975f119fe13c0

AND A LITTLE MORE SBT LOGIC (TONGUE-IN-CHEEK STYLE):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/bed05a055b2f4133

IN A (LONE) NUTSHELL -- THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/0b30398a449c05b7

YEP, HERE'S ANOTHER SBT ESSAY (WITH COMMON SENSE AGAIN INSERTED):
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/00a4ecbb835edc89

JOHN CONNALLY SAID THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY IS "POSSIBLE":
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/741a872f58796bfe

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 23, 2008, 5:10:04 AM4/23/08
to

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7f8d9865c0151610/cba5aa8a8dad42be?hl=en&#cba5aa8a8dad42be

PAT SPEER SAID:


>>> "James, you're accepting, without any evidence, that the bullet wounds are in alignment and project back to the sniper's nest. Based on what? The two main proofs of this are Canning's trajectories, debunked by a number of people including Myers, and Myers' trajectories, debunked by me." <<<


DAVID VON PEIN INTERJECTS:


Pat,

Let me try to get a firmer grip on what you think you've "debunked"
with respect to Dale Myers' "Secrets Of A Homicide" 3D computer
model.....

You're contending that Myers fudged some data, or skewed a limousine
measurement (the "Number of inches the jump seat was from the right
door" measurement, that is)....correct?

And Pat stated the following in an earlier Internet post:


"{Dale K. Myers'} animation deceptively depicts an under-sized
Connally model on a seat 3.5 inches further from the door than the
seat occupied by the flesh and bone Connally, and...when these
mistakes are corrected, the bullet exiting Kennedy's neck strikes
Connally in the middle of his back." -- Patrick Speer; 04/18/08

Therefore, per Pat's above quote, if Mr. Myers were to have slid John
Connally's jump seat inboard a total of only 2.5 inches from the right
door (vs. the "6 inches" that Thomas Kelley of the Secret Service
testified was the distance between the right door and the jump seat
and is the "6-inch" measurement that Pat Speer is claiming that Myers
DID utilize for JBC's seat in Dale's 3D computer model), this would
then mean that Governor Connally would have been struck by the bullet
"in the middle of his back".

But if Myers utilizes the "6 inches from the door" measurement for
JBC's jump seat, it would mean that Myers is able to get the bullet
wound placed properly at the FAR RIGHT portion of JBC's back (near the
armpit, which, of course, is where he was hit by a bullet).

Is that correct, Patrick?

Well, after mulling over these two options afforded Mr. Myers and his
animated computerized model, I think Mr. Patrick Speer might have a
very big problem when trying to reconcile this possible "3.5-inch"
error into any kind of a BIG DEAL or a "lie" by Mr. Myers at all.

Why do I say that?

Well, mainly because of John Bowden Connally and the known bullet
wounds in his body....i.e., we KNOW that Governor Connally was struck
in THE BACK by only ONE single bullet on 11/22/63. And we know where
exactly that entry wound was located (far-right part of the back, near
the right armpit).

So, even if some conspiracists want to argue that JBC was hit by more
than one bullet (total), there hasn't been a single CTer on the planet
(that I'm aware of) who thinks that Connally was struck IN THE BACK by
more than one single bullet.

Therefore, it seems as though Mr. Speer's whole argument falls flat
and is rendered very nearly moot and meaningless.

Why?

Because:

VIA EITHER OF THE DISPUTED JUMP-SEAT MEASUREMENTS (either the 2.5-inch
measurement or the 6-inch version), it's obvious that John Connally
WOULD STILL HAVE BEEN HIT BY THE BULLET THAT EXITED JOHN KENNEDY'S
THROAT.

And that is a shooting scenario (i.e., a "Single Bullet Hitting Both
Men" scenario) that very few conspiracy theorists embrace at all,
regardless of WHERE exactly the jump seat was located.

But Mr. Speer is telling us, it seems to me, that John Connally is
certainly going to be hit in the back by the bullet coming out of
JFK's neck no matter WHERE the jump seat is situated.

And as far as that argument goes, I'd fully agree with him....because
given the alignment of the two victims in the car....plus the fact
they were each struck by a bullet that entered their UPPER
BACKS....plus the fact that a bullet almost certainly (beyond a
proverbial "reasonable doubt") went clean through John Kennedy's body
on a downward trajectory from back to front -- there was simply
nowhere else for that bullet to go except into JBC's back after
leaving JFK's body.

I'll repeat this once again (which I've stated numerous times in the
past) -- It's always been my firm belief that a few things regarding
the SBT and its details can NEVER be fully known with 100% certainty,
with one of the most-crucial of these "unknowable" things being the
exact orientation of the victims' bodies to one another at the precise
moment the SBT bullet struck them at Z223-Z224 (due to the built-in
and obvious analytical limitations of Abraham Zapruder's two-
dimensional motion-picture film).


I'd also like to point out the following Dale Myers' quote, which can
be found on Mr. Myers' website (concerning the "margin of error"
within Dale's computer animation project):


"From about Zapruder frame 240 through 360, the effect of film
grain on the ability to position the occupants in the car accurately
is negligible. At their farthest point from Zapruder's camera, it was
possible to rotate both JFK and JBC up to 6 degrees in any direction
without a perceivable mismatch with the original film. This amount of
error dropped to about 4 degrees by Zapruder frame 190 and within 3
degrees by Zapruder frame 223. Therefore, the ESTIMATED MARGIN OF
ERROR [Myers' emphasis] lies between 3 and 6 degrees, depending on
which point in the film is under discussion. The larger figure was
used to calculate potential errors in plotting trajectories." -- Dale
K. Myers


http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/kframe.htm

PAT SPEER SAID THE FOLLOWING ON APRIL 18, 2008:


>>> "Should we tell Bugliosi that his defense of the single-bullet theory was in large part based on the "erroneous premise" that the jump seat was 6 inches inboard of the door? Or should we assume that Myers, who, after all, was on Bugliosi's payroll, has already set him straight?" <<<


Well, if I were to hazard a guess at what Mr. Bugliosi's reaction
would be to the "Distance From The Right Door" controversy (and I
don't deny there IS definitely a discrepancy in the official records
regarding the precise distance between the door and the jump seat,
with Thomas Kelley and Tom Canning saying one thing, and the Hess &
Eisenhardt body draft saying something else) -- I'd wager that Vince
just might say something like this:

Well, even if you're right and Dale Myers is wrong by 3.5 inches
-- where does your argument really take you? Does it "go anywhere" --
except to a different theory that STILL HAS JOHN CONNALLY BEING HIT IN
THE BACK BY THE SINGLE BULLET THAT EXITED THE FRONT OF KENNEDY'S NECK?

[/VB Mode Off.]

I'd like to also offer up something else here....take a look at the
third picture from the top on the following webpage from Dale Myers'
website:


http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl2b.htm


In that computer-animated image, it looks like Connally's jump seat is
very close to the right door of the car. It doesn't look like it's any
"6 inches" from the door anyway--does it?

I cannot deny that it's my impression that Mr. Myers DOES seem to
slide JBC's seat more than just 2.5 inches inboard from the right door
in the 2004 Discovery Channel documentary (and, as Pat has also said,
the same thing seems to occur in the 2003 ABC-TV special as well,
unless my eyes are deceiving me in some manner).


But when turning back to that last link to Myers' website I just
provided, and focusing on the "Trajectory Cone" that is shown on the
left side of the third photo from the top on that webpage --- if
Connally's seat is slid further inboard than Mr. Myers has it in that
photo, it would mean that the "trajectory [margin-of-error] cone"
would have to be shifted slightly to the WEST on the Dealey Plaza
compass.

Exactly how far west it would need to be shifted and adjusted, I don't
know. I'm just guessing. But we can see that by moving the cone
westward, it completely eliminates the Dal-Tex Building as a source
for the SBT shot, and any such adjusted "cone" could very likely still
include Oswald's Sniper's-Nest window in the Depository.

In any event, any trajectory cone that is shifted WESTWARD would
include ONLY windows in the Book Depository and no other building at
all in the whole of Dealey Plaza.

And since the ONLY KNOWN AND CONFIRMED SOURCE OF GUNFIRE in Dealey
Plaza was the "Oswald window" on the 6th Floor of the TSBD, the "Where
Could The Shot Have Come From?" math becomes fairly simple at this
point (even WITH an "adjusted" trajectory cone).

Or do CTers want to place a SECOND gunman somewhere on the upper
floors of the Depository (to accommodate this different "trajectory
cone" I'm theorizing about here)? Maybe Elsie Dorman was firing a gun
at JFK from her fourth-floor perch, as well as filming the motorcade
at the same time.

Therefore, in the final analysis (which certain CTers will undoubtedly
refer to as another "strawman" argument; but I'd prefer to think of it
as a "common-sense" type of argument instead), even WITH a possible
(but not proven) "3.5-inch" jump-seat discrepancy in Mr. Myers
computer animation, the Warren Commission critics still don't have
ANYWHERE TO GO with their anti-SBT arguments and theories.

As mentioned earlier, about the only places they can go with this
discrepancy, it seems to me, is to a bullet that STILL GOES INTO JOHN
CONNALLY'S BACK, with that bullet STILL BEING FIRED FROM THE BOOK
DEPOSITORY BUILDING as well.

www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

aeffects

unread,
Apr 23, 2008, 1:17:16 PM4/23/08
to
Did you make any money on Reclaiming History? Ghost writer per chance?

David Von Pein

unread,
Apr 27, 2008, 9:48:52 AM4/27/08
to

www.amazon.com/David-Von-Pein/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx498EODPNIRZ8/8/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=176&asin=0393045250&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx253QUC6QN8SV6#Mx253QUC6QN8SV6


>>> "Your depicting me [Pat Speer] as a grassy-knoll-shooter theorist, in an attempt to discredit me, is not appreciated." <<<


Sorry, Pat. I had momentarily forgotten what your specific conspiracy
theory entailed (i.e., frontal shooters vs. 2 or more rear shooters).

It is very, VERY strange, indeed, to ever run across ANY "CTer" who
doesn't think that some of the autopsy materials were "faked" or
"phony" in some way. And it's even rarer to find a conspiracist who
doesn't believe in a frontal (Knoll) gunman.

Based on those two "rarities", I commend you, Patrick.

But the SBT is still an ironclad fact. And nothing at patspeer.com
will ever be able to reconcile the following:

If the SBT is dead-wrong....how is it possible to have so many things
surrounding the shooting of JFK & JBC (at around the time of Zapruder
Film frame #224) so easily reconciled via three letters -- S. B. T.?

In other words -- If the SBT is wrong, then the two or three gunmen
who DID wound John Kennedy and John Connally (in perfect tandem! and
with unwanted bullets that would immediately vanish forever!) were
undeniably the luckiest SOBs on Planet Earth on 11/22/63.

Pat, can I at least get you to admit that the last paragraph I just
wrote above is 100% true, accurate, and reasonable?


www.amazon.com/David-Von-Pein/forum/Fx2TVHW5I0UEY9A/Tx498EODPNIRZ8/8/ref=cm_cd_et_md_pl?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdMsgNo=178&asin=0393045250&cdSort=oldest&cdMsgID=Mx3H10PVB9YDEIL#Mx3H10PVB9YDEIL

David Von Pein

unread,
May 1, 2008, 4:31:59 AM5/1/08
to

A fellow lone-assassin believer received an interesting and detailed e-
mail message from author and animator Dale Myers this week (concerning
Pat Speer's recent attacks on Mr. Myers' computer animation project,
"Secrets Of A Homicide: JFK Assassination").

Here's the complete e-mail message from Mr. Myers:


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

"You're obviously referring to the website and rantings of Pat
Speer, one of many conspiracy theorists who pretend to know the truth
about my reconstruction work on the Kennedy assassination.

"The only thing obvious about these folks is their distain for
the truth and honest research.

"As you noted, Mr. Speer has made no attempt to contact me and
get answers about my work from
the only source who could answer him - which should tell you all you
need to know.

"As Mr. Speer himself has noted on his website, I pointed out
the fallacy of his arguments on my
FAQ page. He has failed to address those fallacies and continues
promoting falsehoods about my work
which include the newly minted, ridiculous assertions you mentioned.

"For instance, he continues to claim that the Connally (JBC)
figure was shrunk (as was the jumpseat) to accomodate the SBT. He now
uses images of my work culled from the Discovery Channel program
"Beyond the Magic Bullet" to promote this nonsense. Even a cursory
look at the images should tell anyone with a brain that the images
used by Mr. Speer are at an angle to the viewer (i..e, the right side
of the image is falling away from the viewer). This is due to the fact
that the images are being filmed directly off my computer monitor and
that the camera filming these images is viewing the monitor at a
considerable angle. This can be seen in any of the wide angle shots in
which I am visible alongside the monitor (none of which, BTW, are
included in Speer's presentation). If Mr. Speer had shown his viewers
those wide angle views, it would be obvious that the reason JBC (and
the jumpseat) appears smaller is because of the camera/monitor
relationship.

"Mr. Speer compounds this nonsense by overlaying the images from
the Discovery program with those culled from the ABC/History Channel
program and claiming that because they do not align I have made
wholesale changes on a frame-by-frame level in order to sell a "lie"
to the networks and the American public. This is obviously false.

"Mr. Speer also attempts to demonstrate his theories about my
work by drawing lines on two-dimensional images I have produced and
pretending that these lines of "alignment" can be projected into three
dimensional space. This is false, as I have already demonstrated on
FAQ page when addressing equally silly accusations made by self-
proclaimed photo expert Bill Miller, another conspiracy theorist who's
concept of photo interpretation is equally bankrupt.

"None of these self-proclaimed experts have retracted their
false accusations about my work (on the contrary, they act as if their
methods haven't been shown to be false and irrational), nor do I
expect them to in the near future. If it isn't Mr. Speer or Miller
perpetuating these myths, it would be someone else. Who has time for
all this nonsense?

"Mr. Speer's claims about the jump seat location have no bearing
on the issue at hand - again, as I have already answered and addressed
in my FAQ page. The figures of JFK and JBC were matched to the
Zapruder film perspective, not to the location of the jumpseat.
Frankly, you could eliminate the entire limousine from the
reconstruction and the alignments of JFK and JBC would still be valid
since their position in space is based on Zapruder's view of the scene
and the relationship of JFK to JBC and their combined relationship to
the TSBD and the surrounding buildings. In short, the position/size of
the jumpseat has no bearing on the SBT. Mr. Speer might as well be
arguing that the side mirror is misplaced, therefore, the
reconstruction is invalid. How much sillier are all these accusations
going to get?

"The movements of JBC and the jumpeat (as shown in the ABC/
History Channel program and the Discovery Channel program),
demonstrating the differences between prominent conspiracy-based
illustrations and reality, were done in unison for clarity. Any
charges to the contrary are false.

"The differences in the height of the JFK and JBC were accounted
for in the reconstruction. Again, any charges to the contrary are
false.

"The location of JBC relative to JFK (i.e. approximately 6
inches to the left of JFK's midline) and JBC's rotational position
relative to the midline of the limousine (i.e. turned approximately 37
degrees to the right) as reported on my website at www.jfkfiles.com is
correct. Any charges to the contrary are false.

"The locations of the wounds of both JFK and JBC were marked
according to medical data culled from the WC and HSCA (including
photographs and X-rays) as reported on my website at www.jfkfiles.com.
Any charges to the contrary are false.

"Anyone who wants to pretend my reconstruction work is false or
doesn't matter is free to do so. In the final analysis, the truth
doesn't require anyone's belief.

"I don't respond to posts on the many newsgroups because of the
sophomoric nature of the vast majority of the postings (and I know
many respected experts on the assassination who feel the same way). It
is the insipid name-calling and disrespect for honest research that I
(and others) find the most
appalling. It is worse than a kindergarten sandbox. Too bad. The
Internet promised to bring people of common interests together.
Instead, it gives a global soap box and a megaphone to those who have
the least to say.

"I appreciate your thoughtful question - it is rare - and hope
this answers your question.

"Feel free to post my response, if you think it will help.
Personally, I think you'll only see the nuts come out of the woodwork
again. It's a never ending cycle of lunacy; one argument after another
to see who can be the top fool.

"Best regards, Dale K. Myers" [April 2008]

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

RELATED LINKS......

DALE MYERS' COMPUTER ANIMATION AND THE SINGLE-BULLET THEORY:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/de1c41667a7635b0
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/58af2cc23e444fb1
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3363328-post.html
www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/faq_01.htm

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

tomnln

unread,
May 1, 2008, 10:56:43 AM5/1/08
to
So nice to see Dale Myers using INSULTS.

It opens the door for RETALIATION !


"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:b0851976-6ade-46c9...@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
May 1, 2008, 3:37:54 PM5/1/08
to

As if Tom-Sack needs any excuse to attack Mr. Myers' excellent
research.

tomnln

unread,
May 1, 2008, 5:10:58 PM5/1/08
to
NUTSACK-SUCKER

http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm

http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm

run run run

"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message

news:3745847b-e048-476c...@k37g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
>
> As is Tom-Sack needs any excuse to attack Mr. Myers' excellent
> research.
>

tomnln

unread,
May 1, 2008, 5:15:12 PM5/1/08
to

"David Von Pein" <davev...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:cfa9f7dd-c875-4990...@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...

>
> As if Tom-Sack needs any excuse to attack Mr. Myers' excellent
> research.

Hey NUTSACK-SUCKER ! ! !

I hope you run outta butter & choke on your popcorn while watching that
CARTOON

Wanna try your own evidence/testimony for a change?>>>

http://whokilledjfk.net/PROVEN%20LIES.htm

http://whokilledjfk.net/CASE%20DISMISSED.htm

David Von Pein

unread,
May 2, 2008, 8:21:07 PM5/2/08
to


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/b50bc6bdf6fe307c

www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/0ed99b67e2e0af1b

>>> "So, Dale Myers dares not post this nonsense himself..." <<<


In essence, Dale Myers DID "post" it -- via an e-mail that he gave
full permission to be re-printed on the Internet.

Whether or not Dale felt it was likely that his e-mail message would
be copied and pasted into an Internet post, I cannot say. But I have a
feeling that Dale, who is far from being a dunce, probably realized
that the person to whom he was e-mailing (who posts exclusively at a
JFK forum at IMDB.com) would, indeed, post the message on the
Internet, especially when these words were included at the end of
Dale's mail -- "Feel free to post my response, if you think it will
help".


>>> "...and you can get away with attacking others because you are only quoting someone else." <<<


As if this is something brand-NEW??

LOL.

It's done every day of the week around here (and at other forums), by
LNers and CTers alike, of course -- i.e., "attacking" the "other side"
by quoting other people and sources other than yourself/(myself).

Gee, if I stopped doing that, I wouldn't have nearly as much fun
around these parts (especially with respect to quoting Vincent
Bugliosi's "attacks" on CTers, like the two zingers provided below,
which I'll toss in just as a bonus here; sans any charge at all):


"The Warren Commission critics and conspiracy theorists have
succeeded in transforming a case very simple and obvious at its core--
Oswald killed Kennedy and acted alone--into its present form of the
most complex murder case, BY FAR, in world history.

"Refusing to accept the plain truth, and dedicating their
existence for over 40 years to convincing the American public of the
truth of their own charges, the critics have journeyed to the outer
margins of their imaginations. Along the way, they have split hairs
and then proceeded to split the split hairs, drawn far-fetched and
wholly unreasonable inferences from known facts, and literally
invented bogus facts from the grist of rumor and speculation.

"With over 18,000 pages of small print in the 27 Warren
Commission volumes alone, and many millions of pages of FBI and CIA
documents, any researcher worth his salt can find a sentence here or
there to support any ludicrous conspiracy theory he might have. And
that, of course, is precisely what the conspiracy community has done."
-- VB

========

"Not the smallest speck of evidence has ever surfaced that any
of the conspiracy community's favorite groups (CIA, mob, etc.) was
involved, in any way, in the assassination. Not only the Warren
Commission, but the HSCA came to the same conclusion. But conspiracy
theorists, as suspicious as a cat in a new home, find occurrences and
events everywhere that feed their suspicions and their already strong
predilection to believe that the official version is wrong." -- VB

========

>>> "Did Myers really misspell "disdain"?" <<<

Yes. I just didn't put in the "[sic]".

And your next nitpick is going to be....?

>>> "So, it is bad when the conspiracy authors get the details wrong, but then it is ok when Myers gets the details wrong?" <<<


Nobody has proven that Myers has any important details wrong. But keep
trying to "prove" it though, Tony. After all, ALL conspiracy theorists
MUST deny the viability of the SBT. It's in their blood.


>>> "Like all arrogant bastards, he runs away from criticism like a frightened kindergardener [sic]." <<<

Go to hell, kook.


And, btw, did you really misspell kindergartner?

>>> "Typical WC defender slime technique. You get away with calling fellow posters nuts because you are only quoting someone else, someone who is not brave enough to defend his work against criticism." <<<


It doesn't really matter to me WHO does the insulting of CTers
(whether it be myself, or Dale K. Myers, or Vincent T. Bugliosi, or
Joe Blow from Kokomo) -- as long as the "CTers ARE DEAD WRONG" word
gets spread as often as possible. That's the most important thing.


www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
May 3, 2008, 2:11:43 AM5/3/08
to


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7f8d9865c0151610/f77ba7da8b49ef09?#f77ba7da8b49ef09


If I were you, Pat, I'd give up on this one.

IMO, you'll end up being less embarrassed if, right now, you
discontinue your quest to try and prove that Dale K. Myers doesn't
know what the hell he's doing WITHIN HIS OWN FIELD OF EXPERTISE (i.e.,
computer animation).

But, then too, that's just my own opinion on the matter. I never
really expect any "CTer" to actually agree with anything uttered by an
"LNer" though.

And the beat goes on. ;)

David Von Pein

unread,
May 3, 2008, 2:15:53 AM5/3/08
to


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/f52fcb8ad2b4b10b

>>> "The point that Myers seems to miss is that with JBC's midline only 6 inches (15 cm) left of JFK's, a shot exiting .5 cm left of JFK's midline will strike no further right than 14.5 cm right of JBC's midline if the shot was straight through JFK at no angle. The wound was 20 cm right of JBC's midline. .... The bullet simply cannot hit JBC in the right armpit." <<<

This is just silly, Andrew. You're acting as if Connally was NOT
turned to his right at all when he was shot. But via Dale Myers'
detailed analysis, JBC was turned 37 degrees to his right when he was
shot in the back. (See webpage below....)

http://jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl1.htm

Obviously, if JBC is turned quite a bit to his right (~37 degrees),
this is going to change any "midline" of JBC from the shooter's POV in
the Book Depository. Oswald shot a TURNED-IN-HIS-SEAT John Connally,
not a Connally who was sitting squarely in his seat with his shoulders
parallel to the trunk of the car.

Another visual (via Dale Myers' "Secrets Of A Homicide" animation
project):

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/images/SOH_1061.jpg

>>> "Until Myers explains this by telling us what he is using for the angle from the SN to JFK, and what he is using for the separation between the two men, why would anyone accept his conclusion?" <<<

I can answer those questions (as can anyone else who has bothered to
read the information available at Mr. Myers' website).....

Dale is using a survey map of Dealey Plaza, detailed blueprints of the
Texas School Book Depository Building, and the original body draft of
SS-100-X (JFK's 1961 Lincoln limousine). .....

http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/tech.htm

And Dale, of course, as everybody also knows, used the Zapruder film.
Dale has, in effect, extracted 3-dimensional information from
Zapruder's two-dimensional motion-picture film.

All of this is fully explained, in great detail, on Mr. Myers' site at
www.jfkfiles.com.

In short.....

The Single-Bullet Theory fits every last piece of physical evidence in
the JFK case, including the Zapruder Film (to an absolute TEE it
"fits" the Z-Film, without a shred of a doubt; CTer scoffing
notwithstanding, naturally).

And, as I've shouted from the cyberspace rooftops a hundred times
previously, to believe that the SBT is a falsehood is, by default, to
believe in some kind of anti-SBT scenario to explain the simultaneous
wounding of JFK & JBC that is inevitably far more illogical and
unsupportable than is the single-bullet conclusion.

Why more conspiracists fail to realize that the above paragraph is
100% accurate can only make me shrug my shoulders incessantly in
bewilderment.

www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

aeffects

unread,
May 3, 2008, 3:28:53 AM5/3/08
to
ole Davey Von Pein needs to respond to himself.... what else does he
do by himself..... fucking KOOK-ster!

David Von Pein

unread,
May 3, 2008, 3:33:43 AM5/3/08
to

I'm Reitzes, Crackpipe. Remember? Get it straight.

aeffects

unread,
May 3, 2008, 3:40:10 AM5/3/08
to
On May 3, 12:33 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> I'm Reitzes, Crackpipe. Remember? Get it straight.

you're Reitzes crackpipe? You be fucked up thois morning eh, son.
Those 3AM demons again?

Perk up son, only 25 more years here....ain't life grand (dumber than
a stump, but GRAND) when you do it for free? LMAO! You rank amateurs
you, that in and of itself makes it worth the price of admission....

David Von Pein

unread,
May 3, 2008, 3:53:56 AM5/3/08
to

Now I even have to explain to the Crackpipe what a comma is used for.

~large-sized sigh~

aeffects

unread,
May 3, 2008, 4:25:51 AM5/3/08
to
On May 3, 12:53 am, David Von Pein <davevonp...@aol.com> wrote:
> Now I even have to explain to the Crackpipe what a comma is used for.
>
> ~large-sized sigh~

save the sigh, son..... another two months on crack, we'll have you in
rehab for about 10 months... no internet there son, just you and your
4 aliases..... rumor has it you can ALL sleep in the same cot. Don't
believe me ask Vinnie, he knows county hospitality....

So is Vinnie gonna give you a few points on the projects backside or
are you still doing this gratis?

justm...@gmail.com

unread,
May 3, 2008, 8:25:40 AM5/3/08
to

Hey, DVP. Maybe you should send a few of Healys posts to VB. Didn't
Vince go after Ricland for spewing the same things (in coherent
sentances) awhile back? We have Healy screaming ghost writers now,
and slandering VB. Of course with Healy it's nothing more then
jealously eating away at him.
The same way he puts down Dale Myers. Anyone that has made a name for
themselves other than Junkie or Crackhead. Healy owns those
titles...no one could ever be as incoherent or stupid as David Gordon
Healy.

aeffects

unread,
May 3, 2008, 2:18:40 PM5/3/08
to
On May 3, 5:25 am, "justme1...@gmail.com" <justme1...@gmail.com>
wrote:

I believe Dale Myers is one of those very Reclaiming History *ghost-
writers*. Can you confirm that, yea or nay?

Perk up Joey, we'll get you involved once you display a working
knowledge of the case, then you can fetch coffee for those that do....
gird those loins, son

justm...@gmail.com

unread,
May 3, 2008, 2:36:21 PM5/3/08
to
> gird those loins, son- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

you already hold that position Healy...you can't even do that right

tomnln

unread,
May 3, 2008, 3:07:21 PM5/3/08
to

<justm...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:33045c17-aa5f-49cd...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...


EXPOSE'

http://whokilledjfk.net/guess_who_wrote.htm

David Von Pein

unread,
May 6, 2008, 6:05:34 PM5/6/08
to

PATRICK SPEER SAID:

>>> "And why did they [the Discovery Channel] ADD a trajectory in post-production onto an image they KNEW to be DISTORTED?" <<<


DVP SAID:


I don't think they did. At least I'm pretty sure that the Discovery
Channel people didn't "add in" any trajectory line during the FULL-
SCREEN portions of Myers' animation that are shown during the "Beyond
The Magic Bullet" program.

That is to say: It appears to me that those full-screen parts of the
animation that are shown during that program are NOT being "filmed at
an angle" directly off of a TV monitor while Myers is sitting there
putting his hands up to a computer screen.

And it's in those full-screen portions when the complete line of
trajectory is shown---travelling from Connally's inshoot wound on his
back, then back through JFK's throat and upper back, and then dragged
back into the sixth-floor window in the Book Depository.

And all of this is viewable at a video clip provided at the link below
(the clip on the left side is from the Discovery Channel documentary;
the other clip is from the 2003 ABC-TV program with Peter Jennings):

www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3363328-post.html

David Von Pein

unread,
May 6, 2008, 11:21:42 PM5/6/08
to

PATRICK SPEER WROTE:

>>> "The [video] clip at your link is most certainly the clip filmed at an angle now denounced by Myers as inaccurate. As you can see they start the trajectory line to the left of the monitor and superimpose it on Myers' distorted animation." <<<


DVP WROTE BACK:


Merely to illustrate the obvious--i.e., that any bullet exiting John
Kennedy's neck IS going to strike John B. Connally's body without a
shred of a doubt.

But the ENTIRE FULL-SCREEN CLIP (showing the trajectory line going
back into the Sniper's-Nest window) isn't filmed at any skewed
"angle", for Pete sake.

In other words, it's not being filmed straight off a computer screen,
kinescope-style.

This seems quite obvious (to me anyway):

www.youtube.com/watch?v=2kEh3Kgwhk0&feature=related

David Von Pein

unread,
May 8, 2008, 7:27:19 PM5/8/08
to

FROM DALE MYERS' WEBSITE (5/8/08):

www.jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/05/con-job-debunking-debunkers.html

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

Con Job: Debunking the Debunkers (by Dale Myers):


"It’s been thirteen years since I released my preliminary computer-
generated JFK assassination reconstruction and five years since an
updated version was broadcast world-wide, although you’d never know it
given the frequency with which the History and Discovery Channels re-
broadcast the two programs my work appeared in.

And consequently it’s no wonder that conspiracy theorists continue to
hammer at my work in the hopes of convincing mainstream America that
my computer reconstruction is nothing more than a carefully
constructed sham designed to further a supposed cover-up in the murder
of President Kennedy.

The newest crop of debunkers push their warped ideas about my work
with graphic illustrations and self-produced YouTube videos which
purport to show the “obvious” lies and distortions these theorists
have supposedly discovered among sequences of my work aired by the
History and Discovery Channels.

One of the more vocal and equally off-base debunkers is Patrick J.
Speer, a self-acknowledged wanna-be poet, turned wanna-be-musician,
turned record buyer for the music industry who eventually became
“obsessed with recent American history.”

Mr. Speer’s graphic intensive website promises “a new perspective on
the Kennedy assassination” and while some newcomers to the subject may
be impressed with the eye-candy, there’s nothing really there that
rises above the same old, tired arguments and misinformation kicked
around by conspiracy theorists for better than four decades.

It’s the same old shoe with new laces.

There are plenty of identical websites that offer up the same kind of
misinformation for those who don’t know any better and if visitors to
these kinds of websites are willing to get their facts about American
history from wanna-be poets and the like, who am I to spoil the party?

In fact, I’ve largely avoided confronting this army of wackiness,
outside of addressing a few of their more frequent allegations,
because doing so proves time and again to represent a colossal waste
of time.

It doesn’t take long to figure out that one could waste a lifetime
attempting to hammer a little common sense into these people who for
one obsessive reason or another find it their calling to opine about
something they know very little about, or in the case of Mr. Speer,
know absolutely nothing about.

I’m referring of course to the multitude of vile and reckless charges
concerning my computer reconstruction of the Kennedy assassination
which are featured as part of Mr. Speer’s “new perspective” on the
case.

Utilizing screen grabs lifted from the two television programs I
participated in, Mr. Speer pretends to debunk my work using graphic
overlays that break every rule of photogrammetry accompanied by
childish headlines like Dale Myers’ House of Mirrors; Murder by
Cartoon; and Cutting the Crap.

I pointed out Mr. Speer’s photographic follies on my FAQ page over
three years ago (without using his name in order to save him
embarrassment), yet Speer continues to use the same deceptive
photographic techniques to – get this – claim that he has evidence of
my deception.

For instance, Speer uses overlays of images taken from two different
angles and claims that because they don’t align I am being deceptive;
or, Speer draws lines of trajectory on a two-dimensional image of a
three-dimensional scene and claims that because the two-dimensional
line doesn’t line up with the three-dimensional scene (an
impossibility due to the basic rules of photogrammetry) that I am
being deceptive.

Forget about convincing Mr. Speer that one cannot draw a rational
conclusion from an irrational premise; I’ve tried. Suffice it to say
that Mr. Speer prefers to live in a land of illusion where physical
realities don’t hold a candle to obsessive conspiracy theories.

I’m not going to spend a lot of time here pointing out the ridiculous
nature of each and every one of Mr. Speer’s goofy assertions. But here
are just two to make the point, as well as the truth of the matter:

Charge: Myers shrunk the model of Governor Connally and his jumpseat
25% in order to get the single bullet theory to work.

Truth: Mr. Speer used a frame grab from the Discovery Channel’s
“Beyond the Magic Bullet” to make his point, but failed to note that
the image he used was taken from a portion of the program in which my
computer work was being displayed on a computer monitor which was at a
significant angle to the camera – the effect being that the computer
images of Kennedy and Connally were compressed horizontally and
consequently the Connally image appeared smaller than the actual
model.

When Mr. Speer was informed that wide-angle sequences from the
Discovery program showed the relationship of the computer monitor to
the program camera (and therefore the fallacy of his argument), he
wrote on his website, “I must admit I did not realize this footage was
shot at an angle. I mean, why would they do that?” Believe it or not,
Mr. Speer than proceeded to claim that the producers of the program
and I conspired to deceive viewers (and presumably the hapless Mr.
Speer) about the true alignment of the single bullet theory by
purposely shooting the monitor on an angle!

Can it get any sillier? I’m afraid it can.

Charge: Myers misplaces Connally’s jumpseat in order to ensure the
alignment of the single bullet theory.

Truth: The location of the jumpseat has no bearing on the alignment of
any trajectory plotted in my computer reconstruction. The figures of


JFK and JBC were matched to the Zapruder film perspective, not to the
location of the jumpseat. Frankly, you could eliminate the entire
limousine from the reconstruction and the alignments of JFK and JBC
would still be valid since their position in space is based on

Zapruder's view of the scene and the relationship of JFK to JBC, and


their combined relationship to the TSBD and the surrounding buildings.

In short, the position and size of the jumpseat has no bearing on the
single bullet theory.

All of this means little to Mr. Speers who now writes, “As he is now
asserting that the limousine model had nothing to do with his
positioning of Connally, only measurements taken from the Zapruder
film, I decided to put the seat in the correct location on Myers'
undistorted over-view, and see how it matched up with Connally….”

Does it matter that Mr. Speer cannot really move the jumpseat to the
“correct” location within my computer rendering (i.e., move a two-
dimensional image in three-dimensional space)? Apparently not, because
Mr. Speer then proceeds to once again break the Cardinal Rule of
photogrammetry (i.e., draw two-dimensional lines on a three-
dimensional image) to “demonstrate” that Connally doesn’t align with
the single bullet trajectory, concluding, “Myers undoubtedly knows
this. Which fuels my suspicion that the distorted animation used in
‘Beyond the Magic Bullet’ was no ‘mistake’.”

One can only feel sorry for Mr. Speer after reading such nonsense. The
only one being conned by such addled thinking is Mr. Speer himself who
despite all efforts is determined to prove just how thick-headed
conspiracy theorists can truly be.

Anyone who wants to pretend my reconstruction work is false or doesn't

matter is free to do so. As I’ve said before, in the final analysis,


the truth doesn't require anyone's belief.

I don't respond to posts on the many Internet newsgroups because of


the sophomoric nature of the vast majority of the postings (and I know
many respected experts on the assassination who feel the same way). It

is the insipid name-calling and disrespect for honest research and
work that I (and others) find the most appalling. It is worse than a
kindergarten sandbox.

Too bad. The Internet promised to bring people of common interests
together. Instead, it gives a global soap box and a megaphone to those

who have the least amount to say.

On occasion, I feel the need to defend my work against these childish
armchair detectives if only to plant a little sanity in a field of
nonsense. Unfortunately, whenever I speak up, it only seems to bring
more nuts out of the woodwork for yet another round.

It's a never ending cycle of lunacy; one ridiculous argument after


another to see who can be the top fool.

Congratulations, Mr. Speer! You’re TOPS with me."

-- Dale K. Myers; May 8, 2008

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

DALE MYERS' COMPUTER ANIMATION AND THE SBT:
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/de1c41667a7635b0
www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/58af2cc23e444fb1
www.hometheaterforum.com/htf/3363328-post.html

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

Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
May 9, 2008, 6:48:03 PM5/9/08
to


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/e8103bb65e4ca0ee

PAT SPEER SAID:


>>> "I challenge you [Dale K. Myers] to come out from behind your "you can't project 2D lines on 3D images" facade, and create an overview depicting the alignment of Kennedy and Connally at frames 223-224, and a 10-degree trajectory from the sniper's nest connecting their wounds. .... Please remember that the bullet striking Kennedy struck him at the T-1 level, and exited at this same level, and that the bullet striking Connally did not pass through his chest in the direction of his heart, as depicted on your Beyond Conspiracy animation. I look forward to studying this image." <<<


DVP SAYS:


Pat hasn't a leg (or an extra bullet) to stand on...because even Pat
admits that a bullet exiting JFK's throat WILL hit John Connally in
the back regardless of where the jump seat is located -- whether it be
"6 inches" from the right door, or "2.5 inches". (And, yes, there's
undeniably a discrepancy in the official records re. the exact
location of that seat -- Kelley/Canning vs. the H&E body draft of the
limo.)

But EITHER jump-seat measurement results in Connally being hit in the
back by the bullet that comes out of Kennedy....and even Patrick J.
Speer acknowledges this fact:

"His [Dale Myers'] animation deceptively depicts an under-sized
Connally model on a seat 3.5 inches further from the door than the
seat occupied by the flesh and bone Connally, and that, when these
mistakes are corrected, the bullet exiting Kennedy's neck strikes
Connally in the middle of his back." -- Pat Speer; 04/18/08


www.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/msg/a220be73b172760f

And since the only verified source of gunfire is the SN in the
TSBD....where does such a "6 inches vs. 2.5 inches" debate really take
a conspiracy theorist?

Does it take the CTer to another unidentified "mystery shooter" in the
Plaza? If so, where? And can anybody verify the presence of such a
shooter? (The answer to that, of course, is no...and always has been.)

The basic (undeniable) facts:

1.) Three bullet shells from Oswald's rifle found in the TSBD's
Sniper's Nest.

2.) 90%+ of the earwitnesses heard 3 shots or fewer.

3.) All bullets and bullet fragments in the whole case are linked
either conclusively to Oswald's Carcano rifle or are (at the very
least) consistent with having come from that same weapon....while, on
the other side of that ballistics coin, there isn't a single bullet or
bullet fragment in the entire case that can be proven to have
positively NOT been fired from Oswald's rifle.

4.) All ENTRY wounds on both victims are positively and undeniably
REAR entry wounds, indicating that all shots that struck any limo
victims came from ABOVE and BEHIND the President's vehicle.

Given this evidence indicating "ONLY THREE SHOTS WERE FIRED, ALL
COMING FROM THE DEPOSITORY'S SNIPER'S NEST", it seems to me that about
the only place Pat Speer can possibly go with the "jump-seat location"
snafu (without adding in a large amount of conjecture and guesswork)
is to theorize that the Sniper's-Nest gunman (who was undeniably Lee
Harvey Oswald, via the sum total of evidence) managed to hit John
Connally with a separate bullet that magically somehow managed to miss
hitting the man who was in the direct path of that bullet (JFK).

So, even if Pat is right when it comes to his particular anti-SBT
stance (which he isn't, of course, for a variety of additional reasons
not discussed in this post), where does he really end up, when logic
and the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE are taken into account? ---

Answer:

Lee Harvey Oswald, with Rifle #C2766, fired three shots from the Texas
School Book Depository Building, hitting Governor Connally once and
President Kennedy twice.

Hardly worth the effort that Pat has put into it....is it?


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

DALE MYERS' "SECRETS OF A HOMICIDE" DVD TRAILER (note the locaton of
JBC's jump seat throughout this trailer; if you pause the video, you
can then go to anywhere within the video in paused mode):


www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/video_preview.htm


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

David Von Pein

unread,
May 9, 2008, 10:20:18 PM5/9/08
to

VIA THE HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS:

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

"Connally...was seated well within the car on a jump seat ahead
of Kennedy; a gap of slightly less than 15 centimeters [6 inches]
separated this seat from the car door. (See Fig. II-19.) ....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0028b.htm

"[HSCA Footnote:] A similar stereophotogrammetric analysis,
performed by the Itek Corp. and verified by the [HSCA's] photographic
evidence panel, indicated that in several stereo pairs Connally was
sitting 10.2 to 20.3 centimeters [4 to 8 inches] to the left of a line
extending straight forward from Kennedy. (See "John Kennedy
Assassination Film Analysis", Itek Corp. (1976), pp. 43-48)." -- HSCA
Vol. 6; Page 49

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0028a.htm


Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
May 9, 2008, 10:52:41 PM5/9/08
to


"Connally...was seated well within the car on a jump seat ahead
of Kennedy; a gap of slightly less than 15 centimeters [6 inches]

separated this seat from the car door. (See Fig. II-19.)" -- HSCA Vol.
6; Page 49

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0028b.htm


HSCA's "Figure 2-19" (linked above), of course, says no such thing
about the jump seat being approx. 6 inches from the right door; to the
contrary, the only measurement on that figure pertaining to this
distance is "2.50 inches".

Now, as to exactly WHERE that measurement was taken from might be
another good question to ask; i.e., was it measured to the BASE
portion of Connally's jump seat? Or was it measured from the door to
the actual SEAT portion of the jump seat, which I think might protrude
out a little bit from the "base" or "platform" that the actual seat
itself rests upon? (Although, I admit, I could very well be wrong
about this piece of guesswork; it's hard to tell by looking at the
photos below.)

I doubt we'll ever know for sure about this precise measurement.

~shrugs~

http://in-broad-daylight.com/LIMO1961.jpg

http://www.in-broad-daylight.com/window.jpg

http://www.in-broad-daylight.com/fbiblky4.jpg

David Von Pein

unread,
May 10, 2008, 2:20:40 AM5/10/08
to

Dale Myers has added the following comments to his original 5/8/08
article posted on his website:

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

"In a recent post on the UK’s Education Forum, Mr. [Patrick J.]
Speer writes, “No one to my knowledge, including Myers, until this
response, had ever suggested the images were distorted because the
animation – the animation shown round the world to convince people the
single-bullet trajectories worked, mind you – was shot at an angle
from a computer monitor.”

"Mr. Speer doesn’t seem to understand that in the real world
there is no need to acknowledge something that is self evident--
namely, that Discovery Channel viewers were watching a presentation
being given from a vantage point that was not perpendicular to the
presentation screen. This is obvious from the Discovery program
sequences that show a wide-angle view of the studio in which the
presentation was being given. Mr. Speer failed to note that fact and
now claims that the Discovery Channel and yours truly conspired to
deceive everyone about the single bullet theory.

"The so-called distortions Mr. Speer refers to are of course the
unintended result of the Discovery Channel photographing the
presentation monitor at an angle and have nothing to do with the
alignments depicted in the actual images appearing on the monitor. And
the trajectory path superimposed over the videotaped sequence by
Discovery editors after the fact has no more relevance or accuracy to
the images below it (other than to illustrate, in very broad terms,
the path of the bullet*) than Mr. Speer’s own attempts to project two-
dimensional lines into three-dimensional space.

"It’s unfathomable to me that anyone could swallow Mr. Speer’s
illogical rationale for dismissing the breadth of my work on the
single bullet theory, but in the world of conspiracy theorists bent on
embracing anyone and anything critical of the single bullet theory,
such idiocy is common place. (The UK’s Education Forum’s
administrator, John Simkin, applauded Speer writing, “Congratulations.
I am sure all members have been very impressed with your work in this
area.”)

[Later....]

"Mr. Speer further complains that the animated sequence I
produced in which Connally is shown sitting inboard of Kennedy by six
inches is equally deceptively because it shows Connally and the
jumpseat moving in unison. I explained in a recent email that Connally
and the jumpseat were moved as one for clarity.

"According to Mr. Speer, “This is as good as a confession that
Myers knew the jumpseat was not 6 inches in from the door when he
created animation showing it to be 6 inches from the door… I wonder
how many [millions of viewers] would feel deceived to find out that
Connally's sitting comfortably in the middle of his seat was merely a
Myers invention designed to ‘clarify’ things for them? Some might call
this an out-and-out fraud perpetrated on the public.”

"I don’t know how many ways to say it, but Connally was situated
six inches inboard of Kennedy at the time they were both hit.
Connally’s jumpseat, however, was fixed to a track in the floor of the
limousine, the outside edge of the jumpseat cushion measured at 2.5
inches from the inside door panel, according to body drafts produced
by Hess & Eisenhardt Company.

"To demonstrate the difference between a rather common (and
inaccurate) drawing purporting to show Connally seated directly in
front of Kennedy at the time of the single bullet shot and their
actual positions as deduced from the Zapruder film and other
photographs, the models of Connally and the jumpseat were moved as a
single unit during presentations for ABC News and the Discovery
Channel.

"The relationship between Connally and the jumpseat are
identical in both positions. Moving Connally and the jumpseat in
unison was simply easier than moving the two separately given the
television time available – especially given the fact that the
position of the jumpseat had absolutely no bearing on the single
bullet theory.

"But for Mr. Speer, focusing on inconsequential minutia is
better than acknowledging his own obvious mistakes in photographic
analysis and logic. It also allows him to play the martyr for his
fellow conspiracy theorists and pretend he has actually proven
something." -- DALE K. MYERS; ADD-ON SECTIONS TO HIS MAY 8TH ARTICLE
LINKED BELOW

http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2008/05/con-job-debunking-debunkers.html

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

* = Which was just exactly my response to Mr. Speer regarding this
very issue (when it surfaced in the following May 6, 2008, newsgroup
exchange):


PATRICK SPEER WROTE:

>>> "The [video] clip at your link is most certainly the clip filmed at an angle now denounced by Myers as inaccurate. As you can see they start the trajectory line to the left of the monitor and superimpose it on Myers' distorted animation." <<<

DVP WROTE BACK:

>>> "Merely to illustrate the obvious--i.e., that any bullet exiting John Kennedy's neck IS going to strike John B. Connally's body without a shred of a doubt. But the ENTIRE FULL-SCREEN CLIP (showing the trajectory line going back into the Sniper's-Nest window) isn't filmed at any skewed "angle", for Pete sake. In other words, it's not being filmed straight off a computer screen, kinescope-style. This seems quite obvious (to me anyway)." <<<


www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/28950255fd4a09b5

www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/c466785c78ce077c

I will add this (once again) regarding the "jump seat" topic:

There is definitely a discrepancy with respect to the exact
measurement of the jump seat that John Connally was sitting on when he
was shot by Lee Harvey Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano bullet (CE399).

The Hess & Eisenhardt chart shows the seat to be "2.50 inches" inboard
of the right door (which is almost certainly the best possible source,
I would think, to rely on for the true distance between those two
points in the limousine, which Myers has, in fact, done in his 3D
computer model).

But there's also testimony from the Warren Commission (via Thomas J.
Kelley) and the HSCA (by Thomas Canning) indicating that the seat was
located 6 inches inside the door.

Author Vincent Bugliosi, via the quotes in his 2007 book "Reclaiming
History", quite obviously thinks the jump seat was a "half foot"
inboard of the right door, instead of the 2.5-inch measurement found
in the H&E body draft (schematic). Vince uses those exact words ("half
foot") at one point in his book. And in an Endnote on Page 344 of the
CD-ROM, VB says this (which certainly is at odds with the Hess &
Eisenhardt measurement):

"A six-inch gap separated Connally's jump seat from the right
door [6 HSCA 49]."


6 HSCA 49:
http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/reportvols/vol6/html/HSCA_Vol6_0028a.htm


But, as Dale Myers has also pointed out, the exact location of the
seat on which John Connally was riding is NOT the most important
factor at all with regard to lining up the SBT trajectory in Dale's
three-dimensional computer model. It is the location of the two MEN
themselves (JFK & JBC) in "virtual space" that is the key factor.

And Dale's model, as he has fully explained already to Mr. Speer, has
been key-framed to the MEN THEMSELVES as they appear in the Zapruder
Film--and not to the SEATS of the two victims.

I'm still a bit confused myself about the precise jump-seat
measurement. As mentioned, there's definitely an official disagreement
there with respect to that measurement from the right-hand door.

But I'll also add a breath of CSA (Common Sense Air) to this Mountain-
Out-Of-A-Molehill discussion:

It couldn't BE more obvious that a bullet proceeding on a downward and
forward path exiting John Kennedy's throat had noplace else to go
except into Governor Connally's back -- REGARDLESS OF EXACT JUMP-SEAT
LOCALITY (be it 6 inches from the damn door, or 2.5 inches from it).

Pat Speer probably realizes that my last paragraph is 100%
true....which is probably why he decided to invent his own unique
"SBT" a while back, wherein Pat pretends that a non-existent bullet
hole was located at the "hairline" of JFK's body, with that bullet
being fired from a make-believe gunman firing a gun from a made-up
shooting location (the Dal-Tex Building), with this make-believe
bullet then exiting Kennedy's throat at a lesser right-to-left angle
than a Depository SBT bullet would.

You see, being a conspiracy theorist, Pat apparently thinks he doesn't
have to stay within the borders of something called "THE KNOWN
EVIDENCE IN THE CASE". Almost all conspiracists own this strange and
unique rulebook; just as nearly all "CTers" also adhere to the
following motto -- "ACCUSE NOW; PROVE NEVER".

And if Pat wants to respond to my last statement with a comment about
my being a hypocrite and insisting that Dale Myers hasn't been able to
stay within the "known evidence" either -- I'd fire back with:

Yes, he has (regardless of exact jump-seat placement).

Why?

Because, as Dale has said (and I have no reason to think he's lying
about this, mainly because it makes SO MUCH SENSE for this statement
printed below to be a truthful and accurate one, based on his computer
animation work):


"The location of the jumpseat has no bearing on the alignment of

ANY trajectory plotted in my computer reconstruction. The figures of


JFK and JBC were matched to the Zapruder film perspective, not to the
location of the jumpseat. Frankly, you could eliminate the entire
limousine from the reconstruction and the alignments of JFK and JBC
would still be valid since their position in space is based on
Zapruder's view of the scene and the relationship of JFK to JBC, and
their combined relationship to the TSBD and the surrounding buildings.
In short, the position and size of the jumpseat has no bearing on the

single bullet theory." -- DALE K. MYERS; 05/08/2008


www.jfkfiles.com


www.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/69758897e673c5a2


www.DavidVonPein.blogspot.com

David Von Pein

unread,
May 11, 2008, 2:38:29 AM5/11/08
to

PAT SPEER SAID:


>>> "DVP, if the distortion of the images used in 'Beyond the Magic Bullet' was "self-evident", than [sic] why have you had such a hard time recognizing it? Myers, in his zeal to call me stupid, is attacking you as well." <<<


DVP SAID:


In all honesty, the thought about "distorted images on computer
monitors filmed at an angle by the Discovery Channel" never even once
crossed my mind before this topic came up recently at the various JFK
forums (and at Dale Myers' website).

Why in the world WOULD it cross anyone's mind particularly?

But when a person stops and THINKS about it for a few moments, then,
yes, I guess it does, indeed, make sense that the angle of the monitor
to the camera would distort things a little bit.

The STRAIGHT-ON view of Myers pushing Connally's jump seat inboard
isn't "distorted" in any great way, however. At least I doubt it is.
It's being filmed HEAD-ON, it looks to me.

And Dale is definitely sliding that jump seat inboard more than 2.5
inches, and IMO that's not a good thing for him to do, regardless of
"time" constraints for the Discovery Channel program. Because it can
only serve to confuse people who see the whole seat (with Connally
sitting on it) being shoved into a place inside the Presidential
limousine where it was never really located.

But.....

In Myers' FULL WORKING MODEL that has been LOCKED IN and "Key Framed"
to the Zapruder Film itself (with the trajectory lines on it leading
back to the Book Depository's Sniper's Nest), and not just culling the
snippet with the moving seat, Dale appears to have that jump seat
CLOSER to the door (i.e., in the CORRECT location, per the body draft
supplied by the limo's manufacturer, Hess & Eisenhardt).

And the Single-Bullet Theory works perfectly via that CLOSER-TO-THE-
DOOR full working model. And THAT'S the most important thing. (IMHO.)
(YMMV.)

www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/concl2b.htm

To repeat (yet again):

The bullet that exited JFK's throat had TWO places to go as it came
out of the President's throat on its downward angle---

1.) Into the seats or floorboards of the limousine.

Or:

2.) Into the body of Governor John B. Connally Jr.

Since we know beyond ALL doubt that #1 did not occur....it means that
#2 did occur.

The SBT lives.
And always will.
Because it's the obvious truth.

Message has been deleted

aeffects

unread,
May 13, 2008, 4:43:09 AM5/13/08
to
45 questions and the 16 smoking guns aren't going away, son..... Ya
can run but ya can't hide.....
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted

David Von Pein

unread,
May 13, 2008, 5:50:46 AM5/13/08