JFK Assassination Forum

JBC is reacting to the shot that JFK is reacting to.   But according to the evidence that is the first shot and he is reacting to hearing it and recognizing it as a rifle shot and realizing that JFK was the likely target.  So he is reacting to it by turning around to look at JFK.  That is not a theory.  That is just going by the evidence. The “theory” is that the evidence is all wrong.

You go by the least reliable evidence we have, eyewitness accounts, and ignore the best evidence we have, the Z-film. No wonder you're so confused about what happened. If eyewitnesses were reliable, they would tell the same story. Obviously, they don't. If the eyewitnesses are correct, the JFKA happened dozens of ways. It really only happened one way and you will never figure out what that way is as long as you put your faith in eyewitnesses.

According to Dr. W. over at the Ed Forum, he’s suddenly unable to log in here. Pity. We could certainly use the extra academic rigor.

That's correct, Mark.

Mr Niederhut stated publicly of this Forum that he wasn't going to post on this Forum again.

https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,4827.msg175519.html#msg175519

For security purposes his password has been terminated, as is the case with every member who publicly announces cessation of posting, or who is known to have become deceased.

If he wishes to rejoin, he can do so.

The first hint of a physical sign of JFK reacting to being shot can be seen in z225.
How soon before this had the bullet passed through his body?

Why not base your analysis on the evidence?  Do you really know that JFK is not already reacting in z224?:



How does the bullet miss his hands?  Why do witnesses on Elm St. put it earlier (before the VP security car finished the turn; Linda Willis: while JFK was in her sightline to the Stemmons sign;just before Phil Willis took his z202 photo, as JFK approached the Thornton Freeway sign)?

I really don't give a shit what you focus on. I just find it silly.
Problems. What problems would that be? Are you denying the shells recovered at the scene could only have been fired by the revolver had in his possession when he tried to shoot the arresting officer?
Are you denying Oswald had the same two makes of bullets that were recovered from Tippit's body? Are you denying Oswald's jacket was found on his escape route? Are you denying Oswald tried to shoot the arresting officer? Are you denying that numerous witnesses IDed Oswald? Just which of the items that I listed do you have problems with?
OK, you go ahead and investigate it and report back to us what you find.

I really don't give a shit what you focus on. I just find it silly.

Of course you do... just like I think you're a fanatical zealot full of BS.

Problems. What problems would that be? Are you denying the shells recovered at the scene could only have been fired by the revolver had in his possession when he tried to shoot the arresting officer?

Let's see if I can mess with your narrow minded brain for a bit! No I don't doubt that the shells recovered were matched to the revolver now in evidence. The problem is that there is no chain of custody for the revolver!

Are you denying Oswald had the same two makes of bullets that were recovered from Tippit's body?

I can't deny or confirm that. What I do know is that Tippit was shot four time by two different bullets and that the shells found at the scene did not match up with the bullets.

Are you denying Oswald's jacket was found on his escape route?

What jacket are you talking about? The jacket found by officers under a car, described as being white, or the gray jacket that Buell Wesley Frazier said Oswald was wearing during the trip to Irving on Thursday afternoon?

Are you denying Oswald tried to shoot the arresting officer?

I wasn't present when it allegedly happened. Neither were you, yet you seem to be willing to jump to conclusions without knowing the actual facts.

Are you denying that numerous witnesses IDed Oswald?

No, that's a fact. I just wonder about the way the line ups were conducted. In my experience it is just about impossible that all the witnesses at a line up identify the same person. There mere fact that none of the witnesses was even reluctant makes the whole line up questionable. This, by far, would be the most interesting part of a trial against Oswald for me. I would have loved to observe these witnesses on the stand being questioned by a defense lawyer.

Just which of the items that I listed do you have problems with?

I have just told you.

OK, you go ahead and investigate it and report back to us what you find.

There is no need to report back to you because you will never ever accept any of it. You are not in a cult for nothing.

AI-version:

Investigative journalist and assassination expert Gus Russo maintains that elements of the Cuban intelligence service (known as the G-2, or DGI) likely encouraged Lee Harvey Oswald to assassinate President Kennedy in retaliation for continuous U.S. plots to overthrow or assassinate Fidel Castro.

Is there a certification process for becoming an assassination expert?

Russo, along with other researchers, argues that Oswald—a fervent Castro supporter—traveled to Mexico City in September 1963 and made contact with Cuban diplomats and intelligence operatives. According to Russo's investigations (detailed in his book Live by the Sword), members of the Cuban regime were made aware of U.S. attempts to assassinate Castro, and they may have in turn accepted or encouraged Oswald’s offer to eliminate Kennedy.[/quote}

I guess the Cubans and Oswalds were just hoping that one day Oswald would have a job at a building overlooking a presidential motorcade route.

Quote

Russo's research builds on declassified documents and interviews with Cuban defectors. For instance, a controversial 2006 documentary co-authored by Russo (Rendezvous with Death) further alleged that Cuban intelligence contracted Oswald to carry out the assassination.

---30---

I have watched the Rendevous With Death documentary, and it is pretty good.

---30---

Due the cadence or sequence of bullet strikes on JBC-JFK, the LNT-SBT JFKA theory does not hold water.

As Trump said to his Energy Secretary yesterday when he started speaking incoherently, "Nobody cares".

Most JFKA researchers, being lefties, then fabricate elaborate tales of a Deep State JFKA.

Some righties, such as James Woolsey, blame Moscow.

Seems to me a low-level plot involving LHO and some G-2'ers, or Alpha 66'ers (who may have been G2 double agents), is more probable.

That's like saying it is more probable that I will win the Mega Millions this week than that I will win the Powerball.

---30---

Remember:

Connally: I was knocked over, just doubled over by the force of the bullet. It went in my back and came out my chest about 2 inches below and the left of my right nipple. The force of the bullet drove my body over almost double and when I looked, immediately I could see I was just drenched with blood. (1 HSCA 42)

Explain to me when this happens, in what frames of the Z-film?

JBC begins to double over and dip to the right at about Z234. It's very obvious.