Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Today at 07:11:20 AM »
Quote from: Dan O'meara on May 23, 2024, 11:32:16 PM
As I said, I don't ignore anything.

Mason Untruth #5
Do you ignore that on two separate occasions Connally examined the Z-frames and chose z234 as the frame he was hit?
If you don't just ignore it, what is your explanation for this.

I don’t ignore it at all. It is just that a second shot at that point is completely inconsistent with:

1. Nellie’s statement to Dr. Shires that he was turned to the right when hit.
2. Nellie’s evidence that after the first shot and before the second she heard JBC yell “no, no, no” before the second shot. JBC appears to utter the words “no, no, no” in the mid 240s.
3. Nellie said she looked back at JFK after the first and before the second shots and saw him with no expression and his hands near his neck. She said after the second shot occurred she never looked back. She does not look back at JFK until after z250 and turns to look at JBC at z269-270. So z250-269 is before the second shot, according to that.
4. Altgens said his z255 #6 photo was after the first and before any other shots.
5. Hickey said he was turned facing forward before the second shot and remained facing forward to see the third shot. He is still facing rearward in Altgens 6.
6. JBC insisted that he turned to his right trying to see JFK before the second shot. There is nowhere prior to z240 that he makes any attempt to see JFK.
7.  The first shot was after z186. We both agree on that. But there are over 40 witnesses who recalled the shot pattern as 1……2…3. That pattern cannot possibly fit a second shot before the midpoint between 1 and 3 with the headshot being  the third shot. Z234 is far too early.
8… I could go on, but you get the idea.

Quote
What universe are you in Dan?

The universe that understands how the English language works.
So can you tell us why JBC saying he heard the first shot and then felt the bullet impact in his back was actually saying the opposite?  No interpretation. Just read what he said.
2
Conspiracy Theories / Re: RFK Jr Believes Second Gunman Involved In Father's Assassination
« Last post by Richard Smith on Today at 01:14:50 AM »
Quote from: Joe Elliott on May 23, 2024, 08:08:50 PM
Yes. Just as the Trump supporters say the evidence for thousands of fraudulent ballots is overwhelming. And the evidence of the voting software was bogus is overwhelming. Although I don't know why the Democrats would need both fraudulent ballots and software but the evidence for both is overwhelming so there you go.

The Dems motto is legalize the fraud and it's problem solved.  We were told senile Biden received more votes than any candidate in US history.  More than Reagan, FDR, JFK, Obama, or Clinton.  The most popular president in history.  But when he has a "rally' ten people show up.  Eight are from the press and two are bystanders pausing to see what is going on. 
3
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / WFAA-TV Zapruder Interview 11/22/63
« Last post by Jeff Shaw on Today at 01:13:32 AM »
Like most on here I have been studying and researching the JFKA for decades. Until recently I could not bring myself to accept Zapruder alteration. The biggest obstacle for me was the WFAA interview with Zapruder the afternoon of the assassination. When asked what he saw, at one point Z takes his right hand and indicates a large wound to the right side of his head, almost in the exact location we saw being blown out in the film he took. From his indication, the wound was frontal-temporal, at least that’s my interpretation. Bear in mind this interview was done within an hour or so of the assassination. All of which begs the obvious question- Zapruder’s account, first-hand and fresh in his memory, comports with the Z film, and yet I don’t recall any of the Parkland personnel ever indicating a wound as frontal as these two sources indicate. If the film was altered, again I believe there’s solid evidence it was, how do I/we explain away Z’s account on live

Fellow CTs, help me get this monkey off my back.
4
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Dan O'meara on May 23, 2024, 11:32:16 PM »
Quote from: Andrew Mason on May 23, 2024, 06:30:40 PM
As I said, I don't ignore anything. I just don't attribute any weight to his estimates of the length of time between the shots or his thinking that the shots were from an automatic rifle. These estimates ranged from a split-second to no, not a split second, more like two seconds to a very, very brief span of time, duly noting that he considered 10-12 seconds to be a very brief span of time.  I don't attribute weight to these estimates because they are inconsistent and do not fit with the spacing observed by many other witnesses.  I do attribute great weight to his recollection of hearing the first shot a perceptible amount of time BEFORE he felt the IMPACT of the bullet in the back.  I accept that because all statements he made about that are consistent and they fit with what is seen in the zfilm and with other witnesses as to when the second shot occurred.

As far as Connally's impression that it was fire from an automatic rifle, all I can say is that he accepts the Warren Commission report that Oswald fired all the shots with the bolt action 2766 MC so his impression was wrong by his own admission.  Besides, 10-12 seconds to fire and then reload aim and fire two more shots does not require an automatic rifle.
You aren't serious are you?   In every statement he ever made he emphasized that he heard the first shot and THEN after turning around to his right, failing to see JFK properly and deciding to turn left he felt the impact of the bullet in his back. For example 4 H 135-136:
"Mr. SPECTER. In your view, which bullet caused the injury to your chest, Governor Connally?
Governor CONNALLY. The second one.
SPECTER. And what is your reason for that conclusion, sir?
Governor CONNALLY. Well, in my judgment, it just couldn’t conceivably have
been the first one because I heard the sound of the shot. In the first place, I
don’t know anything about the velocity of this particular bullet, but any rifle
has a velocity that exceeds the speed of sound, and when I heard the sound
of that first shot, that bullet had already reached where I was, or it had reached
that far, and, after I heard that shot, I had the time to turn to my right, and
start to turn to my left before I felt anything.
It is not conceivable to me that I could have been hit by the first bullet,
and then I felt the blow from something which was obviously a bullet,..."

What universe are you in Dan?

As I said, I don't ignore anything.

Mason Untruth #5
Do you ignore that on two separate occasions Connally examined the Z-frames and chose z234 as the frame he was hit?
If you don't just ignore it, what is your explanation for this.

What universe are you in Dan?

The universe that understands how the English language works.
5
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Cuba's Investigation into Mexico City: "It Was Oswald"
« Last post by Martin Weidmann on May 23, 2024, 10:21:02 PM »
Quote from: Steve M. Galbraith on May 23, 2024, 07:44:25 PM
It seems obvious that if the person below impersonated Oswald at the Soviet Embassy and Cuban consulate that both Moscow and Havana would have exposed it, would have been telling the world about the act of deception. Screaming it in fact. They wouldn't hold it back. After all they both blamed the CIA for the assassination; why not include this into their allegation?

But like "the dog that didn't bark" was a clue the fact they didn't bark, didn't expose it certainly seems to me evidence - not proof but along with the other information pretty powerful evidence - that it *was* Oswald. Add the fact that both intelligence agencies investigated the incident (Oleg Nechiporenko quotes from the report by the head of the KGB who said it was Oswald) and concluded it was Oswald then what more do we need? We have, then, the Soviet investigation and the above Cuban investigation. Add the American investigation and what more is needed?

What's the other explanation? They were fooled by this person? A four year old can tell you it's not Oswald. And yes I know about the next allegation: "But what the phone calls??!"



The whole "Oswald in Mexico" thing is only significant as a way to color Oswald in the most negative way possible. In no other murder case it would matter where the suspect was weeks prior to the murder. It's only an issue in the Kennedy case and one can only wonder why.

The real question that is never asked is why it is of such importance where Oswald was weeks prior to the assassination when at the same time it's being claimed (by some LN's) that Oswald did not decide to kill Kennedy until 24 to 48 hours before the actual murder.
6
Conspiracy Theories / Re: RFK Jr Believes Second Gunman Involved In Father's Assassination
« Last post by Joe Elliott on May 23, 2024, 08:08:50 PM »
Quote from: Jon Banks on May 13, 2024, 02:50:49 PM
RFK Jr is right.

The evidence of multiple shooters in RFK Sr's murder is overwhelming.

Yes. Just as the Trump supporters say the evidence for thousands of fraudulent ballots is overwhelming. And the evidence of the voting software was bogus is overwhelming. Although I don't know why the Democrats would need both fraudulent ballots and software but the evidence for both is overwhelming so there you go.
7
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Cuba's Investigation into Mexico City: "It Was Oswald"
« Last post by Steve M. Galbraith on May 23, 2024, 07:44:25 PM »
It seems obvious that if the person below impersonated Oswald at the Soviet Embassy and Cuban consulate that both Moscow and Havana would have exposed it, would have been telling the world about the act of deception. Screaming it in fact. They wouldn't hold it back. After all they both blamed the CIA for the assassination; why not include this into their allegation?

But like "the dog that didn't bark" was a clue the fact they didn't bark, didn't expose it certainly seems to me evidence - not proof but along with the other information pretty powerful evidence - that it *was* Oswald. Add the fact that both intelligence agencies investigated the incident (Oleg Nechiporenko quotes from the report by the head of the KGB who said it was Oswald) and concluded it was Oswald then what more do we need? We have, then, the Soviet investigation and the above Cuban investigation. Add the American investigation and what more is needed?

What's the other explanation? They were fooled by this person? A four year old can tell you it's not Oswald. And yes I know about the next allegation: "But what about the phone calls??!"

8
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Dan O'meara on May 23, 2024, 06:51:08 PM »
Quote from: Charles Collins on May 23, 2024, 04:30:38 PM

This head snap to the left (that first came up in the HSCA investigation if I'm not mistaken) has been completely debunked in REPLY#60 (pg8) of "The First Shot" thread, where it is shown, for a fact, that at z207 JFK's head is still orientated to his right.

Thank you, I have never been able to discern this head snap. So, I will not argue with you about it. However, the Rosemary Willis head snap around this same time is one of the fastest head snaps on the Z-film according to Roberdeaux’s notes.

Roberdeaux names both JBC’s and JFK’s head snaps, but labels Jackie’s as a head turn. If you note the number of frames that it takes for JFK and JBC to complete their snaps, I think you will see that they are both several times faster than a normal head turn like you are trying to label them as. So I will respectfully have to disagree with you.



As excellent a researcher as Roberdeaux is, and there can be little doubt of that, I've always found it of paramount importance to do my own research rather than rely on the work of others, regardless of how illustrious they are. Below is a close-up video of JFK in the Z-film. We see his head turn to the right as he waves and smiles to the crowds lined on Elm Street. I, personally, do not detect any great urgency in this head turn and the fact that he begins to smile and wave makes a mockery of any notion that he is responding to the sound of a shot.
Is he smiling and waving at the bullet as it passes by?
This is the very well documented moment when Mary Woodward and her colleagues call out to the President and the First Lady to look their way. This would explain why JFK begins to smile and wave. This is why Jackie turns her head from left to right. I too must respectfully disagree with any notion that JFK's head has snapped to the right as a result of hearing a shot. In fact, I find the idea ludicrous.

9
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Andrew Mason on May 23, 2024, 06:30:40 PM »
Quote from: Dan O'meara on May 23, 2024, 11:08:47 AM
I dont ignore anything Connally said.

Mason Untruth #3
You ignore virtually everything Connally says about the shooting.
As I said, I don't ignore anything. I just don't attribute any weight to his estimates of the length of time between the shots or his thinking that the shots were from an automatic rifle. These estimates ranged from a split-second to no, not a split second, more like two seconds to a very, very brief span of time, duly noting that he considered 10-12 seconds to be a very brief span of time.  I don't attribute weight to these estimates because they are inconsistent and do not fit with the spacing observed by many other witnesses.  I do attribute great weight to his recollection of hearing the first shot a perceptible amount of time BEFORE he felt the IMPACT of the bullet in the back.  I accept that because all statements he made about that are consistent and they fit with what is seen in the zfilm and with other witnesses as to when the second shot occurred.

As far as Connally's impression that it was fire from an automatic rifle, all I can say is that he accepts the Warren Commission report that Oswald fired all the shots with the bolt action 2766 MC so his impression was wrong by his own admission.  Besides, 10-12 seconds to fire and then reload aim and fire two more shots does not require an automatic rifle.

Quote

You want us to believe that the shot sound arrived at his ears after he was hit in the back, contrary to every statement that he ever made.

I know, from past experience, that when you lose it you start to post really weird things and this is an example. A rifle bullet travels faster than the speed of sound so, of course, Connally is going to hear the shot AFTER he has actually been shot. You are correct when you say that I want you to believe "the shot sound arrived at his ears after he was hit in the back". The bullet is traveling faster than sound so it will reach Connally before the sound does. Everybody knows this.
But you believe that this is "contrary to every statement that he ever made".
So, I would like you to reproduce any statement where Connally says the shot sound reached him BEFORE the bullet did.

Again, knowing you like I do, this will probably be part of the 'wilful ignorance' strategy you often use. I will have already posted the answer to this apparent conundrum but, even though you are aware of it, you will pretend you're not to try a score a point. Either that or you have genuinely lost it.

You aren't serious are you?   In every statement he ever made he emphasized that he heard the first shot and THEN after turning around to his right, failing to see JFK properly and deciding to turn left he felt the impact of the bullet in his back. For example 4 H 135-136:
"Mr. SPECTER. In your view, which bullet caused the injury to your chest, Governor Connally?
Governor CONNALLY. The second one.
SPECTER. And what is your reason for that conclusion, sir?
Governor CONNALLY. Well, in my judgment, it just couldn’t conceivably have
been the first one because I heard the sound of the shot. In the first place, I
don’t know anything about the velocity of this particular bullet, but any rifle
has a velocity that exceeds the speed of sound, and when I heard the sound
of that first shot, that bullet had already reached where I was, or it had reached
that far, and, after I heard that shot, I had the time to turn to my right, and
start to turn to my left before I felt anything.
It is not conceivable to me that I could have been hit by the first bullet,
and then I felt the blow from something which was obviously a bullet,..."

What universe are you in Dan?
10
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Dan O'meara on May 23, 2024, 06:28:23 PM »
Quote from: Andrew Mason on May 23, 2024, 06:06:10 PM
I think dozens of witnesses who put the first shot around z190-200 and the lack of a single witness who said that JFK continued to smile and wave after the first "horrible ear-shattering noise" together with 40+ witnesses who volunteered their recall of the 1......2...3 shot pattern tell us more than equivocal grainy zframes even if interpreted by experts.  I agree that physical evidence is important, but SBTers seem to be ignoring all the physical evidence (eg. condition of CE399 not fitting damage to the fifth rib or radius and clothing and being unwilling to acknowledge that an elliptical shaped wound is consistent with a pristine bullet hitting at an angle).
Here is Rosemary Willis' head turn at z213-217:


It looks like she has already looked back at the TSBD and is returning to look in the direction of the President's car.  The more interesting head movement is the right-rearward snap from z204-206:

Witnesses may be accurate or inaccurate; reliable or unreliable.  But there are simple ways of determining that issue.  If all the witnesses who were watching JFK at the time of the first shot said that he did not continue to smile or wave and almost all of those witnesses said he did things that we see him doing after he emerges from behind the Stemmons sign (which reaction appears to have started earlier) either all the witnesses were in collusion or they actually saw something that caused them to believe they saw JFK react to the first shot as we see him reacting when he emerges from behind the sign.

I think dozens of witnesses who put the first shot around z190-200

Mason Untruth #5
There is not a single witness who puts the first shot around z190-200
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10