Recent Posts

Recent Posts

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10
31
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Hypothetical question
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 04:15:42 PM »
I am skeptical of Agent Landis' claim, 60 years after the fact, that he found the bullet and place it on a gurney. That seems like an odd thing to do. Surely he would have known that was a key piece of evidence and needed to be preserved. I know he probably wasn't an experienced crime scene investigator but even a layman would understand how important that was. Why did he wait 60 years to claim this? I don't think he lied about it. I think he just has a false memory of it.
32
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Jack Ruby kicks Oswald! And other interesting stuff.
« Last post by Gerry Down on Yesterday at 03:54:11 PM »
It's worth noting that Owald's hand was handcuffed to Levealle. So if Levealle lifted up his arm, in an effort to tackle Ruby, it would have dragged Oswald's arm and torso upwards.
33
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Hypothetical question
« Last post by Zeon Mason on Yesterday at 03:27:49 PM »
Quote from: Andrew Mason on Yesterday at 02:26:46 AM
I say A (CE399 was the first shot and did not cause JBC’s torso wound) is false and B (the second shot struck JBC in the torso and forearm and fragmented with fragments going high on and over the windshield causing the windshield damage and striking Tague) is true, based on the evidence.  You argue that B can’t be true because if B was true then A couldn’t be true! That is true of course, but it doesn’t advance an argument.

The whole point is that CE 399 did not pass “thru 2 and a wrist bone”.  I am suggesting it passed through JFK ‘s neck and caused JBC’s thigh wound.  That is why it was hardly damaged.

If a second shot struck JBC at full speed and struck bone in the torso and smashed the radius it would have experienced forces that exceeded the yield strength of its copper jacket, which means it would have fragmented.
If it strikes the radius at z271 or so and bullet fragments deflect off the back of the forearm surface which is angled up and to the right, they are going to deflect away from the point of contact, which is up and to the left. 

One fragment struck the windshield frame so something deflected it upward. How would a fragment from the head shot have deflected upward? What could fragments have struck to cause such a deflection?

Did that Z190 bullet (your CE 399)  stop in JC’s thigh? Because if it did not then how could CE 399 have been found on the stretcher presumably having fallen out of JCs leg while he was on the stretcher?

If it did stop in the  thigh, at 1500 ft/sec it should have been deeply buried in his thigh, which is contrary to the wound being described as a “shallow” wound.

If it kept going after striking the left thigh, it would have gone into the front seat cushion and metal springs. Maybe it could have stopped there and then fallen onto the floor board later to be discovered by an SS agent who placed it on a stretcher without telling anyone about finding it until 60 years later. 🙄

JFKs head was a spherical volume of skull bone and his head was leaning left when he was stuck in the upper right ( occipital parietal) area of the skull. It was nearly a tangential strike. It’s highly probable therefore that the Z313 bullet could fragment into several fragments which deflected upward enough  to hit the inside of the windshield , hit the chrome frame of the windshield and fly over the windshield.

An irregular shaped fragment hitting the chrome windshield could bounce back in any number of ways.

The Dale Myers computer model has lined up all wounds  of JC and JFK at z224 including JCs right hand wrist bone, and there’s no fragmenting of the CE 399. The bullet was slowed from 2000 ft/ sec to 1500 ft/sec as it exited JFKs body. It was further slowed down to 900 ft/ sec approx as it exited JCs right side chest and it struck JC in his right hand at 900 ft/ sec, went THRU the wrist bone and exited the lower palm of his hand which slowed it down enough that when it hit JVs inner left thigh, it stopped creating only a shallow wound. That’s why the WC story  is that CE 399 fell out of JCs thigh and was found on a stretcher or found in the car or fell out and was picked up off the floor of the operating room or something like that (lolz).
34
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Jack Ruby kicks Oswald? And other interesting stuff.
« Last post by John Mytton on Yesterday at 03:18:26 PM »
• After Jack Ruby shot Oswald, he kicks Oswald either in the head or somewhere in the upper body. Which indicates to me that this wasn't a mob hit, but Ruby was really pissed off with Oswald and in a fit of uncontrollable rage, Ruby suddenly snapped and unleashed on Oswald.

Ruby on the left wearing the hat, steps forward with his right leg and then with all the force he can muster, whacks Oswald with his left foot which drives Oswald's upper torso and head upwards, close to a foot in height.



This full speed GIF of the above, better illustrates Oswald's reaction.



• These two camera operators flinch after hearing shots, these types of vertical flinches are seen in the Zapruder film and working backwards, just after the headshot, then just after the SBF and just before Connally turns his head rapidly to the right, an action that he testified that did.







• The placement of the shells in the Sniper's nest wasn't just random but was a result of how Oswald was tracking his target. The following GIF came from a simulation which accurately placed the 2nd two shots to coincide with the LNers SBF and the headshot and therefore these two shells bounced off the rear boxes and ended up closer to Oswald but the first shot in this recreation was a little early but it still wouldn't change where the furthest bullet ended up.



• Nix filmed the same event as Zapruder(Muchmore and Bronson also captured bits of it as well) which proves beyond all doubt that they are both authentic and there was no Limo stop or whatever the latest fakery fad is, but some critics who have no concept of perspective, lamely point to what they perceive as the differing position of Hill And Jackie on the Limo trunk.

Griffith uses this sole example of his proof of fakery in both Nix and/or Zapruder, yeah I know it's kinda pathetic.



But Jerry Organ who is/was a master of 3D modelling, with a tiny bit of help and direction from me, proved it's just the change in perspective from either side of Dealey Plaza.





• These two morphs that I put together show smooth rotation because they both came from impossible to fake stereoscopic pairs. The first GIF shows Kennedy's left brain hemisphere to be intact and the flap over the right temple as seen in Zapruder. And the second GIF shows the back of Kennedy's head to be intact with a solitary bullet entrance hole where the hair is parted, next to the top of the ruler. Sorry bout that CT's!





JohnM
35
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Released Videos From The Pentagon's First Batch Of UFO Files
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 03:16:09 PM »
Forgive me if I don't get excited about all this UFO and alien nonsense. Last night Neil DeGrasse Tyson expressed the same thought I have had for years. Just because we don't know what these objects are, it's completely irrational to assume they are extraterrestrial visitors. I suspect some are simply optical illusions or misidentified objects. One of the clips I saw was of a small white object flying above the roofs of buildings in an urban setting. Maybe somebody was flying a drone. Some of the sighting near Roswell New Mexico could be experimental aircraft which of course the Air Force would want to keep top secret.

I find it pretty absurd to think that the unidentified flying objects could be visitors from other solar systems given the distances involved. During the first Cosmos series, Dr. Carl Sagan made the point that it is not possible to fly faster than the speed of light. You could theoretically come close, but not reach or exceed it. The nearest star is over four light years away and our deep space telescopes have given us no indication of life there.

I don't doubt there is life elsewhere in our vast universe and some of it might well be intelligent life. Such intelligent life might be well ahead or way behind our species in development. They are still bound by the cosmic speed limit. Even if they were capable of interstellar travel, what reason would they have to visit the third rock from the sun? Why would they come all this way and then play hide and seek with us.
36
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Released Videos From The Pentagon's First Batch Of UFO Files
« Last post by Lance Payette on Yesterday at 03:15:24 PM »
Since I have a de facto Ph.D. in UFO Studies after 60+ years of intense involvement and one distinctly non-mundane close-up encounter, I will say that I think the current UAP Disclosure movement is completely misguided to the extent it focuses almost exclusively on nuts-and-bolts craft, supposed crashes and supposed retrieved bodies. Among those of us who have been involved in the field for decades, this is viewed as just about the least likely of the numerous alternative explanations. Whatever the UFO phenomenon (or phenomena) is (or are), the explanation is almost surely something far stranger than this. I personally believe that most of what is observed and photographed is staged - i.e., an intended distraction from what the phenomenon is really all about. Jacques Vallee's notion that it's a "control system" of some sort is probably the closest to the truth. (As mentioned previously, I attended the 1989 MUFON annual conference in Las Vegas where wackos William Cooper and John Lear made their case that JFK was killed - by either Hickey or Greer, as I recall - because he was about to reveal the Alien Secret. So there's the JFK angle that wacky old Douglas Caddy still accepts.)
37
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Old Article on G2-Castro Perping the JFKA---Gus Russo
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 02:59:33 PM »
Is there any conspiracy angle you won't believe.

The only one who knew what Oswald was going to do was Oswald and he didn't even know that until he found out JFK would be riding past his workplace in a slow-moving car.
38
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Gov. John Connally Grips His White Stetson Hat at Z-272
« Last post by John Corbett on Yesterday at 02:54:18 PM »
Quote from: Zeon Mason on Yesterday at 02:02:23 PM
The TSBD shooter was not likely a professional shooter. It would have been much easier to shoot at a stationary JFK giving a speech. And one shot thru the chest from 200 yds away is not that difficult for the professional.

So the choice of the TSBD points to Oswald because it’s convenient being his place of work. It could also be some other TSBD worker without an alibi such as Jack Dougherty.

I made this same point when I did the podcast with Fred Litwin. Dealey Plaza would be an unlikely choice for a professional hitman. Not only would you have moving target but witnesses everywhere. A much better choice would have been when JFK was speaking to the crowd in front of the hotel in Ft. Worth that morning. A stationary target surrounded by tall buildings. One shot, one kill.

Oswald didn't choose the TSBD. It was the opportunity handed to him. It was a take it or leave it choice.

I also think it is absurd to think there would have been a hit team. Why would you shoot at JFK with multiple rifles if your intent was to frame one man. An professional hit man worth his salt wouldn't have needed more than one shot to take out JFK if he chose his location wisely, like the Ft. Worth hotel.
Quote

The TSBD shooter wasn’t apparently wearing a mask and he exposed himself to being  photographed as he stuck his rifle OUT the window and KEPT it stuck out for several seconds AFTER the last shot fired. That’s not what a professional would likely do.

The CT alternatives  for why a professional shooter would do such stupid actions would be that his employer required him to set up Oswald, or the shooter himself had a personal vendetta against Oswald.

I’m sure some CT has suggested that LBJ had his hit man Malcolm Wallace do the job but why the need to set up Oswald?

The idea that these imaginary plotters would need a fall guy is absurd too. Why would they need a patsy? That just complicates things. A competent hitman who fires one shot from a hidden location and then slips away makes much more sense. Oswald got spotted because he took three shots. That gave a few witnesses a chance to locate him. A sniper firing from a concealed location could easily disappear before anyone figured out where the shot came from. He would be gone almost as soon as the muzzle blast was heard by the people on the ground. Leave an untraceable rifle at the scene and just calmly leave the premises. Why care if the investigators had someone to pin it on? As long as the hitman couldn't be identified, that is all that would be needed. The people who hired him might make sure he slept with the fishes, just to be safe. Bugliosi made the point that if either the CIA or Mafia had hired the assassin, there would have been a car waiting for him outside to drive him to his death.

The killing of JFK wasn't a professional hit. It was carried out by a guy who was taught to shoot in the Marinee Corps and had some level of proficiency though not an expert. The location wasn't ideal but it was the only choice available to him so he took it.
39
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: Zapruder film "fakery" and the ED Forum Kooks!
« Last post by Royell Storing on Yesterday at 02:38:07 PM »
Quote from: John Mytton on Yesterday at 11:33:34 AM
After looking at the above briefing board, I noticed what at first seemed to be a sprocket hole on the lower left corner of Z314, which could add evidence that the Zapruder film that they had on the 23rd was the unmasked original. So I had a look online for the SS copy and the best I could find was from a video posted by "The JFK Theorist" but frustratingly he wasn't sure where he got it from.

NOTICE: video 87.38 is NOT sourced from the National Archives, but I cannot remember where it originates from. I added it as a replacement because 87.38 is not available online and probably will not be for a while. I cannot and will not confirm that the replacement is the same as 87.38, but I believe it is extremely similar and originates from the Secret Service, presumably the Dallas Secret Service.



Anyway, I used this copy and overlayed the Z314 from the briefing board to see if the sprocket hole lined up with the respective Z314 and the holes don't line up.



But what is interesting is that instead of cropping the original at the limit of the sprocket holes, the briefing board Z314 was cropped on the LHS at the exact limit of the masked off area, on what is most probably a copy of the SS original. Also worth noting is that after reviewing several images of 8mm film that has the sprocket holes masked off by the camera or by post processing, this left edge isn't always consistent in relation to the sprocket holes. And additionally, the briefing board photo wasn't exactly square, so I applied corrective software to square it up with Z314 and TBH it's still fractionally off but insignificant enough as to not affect the above conclusion.



JohnM

   That Sunday Briefing Board Crew were "D Lister's". Who would give their best material/Original Z Film to a group of "D Lister's"?  Well, other than Time/Life who putzed around with "D Lister's" to the point of burning their $150,000 Z Film?
40
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate / Re: JFK's raised left arm identified at Bethesda
« Last post by Royell Storing on Yesterday at 02:26:35 PM »

   John M - I haven't looked at the Brugioni Q/A in a while, but as I recall Brugioni admits to Not being a photo expert. He's an IMAGE EXPERT. He was the best at examining extremely high aerial photos/images, like the images taken by Gary Powers U-2 spy plane etc.
                I'm not sure if Brugioni clearly understood what Horne meant when he asked about images "bleeding over". I thought Horne's question was poorly worded. Just using the word "bleed" or "bleeding" amidst the setting of an assassination has an immediate negative impact on the listener. I believe that Brugioni thought Horne was asking about the general quality of the images. Were the images "bleeding" or smearing or stretching to the (L) and into the area between the sprocket holes. I believe this is what Brugioni thought he was being asked about. I think he thought Horne was asking if the standard images were being duplicated/"bleeding" into the sprocket hole area.
                With a case now 62+ years old, we need to stay away from accusing eyewitnesses of having "hazy" recollections or just being "foggy".  Both sides can play this game until the cows come home. A legit eyewitness decades later does still have value. And an expert witness such a Brugioni, on the 1963 CIA payroll, holds even greater value.     
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 10