The Truly Magical Bullet

[Matt Grantham]

But not according to Dr. Humes, who conducted the autopsy!  Why is his conclusion not considered important? Why is a passive observer with no medical training who reached no conclusion used to reject the autopsy findings?

 The conclusions importance is the facts that is based upon What was Humes conclusion based on?

[Howard Gee]

You said "plausible explanation", not wild-ass guess that you made up out of whole cloth.

But two can play that game:  then the the bullet that supposedly entered JFK's throat probably hit concrete and might have fragmented making it even more difficult to find or recover.

Besides being a wholly unpleasant arrogant troll, you're also a raging hypocrite.  Your drooling conjectures are somehow superior because . . .

Reasons.

Another bad hair day, Johnny ?

You asked me to speculate about what might have happened to the missed shot.

My response was that it hit concrete and probably fragmented making it very difficult to find.

I also pointed out that finding a bullet that missed the limo and could have wound up anywhere in or around the plaza would naturally be far more difficult than locating where a frontal entry bullet to JFK's throat went.

I think those are logical, reasonable, rational responses and observations.

But to Johnny, they're 'wild ass guesses, made up out of whole cloth', by a 'wholly unpleasant arrogant troll'.

Take a deep breath, Johnny boy.

And instead of trolling this thread with your garbage, try to explain what happened to the bullet that entered JFK's throat.

I'm assuming you were being facetious about the bullet that entered JFK's throat hitting concrete and fragmenting. Unless JFK's Adam's apple was made of concrete or there was another concrete structure in his throat, I think we can rule out your answer. So, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and say you were being facetious.

But don't worry Johnny, there's still time for you to answer the question posed in this thread - What happened to the bullet that suppoedly entered JFK's throat ??

If, like the rest of the drooling kooks, you're unable to offer a plausible answer, please go back to your corner and suck your thumb or polish your shiney dome.

Try not to troll this thread.

Now, can we get back on topic ?

Challenge still open.

WHAT HAPPENED TO THE BULLET THAT ENTERED JFK'S THROAT ?

[Joe Elliott]

No, you misunderstood.  There definitely was a predetermined conclusion.  That's indisputable.

It seems that you are not only a believer in Large Secret Enduring Conspiracies, but in mind reading as well. How else could you tell that the police didn?t do something they never did, shutdown a vital street for hours to search the streets for possible bullet fragments, because right from the get go, they had a predetermined conclusion.

How does them bringing in the three tramps for questioning and summoning many policemen to check out a man who ignored their call to stop and entered a library fit in to the police following ?a predetermined conclusion?.

Why do 3 found shells make it "probable" that 3 shots were fired, as opposed to say an already empty shell ejection followed by 2 shots for example?

That is why I said ?probable?, not ?absolutely?. It is possible Oswald left a shell there to create a mystery for the police, so they would falsely assume that there was an extra shot that was never fired there. It is even less likely that Oswald left the shell in the rifle after his last practice shot many months earlier, and never operated the bolt that would have ejected it.

Most likely, the three shells mean there were three shots fired from that rifle from that floor. And there is evidence for all three shots.

Nelly said that the early shot that didn't hit her husband hit the president though.

And the Zapruder film shows her looking at neither man until well after both were obviously wounded. But there is no need for a witness to be actually looking at the two men during the z220?s to refute a SBT during the z220?s, so long as her memory refutes the SBT.

We've been through that before.  You're cherry picking your jiggles to support your predetermined narrative.

No, not an arbitrary cherry pick. I eliminate the four strong jiggles associated with JFK starting to disappear behind the sign because tests show that someone filming a subject that disappears behind the something in the foreground will jiggle the camera. It doesn?t matter if there were shots then or not, we would expect the camera to jiggle anyway during this period.

The 3 remaining strongest camera jiggles, imply shots at z153, z222 and z312. And the camera jiggles get stronger and stronger with each shot, as the barrel of the rifle gets pointed closer and closer to Mr. Zapruder?s general direction.

A coincidence? Possibly. But probably not.

[Jerry Freeman]

How many more Magic Bullet threads do we need to start here?

[Andrew Mason]

And the Zapruder film shows her looking at neither man until well after both were obviously wounded. But there is no need for a witness to be actually looking at the two men during the z220?s to refute a SBT during the z220?s, so long as her memory refutes the SBT.

How is JBC "obviously wounded" in the z220's?

No, not an arbitrary cherry pick. I eliminate the four strong jiggles associated with JFK starting to disappear behind the sign because tests show that someone filming a subject that disappears behind the something in the foreground will jiggle the camera. It doesn?t matter if there were shots then or not, we would expect the camera to jiggle anyway during this period.

What "tests" are you referring to?  Camera jiggle theory has never been used to consistently and accurately pinpoint shots. Never. It is just an untested theory.

The 3 remaining strongest camera jiggles, imply shots at z153, z222 and z312. And the camera jiggles get stronger and stronger with each shot, as the barrel of the rifle gets pointed closer and closer to Mr. Zapruder?s general direction.

How is it that Zapruder jiggled the camera in response to a shot at z222 before he would have heard any sound from the shot? The bullet travels at about twice the speed of sound.  A shot at z222, which was about 185 feet from the SN would have been fired about 90 ms earlier.  So the sound, traveling at 1130 fps, would have reached Zapruder, who was about 275 feet from the SN, about  240 ms. after firing, or about 150 ms after z222 i.e. z225.

[John Iacoletti]

Another bad hair day, Johnny ?

You asked me to speculate about what might have happened to the missed shot.

My response was that it hit concrete and probably fragmented making it very difficult to find.

I also pointed out that finding a bullet that missed the limo and could have wound up anywhere in or around the plaza would naturally be far more difficult than locating where a frontal entry bullet to JFK's throat went.

I think those are logical, reasonable, rational responses and observations.

Of course you do.

So your "logical", "common sense", speculative answer (guess) is "duh....I dunno....it musta disappeared".

So, unless you're a raging hypocrite, then you should also accept the same answer for where the throat shot bullet went.

The fact that you find that kind of answer "plausible" only when you are the one giving it not only shows your hypocrisy, but also your megalomaniacal arrogance.  Not to mention your continued cowardly and juvenile namecalling when your fallacious and vacuous arguments are shot down again and again.  Keep it up though.  You're making your side cringe with each and every post.

[John Iacoletti]

It seems that you are not only a believer in Large Secret Enduring Conspiracies, but in mind reading as well. How else could you tell that the police didn?t do something they never did, shutdown a vital street for hours to search the streets for possible bullet fragments, because right from the get go, they had a predetermined conclusion.

How ironic.  You seem to be the self-appointed mindreader here as I have never said that I believe in "Large Secret Enduring Conspiracies" nor did I ever say anything about the police shutting down a street.  Those are your strawmen.

How does them bringing in the three tramps for questioning and summoning many policemen to check out a man who ignored their call to stop and entered a library fit in to the police following ?a predetermined conclusion?.

I think you are very confused.  It was the Warren Commission "investigation" that had the predetermined conclusion.

That is why I said ?probable?, not ?absolutely?. It is possible Oswald left a shell there to create a mystery for the police, so they would falsely assume that there was an extra shot that was never fired there. It is even less likely that Oswald left the shell in the rifle after his last practice shot many months earlier, and never operated the bolt that would have ejected it.

You never give any actual justifications when you label things "probable" or "likely".  That just seems to correlate with whether you just want to believe it or not.

For one thing, you don't know that Oswald did anything with that rifle, but what's so unlikely about leaving an empty shell in a rifle to protect the firing pin?

Most likely, the three shells mean there were three shots fired from that rifle from that floor. And there is evidence for all three shots.

Really?  What is the sum total of evidence for the alleged "first missed shot"?

And the Zapruder film shows her looking at neither man until well after both were obviously wounded.

Way overstated.  Nellie's head is visible in very few Z frames before the head shot.