Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
31
Or you can sit behind a computer, roaming the internet, and find a boogeyman in a obscure, fuzzy photo and consider that and that alone serious research. Where did the photo come from? It doesn't matter. What do other photos and films reveal? It doesn't matter. What did the people who were there say? It doesn't matter. One image alone is sufficient.

If you think the second approach is better than the first, that the first is antiquated and no longer useful, then, well, you really are fooling yourself.

Steve, I wish this could be tattooed onto the homepage of this forum. This armchair sleuthing, which runs rampant and unchecked at the JFK Education Forum as well, is the bane of the JFK research community.
32
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: The First Shot
« Last post by Andrew Mason on Yesterday at 05:12:33 PM »
Why do you find it hard to believe that JBC has already been hit in Z-230?

In which Zapruder frame do you think JBC was hit?
The evidence suggests he was hit by two bullets.
The evidence shows that the missile that struck his thigh and did this:


was likely not the same missile that did this:


The position of JBC at the time of the third shot at z313 and the trajectory of his wounds (along the direction of the right femur and from right armpit to below right nipple) eliminates JBC being hit that shot.  So I conclude that he was hit on the first two shots.

The evidence establishes that there was a shorter space between the second and third shots and a longer pause after the first.  The evidence also establishes that the first shot was after z186.  It is difficult to pinpoint but I put it around z193, which is just as JFK clears the last part of the oak tree branch as seen from the SN. At that point, the right to left trajectory from the SN through JFK's midline goes on to the left side of JBC, nowhere near his right armpit.

The shot pattern puts the second shot a perceptible amount of time after the midpoint (313+193)/2=z253.  This means it was after Altgens' #6 photo taken at z254-255.  Hickey is still turned around looking rearward and he said he was turned forward looking at JFK at the time of the last two shots.  Greer said he turned around immediately after (almost simultaneously) the second shot. He begins that turn just before z281.  There is also distinct forward motion of JBC beginning at z271-272.  Hickey also said that he saw the hair on the right side of JFK's head fly forward at the time of the second shot.  That hair flies forward at z273-276.  So I put the second shot - the one that struck JBC in the right armpit, exited under his right nipple then struck the back of his right radius which is positioned directly in the exit path - at z271-272.  That is the shot on which Tague said he was struck. That is also the shot that Greer said gave a concussion effect as if it struck something in the car. His right ear was a few inches from the damaged windshield frame.

So, to answer your first question, I do agree that JBC had been shot by z230. But only in the thigh. 

33
Professional or serious historians or researches like Max Holland, investigative journalists, people like Fred Litwin here, spend months and years, sometimes even decades, researching an issue or topic. They travel around the country, interview people, locate primary or original sources like photos, letters. Then they take those materials to experts who analyze them, authenticate them. The photos or films are given to labs to evaluate. Digitized, enhanced, made, if possible, clearer.

They spend thousands of hours and thousands of dollars on their topic. Again, Fred Litwin is a perfect example. He travels to the archives, to libraries, and finds the primary documents.

Or you can sit behind a computer, roaming the internet, and find a boogeyman in a obscure, fuzzy photo and consider that and that alone serious research. Where did the photo come from? It doesn't matter. What do other photos and films reveal? It doesn't matter. What did the people who were there say? It doesn't matter. One image alone is sufficient.

If you think the second approach is better than the first, that the first is antiquated and no longer useful, then, well, you really are fooling yourself.
34
     This is another reason this case remains unsolved after almost 62 yrs. People have staked out hard line LN Positions. When NEW IMAGE EVIDENCE such as the Bell still frame you have presented challenges their iron clad LN position(s), they only acknowledge seeing what they WANT to see. They do Not accept seeing everything that is actually on the image. This dark figure based on the attire worn, is NOT Zapruder. Personally, I believe this dark figure is also NOT moving on the same Ground Level as Sitzman. To this day, immediately following the kill shot, we only Know of Zapruder being physically on the Pergola Shelter Level of the Knoll. Same goes for Sitzman. This dark figure and Sitzman are on differing levels of the Knoll in that Bell Film still frame. That dark figure based on: (1) attire, and (2) location, is Not Zapruder.
35
Sigh. . . .

Again, for the umpteenth time:

-- We have known for at least 20 years that the back wound was shallow and had no exit point, which is why the first two drafts of the autopsy report said nothing about the throat wound being an exit point for the back wound.

-- Abundant photographic evidence proves that no bullet exited JFK's shirt slits, and that the tie knot could not have been nicked by any bullet exiting the shirt slits.

-- Connally himself, the guy who actually experienced the wounding, said he was certain he was not hit before Z229.

-- The JFK clothing holes prove the back wound was several inches below the throat wound.

-- The hit on JFK occurred at Z186-190, but even a hit at Z199 would not have suddenly visibly jolted him forward at Z226-232. The Z226-232 reaction is clearly an immediate response to the impact of a bullet.

-- Connally's back wound proves the bullet that made the wound was not severely yawing or traveling sideways, and the narrow wound tract through Connally's chest proves the same thing about the bullet's behavior as it passed through the chest. 

-- Repeated wound ballistics tests have invalidated the SBT and proved that no bullet could have done the alleged damage and emerged in CE 399's nearly pristine condition.

I have personally documented these facts many times in this forum, but you guys keep ignoring them and pretending that the SBT is valid. This is why we never get anywhere in this forum, because we have a bunch of people like you who continue to cling to absurd myths such as the SBT in spite of the many facts that refute them.




36
Oh yes it is.
38
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Viewing The Bored
« Last post by Tom Graves on Yesterday at 05:29:23 AM »

That's it.

That's the post.
39
MTG--

I have posted a video on EF-JFKA 1962 wherein JFK refers to 500 terror attacks, murders etc. a week by communists, against public officials and facilities in SV, then a nation of 13 million.

That would be 11,000 terror attacks every week in the present-day US, for comparison.

The communists mounted a terror campaign in SV, and such campaigns are hellish to defeat. The terrorists can strike anywhere--bus stops, factories, shopping areas, power lines, government offices, public officials, you name it. Then hide.

This goes on today in southern Thailand, facing Muslim terrorists.

Yet to beat the terrorists calls for very intense and sustained efforts that appear brutal. And even decent governments too are made up of men, who have flaws, and sometimes go to excess.

The left-wing is out to lunch on SV, and today on the Middle East.

Then, at the EF-JFKA, there are participants who appear tainted by Putin money.

Besides all that, one of the moderators there is an anti-Semitic crackpot.
40
    If the person on the edge of this still frame is a male, he is wearing a coat that extends down to about the knee level. That would make it an Overcoat or Trench Coat. Zapruder was wearing a suit coat. The length of the coat DQ's the figure being Zapruder.

I think you are correct... The attire is not that of Zapruder or Sitzman...
Here's from the Paschal Film copy Duncan posted...


Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10