|
|
 November 01, 2010, 07:45:29 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
Why did a person coming forward saying he was wounded CHANGE the wound locations on a body that was autopsied months before?
The wound in the back of JFK was duly noted as being in the back below the shoulders at the T-3 level about 4 to 6 inches to the RIGHT of the spine. It was that way for months, and then finally the WC could not ignore the story of James Tague anymore. James Tague was hit in the cheek by a bullet that ricocheted off the curb near where he was standing under the Triple Underpass. The DPD and FBI tried to explain this away for a many months as they had said only three shots were fired and that one hit JFK in the back, one hit him in the head and one hit JBC (keep in mind the prosectors had stated there was NO wound to JFK's throat).
Finally when forced to deal with the situation the FBI submitted a report to the WC on July 17, 1964 that said the following:
Quote on
It should be noted that, since this mark was observed on November 22, 1963, there have been numerous rains, which could have possibly washed away a mark and also that the area is cleaned by a street cleaning machine about once a week, which could also wash away any such mark.
Quote off
The WC could not "wash away" this issue however as they were getting pressure to look into it and they were sent the Tom Dillard (Dallas Morning News) photo and it was mentioned that he believed there was a lead mark on the curb when he viewed it shortly after the shooting on 11/22/63.
The FBI finally removed the area of the curb for testing and this was what they said about the results:
Quote on
Small foreign metal smears were found adhering to the curbing section within the area of the mark. These metal smears were spectrographically determined to be essentially lead with a trace of antimony. No copper was found. The lead could have originated from the lead core of a mutilated metal-jacketed bullet such as the type bullet loaded into a 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges (it should be noted there was NO such thing as Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges, there was simply 6.5 mm cartridges) or from some other source having the same composition....The absence of copper precludes the possibility that the mark on the curbing section was made by an unmutilated military-type full-metal jacketed bullet...Further, the damage to the curbing would have been much more extensive if a rifle bullet the curbing without first having struck some other object. Therefore, this mark could not have been made by the first impact of a high-velocity bullet.
Quote off
So after months of ignoring Tague and dismissing the idea of a 4th shot is anyone surprised by the fact that the object that hit the curbing section and wounded Tague was NOT found to be a whole bullet? They had to say it was a "fragment" from one of the other three that went on to hit the curb and break a piece off and have it fly up and cut Tague's cheek. Of course the possibility of it being a NON FULL-METAL JACKETED bullet did not get entertained either.
Back to the main point here, why did Tague's coming forward cause the wound in the back cause the following to happen when JFK's body had already been autopsied?
1) The back wound moved post-mortem to the T-1 level and placed at the base of the neck.
2) The admittance of a throat wound they had previously denied, but of course this was an EXIT according to the WC.
Can anyone explain why the issue of Tague should CHANGE THE WOUNDS seen on JFK's body when it had been autopsied already?
-------------------------
-------------------------
A nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people. -- John F. Kennedy
"Benavides- Saw Oswald kill Tippit, picked him out of a lineup." - Brian "Doesn't Know His Rear From His Back" Walker
|
|
|
 Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 01, 2010, 07:59:54 PM
|
Full Member
Posts: 247
|
Didn't Ford have something to do with this moving of the bullet hole?
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 01, 2010, 08:42:52 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
Didn't Ford have something to do with this moving of the bullet hole?
Ford and Specter moved it to invent the SBT.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 02, 2010, 10:47:55 AM
|
Super Member
Posts: 1299
Profile In Courage
|
Why did a person coming forward saying he was wounded CHANGE the wound locations on a body that was autopsied months before?
The wound in the back of JFK was duly noted as being in the back below the shoulders at the T-3 level about 4 to 6 inches to the RIGHT of the spine. It was that way for months, and then finally the WC could not ignore the story of James Tague anymore. James Tague was hit in the cheek by a bullet that ricocheted off the curb near where he was standing under the Triple Underpass. The DPD and FBI tried to explain this away for a many months as they had said only three shots were fired and that one hit JFK in the back, one hit him in the head and one hit JBC (keep in mind the prosectors had stated there was NO wound to JFK's throat).
Finally when forced to deal with the situation the FBI submitted a report to the WC on July 17, 1964 that said the following:
Quote on
It should be noted that, since this mark was observed on November 22, 1963, there have been numerous rains, which could have possibly washed away a mark and also that the area is cleaned by a street cleaning machine about once a week, which could also wash away any such mark.
Quote off
The WC could not "wash away" this issue however as they were getting pressure to look into it and they were sent the Tom Dillard (Dallas Morning News) photo and it was mentioned that he believed there was a lead mark on the curb when he viewed it shortly after the shooting on 11/22/63.
The FBI finally removed the area of the curb for testing and this was what they said about the results:
Quote on
Small foreign metal smears were found adhering to the curbing section within the area of the mark. These metal smears were spectrographically determined to be essentially lead with a trace of antimony. No copper was found. The lead could have originated from the lead core of a mutilated metal-jacketed bullet such as the type bullet loaded into a 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges (it should be noted there was NO such thing as Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges, there was simply 6.5 mm cartridges) or from some other source having the same composition....The absence of copper precludes the possibility that the mark on the curbing section was made by an unmutilated military-type full-metal jacketed bullet...Further, the damage to the curbing would have been much more extensive if a rifle bullet the curbing without first having struck some other object. Therefore, this mark could not have been made by the first impact of a high-velocity bullet.
Quote off
So after months of ignoring Tague and dismissing the idea of a 4th shot is anyone surprised by the fact that the object that hit the curbing section and wounded Tague was NOT found to be a whole bullet? They had to say it was a "fragment" from one of the other three that went on to hit the curb and break a piece off and have it fly up and cut Tague's cheek. Of course the possibility of it being a NON FULL-METAL JACKETED bullet did not get entertained either.
Back to the main point here, why did Tague's coming forward cause the wound in the back cause the following to happen when JFK's body had already been autopsied?
1) The back wound moved post-mortem to the T-1 level and placed at the base of the neck.
2) The admittance of a throat wound they had previously denied, but of course this was an EXIT according to the WC.
Can anyone explain why the issue of Tague should CHANGE THE WOUNDS seen on JFK's body when it had been autopsied already?
Incompetence, incompetence! It's everywhere. Was then and is now.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 02, 2010, 08:55:53 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
Why did a person coming forward saying he was wounded CHANGE the wound locations on a body that was autopsied months before?
The wound in the back of JFK was duly noted as being in the back below the shoulders at the T-3 level about 4 to 6 inches to the RIGHT of the spine. It was that way for months, and then finally the WC could not ignore the story of James Tague anymore. James Tague was hit in the cheek by a bullet that ricocheted off the curb near where he was standing under the Triple Underpass. The DPD and FBI tried to explain this away for a many months as they had said only three shots were fired and that one hit JFK in the back, one hit him in the head and one hit JBC (keep in mind the prosectors had stated there was NO wound to JFK's throat).
Finally when forced to deal with the situation the FBI submitted a report to the WC on July 17, 1964 that said the following:
Quote on
It should be noted that, since this mark was observed on November 22, 1963, there have been numerous rains, which could have possibly washed away a mark and also that the area is cleaned by a street cleaning machine about once a week, which could also wash away any such mark.
Quote off
The WC could not "wash away" this issue however as they were getting pressure to look into it and they were sent the Tom Dillard (Dallas Morning News) photo and it was mentioned that he believed there was a lead mark on the curb when he viewed it shortly after the shooting on 11/22/63.
The FBI finally removed the area of the curb for testing and this was what they said about the results:
Quote on
Small foreign metal smears were found adhering to the curbing section within the area of the mark. These metal smears were spectrographically determined to be essentially lead with a trace of antimony. No copper was found. The lead could have originated from the lead core of a mutilated metal-jacketed bullet such as the type bullet loaded into a 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges (it should be noted there was NO such thing as Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges, there was simply 6.5 mm cartridges) or from some other source having the same composition....The absence of copper precludes the possibility that the mark on the curbing section was made by an unmutilated military-type full-metal jacketed bullet...Further, the damage to the curbing would have been much more extensive if a rifle bullet the curbing without first having struck some other object. Therefore, this mark could not have been made by the first impact of a high-velocity bullet.
Quote off
So after months of ignoring Tague and dismissing the idea of a 4th shot is anyone surprised by the fact that the object that hit the curbing section and wounded Tague was NOT found to be a whole bullet? They had to say it was a "fragment" from one of the other three that went on to hit the curb and break a piece off and have it fly up and cut Tague's cheek. Of course the possibility of it being a NON FULL-METAL JACKETED bullet did not get entertained either.
Back to the main point here, why did Tague's coming forward cause the wound in the back cause the following to happen when JFK's body had already been autopsied?
1) The back wound moved post-mortem to the T-1 level and placed at the base of the neck.
2) The admittance of a throat wound they had previously denied, but of course this was an EXIT according to the WC.
Can anyone explain why the issue of Tague should CHANGE THE WOUNDS seen on JFK's body when it had been autopsied already?
Incompetence, incompetence! It's everywhere. Was then and is now. Unsupported claims and assertions, unsupported claims and assertions! It's everywhere. Was then and is now. Thanks for the rebuttal Ross! It was very helpful in showing the dishonesty of some to side track the issue at hand.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 02, 2010, 10:27:19 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6711
|
Why did a person coming forward saying he was wounded CHANGE the wound locations on a body that was autopsied months before?
The wound in the back of JFK was duly noted as being in the back below the shoulders at the T-3 level about 4 to 6 inches to the RIGHT of the spine. It was that way for months, and then finally the WC could not ignore the story of James Tague anymore. James Tague was hit in the cheek by a bullet that ricocheted off the curb near where he was standing under the Triple Underpass. The DPD and FBI tried to explain this away for a many months as they had said only three shots were fired and that one hit JFK in the back, one hit him in the head and one hit JBC (keep in mind the prosectors had stated there was NO wound to JFK's throat).
Finally when forced to deal with the situation the FBI submitted a report to the WC on July 17, 1964 that said the following:
Quote on
It should be noted that, since this mark was observed on November 22, 1963, there have been numerous rains, which could have possibly washed away a mark and also that the area is cleaned by a street cleaning machine about once a week, which could also wash away any such mark.
Quote off
The WC could not "wash away" this issue however as they were getting pressure to look into it and they were sent the Tom Dillard (Dallas Morning News) photo and it was mentioned that he believed there was a lead mark on the curb when he viewed it shortly after the shooting on 11/22/63.
The FBI finally removed the area of the curb for testing and this was what they said about the results:
Quote on
Small foreign metal smears were found adhering to the curbing section within the area of the mark. These metal smears were spectrographically determined to be essentially lead with a trace of antimony. No copper was found. The lead could have originated from the lead core of a mutilated metal-jacketed bullet such as the type bullet loaded into a 6.5 millimeter Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges (it should be noted there was NO such thing as Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges, there was simply 6.5 mm cartridges) or from some other source having the same composition....The absence of copper precludes the possibility that the mark on the curbing section was made by an unmutilated military-type full-metal jacketed bullet...Further, the damage to the curbing would have been much more extensive if a rifle bullet the curbing without first having struck some other object. Therefore, this mark could not have been made by the first impact of a high-velocity bullet.
Quote off
So after months of ignoring Tague and dismissing the idea of a 4th shot is anyone surprised by the fact that the object that hit the curbing section and wounded Tague was NOT found to be a whole bullet? They had to say it was a "fragment" from one of the other three that went on to hit the curb and break a piece off and have it fly up and cut Tague's cheek. Of course the possibility of it being a NON FULL-METAL JACKETED bullet did not get entertained either.
Back to the main point here, why did Tague's coming forward cause the wound in the back cause the following to happen when JFK's body had already been autopsied?
1) The back wound moved post-mortem to the T-1 level and placed at the base of the neck.
2) The admittance of a throat wound they had previously denied, but of course this was an EXIT according to the WC.
Can anyone explain why the issue of Tague should CHANGE THE WOUNDS seen on JFK's body when it had been autopsied already?
You never seem to know what you are talking about. Who "duly noted" the back wound at T-3? Only one person, Admiral Burkley and he did not examine the body carefully. He just signed the death certificate. He had no idea where T-3 was nor do you. A bullet coming down at 18 degrees and hitting near T-3 would have blasted through that vertebra and smashed into the manubrium, neither of which were injured. You may think this was an official conclusion. It was not. It was just a guess. Then you made it worse by saying, "The wound in the back of JFK was duly noted as being in the back below the shoulders at the T-3 level about 4 to 6 inches to the RIGHT of the spine. " You are extremely confused. That 4 to 6 inches was never about the location to the right of the spine. It was a wide range of guesses about how far DOWN the wound was, depending on whether you buy the WC defender lies about his jacket being bunched up. With or without the bunch the wound is always 1-3/4 inches to the right of the MIDLINE. We can and should debate for the next decade exactly how far down on the back the wound really was. But it was never measured correctly. So all we can do now is guess and try to reconstruct its location. You wrote: (it should be noted there was NO such thing as Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges, there was simply 6.5 mm cartridges) That is simply not true. You know nothing about ballistics and ammunition. There are many types of 6.5 cartridges each incompatible with each other. Different model rifles all 6.5 mm nominally use different cartridges and you can't use one in a different model rifle. Oswald's rifle used the 6.5 x 52.5 mm cartridge.The Greek Mannlicher and Schoenaur used the 6.5 x 53.5 mm cartridge. The Dutch Mannlicher used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge. The Swedish Mauser used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge. The Portuguese Mauser used the 6.5 x 58 mm cartridge. The Japanese rifle used the 6.5 x 50.5 cartridge. In addition to the size difference there are minor differences in design. For example when shopping for Carcano ammo I was able to instantly spot the original Italian SMI ammo when I saw the crimps on the neck. There are also some telltale differences in quality of design and craftsmanship. And of course you can often tell the difference by the headstamping on each cartridge. It's not even realistic to claim that there are only 6.5 mm bullets. Aside from the obvious differences between a hunting round and a FMJ, there are small difference amongst the same type of hunting bullet or FMJ bullet according to brand. FBI agent Robert Frazier was able to tell instantly that the recovered bullets were WCC M-C without seeing the cartridges. The DPD wasn't even able to identify the caliber or coating of the Walker bullet. Tague had nothing to do with moving up the back wound. The two things are unrelated. The WC had to lie and move up the back wound because they knew it was lower than the throat wound and when Specter made up the SBT the bullet must leave Kennedy on a downward course to hit Connally. THAT"s when they decided to lie and move the wound up to the neck. Before that it was always in the upper back. I don't believe the Tague wounding was caused by a fragment from the head shot, but that seems to be the most popular theory of the WC defenders. At least they have the bullet break up so that only a lead fragment hits the curb. One popular conspiracy theory is that a missed shot hit the pavement and broke up into pieces and one piece hit the curb. A new theory of the WC defenders has the missed shot hitting the tree and then only the lead core goes on to hit the curb. My theory is that the missed shot hit Connally's wrist and broke up with some pieces hitting the limo and the lead core from the base squeezed out hitting the curb. I think Bob Cutler had a theory that a non-FMJ bullet directly hit the curb.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 02, 2010, 10:30:19 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6711
|
Didn't Ford have something to do with this moving of the bullet hole?
Yes, he changed the wording of the draft of the WC report. As a guest, you are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 02, 2010, 10:31:51 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6711
|
Didn't Ford have something to do with this moving of the bullet hole?
Ford and Specter moved it to invent the SBT. Close. Specter invented the SBT and then the WC realized the back wound was too low to allow his SBT to work. So Ford did a little damage control and rewrote the WCR.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 03, 2010, 09:44:06 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
For Tony Marsh!
You never seem to know what you are talking about. Who "duly noted" the back wound at T-3? Only one person, Admiral Burkley and he did not examine the body carefully. He just signed the death certificate. He had no idea where T-3 was nor do you.
Tony, YOU never seem to what you are talking about! This is but one witness who describes a wound similar to the one noted on the Naval Death Certificate.
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
Do you think Burkley just signed a Death Certificate that said this without conferring with the doctors at PH?
A bullet coming down at 18 degrees and hitting near T-3 would have blasted through that vertebra and smashed into the manubrium, neither of which were injured. You may think this was an official conclusion. It was not. It was just a guess.
Then all you have to do is cite or quote Burkley saying this. When can I expect that?
Then you made it worse by saying, "The wound in the back of JFK was duly noted as being in the back below the shoulders at the T-3 level about 4 to 6 inches to the RIGHT of the spine. "
What is this?
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
Why do you make silly comments like and then try and make it seem like I am the kooky one? Surely you don't think Burkley signed a Death Certificate stating this WITHOUT conferring with the PH doctors since he did NOT personally work on JFK? I hope not.
You are extremely confused. That 4 to 6 inches was never about the location to the right of the spine. It was a wide range of guesses about how far DOWN the wound was, depending on whether you buy the WC defender lies about his jacket being bunched up. With or without the bunch the wound is always 1-3/4 inches to the right of the MIDLINE. We can and should debate for the next decade exactly how far down on the back the wound really was. But it was never measured correctly. So all we can do now is guess and try to reconstruct its location.
The ONLY one that seems confused is YOU!
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
You wrote: (it should be noted there was NO such thing as Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges, there was simply 6.5 mm cartridges)
That is simply not true. You know nothing about ballistics and ammunition. There are many types of 6.5 cartridges each incompatible with each other. Different model rifles all 6.5 mm nominally use different cartridges and you can't use one in a different model rifle. Oswald's rifle used the 6.5 x 52.5 mm cartridge.The Greek Mannlicher and Schoenaur used the 6.5 x 53.5 mm cartridge. The Dutch Mannlicher used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge.
Tony is on a roll today! YOU are the one ignorant of the facts in this case Tony as there is no Carcano ammo! The Carcano is a WEAPON not an ammo type. The WCC (along with other companies) made 6.5 mm cartridges, but they were NOT called "Carcano cartridges" as ANY weapon that fires a 6.5 mm round can use them.
Just how clueless are you?
The Swedish Mauser used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge. The Portuguese Mauser used the 6.5 x 58 mm cartridge. The Japanese rifle used the 6.5 x 50.5 cartridge. In addition to the size difference there are minor differences in design. For example when shopping for Carcano ammo I was able to instantly spot the original Italian SMI ammo when I saw the crimps on the neck. There are also some telltale differences in quality of design and craftsmanship. And of course you can often tell the difference by the headstamping on each cartridge.
So you are saying there is NOT a standard 6.5 mm cartridge (whether it be a 50.5 version or a 54 version) that WORKS IN ALL THE TYPES OF WEAPONS you listed?
That is my point! THERE IS NO AMMO JUST FOR THE MANNLICHER-CARCANO (even the Mannlicher is not really needed)!
It's not even realistic to claim that there are only 6.5 mm bullets. Aside from the obvious differences between a hunting round and a FMJ, there are small difference amongst the same type of hunting bullet or FMJ bullet according to brand. FBI agent Robert Frazier was able to tell instantly that the recovered bullets were WCC M-C without seeing the cartridges. The DPD wasn't even able to identify the caliber or coating of the Walker bullet.
We are discussing a FMJ bullet here (although it could have been a hunting soft point) based on the comments by the FBI. Why can't you stay on topic?
Tague had nothing to do with moving up the back wound. The two things are unrelated. The WC had to lie and move up the back wound because they knew it was lower than the throat wound and when Specter made up the SBT the bullet must leave Kennedy on a downward course to hit Connally.
There was NO need for the SBT until the issue of Tague came up. Before that they had three wounds and three bullets.
THAT"s when they decided to lie and move the wound up to the neck. Before that it was always in the upper back.
The wounding of Tague necessitated the need for a SBT theory, and to make this work they needed the wound to be at the T-1 level.
I don't believe the Tague wounding was caused by a fragment from the head shot, but that seems to be the most popular theory of the WC defenders. At least they have the bullet break up so that only a lead fragment hits the curb.
And yet the other bullet supposedly hit two bones and did NOT break up in the least.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 03, 2010, 11:50:04 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6711
|
For Tony Marsh!
You never seem to know what you are talking about. Who "duly noted" the back wound at T-3? Only one person, Admiral Burkley and he did not examine the body carefully. He just signed the death certificate. He had no idea where T-3 was nor do you.
Tony, YOU never seem to what you are talking about! This is but one witness who describes a wound similar to the one noted on the Naval Death Certificate.
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
A bullet coming down at 18 degrees and hitting near T-3 would have blasted through that vertebra and smashed into the manubrium, neither of which were injured. You may think this was an official conclusion. It was not. It was just a guess.
Then all you have to do is cite or quote Burkley saying this. When can I expect that?
Then you made it worse by saying, "The wound in the back of JFK was duly noted as being in the back below the shoulders at the T-3 level about 4 to 6 inches to the RIGHT of the spine. "
What is this?
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
Why do you make silly comments like and then try and make it seem like I am the kooky one? Surely you don't think Burkley signed a Death Certificate stating this WITHOUT conferring with the PH doctors since he did NOT personally work on JFK? I hope not.
You are extremely confused. That 4 to 6 inches was never about the location to the right of the spine. It was a wide range of guesses about how far DOWN the wound was, depending on whether you buy the WC defender lies about his jacket being bunched up. With or without the bunch the wound is always 1-3/4 inches to the right of the MIDLINE. We can and should debate for the next decade exactly how far down on the back the wound really was. But it was never measured correctly. So all we can do now is guess and try to reconstruct its location.
The ONLY one that seems confused is YOU!
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
You wrote: (it should be noted there was NO such thing as Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges, there was simply 6.5 mm cartridges)
That is simply not true. You know nothing about ballistics and ammunition. There are many types of 6.5 cartridges each incompatible with each other. Different model rifles all 6.5 mm nominally use different cartridges and you can't use one in a different model rifle. Oswald's rifle used the 6.5 x 52.5 mm cartridge.The Greek Mannlicher and Schoenaur used the 6.5 x 53.5 mm cartridge. The Dutch Mannlicher used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge.
Tony is on a roll today! YOU are the one ignorant of the facts in this case Tony as there is no Carcano ammo! The Carcano is a WEAPON not an ammo type. The WCC (along with other companies) made 6.5 mm cartridges, but they were NOT called "Carcano cartridges" as ANY weapon that fires a 6.5 mm round can use them.
Just how clueless are you?
The Swedish Mauser used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge. The Portuguese Mauser used the 6.5 x 58 mm cartridge. The Japanese rifle used the 6.5 x 50.5 cartridge. In addition to the size difference there are minor differences in design. For example when shopping for Carcano ammo I was able to instantly spot the original Italian SMI ammo when I saw the crimps on the neck. There are also some telltale differences in quality of design and craftsmanship. And of course you can often tell the difference by the headstamping on each cartridge.
So you are saying there is NOT a standard 6.5 mm cartridge (whether it be a 50.5 version or a 54 version) that WORKS IN ALL THE TYPES OF WEAPONS you listed?
That is my point! THERE IS NO AMMO JUST FOR THE MANNLICHER-CARCANO (even the Mannlicher is not really needed)!
It's not even realistic to claim that there are only 6.5 mm bullets. Aside from the obvious differences between a hunting round and a FMJ, there are small difference amongst the same type of hunting bullet or FMJ bullet according to brand. FBI agent Robert Frazier was able to tell instantly that the recovered bullets were WCC M-C without seeing the cartridges. The DPD wasn't even able to identify the caliber or coating of the Walker bullet.
We are discussing a FMJ bullet here (although it could have been a hunting soft point) based on the comments by the FBI. Why can't you stay on topic?
Tague had nothing to do with moving up the back wound. The two things are unrelated. The WC had to lie and move up the back wound because they knew it was lower than the throat wound and when Specter made up the SBT the bullet must leave Kennedy on a downward course to hit Connally.
There was NO need for the SBT until the issue of Tague came up. Before that they had three wounds and three bullets.
THAT"s when they decided to lie and move the wound up to the neck. Before that it was always in the upper back.
The wounding of Tague necessitated the need for a SBT theory, and to make this work they needed the wound to be at the T-1 level.
I don't believe the Tague wounding was caused by a fragment from the head shot, but that seems to be the most popular theory of the WC defenders. At least they have the bullet break up so that only a lead fragment hits the curb.
And yet the other bullet supposedly hit two bones and did NOT break up in the least.
>>This is but one witness who describes a wound similar to the one noted on the Naval Death Certificate. That's YOUR interpretation of what level you think their descriptions represent. I stand by my remark. Burkley was the ONLY one who put T-3 in writing. >>Do you think Burkley just signed a Death Certificate that said this without conferring with the doctors at PH? Of course not. Don't be silly. But the autopsy doctors did not tell him T-3. That was his own idea. Do you think Burkley just signed a Death Certificate that said this without seeing the body himself? >>Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column. You are still confused. He said 6 inches below the neckline, not 6 inches to the right-hand side of the spinal column. >>So you are saying there is NOT a standard 6.5 mm cartridge (whether it be a 50.5 version or a 54 version) that WORKS IN ALL THE TYPES OF WEAPONS you listed? Correct. You can not interchange different length cartridges. The cartridge must fit each particular chamber precisely, not too short, not too long. >>THERE IS NO AMMO JUST FOR THE MANNLICHER-CARCANO Again you don't know what the Hell you are talking about and just SHOUTING does not make you correct. Ammo is sold in the same caliber for different models of rifle and they are not interchangeable. There may be several models which all use the same cartridge, but the 6.5 x 52.5 ammo can only be used in the Carcano, the Breda and the Fiat-Revelli. >>We are discussing a FMJ bullet here No, you were discussing the cartridges not the bullet. Maybe you don't know the difference between a cartridge and a bullet. As for the SBT in mid April 1964 the WC was preparing to conclude three shots three hits. They had no concept of what caused the injury to Tague. Everything was fine and dandy until Specter realized there was not enough time for Oswald's rifle to fire two shots with 30 Zapruder frames. That is what caused the SBT. They could easily have said as some WC defenders have that a fragment from the head shot wounded Tague and still had no need for a SBT. First shot hits Kennedy, second shot hits Connally, last shot hits Kennedy's head and a fragment hits the curb near Tague.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 04, 2010, 08:02:46 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 8302
|
For Tony Marsh!
You never seem to know what you are talking about. Who "duly noted" the back wound at T-3? Only one person, Admiral Burkley and he did not examine the body carefully. He just signed the death certificate. He had no idea where T-3 was nor do you.
Tony, YOU never seem to what you are talking about! This is but one witness who describes a wound similar to the one noted on the Naval Death Certificate.
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
A bullet coming down at 18 degrees and hitting near T-3 would have blasted through that vertebra and smashed into the manubrium, neither of which were injured. You may think this was an official conclusion. It was not. It was just a guess.
Then all you have to do is cite or quote Burkley saying this. When can I expect that?
Then you made it worse by saying, "The wound in the back of JFK was duly noted as being in the back below the shoulders at the T-3 level about 4 to 6 inches to the RIGHT of the spine. "
What is this?
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
Why do you make silly comments like and then try and make it seem like I am the kooky one? Surely you don't think Burkley signed a Death Certificate stating this WITHOUT conferring with the PH doctors since he did NOT personally work on JFK? I hope not.
You are extremely confused. That 4 to 6 inches was never about the location to the right of the spine. It was a wide range of guesses about how far DOWN the wound was, depending on whether you buy the WC defender lies about his jacket being bunched up. With or without the bunch the wound is always 1-3/4 inches to the right of the MIDLINE. We can and should debate for the next decade exactly how far down on the back the wound really was. But it was never measured correctly. So all we can do now is guess and try to reconstruct its location.
The ONLY one that seems confused is YOU!
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
You wrote: (it should be noted there was NO such thing as Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges, there was simply 6.5 mm cartridges)
That is simply not true. You know nothing about ballistics and ammunition. There are many types of 6.5 cartridges each incompatible with each other. Different model rifles all 6.5 mm nominally use different cartridges and you can't use one in a different model rifle. Oswald's rifle used the 6.5 x 52.5 mm cartridge.The Greek Mannlicher and Schoenaur used the 6.5 x 53.5 mm cartridge. The Dutch Mannlicher used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge.
Tony is on a roll today! YOU are the one ignorant of the facts in this case Tony as there is no Carcano ammo! The Carcano is a WEAPON not an ammo type. The WCC (along with other companies) made 6.5 mm cartridges, but they were NOT called "Carcano cartridges" as ANY weapon that fires a 6.5 mm round can use them.
Just how clueless are you?
The Swedish Mauser used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge. The Portuguese Mauser used the 6.5 x 58 mm cartridge. The Japanese rifle used the 6.5 x 50.5 cartridge. In addition to the size difference there are minor differences in design. For example when shopping for Carcano ammo I was able to instantly spot the original Italian SMI ammo when I saw the crimps on the neck. There are also some telltale differences in quality of design and craftsmanship. And of course you can often tell the difference by the headstamping on each cartridge.
So you are saying there is NOT a standard 6.5 mm cartridge (whether it be a 50.5 version or a 54 version) that WORKS IN ALL THE TYPES OF WEAPONS you listed?
That is my point! THERE IS NO AMMO JUST FOR THE MANNLICHER-CARCANO (even the Mannlicher is not really needed)!
It's not even realistic to claim that there are only 6.5 mm bullets. Aside from the obvious differences between a hunting round and a FMJ, there are small difference amongst the same type of hunting bullet or FMJ bullet according to brand. FBI agent Robert Frazier was able to tell instantly that the recovered bullets were WCC M-C without seeing the cartridges. The DPD wasn't even able to identify the caliber or coating of the Walker bullet.
We are discussing a FMJ bullet here (although it could have been a hunting soft point) based on the comments by the FBI. Why can't you stay on topic?
Tague had nothing to do with moving up the back wound. The two things are unrelated. The WC had to lie and move up the back wound because they knew it was lower than the throat wound and when Specter made up the SBT the bullet must leave Kennedy on a downward course to hit Connally.
There was NO need for the SBT until the issue of Tague came up. Before that they had three wounds and three bullets.
THAT"s when they decided to lie and move the wound up to the neck. Before that it was always in the upper back.
The wounding of Tague necessitated the need for a SBT theory, and to make this work they needed the wound to be at the T-1 level.
I don't believe the Tague wounding was caused by a fragment from the head shot, but that seems to be the most popular theory of the WC defenders. At least they have the bullet break up so that only a lead fragment hits the curb.
And yet the other bullet supposedly hit two bones and did NOT break up in the least.
>>This is but one witness who describes a wound similar to the one noted on the Naval Death Certificate. That's YOUR interpretation of what level you think their descriptions represent. I stand by my remark. Burkley was the ONLY one who put T-3 in writing. >>Do you think Burkley just signed a Death Certificate that said this without conferring with the doctors at PH? Of course not. Don't be silly. But the autopsy doctors did not tell him T-3. That was his own idea. Do you think Burkley just signed a Death Certificate that said this without seeing the body himself? >>Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column. You are still confused. He said 6 inches below the neckline, not 6 inches to the right-hand side of the spinal column. >>So you are saying there is NOT a standard 6.5 mm cartridge (whether it be a 50.5 version or a 54 version) that WORKS IN ALL THE TYPES OF WEAPONS you listed? Correct. You can not interchange different length cartridges. The cartridge must fit each particular chamber precisely, not too short, not too long. >>THERE IS NO AMMO JUST FOR THE MANNLICHER-CARCANO Again you don't know what the Hell you are talking about and just SHOUTING does not make you correct. Ammo is sold in the same caliber for different models of rifle and they are not interchangeable. There may be several models which all use the same cartridge, but the 6.5 x 52.5 ammo can only be used in the Carcano, the Breda and the Fiat-Revelli. >>We are discussing a FMJ bullet here No, you were discussing the cartridges not the bullet. Maybe you don't know the difference between a cartridge and a bullet. As for the SBT in mid April 1964 the WC was preparing to conclude three shots three hits. They had no concept of what caused the injury to Tague. Everything was fine and dandy until Specter realized there was not enough time for Oswald's rifle to fire two shots with 30 Zapruder frames. That is what caused the SBT. They could easily have said as some WC defenders have that a fragment from the head shot wounded Tague and still had no need for a SBT. First shot hits Kennedy, second shot hits Connally, last shot hits Kennedy's head and a fragment hits the curb near Tague. >>This is but one witness who describes a wound similar to the one noted on the Naval Death Certificate. That's YOUR interpretation of what level you think their descriptions represent.
I stand by my remark. Burkley was the ONLY one who put T-3 in writing.So you "stand by" your silly comment that Burkley would sign a document HE did not check on with the doctors who actually worked on JFK? My interpretation has NOTHING to do with it as Hill's comment is quite clear for everyone to see! Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound? Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column. >>Do you think Burkley just signed a Death Certificate that said this without conferring with the doctors at PH? Of course not. Don't be silly. But the autopsy doctors did not tell him T-3. That was his own idea.  He is INSISTING he did but for me to mention it is "silly!" YOU are saying he just put that in and signed it without looking at the body or conferring with the PH doctors! YOU are the silly one! Do you think Burkley just signed a Death Certificate that said this without seeing the body himself? >>Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column. You are still confused. He said 6 inches below the neckline, not 6 inches to the right-hand side of the spinal column.What part of "right-hand side" of the spinal column is confusing you? >>So you are saying there is NOT a standard 6.5 mm cartridge (whether it be a 50.5 version or a 54 version) that WORKS IN ALL THE TYPES OF WEAPONS you listed? Correct. You can not interchange different length cartridges.
The cartridge must fit each particular chamber precisely, not too short, not too long.Of course you can't, BUT WHO IS SAYING THAT YOU CAN? What you can't do is call a 6.5 mm cartridge (no matter what type it is -- i.e. 50.5, etc...) a CARCANO CARTRIDGE. The Carcano was a WEAPON, NOT AN AMMO TYPE!>>THERE IS NO AMMO JUST FOR THE MANNLICHER-CARCANO Again you don't know what the Hell you are talking about and just SHOUTING does not make you correct.
Ammo is sold in the same caliber for different models of rifle and they are not interchangeable.
There may be several models which all use the same cartridge, but the 6.5 x 52.5 ammo can only be used in the Carcano, the Breda and the Fiat-Revelli.YOU are the  Tony as you are confusing "using" with my comment. MY comment was there was "no such thing as a Mannlicher-Carcano ammo" as ANY STANDARD 6.5 MM AMMO that fit the specs of that gun could be used! The makers of the ammo for the alleged murder weapon was the WWC so you will have to CITE OR QUOTE them saying they called this ammo "Mannlicher-Carcano Ammo!" It could be used IN that weapon of course, but it could also be used in OTHER WEAPONS that used that same caliber type. Just how slow are you? >>We are discussing a FMJ bullet here No, you were discussing the cartridges not the bullet.
Maybe you don't know the difference between a cartridge and a bullet.Maybe you should quit while you are behind as the WHOLE POINT OF THE POST WAS TO DISCUSS THE BULLET THAT HIT THE CURB! NO one, but you of course, said a CARTRIDGE hit the curb and that was what they tested for! Excuse my "shouting" but when you discuss things with people like you who make silly statements that have no bearing in fact you have to! Then of course it is all my fault to boot.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
|
|
November 05, 2010, 06:39:30 PM
|
Super Member
Posts: 6711
|
For Tony Marsh!
You never seem to know what you are talking about. Who "duly noted" the back wound at T-3? Only one person, Admiral Burkley and he did not examine the body carefully. He just signed the death certificate. He had no idea where T-3 was nor do you.
Tony, YOU never seem to what you are talking about! This is but one witness who describes a wound similar to the one noted on the Naval Death Certificate.
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
Do you think Burkley just signed a Death Certificate that said this without conferring with the doctors at PH?
A bullet coming down at 18 degrees and hitting near T-3 would have blasted through that vertebra and smashed into the manubrium, neither of which were injured. You may think this was an official conclusion. It was not. It was just a guess.
Then all you have to do is cite or quote Burkley saying this. When can I expect that?
Then you made it worse by saying, "The wound in the back of JFK was duly noted as being in the back below the shoulders at the T-3 level about 4 to 6 inches to the RIGHT of the spine. "
What is this?
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
Why do you make silly comments like and then try and make it seem like I am the kooky one? Surely you don't think Burkley signed a Death Certificate stating this WITHOUT conferring with the PH doctors since he did NOT personally work on JFK? I hope not.
You are extremely confused. That 4 to 6 inches was never about the location to the right of the spine. It was a wide range of guesses about how far DOWN the wound was, depending on whether you buy the WC defender lies about his jacket being bunched up. With or without the bunch the wound is always 1-3/4 inches to the right of the MIDLINE. We can and should debate for the next decade exactly how far down on the back the wound really was. But it was never measured correctly. So all we can do now is guess and try to reconstruct its location.
The ONLY one that seems confused is YOU!
Representative BOGGS. Did you see any other wound other than the head wound?
Mr. HILL. Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.
You wrote: (it should be noted there was NO such thing as Mannlicher-Carcano cartridges, there was simply 6.5 mm cartridges)
That is simply not true. You know nothing about ballistics and ammunition. There are many types of 6.5 cartridges each incompatible with each other. Different model rifles all 6.5 mm nominally use different cartridges and you can't use one in a different model rifle. Oswald's rifle used the 6.5 x 52.5 mm cartridge.The Greek Mannlicher and Schoenaur used the 6.5 x 53.5 mm cartridge. The Dutch Mannlicher used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge.
Tony is on a roll today! YOU are the one ignorant of the facts in this case Tony as there is no Carcano ammo! The Carcano is a WEAPON not an ammo type. The WCC (along with other companies) made 6.5 mm cartridges, but they were NOT called "Carcano cartridges" as ANY weapon that fires a 6.5 mm round can use them.
Just how clueless are you?
The Swedish Mauser used the 6.5 x 54 mm cartridge. The Portuguese Mauser used the 6.5 x 58 mm cartridge. The Japanese rifle used the 6.5 x 50.5 cartridge. In addition to the size difference there are minor differences in design. For example when shopping for Carcano ammo I was able to instantly spot the original Italian SMI ammo when I saw the crimps on the neck. There are also some telltale differences in quality of design and craftsmanship. And of course you can often tell the difference by the headstamping on each cartridge.
So you are saying there is NOT a standard 6.5 mm cartridge (whether it be a 50.5 version or a 54 version) that WORKS IN ALL THE TYPES OF WEAPONS you listed?
That is my point! THERE IS NO AMMO JUST FOR THE MANNLICHER-CARCANO (even the Mannlicher is not really needed)!
It's not even realistic to claim that there are only 6.5 mm bullets. Aside from the obvious differences between a hunting round and a FMJ, there are small difference amongst the same type of hunting bullet or FMJ bullet according to brand. FBI agent Robert Frazier was able to tell instantly that the recovered bullets were WCC M-C without seeing the cartridges. The DPD wasn't even able to identify the caliber or coating of the Walker bullet.
We are discussing a FMJ bullet here (although it could have been a hunting soft point) based on the comments by the FBI. Why can't you stay on topic?
Tague had nothing to do with moving up the back wound. The two things are unrelated. The WC had to lie and move up the back wound because they knew it was lower than the throat wound and when Specter made up the SBT the bullet must leave Kennedy on a downward course to hit Connally.
There was NO need for the SBT until the issue of Tague came up. Before that they had three wounds and three bullets.
THAT"s when they decided to lie and move the wound up to the neck. Before that it was always in the upper back.
The wounding of Tague necessitated the need for a SBT theory, and to make this work they needed the wound to be at the T-1 level.
I don't believe the Tague wounding was caused by a fragment from the head shot, but that seems to be the most popular theory of the WC defenders. At least they have the bullet break up so that only a lead fragment hits the curb.
And yet the other bullet supposedly hit two bones and did NOT break up in the least.
>>Yes, sir; I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column. The 6 inches is the distance down. You said the 6 inches was the distance to the right of the spinal column. >> YOU are the one ignorant of the facts in this case Tony as there is no Carcano ammo!
You are ignorant. Of course there is Carcano ammo. It says do right on the box "Carcano." You know nothing about rifles.
Go out and buy a 6.5 Carcano and then go to the gun shop and ask the clerk for 6.5 mm ammo. He'll ask you which weapon it is for.
If you say Swedish Mauser it won't work in the Carcano.
When you look through a catalog of ammo it lists several types of 6.5 mm types.
Carcano is shorthand for Mannlicher-Carcano.
-------------------------
|
|
|
Reply |
|
|
| 0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
|
