JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate > JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate
A History of the Single-Bullet Theory Follies
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on September 04, 2025, 04:07:16 PM ---Why do you keep denying reality? Or is your eyesight just extremely poor? As anyone can see in the photos of CE 399, the bullet has no deformation whatsoever except for a slight deformation at its base, which is not even visible unless you look at the photo of the bottom of the bullet. One can also see that the bullet's lands and grooves are intact. And, as no disputes, the bullet weighed only 2.4 grains less after its alleged journey through two men than it did before it was fired, which means that it retained 98.5% of its substance.
Are you so pathologically determined to believe in the lone-gunman theory that you can't see what everyone else can see in the photos of CE 399? Are you aware that the WC described CE 399 as "a nearly whole bullet," and that the FBI's ballistics expert Robert Frazier said the bullet was only "slightly flattened" at its base?
Why are we even talking about CE 399's condition when you refuse to face the fact that we know that no bullet exited the shirt slits because there was no hole in the tie and because there is no way a bullet exiting the slits could have magically weaved around the body of the knot and then nicked the top of the knot? Why do you keep Ignoring this hard physical evidence? If a bullet had exited the shirt slits, it could not have missed the tie knot, but there was no hole through the tile, only a nick on the top of the knot.
--- End quote ---
There you go, again, Comrade Griffith!
Btw, you never answered my question on another thread:
Did they [the geniuses at the FBI or wherever] try firing the kind of bullets Oswald killed JFK with through a living man's lower neck/upper back (or through a corpse or a block of ballistics gel in case there were no volunteers) in such a way that the bullet would then travel about three feet and penetrate a turned-35-degrees-to-his-right living man's (or corpse's) chest from back-to-front, ride along (and smash) his fifth rib in the process, exit below his nipple, and then penetrate his wrist butt-end-first and strike in the living man (or corpse) the only hard bone that CE-399 is known to have hit in either JFK or JBC, the volunteer's (or corpse's) radial bone, while tumbling and/or twirling?
Tangentially (pardon the pun), are you aware of the fact that CE-399 ended up with a longitudinal twist?
How do you suppose that happened?
Do you postulate that it was manufactured by Chubby Checker?
//www.youtube.com/watch?v=-CCgDvUM4TM
Michael T. Griffith:
--- Quote from: Tom Graves on September 04, 2025, 04:14:02 PM ---There you go, again, Comrade Griffith!
Btw, you never answered my question on another thread:
Did they [the geniuses at the FBI or wherever] try firing the kind of bullets Oswald killed JFK with through a living man's lower neck/upper back (or through a corpse or a block of ballistics gel in case there were no volunteers) in such a way that the bullet would then travel about three feet and penetrate a turned-35-degrees-to-his-right living man's (or corpse's) chest from back-to-front, ride along (and smash) his fifth rib in the process, exit below his nipple, and then penetrate his wrist butt-end-first and strike in the living man (or corpse) the only hard bone that CE-399 is known to have hit in either JFK or JBC, the volunteer's (or corpse's) radial bone, while tumbling and/or twirling?
Tangentially (pardon the pun), are you aware of the fact that CE-399 ended up with a longitudinal twist? How do you suppose that happened? Do you postulate that it was manufactured by Chubby Checker?
--- End quote ---
So never mind that even Frazier said CE 399 is only "slightly flattened." Never mind the photos of CE 399. Never mind that bullets merely fired into cotton wadding emerged with the same or more damage as CE 399. Just never mind all that.
And now you have declared that all wound ballistics tests are a waste of time. According to your silly question, no such test can be valid unless it involves live humans and hits at exactly the same angles and speed alleged for the original bullet. What a stupendously silly, uneducated argument. Be sure to contact all the forensic and wound ballistics experts who conduct wound ballistics tests and tell them they're wasting their time!
Why are we even talking about CE 399's condition when you refuse to face the fact that we know that no bullet exited the shirt slits because there was no hole in the tie and because there is no way a bullet exiting the slits could have magically weaved around the body of the knot and then nicked the top of the knot? Why do you keep Ignoring this hard physical evidence? If a bullet had exited the shirt slits, it could not have missed the tie knot, but there was no hole through the tie, only a nick on the top of the knot (which was made by one of the Parkland nurses as they hurriedly cut away JFK's clothing).
Tom Graves:
--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on September 04, 2025, 04:55:03 PM ---So never mind that even Frazier said CE 399 is only "slightly flattened." Never mind the photos of CE 399. Never mind that bullets merely fired into cotton wadding emerged with the same or more damage as CE 399. Just never mind all that.
And now you have declared that all wound ballistics tests are a waste of time. According to your silly question, no such test can be valid unless it involves live humans and hits at exactly the same angles and speed alleged for the original bullet. What a stupendously silly, uneducated argument. Be sure to contact all the forensic and wound ballistics experts who conduct wound ballistics tests and tell them they're wasting their time!
Why are we even talking about CE 399's condition when you refuse to face the fact that we know that no bullet exited the shirt slits because there was no hole in the tie and because there is no way a bullet exiting the slits could have magically weaved around the body of the knot and then nicked the top of the knot? Why do you keep Ignoring this hard physical evidence? If a bullet had exited the shirt slits, it could not have missed the tie knot, but there was no hole through the tie, only a nick on the top of the knot (which was made by one of the Parkland nurses as they hurriedly cut away JFK's clothing).
--- End quote ---
Dear Comrade Griffith,
Firing a Carcano bullet through two live human beings or, if you insist, two corpses (or, if you're running really low on corpses, just one largish one of the male type "sitting in" for JBC about three feet in front of, and significantly lower and farther to the left than a large boneless block of ballistics gel (representing JFK's upper torso and neck), and, most importantly, turned 35 degrees to his right, is not necessary for ballistics analysis to determine whether or not CE-399 was fired from Oswald's Carcano to the exclusion of all other firearms in the known universe, but it would be necessary to do (perhaps a trillion times!) in order to replicate exactly the damage that CE-399 did to itself and to JBC's fifth rib and radial bone after it penetrated JFK's lower neck / upper back while travelling about 1,300 mph, nicked the transverse process of his T-1 vertebra, bruised the top of his lung, and exited his throat just below his Adam's apple.
The lesson yet to be learned by Comrade Griffith:
Cherry-picking, hyperbole and gaslighting will get you nowhere (except, perhaps, another lucrative, KGB-approved tinfoil-hat JFKA book contract).
But then, again, maybe that's why you're here.
Either that, or "former" KGB officer Vladimir Putin wants you to be here so that you can continue spreading (perhaps even unwittingly!) KGB-endorsed JFKA . . . uhh . . ."fibs."
-- Tom
Tim Nickerson:
--- Quote from: Michael T. Griffith on September 04, 2025, 03:26:40 PM ---Oh, well, that settles it! Frazier said that CE 399, a virtually undeformed bullet, could have made the "very irregular tear," shaped like an H, 1.5 inches high, 1.75 inches wide on the right side of the H, 1.25 inches on the left side of the H, with a 1-inch wide crossbar tear connecting the sides of the H, so it must be true--never mind that the exit hole in Connally's coat was only 0.5 inches high (i.e., just half an inch high) and 0.38 inches wide and was nearly perfectly circular!
Did you stop to think about this before you posted it? Why not try thinking for yourself instead of blindly accepting every factoid the FBI peddled?
Now think, just think: How could the same bullet that tore a 1.5-inch x 1.75-inch/1.25-inch H-shaped hole in the shirt have then torn a hole in the coat that was 200% smaller in height and width than the hole in the shirt? How would that work?
Look at these high-quality, close-up photos of the holes in Connally's coat and shirt:
https://share.google/meleOhNbOCbAGaReB
--- End quote ---
What exactly are you saying? That the hole in the jacket and the hole in the shirt were not caused by the same object? That is what you're saying, even though you don't realize it.
--- Quote ---I notice you once again declined to face the fact that we know that no bullet exited the shirt slits because there was no hole in the tie and there is no way a bullet exiting the slits could have magically weaved around the body of the knot and then nicked the top of the knot near the left edge. Ignoring this hard physical evidence will not make it go away.
--- End quote ---
The bullet never passed through the necktie. Nor did it magically weaved around the body of the knot. It grazed the left side of the knot, leaving a nick in it.
Lance Payette:
My fellow CTers, we can't just keep saying the SBT is nonsense. We know it's nonsense, of course, notwithstanding the umpteen medical and forensic experts who think it isn't, but still: we do have to have our own theory of CE 399, do we not? I mean, there it is, daring us to explain it. So, let's collectively don our tinfoil propellor beanies and attempt to explain it, OK?
1. It can't be the bullet that barely penetrated JFK's back and fell out to be discovered in the back seat by Landis and/or on a stretcher at Parkland by Tomlinson, can it? CE 399 has suffered some serious damage to its fanny, so it can't have simply penetrated an inch or two - on its fanny, no less - and dropped out, can it?
2. Do we think it went through JFK's back and throat and then did ... well, what? Hit the windshield frame, perhaps? Would this scenario account for its curious condition and curious provenance? Think, people.
3. We don't think it caused all of Connally's wounds, do we? If we think that, aren't we splitting hairs in rejecting the SBT? I mean, if it inflicted all of JBC's wounds, the SBT isn't much of a stretch - is it?
4. Was it a post-assassination plant? How would that have worked - was it prepared in advance or in the short time before it was discovered by Landis and/or Tomlinson? How and why would anyone have done that? What was the necessity for a bullet like CE 399 at all? What does it add to the case against the patsy? Why did the conspirators plant such an oddly pristine bullet that would inevitably raise so many questions? Think, people.
I have seen all of the foregoing scenarios suggested. Our heroes, Gary Aguilar and Tink Thompson of "The Magic Bullet: Even More Magic Than We Knew" fame, seem to favor the plant hypothesis - which, I must confess, seems to me the most implausible of all. If a gun were held to my head (a poor choice of words indeed), I think I'd opt for #1. Aren't we kind of painted into the corner of #4 because none of the other choices really works? Am I missing a choice #5?
Help me out here, my fellow beanie wearers. I eschew all the technical stuff and simply like to go to bed at night with some level of confidence that what we believe actually makes sense. What do we believe about CE 399 that actually makes sense?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version