JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Lance Payette on April 30, 2025, 11:59:17 PM
-
I happened to play golf today with a guy who is the ultimate real deal.
Degree in Explosives Engineering ... 23 years as a sniper ... served with Delta Force, Counterterrorism Operations and Special Forces ... was part of every major counterterrorism operation over the past 30 years with the exception of the killing of Bin Laden ... retired as a counterterrorism instructor ... now lives mostly in Jordan but continues to provide counterterrorism instruction as needed.
Once we knew each other a bit, I said in kind of a lighthearted way that I participate in online communities where many folks are JFKA conspiracy theorists and 9/11 Truthers. I got only the briefest of responses, but they weren't what I was expecting:
"I could've made those shots with my sniper rifle, no problem. With the rifle that supposedly made those shots, NO WAY."
"My degree and my expertise are in Explosives Engineering. I know of no way a building can collapse like that EXCEPT IN A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION."
Just one man's opinion, of course, but a pretty well-informed opinion. He wasn't off in any conspiracy ozone by any means and agreed it would be difficult to believe the 9/11 Truthers' claims, yet he couldn't deny what his eyes and his expertise seemed to tell him.
-
"I could've made those shots with my sniper rifle, no problem. With the rifle that supposedly made those shots, NO WAY."
Just to stay on topic here, what exactly were "those shots" that he referred to?
-
Degree in Explosives Engineering ... 23 years as a sniper ... served with Delta Force, Counterterrorism Operations and Special Forces ... was part of every major counterterrorism operation over the past 30 years with the exception of the killing of Bin Laden ... retired as a counterterrorism instructor ... now lives mostly in Jordan but continues to provide counterterrorism instruction as needed.
He has a degree in Explosives Engineering. What experience does he have in bringing down skyscrapers by explosive demolition? You didn't happen to ask him perchance?
-
What I have said here is the sum total of my conversations with him about the JFKA and 9/11. He was definitely the real deal; his wife, a Jordanian lawyer, was with him. I have no idea how much he actually knows or cares about the JFKA or 9/11. I was simply surprised that his responses were so different from what I had expected. The way I introduced the topic kind of invited the response, "Yeah, those wacky CTers and 9/11 Truthers are nuts." As I said, "Strictly FWIW."
-
"My degree and my expertise are in Explosives Engineering. I know of no way a building can collapse like that EXCEPT IN A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION."
I've looked into the building collapses and the logistics of planting the explosives would be practically impossible, but that doesn't stop people like Neidernut with his degrees and knowledge of civil engineering, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, thermodynamics, physics, etc etc... Gee whiz that Harvard Education was all encompassing!
But the reality in Building 7 is besides the heavy fires and severe structural damage caused by the earlier collapses, is that just before Building 7 collapses there is not one tell tale of an audible explosion of what is needed in a genuine controlled demolition. In the following video of multiple angles of the Building 7 collapse some of the footage is accompanied by sound and the most striking feature is in the period directly before is the eerie silence.
And as for the WTC 1/2 collapses, to me they don't look very controlled and as Neidernut likes to guess, that the windows being blown just ahead of the collapsing floors is the result of explosives, which in reality is just the air pressure escaping as the inside air of the building is severely compressed and looking for a way out. And again just before the demolition of the twin towers, there would be massive explosions but all I can here is the sounds of the buildings collapsing.
In the seconds preceding the collapse, the weakened structure drastically bows inwards as the top floors collapse into the floors below and on and on it goes till the building was demolished.
(https://i.postimg.cc/1XR5WQkr/15d987530fb19f490198129171c8d200.gif)
(https://i.postimg.cc/1RMz88FC/a41c4d30-a300-40cc-8629-fa399291888f.gif)
BTW, there was no thermite or even nanothermite particles discovered at the scene, the only samples of microscopic red chips which I don't believe have been properly analysed, came from some Kooks!
JohnM
-
I've looked into the building collapses and the logistics of planting the explosives would be practically impossible, but that doesn't stop people like Neidernut with his degrees and knowledge of civil engineering, chemical engineering, mechanical engineering, thermodynamics, physics, etc etc... Gee whiz that Harvard Education was all encompassing!
I think I was the one who originally started referring to him as Niedernut as long as I could get away with it, but I was finally admonished about not playing with members' names (which didn't stop Di Eugenio from referring to me as "Lancie," as though that were somehow clever). If someone had told me he would one day be an Ed Forum moderator, I simply would not have believed it. Proof indeed that Harvard-educated psychologists can be wackier than ordinary mortals, but I've said basically the same thing 100 times about lawyers - a law license is no guarantee of anything, including minimal legal competence. In fact, one of my roles was once the involuntary commitment of people who were seriously mentally ill. By statute, I needed the testimony of two licensed psychologists or psychiatrists. When I took over the case load, my predecessor said, "Wait 'til you meet the psychiatrists - they're crazier than the patients!" Yep.
This was strictly a FWIW post because I was surprised that someone of his background gave me responses 180 degrees from what I had expected. He did agree with me on the 11th green that a controlled demolition "makes no sense," but he likewise didn't back off on saying he'd never seen a building collapse in that manner except in a controlled demolition.
-
I happened to play golf today with a guy who is the ultimate real deal.
Degree in Explosives Engineering ... 23 years as a sniper ... served with Delta Force, Counterterrorism Operations and Special Forces ... was part of every major counterterrorism operation over the past 30 years with the exception of the killing of Bin Laden ... retired as a counterterrorism instructor ... now lives mostly in Jordan but continues to provide counterterrorism instruction as needed.
Once we knew each other a bit, I said in kind of a lighthearted way that I participate in online communities where many folks are JFKA conspiracy theorists and 9/11 Truthers. I got only the briefest of responses, but they weren't what I was expecting:
"I could've made those shots with my sniper rifle, no problem. With the rifle that supposedly made those shots, NO WAY."
"My degree and my expertise are in Explosives Engineering. I know of no way a building can collapse like that EXCEPT IN A CONTROLLED DEMOLITION."
Just one man's opinion, of course, but a pretty well-informed opinion. He wasn't off in any conspiracy ozone by any means and agreed it would be difficult to believe the 9/11 Truthers' claims, yet he couldn't deny what his eyes and his expertise seemed to tell him.
He probably doesn't realize the capability of Oswald's short-rifle, the short distance of the shots, and the fact that Oswald took 10.2 seconds to fire all three shots in the echo chamber known as Dealey Plaza.
-
My guess is that this person is an equipment snob.** And that he is just repeating the misguided opinions of some CT authors regarding the capabilities of the Carcano rifle. I think that he would be surprised to learn the following test results:
A more appropriate analogy would be the 100-yard test done by Robert Frazier after attempting to zero the scope at that distance. If we average the size of the four groups of 3-shots per group, we have an average group of 3.69-inches in diameter. Since 1-inch equals 1-MOA at 100-yards we have an average 3.69-MOA size group at 100-yards. That indicates that it is a pretty precise rifle. Especially so for a surplus WW-II era rifle. And even more so considering that these shots were fired as fast as possible with accuracy being a lower priority than speed.
**Reading the autobiography, and other works, of Chris Kyle (American Sniper) we learn that the shooting equipment they use is typically some of the finest available. Chris’ longest confirmed kill was at a distance of about 1600-yards (just under a mile). The average distance of his kills was about 400-yards. Dealey Plaza shots were less than 100-yards (~265-feet for the longest). The Carcano rifle was more than capable of those shots.
-
The difficulty was not the shot. The difficulty was in the time frame.
Carlos Hathcock:
"Let me tell you what we did at Quantico. We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did". (KILL ZONE, pp. 89-90).
“trying to duplicate the feat of 3 shots in 5.6 seconds on a moving target in a high to low angle. He said after several tries they simply could not duplicate it”
Three shots in 5.6 seconds are what was not duplicated.
-
The difficulty was not the shot. The difficulty was in the time frame.
Carlos Hathcock:
"Let me tell you what we did at Quantico. We reconstructed the whole thing: the angle, the range, the moving target, the time limit, the obstacles, everything. I don't know how many times we tried it, but we couldn't duplicate what the Warren Commission said Oswald did". (KILL ZONE, pp. 89-90).
“trying to duplicate the feat of 3 shots in 5.6 seconds on a moving target in a high to low angle. He said after several tries they simply could not duplicate it”
Three shots in 5.6 seconds are what was not duplicated.
The Warren Commission did not say that. Here is what the WC actually said in its report (page 117):
Time Span of shots
Witnesses at the assassination scene said that the shots were fired within a few seconds, with the general estimate being 5 to 6 seconds. 365 That approximation was most probably based on the earlier publicized reports that the first shot struck the President in the neck, the second wounded the Governor and the third shattered the President’s head, with the time span from the neck to the head shots on the President being approximately 5 seconds. As previously indicated, the time span between the shot entering the back of the President’s neck and the bullet which shattered his skull was 4.8 to 5.6 seconds. If the second shot missed, then 4.8 to 5.6 seconds was the total time span of the shots. If either the first or third shots missed, then a minimum of 2.3 seconds (necessary to operate the rifle) must be added to the time span of the shots which hit, giving a minimum time of 7.1 to 7.9 seconds for the three shots. If more than 2.3 seconds elapsed between a shot that missed and one that hit, then the time span would be correspondingly increased.
The Warren Commission did not form a conclusion regarding which shot might have missed. Therefore the WC only concluded that the time span of the shots could have been from 4.8 to 7.9-seconds, or even more, depending on which shot actually did miss.
-
The Warren Commission did not say that. Here is what the WC actually said in its report (page 117):
Time Span of shots
Witnesses at the assassination scene said that the shots were fired within a few seconds, with the general estimate being 5 to 6 seconds. 365 That approximation was most probably based on the earlier publicized reports that the first shot struck the President in the neck, the second wounded the Governor and the third shattered the President’s head, with the time span from the neck to the head shots on the President being approximately 5 seconds. As previously indicated, the time span between the shot entering the back of the President’s neck and the bullet which shattered his skull was 4.8 to 5.6 seconds. If the second shot missed, then 4.8 to 5.6 seconds was the total time span of the shots. If either the first or third shots missed, then a minimum of 2.3 seconds (necessary to operate the rifle) must be added to the time span of the shots which hit, giving a minimum time of 7.1 to 7.9 seconds for the three shots. If more than 2.3 seconds elapsed between a shot that missed and one that hit, then the time span would be correspondingly increased.
The Warren Commission did not form a conclusion regarding which shot might have missed. Therefore the WC only concluded that the time span of the shots could have been from 4.8 to 7.9-seconds, or even more, depending on which shot actually did miss.
As previously indicated, the time span between the shot entering the back of the President’s neck and the bullet which shattered his skull was 4.8 to 5.6 seconds. If the second shot missed, then 4.8 to 5.6 seconds was the total time span of the shots.
Eyewitnesses unanimously state the first shot struck JFK with the exception of Woodward . Altgens stated the one thing he was sure of was that there was not a shot after the head shot.
Altgens....” but as I say, that's an obvious conclusion on my part, but there was not another shot fired after the President was struck in the head.”
I think he would have been close enough to know. Maybe the only question you should ask yourself is why are so many of the eyewitnesses two shot witnesses. Altgens is included.
Something else the WC stated is they felt the witnesses were influenced by the media into inflating the number of shots. I don’t see that anywhere in your post about the WC conclusions.