Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Steve Barber on Today at 12:25:14 AM »
Quote from: Charles Collins on May 03, 2024, 07:27:48 PM

Thanks Steve, that’s a very clear sequence of frames and it shows the double shoulder movement as you describe. It also shows JFK’s concurrent reactions, JBC’s jacket front flipping out, and JBC’s right hand and arm moving rapidly upwards. All of this happens in a small fraction of a second. It sure looks to me like this is where both JFK and JBC were struck with CE 399.

  My pleasure, Charles.  I'm you are able to see the "hunching" of the shoulders.  It was David Von Pein  who first pointed this out, although I didn't know that he had until after I saw it, and I started a thread in a JFK group and included this gif a long while back, and he posted a note informing us that he had found this himself, and had also posted a gif of it. 
I agree with you all the way that this is further proof of both men reacting simutaneously by the same bullet.  Thanks so much!
2
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Need Help Bulding a Physical Scale Model of Dealey Plaza
« Last post by Jerry Organ on May 03, 2024, 08:33:39 PM »
Quote from: Royell Storing on May 03, 2024, 04:56:16 PM
   Do you know the DATE the "aerial" you are using was taken? As I said previously, I have seen footage of a TARP/TENT stretching from that "south edge" ALL the way back near the Shelter. It's possible there were alterations made within this area after the assassination and completed before this "aerial" was taken.  Do we know for a Fact that the retaining wall "south edge" which extended toward The Steps, ran perpendicular/right angle to the longer section of retaining wall? Is it possible that this "south edge" extension Angled away from the longer section of that wall? Generally mirroring a wedge/pie slice.

Here's the Phase II Map without any alteration by me.



The greyed areas were walkway alterations, some for accessibility, some to replace decayed slabs. That might be the reason for the tarp and construction beside the Pergola. There were no plans, that I can see, to alter the retaining wall itself, or the stairs leading up to it. The renovations proposed in Phase II were completed a few months before the 50th anniversary.



The new concrete behind the retaining wall appears to reach the topmost of the original steps, which are preserved save for hand-railings. You can use Google Earth to get a good sense as to how square the space is that's between the retaining wall and S-N fence portion.
3
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Hany Farid - The Truth Of The Backyard Photographs
« Last post by Paul McBrearty on May 03, 2024, 08:23:30 PM »
Quote from: Fergus O'brien on April 28, 2024, 03:30:32 PM
and you would not be at all biased MR MAY ?  , i think we both know differently dont we ? . i am quite long in the tooth in terms of studying this case and reading JFK threads on such forums as this  . and as such you are no stranger to me . as we might say where i come from I KNOW YOU OF OLD . i am not trying to BS you so if you wouldnt mind please dont try to BS me . but thank you for your reply , it is nothing less than i might expect from one such as you .

Another unsociable, hairbrained response.
4
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Jerry Organ on May 03, 2024, 08:13:10 PM »
Quote from: Andrew Mason on May 03, 2024, 04:42:56 PM
No.  It is about what you need to do in order to justify calling it "bats_it crazy". (I would write it out in full but it comes out as batspombleprofglidnoctobuns).
 A sight line is a sightline.  The zoom lens changes perspective but not sightlines.  Changing focal length does not unblock parts that were previously blocked.

In your zoom "correction" you have JFK too far to the right.   



That's where you have Kennedy and where he ends up with the proper perspective and line-of-sight. I discovered you had Kennedy pressed about six inches into the seat-back. So the President, per your Theory, is too far back, not too far to his right.

Quote
In z193 the sightline from Zapruder blocks up to the right edge of the left trunk hand-hold:



I have more confidence where the back tire and door seams are in that view than where I used to place the hand-grips. I've since slightly shifted the hand-grip location a few times, based on better information and photos. Without my own direct measurements (or someone who takes measurements and documents exactly where they start from and go to), I can't vouch for it.



Here's where your back tire and door leave Kennedy.

Quote
Yes.  You might use this as a guide:


Right. So we know how that person on that particular day had his knees high up, as least the moment the photo was taken. That has no more to do with how Connally's knees might have been than the man in the back seat has to do with how JFK sat. What if the door was closed and leaning one legs against it was helpful.



This photograph shows Kennedy with both knees together and against the car interior. By your definition, the President is a eunuch. There is no sign that Connally's thighs are sharply angled up.

I'm going to amend my model of your Theory with some or all of this:
  • Distance between JFK's exit wound and JBC's spine about 30-32 inches.
  • Connally a bit lower
  • Connally's head aligned with the side window, while being over as far as possible to the side of the car
  • Connally's torso twisted
  • Raise up Connally's left knee
  • Slope of 21 degrees relative to the car
I won't make Connally's head disturbingly smaller.
5
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Oswald Acted Alone Is The Most Popular Theory
« Last post by Paul McBrearty on May 03, 2024, 07:44:50 PM »
Quote from: Jack Nessan on May 03, 2024, 02:15:32 AM
The proof is your whole nonsense.

Everything he writes and the way he writes is nonsense. Thumb1:
6
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: How Accurate are Buglioisi's 53 Pieces of Evidence ?
« Last post by Paul McBrearty on May 03, 2024, 07:37:04 PM »
What language is this now, gibberish?
7
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Charles Collins on May 03, 2024, 07:27:48 PM »
Quote from: Steve Barber on May 03, 2024, 06:34:55 PM


 All,
 
  I posted the wrong gif yesterday, and meant to post the one attached, which is much slower and makes it easier to watch Connally's double shoulder up and down movement.
It's very difficult to see it at regular speed.  My apologies or posting the wrong gif.  It's easiest to see if you watch his right shoulder.

 


Thanks Steve, that’s a very clear sequence of frames and it shows the double shoulder movement as you describe. It also shows JFK’s concurrent reactions, JBC’s jacket front flipping out, and JBC’s right hand and arm moving rapidly upwards. All of this happens in a small fraction of a second. It sure looks to me like this is where both JFK and JBC were struck with CE 399.
8
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Oswald Acted Alone Is The Most Popular Theory
« Last post by Paul McBrearty on May 03, 2024, 07:19:05 PM »
Quote from: Fergus O'brien on May 03, 2024, 07:09:08 PM
lol when did i claim that Frazier was involved in a plot to frame Oswald for the assassination ? . it is typical of LN to dream up nonsense and then to claim SO CALLED CT made the claims . LN and rationality are two things that in my experience rarely if ever go together . after all to believe LN we would have to accept that every liar , conman /woman ,fame seeker and money grabber and nut in dallas converged on dealey plaza that tragic day . on the overpass alone we have 3 different people saying a shot came from the knoll and that they saw a puff of smoke under the tress there . but LN ignore or dismiss them . we have 3 to 4 people in the depository saying they saw or spoke to Oswald on the 1st and 2nd floors between about 11.45 and in and around 12.20 . but LN ignore or dismiss them . and you talk about what is rational ? .

Frazier was considered and questioned as a potential accomplice . he himself said that Fritz thrust an already typed up confession into his face demanding he sign it , and that Frazier rightly refused to sign . we only have one persons word for what may have been said in that car , so all we have is what Frazier claimed Oswald said . and we only have the word of those involved in interrogation for what oswald is said to have claimed . you ask a valid question . if Oswald carried his lunch in a paper sack where is that sack ? . but i would say given that Oswald is said to have claimed he carried his lunch that then the cops should have been asking him WHERE IS THAT SACK ? and trying to find it . for me it would be a logical thing if i was told by a suspect that he  carried his lunch in a sack (not a rifle ) to ask them WELL WHERE DID YOU LEAVE THE SACK ? .if you left it there it should still be there RIGHT ? .i feel certain that if for example Oswald said that he carried his lunch in a sack that any competent cop would have asked WELL WHERE IS THE SACK ? and if he said for example IN THE DOMINO ROOM and that if it was searched and was not there that we would have heard all about that in the media .as it would be used to say Oswald was caught in a lie . and ive never heard , seen or read of such a thing happening .

the area of the seat where Frazier said the sack lay was measured and it came in as roughly 24 inches long .

Worst grammar I've ever seen, you stupid clueless, obnoxious
idiot. You haven't got a clue as to what you are talking about, you stupid idiot. Don't even think about speaking to me like that again. Go back to school you ignoramus, learn how to write, you monkey brain.
9
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: Oswald Acted Alone Is The Most Popular Theory
« Last post by Fergus O'brien on May 03, 2024, 07:09:08 PM »
Quote from: Richard Smith on May 03, 2024, 01:37:09 PM
This is a great example of CTer "logic."  Refusing to look to the totality of circumstances or applying any analysis to the situation.  Frazier - someone with no apparent reason to lie - tells the police that LHO carries a long package to work that morning that Oswald tells Frazier contains curtain rods.  Frazier also specifically asks Oswald about his lunch.  LHO confirms to him that he is not carrying his lunch that morning.   When asked about the bag after his arrest, LHO denies carrying any long bag along the lines described by Frazier.  He denies carrying any curtain rods.  In complete contradiction of what he told Frazier that morning, he then claims it was his lunch.   Did he carry his lunch to work that morning in a two-foot-long bag? And then for some unknown reason lie to Frazier about his lunch and the curtain rods.  That makes absolutely no sense.  Obviously, either Frazier or Oswald is lying about this situation.   Who has the greater incentive to lie?  A random witness or the person accused of murder?  What happened to Oswald's two-foot-long bag if it is not the longer bag found on the 6th floor? 

What is the most rational way to reconcile these conflicting accounts?   Obviously, that Frazier did not estimate the length of the bag correctly.   It was an estimate.  He repeated over and over that he didn't really take much notice of it.  What is the alternative?  That Frazier knowingly lied to implicate Oswald but he did so in way that doesn't really do that since he claimed the bag was too short to contain the rife?  LOL.  In addition to there being zero credible evidence that Frazier was involved in a plot to frame Oswald for the assassination, even if he were involved his "lie" would be to place a bag long enough to contain the rifle in Oswald's hands.  That would be the entire purpose of the lie.  He wouldn't insist it was too short for that purpose.  There is no way to reconcile Frazier's account in any other way except that Oswald carried a long bag that morning and he simply gave an estimate of its length that was slightly shorter than the actual bag.

lol when did i claim that Frazier was involved in a plot to frame Oswald for the assassination ? . it is typical of LN to dream up nonsense and then to claim SO CALLED CT made the claims . LN and rationality are two things that in my experience rarely if ever go together . after all to believe LN we would have to accept that every liar , conman /woman ,fame seeker and money grabber and nut in dallas converged on dealey plaza that tragic day . on the overpass alone we have 3 different people saying a shot came from the knoll and that they saw a puff of smoke under the tress there . but LN ignore or dismiss them . we have 3 to 4 people in the depository saying they saw or spoke to Oswald on the 1st and 2nd floors between about 11.45 and in and around 12.20 . but LN ignore or dismiss them . and you talk about what is rational ? .

Frazier was considered and questioned as a potential accomplice . he himself said that Fritz thrust an already typed up confession into his face demanding he sign it , and that Frazier rightly refused to sign . we only have one persons word for what may have been said in that car , so all we have is what Frazier claimed Oswald said . and we only have the word of those involved in interrogation for what oswald is said to have claimed . you ask a valid question . if Oswald carried his lunch in a paper sack where is that sack ? . but i would say given that Oswald is said to have claimed he carried his lunch that then the cops should have been asking him WHERE IS THAT SACK ? and trying to find it . for me it would be a logical thing if i was told by a suspect that he  carried his lunch in a sack (not a rifle ) to ask them WELL WHERE DID YOU LEAVE THE SACK ? .if you left it there it should still be there RIGHT ? .i feel certain that if for example Oswald said that he carried his lunch in a sack that any competent cop would have asked WELL WHERE IS THE SACK ? and if he said for example IN THE DOMINO ROOM and that if it was searched and was not there that we would have heard all about that in the media .as it would be used to say Oswald was caught in a lie . and ive never heard , seen or read of such a thing happening .

the area of the seat where Frazier said the sack lay was measured and it came in as roughly 24 inches long .
10
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate / Re: When Was JBC Hit?
« Last post by Steve Barber on May 03, 2024, 06:34:55 PM »
 

 All,
 
  I posted the wrong gif yesterday, and meant to post the one attached, which is much slower and makes it easier to watch Connally's double shoulder up and down movement.
It's very difficult to see it at regular speed.  My apologies or posting the wrong gif.  It's easiest to see if you watch his right shoulder.

 
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10