Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
41
Your Black Object is most certainly not "entirely Black." Zoom in on it and you can pretty clearly see a face, although it's possible this is pareidolia : https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1813359032244661&set=gm.1221491097890220.

You can also see it clearly here: https://www.jfk.org/collections-archive/photograph-of-the-exterior-of-the-texas-school-book-depository-3/. Those wacky conspirators left it up days after the JFKA was over.

The reality is, (1) you are addicted to mentally masturbating over your nonsense; (2) you can't stand to allow one of your nonsensical threads to die a well-deserved death, so you keep bringing them to the front page with yet more nonsense; and (3) the mysterious "long term JFK Assassination researchers" you keep mentioning are completely imaginary. Isn't that about right?
42
HUH? Did you miss the statements below in the passages I quoted about Dr. Gregory's interview, or did you just not understand them? Let's read them again:

We mentioned to Dr. Gregory that we had looked forward to talking with Dr. Shaw but that he was unavailable. Dr. Gregory said he and Shaw had talked about the wounding of Connally, and both believed that Connally and Kennedy had been hit by separate shots. Why? Because of the character of Connally’s back wound, Gregory explained. It was small and elliptical in shape. But most importantly, it had very clean edges. No fibers had been carried into Connally’s back wound, while his wrist wound was fouled with numerous fibers from his wool suit.

Do you understand now? The projectile that hit Connally's wrist carried with it numerous fibers from his wool suit into the wrist wound, but Connally's back wound had no fibers in it. If the bullet that hit Connally's back had just torn through four layers of JFK's clothing, it would have carried fibers from that clothing into Connally's back wound, but Connally's back wound had no fibers in it.

This is one of the reasons that both Dr. Gregory and Dr. Shaw concluded that the bullet that hit Connally's back had not hit anything else first. 

Seriously? I'm sure Dr. Gregory didn't think that years later someone who doesn't even know the basics about the wounds in the case would question why he said the wound was elliptical.

He said the wound was elliptical because . . . it was elliptical. Dr. Shaw, the guy who operated on it, said it was elliptical: "The wound entrance was an elliptical wound" (6 H 95).

It was elliptical because it was elliptical??? Is that supposed to be an answer. If ever there was a case of circular logic, this was it. I would bet a forensic pathologist would come to a very different conclusion about the elliptical wound. In fact the FPP panel did reach a very different conclusion. With one dissent, the panel concluded that the bullet that hit JBC in the back had first passed through JFK's torso. 
43
HSCA report: "The panel noted that at approximately Zapruder frame 200 the President's movements suddenly freeze, as his right hand seemed to stop abruptly in the midst of a waving motion. Then during frames 200-202, his head moves rapidly from right to left. The sudden interruption of the president's hand-waving motion, coupled with his rapid head movements, was considered by the photographic panel as evidence of President Kennedy's reaction to some 'severe external stimulus.'"

HSCA photographic panel: "By a vote of 12 to 5, the Panel determined that President Kennedy first showed a reaction to some severe external stimulus by Zapruder frame 207, as he is seen going behind a sign that obstructed Zapruder's view. ... At approximately Zapruder frame 200 , Kennedy's movements suddenly freeze; his right hand abruptly stops in the midst of a waving motion and his head moves rapidly from right to his left in the direction of his wife. Based on these movements, it appears that by the time the President goes behind the sign at frame 207 he is evidencing some kind of reaction to a severe external stimulus."

I have no more than a neutered pug in the fight, but on one side we have (1) the HSCA photographic panel, folks like Orr and any number of others who have studied the matter intensively, and the lying eyes of women who were standing right smack there at the time, versus (2) what John thinks he sees in the Z film. Ho-kay ... Maybe the severe external stimulus was Jackie's cheap French perfume.

I wonder if this illustrious panel considered that the reason JFK stopped waving could be that the crowd on the north side of Elm St. was starting to thin out.. I also wonder what the qualifications were to be on this panel. The fact that the vote was 12 to 5 indicates that this analysis was not exactly a science. More of a in-the-eye-of-the-beholder exercise. The low resolution of the film also makes such interpretations quite dubious.
44
As usual, the people you cite don't say why they reached their conclusion.

HUH? Did you miss the statements below in the passages I quoted about Dr. Gregory's interview, or did you just not understand them? Let's read them again:

We mentioned to Dr. Gregory that we had looked forward to talking with Dr. Shaw but that he was unavailable. Dr. Gregory said he and Shaw had talked about the wounding of Connally, and both believed that Connally and Kennedy had been hit by separate shots. Why? Because of the character of Connally’s back wound, Gregory explained. It was small and elliptical in shape. But most importantly, it had very clean edges. No fibers had been carried into Connally’s back wound, while his wrist wound was fouled with numerous fibers from his wool suit.

Do you understand now? The projectile that hit Connally's wrist carried with it numerous fibers from his wool suit into the wrist wound, but Connally's back wound had no fibers in it. If the bullet that hit Connally's back had just torn through four layers of JFK's clothing, it would have carried fibers from that clothing into Connally's back wound, but Connally's back wound had no fibers in it.

This is one of the reasons that both Dr. Gregory and Dr. Shaw concluded that the bullet that hit Connally's back had not hit anything else first. 

Does Gregory say why he thinks the wound on JBC's back was elliptical?

Seriously? I'm sure Dr. Gregory didn't think that years later someone who doesn't even know the basics about the wounds in the case would question why he said the wound was elliptical.

He said the wound was elliptical because . . . it was elliptical. Dr. Shaw, the guy who operated on it, said it was elliptical: "The wound entrance was an elliptical wound" (6 H 95). 

45

    I have spotted a BLACK OBJECT sitting ATOP the (R) HUGE GATE. It is directly above the (R) Huge Gate and sits tightly between the point where the Texas School Book Depository ends and the (R) Huge Gate begins. It looks to be about the size of a home stereo speaker and is entirely Black. I have asked several other long term JFK Assassination researchers as to the identity/purpose of this object. Nobody positively knows what it is or what it is doing there. It's been speculated that this might be a "sign" of some kind, but nobody knows what that alleged sign might be for. You could Not see this possible sign if you were traveling either direction on the Elm St Extension. It would Not be within your field of vision. Plus, there appears to be absolutely No Printing or differing color anywhere on it. Based on the images we see of it, it is Completely Black. For the time being, I am referring to this object as "The Black Box".
   Being that the Black Box is situated down the Elm St Extension, there are few images showing it, and even these images only show portions of it. I believe the Best view of this object can be seen on this Forum's, "PHOTO RESEARCH GALLERY". It is on "KIMBROUGH PHOTO #7". If anyone knows the possible purpose of this "Black Box", please let me know. Whatever that Black Box is, it looks entirely out of place.
46
I would say John Orr has either a very active imagination or very poor eyesight.
I'd love to know what they see that tells them that. I see JFK calmly lowering his right hand after having been waving to the few remainin spectators on Elm St.
Oh, brother. Another so-and-so said argument. It is completely at odds with what I see in the Z-film. I see JFK acting very calmly lowering his right hand while turned toward the spectators. I'm not going to bother looking it up but I seem to remember somebody on this forum saying those women indicated JFK smiled at them. That doesn't seem to dovetail with a "severe external stimulus".

HSCA report: "The panel noted that at approximately Zapruder frame 200 the President's movements suddenly freeze, as his right hand seemed to stop abruptly in the midst of a waving motion. Then during frames 200-202, his head moves rapidly from right to left. The sudden interruption of the president's hand-waving motion, coupled with his rapid head movements, was considered by the photographic panel as evidence of President Kennedy's reaction to some 'severe external stimulus.'"

HSCA photographic panel: "By a vote of 12 to 5, the Panel determined that President Kennedy first showed a reaction to some severe external stimulus by Zapruder frame 207, as he is seen going behind a sign that obstructed Zapruder's view. ... At approximately Zapruder frame 200 , Kennedy's movements suddenly freeze; his right hand abruptly stops in the midst of a waving motion and his head moves rapidly from right to his left in the direction of his wife. Based on these movements, it appears that by the time the President goes behind the sign at frame 207 he is evidencing some kind of reaction to a severe external stimulus."

I have no more than a neutered pug in the fight, but on one side we have (1) the HSCA photographic panel, folks like Orr and any number of others who have studied the matter intensively, and the lying eyes of women who were standing right smack there at the time, versus (2) what John thinks he sees in the Z film. Ho-kay ... Maybe the severe external stimulus was Jackie's cheap French perfume.
47

Dr. Gregory pointed out that he’d been a field surgeon during the Korean War and later had made a study of gunshot injuries, examining more than five hundred gunshot wounds. It was his opinion, supported by Dr. Shaw, that the small, clean and elliptical wound in Connally’s back had come from a projectile that had hit nothing else first. (Last Second in Dallas, pp. 157-158)[/font]

As usual, the people you cite don't say why they reached their conclusion.

Does Gregory say why he thinks the wound on JBC's back was elliptical?
48

The fact of the matter is that most WC apologists are simply not interested in credible evidence of conspiracy, and they will look for any excuse, no matter how lame and vacuous, to dismiss such evidence.

I'd be very interested in such evidence if I ever saw any.
Quote

Yes, I've read the replies of Lance Payette and John Corbett in this thread. I don't think they're worth answering.


If I had made a statement like that, you'd accuse me of dodging.
49
Dr. Charles Gregory, the Parkland surgeon who operated on Connally's wrist, provided important information on the wounding of Governor Connally in his interview with Dr. Josiah Thompson, Richard Billings, and Ed Kern. After reviewing high-quality enlargements of the relevant Zapruder frames, Dr. Gregory said that Connally must have been hit no earlier than Z234 based on his Z238-242 reactions, that he and Dr. Robert Shaw (Connally's chest surgeon) concluded that JFK and Connally were hit by separate bullets, and that both he and Dr. Shaw concluded that Connally's back wound indicated the bullet had not hit anything else beforehand. Dr. Thompson discusses this crucial information in his 2021 book Last Second in Dallas:

I was already in Dr. Gregory’s office and talking with him when they arrived. I had made photocopies of his deposition, and Kern and Billings had brought with them the four-by-five-inch Ektachrome transparencies from the Zapruder film. I did most of the questioning, and Kern and Billings showed the transparencies on a light table.

After the transparencies were laid out, I asked Dr. Gregory to look closely at what happens between frames 237 and 238, three-quarters of a second after the president has clearly been hit. We moved the other transparencies aside and looked closely at 237 through 240. In this series of frames Governor Connally is turning in his seat to the right. This means that the angle between his right shoulder and the car door gets smaller over time. Then, quite suddenly, it reverses direction and gets larger. What brings about this change in angle is the collapse of Connally’s right shoulder. But that is not all. In frames 238, 239, and 240, Connally’s cheeks puff out and his hair is disordered.

I pointed this out to Dr. Gregory and asked his opinion about what caused it. He explained that the epiglottis is like a trapdoor at the top of the windpipe. A shot through the chest such as Connally received would shock the chest wall and force air upward through the epiglottis. Since it couldn’t all escape from his mouth immediately, it would puff out his cheeks. The three effects we were seeing, Gregory said, were the effects of a bullet driving through the chest.

I asked him what was the maximum time before frame 238 when the bullet could have hit Connally. He thought for a moment and then replied, “A quarter of a second. Maybe 234 at the earliest.” This was generally in line with his testimony before the commission, where he said that “in frames marked 234, 235 and 236, Governor Connally was in a position such that a single missile . . . could have passed through his chest.”  Obviously, this was much too late for Connally to have been hit by the same bullet that hit Kennedy. . . .

But there was more.

We mentioned to Dr. Gregory that we had looked forward to talking with Dr. Shaw but that he was unavailable. Dr. Gregory said he and Shaw had talked about the wounding of Connally, and both believed that Connally and Kennedy had been hit by separate shots. Why? Because of the character of Connally’s back wound, Gregory explained. It was small and elliptical in shape. But most importantly, it had very clean edges. No fibers had been carried into Connally’s back wound, while his wrist wound was fouled with numerous fibers from his wool suit.

Dr. Gregory pointed out that he’d been a field surgeon during the Korean War and later had made a study of gunshot injuries, examining more than five hundred gunshot wounds. It was his opinion, supported by Dr. Shaw, that the small, clean and elliptical wound in Connally’s back had come from a projectile that had hit nothing else first. (Last Second in Dallas, pp. 157-158)


50
Your hero and mine, John Orr, has the first shot at Z204 and JFK's first reactions at Z205.

I would say John Orr has either a very active imagination or very poor eyesight.
Quote

He notes that the HSCA photographic panel agreed JFK was reacting to a "severe external stimulus" by Z207.

I'd love to know what they see that tells them that. I see JFK calmly lowering his right hand after having been waving to the few remainin spectators on Elm St.
Quote

This would dovetail nicely with the recollections of the women along Elm just to the east of the Stemmons sign, who all said the first shot occurred when JFK was "right in front" of them. It doesn't seem to me to be too much of a stretch to give credence to women who were standing mere feet from JFK and who said the first shot occurred when he was "right in front" of them. The fallibility of eyewitness testimony doesn't require us to think these women were actually all drunk and staring at their iPhones.

Oh, brother. Another so-and-so said argument. It is completely at odds with what I see in the Z-film. I see JFK acting very calmly lowering his right hand while turned toward the spectators. I'm not going to bother looking it up but I seem to remember somebody on this forum saying those women indicated JFK smiled at them. That doesn't seem to dovetail with a "severe external stimulus".
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10