Dear DangerMan Tom:

Why are  you still stuck in the 60’s USA spy vs USSR spy world? Do you really believe that Kruschev would risk assassinating a US President who had just made concessions to the USSR to resolve the Cuban Missile Crisis?A US president who had publicly stated he wanted cooperation with the USSR to explore outer space. A US President that Kruschev said was the best US President they had ever dealt with?

In response to the question Does it really matter who killed JFK, the answer is: YES IT DOES. Because if the Marxist Leftist Kook  Oswald did it then we should beware of all the other potential Marxist Leftist Kooks out there whom might have a similar obsession with the current US President.

Or, if it was a conspiracy, then why did JFK have to be terminated and who profited and did their organization continue  to exist or have they all died.

I don’t think echos or reverberation effect following the initial muzzle blast is the answer to this “back to back” perception of a significant majority of witnesses hearing the spacing of the last 2 shots.

If this phenomenon is happening then should not there be that effect for each of the 3 shots resulting in witnesses thinking they heard 6 shots and the spacing would be 1.(2)…..3.(4)..5.(6)?

Has it occurred to you that the KGB knew of evidence that rogue elements of the CIA played a role in the JFK assassination and decided to try to get this information to the American people to counter the common belief that Oswald acted on behalf of the Soviets and/or their Cuban proxies?

If Richard Case Nagell was telling the truth, and there are good reasons to believe he was mostly truthful, then the KGB knew about the assassination plot before JFK was killed and tried to prevent it because they feared right-wingers in the U.S. Government would use it to persuade the government to start WWIII with the Soviets and/or the Cubans.

Dear Michael "Useful Idiot Or Worse" Griffith,

John M. Newman, whom you probably idolized in 2008 when he was preaching, in the epilogue of his revised edition of Oswald and the CIA, that evil, evil James Angleton masterminded the JFK assassination, now says that Angleton's confidant, mentor, and mole-hunting superior, Bruce Leonard Solie in the Office of Security, was a KGB "mole" and that he sent former Marine sharpshooter and U-2 radar operator Oswald to Moscow in 1959 as an ostensible "dangle" in a (unbeknownst to Angleton and Oswald) planned-to-fail hunt for "Popov's U-2 Mole" (Solie) in the wrong part of the CIA.

Which ties in with what Nagell said.

Just substitute Bruce Leonard Solie (and Nosenko-defending Leonard V. McCoy and Russia-born Nosenko-defender George Kisevalter?) for "rogue elements of the CIA."

-- Tom

PS In October 1968, Solie "cleared" false-defector-in-place-in-Geneva-in-June-1962 / false (or perhaps rogue) physical defector to the U.S. in February, 1964 Yuri "The KGB Had Nothing To Do With Oswald In The USSR!", Nosenko via a bogus polygraph exam and a specious report, and from June 1966 to December 1975 he was instrumental in the Igor Kochnov (KITTY HAWK) case which ended tragically when former defector Nicholas Shadrin (formerly Nikolas Artamonov) was kidnapped by the KGB in Vienna, and from 1975 to 1978 he hid CIA documents from the Church Committee and the HSCA.

   WHO CARES about this bickering between Lane and Dudman? You guys get knotted up in  that does Not matter.
   Show this Forum the Image Evidence of a hole in the windshield. Personally, I believe there are far better images of the JFK Limo windshield than Altgens 6. There are very clear images of the JFK Limo taken from the rear of the car as it sat at Parkland Hospital. The trunk of the car is closed and there is No Top on the car. These CLEAR Images of the JFK Limo also include Wiegman entering the picture from the (R) with his camera at his face. (time stamp). The entire inside of the windshield is visible in these images. Research 'Work" focusing on these images of the inside of the windshield should reveal whether it had a thru-n-thru HOLE in it or Not.

I have said nothing about the photographic evidence of a windshield bullet hole. My point is that eight witnesses in three different locations saw a hole the windshield.

When Dudman spoke in 1988, he had no idea that the windshield in evidence was not the original windshield, that the windshield had been replaced. If he had known this, he almost certainly would have stood by his original account as expressed in his two December 1963 articles. He had no doubt that he had seen a hole in the windshield.

Two weeks after Dudman wrote his December 1 article for the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, fellow journalist Robert Branson noted that "Richard Dudman . . . insists that when he inspected the car afterward, he saw what appeared to him to be a small, round hole near the middle of the windshield."

Interesting form of debate. I post a response in the form of Dr. Shaw’s drawing.  I also post an explanation of why the evidence implies that the bullet changed direction upon hitting JBC in the fifth rib.   You call the post dumb.  I then ask which one is dumb. And your response asks me to explain which one isn’t dumb.

Seems like a perfectly reasonable question.