Recovery Board
: RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum.
Time heals all wounds it is said but time wounds all heels.
One thing that will not soon fade are boorish instances of TBMs open hostility toward our fallen president such as Steve B's mom who responded to news of the tragedy by deeming it to be Kennedy's just deserts.
Few if any TBMs would likely know that JFK was actually a lot more conservative than his father Joe and that Kennedy was a close friend of Barry Goldwater from their days as freshmen senators.
So I was wondering about whether JFK is held in any higher esteem today on his 100th birthday than he was by my own parent's generation.
One thing that will not soon fade are boorish instances of TBMs open hostility toward our fallen president such as Steve B's mom who responded to news of the tragedy by deeming it to be Kennedy's just deserts.
Few if any TBMs would likely know that JFK was actually a lot more conservative than his father Joe and that Kennedy was a close friend of Barry Goldwater from their days as freshmen senators.
So I was wondering about whether JFK is held in any higher esteem today on his 100th birthday than he was by my own parent's generation.
I don't recall seeing that kind of animosity by my parents. But then they were TBM Democrats.
A Democrat in my parents generation may be the rough equivalent of a moderate Conservative today. Today the two parties have become so polarized they are unrecognizable from when I was a youth.
A Democrat in my parents generation may be the rough equivalent of a moderate Conservative today. Today the two parties have become so polarized they are unrecognizable from when I was a youth.
I agree with you. The two parties are quite different from what they used to be.
I grew up in a town where people were Democrats and JFK was popular. I suppose there were those who didnt like him, but they were a minority and kept quiet. A Catholic friend of mine told me her family were Republcans when they moved there but changed because being Catholic in a Mormon town was about as different as they could handle
I was in junior high school when JFK was elected. I remember my Catholic neighbor-buddy telling me that the country was afraid to elect Kennedy because they would be afraid the Pope would run the country. Dejavue all over again.
I'm afraid that the number of people who remember the Kennedy administration is dwindling, and these whipper-snappers today aren't interested in history(except the conspiracy theorists). If Mormons think of him at all, It's as that upstart Great&Abominable who had the temerity to launch the space program and undermine the authority of the prophet.
I was too young to actually remember much; raging hormones put paid to any real interest in history or history-being-made for me.
There is a moving movie made by the Southern Poverty Law Center about the Children's March in Birmingham and some other movies that have been made about that time that have given me a glimpse of a president who did something that mattered a lot.
There is a moving movie made by the Southern Poverty Law Center about the Children's March in Birmingham and some other movies that have been made about that time that have given me a glimpse of a president who did something that mattered a lot.
My parents were die-hard Republicans who felt terrible about the assignation. As to Kennedy's legacy, to me its mixed. Cuban Missile Crises and Bay of Pigs. Foundation for Civil Rights legislation but stalled until LBJ.
Because Kennedy's life was horribly cut short, we'll never know of his full legacy. His written speeches are brilliant, and I'm inclined to say that he may very well have been remarkable in a second term. "Jack, we hardly knew you." The Boner.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2017 07:55PM by BYU Boner.
Because Kennedy's life was horribly cut short, we'll never know of his full legacy. His written speeches are brilliant, and I'm inclined to say that he may very well have been remarkable in a second term. "Jack, we hardly knew you." The Boner.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2017 07:55PM by BYU Boner.
I agree, Boner, I would consider it a mixed legacy. I will always love him for launching our race to the moon, however.
Well here's some super arcane JFK trivia. . . . Dr Strangelove was scheduled to open on the night of the 22nd.
Kennedy had a keen interest in the film which featured a character based on his nemesis, the mad bomber Curtis Lemay, a film he never got to see.
Kubrick hastily called off the ill-timed premier. Pretty sure JFK would have loved the film the way he also loved James Bond flicks.....stories based on the realities he was living through.
Kennedy had a keen interest in the film which featured a character based on his nemesis, the mad bomber Curtis Lemay, a film he never got to see.
Kubrick hastily called off the ill-timed premier. Pretty sure JFK would have loved the film the way he also loved James Bond flicks.....stories based on the realities he was living through.
My cousin in Magna Utah hated JFK because he was a Catholic and a Democrat....in what seemed like equal measure.
My Christian Science mother was a knee-jerk Republican and an intense Catholic-phobe. She never said it, but I sensed she felt that JFK "got what he deserved." Oddly, she believed the Jesuits were somehow involved in his assassination. Go figure.
I sense Christian Scientists (what's left of them) have moved from the political right to the left. The Christian Science Monitor, once touted as "an International Daily Newspaper," * went from broadsheet to tabloid (format) to "on-line" with a weekly magazine, now little more than "NPR in print."
For those who find the Kennedys repugnant, check out "Kennedy Babylon," by a Boston columnist, Howie Carr. What can I say? I'm from Boston (adopted, not native).
*Wags called it, "the newspaper that everybody respects but nobody reads."
I sense Christian Scientists (what's left of them) have moved from the political right to the left. The Christian Science Monitor, once touted as "an International Daily Newspaper," * went from broadsheet to tabloid (format) to "on-line" with a weekly magazine, now little more than "NPR in print."
For those who find the Kennedys repugnant, check out "Kennedy Babylon," by a Boston columnist, Howie Carr. What can I say? I'm from Boston (adopted, not native).
*Wags called it, "the newspaper that everybody respects but nobody reads."
They always liked JFK. He was assassinated on my father's birthday. My parents never forgot. I was raised a democrat and have always been one.
His murderer was, as I evaluate, very close to Son Of Perdition, as was John Lennon's.... Since then, I would say there have been a number of Perdition murders, in the news even; some quite recently.
What newspapers have identified specific individuals as Sons of Perdition? And who were these Sons of Perdition? Names, please.
On 22 November 1963, I was 9 years old, in the 4th grade, at Morningside Elementary School in Salt Lake City, Utah, when news came in that JFK had been gunned down.
The school principal, Dr. John Fitgerald (a sophisticated, articulate, outspoken, liberal-minded, gentle, courageous, eventually-excommunicated LDS advocate for Black civil rights, who also was a very talented violinist), had all the students assemble in the cafeteria where--amid the soft weeping of teachers--he informed us that the President had been shot. We were then dismissed from school.
I walked down the hill to my home, on 2879 East Bonnie Brae Avenue, and came into the house through the back door into the laundry room, where my mother, Lela, was sitting ironing clothes while watching a small black-and-white TV. I said to her, "The president's been shot"; whereupon my mother replied, "Serves him right."
My mother, you see, was a John Bircher extremist. My grandmother, Flora Amussen Benson, wife of Ezra Taft Benson, was also a member of the John Birch Society. ETB was not a John Birch member himself but, nonetheless, a very strong supporter of the Birch Society, who told me that outside of the Mormon Church, the Birch Society was the most effective force in the world fighting the evils of Communism. My father, Mark, was also not a card-carrying member of the JBS, telling me that he was not "a joiner," but that he still supported the Bircher manifesto. ETB's oldest dhild, Reed--my uncle (whose first name I bear as my middle given one)--was a high-ranking Birch Society official who set up the Washington, D.C., office of the JBS. The founder of the Birch Society, Robert Welch (whom my grandfather greatly admired and who subscribed me to Welch's Bircher publications), declared that the Warren Commission (established by president Lyndon B. Johnson to investigate the Kennedy assassination) was created on the orders of the Soviet Communist Party.
Welcome to my little, once-upon-a-time corner of the Mormon-Bircher world.
Two days after Kennedy was killed (that being Sunday, 24 November 1963), the Benson family was sitting in local stake conference. I remember how I didn't want to be in church that day but, instead, wanted (along with the rest of America) to be following what has happening with regard to the tragic murder of the nation's president. But, alas, there I was, stuck in the back of the cultural hall, listening to some irrelevant sermon while my mind was focused elsewhere. Suddenly, the speaker announced from the pulpit that Kennedy's assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been shot and killed by (I later was to find out) Dallas nightclub owner, Jack Ruby. At that point, I really wanted to go home and tune into the news but was forced to remain at church with the rest of the clan.
Years later, in October 1992, when I was working for the "Arizona Republic" newspaper, I went to Richardson (a north Dallas suburb) for my high school reunion and, while there, made a visit to the site of Kennedy's assassination--Dealey Plaza in downtown Dallas (My family had moved to the Dallas area in 1965).
It was late afternoon. I was standing across from Elm Street, looking toward the Texas School Book Depository building where Oswald had built his sniper lair on its sixth floor, and from where he then shot the president to death with a 1940 Italian-made Mannlicher-Carcano rifle with a 4-powered scope (which he had bought via, mail-order, from Chicago). A fleeing Oswald left the rifle with his palm print on it, along with the expended shell casings, at the scene of the crime. (I went up to the sixth floor that day to observe the reconstructed sniper's nest that Oswald had built for himself to carry out his atrocity, as well as to get a sense of the window view of the street below from which Oswald took deadly aim at President Kennedy).
Someone came running across Elm to where I was standing, informing me that former Texas governor, John Connally (who had been riding in the same motorcade limousine that day with JFK and who was seriously wounded), was over at the Texas School Book Depository. I took my video camera, along with my summary volume of the Warren Commission Report, and, along with a friend of mine from Oklahoma who also worked at the "Arizona Republic," quickly made my way over to the building. There was Connally, having exited his black sedan. standing next to a corner of the Depository.
I asked Cønnally if I could ask him a question. He graciously assented, so I asked the governor a question that he had been asked when questioned by the Warren Commission: Had he had been hit by the same bullet that struck the president in the back shoulder, exited out through the front of the president's throat and (according to the Warren Commission Report) proceeded into and through the body of Connally, where it ultimately lodged in Connally's thigh?
In answer to my inquiry, Governor Connally matter-of-factly replied that, no, he had not been struck by the same bullet. Rather, he reiterated to me that he heard what he thought sounded like firecrackers, turned around to see the president grasping at his own throat and then was hit with what Connally insisted was a bullet separate from the round which had struck JFK from the back, in the shoulder, and come out through his throat. (Connally did, however, believe that Oswald had fired all the shots in Dealey Plaza that day).
I thanked the governor, then asked if I could have my picture taken with him. He politely agreed. He also agreed to my request the he sign my personal copy of the Warren Commission's summary volume.
That same day, I also spoke to the ambulance driver who, on 22 November 1963, had helped carry JFK's body-bag-shrouded remains out to the ambulance, which was then driven by Secret Service agents to Love Field (as the Dallas airport was known at the time), and from there flown back to Maryland where the official autopsy was performed at Bethesda Naval Hospital.
The ambulance driver told me that, while he did not actually look directly at the president's body, he was able to feel the back of JFK's head, since he was carrying the president's corpse by the head as it was wrapped in the body bag. He told me that there was no back to the back of JFK's head.
I also spoke with Marilyn Sitzman, the secretary for Abraham Zapruder (the man who took the infamous film footage capturing the killing of Kennedy, including the fatal head shot). Sitzman was at Dealey Plaza helping steady Zapruder as he filmed the motorcade coming down Elm Street toward Stemmons Freeway. I asked her where she heard the assassin's shots coming from. She replied that it was difficult to pinpoint their origination, since Dealey Plaza acoustically had become a canyon-like echo chamber.
I spoke to a few other witnesses and/or photo-takers of the assassination (who, coincidentally for me, had gathered at Dealey Plaza on that day in October 1992 as part of a so-called "conspiracy buff" convention). They all claimed (or at least strongly suggested) that JFK had been murdered by a cabal of assassins along with (or supposedly not involved with) Oswald.
These individuals with whom I spoke included:
--Beverly Oliver, who said she took photographs of the entire assassination sequence that she claimed were quickly confiscated by the government and never returned to her:
--Jean Hill, who insisted that she saw a muzzle flash from a gunman firing at JFK from behind a wooden fence atop the so-called "grassy knoll;" and
--Ed Hoffman, a deaf-mute who (doing sign language through an interpreter combined with rather inarticulate vocalizations), claimed that he had witnessed from the far side of Stemmons Freeway (approximately 300 yards from the "grassy knoll" fence), activity behind that fence which he said involved several co-conspiring assassins engaged in the observable shooting of Kennedy and immediate concealment of the murder weapon, followed by their escape from the scene.
All of these individuals' claims were, to one degree or the other, eventually shown to be self-contradictory, imaginatively enhanced, troublingly inconsistent or otherwise non-credible in critical respects.
Personally speaking as someone who has read a great deal on the conspiracy vs. non-conspiracy arguments per the JFK assassination, I am now of the opinion that Oswald clearly acted (particularly in his short-lived couple of days post-assassination) like a guilty man--and that the preponderance of evidence points to Oswald being the likely lone assassin.
(see Gerald Posner's "Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK," and Vincent Bugliosi's, "Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy")
In a nutshell, below are some basic reasons for my conclusion:
1) Oswald was the only employee of the Texas School Book Depository to flee the scene the day of the assassination.
2) Oswald, now using a revolver, shot to death Dallas police officer J.D. Tippet, who had stopped him because Oswald matched an all-points-bulletin description put out on the assassin's physical profile.
3) Oswald, after gunning down Tippet, ditched his jacket and rapidly took cover in a movie theater, where he was surrounded and captured by pursuing Dallas police officers, but not before he stood up, shouted,"This is it!," and unsuccessfully tried to fire his pistol at the arresting officers.
4) Oswald, according to some conspiracy theorists, never brought a rifle into the Texas School Book Depository building but, instead (so the claim goes), carried curtain rods wrapped in an extended paper bag into the building, supposedly to be measured by a co-worker for Oswald's apartment. However, no curtain rods were discovered in the School Book Depository, although Oswald's rifle, three spent shells and the paper packaging for the rifle were.
5) Oswald, in the months prior to his assassination of JFK, had also attempted to murder (with the same rifle that he later used to kill Kennedy), a right-wing general living in Dallas-- Edwin A. Walker--a bungled attempt which Oswald admitted to his wife, Marina.
6) Oswald admired those whom he regarded as being ahead of their time for having performed what he regarded as notable acts that would live on in the collective memory for 10,000 years. Oswald clearly wanted to be remembered the same way.
_____
What I remember from 22 November 1963 was my Mormon mother telling me that John F. Kennedy's assassination "served him right."
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 07:43AM by steve benson.
The school principal, Dr. John Fitgerald (a sophisticated, articulate, outspoken, liberal-minded, gentle, courageous, eventually-excommunicated LDS advocate for Black civil rights, who also was a very talented violinist), had all the students assemble in the cafeteria where--amid the soft weeping of teachers--he informed us that the President had been shot. We were then dismissed from school.
I walked down the hill to my home, on 2879 East Bonnie Brae Avenue, and came into the house through the back door into the laundry room, where my mother, Lela, was sitting ironing clothes while watching a small black-and-white TV. I said to her, "The president's been shot"; whereupon my mother replied, "Serves him right."
My mother, you see, was a John Bircher extremist. My grandmother, Flora Amussen Benson, wife of Ezra Taft Benson, was also a member of the John Birch Society. ETB was not a John Birch member himself but, nonetheless, a very strong supporter of the Birch Society, who told me that outside of the Mormon Church, the Birch Society was the most effective force in the world fighting the evils of Communism. My father, Mark, was also not a card-carrying member of the JBS, telling me that he was not "a joiner," but that he still supported the Bircher manifesto. ETB's oldest dhild, Reed--my uncle (whose first name I bear as my middle given one)--was a high-ranking Birch Society official who set up the Washington, D.C., office of the JBS. The founder of the Birch Society, Robert Welch (whom my grandfather greatly admired and who subscribed me to Welch's Bircher publications), declared that the Warren Commission (established by president Lyndon B. Johnson to investigate the Kennedy assassination) was created on the orders of the Soviet Communist Party.
Welcome to my little, once-upon-a-time corner of the Mormon-Bircher world.
Two days after Kennedy was killed (that being Sunday, 24 November 1963), the Benson family was sitting in local stake conference. I remember how I didn't want to be in church that day but, instead, wanted (along with the rest of America) to be following what has happening with regard to the tragic murder of the nation's president. But, alas, there I was, stuck in the back of the cultural hall, listening to some irrelevant sermon while my mind was focused elsewhere. Suddenly, the speaker announced from the pulpit that Kennedy's assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been shot and killed by (I later was to find out) Dallas nightclub owner, Jack Ruby. At that point, I really wanted to go home and tune into the news but was forced to remain at church with the rest of the clan.
Years later, in October 1992, when I was working for the "Arizona Republic" newspaper, I went to Richardson (a north Dallas suburb) for my high school reunion and, while there, made a visit to the site of Kennedy's assassination--Dealey Plaza in downtown Dallas (My family had moved to the Dallas area in 1965).
It was late afternoon. I was standing across from Elm Street, looking toward the Texas School Book Depository building where Oswald had built his sniper lair on its sixth floor, and from where he then shot the president to death with a 1940 Italian-made Mannlicher-Carcano rifle with a 4-powered scope (which he had bought via, mail-order, from Chicago). A fleeing Oswald left the rifle with his palm print on it, along with the expended shell casings, at the scene of the crime. (I went up to the sixth floor that day to observe the reconstructed sniper's nest that Oswald had built for himself to carry out his atrocity, as well as to get a sense of the window view of the street below from which Oswald took deadly aim at President Kennedy).
Someone came running across Elm to where I was standing, informing me that former Texas governor, John Connally (who had been riding in the same motorcade limousine that day with JFK and who was seriously wounded), was over at the Texas School Book Depository. I took my video camera, along with my summary volume of the Warren Commission Report, and, along with a friend of mine from Oklahoma who also worked at the "Arizona Republic," quickly made my way over to the building. There was Connally, having exited his black sedan. standing next to a corner of the Depository.
I asked Cønnally if I could ask him a question. He graciously assented, so I asked the governor a question that he had been asked when questioned by the Warren Commission: Had he had been hit by the same bullet that struck the president in the back shoulder, exited out through the front of the president's throat and (according to the Warren Commission Report) proceeded into and through the body of Connally, where it ultimately lodged in Connally's thigh?
In answer to my inquiry, Governor Connally matter-of-factly replied that, no, he had not been struck by the same bullet. Rather, he reiterated to me that he heard what he thought sounded like firecrackers, turned around to see the president grasping at his own throat and then was hit with what Connally insisted was a bullet separate from the round which had struck JFK from the back, in the shoulder, and come out through his throat. (Connally did, however, believe that Oswald had fired all the shots in Dealey Plaza that day).
I thanked the governor, then asked if I could have my picture taken with him. He politely agreed. He also agreed to my request the he sign my personal copy of the Warren Commission's summary volume.
That same day, I also spoke to the ambulance driver who, on 22 November 1963, had helped carry JFK's body-bag-shrouded remains out to the ambulance, which was then driven by Secret Service agents to Love Field (as the Dallas airport was known at the time), and from there flown back to Maryland where the official autopsy was performed at Bethesda Naval Hospital.
The ambulance driver told me that, while he did not actually look directly at the president's body, he was able to feel the back of JFK's head, since he was carrying the president's corpse by the head as it was wrapped in the body bag. He told me that there was no back to the back of JFK's head.
I also spoke with Marilyn Sitzman, the secretary for Abraham Zapruder (the man who took the infamous film footage capturing the killing of Kennedy, including the fatal head shot). Sitzman was at Dealey Plaza helping steady Zapruder as he filmed the motorcade coming down Elm Street toward Stemmons Freeway. I asked her where she heard the assassin's shots coming from. She replied that it was difficult to pinpoint their origination, since Dealey Plaza acoustically had become a canyon-like echo chamber.
I spoke to a few other witnesses and/or photo-takers of the assassination (who, coincidentally for me, had gathered at Dealey Plaza on that day in October 1992 as part of a so-called "conspiracy buff" convention). They all claimed (or at least strongly suggested) that JFK had been murdered by a cabal of assassins along with (or supposedly not involved with) Oswald.
These individuals with whom I spoke included:
--Beverly Oliver, who said she took photographs of the entire assassination sequence that she claimed were quickly confiscated by the government and never returned to her:
--Jean Hill, who insisted that she saw a muzzle flash from a gunman firing at JFK from behind a wooden fence atop the so-called "grassy knoll;" and
--Ed Hoffman, a deaf-mute who (doing sign language through an interpreter combined with rather inarticulate vocalizations), claimed that he had witnessed from the far side of Stemmons Freeway (approximately 300 yards from the "grassy knoll" fence), activity behind that fence which he said involved several co-conspiring assassins engaged in the observable shooting of Kennedy and immediate concealment of the murder weapon, followed by their escape from the scene.
All of these individuals' claims were, to one degree or the other, eventually shown to be self-contradictory, imaginatively enhanced, troublingly inconsistent or otherwise non-credible in critical respects.
Personally speaking as someone who has read a great deal on the conspiracy vs. non-conspiracy arguments per the JFK assassination, I am now of the opinion that Oswald clearly acted (particularly in his short-lived couple of days post-assassination) like a guilty man--and that the preponderance of evidence points to Oswald being the likely lone assassin.
(see Gerald Posner's "Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK," and Vincent Bugliosi's, "Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy")
In a nutshell, below are some basic reasons for my conclusion:
1) Oswald was the only employee of the Texas School Book Depository to flee the scene the day of the assassination.
2) Oswald, now using a revolver, shot to death Dallas police officer J.D. Tippet, who had stopped him because Oswald matched an all-points-bulletin description put out on the assassin's physical profile.
3) Oswald, after gunning down Tippet, ditched his jacket and rapidly took cover in a movie theater, where he was surrounded and captured by pursuing Dallas police officers, but not before he stood up, shouted,"This is it!," and unsuccessfully tried to fire his pistol at the arresting officers.
4) Oswald, according to some conspiracy theorists, never brought a rifle into the Texas School Book Depository building but, instead (so the claim goes), carried curtain rods wrapped in an extended paper bag into the building, supposedly to be measured by a co-worker for Oswald's apartment. However, no curtain rods were discovered in the School Book Depository, although Oswald's rifle, three spent shells and the paper packaging for the rifle were.
5) Oswald, in the months prior to his assassination of JFK, had also attempted to murder (with the same rifle that he later used to kill Kennedy), a right-wing general living in Dallas-- Edwin A. Walker--a bungled attempt which Oswald admitted to his wife, Marina.
6) Oswald admired those whom he regarded as being ahead of their time for having performed what he regarded as notable acts that would live on in the collective memory for 10,000 years. Oswald clearly wanted to be remembered the same way.
_____
What I remember from 22 November 1963 was my Mormon mother telling me that John F. Kennedy's assassination "served him right."
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 07:43AM by steve benson.
I, also, remember the day well. Too well. The assassination by Oswald came shortly after the Massachusetts Young Republican organization had denounced Kennedy for the death of Diem in Vietnam. I was president of my dorm and when I heard of the shooting, before Kennedy was declared dead, purchased a copy of the "Extra" of the Boston Traveler newspaper on Massachusetts Avenue in front of MIT. I still have that paper with the headline of Kennedy being shot ... but not yet dead.
I wholeheartedly agree with your conclusion, Steve, that the killing was the work of one man and not a conspiracy. None of us living will forget that day.
I wholeheartedly agree with your conclusion, Steve, that the killing was the work of one man and not a conspiracy. None of us living will forget that day.
In official medical examinations made of the slain president's body, a neat, small entry wound was found in the top rear of his head as visibly indicated by both the color autopsy photos and their companion black-and-white autopsy drawings, which show the rear scalp of Kennedy's head being held up by an autopsy doctor. Behind that raised scalp flap is a massive, ugly, evacuated hole in Kennedy's skull (as shown in gruesome detail in other autopsy photos), which was caused by the rear-entering round blowing his brains out with enormous force, through the right side of his skull.
That Kenndy's head moved back and to the left in response to the fatal shot is logically explained by the fact that the rear-entering bullet, fired by Oswald, blew out the right side of JFK's skull with significant, propellant-like force. (Check the Zapruder film at the appropriate frame where the kill shot is captured and you will see that JFK's head literally evaporated in a far-flung, fanned-out spray of blood, bone and brain tissue). Kennedy's head was jerked backward from the force of the blast-out from the right side of his head, which was extremely powerful and lethal in every sense of the word.
Moreover, no expended rounds were found in any of the areas from which conspiracy theorists claim additional assassins may have fired (i.e., from behind the wooden picket fence atop the grassy knoll; from beneath an open manhole cover on Elm Street; or from the Dal Tech bullding in a supposed "triangulation of fire"--and from which these supposed additional gunmen would have had to retreat in haste in order to avoid detection and apprehension)
From from Gerald Posner's book, "Case Closed":
"[Eye- and/or ear-witnesses Domingo] Benavides and Virginia and Barbara Davis found four shells that Oswald had emptied from his gun while escaping. These shells were matched, to the exclusion of any other gun, to Oswald's revolver, which he had with him when captured just blocks away.
"Of the recovered shells, two were manufactured by Winchester-Western and two by Remington-Peters. Of the four bullets removed from Tippit during the autopsy, three were Winchester-Western and one was Remington-Peters. That indicated that Oswald likely fired five shots and one missed, leaving an undiscovered Remington-Peters bullet and a Winchester-Western shell. Eddie Kinsley, an ambulance attendant who took Tippit to the hospital, said that upon unloading the body, he kicked a loose bullet, which had evidently struck a button on Tippit's uniform, onto the parking lot. The witnesses disagreed over the number of shots (much the same as at Dealey Plaza). . . . When Oswald was arrested, he had six bullets in his revolver and five loose ones in his pocket. Eight were Winchester-Western and three were Remington-Peters. ('Warren Commission," vol. 3, p. 458)
"Oswald's pistol was a .38 caliber, rechambered, by the company he purchased it from, to handle .38 special ammuntion, a better bullet than .38 regular ammo. However, that presented unique problems to the ballistics experts when they tried to match the four slugs recovered from Tippit's body. According to ballistics expert Joseph Nicol, 'This means that the bullet, instead of touching on all surfaces as it goes down the barrel, actually wobbles a little bit. As a consequence, it is difficult to have it strike the same places every time that it goes through the barrel, so that the match on the projectiles was extremely difficult.' On three of the bullets, the best the experts could conclude that the bullets had the same characteristics as Oswald's revolver, but they could not isolate them only to that gun. However, a fourth bullet had enough unique characteristics that it was matched to his revolver, to the exclusion of all others." ("Cased Closed," p. 279)
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 07:15PM by steve benson.
That Kenndy's head moved back and to the left in response to the fatal shot is logically explained by the fact that the rear-entering bullet, fired by Oswald, blew out the right side of JFK's skull with significant, propellant-like force. (Check the Zapruder film at the appropriate frame where the kill shot is captured and you will see that JFK's head literally evaporated in a far-flung, fanned-out spray of blood, bone and brain tissue). Kennedy's head was jerked backward from the force of the blast-out from the right side of his head, which was extremely powerful and lethal in every sense of the word.
Moreover, no expended rounds were found in any of the areas from which conspiracy theorists claim additional assassins may have fired (i.e., from behind the wooden picket fence atop the grassy knoll; from beneath an open manhole cover on Elm Street; or from the Dal Tech bullding in a supposed "triangulation of fire"--and from which these supposed additional gunmen would have had to retreat in haste in order to avoid detection and apprehension)
From from Gerald Posner's book, "Case Closed":
"[Eye- and/or ear-witnesses Domingo] Benavides and Virginia and Barbara Davis found four shells that Oswald had emptied from his gun while escaping. These shells were matched, to the exclusion of any other gun, to Oswald's revolver, which he had with him when captured just blocks away.
"Of the recovered shells, two were manufactured by Winchester-Western and two by Remington-Peters. Of the four bullets removed from Tippit during the autopsy, three were Winchester-Western and one was Remington-Peters. That indicated that Oswald likely fired five shots and one missed, leaving an undiscovered Remington-Peters bullet and a Winchester-Western shell. Eddie Kinsley, an ambulance attendant who took Tippit to the hospital, said that upon unloading the body, he kicked a loose bullet, which had evidently struck a button on Tippit's uniform, onto the parking lot. The witnesses disagreed over the number of shots (much the same as at Dealey Plaza). . . . When Oswald was arrested, he had six bullets in his revolver and five loose ones in his pocket. Eight were Winchester-Western and three were Remington-Peters. ('Warren Commission," vol. 3, p. 458)
"Oswald's pistol was a .38 caliber, rechambered, by the company he purchased it from, to handle .38 special ammuntion, a better bullet than .38 regular ammo. However, that presented unique problems to the ballistics experts when they tried to match the four slugs recovered from Tippit's body. According to ballistics expert Joseph Nicol, 'This means that the bullet, instead of touching on all surfaces as it goes down the barrel, actually wobbles a little bit. As a consequence, it is difficult to have it strike the same places every time that it goes through the barrel, so that the match on the projectiles was extremely difficult.' On three of the bullets, the best the experts could conclude that the bullets had the same characteristics as Oswald's revolver, but they could not isolate them only to that gun. However, a fourth bullet had enough unique characteristics that it was matched to his revolver, to the exclusion of all others." ("Cased Closed," p. 279)
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 07:15PM by steve benson.
In the years after Kennedy was killed, I finally came to regard as an exotic myth that JFK's assassination was the result of either:
(a) Oswald working with others to effectuate JFK's murder: or
(b) Oswald not being involved at all in the JFK assassination; and that, instead, it was carried about by other individuals and forces not associated with Oswald.
I was wrong in my earlier views that Kennedy was killed at the hands of a conspiratorial plot, based on further awareness and examination of available evidence.
For instance, these JFK death-by-conspiracy theories tend to be unreasonably complicated and empirically irrational. Based on deeper review, I was persuaded that Oswald was,in fact, the lone shooter--particularly as demonstrated by his post-assassination behavior that clearly pointed to him as acting like one would expect a guilty suspect to behave.
I arrived at this conclusion after a good many years looking at several different (and often competing) angles, propositions, theories and assertions. Such is the winding trail of someone willing to examine, in detail, a wide variety of proffered explanations; weigh them as to their respective strengths and weaknesses; and then arrive at a reasoned and informed conclusion.
Historically, there has been a conspiracy-minded inclination on a variety of fronts among certain members of my Benson family on a variety of fronts (particularly as conclusively demonstrated by my grandfather, Ezra Taft, and his Bircher son, Reed). Having thusly acknowledged the non-persuasiveness of the conspiracy case, it nonetheless bears noting that the conspiracy tilt of the American people in regard to their beliefs about Kennedy's murder is not confined to the Mormon portion of the population. A majority of Americans polled still believe that JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy--and most of those Americans are, of course, not Mormon.
Moreover, there are arguably reasonable people who have concluded (although at this point, I think wrongly so), that Kennedy was the victim of a murder conspiracy. Take, for example, the official website of the National Archives, which has summarized the much-disputed findings of the House Select Committee on Assassinations:
"I.A. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.
"I.B. Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.
"I.C. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee was unable to identify the other gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy.
"I.D. Agencies and departments of the U.S. Government performed with varying degrees of competency in the fulfillment of their duties. President John F. Kennedy did not receive adequate protection. A thorough and reliable investigation into the responsibility of Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination was conducted. The investigation into the possibility of conspiracy in the assassination was inadequate. the conclusions of the investigations were arrived at in good faith, but presented in a fashion that was too definitive."
("JFK Assassination Records: Report of the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives," at: http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/)
Robert Blakey--who served as chief counsel and staff director to the House Select Committee on Assassinations from 1977 to 1979--concluded that Kennedy was killed by a group of co-conspiring assassins. According to a Blakey biography, in his role for the Committee, "he led the investigation into the assassination, re-examining the evidence with a new forensics panel." Blakey was no off-the-street, so-called assassination-conspiracy buff. As the biography notes, he "studied at Notre Dame Law School (1957-60), . . . was admitted to the bar of the District of Columbia and worked as a Special Attorney at the Department of Justice in the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section from 1960 to 1964 . . . [and] served as a professor of law and director of the Cornell Institute on Organized Crime at Cornell Law School. . . .
Laying out his reasons for the argument that Kennedy was the victim of a multiple-shooter plot, "Blakey . . . co-author[ed] with Richard Billings . . . 'The Plot to Kill the President' (1981). In the book, Blakey and Billings argue that there was a conspiracy to kill John F. Kennedy. He believes that Lee Harvey Oswald was involved but believes that there was at least one gunman firing from the Grassy Knoll. Blakey came to the conclusion that the Mafia boss, Carlos Marcello, organized the assassination. The book was reissued in paperback in 1993 as "Fatal Hour: The Assassination of President Kennedy by Organized Crime.'
"Carl Oglesby summarized Blakey and Billings' theory as follows:
"(a) Oswald alone did shoot and kill JFK. as the Warren Commission deduced.
"(b) An unknown confederate of Oswald's, however, also shot at the President, firing from the celebrated 'grassy knoll.' This shot missed.
"(c) Apart from the question of the number of assailants in the attack, Oswald acted as the tool of a much larger conspiracy.
"(d) The conspiracy behind Oswald was rooted in organized crime and was specifically provoked by JFK's anti-crime program. Singly or in some combination, prime suspects are Carlos Marcello and Santos Trafficante, godfathers respectively of the New Orleans and Tampa Mafias. Each one had the motive, means, and opportunity to kill JFK."
"[Blakey] also helped draft the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992. In 1993, Gaeton Fonzi published 'The Last Investigation,' a book detailing his research into the assassination. It is considered by many critics as among the best books on the JFK assassination and is currently recognized as an authority on those aspects of the assassination involving anti-Castro Cubans and the intelligence agencies. As Paul Vitello pointed out in the the 'New York Times': 'He (Fonzi) chronicled the near-blanket refusal of government intelligence agencies, especially the CIA., to provide the committee with documents it requested. And he accused committee leaders of folding under pressure--from Congressional budget hawks, political advisers and the intelligence agencies themselves--just as promising new leads were emerging.' . . .
"In the book, Fonzi criticized Blakey for being overly deferential to the CIA. Blakey now accepts that Fonzi was probably right about this. Blakey was shocked in 2003 when declassified CIA documents revealed the full identity of the retired agent who had acted as the committee’s liaison to the agency, George Joannides, who had also overseen a group of anti-Castro Cuban exiles in Dallas in the months before the assassination, when Lee Harvey Oswald was in contact with them.
"Blakey was furious when he discovered this information. He issued a statement where he said: 'I am no longer confident that the Central Intelligence Agency co-operated with the committee. . . . I was not told of Joannides' background with the DRE, a focal point of the investigation. Had I known who he was, he would have been a witness who would have been interrogated under oath by the staff or by the committee. He would never have been acceptable as a point of contact with us to retrieve documents. In fact, I have now learned, as I note above, that Joannides was the point of contact between the Agency and DRE during the period Oswald was in contact with DRE. That the Agency would put a 'material witness' in as a 'filter' between the committee and its quests for documents was a flat out breach of the understanding the committee had with the Agency that it would co-operate with the investigation.'
"In August, 2013, Blakey told the 'Las Vegas Sun': 'They [the CIA] held stuff back from the Warren Commission, they held stuff back from us, they held stuff back from the ARRB. That's three agencies that they were supposed to be fully candid with. And now they're taking the position that some of these documents can't be released even today. Why are they continuing to fight tooth and nail to avoid doing something they'd promised to do?'"
(John Simkin, "The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: G. Robert Blakey," September 1997-August 2013, at: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKblakey.htm)
Im the end (after reading a great deal from multiple and often competing perspectives), I have come to accept that the Warren Commission was correct in identifying Oswald as the lone assassin/shooter of JFK, From information provided above, it should be clear that not all who contend that Kennedy was killed as a result of an alleged conspiracy are simply liars. Some pro-conspiracy researchers may simply be more uninformed than they are prevaricating.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 07:43PM by steve benson.
(a) Oswald working with others to effectuate JFK's murder: or
(b) Oswald not being involved at all in the JFK assassination; and that, instead, it was carried about by other individuals and forces not associated with Oswald.
I was wrong in my earlier views that Kennedy was killed at the hands of a conspiratorial plot, based on further awareness and examination of available evidence.
For instance, these JFK death-by-conspiracy theories tend to be unreasonably complicated and empirically irrational. Based on deeper review, I was persuaded that Oswald was,in fact, the lone shooter--particularly as demonstrated by his post-assassination behavior that clearly pointed to him as acting like one would expect a guilty suspect to behave.
I arrived at this conclusion after a good many years looking at several different (and often competing) angles, propositions, theories and assertions. Such is the winding trail of someone willing to examine, in detail, a wide variety of proffered explanations; weigh them as to their respective strengths and weaknesses; and then arrive at a reasoned and informed conclusion.
Historically, there has been a conspiracy-minded inclination on a variety of fronts among certain members of my Benson family on a variety of fronts (particularly as conclusively demonstrated by my grandfather, Ezra Taft, and his Bircher son, Reed). Having thusly acknowledged the non-persuasiveness of the conspiracy case, it nonetheless bears noting that the conspiracy tilt of the American people in regard to their beliefs about Kennedy's murder is not confined to the Mormon portion of the population. A majority of Americans polled still believe that JFK was killed as a result of a conspiracy--and most of those Americans are, of course, not Mormon.
Moreover, there are arguably reasonable people who have concluded (although at this point, I think wrongly so), that Kennedy was the victim of a murder conspiracy. Take, for example, the official website of the National Archives, which has summarized the much-disputed findings of the House Select Committee on Assassinations:
"I.A. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.
"I.B. Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.
"I.C. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee was unable to identify the other gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy.
"I.D. Agencies and departments of the U.S. Government performed with varying degrees of competency in the fulfillment of their duties. President John F. Kennedy did not receive adequate protection. A thorough and reliable investigation into the responsibility of Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination was conducted. The investigation into the possibility of conspiracy in the assassination was inadequate. the conclusions of the investigations were arrived at in good faith, but presented in a fashion that was too definitive."
("JFK Assassination Records: Report of the Select Committee on Assassinations of the U.S. House of Representatives," at: http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/)
Robert Blakey--who served as chief counsel and staff director to the House Select Committee on Assassinations from 1977 to 1979--concluded that Kennedy was killed by a group of co-conspiring assassins. According to a Blakey biography, in his role for the Committee, "he led the investigation into the assassination, re-examining the evidence with a new forensics panel." Blakey was no off-the-street, so-called assassination-conspiracy buff. As the biography notes, he "studied at Notre Dame Law School (1957-60), . . . was admitted to the bar of the District of Columbia and worked as a Special Attorney at the Department of Justice in the Organized Crime and Racketeering Section from 1960 to 1964 . . . [and] served as a professor of law and director of the Cornell Institute on Organized Crime at Cornell Law School. . . .
Laying out his reasons for the argument that Kennedy was the victim of a multiple-shooter plot, "Blakey . . . co-author[ed] with Richard Billings . . . 'The Plot to Kill the President' (1981). In the book, Blakey and Billings argue that there was a conspiracy to kill John F. Kennedy. He believes that Lee Harvey Oswald was involved but believes that there was at least one gunman firing from the Grassy Knoll. Blakey came to the conclusion that the Mafia boss, Carlos Marcello, organized the assassination. The book was reissued in paperback in 1993 as "Fatal Hour: The Assassination of President Kennedy by Organized Crime.'
"Carl Oglesby summarized Blakey and Billings' theory as follows:
"(a) Oswald alone did shoot and kill JFK. as the Warren Commission deduced.
"(b) An unknown confederate of Oswald's, however, also shot at the President, firing from the celebrated 'grassy knoll.' This shot missed.
"(c) Apart from the question of the number of assailants in the attack, Oswald acted as the tool of a much larger conspiracy.
"(d) The conspiracy behind Oswald was rooted in organized crime and was specifically provoked by JFK's anti-crime program. Singly or in some combination, prime suspects are Carlos Marcello and Santos Trafficante, godfathers respectively of the New Orleans and Tampa Mafias. Each one had the motive, means, and opportunity to kill JFK."
"[Blakey] also helped draft the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992. In 1993, Gaeton Fonzi published 'The Last Investigation,' a book detailing his research into the assassination. It is considered by many critics as among the best books on the JFK assassination and is currently recognized as an authority on those aspects of the assassination involving anti-Castro Cubans and the intelligence agencies. As Paul Vitello pointed out in the the 'New York Times': 'He (Fonzi) chronicled the near-blanket refusal of government intelligence agencies, especially the CIA., to provide the committee with documents it requested. And he accused committee leaders of folding under pressure--from Congressional budget hawks, political advisers and the intelligence agencies themselves--just as promising new leads were emerging.' . . .
"In the book, Fonzi criticized Blakey for being overly deferential to the CIA. Blakey now accepts that Fonzi was probably right about this. Blakey was shocked in 2003 when declassified CIA documents revealed the full identity of the retired agent who had acted as the committee’s liaison to the agency, George Joannides, who had also overseen a group of anti-Castro Cuban exiles in Dallas in the months before the assassination, when Lee Harvey Oswald was in contact with them.
"Blakey was furious when he discovered this information. He issued a statement where he said: 'I am no longer confident that the Central Intelligence Agency co-operated with the committee. . . . I was not told of Joannides' background with the DRE, a focal point of the investigation. Had I known who he was, he would have been a witness who would have been interrogated under oath by the staff or by the committee. He would never have been acceptable as a point of contact with us to retrieve documents. In fact, I have now learned, as I note above, that Joannides was the point of contact between the Agency and DRE during the period Oswald was in contact with DRE. That the Agency would put a 'material witness' in as a 'filter' between the committee and its quests for documents was a flat out breach of the understanding the committee had with the Agency that it would co-operate with the investigation.'
"In August, 2013, Blakey told the 'Las Vegas Sun': 'They [the CIA] held stuff back from the Warren Commission, they held stuff back from us, they held stuff back from the ARRB. That's three agencies that they were supposed to be fully candid with. And now they're taking the position that some of these documents can't be released even today. Why are they continuing to fight tooth and nail to avoid doing something they'd promised to do?'"
(John Simkin, "The Assassination of John F. Kennedy: G. Robert Blakey," September 1997-August 2013, at: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKblakey.htm)
Im the end (after reading a great deal from multiple and often competing perspectives), I have come to accept that the Warren Commission was correct in identifying Oswald as the lone assassin/shooter of JFK, From information provided above, it should be clear that not all who contend that Kennedy was killed as a result of an alleged conspiracy are simply liars. Some pro-conspiracy researchers may simply be more uninformed than they are prevaricating.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 07:43PM by steve benson.
steve benson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> That Kenndy's head moved back and to the left in
> response to the fatal shot is logically explained
> by the fact that the rear-entering bullet, fired
> by Oswald, blew out the right side of JFK's skull
> with significant, propellant-like force.
So the "propellant-like force" as applied at the back of Kennedy's head then moved (propelled) Kennedy's head backwards?
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/propellant
IF / AS it is necessary to create a new term in that instance, in the attempt to explain the issue,"Anti Propellant force" would be far more appropriate than "propellant-like", because pulling objects into motion is NOT very "propellant-like" at all.
A word besides "logically" also needs to be employed in that instance as propel-ing is typically associated with pushing things so that train of thought is much more subjective (convoluted) than logical. Pulling via using projectiles would be an impossible action for any person ( not mentioning any names) who was behind JFK.
> (Check
> the Zapruder film at the appropriate frame where
> the kill shot is captured and you will see that
Yes. Please see the Zapruder film for reference
> JFK's head literally evaporated in a far-flung,
> fanned-out spray of blood, bone and brain tissue).
That simply is NOT accurate.
Far is relative. In a biological sense any time tissue or blood instantly and rapidly (violently) leaves the containment of a victim person's head, then that departure can subjectively be thought of as (too) "far flung" as in too far for that life to continue. In physics, due to conservation of momentum, the far in "far flung" is never farther than the total energy of the collision can facilitate for any subsequent object body involved. i.e. / e.g. although a projectile did cause horrendous and spectacular damage to JFK's head that certainly lead to JFK's demise, by observing physical laws it is just as certain that none of the subsequent fragments of JFK's head landed on the planet Venus. .......AS WELL, by (strictly) observing the laws of physics some other physical realities relative to JFK's assassination should also become BLATANTLY apparent and OBVIOUS.
Quite contrary to that which was initially indicated/asserted by you, Although JFK's head sustained substantial damage and loss of critical tissue that was definitely immediately fatal, the majority of the head remained in basically intact form however broken just as seen in subsequent autopsy photos.
A very small portion of the head was turned into a concentrated mist of very finely divided particulates and liquid droplets on impact, NOT so much vaporized material ( there is a difference), that finely divided material coming from a high pressure impact point as escaping to a lower pressure area was then projected in front of Kennedy, and in the opposite direction that the bullet was traveling. That "back" spray of mist observed in front of Kennedy can be seen/observed in the Zapruder film as the blood halo that appears -as in is visible very briefly in front of Kennedy as he is shot and then disappears -as in is no longer visible just as quickly in the Zapruder photographic film just as the same phenomena can be observed more clearly in other examples of high speed photography of high speed impacts (see the included photo link and video link).
That phenomena is the same thing that creates craters that are (everywhere on solid bodies /planets throughout the universe) visible on the surface of the moon and on the surface of the earth in certain places. The backwards to the projectile motion path crater expulsion material (ejecta) however rapidly moving is always the much smaller /tiny seeming exception in the result of a high speed impact. Please note: any propulsive effect of the ejecta created from the high pressure zone at the impact point will act to move the body of origin in the same direction that the projectile is traveling, and that (actual) propellant effect is much smaller than the total available impact energy exchanged in the collision. The ejecta effect as craters are created from impacts is an interesting phenomena, but it can NOT pull anything anywhere, and the ejecta is NOT pulled from high pressure zone of impact, it is PUSHED out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTgvUc0VCfY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1n-XgNKY2I
As a projectile pierces another object the net movement of all the objects (particles) involved is always complimentary to the direction of the moving projectile. There can be more substantial rebound effects of displaced impact material due to the cratering effect in action as the target object is much much larger and more massive than the projectile making the target object much more resilient to total penetration in order for more massive rebound to occur.
Since the bullet that hit Kennedy's head did completely penetrate the head, the more massive rebound effect would not apply, even though some rebound effect - a relatively tiny amount, is observed as the blood halo in the Zapruder film. Even when the more substantial rebound is in effect, the net movement of the target object is still fundamentally complimentary to the direction motion of the projectile because of conservation of momentum, even if it is difficult /impossible to actually measure and subsequently determine it (as opposed to calculating it which is handily facilitated by the law of conservation of momentum) as in the instance of a meteor hitting a vastly larger planet.
In situations where the containment/container is fragile or easily ruptured /fractured and the contained matter is highly viscous or liquid then the displacement effect of the impact may be more /highly lateral, but the net displacement of effected material still has to favor the direction of the projectile due to conservation of momentum. Swirling vortex effects of aerodynamics may complicate observations in some instances when impacts occur in gaseous atmospheres, but there is still NO pulling effect in action AND conservation of momentum is still in action.
In simple terms: although the back splash from the quirky crater effect may come into play to whatever spectacular and trivial extent, (With out involving some other superior force) It simply is NOT possible to push an object or the bulk of material from a impact shattered object in the opposite direction from which it is impacted /being pushed.
Increasing the energy of the impact my provide more energy for seemingly contrary effects but the final outcome in terms of mass displaced with respect to which direction will always still dramatically /overwhelmingly favor the direction of the projectile.
There is a reason that JFK's head and the bulk of the material ejected from the back of his head moved in a certain direction. That reason is fundamental and it does NOT involving any force of pull or pulling.
Just as previously noted, although JFK's head sustained horrendous damage from a biological standpoint and a substantial loss of tissue that would make biological function completely impossible resulting in certain death, EVEN SO the head was NOT completely converted into much smaller particles/segments and completely removed and displaced.
> Kennedy's head was jerked backward from the force
> of the blast-out from the right side of his head,
> which was extremely powerful and lethal in every
> sense of the word.
that simply is NOT how things work in a high energy impact or any impact. as there described, such action simply is NOT possible. that is saying that Kennedy was struck in the back of the head so aggressively that his head moved backward toward the direction of incoming blow after the blow struck him.
The WCR with is an absolute absurdity and travesty, (so much like the book that the MORmON religion is based on) ( and I have not even gotten into the matter of magic bullets with magic trajectories that also defy the laws of phsysics), just as John Conally so aptly disavowed it.
(It might be asked of LBJ exactly what he saw at the time JFK was shot, which was the floor of board of the car that LBJ was riding in because LBJ was already down in anticipation of the flying bullets from gun shots ...that had yet to be fired )
http://www.coolfunpics.com/bullet-hits-apple/
the collision of a high speed projectile with the base/target object definitely does create a high pressure reaction with in the base object that further causes other reactions.
note: the high speed impact does cause two different dispersion cones which move in opposite directions in reaction to pressure, one on the entry side, and one on the exit side of the object being struck.
note: considering the the entry side dispersion cone and the exit side dispersion cone, which dispersion cone is lead by a ring of finer particulate, faster moving ejected material, as shown by the photo ?
note: which dispersion cone experienced highest peak pressures as it was initiated ?
note: which dispersion cone is lead by a higher velocity finer mist zone? (Hint: it is NOT the exit dispersion cone.)
note: which dispersion cone would generate a resultant propulsive effect, in contrast to directly imparted propulsion caused by the projectile ? In which direction would that propulsive stream push the base object that was struck in the collision? Is it possible for that propulsive force to be greater than the energy of the moving projectile? could that propulsive force ever counteract the momentum of the projectile ?
note: which dispersion cone will move the most material? In which direction?
note: which dispersion cone type is most consistent with the blood halo as observed in the Zapruder film as that halo so abruptly appears (is visible) and disappears (is no longer visible) in front of JFK as JFK is struck by a bullet?
note: which direction will the vast majority of effected material from the impact move in ? with the direction of the projectile path or against it ?
note: Which direction will the base/target object move in reaction to the collision with the projectile? the same direction as the projectile (bullet) path or against it ?
IF a person is unsure, or they say against the direction of the projectile path, then they should perform the experiment over and over until more certainty is achieved. After 50 or 100 or 1000 times a certain very consistent reaction to impacts and collisions should be noted.
I think that I would like to go to Dealey plaza some day to see it in person, then again maybe the heaping doses of officially endorsed and promoted WCR based propaganda would just piss me off more than anything else.
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> That Kenndy's head moved back and to the left in
> response to the fatal shot is logically explained
> by the fact that the rear-entering bullet, fired
> by Oswald, blew out the right side of JFK's skull
> with significant, propellant-like force.
So the "propellant-like force" as applied at the back of Kennedy's head then moved (propelled) Kennedy's head backwards?
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/propellant
IF / AS it is necessary to create a new term in that instance, in the attempt to explain the issue,"Anti Propellant force" would be far more appropriate than "propellant-like", because pulling objects into motion is NOT very "propellant-like" at all.
A word besides "logically" also needs to be employed in that instance as propel-ing is typically associated with pushing things so that train of thought is much more subjective (convoluted) than logical. Pulling via using projectiles would be an impossible action for any person ( not mentioning any names) who was behind JFK.
> (Check
> the Zapruder film at the appropriate frame where
> the kill shot is captured and you will see that
Yes. Please see the Zapruder film for reference
> JFK's head literally evaporated in a far-flung,
> fanned-out spray of blood, bone and brain tissue).
That simply is NOT accurate.
Far is relative. In a biological sense any time tissue or blood instantly and rapidly (violently) leaves the containment of a victim person's head, then that departure can subjectively be thought of as (too) "far flung" as in too far for that life to continue. In physics, due to conservation of momentum, the far in "far flung" is never farther than the total energy of the collision can facilitate for any subsequent object body involved. i.e. / e.g. although a projectile did cause horrendous and spectacular damage to JFK's head that certainly lead to JFK's demise, by observing physical laws it is just as certain that none of the subsequent fragments of JFK's head landed on the planet Venus. .......AS WELL, by (strictly) observing the laws of physics some other physical realities relative to JFK's assassination should also become BLATANTLY apparent and OBVIOUS.
Quite contrary to that which was initially indicated/asserted by you, Although JFK's head sustained substantial damage and loss of critical tissue that was definitely immediately fatal, the majority of the head remained in basically intact form however broken just as seen in subsequent autopsy photos.
A very small portion of the head was turned into a concentrated mist of very finely divided particulates and liquid droplets on impact, NOT so much vaporized material ( there is a difference), that finely divided material coming from a high pressure impact point as escaping to a lower pressure area was then projected in front of Kennedy, and in the opposite direction that the bullet was traveling. That "back" spray of mist observed in front of Kennedy can be seen/observed in the Zapruder film as the blood halo that appears -as in is visible very briefly in front of Kennedy as he is shot and then disappears -as in is no longer visible just as quickly in the Zapruder photographic film just as the same phenomena can be observed more clearly in other examples of high speed photography of high speed impacts (see the included photo link and video link).
That phenomena is the same thing that creates craters that are (everywhere on solid bodies /planets throughout the universe) visible on the surface of the moon and on the surface of the earth in certain places. The backwards to the projectile motion path crater expulsion material (ejecta) however rapidly moving is always the much smaller /tiny seeming exception in the result of a high speed impact. Please note: any propulsive effect of the ejecta created from the high pressure zone at the impact point will act to move the body of origin in the same direction that the projectile is traveling, and that (actual) propellant effect is much smaller than the total available impact energy exchanged in the collision. The ejecta effect as craters are created from impacts is an interesting phenomena, but it can NOT pull anything anywhere, and the ejecta is NOT pulled from high pressure zone of impact, it is PUSHED out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTgvUc0VCfY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q1n-XgNKY2I
As a projectile pierces another object the net movement of all the objects (particles) involved is always complimentary to the direction of the moving projectile. There can be more substantial rebound effects of displaced impact material due to the cratering effect in action as the target object is much much larger and more massive than the projectile making the target object much more resilient to total penetration in order for more massive rebound to occur.
Since the bullet that hit Kennedy's head did completely penetrate the head, the more massive rebound effect would not apply, even though some rebound effect - a relatively tiny amount, is observed as the blood halo in the Zapruder film. Even when the more substantial rebound is in effect, the net movement of the target object is still fundamentally complimentary to the direction motion of the projectile because of conservation of momentum, even if it is difficult /impossible to actually measure and subsequently determine it (as opposed to calculating it which is handily facilitated by the law of conservation of momentum) as in the instance of a meteor hitting a vastly larger planet.
In situations where the containment/container is fragile or easily ruptured /fractured and the contained matter is highly viscous or liquid then the displacement effect of the impact may be more /highly lateral, but the net displacement of effected material still has to favor the direction of the projectile due to conservation of momentum. Swirling vortex effects of aerodynamics may complicate observations in some instances when impacts occur in gaseous atmospheres, but there is still NO pulling effect in action AND conservation of momentum is still in action.
In simple terms: although the back splash from the quirky crater effect may come into play to whatever spectacular and trivial extent, (With out involving some other superior force) It simply is NOT possible to push an object or the bulk of material from a impact shattered object in the opposite direction from which it is impacted /being pushed.
Increasing the energy of the impact my provide more energy for seemingly contrary effects but the final outcome in terms of mass displaced with respect to which direction will always still dramatically /overwhelmingly favor the direction of the projectile.
There is a reason that JFK's head and the bulk of the material ejected from the back of his head moved in a certain direction. That reason is fundamental and it does NOT involving any force of pull or pulling.
Just as previously noted, although JFK's head sustained horrendous damage from a biological standpoint and a substantial loss of tissue that would make biological function completely impossible resulting in certain death, EVEN SO the head was NOT completely converted into much smaller particles/segments and completely removed and displaced.
> Kennedy's head was jerked backward from the force
> of the blast-out from the right side of his head,
> which was extremely powerful and lethal in every
> sense of the word.
that simply is NOT how things work in a high energy impact or any impact. as there described, such action simply is NOT possible. that is saying that Kennedy was struck in the back of the head so aggressively that his head moved backward toward the direction of incoming blow after the blow struck him.
The WCR with is an absolute absurdity and travesty, (so much like the book that the MORmON religion is based on) ( and I have not even gotten into the matter of magic bullets with magic trajectories that also defy the laws of phsysics), just as John Conally so aptly disavowed it.
(It might be asked of LBJ exactly what he saw at the time JFK was shot, which was the floor of board of the car that LBJ was riding in because LBJ was already down in anticipation of the flying bullets from gun shots ...that had yet to be fired )
http://www.coolfunpics.com/bullet-hits-apple/
the collision of a high speed projectile with the base/target object definitely does create a high pressure reaction with in the base object that further causes other reactions.
note: the high speed impact does cause two different dispersion cones which move in opposite directions in reaction to pressure, one on the entry side, and one on the exit side of the object being struck.
note: considering the the entry side dispersion cone and the exit side dispersion cone, which dispersion cone is lead by a ring of finer particulate, faster moving ejected material, as shown by the photo ?
note: which dispersion cone experienced highest peak pressures as it was initiated ?
note: which dispersion cone is lead by a higher velocity finer mist zone? (Hint: it is NOT the exit dispersion cone.)
note: which dispersion cone would generate a resultant propulsive effect, in contrast to directly imparted propulsion caused by the projectile ? In which direction would that propulsive stream push the base object that was struck in the collision? Is it possible for that propulsive force to be greater than the energy of the moving projectile? could that propulsive force ever counteract the momentum of the projectile ?
note: which dispersion cone will move the most material? In which direction?
note: which dispersion cone type is most consistent with the blood halo as observed in the Zapruder film as that halo so abruptly appears (is visible) and disappears (is no longer visible) in front of JFK as JFK is struck by a bullet?
note: which direction will the vast majority of effected material from the impact move in ? with the direction of the projectile path or against it ?
note: Which direction will the base/target object move in reaction to the collision with the projectile? the same direction as the projectile (bullet) path or against it ?
IF a person is unsure, or they say against the direction of the projectile path, then they should perform the experiment over and over until more certainty is achieved. After 50 or 100 or 1000 times a certain very consistent reaction to impacts and collisions should be noted.
I think that I would like to go to Dealey plaza some day to see it in person, then again maybe the heaping doses of officially endorsed and promoted WCR based propaganda would just piss me off more than anything else.
("Ballistics & Forensic Experts on the JFK Head Shot," compiled by Joel Grant,
(For all cited testimony, see; http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/headwnd.htm)
(For all cited testimony, see; http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/headwnd.htm)
I've heard a lot of conspiracy theories about JFK and they all sound like B.S.
My dad was a life-long conservative republican. He always loathed JFK. I'm not sure why. Democrat? Probably. Catholic? I don't know; my mom was a Catholic before they married, but he was agitated at times that my oldest brother married a Catholic and converted.
Ironically, as others have noted above, by today's litmus tests, JFK would have been a Republican: tax cuts, unilateral foreign action, etc. But, as others have noted as well, both parties have shifted dramatically in my lifetime (IMO).
Ironically, as others have noted above, by today's litmus tests, JFK would have been a Republican: tax cuts, unilateral foreign action, etc. But, as others have noted as well, both parties have shifted dramatically in my lifetime (IMO).
Well this is neither the time nor the place to refute the flimsy assertions contained in the Warren report.
I will say that the passage of time has given me a much greater appreciation of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
I will say that the passage of time has given me a much greater appreciation of John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
But no more.
While not perfect. comprehensive or final in all respects or conclusions, it--even if one were to regard it as a preliminary assessment--holds together far better than the myriad of wild conspiracy tales purporting to expose and explain "the truth."
_____
**WARNING: What follows contains graphic imagery: http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100shot5.html
"The JFK 100: The Fifth Shot ('Back and to the Left')
" . . . NOTE: The following article contains graphic images of John F. Kennedy's murder. These images are presented for educational purposes only. No disrespect to the late President is intended.
"One of the most famous and oft-quoted moments of Oliver Stone's 'JFK' occurs as New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) screens the home movie by eyewitness Abraham Zapruder, and describes the shot that fatally struck President John F. Kennedy in the head.
"[GARRISON] (VOICE OVER)
"'The car brakes. The fifth and fatal shot -- frame 313 -- takes Kennedy in the head from the front . . .
"CUT TO the picket fence shooter. We see JFK from his point of view. He fires, and then we see Kennedy in the Zapruder film flying backwards and to his left in a ferocious, conclusive spray of blood and brain tissue. We repeat the shot.
"'[GARRISON] (V. O.)
"'This is the key shot. Watch it again. The President going back to his left. Shot from the front and right. Totally inconsistent with the shot from the Depository. Again -- (repeats) . . . back and to the left. (he repeats it like a mantra) . . . back and to the left . . . back and to the left.'
"One of the most shocking images ever recorded on film, this vision of the life of John F. Kennedy being forever snuffed out frequently drew audible gasps and murmurs from JFK's theatrical audiences.
"Once the shock has passed, Oliver Stone's point is easily made: the President appears to be rocketed back in his seat, seemingly proof that the fatal shot came from in front -- on the grassy knoll, Stone claims.
"Appearances can be deceiving, however; there are numerous problems with Stone's thesis. This article will examine the most important issues one by one.
-"The Double Movement
"The simple fact is that John F. Kennedy's head did not snap 'back and to the left.' What the human eye cannot perceive while viewing the Zapruder film is clearly revealed in a frame-by-frame comparison: that between Zapruder frames 312 and 313, the President's head is propelled forward several inches (2.3 inches, according to one study), before strongly snapping backwards, beginning at frame 313 (the first frame in which the results of the bullet strike become visible).
"This animated image created by researcher Vincent Van demonstrates the forward movement of the President's head with startling clarity.
*"President Kennedy struck from behind at Zapruder frames 312-313
"As one of Oliver Stone's consultants, longtime researcher Robert Groden, notes in his book, The Killing of a President, the forward movement of the President's head can also be seen in the corresponding frames of the film taken by an eyewitness on the other side of Elm Street, Orville Nix.
*"A comparison between the Zapruder and Nix films
"Something has caused the President's head to lurch violently forward between frames 312 and 313 of Abraham Zapruder's film, exposed about one-eighteenth of a second apart. A reasonable hypothesis, under the circumstances, would seem to be that the President was struck in the back of the head by a bullet from the rear.
"If so, what do we make of the violent snap backwards that begins in frame 314, memorialized so vividly by Oliver Stone in JFK? Stone tells us it's proof of a shot from the front, but forensics experts disagree.
-"The Head Snap
"A 1999 documentary, 'The Secret KGB JFK Assassination Files,' brought Robert Groden face to face with several of the most knowledgeable and experienced experts in the field of forensic pathology for a meticulous reconstruction of the assassination in Dealey Plaza. One was Vincent Di Maio, a forensic pathologist for more than forty years and the author of several widely used textbooks, including Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques.
"When Groden raised the possibility that a 'transfer of momentum' from a bullet could be responsible for the sort of violent movement seen in the Zapruder film, Di Maio, without hesitation, said, 'No. That's make-believe. That's [something out of] Arnold Schwarzenegger pictures.'
"This opinion was echoed by Charles S. Petty, the longtime medical examiner of Dallas County, Texas, ranked by his peers as the 'Quintessential Forensic Pathologist,' who served on the Forensic Pathology Panel of the House Select Committee that reinvestigated the JFK assassination in the 1970s, and who testified in the 1986 London Weekend Television mock trial of Lee Harvey Oswald. When questioned at the mock trial by prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, Petty testified that the head snap could not have been due to a shot from the front: 'Because the head is too heavy, there is too much muscular resistance to movement.'
"'So the killings that people see on television and in the movies, which is the only type of killings most people ever see,' asked Bugliosi, 'where the person struck by the bullet very frequently, visibly, and dramatically is propelled backward by the force of the bullets, that's not what actually happens in life when a bullet hits a human being?'
"'No, of course not,' replied Petty.
"Even forensic expert Cyril Wecht, a consultant on Oliver Stone's 'JFK' and long one of the most vociferous critics of the Warren Commission, when asked whether it is a 'matter of physics' that a body will move in the same direction as a bullet that strikes it, testified (in the murder trial of Lyle and Erik Menendez) that 'when you deal with these things on a purely engineering basis, you're forgetting that the human body has movement at joints and you're forgetting that the human body has movement that is controlled voluntarily or even involuntarily by the parasympathetic nervous system. So, you know, that's the problem in trying to deal with something like this from a purely mechanical engineering or physicist standpoint. Some of the [Newtonian] concepts, indeed are applicable and relevant, but you have to then factor in the biological element, the entire neuromuscular system and so on, all of the voluntary and involuntary reflexive aspects of it. . . . Sir [Isaac] Newton and others just never dealt with those things. They dealt with stationary objects moving in a certain fashion when other objects strike them or are struck by a moving object, and that's just a very different situation.'
"Another prominent conspiracy theorist, David Mantik, who has been championed as 'the most qualified student to ever study the death of JFK' by outspoken conspiracy theory advocate James Fetzer, succinctly states, 'I do not believe that a frontal shot, with any reasonable sized rifle or bullet, could produce the observed head snap--too much energy is required.'
"Then what is responsible for the head snap?
"In the LWT mock trial of Oswald, Dr. Petty explained it this way: 'The head snap to the rear, in the view of the panel, was that this was an automatic, involuntary reaction on the part of the President's nerves and muscles. There was a blast inside the head, the nerves were fired off, and the muscles were set into action. The muscles in the back are stronger than the muscles in the front and so therefore the head moved backward.'
"Professor Ken Rahn of the University of Rhode Island affirms the validity of the panel's analysis, and offers this detailed analysis of the head snap:
"'This complex motion can be viewed as containing three components. The first is Mrs. Kennedy's, in which she pulls, no doubt reflexively, away from her husband's exploding head by recoiling backward (while straightening up) and to her left. The second is of Mr. Kennedy's right arm and shoulder, which lift upward as his trunk rotates counterclockwise (leftward) about his hip, while his upper torso is moving backward and to his left. This motion continues until his left arm appears to hit the rear seat in about 319, after which he bounces forward. Third is his head, which moves back steadily from 313 to about 320 or 321 (one or two frames after his torso has begun to move forward), all the while rotating counterclockwise faster than his upper torso, until by about 321 we are given a nearly direct view of the rear of his head, which incidentally shows no evidence of the massive blowout so often claimed from the reports of the Parkland medical personnel. The visible damage is clearly to the right occipitoparietal area of the head, or very roughly in the upper part of the right rear half of the head (just where the autopsy physicians placed it). In no way is the damage centered in the rear of the head [as some conspiracy-oriented researchers claim].'
"'The key point here is that this complex rearward movement is not compatible with a direct hit of a bullet from the right front. The head does not snap backward rapidly the way it snapped forward, even though it was perfectly free to do so. Rather the head starts moving backward slowly and gains momentum over several frames. There is no cloud of brain matter to the rear as there was to the front. There is no damage to the left hemisphere of his brain, as there would have to be with a hit from the right. There is no cone of tiny fragments going from right to left in the brain, and no exit wound on the left side. No, the rearward motion was of JFK's entire upper torso, with the head just moving along with the neck. It is a vicious recoil of sorts from the exploding right side of his head. Such a movement could have been caused by a mechanical recoil from the particles that exploded frontward out of his head (the so-called "jet effect"), by some sort of neurological reaction (sometimes called a "neuromuscular spasm"), or a combination of both. The available data strongly suggest that it was indeed a combination of effects, whose detailed contributions will probably never be known with certainty.'
"Oliver Stone uses the backwards motion of the President's head in the Zapruder film (beginning in frame 314) to argue for an assassin on the grassy knoll. As discussed in the previous section, this argument ignores the forward motion of the head that occurs between frames 312 and 313.
"But putting aside the initial forward motion, is the backwards motion in the Zapruder film evidence of a shot from the knoll?
-"The Trajectory from the Knoll
"'Back and to the left, back and to the left,' intones New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) in JFK.
"But look more closely. The President was not thrust 'back and to the left'; JFK states it more accurately a few seconds earlier: 'This is the key shot. Watch it again. The President going back to his left.'
"Back to his left. This is what the Zapruder film shows . . .
*"A comparison of Z frames 315-318
"Does this [series of frames] make a difference? It does. Had the President been thrust to the left, that is, the left side of the limousine, directly into his wife, Jacqueline, this would not be inconsistent with the trajectory of a shot from the grassy knoll.
"But that's not what happened. JFK lurched forcefully to his left, almost directly backwards in his seat.
"In 1992, author Harrison E. Livingstone became the first conspiracy-oriented author to debunk the myth of the grassy knoll gunman. Livingstone writes:
"'If [the President] had been hit from the Grassy Knoll or stockade fence, it would have taken off the left side of his head and thrown him violently sideways, and not backward as in the film. The left side of his head was not damaged at all.'
"Author and JFK consultant Gus Russo concurs. He stood behind the camera as Oliver Stone filmed the motorcade scene, and has this to say:
"'Standing behind the picket fence, it is . . . apparent that if the shot were from the front, then it couldn't have originated behind the fence: the fence is at a 90 degree angle to Kennedy's head -- tilted 34 degrees left of center when hit -- at the time the President was struck. A virtual broadside hit. Such a shot would not have forced JFK's head forward or backward, but side to side, with the bullet exiting near Kennedy's left ear, hitting Jackie. Of course, none of this happened.'
"Note also that in the frames of the Zapruder film following the head shot, the wound is towards the front right of the President's head, not in the back, as Oliver Stone claims elsewhere in JFK.
"Compare the following images, depicting the approximate trajectory a bullet would take in order to hypothetically cause the rearward movement of the President, and the approximate trajectory a bullet would take from where Oliver Stone places a gunman on the grassy knoll.
*"Approximate trajectory of hypothetical shot from the front
*"Approximate trajectory of hypothetical shot from the front
*"Approximate trajectory from Stone's grassy knoll gunman
*"Approximate trajectory from Stone's grassy knoll gunman
"Harrison Livingstone is not the only conspiracy theorist to acknowledge the disconnect between grassy knoll gunman theories and the 'back and to the left' motion apparent in the Zapruder film.
"Sherry Fiester is the former head of the Forensic Investigative Unit for St. Charles Parish of the Louisiana Sheriff's Department. She is a member of the Association for Crime Scene Reconstruction and 'has testified as an expert in crime scene reconstruction and bloodstain pattern analysis in over 30 judicial districts in the states of Louisiana, Mississippi and Florida.' She believes that a shot struck the President from the front, but acknowledges that the President's wounds rule out the possibility that a shot could have come from his right side.
"Based on the location of the President's wounds, his precise location in Dealey Plaza, and his orientation within the limousine, Fiester created the following diagram. 'The pink area represents possible locations for the shooter of the fatal headshot,' she notes. 'The pink line near the center of the cone represents the location JFK was facing at the time of the shooting.'
"Sherry Fiester's plotted trajectory of a hypothetical shot from the front
"Fiester observes, 'Since the grassy knoll is not positioned within the possible locations of the shooter for the headshot, the fatal headshot could not have originated from behind the picket fence.'
"Gus Russo adds:
"'In Dale Myers's meticulous reconstruction of the event, he asked the computer to draw a line from low in the back of Kennedy's head--where some have erroneously stated a wound existed--to the wound in the right temple area. Giving the front-shooter theorists the benefit of the doubt, and negating all the autopsy X-rays and photos, Myers then followed the line forward to determine where such a shooter had to be located. It turns out that if the shooter were in front of Kennedy, in a line with his wounds and front-to-back axis of movement, the assailant could only be in one place: [thirteen] feet in the air above the southernmost point of the railroad underpass.'
-"'The Cause of the Backward Motion
"The simple truth is that, regardless of the trajectory, a rifle shot alone could not cause anyone to be propelled violently in any direction to the degree President Kennedy is in the Zapruder film; the laws of physics simply do not allow for it.
"Researcher Joel Grant interviewed Duncan MacPherson, a rocket scientist (literally) since the 1950s. Listing some of his credentials, Grant writes that in 1959, MacPherson 'developed a new guidance technique and the equations that were used to guide the Mercury astronauts into orbit on the Atlas launch vehicle. These equations were modified under his supervision to control Gemini and, later, Apollo launches.' In the late 1960s, 'MacPherson branched into Systems Engineering, relating primarily to trajectory dynamics.' Since 1989, 'Mr. MacPherson has been an independent technical consultant to organizations interested in space flight activities.'
"Here is an excerpt from Grant's interview with MacPherson:
"'Q. It is common knowledge that, as captured by Abraham Zapruder, President Kennedy's head and upper torso lurch energetically immediately following the explosion of his head. Could this movement have been caused by the directly transferred momentum of a bullet? That is, can a bullet "push" somebody like that?
"'A. No, and no. The movement of a body due to bullet momentum cannot be greater than the movement of the same body if it was holding the gun that fired the bullet. This is a result of elementary physics and is not disputed by anyone who understands physics. The major frustrating feature of the Kennedy assassination phenomenon is the willingness of people to pretend to talk authoritatively on subjects they know absolutely nothing about, especially things related to firearms. This body recoil is one favorite. . . .
"'Q. If the effects observed on the Zapruder film are not the result of a direct "push" by a bullet, what could account for JFK's movements?
"A. In general, body movement in response to nervous system trauma is a result of contractions in body muscles. This is related to movements of your leg when a doctor raps you on the knee with his little mallet; your leg moves because a nerve induces a muscle contraction, not because it was driven into motion by the force of the tiny rap with the mallet. . . . In addition to this effect, simulations have shown that bullet strikes to the skull that result in blowing out a significant hole upon exit result in skull recoil towards the bullet entry direction. The dynamics of this are a little complicated, but are more related to the pressure inside the skull cavity created by the bullet passage than to effects directly related to the bullet movement. The dynamics of this kind of impact were demonstrated independently in testing by Dr. Luis Alvarez and by Dr. John K. Lattimer, et al. . . . The main aspect of the Kennedy assassination that would surprise most people is how uncontroversial the wound ballistics aspects are among the physicians in the country who are most experienced in gunshot trauma. (I am not one of these, but have talked to several.) It is a sad truth that most autopsy reports are full of errors and inconsistencies which are obvious to any careful review; it shouldn't be like this, but it is. The problems with the Kennedy autopsy do not require a conspiracy to explain, they are more or less business as usual exposed to the glare of careful examination.'
-"Some Final Thoughts
"Gus Russo began his inquiry into the assassination believing that a conspiracy including several gunmen had taken President Kennedy's life. While he still is not convinced that Lee Harvey Oswald acted without guidance or assistance (see his book, Live by the Sword), he learned long ago that the facts preclude a gunman on the grassy knoll.
"Russo writes:
"'When one first stands behind the picket fence, he/she is struck by a number of sensations. First, there is no clear shot at the middle lane of Elm Street [where the limousine was] until the instant of the head shot, allowing for no earlier shots or tracking of the moving target. It turns out that the intended victim is obscured by road signs and a white retaining wall about ten feet in front of the fence.
"'An even more compelling problem was driven home during the filming of JFK. I was fortunate to be able to stand near the camera as this scene was reenacted. With the street crowd added as it appeared on the day of the shooting, it became clear that, insofar as the first two shots are concerned, a grassy knoll shot was also obstructed by the crowd that lined the sidewalk. The assassin would thus [have] had to shoot through the white wall, the road signs, and bystanders to get to the President. If the assassin shot Kennedy in the head, he had to shoot in the first second the car emerged from behind the retaining wall, again past (or through) the heads of spectators.'
"Such a shooter would have been standing only a few yards to the right of Abraham Zapruder and his receptionist, Marilyn Sitzman, who were perched on a pedestal several feet above the ground. When asked by Gus Russo about the possibility that someone was shooting from the knoll area, Sitzman replied, 'That's absurd. I was only a few feet away, and I didn't hear or see anything suspicious.'
In fact, not a single person that day reported seeing anyone fire from the grassy knoll, despite the fact that the stockade fence is only five feet tall. Moreover, such a gunman would have been completely exposed on the sides and in the back, yet eyewitness Lee Bowers, in an elevated railroad tower some yards away, saw no one with a rifle, nor did he see anyone flee the area.'
"In the end, perhaps it is appropriate that the fabled grassy knoll gunman was brought to life in a Hollywood fantasy; certainly, no such individual has any basis in reality."
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 08:23PM by steve benson.
While not perfect. comprehensive or final in all respects or conclusions, it--even if one were to regard it as a preliminary assessment--holds together far better than the myriad of wild conspiracy tales purporting to expose and explain "the truth."
_____
**WARNING: What follows contains graphic imagery: http://www.jfk-online.com/jfk100shot5.html
"The JFK 100: The Fifth Shot ('Back and to the Left')
" . . . NOTE: The following article contains graphic images of John F. Kennedy's murder. These images are presented for educational purposes only. No disrespect to the late President is intended.
"One of the most famous and oft-quoted moments of Oliver Stone's 'JFK' occurs as New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) screens the home movie by eyewitness Abraham Zapruder, and describes the shot that fatally struck President John F. Kennedy in the head.
"[GARRISON] (VOICE OVER)
"'The car brakes. The fifth and fatal shot -- frame 313 -- takes Kennedy in the head from the front . . .
"CUT TO the picket fence shooter. We see JFK from his point of view. He fires, and then we see Kennedy in the Zapruder film flying backwards and to his left in a ferocious, conclusive spray of blood and brain tissue. We repeat the shot.
"'[GARRISON] (V. O.)
"'This is the key shot. Watch it again. The President going back to his left. Shot from the front and right. Totally inconsistent with the shot from the Depository. Again -- (repeats) . . . back and to the left. (he repeats it like a mantra) . . . back and to the left . . . back and to the left.'
"One of the most shocking images ever recorded on film, this vision of the life of John F. Kennedy being forever snuffed out frequently drew audible gasps and murmurs from JFK's theatrical audiences.
"Once the shock has passed, Oliver Stone's point is easily made: the President appears to be rocketed back in his seat, seemingly proof that the fatal shot came from in front -- on the grassy knoll, Stone claims.
"Appearances can be deceiving, however; there are numerous problems with Stone's thesis. This article will examine the most important issues one by one.
-"The Double Movement
"The simple fact is that John F. Kennedy's head did not snap 'back and to the left.' What the human eye cannot perceive while viewing the Zapruder film is clearly revealed in a frame-by-frame comparison: that between Zapruder frames 312 and 313, the President's head is propelled forward several inches (2.3 inches, according to one study), before strongly snapping backwards, beginning at frame 313 (the first frame in which the results of the bullet strike become visible).
"This animated image created by researcher Vincent Van demonstrates the forward movement of the President's head with startling clarity.
*"President Kennedy struck from behind at Zapruder frames 312-313
"As one of Oliver Stone's consultants, longtime researcher Robert Groden, notes in his book, The Killing of a President, the forward movement of the President's head can also be seen in the corresponding frames of the film taken by an eyewitness on the other side of Elm Street, Orville Nix.
*"A comparison between the Zapruder and Nix films
"Something has caused the President's head to lurch violently forward between frames 312 and 313 of Abraham Zapruder's film, exposed about one-eighteenth of a second apart. A reasonable hypothesis, under the circumstances, would seem to be that the President was struck in the back of the head by a bullet from the rear.
"If so, what do we make of the violent snap backwards that begins in frame 314, memorialized so vividly by Oliver Stone in JFK? Stone tells us it's proof of a shot from the front, but forensics experts disagree.
-"The Head Snap
"A 1999 documentary, 'The Secret KGB JFK Assassination Files,' brought Robert Groden face to face with several of the most knowledgeable and experienced experts in the field of forensic pathology for a meticulous reconstruction of the assassination in Dealey Plaza. One was Vincent Di Maio, a forensic pathologist for more than forty years and the author of several widely used textbooks, including Gunshot Wounds: Practical Aspects of Firearms, Ballistics, and Forensic Techniques.
"When Groden raised the possibility that a 'transfer of momentum' from a bullet could be responsible for the sort of violent movement seen in the Zapruder film, Di Maio, without hesitation, said, 'No. That's make-believe. That's [something out of] Arnold Schwarzenegger pictures.'
"This opinion was echoed by Charles S. Petty, the longtime medical examiner of Dallas County, Texas, ranked by his peers as the 'Quintessential Forensic Pathologist,' who served on the Forensic Pathology Panel of the House Select Committee that reinvestigated the JFK assassination in the 1970s, and who testified in the 1986 London Weekend Television mock trial of Lee Harvey Oswald. When questioned at the mock trial by prosecutor Vincent Bugliosi, Petty testified that the head snap could not have been due to a shot from the front: 'Because the head is too heavy, there is too much muscular resistance to movement.'
"'So the killings that people see on television and in the movies, which is the only type of killings most people ever see,' asked Bugliosi, 'where the person struck by the bullet very frequently, visibly, and dramatically is propelled backward by the force of the bullets, that's not what actually happens in life when a bullet hits a human being?'
"'No, of course not,' replied Petty.
"Even forensic expert Cyril Wecht, a consultant on Oliver Stone's 'JFK' and long one of the most vociferous critics of the Warren Commission, when asked whether it is a 'matter of physics' that a body will move in the same direction as a bullet that strikes it, testified (in the murder trial of Lyle and Erik Menendez) that 'when you deal with these things on a purely engineering basis, you're forgetting that the human body has movement at joints and you're forgetting that the human body has movement that is controlled voluntarily or even involuntarily by the parasympathetic nervous system. So, you know, that's the problem in trying to deal with something like this from a purely mechanical engineering or physicist standpoint. Some of the [Newtonian] concepts, indeed are applicable and relevant, but you have to then factor in the biological element, the entire neuromuscular system and so on, all of the voluntary and involuntary reflexive aspects of it. . . . Sir [Isaac] Newton and others just never dealt with those things. They dealt with stationary objects moving in a certain fashion when other objects strike them or are struck by a moving object, and that's just a very different situation.'
"Another prominent conspiracy theorist, David Mantik, who has been championed as 'the most qualified student to ever study the death of JFK' by outspoken conspiracy theory advocate James Fetzer, succinctly states, 'I do not believe that a frontal shot, with any reasonable sized rifle or bullet, could produce the observed head snap--too much energy is required.'
"Then what is responsible for the head snap?
"In the LWT mock trial of Oswald, Dr. Petty explained it this way: 'The head snap to the rear, in the view of the panel, was that this was an automatic, involuntary reaction on the part of the President's nerves and muscles. There was a blast inside the head, the nerves were fired off, and the muscles were set into action. The muscles in the back are stronger than the muscles in the front and so therefore the head moved backward.'
"Professor Ken Rahn of the University of Rhode Island affirms the validity of the panel's analysis, and offers this detailed analysis of the head snap:
"'This complex motion can be viewed as containing three components. The first is Mrs. Kennedy's, in which she pulls, no doubt reflexively, away from her husband's exploding head by recoiling backward (while straightening up) and to her left. The second is of Mr. Kennedy's right arm and shoulder, which lift upward as his trunk rotates counterclockwise (leftward) about his hip, while his upper torso is moving backward and to his left. This motion continues until his left arm appears to hit the rear seat in about 319, after which he bounces forward. Third is his head, which moves back steadily from 313 to about 320 or 321 (one or two frames after his torso has begun to move forward), all the while rotating counterclockwise faster than his upper torso, until by about 321 we are given a nearly direct view of the rear of his head, which incidentally shows no evidence of the massive blowout so often claimed from the reports of the Parkland medical personnel. The visible damage is clearly to the right occipitoparietal area of the head, or very roughly in the upper part of the right rear half of the head (just where the autopsy physicians placed it). In no way is the damage centered in the rear of the head [as some conspiracy-oriented researchers claim].'
"'The key point here is that this complex rearward movement is not compatible with a direct hit of a bullet from the right front. The head does not snap backward rapidly the way it snapped forward, even though it was perfectly free to do so. Rather the head starts moving backward slowly and gains momentum over several frames. There is no cloud of brain matter to the rear as there was to the front. There is no damage to the left hemisphere of his brain, as there would have to be with a hit from the right. There is no cone of tiny fragments going from right to left in the brain, and no exit wound on the left side. No, the rearward motion was of JFK's entire upper torso, with the head just moving along with the neck. It is a vicious recoil of sorts from the exploding right side of his head. Such a movement could have been caused by a mechanical recoil from the particles that exploded frontward out of his head (the so-called "jet effect"), by some sort of neurological reaction (sometimes called a "neuromuscular spasm"), or a combination of both. The available data strongly suggest that it was indeed a combination of effects, whose detailed contributions will probably never be known with certainty.'
"Oliver Stone uses the backwards motion of the President's head in the Zapruder film (beginning in frame 314) to argue for an assassin on the grassy knoll. As discussed in the previous section, this argument ignores the forward motion of the head that occurs between frames 312 and 313.
"But putting aside the initial forward motion, is the backwards motion in the Zapruder film evidence of a shot from the knoll?
-"The Trajectory from the Knoll
"'Back and to the left, back and to the left,' intones New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) in JFK.
"But look more closely. The President was not thrust 'back and to the left'; JFK states it more accurately a few seconds earlier: 'This is the key shot. Watch it again. The President going back to his left.'
"Back to his left. This is what the Zapruder film shows . . .
*"A comparison of Z frames 315-318
"Does this [series of frames] make a difference? It does. Had the President been thrust to the left, that is, the left side of the limousine, directly into his wife, Jacqueline, this would not be inconsistent with the trajectory of a shot from the grassy knoll.
"But that's not what happened. JFK lurched forcefully to his left, almost directly backwards in his seat.
"In 1992, author Harrison E. Livingstone became the first conspiracy-oriented author to debunk the myth of the grassy knoll gunman. Livingstone writes:
"'If [the President] had been hit from the Grassy Knoll or stockade fence, it would have taken off the left side of his head and thrown him violently sideways, and not backward as in the film. The left side of his head was not damaged at all.'
"Author and JFK consultant Gus Russo concurs. He stood behind the camera as Oliver Stone filmed the motorcade scene, and has this to say:
"'Standing behind the picket fence, it is . . . apparent that if the shot were from the front, then it couldn't have originated behind the fence: the fence is at a 90 degree angle to Kennedy's head -- tilted 34 degrees left of center when hit -- at the time the President was struck. A virtual broadside hit. Such a shot would not have forced JFK's head forward or backward, but side to side, with the bullet exiting near Kennedy's left ear, hitting Jackie. Of course, none of this happened.'
"Note also that in the frames of the Zapruder film following the head shot, the wound is towards the front right of the President's head, not in the back, as Oliver Stone claims elsewhere in JFK.
"Compare the following images, depicting the approximate trajectory a bullet would take in order to hypothetically cause the rearward movement of the President, and the approximate trajectory a bullet would take from where Oliver Stone places a gunman on the grassy knoll.
*"Approximate trajectory of hypothetical shot from the front
*"Approximate trajectory of hypothetical shot from the front
*"Approximate trajectory from Stone's grassy knoll gunman
*"Approximate trajectory from Stone's grassy knoll gunman
"Harrison Livingstone is not the only conspiracy theorist to acknowledge the disconnect between grassy knoll gunman theories and the 'back and to the left' motion apparent in the Zapruder film.
"Sherry Fiester is the former head of the Forensic Investigative Unit for St. Charles Parish of the Louisiana Sheriff's Department. She is a member of the Association for Crime Scene Reconstruction and 'has testified as an expert in crime scene reconstruction and bloodstain pattern analysis in over 30 judicial districts in the states of Louisiana, Mississippi and Florida.' She believes that a shot struck the President from the front, but acknowledges that the President's wounds rule out the possibility that a shot could have come from his right side.
"Based on the location of the President's wounds, his precise location in Dealey Plaza, and his orientation within the limousine, Fiester created the following diagram. 'The pink area represents possible locations for the shooter of the fatal headshot,' she notes. 'The pink line near the center of the cone represents the location JFK was facing at the time of the shooting.'
"Sherry Fiester's plotted trajectory of a hypothetical shot from the front
"Fiester observes, 'Since the grassy knoll is not positioned within the possible locations of the shooter for the headshot, the fatal headshot could not have originated from behind the picket fence.'
"Gus Russo adds:
"'In Dale Myers's meticulous reconstruction of the event, he asked the computer to draw a line from low in the back of Kennedy's head--where some have erroneously stated a wound existed--to the wound in the right temple area. Giving the front-shooter theorists the benefit of the doubt, and negating all the autopsy X-rays and photos, Myers then followed the line forward to determine where such a shooter had to be located. It turns out that if the shooter were in front of Kennedy, in a line with his wounds and front-to-back axis of movement, the assailant could only be in one place: [thirteen] feet in the air above the southernmost point of the railroad underpass.'
-"'The Cause of the Backward Motion
"The simple truth is that, regardless of the trajectory, a rifle shot alone could not cause anyone to be propelled violently in any direction to the degree President Kennedy is in the Zapruder film; the laws of physics simply do not allow for it.
"Researcher Joel Grant interviewed Duncan MacPherson, a rocket scientist (literally) since the 1950s. Listing some of his credentials, Grant writes that in 1959, MacPherson 'developed a new guidance technique and the equations that were used to guide the Mercury astronauts into orbit on the Atlas launch vehicle. These equations were modified under his supervision to control Gemini and, later, Apollo launches.' In the late 1960s, 'MacPherson branched into Systems Engineering, relating primarily to trajectory dynamics.' Since 1989, 'Mr. MacPherson has been an independent technical consultant to organizations interested in space flight activities.'
"Here is an excerpt from Grant's interview with MacPherson:
"'Q. It is common knowledge that, as captured by Abraham Zapruder, President Kennedy's head and upper torso lurch energetically immediately following the explosion of his head. Could this movement have been caused by the directly transferred momentum of a bullet? That is, can a bullet "push" somebody like that?
"'A. No, and no. The movement of a body due to bullet momentum cannot be greater than the movement of the same body if it was holding the gun that fired the bullet. This is a result of elementary physics and is not disputed by anyone who understands physics. The major frustrating feature of the Kennedy assassination phenomenon is the willingness of people to pretend to talk authoritatively on subjects they know absolutely nothing about, especially things related to firearms. This body recoil is one favorite. . . .
"'Q. If the effects observed on the Zapruder film are not the result of a direct "push" by a bullet, what could account for JFK's movements?
"A. In general, body movement in response to nervous system trauma is a result of contractions in body muscles. This is related to movements of your leg when a doctor raps you on the knee with his little mallet; your leg moves because a nerve induces a muscle contraction, not because it was driven into motion by the force of the tiny rap with the mallet. . . . In addition to this effect, simulations have shown that bullet strikes to the skull that result in blowing out a significant hole upon exit result in skull recoil towards the bullet entry direction. The dynamics of this are a little complicated, but are more related to the pressure inside the skull cavity created by the bullet passage than to effects directly related to the bullet movement. The dynamics of this kind of impact were demonstrated independently in testing by Dr. Luis Alvarez and by Dr. John K. Lattimer, et al. . . . The main aspect of the Kennedy assassination that would surprise most people is how uncontroversial the wound ballistics aspects are among the physicians in the country who are most experienced in gunshot trauma. (I am not one of these, but have talked to several.) It is a sad truth that most autopsy reports are full of errors and inconsistencies which are obvious to any careful review; it shouldn't be like this, but it is. The problems with the Kennedy autopsy do not require a conspiracy to explain, they are more or less business as usual exposed to the glare of careful examination.'
-"Some Final Thoughts
"Gus Russo began his inquiry into the assassination believing that a conspiracy including several gunmen had taken President Kennedy's life. While he still is not convinced that Lee Harvey Oswald acted without guidance or assistance (see his book, Live by the Sword), he learned long ago that the facts preclude a gunman on the grassy knoll.
"Russo writes:
"'When one first stands behind the picket fence, he/she is struck by a number of sensations. First, there is no clear shot at the middle lane of Elm Street [where the limousine was] until the instant of the head shot, allowing for no earlier shots or tracking of the moving target. It turns out that the intended victim is obscured by road signs and a white retaining wall about ten feet in front of the fence.
"'An even more compelling problem was driven home during the filming of JFK. I was fortunate to be able to stand near the camera as this scene was reenacted. With the street crowd added as it appeared on the day of the shooting, it became clear that, insofar as the first two shots are concerned, a grassy knoll shot was also obstructed by the crowd that lined the sidewalk. The assassin would thus [have] had to shoot through the white wall, the road signs, and bystanders to get to the President. If the assassin shot Kennedy in the head, he had to shoot in the first second the car emerged from behind the retaining wall, again past (or through) the heads of spectators.'
"Such a shooter would have been standing only a few yards to the right of Abraham Zapruder and his receptionist, Marilyn Sitzman, who were perched on a pedestal several feet above the ground. When asked by Gus Russo about the possibility that someone was shooting from the knoll area, Sitzman replied, 'That's absurd. I was only a few feet away, and I didn't hear or see anything suspicious.'
In fact, not a single person that day reported seeing anyone fire from the grassy knoll, despite the fact that the stockade fence is only five feet tall. Moreover, such a gunman would have been completely exposed on the sides and in the back, yet eyewitness Lee Bowers, in an elevated railroad tower some yards away, saw no one with a rifle, nor did he see anyone flee the area.'
"In the end, perhaps it is appropriate that the fabled grassy knoll gunman was brought to life in a Hollywood fantasy; certainly, no such individual has any basis in reality."
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 08:23PM by steve benson.
Many of the conspiracy theories are nutty ie, Oliver Stone's 'everybody did it' for starts. However, there are also plenty of problems with the Warren Commission, Oswald as lone gunman and the magic bullet. Many sane and informed people questioned the official report. LBJ expressed doubts to Cronkite, RFK 's son says he privately thought the Mafia was involved and blamed himself for going after Hoffa, and Connelly said he heard the shot that struck Kennedy in the throat,turned and saw him clutching his throat before he was himself shot.I have read dozens of books on the subject and am inclined to think there was more to it than just Oswald.As you said, this isnt the place and books have been written on this so I am not going to take the time to reiterate all the theories and questions. It would take pages. lol. We will probably never know what happened.
This was meant as a reply to Shummy and not Benson.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 11:14PM by bona dea.
This was meant as a reply to Shummy and not Benson.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 11:14PM by bona dea.
My mom was a "Skousen" MORmON, even IF she did not know it, even as she did not have a clue who Cleon Skousen is /was. I am talking about a woman who was consummately steadfastly faithFOOL to MORmONISM and her MORmON religion ......WHATEVER MORmONISM happened to be as it was presented to her through the channels that she accepted and held to be official. I am talking about a woman who NEVER has paid enough attention to what was really going on in MORmONISM to be able to accurately name at any given time in her life all twelve of the existing MORmON ASSpostHOLES. IN the younger days of her MORmON prime she might have been able to name 6 current MORmON ASSpostHOLES. At present she would be lucky to be able to get 2 correct, and that is with an allowance of 5 years of those mentioned actually still being alive or not.
So her response would very likely include Packer. Regardless of that ignorance, my mom would steadfastly bear testimony that all of the ASSpostHOLES are true representatives of Christ and Christ's restored church on the earth ........whoever the 12 actually are or might be !!!!
My Mom was spoon fed her version of MORmONISM by her MORmON family, which was mostly directed by my MORmON grandfather and then his oldest son which was where the Skousenism came in, even If Skousen's name was not alway's cited as a source. My Male parent was just maintaining MORmON appearances to stay hooked up with his MORmON sweetheart my mom while he also ran for bishop. He was very seriously about those matters however myopic, self serving and STUPID.
Skousen MORmONS LOATHED, HATED and DESPISED JFK. OF course Good MORmONS never admit to actually hating anyone because they are trying so much to be like MORmON Jesus who does not hate anyone. Even so, even as a child I knew that my Mom Despised JFK in her own "we love everyone!! ..... even if we do not like what they do" (totally delusional) MORmON way.
Just as my mom never openly stated / declared that she was glad that JFK was dead, and if pressed on the point she would say that it was sad that he had been killed, she also thought it was a much better outcome politically that JFK had been eliminated.
People that were good were supposed to be able to automatically figure out on their own that Kennedy had been killed because he had OBVIOUSLY been bad enough to tick off God.
That said, IF JFK has regained some grace with MORmONS, it is because MORmONS suck at keeping track of historical things / details which is the very same (dumb bell brainless) trait that does so much to allow them to stay in MORmONISM.
As it turns out, JFK was a person more similar to Joe Smith than not, in comparison to the average guy. JFK wanted to have sex with a lot of women and JFK did have sex with a lot of women, including a 19 year old White house intern who had only been on the job 5 days when JFK managed to nail her.
Of course we did not know that particular detail at the time, but my family was very devoted to the general notion that the Kennedy's were abject filth and completely immoral, and complete enemies to the decency that our MORmON family revered as MORmONS. All of that actually worked in my favor, as far as facilitating my exist from MORmONISM. Bud Scruggs had been Ted Kennedy's campaign manager. In my family, some one working to keep a Kennedy in Government is the next best thing to a some one selling their soul to Satan. When Bud Scruggs was done working for Ted Kennedy, he showed up in Utah. Then Bud went on to become a prominent business figure and advocate of the "Utah" (MORmON) Olympic effort. I could not understand how some one so EVIL could so readily fit in with MORmON schemes. And MORmON leaders actually seemed to revel in Scruggs prominence which was largely based on EVIL (association with the Kennedys)
Given my MORmON background that was Skousen based, even IF I did not know it at the time, Scruggs coziness with the Utah (MORmON) business interests put up some HUGE red flags for me.
Even though I had exited THE ( MORmON) church by then, I knew it was absolute Caca when the Rmoney campaign tried to draw parallels between JFK and Rmoney as religious based outsiders trying to buck the odds in the supposed interest of doing all that was possible to make America better.
I have connected enough dots to know that my families loathing of the Kennedys came from Skousen style MORmONISM. What particularly set off Cleon Skousen against the Kennedys, I do not know. It would be interesting to find out.
One more thing. JFK did not end up with the back of his head missing because a bullet struck him from behind. The missing back of JFK's head as well as the remaining bulk of JFK's head moved in the same direction as the bullet that collided with his head when shattering it. That is (pure raw) physics, not politics nor propaganda like the POS Warren report. ......Connally autographing a copy of the (BS) Warren Report after personally disavowing the Warren report's chief finding/ contention - that is a gem!!!
So her response would very likely include Packer. Regardless of that ignorance, my mom would steadfastly bear testimony that all of the ASSpostHOLES are true representatives of Christ and Christ's restored church on the earth ........whoever the 12 actually are or might be !!!!
My Mom was spoon fed her version of MORmONISM by her MORmON family, which was mostly directed by my MORmON grandfather and then his oldest son which was where the Skousenism came in, even If Skousen's name was not alway's cited as a source. My Male parent was just maintaining MORmON appearances to stay hooked up with his MORmON sweetheart my mom while he also ran for bishop. He was very seriously about those matters however myopic, self serving and STUPID.
Skousen MORmONS LOATHED, HATED and DESPISED JFK. OF course Good MORmONS never admit to actually hating anyone because they are trying so much to be like MORmON Jesus who does not hate anyone. Even so, even as a child I knew that my Mom Despised JFK in her own "we love everyone!! ..... even if we do not like what they do" (totally delusional) MORmON way.
Just as my mom never openly stated / declared that she was glad that JFK was dead, and if pressed on the point she would say that it was sad that he had been killed, she also thought it was a much better outcome politically that JFK had been eliminated.
People that were good were supposed to be able to automatically figure out on their own that Kennedy had been killed because he had OBVIOUSLY been bad enough to tick off God.
That said, IF JFK has regained some grace with MORmONS, it is because MORmONS suck at keeping track of historical things / details which is the very same (dumb bell brainless) trait that does so much to allow them to stay in MORmONISM.
As it turns out, JFK was a person more similar to Joe Smith than not, in comparison to the average guy. JFK wanted to have sex with a lot of women and JFK did have sex with a lot of women, including a 19 year old White house intern who had only been on the job 5 days when JFK managed to nail her.
Of course we did not know that particular detail at the time, but my family was very devoted to the general notion that the Kennedy's were abject filth and completely immoral, and complete enemies to the decency that our MORmON family revered as MORmONS. All of that actually worked in my favor, as far as facilitating my exist from MORmONISM. Bud Scruggs had been Ted Kennedy's campaign manager. In my family, some one working to keep a Kennedy in Government is the next best thing to a some one selling their soul to Satan. When Bud Scruggs was done working for Ted Kennedy, he showed up in Utah. Then Bud went on to become a prominent business figure and advocate of the "Utah" (MORmON) Olympic effort. I could not understand how some one so EVIL could so readily fit in with MORmON schemes. And MORmON leaders actually seemed to revel in Scruggs prominence which was largely based on EVIL (association with the Kennedys)
Given my MORmON background that was Skousen based, even IF I did not know it at the time, Scruggs coziness with the Utah (MORmON) business interests put up some HUGE red flags for me.
Even though I had exited THE ( MORmON) church by then, I knew it was absolute Caca when the Rmoney campaign tried to draw parallels between JFK and Rmoney as religious based outsiders trying to buck the odds in the supposed interest of doing all that was possible to make America better.
I have connected enough dots to know that my families loathing of the Kennedys came from Skousen style MORmONISM. What particularly set off Cleon Skousen against the Kennedys, I do not know. It would be interesting to find out.
One more thing. JFK did not end up with the back of his head missing because a bullet struck him from behind. The missing back of JFK's head as well as the remaining bulk of JFK's head moved in the same direction as the bullet that collided with his head when shattering it. That is (pure raw) physics, not politics nor propaganda like the POS Warren report. ......Connally autographing a copy of the (BS) Warren Report after personally disavowing the Warren report's chief finding/ contention - that is a gem!!!
"(pure raw) physics, not politics nor propaganda like the POS Warren report," is, in point of fact, a POS of its own: -- meaning a "Pile of Sophistry."
See compelling evidence of the actual physics at play, as posted earlier up this thread: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1981065,1981391#msg-1981391
For an accurate assessment of the physics involved in JFK's "head snap" at the moment the bullet impacted his head, I would recommend reading the arguably seminal book on the JFK assassination, "Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy," authored by Vincent Bugliosi [hereafter referred to as VB].
Below is a relevant portion of the book as reviewed in a forum devoted to discussion of the JFK assassination:
"Regarding JFK's head snap to the rear, . . . [VB] is [not] telling the readers . . . that the rear head snap never occurred at all. But that is not what [VB] is saying at all! . . .
"[T]he key words . . . on p. 451 are . . . 'at the moment of the head shot.' . . . For emphasis, [VB] put the word 'apparent' in italics [in reference to the head shot] . . . [T]he reason for emphasizing that word in that particular sentence is because of the continued misconception that people still have to this very day about the movements of JFK's head as seen in the Zapruder Film (at frames 312 and 313). I.E., most people still think that the ONLY discernible movement of President Kennedy's head is a BACK AND TO THE LEFT movement right after the bullet strikes him.
"But, of course, this is not true, as this super-slow-motion [Zapruder film] clip shows. As can easily be seen in the . . . clip (and as was confirmed on CBS-TV via the tests done by the Itek Corporation in 1975 and 1976), JFK's head moves a few inches FORWARD at the critical moment-of-impact frame--Z313.
"Therefore, when [VB] says 'the APPARENT backward snap of the president's head at the moment of the head shot,' he isn't DENYING the existence of the head snap to the rear (quite obviously, since [VB] talks about that rear head movement openly and honestly in various other parts of his book, and Vince talked about the rear head snap a lot in many of his radio interviews in 2007).
"[VB] is merely saying that 'AT THE MOMENT OF THE HEAD SHOT' (i.e., AT Z-FRAME 313), any perceived "backward snap" of Kennedy's head is a false perception on the part of casual viewers of the film. Because JFK's head FIRST moves forward after the bullet strikes him--andonly after the discernible forward movement does his head begin to move toward the rear."
("Debunking DiEugenio, re: Bugliosi," by David Von Pein, "Bugliosi Answers His Critics!--Kennedy Assassination Forum," original emphasis, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwjoxufX6Y7UAhUp3IMKHVflCrYQFggsMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jfkassassinationforum.com%2Findex.php%3Ftopic%3D2712.15%3Bwap2&usg=AFQjCNHHRA6zr6t_fC66bqnsRNnLK0Syhw&sig2=xYzzlm2jtddB6I_n3PyLJQ)
Bugliosi himself explains the cause of the president's rearward head snap:
"You can’t see it by looking at the [Zapruder] film; you have to look at the individual frames . . . . At frame 312, the president’s head is okay. At frame 313, which is 1/18 of a second later, you see the president struck in the head, the explosion to the head. (There are 18.3 frames per second in the Zapruder film.) In frame 313, the President’s head [is] not pushed backwards, which would be consistent with the head snap theory, but it’s pushed slightly forward, 2.3 inches forward, indicating a shot from the rear, where Oswald was. This all-important moment of impact is much more important than what you see on the film: [in frame 313] the president’s head is pushed forward, indicating a shot from the rear. That is very clearly shown in the photo section of 'Reclaiming History.' Also, a high-contrast photo of frame 313 [shows] this terrible spray of blood and tissue all to the front, indicating a shot from the rear.
"The head snap to the rear [was from] nerve damage caused by the bullet entering the President’s brain causing his back muscles to tighten, which in turn caused the head to snap to the rear."
("Why Vincent Bugliosi Is So Sure Oswald Alone Killed JFK: Interview," by Robin Lindley,"History News Network," Columbia College of Arts and Sciences, George Washington University, 9 August 2007, http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVi6N1ShZmfcAIN4PxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTByOHZyb21tBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1495877134/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fhistorynewsnetwork.org%2farticle%2f41490/RK=1/RS=xRRyH3zENY2tbSi3pwBYW4.OoSI-)
Edited 10 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 09:42PM by steve benson.
See compelling evidence of the actual physics at play, as posted earlier up this thread: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1981065,1981391#msg-1981391
For an accurate assessment of the physics involved in JFK's "head snap" at the moment the bullet impacted his head, I would recommend reading the arguably seminal book on the JFK assassination, "Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy," authored by Vincent Bugliosi [hereafter referred to as VB].
Below is a relevant portion of the book as reviewed in a forum devoted to discussion of the JFK assassination:
"Regarding JFK's head snap to the rear, . . . [VB] is [not] telling the readers . . . that the rear head snap never occurred at all. But that is not what [VB] is saying at all! . . .
"[T]he key words . . . on p. 451 are . . . 'at the moment of the head shot.' . . . For emphasis, [VB] put the word 'apparent' in italics [in reference to the head shot] . . . [T]he reason for emphasizing that word in that particular sentence is because of the continued misconception that people still have to this very day about the movements of JFK's head as seen in the Zapruder Film (at frames 312 and 313). I.E., most people still think that the ONLY discernible movement of President Kennedy's head is a BACK AND TO THE LEFT movement right after the bullet strikes him.
"But, of course, this is not true, as this super-slow-motion [Zapruder film] clip shows. As can easily be seen in the . . . clip (and as was confirmed on CBS-TV via the tests done by the Itek Corporation in 1975 and 1976), JFK's head moves a few inches FORWARD at the critical moment-of-impact frame--Z313.
"Therefore, when [VB] says 'the APPARENT backward snap of the president's head at the moment of the head shot,' he isn't DENYING the existence of the head snap to the rear (quite obviously, since [VB] talks about that rear head movement openly and honestly in various other parts of his book, and Vince talked about the rear head snap a lot in many of his radio interviews in 2007).
"[VB] is merely saying that 'AT THE MOMENT OF THE HEAD SHOT' (i.e., AT Z-FRAME 313), any perceived "backward snap" of Kennedy's head is a false perception on the part of casual viewers of the film. Because JFK's head FIRST moves forward after the bullet strikes him--andonly after the discernible forward movement does his head begin to move toward the rear."
("Debunking DiEugenio, re: Bugliosi," by David Von Pein, "Bugliosi Answers His Critics!--Kennedy Assassination Forum," original emphasis, https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwjoxufX6Y7UAhUp3IMKHVflCrYQFggsMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jfkassassinationforum.com%2Findex.php%3Ftopic%3D2712.15%3Bwap2&usg=AFQjCNHHRA6zr6t_fC66bqnsRNnLK0Syhw&sig2=xYzzlm2jtddB6I_n3PyLJQ)
Bugliosi himself explains the cause of the president's rearward head snap:
"You can’t see it by looking at the [Zapruder] film; you have to look at the individual frames . . . . At frame 312, the president’s head is okay. At frame 313, which is 1/18 of a second later, you see the president struck in the head, the explosion to the head. (There are 18.3 frames per second in the Zapruder film.) In frame 313, the President’s head [is] not pushed backwards, which would be consistent with the head snap theory, but it’s pushed slightly forward, 2.3 inches forward, indicating a shot from the rear, where Oswald was. This all-important moment of impact is much more important than what you see on the film: [in frame 313] the president’s head is pushed forward, indicating a shot from the rear. That is very clearly shown in the photo section of 'Reclaiming History.' Also, a high-contrast photo of frame 313 [shows] this terrible spray of blood and tissue all to the front, indicating a shot from the rear.
"The head snap to the rear [was from] nerve damage caused by the bullet entering the President’s brain causing his back muscles to tighten, which in turn caused the head to snap to the rear."
("Why Vincent Bugliosi Is So Sure Oswald Alone Killed JFK: Interview," by Robin Lindley,"History News Network," Columbia College of Arts and Sciences, George Washington University, 9 August 2007, http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVi6N1ShZmfcAIN4PxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTByOHZyb21tBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1495877134/RO=10/RU=http%3a%2f%2fhistorynewsnetwork.org%2farticle%2f41490/RK=1/RS=xRRyH3zENY2tbSi3pwBYW4.OoSI-)
Edited 10 time(s). Last edit at 05/26/2017 09:42PM by steve benson.
steve benson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> "(pure raw) physics, not politics nor propaganda
> like the POS Warren report," is, in point of
> fact, a POS of its own: -- meaning a "Pile of
> Sophistry."
I agree !!!! The WCR is a Pile Of Sophistry. As in a large pile of Sophistry/ *Sophistry* as needed to try to keep the obvious buried and obscured .....an attempt which does NOT work.
and just as you so wonderfully reported, John Conally himself -an actual victim of Oswald's (supposed) instant trajectory changing (magic) bullets, does NOT buy the WCR's (BOGUS ) chief findings /key assertions about what Oswald's (quirky) bullets were determined to be doing on that infamous fabled day.
In few more decades it will be interesting to see which name /terms invoke a higher degree of implied dishonesty and pious phoniness: MORmON or Warren, as in Chief Justice Warren who was really a self made caca head even if he was on the supreme court as in the WCR.
>
> See compelling evidence of the actual physics at
> play, as posted earlier up this thread:
> http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1981065,1981
> 391#msg-1981391
>
>
> For an accurate assessment of the physics
> involved in JFK's "head snap" at the moment the
> bullet impacted his head, I would recommend
> reading the arguably seminal book on the JFK
> assassination, "Reclaiming History: The
> Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,"
> authored by Vincent Bugliosi .
>
> Below is a relevant portion of the book as
> reviewed in a forum devoted to discussion of the
> JFK assassination:
>
> "Regarding JFK's head snap to the rear, . . . is
> telling the readers . . . that the rear head snap
> never occurred at all. But that is not what is
> saying at all! . . .
>
> "he key words . . . on p. 451 are . . . 'at the
> moment of the head shot.' . . . For emphasis, put
> the word 'apparent' in italics . . . he reason
> for emphasizing that word in that particular
> sentence is because of the continued misconception
> that people still have to this very day about the
> movements of JFK's head as seen in the Zapruder
> Film (at frames 312 and 313). I.E., most people
> still think that the ONLY discernible movement of
> President Kennedy's head is a BACK AND TO THE LEFT
> movement right after the bullet strikes him.
>
> "But, of course, this is not true, as this
> super-slow-motion clip shows. As can easily be
> seen in the . . . clip (and as was confirmed on
> CBS-TV via the tests done by the Itek Corporation
> in 1975 and 1976), JFK's head moves a few inches
> FORWARD at the critical moment-of-impact
> frame--Z313.
>
> "Therefore, when says 'the APPARENT backward
> snap of the president's head at the moment of the
> head shot,' he isn't DENYING the existence of the
> head snap to the rear (quite obviously, since
> talks about that rear head movement openly and
> honestly in various other parts of his book, and
> Vince talked about the rear head snap a lot in
> many of his radio interviews in 2007).
Yah, well Doctor Crenshaw told me and many others that it was obvious to him as he attended JFK at Parkland hospital that the back of Kennedy's head was missing as displaced matter from an exit wound from a high speed gun shot wound.
>
> " is merely saying that 'AT THE MOMENT OF THE HEAD
> SHOT' (i.e., AT Z-FRAME 313), any perceived
> "backward snap" of Kennedy's head is a false
> perception on the part of casual viewers of the
> film. Because JFK's head FIRST moves forward after
> the bullet strikes him--andonly after the
> discernible forward movement does his head begin
> to move toward the rear."
>
> ("Debunking DiEugenio, re: Bugliosi," by David Von
> Pein, "Bugliosi Answers His Critics!--Kennedy
> Assassination Forum," original emphasis,
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&so
> urce=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwjoxufX6Y7UAhUp3IMKHVflCrY
> QFggsMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jfkassassinationforu
> m.com%2Findex.php%3Ftopic%3D2712.15%3Bwap2&usg=AFQ
> jCNHHRA6zr6t_fC66bqnsRNnLK0Syhw&sig2=xYzzlm2jtddB6
> I_n3PyLJQ)
>
>
> Bugliosi himself explains the cause of the
> president's rearward head snap:
>
> "You can’t see it by looking at the film; you
> have to look at the individual frames . . . . At
> frame 312, the president’s head is okay. At
> frame 313, which is 1/18 of a second later, you
> see the president struck in the head, the
> explosion to the head. (There are 18.3 frames per
> second in the Zapruder film.) In frame 313, the
> President’s head not pushed backwards, which
> would be consistent with the head snap theory, but
> it’s pushed slightly forward, 2.3 inches
> forward, indicating a shot from the rear, where
> Oswald was. This all-important moment of impact is
> much more important than what you see on the film:
> the president’s head is pushed forward,
> indicating a shot from the rear.
at least in this instance there is proper acknowledgement of how target objects fundamentally react to impacts /collisions from a projectile strike -they end up moving in the same direction as the striking projectile.
> That is very
> clearly shown in the photo section of 'Reclaiming
> History.' Also, a high-contrast photo of frame 313
> this terrible spray of blood and tissue all to
> the front, indicating a shot from the rear.
that terrible spray of blood and tissue as observed in the Zapruder film is actually indicative of the entry side dispersion cone high speed leading ring from a high speed impact. NOT the exit side dispersion cone which is typically a lot less flashy as the exit side merely has the bulk of displaced material exiting the target object as fundamentally motivated /propelled by the projectile.
that said, give your best guess on whether these created holes from impacts (with their adorning extended almost flower like petals ......of solid steel) are on the entry side or the exit side of the flat steel plate target object
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-61d2e5ab189faeb87411527ef088aaec-c
in the following photo the high velocity leading ring of the entry side dispersion cone is visible. http://www.coolfunpics.com/bullet-hits-apple/
> The head snap to the rear nerve damage caused by
> the bullet entering the President’s brain
> causing his back muscles to tighten, which in turn
> caused the head to snap to the rear."111
>
> ("Why Vincent Bugliosi Is So Sure Oswald Alone
> Killed JFK: Interview," by Robin Lindley,"History
> News Network," Columbia College of Arts and
> Sciences, George Washington University, 9 August
> 2007,
> http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVi6N1ShZmfcAIN4
> PxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTByOHZyb21tBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ
> 0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1495877134/RO=10/RU=http
> %3a%2f%2fhistorynewsnetwork.org%2farticle%2f41490/
> RK=1/RS=xRRyH3zENY2tbSi3pwBYW4.OoSI-)
I am flattered that you spent 10 edits in your attempt to respond to me, However, the laws of physics are completely unmoved.
Keep editing your response until you get to the point of realizing that the best thing about POSners lame and crappy assertions are the first three letters of his last name that so aptly describe what POSner and his horrible WCR apologetics composition really are. In the mean time, do not let the magic bullet of WCR clip you if it happens to retake flight.
-------------------------------------------------------
> "(pure raw) physics, not politics nor propaganda
> like the POS Warren report," is, in point of
> fact, a POS of its own: -- meaning a "Pile of
> Sophistry."
I agree !!!! The WCR is a Pile Of Sophistry. As in a large pile of Sophistry/ *Sophistry* as needed to try to keep the obvious buried and obscured .....an attempt which does NOT work.
and just as you so wonderfully reported, John Conally himself -an actual victim of Oswald's (supposed) instant trajectory changing (magic) bullets, does NOT buy the WCR's (BOGUS ) chief findings /key assertions about what Oswald's (quirky) bullets were determined to be doing on that infamous fabled day.
In few more decades it will be interesting to see which name /terms invoke a higher degree of implied dishonesty and pious phoniness: MORmON or Warren, as in Chief Justice Warren who was really a self made caca head even if he was on the supreme court as in the WCR.
>
> See compelling evidence of the actual physics at
> play, as posted earlier up this thread:
> http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1981065,1981
> 391#msg-1981391
>
>
> For an accurate assessment of the physics
> involved in JFK's "head snap" at the moment the
> bullet impacted his head, I would recommend
> reading the arguably seminal book on the JFK
> assassination, "Reclaiming History: The
> Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,"
> authored by Vincent Bugliosi .
>
> Below is a relevant portion of the book as
> reviewed in a forum devoted to discussion of the
> JFK assassination:
>
> "Regarding JFK's head snap to the rear, . . . is
> telling the readers . . . that the rear head snap
> never occurred at all. But that is not what is
> saying at all! . . .
>
> "he key words . . . on p. 451 are . . . 'at the
> moment of the head shot.' . . . For emphasis, put
> the word 'apparent' in italics . . . he reason
> for emphasizing that word in that particular
> sentence is because of the continued misconception
> that people still have to this very day about the
> movements of JFK's head as seen in the Zapruder
> Film (at frames 312 and 313). I.E., most people
> still think that the ONLY discernible movement of
> President Kennedy's head is a BACK AND TO THE LEFT
> movement right after the bullet strikes him.
>
> "But, of course, this is not true, as this
> super-slow-motion clip shows. As can easily be
> seen in the . . . clip (and as was confirmed on
> CBS-TV via the tests done by the Itek Corporation
> in 1975 and 1976), JFK's head moves a few inches
> FORWARD at the critical moment-of-impact
> frame--Z313.
>
> "Therefore, when says 'the APPARENT backward
> snap of the president's head at the moment of the
> head shot,' he isn't DENYING the existence of the
> head snap to the rear (quite obviously, since
> talks about that rear head movement openly and
> honestly in various other parts of his book, and
> Vince talked about the rear head snap a lot in
> many of his radio interviews in 2007).
Yah, well Doctor Crenshaw told me and many others that it was obvious to him as he attended JFK at Parkland hospital that the back of Kennedy's head was missing as displaced matter from an exit wound from a high speed gun shot wound.
>
> " is merely saying that 'AT THE MOMENT OF THE HEAD
> SHOT' (i.e., AT Z-FRAME 313), any perceived
> "backward snap" of Kennedy's head is a false
> perception on the part of casual viewers of the
> film. Because JFK's head FIRST moves forward after
> the bullet strikes him--andonly after the
> discernible forward movement does his head begin
> to move toward the rear."
>
> ("Debunking DiEugenio, re: Bugliosi," by David Von
> Pein, "Bugliosi Answers His Critics!--Kennedy
> Assassination Forum," original emphasis,
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&so
> urce=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwjoxufX6Y7UAhUp3IMKHVflCrY
> QFggsMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.jfkassassinationforu
> m.com%2Findex.php%3Ftopic%3D2712.15%3Bwap2&usg=AFQ
> jCNHHRA6zr6t_fC66bqnsRNnLK0Syhw&sig2=xYzzlm2jtddB6
> I_n3PyLJQ)
>
>
> Bugliosi himself explains the cause of the
> president's rearward head snap:
>
> "You can’t see it by looking at the film; you
> have to look at the individual frames . . . . At
> frame 312, the president’s head is okay. At
> frame 313, which is 1/18 of a second later, you
> see the president struck in the head, the
> explosion to the head. (There are 18.3 frames per
> second in the Zapruder film.) In frame 313, the
> President’s head not pushed backwards, which
> would be consistent with the head snap theory, but
> it’s pushed slightly forward, 2.3 inches
> forward, indicating a shot from the rear, where
> Oswald was. This all-important moment of impact is
> much more important than what you see on the film:
> the president’s head is pushed forward,
> indicating a shot from the rear.
at least in this instance there is proper acknowledgement of how target objects fundamentally react to impacts /collisions from a projectile strike -they end up moving in the same direction as the striking projectile.
> That is very
> clearly shown in the photo section of 'Reclaiming
> History.' Also, a high-contrast photo of frame 313
> this terrible spray of blood and tissue all to
> the front, indicating a shot from the rear.
that terrible spray of blood and tissue as observed in the Zapruder film is actually indicative of the entry side dispersion cone high speed leading ring from a high speed impact. NOT the exit side dispersion cone which is typically a lot less flashy as the exit side merely has the bulk of displaced material exiting the target object as fundamentally motivated /propelled by the projectile.
that said, give your best guess on whether these created holes from impacts (with their adorning extended almost flower like petals ......of solid steel) are on the entry side or the exit side of the flat steel plate target object
https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-61d2e5ab189faeb87411527ef088aaec-c
in the following photo the high velocity leading ring of the entry side dispersion cone is visible. http://www.coolfunpics.com/bullet-hits-apple/
> The head snap to the rear nerve damage caused by
> the bullet entering the President’s brain
> causing his back muscles to tighten, which in turn
> caused the head to snap to the rear."111
>
> ("Why Vincent Bugliosi Is So Sure Oswald Alone
> Killed JFK: Interview," by Robin Lindley,"History
> News Network," Columbia College of Arts and
> Sciences, George Washington University, 9 August
> 2007,
> http://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0LEVi6N1ShZmfcAIN4
> PxQt.;_ylu=X3oDMTByOHZyb21tBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMxBHZ
> 0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--/RV=2/RE=1495877134/RO=10/RU=http
> %3a%2f%2fhistorynewsnetwork.org%2farticle%2f41490/
> RK=1/RS=xRRyH3zENY2tbSi3pwBYW4.OoSI-)
I am flattered that you spent 10 edits in your attempt to respond to me, However, the laws of physics are completely unmoved.
Keep editing your response until you get to the point of realizing that the best thing about POSners lame and crappy assertions are the first three letters of his last name that so aptly describe what POSner and his horrible WCR apologetics composition really are. In the mean time, do not let the magic bullet of WCR clip you if it happens to retake flight.
Plus, in addition to the questions of movements, review a boatload of other critical applicable facts relating to Oswald, link to his rifle, the bullet fragments, the wounds, the sequence of events--topics that that you seem not to have encountered before, at least not in any comprehensive way.
This is your lucky day. Enjoy:
"Physics and the Frontal Hit That Never Was"
by Ken Rahn
16 February 2003
http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/Physics_of_head_shot/Physics_of_the_head_shot.html
"From 1994 through 1997 I spent a lot of time trying to quantitatively understand JFK's double response to the fatal head shot, the original topic that drew me into the JFK assassination. By 'double response,' I mean the quick forward snap (that is now conveniently ignored by most writers) and the longer, slower rearward lurch, the only movement seen when the Zapruder film is viewed at full speed. My goal was to see which of these movements was compatible with the Mannlicher-Carcano bullet that hit the rear of JFK's head, exited in pieces from the front right side, and then went on to hit the windshield and possibly also fly over the top and hit James Tague or the curb near him.
"I was struck by the fact that this problem could be approached, at least in principle, by combining the basic physics of colliding bodies with some principles of wound ballistics. I was also surprised that no one seemed to have done this either qualitatively or quantitatively. I began simply, with the forward snap, and learned quickly that its speed was fully compatible with the Carcano bullet and reasonable exit velocities. I then combined the rearward motion, the real goal of the work, with the forward snap and learned that the former was also compatible with the known hit. In the process, I generated seven simulations, each of increasing complexity, separately for translational (linear) and rotational (angular) motions, for 14 simulations in all. I ended by adding an eighth simulation for angular motion and a treatment of some of the major errors that could render some of my conclusions suspect.
"Along the way, I tried to present a summary of this work at two JFK conferences, COPA in 1997 and Lancer in 1998. COPA toyed with the paper and then declined it because I refused to tell them precisely what my conclusions were going to be. (I followed standard scientific practice and submitted an abstract of the type they requested, but no more. This smacked of censorship to me, and was an eye-opening experience.) I then submitted a similar abstract to JFK Lancer's meeting in Dallas. Their program chairman George Michael Evica effectively pocket-vetoed that abstract by refusing to act one way or the other on it until it was too late. That was another eye-opening experience. The two experiences jointly showed that the JFK community was not interested in serious discussion of the possibility that the prime piece of evidence for conspiracy, JFK's rearward lurch, might actually have been a physical effect of a shot from the rear. Talk about being closed-minded!
"In 1997 I had to put this work aside and turn to other things. Only in November 2002, five years later, did I find myself with enough time to begin to prepare an Internet version of it. I have greatly expanded it, and am posting it in detail so that others may judge the data, calculations, reasoning, and conclusions as fairly as possible. Rational comments are always appreciated, particularly on points that appear weak. I can be reached at krahn@uri.edu or kenrahn@kenrahn.com .
"This monograph addresses four basic questions:
-"Can the forward snap be accounted for by a rearward shot from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle? Answer: Yes, with ease.
-"Can the initial rearward lurch of head and body be accounted for by a rearward shot from the same rifle? Answer: Yes, with ease.
-"Must a rearward shot from this rifle have created a rearward lurch similar to that observed? Answer: Yes, provided only that a cloud of brain matter was thrown forward.
"-Can a shot from the grassy knoll explain or contribute to the rearward lurch? Answers: No; qualified yes.
"The answers effectively debunk the notion of a frontal hit and thereby remove the major piece of evidence for conspiracy in the JFK assassination.
"The questions are addressed by the 39 chapters of the monograph shown below [NOTE: Go to the website, where there are direct links to the categories that follow]..
"Abstract
"Setting the stage
1. Introduction
2. The Zapruder film: movements to be explained
3. The physics of colliding and exploding objects
4. Wound ballistics and physics
5. Variables and values
"Question 1: Can the forward snap be explained by a shot from Oswald's rifle?
6. The forward snap—linear calculations
7. The forward snap—angular calculations
"Question 2: Can the rearward lurch by explained by a shot from Oswald's rifle?
8. Plausibility analysis of the rearward lurch
9. Lurch 1 Linear—simplest analysis, with bullet, body, and cloud
10. Lurch 2 Linear—adds large fragments
11. Lurch 3 Linear—adds conical 3-D motion of cloud
12. Lurch 4 Linear—adds 3-D motion of large fragments
13. Lurch 5 Linear—adds 3-D motion of body
14. Snap/Lurch 6 Linear—adds four time intervals and solves for vcloud
15. Snap/Lurch 7 Linear—adds four time intervals, sets vcloud, and solves for PE
16. Lurch 1 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 1 Linear
17. Lurch 2 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 2 Linear
18. Lurch 3 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 3 Linear
19. Lurch 4 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 4 Linear
20. Lurch 5 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 5 Linear
21. Snap/Lurch 6 Angular—rotational analog of Snap/Lurch 6 Linear
22. Snap/Lurch 7 Angular—rotational analog of Snap/Lurch 7 Linear
23. Summary of solutions and most important variables
"Question 3: Must the rearward lurch be explained by a shot from Oswald's rifle?
24. Introduction to the built-in constraints
25. Preconstraining with mhead, dsnap, tlurch, and vfrags
26. Constraints on Θcl and PE
27. Constraints on mcloud and vcloud from Θcl vs. mcloud
28. Constraints on mcloud and vcloud from Θcl vs. PE
29. Constraints on mcloud and vcloud from mcloud vs. vcloud
30. Grand summary of constraints
"Question 4: Can the rearward lurch be explained or contributed to by a frontal shot?
31. Introduction to a frontal hit
32. Scenario 1—no cloud or large fragments
33. Scenario 2—cloud and fragments as observed
34. Scenario 3—frontal hit right after rear hit
35. Scenario 4—rear hit provides only snap
36. Summary of the frontal scenarios
"Synopsis
37. The unification of the physical evidence provided by these calculations
38. Objections and replies
39. Future work
"Acknowledgments"
_____
If you didn't' have either the have time or the interest to plow through the physics, then I'll help you cut to the chase: i.e., I'll acquaint you with the Synopsis. You can always go back later and read the fill-in-your-blanks with the pertinent facts:
"37. The Unification of Physical Evidence Provided by These Calculations
"The physical evidence in the JFK case now speaks with one voice. It provides an extremely strong framework inside which the assassination must be interpreted. Here is its essence.
"The Movements
"The quick forward snap came from a shot from the rear.
"The initial rapid rearward lurch also came from a shot from the rear.
"Neither the forward snap nor the bulk of the lurch could have come from a frontal shot.
"The forward-moving diffuse cloud and large fragments also came from that shot from the rear.
"Thus the Zapruder film provides no positive evidence for a second shooter, and all but disallows one. One bullet from the rear created all the motions.
"The Fragments
"One bullet also explains all the fragments from the head shot (in head, on rear carpet, and in front seat).
"That bullet differed chemically from the bullet of the body shot (Connally's wrist; Parkland stretcher).
"The two large fragments from the head shot came from Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other rifles.
"The stretcher bullet (CE 399) also came from Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other rifles.
"Thus every fragment and every motion came solely from two bullets from Oswald's rifle.
"The Rifle
"Oswald owned and possessed that rifle at the time of the assassination.
"He was earlier photographed holding the same rifle.
"His fingerprints were found on the rifle and the shipping cartons that were used as a gun rest.
"No one else has been linked to the rifle or the shooting in any physical way.
"The Wounds
"There were two sets of wounds in Kennedy's body and one set in Connally.
"No bullet was found in either man's body.
"Only two bullets were found externally, both shot from Oswald's rifle at the rear.
"Only two chemical compositions of the fragments were found, which grouped with the two bullets.
"Thus the two bullets explain all the wounds to both men, and indicate that they had been properly aligned for a double-body hit.
"The Link to Oswald
"Both the bullets found had come from Oswald's rifle.
"Oswald was in the building at the time (by his own admission to a reporter, as documented in 'The Men Who Killed Kennedy, Reel 4, 'The Patsy').
"Empty shells from his rifle were found at the window through which the rifle was shot.
"Oswald left the building abruptly after the shooting, returned to his rooming house, got his pistol, and shortly thereafter used it to kill Officer J. D. Tippit in cold blood.
"He fled the scene, hid in the Texas Theater, and tried to kill again as he was being arrested.
"All this evidence sums up to two bullets from Oswald's rifle explaining everything. Two questions remain, whether he was the shooter and whether he had help.
"The first can only be answered probabilistically, for there is no direct hard evidence that he was the shooter. But the tight web of circumstantial evidence provides a probability of >99%, and probably more like 99.9%. It is not certain, however, and will probably never be certain.
"The second question, concerning help, has been debated for nearly 40 years. It has been investigated endlessly, without yielding anything definitive. Right now we can say that the shooter did not need help and appears not to have received any. Three shots. One missed everything, one hit the back instead of the head, and the last came within an inch or so of missing the head. But they did the job, and then the guy tried to run away.
"The Critical Sequence of Events
"The evidence listed above produces the fir following series of events:
"A shot from Oswald's rifle passed though both men's bodies, probably around Z-224. It left fragments in Connally's wrist and was later retrieved as CE 399.
"A second shot from Oswald's rifle hit in the right rear of Kennedy's head. It took about 0.4 milliseconds to pass through. During this time the bullet snapped the head forward, probably by at least 2 inches or so.
"The bullet first drilled a small hole in the rear of the skull. At that point it deformed, and may have broken into two or three large fragments.
"As the bullet was passing through the brain and depositing energy there, brain matter briefly passed rearward out the entrance wound (backspatter).
"The bullet or major fragments then broke though the right front side of the skull, creating an exit wound and possibly further fragmenting.
"The act of creating the exit wound weakened or fractured the nearby skull and prepared it for the coming explosion.
"The momentum of the exiting fragments forced brain matter through the exit wound right after the fragments.
"The two large fragments exited with nearly the same trajectories and went on to hit the windshield and chrome strip and bounce back into the front seat.
"Meanwhile, the brain matter pushed radially outward by the tunneling bullet continued toward the walls of the cranium. A "temporary cavity" formed and oscillated in size for several milliseconds. At some point, probably the first maximum, the high pressure exploded the cranium and formed the large wound at the right side and top of the head.
"The explosion hurled large pieces of skull upward and forward. They were followed by large amounts of brain matter in the same general direction. The largest such piece, the Harper fragment, exited rapidly (313), slowed down as it rose (313), reached an apex (314), and then began to fall (315). A second shower of fragments exited at a lower angle, but also forward. A broad, diffuse cloud of smaller fragments existed from at least 313 to 315.
"The exiting brain matter covered the limousine and passengers in front of Kennedy. The forward momentum given to it by the explosion was balanced by rearward momentum given to the body. This momentum accelerated the body rearward to a speed of about 0.8 feet per second (at the top of the head). This ended the mechanical phase of the head shot.
"The body continued to accelerate rearward during the next few frames, but at a much smaller rate. The cause could not have been a continuing recoil from the rear shot or any effect of a frontal shot. The only reasonable remaining possibility is a reflexive stiffening of the back muscles.
"Kennedy then bounced off the rear seat and fell forward toward his wife.
"Oswald hurriedly left the building, went to his rooming house and picked up his pistol, killed Officer J.D. Tippit in cold blood, and then tried to kill again in the Texas Theater.
"This simple scenario is now complete for all practical purposes. Two shots from Oswald's rifle did everything at Dealey Plaza; four shots from Oswald's pistol on the street in Oak Cliff. No help was needed or allowed by the physical evidence. There is no any physical evidence that any was given. This is now the documented story of the Dallas assassinations. Anything more has remained speculation for nearly 40 years."
_____.
That's it, "Smirk."
Wipe the smirk off your face, re-read and absorb.
There will be a test.
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2017 04:58AM by steve benson.
This is your lucky day. Enjoy:
"Physics and the Frontal Hit That Never Was"
by Ken Rahn
16 February 2003
http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/Physics_of_head_shot/Physics_of_the_head_shot.html
"From 1994 through 1997 I spent a lot of time trying to quantitatively understand JFK's double response to the fatal head shot, the original topic that drew me into the JFK assassination. By 'double response,' I mean the quick forward snap (that is now conveniently ignored by most writers) and the longer, slower rearward lurch, the only movement seen when the Zapruder film is viewed at full speed. My goal was to see which of these movements was compatible with the Mannlicher-Carcano bullet that hit the rear of JFK's head, exited in pieces from the front right side, and then went on to hit the windshield and possibly also fly over the top and hit James Tague or the curb near him.
"I was struck by the fact that this problem could be approached, at least in principle, by combining the basic physics of colliding bodies with some principles of wound ballistics. I was also surprised that no one seemed to have done this either qualitatively or quantitatively. I began simply, with the forward snap, and learned quickly that its speed was fully compatible with the Carcano bullet and reasonable exit velocities. I then combined the rearward motion, the real goal of the work, with the forward snap and learned that the former was also compatible with the known hit. In the process, I generated seven simulations, each of increasing complexity, separately for translational (linear) and rotational (angular) motions, for 14 simulations in all. I ended by adding an eighth simulation for angular motion and a treatment of some of the major errors that could render some of my conclusions suspect.
"Along the way, I tried to present a summary of this work at two JFK conferences, COPA in 1997 and Lancer in 1998. COPA toyed with the paper and then declined it because I refused to tell them precisely what my conclusions were going to be. (I followed standard scientific practice and submitted an abstract of the type they requested, but no more. This smacked of censorship to me, and was an eye-opening experience.) I then submitted a similar abstract to JFK Lancer's meeting in Dallas. Their program chairman George Michael Evica effectively pocket-vetoed that abstract by refusing to act one way or the other on it until it was too late. That was another eye-opening experience. The two experiences jointly showed that the JFK community was not interested in serious discussion of the possibility that the prime piece of evidence for conspiracy, JFK's rearward lurch, might actually have been a physical effect of a shot from the rear. Talk about being closed-minded!
"In 1997 I had to put this work aside and turn to other things. Only in November 2002, five years later, did I find myself with enough time to begin to prepare an Internet version of it. I have greatly expanded it, and am posting it in detail so that others may judge the data, calculations, reasoning, and conclusions as fairly as possible. Rational comments are always appreciated, particularly on points that appear weak. I can be reached at krahn@uri.edu or kenrahn@kenrahn.com .
"This monograph addresses four basic questions:
-"Can the forward snap be accounted for by a rearward shot from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle? Answer: Yes, with ease.
-"Can the initial rearward lurch of head and body be accounted for by a rearward shot from the same rifle? Answer: Yes, with ease.
-"Must a rearward shot from this rifle have created a rearward lurch similar to that observed? Answer: Yes, provided only that a cloud of brain matter was thrown forward.
"-Can a shot from the grassy knoll explain or contribute to the rearward lurch? Answers: No; qualified yes.
"The answers effectively debunk the notion of a frontal hit and thereby remove the major piece of evidence for conspiracy in the JFK assassination.
"The questions are addressed by the 39 chapters of the monograph shown below [NOTE: Go to the website, where there are direct links to the categories that follow]..
"Abstract
"Setting the stage
1. Introduction
2. The Zapruder film: movements to be explained
3. The physics of colliding and exploding objects
4. Wound ballistics and physics
5. Variables and values
"Question 1: Can the forward snap be explained by a shot from Oswald's rifle?
6. The forward snap—linear calculations
7. The forward snap—angular calculations
"Question 2: Can the rearward lurch by explained by a shot from Oswald's rifle?
8. Plausibility analysis of the rearward lurch
9. Lurch 1 Linear—simplest analysis, with bullet, body, and cloud
10. Lurch 2 Linear—adds large fragments
11. Lurch 3 Linear—adds conical 3-D motion of cloud
12. Lurch 4 Linear—adds 3-D motion of large fragments
13. Lurch 5 Linear—adds 3-D motion of body
14. Snap/Lurch 6 Linear—adds four time intervals and solves for vcloud
15. Snap/Lurch 7 Linear—adds four time intervals, sets vcloud, and solves for PE
16. Lurch 1 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 1 Linear
17. Lurch 2 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 2 Linear
18. Lurch 3 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 3 Linear
19. Lurch 4 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 4 Linear
20. Lurch 5 Angular—rotational analog of Lurch 5 Linear
21. Snap/Lurch 6 Angular—rotational analog of Snap/Lurch 6 Linear
22. Snap/Lurch 7 Angular—rotational analog of Snap/Lurch 7 Linear
23. Summary of solutions and most important variables
"Question 3: Must the rearward lurch be explained by a shot from Oswald's rifle?
24. Introduction to the built-in constraints
25. Preconstraining with mhead, dsnap, tlurch, and vfrags
26. Constraints on Θcl and PE
27. Constraints on mcloud and vcloud from Θcl vs. mcloud
28. Constraints on mcloud and vcloud from Θcl vs. PE
29. Constraints on mcloud and vcloud from mcloud vs. vcloud
30. Grand summary of constraints
"Question 4: Can the rearward lurch be explained or contributed to by a frontal shot?
31. Introduction to a frontal hit
32. Scenario 1—no cloud or large fragments
33. Scenario 2—cloud and fragments as observed
34. Scenario 3—frontal hit right after rear hit
35. Scenario 4—rear hit provides only snap
36. Summary of the frontal scenarios
"Synopsis
37. The unification of the physical evidence provided by these calculations
38. Objections and replies
39. Future work
"Acknowledgments"
_____
If you didn't' have either the have time or the interest to plow through the physics, then I'll help you cut to the chase: i.e., I'll acquaint you with the Synopsis. You can always go back later and read the fill-in-your-blanks with the pertinent facts:
"37. The Unification of Physical Evidence Provided by These Calculations
"The physical evidence in the JFK case now speaks with one voice. It provides an extremely strong framework inside which the assassination must be interpreted. Here is its essence.
"The Movements
"The quick forward snap came from a shot from the rear.
"The initial rapid rearward lurch also came from a shot from the rear.
"Neither the forward snap nor the bulk of the lurch could have come from a frontal shot.
"The forward-moving diffuse cloud and large fragments also came from that shot from the rear.
"Thus the Zapruder film provides no positive evidence for a second shooter, and all but disallows one. One bullet from the rear created all the motions.
"The Fragments
"One bullet also explains all the fragments from the head shot (in head, on rear carpet, and in front seat).
"That bullet differed chemically from the bullet of the body shot (Connally's wrist; Parkland stretcher).
"The two large fragments from the head shot came from Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other rifles.
"The stretcher bullet (CE 399) also came from Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other rifles.
"Thus every fragment and every motion came solely from two bullets from Oswald's rifle.
"The Rifle
"Oswald owned and possessed that rifle at the time of the assassination.
"He was earlier photographed holding the same rifle.
"His fingerprints were found on the rifle and the shipping cartons that were used as a gun rest.
"No one else has been linked to the rifle or the shooting in any physical way.
"The Wounds
"There were two sets of wounds in Kennedy's body and one set in Connally.
"No bullet was found in either man's body.
"Only two bullets were found externally, both shot from Oswald's rifle at the rear.
"Only two chemical compositions of the fragments were found, which grouped with the two bullets.
"Thus the two bullets explain all the wounds to both men, and indicate that they had been properly aligned for a double-body hit.
"The Link to Oswald
"Both the bullets found had come from Oswald's rifle.
"Oswald was in the building at the time (by his own admission to a reporter, as documented in 'The Men Who Killed Kennedy, Reel 4, 'The Patsy').
"Empty shells from his rifle were found at the window through which the rifle was shot.
"Oswald left the building abruptly after the shooting, returned to his rooming house, got his pistol, and shortly thereafter used it to kill Officer J. D. Tippit in cold blood.
"He fled the scene, hid in the Texas Theater, and tried to kill again as he was being arrested.
"All this evidence sums up to two bullets from Oswald's rifle explaining everything. Two questions remain, whether he was the shooter and whether he had help.
"The first can only be answered probabilistically, for there is no direct hard evidence that he was the shooter. But the tight web of circumstantial evidence provides a probability of >99%, and probably more like 99.9%. It is not certain, however, and will probably never be certain.
"The second question, concerning help, has been debated for nearly 40 years. It has been investigated endlessly, without yielding anything definitive. Right now we can say that the shooter did not need help and appears not to have received any. Three shots. One missed everything, one hit the back instead of the head, and the last came within an inch or so of missing the head. But they did the job, and then the guy tried to run away.
"The Critical Sequence of Events
"The evidence listed above produces the fir following series of events:
"A shot from Oswald's rifle passed though both men's bodies, probably around Z-224. It left fragments in Connally's wrist and was later retrieved as CE 399.
"A second shot from Oswald's rifle hit in the right rear of Kennedy's head. It took about 0.4 milliseconds to pass through. During this time the bullet snapped the head forward, probably by at least 2 inches or so.
"The bullet first drilled a small hole in the rear of the skull. At that point it deformed, and may have broken into two or three large fragments.
"As the bullet was passing through the brain and depositing energy there, brain matter briefly passed rearward out the entrance wound (backspatter).
"The bullet or major fragments then broke though the right front side of the skull, creating an exit wound and possibly further fragmenting.
"The act of creating the exit wound weakened or fractured the nearby skull and prepared it for the coming explosion.
"The momentum of the exiting fragments forced brain matter through the exit wound right after the fragments.
"The two large fragments exited with nearly the same trajectories and went on to hit the windshield and chrome strip and bounce back into the front seat.
"Meanwhile, the brain matter pushed radially outward by the tunneling bullet continued toward the walls of the cranium. A "temporary cavity" formed and oscillated in size for several milliseconds. At some point, probably the first maximum, the high pressure exploded the cranium and formed the large wound at the right side and top of the head.
"The explosion hurled large pieces of skull upward and forward. They were followed by large amounts of brain matter in the same general direction. The largest such piece, the Harper fragment, exited rapidly (313), slowed down as it rose (313), reached an apex (314), and then began to fall (315). A second shower of fragments exited at a lower angle, but also forward. A broad, diffuse cloud of smaller fragments existed from at least 313 to 315.
"The exiting brain matter covered the limousine and passengers in front of Kennedy. The forward momentum given to it by the explosion was balanced by rearward momentum given to the body. This momentum accelerated the body rearward to a speed of about 0.8 feet per second (at the top of the head). This ended the mechanical phase of the head shot.
"The body continued to accelerate rearward during the next few frames, but at a much smaller rate. The cause could not have been a continuing recoil from the rear shot or any effect of a frontal shot. The only reasonable remaining possibility is a reflexive stiffening of the back muscles.
"Kennedy then bounced off the rear seat and fell forward toward his wife.
"Oswald hurriedly left the building, went to his rooming house and picked up his pistol, killed Officer J.D. Tippit in cold blood, and then tried to kill again in the Texas Theater.
"This simple scenario is now complete for all practical purposes. Two shots from Oswald's rifle did everything at Dealey Plaza; four shots from Oswald's pistol on the street in Oak Cliff. No help was needed or allowed by the physical evidence. There is no any physical evidence that any was given. This is now the documented story of the Dallas assassinations. Anything more has remained speculation for nearly 40 years."
_____.
That's it, "Smirk."
Wipe the smirk off your face, re-read and absorb.
There will be a test.
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2017 04:58AM by steve benson.
steve benson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>You want physics? Then do the math . . .
I have physics.
And just like keeping track of a bank account, it does not do any good to add and subtract numbers IF a person really has no idea which numbers contribute and which numbers detract from the account.
> Plus, in addition to the questions of movements,
> review a boatload
in this instance, it seems that the more common, more crude, more unpleasant term of butt load is more appropriate because the butt load of information provided really is crap.
> of other critical applicable
> facts relating to Oswald, link to his rifle, the
> bullet fragments, the wounds, the sequence of
> events--topics that that you seem not to have
> encountered before, at least not in any
> comprehensive way.
>
> This is your lucky day.
It really is, me and my colleagues will be laughing about Rahn's assertions of "jet effect" ignoring conservation of momentum to the extent of completely overwhelming the original source of energy to the situation. .....maybe it's a nuclear reaction thing!!!
> Enjoy:
Don't worry , I will. I am.
THANKS!!!!!
> "Physics and the Frontal Hit That Never Was"
>
> by Ken Rahn
> 16 February 2003
>
> http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/Physi
> cs_of_head_shot/Physics_of_the_head_shot.html
>
>
> "From 1994 through 1997 I spent a lot of time
> trying to quantitatively understand JFK's double
> response to the fatal head shot, the original
> topic that drew me into the JFK assassination. By
> 'double response,' I mean the quick forward snap
> (that is now conveniently ignored by most writers)
> and the longer, slower rearward lurch, the only
> movement seen when the Zapruder film is viewed at
> full speed. My goal was to see which of these
> movements was compatible with the
> Mannlicher-Carcano bullet that hit the rear of
> JFK's head, exited in pieces from the front right
> side, and then went on to hit the windshield and
> possibly also fly over the top and hit James Tague
> or the curb near him.
>
> "I was struck by the fact that this problem could
> be approached, at least in principle, by combining
> the basic physics of colliding bodies with some
> principles of wound ballistics. I was also
> surprised that no one seemed to have done this
> either qualitatively or quantitatively. I began
> simply, with the forward snap, and learned quickly
> that its speed was fully compatible with the
> Carcano bullet and reasonable exit velocities. I
> then combined the rearward motion, the real goal
> of the work, with the forward snap and learned
> that the former was also compatible with the known
> hit. In the process, I generated seven
> simulations, each of increasing complexity,
> separately for translational (linear) and
> rotational (angular) motions, for 14 simulations
> in all. I ended by adding an eighth simulation for
> angular motion and a treatment of some of the
> major errors that could render some of my
> conclusions suspect.
And even with all of that calculation, Rahn still can not keep track of conservation of momentum, what really constitutes thrust (as opposed to simple fundamental energy transfer between objects in a collision) and which direction that various factors really plays into.
> "This monograph addresses four basic questions:
>
> -"Can the forward snap be accounted for by a rearward shot from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle?
> Answer: Yes, with ease.
With ease ........IF the appropriate magic ignorance is applied /employed.
> -"Can the initial rearward lurch of head and body
> be accounted for by a rearward shot from the same
> rifle? Answer: Yes, with ease.
>
> -"Must a rearward shot from this rifle have
> created a rearward lurch similar to that observed?
> Answer: Yes, provided only that a cloud of brain
> matter was thrown forward.
>
> "-Can a shot from the grassy knoll explain or
> contribute to the rearward lurch? Answers: No;
> qualified yes.
......but shot from behind CAN (LOL!!!!!!!!!)
> "The answers effectively debunk the notion of a
> frontal hit and thereby remove the major piece of
> evidence for conspiracy in the JFK assassination.
>
> "The questions are addressed by the 39 chapters of
> the monograph shown below ..
>
> "Abstract
>
> "Setting the stage
>
> 1. Introduction
> 2. The Zapruder film: movements to be
> explained
> 3. The physics of colliding and exploding
> objects
> 4. Wound ballistics and physics
> 5. Variables and values
>
>
> "Question 1: Can the forward snap be explained by
> a shot from Oswald's rifle?
>
> 6. The forward snap—linear calculations
> 7. The forward snap—angular calculations
>
> "Question 2: Can the rearward lurch by explained
> by a shot from Oswald's rifle?
>
> 8. Plausibility analysis of the rearward
> lurch
> _____
>
>
> If you didn't' have either the have time or the
> interest to plow through the physics, then I'll
> help you cut to the chase:
Which is a big contrived tail chase in this instance !!!
> i.e., I'll acquaint
> you with the Synopsis. You can always go back
> later and read the fill-in-your-blanks with the
> pertinent facts:
>
> "37. The Unification of Physical Evidence Provided
> by These Calculations
>
> "The physical evidence in the JFK case now speaks
> with one voice.
quite (errantly) self congratulatory for some one who claims to be an objective observer engineer and is Rahn-g / Wrong
> It provides an extremely strong
> framework inside which the assassination must be
> interpreted. Here is its essence.
>
> "The Movements
>
> "The quick forward snap came from a shot from the
> rear.
>
>
> "The initial rapid rearward lurch also came from a
> shot from the rear.
>
> "Neither the forward snap nor the bulk of the
> lurch could have come from a frontal shot.
so the shot from the rear facilitated both forward and rearward movement of JFK's head. but just as much it would be impossible for a shot from the front to contribute to either.
>
> "The forward-moving diffuse cloud and large
> fragments also came from that shot from the rear.
>
> "Thus the Zapruder film provides no positive
> evidence for a second shooter, and all but
> disallows one. One bullet from the rear created
> all the motions.
>
>
> "The Fragments
>
> "One bullet also explains all the fragments from
> the head shot (in head, on rear carpet, and in
> front seat).
>
> "That bullet differed chemically from the bullet
> of the body shot (Connally's wrist; Parkland
> stretcher).
>
> "The two large fragments from the head shot came
> from Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other
> rifles.
>
> "The stretcher bullet (CE 399) also came from
> Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other
> rifles.
>
> "Thus every fragment and every motion came solely
> from two bullets from Oswald's rifle.
>
>
> "The Rifle
>
> "Oswald owned and possessed that rifle at the time
> of the assassination.
>
> "He was earlier photographed holding the same
> rifle.
>
> "His fingerprints were found on the rifle and the
> shipping cartons that were used as a gun rest.
yah, I bet Oswald's prints were all over that rifle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2W_-ID8RMI
> "No one else has been linked to the rifle or the
> shooting in any physical way.
What about Malcolm Wallace's fingerprint that was found on the same rifle.
>
> "The Wounds
>
> "There were two sets of wounds in Kennedy's body
> and one set in Connally.
>
> "No bullet was found in either man's body.
>
> "Only two bullets were found externally, both shot
> from Oswald's rifle at the rear.
>
> "Only two chemical compositions of the fragments
> were found, which grouped with the two bullets.
>
> "Thus the two bullets explain all the wounds to
> both men, and indicate that they had been properly
> aligned for a double-body hit.
>
>
> "The Link to Oswald
>
> "Both the bullets found had come from Oswald's
> rifle.
>
> "Oswald was in the building at the time (by his
> own admission to a reporter, as documented in 'The
> Men Who Killed Kennedy, Reel 4, 'The Patsy').
>
> "Empty shells from his rifle were found at the
> window through which the rifle was shot.
>
> "Oswald left the building abruptly after the
> shooting, returned to his rooming house, got his
> pistol, and shortly thereafter used it to kill
> Officer J. D. Tippit in cold blood.
>
> "He fled the scene, hid in the Texas Theater, and
> tried to kill again as he was being arrested.
>
> "All this evidence sums up to two bullets from
> Oswald's rifle explaining everything. Two
> questions remain, whether he was the shooter and
> whether he had help.
>
> "The first can only be answered probabilistically,
....not to be confused with the homophone "probaballistically" ....unless creating confusion is really intended
best of all Rahn's choice and attendant use of that word increased the probability that he is a complete wing nut by 16 to 49 per cent, there are calculations on that !!!!
> for there is no direct hard evidence that he was
> the shooter. But the tight web of circumstantial
> evidence provides a probability of >99%, and
> probably more like 99.9%.
..... I'd bet that Con man Rahn even has some "comprehensive" personal tabulations to show how he arrived at the probability numbers that he gave
> It is not certain,
> however, and will probably never be certain.
>
> "The second question, concerning help, has been
> debated for nearly 40 years. It has been
> investigated endlessly, without yielding anything
> definitive. Right now we can say that the shooter
> did not need help and appears not to have received
> any. Three shots. One missed everything, one hit
> the back instead of the head, and the last came
> within an inch or so of missing the head. But they
> did the job, and then the guy tried to run away.
>
>
> "The Critical Sequence of Events
>
> "The evidence listed above produces the fir
> following series of events:
>
> "A shot from Oswald's rifle passed though both
> men's bodies, probably around Z-224. It left
> fragments in Connally's wrist and was later
> retrieved as CE 399.
>
> "A second shot from Oswald's rifle hit in the
> right rear of Kennedy's head. It took about 0.4
> milliseconds to pass through. During this time the
> bullet snapped the head forward, probably by at
> least 2 inches or so.
>
> "The bullet first drilled a small hole in the rear
> of the skull. At that point it deformed, and may
> have broken into two or three large fragments.
>
> "As the bullet was passing through the brain and
> depositing energy there, brain matter briefly
> passed rearward out the entrance wound
> (backspatter).
"backspatter" -The truly propulsive mechanism of the entry zone (of utterly trivial magnitude and consequence) in operation, that Rahn is so concerned about because he (errantly) asserts that is of over whelming magnitude as he also goes on to errantly assert that it is in effect on the target body in the exit zone of the High Speed Projectile, just as Rahn can not tell which zone is which ........which renders all Rahn-g (Wrong) results.
> "The bullet or major fragments then broke though
> the right front side of the skull, creating an
> exit wound and possibly further fragmenting.
>
> "The act of creating the exit wound weakened or
> fractured the nearby skull and prepared it for the
> coming explosion.
This a very subjective approach to an attempt to (supposedly) objectively explain a mechanically occurring chain of events ....or is it just explain-like logic in action!!!
> "The momentum of the exiting fragments
meaning "fragments" of the (supposed) 6.5 mm FMJ bullet attributed to Oswald .....BUT WAIT !!!, FMJ bullets are intended to be very resilient and to NOT fragment especially in soft matter like human tissue EVEN IF impact occurs at highest possible /muzzle velocity. And as a specific indication of that high resilience of 6.5 FMJ bullets, the other (magic trajectory) 6.5 mm FMJ bullet of Oswalds found on the stretcher at Parkland hospital which struck Kennedy and Conally was NOT even deformed let alone expanded let alone fragmented. It appears that they vaunted Rahn has given some sign of contradicting himself ( just as Steve Benson did when Steve divulged that Governor Connally who was supposedly shot by the magic bullet did not believe the KEY WCR contention/finding that the same bullet had hit Kennedy and himself /Connally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RGZPa8FdbA
....unless you want to claim that bullet means nothing because it was planted which will then blow a big hole in the (your) Lone Gun Man theory. The choice is yours. ,
> forced
> brain matter through the exit wound right after
> the fragments.
as well, that action would be a fundamental energy transfer from a collision which does NOT produce thrust, especially magic countering thrust on the target object.
>
> "The two large fragments exited with nearly the
> same trajectories and went on to hit the
> windshield and chrome strip and bounce back into
> the front seat.
>
> "Meanwhile, the brain matter pushed radially
> outward by the tunneling bullet continued toward
> the walls of the cranium. A "temporary cavity"
> formed and oscillated
I'd bet that oscillation somehow sounded just like a jet engine being wound up !!!! IF only we could get a recording of it !!!
(LOL!!!!)
> in size for several
> milliseconds. At some point, probably the first
> maximum, the high pressure exploded the cranium
> and formed the large wound at the right side and
> top of the head.
>
> "The explosion hurled large pieces of skull upward
> and forward. They were followed by large amounts
> of brain matter in the same general direction. The
> largest such piece, the Harper fragment, exited
> rapidly (313), slowed down as it rose (313),
> reached an apex (314), and then began to fall
> (315). A second shower of fragments exited at a
> lower angle, but also forward. A broad, diffuse
> cloud of smaller fragments existed from at least
> 313 to 315.
even so, poor Jackie goes onto the rear deck lid of the Lincoln Pres Limo to collect fragments of Jack's shattered head, even though the primary fragments went forward according to Rahn
>
> "The exiting brain matter covered the limousine
> and passengers in front of Kennedy. The forward
> momentum given to it by the explosion was balanced
> by rearward momentum given to the body.
So... the energy transfer of impact that occurred on the head somehow magically acted in the lower area of the body so the action could be made to match the events ? A truly amazing statement coming from a person who made this statement in his foreward. QUOTE And most importantly, they should commit themselves to learning the truth, wherever it lies. UNQUOTE
......so interesting that Con Man Rahn ended up saying that the truth lies.....
how about just following the facts where ever they lead instead of making them "lie"
> This
> momentum accelerated the body rearward to a speed
> of about 0.8 feet per second (at the top of the
> head). This ended the mechanical phase of the head
> shot.
>
> "The body continued to accelerate rearward during
> the next few frames, but at a much smaller rate.
what did the back of the seat have to say about that ???
> The cause could not have been a continuing recoil
> from the rear shot or any effect of a frontal
> shot. The only reasonable remaining possibility is
> a reflexive stiffening of the back muscles.
Said the guy who did a lot of (Mis applied) calculations on bullet energy and conservation of momentum while also ignoring it, AND who also has ZERO empirical data on force /energy of muscle contractions that he then goes on to invoke and depend on ...........when he is not relying on his "jet effect" theory.
From section 8 of Rahn's treatise.
QUOTE
When all is said and done, the plausibility arguments show that a WCC/MC bullet from Oswald's rifle can easily explain the forward snap. That should come as no surprise. They also show that the bullet can easily explain the initial part of the rearward lurch, via the phenomenon commonly known as the "jet effect."
UNQUOTE
In order for the Rahn's invoked (so called) "jet effect" to function/operate to move JFK's head backwards toward the source of the bullet, JFK's head has to become an effective Pressure Containment Vessel, as that effective PCV JFK's head is able to effectively contain HIGH pressure the likes of which are necessary to induce substantial jet thrust needed to make the PCV move very abruptly at the right moment, even though the PCV is pierced at an entry point by a High Speed Projectile / Bullet. With in the confines of the PCV the HSP imparts its very directional Kinetic Energy to the material (brain matter) contained inside the PCV. As the HSP is slowed by the contained material, the HSP's kinetic energy is consumed and converted to potential energy by compressing ......and "oscillating" the contained material. While that dynamic exchange process is going on, the bulk of PCV is temporarily able to somehow completely resist the natural tendency of moving in the same direction that the HSP is traveling. The slowed HSP projectile finally passes through the PCV to where the HSP punctures the wall of the PCV for a second time (at the front of JFK's head) for the HSP to exit from the PCV. The contained material is stationary except for wild oscillations, while being compressed ....even though the HSP is racing through it, and it is highly compressed as well as stationary. Given the release of an exit point breech in the PCV made by the exiting HSP, the stationary contained material begins to rapidly accelerate out of the created exit hole. The compressed contained material very selectively avoids using the HSP entry hole into the PCV as an exit. The subsequent accelerating flow of formerly contained material out the properly selected exit channel then creates thrust that turns out to be much greater than the original KE energy of HSP, demonstrated by how rapidly it moves the PCV in the opposite direction as the HSP is moving. The PCV (JFK's fractured head) that was completely resistant to moving forward now then will move backward like a tightly filled untied balloon that has just been turned loose.
Yah! that could happen !!!
> "Kennedy then bounced off the rear seat and fell
> forward toward his wife.
>
> "Oswald hurriedly left the building,
while also taking time to drink a soda pop according to other accounts
> went to his
> rooming house and picked up his pistol, killed
> Officer J.D. Tippit in cold blood, and then tried
> to kill again in the Texas Theater.
Where Oswald completely failed to be lethal even as Oswald had been quite lethal in killing Officer Tippits and horrendously, stunningly lethal at the much more difficult task of gunning down JFK in a moving car
yah, that makes sense !!!!!!
> "This simple scenario is now complete for all
> practical purposes. Two shots from Oswald's rifle
> did everything at Dealey Plaza; four shots from
> Oswald's pistol on the street in Oak Cliff. No
> help was needed or allowed by the physical
> evidence. There is no any physical evidence that
> any was given. This is now the documented story of
> the Dallas assassinations. Anything more has
> remained speculation for nearly 40 years."
> _____.
the self declared and self emphasized academic Rahn-g has said so !!!
>
> That's it, "Smirk."
"It" certainly is, but you left out two key letters just ahead of the "it"
> Wipe the smirk off your face, re-read and absorb.
>
>
> There will be a test.
There was a test and Con Man Rahn failed it !!!, as the lone gun man theory has far more holes in it than JFK's corpse.
FTR the apex of goofiness in your claims is centered
on created "propellant-like" "jet" thrust generated between the miraculous interaction of the incoming bullet and JFK's Pressure Containment Vessel head and brain matter based thrust medium that so effectively overwhelmed and counter acted the energy of the bullet as Kennedy's head was effectively moved in the opposite direction that the bullet was traveling.
but I have to give you credit for having a ready made butt load of logic pulling explanation-like material, as concocted by some one else to save you the trouble. I bet that speeds up your typing rate just like the "jet effect" that Rahn talked about.
Too bad that the magic bullet did not manage to collide with Rahn's head to create another example of some momentum reversing "jet effect" using Rahn's own head so Rahn could be an even bigger ex spurt (right out the exit hole in his head) on the topic.
Con man Rahn probably has some extensive calculations on how fart gas and the gravitational pull from the spin of Saturn also play into JFK's backwards head movement as JFK was killed from a shot from behind, among all his other basically meaningless because he can not really keep track of what is what number plays.
-------------------------------------------------------
>You want physics? Then do the math . . .
I have physics.
And just like keeping track of a bank account, it does not do any good to add and subtract numbers IF a person really has no idea which numbers contribute and which numbers detract from the account.
> Plus, in addition to the questions of movements,
> review a boatload
in this instance, it seems that the more common, more crude, more unpleasant term of butt load is more appropriate because the butt load of information provided really is crap.
> of other critical applicable
> facts relating to Oswald, link to his rifle, the
> bullet fragments, the wounds, the sequence of
> events--topics that that you seem not to have
> encountered before, at least not in any
> comprehensive way.
>
> This is your lucky day.
It really is, me and my colleagues will be laughing about Rahn's assertions of "jet effect" ignoring conservation of momentum to the extent of completely overwhelming the original source of energy to the situation. .....maybe it's a nuclear reaction thing!!!
> Enjoy:
Don't worry , I will. I am.
THANKS!!!!!
> "Physics and the Frontal Hit That Never Was"
>
> by Ken Rahn
> 16 February 2003
>
> http://www.kenrahn.com/JFK/Scientific_topics/Physi
> cs_of_head_shot/Physics_of_the_head_shot.html
>
>
> "From 1994 through 1997 I spent a lot of time
> trying to quantitatively understand JFK's double
> response to the fatal head shot, the original
> topic that drew me into the JFK assassination. By
> 'double response,' I mean the quick forward snap
> (that is now conveniently ignored by most writers)
> and the longer, slower rearward lurch, the only
> movement seen when the Zapruder film is viewed at
> full speed. My goal was to see which of these
> movements was compatible with the
> Mannlicher-Carcano bullet that hit the rear of
> JFK's head, exited in pieces from the front right
> side, and then went on to hit the windshield and
> possibly also fly over the top and hit James Tague
> or the curb near him.
>
> "I was struck by the fact that this problem could
> be approached, at least in principle, by combining
> the basic physics of colliding bodies with some
> principles of wound ballistics. I was also
> surprised that no one seemed to have done this
> either qualitatively or quantitatively. I began
> simply, with the forward snap, and learned quickly
> that its speed was fully compatible with the
> Carcano bullet and reasonable exit velocities. I
> then combined the rearward motion, the real goal
> of the work, with the forward snap and learned
> that the former was also compatible with the known
> hit. In the process, I generated seven
> simulations, each of increasing complexity,
> separately for translational (linear) and
> rotational (angular) motions, for 14 simulations
> in all. I ended by adding an eighth simulation for
> angular motion and a treatment of some of the
> major errors that could render some of my
> conclusions suspect.
And even with all of that calculation, Rahn still can not keep track of conservation of momentum, what really constitutes thrust (as opposed to simple fundamental energy transfer between objects in a collision) and which direction that various factors really plays into.
> "This monograph addresses four basic questions:
>
> -"Can the forward snap be accounted for by a rearward shot from Lee Harvey Oswald's rifle?
> Answer: Yes, with ease.
With ease ........IF the appropriate magic ignorance is applied /employed.
> -"Can the initial rearward lurch of head and body
> be accounted for by a rearward shot from the same
> rifle? Answer: Yes, with ease.
>
> -"Must a rearward shot from this rifle have
> created a rearward lurch similar to that observed?
> Answer: Yes, provided only that a cloud of brain
> matter was thrown forward.
>
> "-Can a shot from the grassy knoll explain or
> contribute to the rearward lurch? Answers: No;
> qualified yes.
......but shot from behind CAN (LOL!!!!!!!!!)
> "The answers effectively debunk the notion of a
> frontal hit and thereby remove the major piece of
> evidence for conspiracy in the JFK assassination.
>
> "The questions are addressed by the 39 chapters of
> the monograph shown below ..
>
> "Abstract
>
> "Setting the stage
>
> 1. Introduction
> 2. The Zapruder film: movements to be
> explained
> 3. The physics of colliding and exploding
> objects
> 4. Wound ballistics and physics
> 5. Variables and values
>
>
> "Question 1: Can the forward snap be explained by
> a shot from Oswald's rifle?
>
> 6. The forward snap—linear calculations
> 7. The forward snap—angular calculations
>
> "Question 2: Can the rearward lurch by explained
> by a shot from Oswald's rifle?
>
> 8. Plausibility analysis of the rearward
> lurch
> _____
>
>
> If you didn't' have either the have time or the
> interest to plow through the physics, then I'll
> help you cut to the chase:
Which is a big contrived tail chase in this instance !!!
> i.e., I'll acquaint
> you with the Synopsis. You can always go back
> later and read the fill-in-your-blanks with the
> pertinent facts:
>
> "37. The Unification of Physical Evidence Provided
> by These Calculations
>
> "The physical evidence in the JFK case now speaks
> with one voice.
quite (errantly) self congratulatory for some one who claims to be an objective observer engineer and is Rahn-g / Wrong
> It provides an extremely strong
> framework inside which the assassination must be
> interpreted. Here is its essence.
>
> "The Movements
>
> "The quick forward snap came from a shot from the
> rear.
>
>
> "The initial rapid rearward lurch also came from a
> shot from the rear.
>
> "Neither the forward snap nor the bulk of the
> lurch could have come from a frontal shot.
so the shot from the rear facilitated both forward and rearward movement of JFK's head. but just as much it would be impossible for a shot from the front to contribute to either.
>
> "The forward-moving diffuse cloud and large
> fragments also came from that shot from the rear.
>
> "Thus the Zapruder film provides no positive
> evidence for a second shooter, and all but
> disallows one. One bullet from the rear created
> all the motions.
>
>
> "The Fragments
>
> "One bullet also explains all the fragments from
> the head shot (in head, on rear carpet, and in
> front seat).
>
> "That bullet differed chemically from the bullet
> of the body shot (Connally's wrist; Parkland
> stretcher).
>
> "The two large fragments from the head shot came
> from Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other
> rifles.
>
> "The stretcher bullet (CE 399) also came from
> Oswald's rifle to the exclusion of all other
> rifles.
>
> "Thus every fragment and every motion came solely
> from two bullets from Oswald's rifle.
>
>
> "The Rifle
>
> "Oswald owned and possessed that rifle at the time
> of the assassination.
>
> "He was earlier photographed holding the same
> rifle.
>
> "His fingerprints were found on the rifle and the
> shipping cartons that were used as a gun rest.
yah, I bet Oswald's prints were all over that rifle
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2W_-ID8RMI
> "No one else has been linked to the rifle or the
> shooting in any physical way.
What about Malcolm Wallace's fingerprint that was found on the same rifle.
>
> "The Wounds
>
> "There were two sets of wounds in Kennedy's body
> and one set in Connally.
>
> "No bullet was found in either man's body.
>
> "Only two bullets were found externally, both shot
> from Oswald's rifle at the rear.
>
> "Only two chemical compositions of the fragments
> were found, which grouped with the two bullets.
>
> "Thus the two bullets explain all the wounds to
> both men, and indicate that they had been properly
> aligned for a double-body hit.
>
>
> "The Link to Oswald
>
> "Both the bullets found had come from Oswald's
> rifle.
>
> "Oswald was in the building at the time (by his
> own admission to a reporter, as documented in 'The
> Men Who Killed Kennedy, Reel 4, 'The Patsy').
>
> "Empty shells from his rifle were found at the
> window through which the rifle was shot.
>
> "Oswald left the building abruptly after the
> shooting, returned to his rooming house, got his
> pistol, and shortly thereafter used it to kill
> Officer J. D. Tippit in cold blood.
>
> "He fled the scene, hid in the Texas Theater, and
> tried to kill again as he was being arrested.
>
> "All this evidence sums up to two bullets from
> Oswald's rifle explaining everything. Two
> questions remain, whether he was the shooter and
> whether he had help.
>
> "The first can only be answered probabilistically,
....not to be confused with the homophone "probaballistically" ....unless creating confusion is really intended
best of all Rahn's choice and attendant use of that word increased the probability that he is a complete wing nut by 16 to 49 per cent, there are calculations on that !!!!
> for there is no direct hard evidence that he was
> the shooter. But the tight web of circumstantial
> evidence provides a probability of >99%, and
> probably more like 99.9%.
..... I'd bet that Con man Rahn even has some "comprehensive" personal tabulations to show how he arrived at the probability numbers that he gave
> It is not certain,
> however, and will probably never be certain.
>
> "The second question, concerning help, has been
> debated for nearly 40 years. It has been
> investigated endlessly, without yielding anything
> definitive. Right now we can say that the shooter
> did not need help and appears not to have received
> any. Three shots. One missed everything, one hit
> the back instead of the head, and the last came
> within an inch or so of missing the head. But they
> did the job, and then the guy tried to run away.
>
>
> "The Critical Sequence of Events
>
> "The evidence listed above produces the fir
> following series of events:
>
> "A shot from Oswald's rifle passed though both
> men's bodies, probably around Z-224. It left
> fragments in Connally's wrist and was later
> retrieved as CE 399.
>
> "A second shot from Oswald's rifle hit in the
> right rear of Kennedy's head. It took about 0.4
> milliseconds to pass through. During this time the
> bullet snapped the head forward, probably by at
> least 2 inches or so.
>
> "The bullet first drilled a small hole in the rear
> of the skull. At that point it deformed, and may
> have broken into two or three large fragments.
>
> "As the bullet was passing through the brain and
> depositing energy there, brain matter briefly
> passed rearward out the entrance wound
> (backspatter).
"backspatter" -The truly propulsive mechanism of the entry zone (of utterly trivial magnitude and consequence) in operation, that Rahn is so concerned about because he (errantly) asserts that is of over whelming magnitude as he also goes on to errantly assert that it is in effect on the target body in the exit zone of the High Speed Projectile, just as Rahn can not tell which zone is which ........which renders all Rahn-g (Wrong) results.
> "The bullet or major fragments then broke though
> the right front side of the skull, creating an
> exit wound and possibly further fragmenting.
>
> "The act of creating the exit wound weakened or
> fractured the nearby skull and prepared it for the
> coming explosion.
This a very subjective approach to an attempt to (supposedly) objectively explain a mechanically occurring chain of events ....or is it just explain-like logic in action!!!
> "The momentum of the exiting fragments
meaning "fragments" of the (supposed) 6.5 mm FMJ bullet attributed to Oswald .....BUT WAIT !!!, FMJ bullets are intended to be very resilient and to NOT fragment especially in soft matter like human tissue EVEN IF impact occurs at highest possible /muzzle velocity. And as a specific indication of that high resilience of 6.5 FMJ bullets, the other (magic trajectory) 6.5 mm FMJ bullet of Oswalds found on the stretcher at Parkland hospital which struck Kennedy and Conally was NOT even deformed let alone expanded let alone fragmented. It appears that they vaunted Rahn has given some sign of contradicting himself ( just as Steve Benson did when Steve divulged that Governor Connally who was supposedly shot by the magic bullet did not believe the KEY WCR contention/finding that the same bullet had hit Kennedy and himself /Connally.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-RGZPa8FdbA
....unless you want to claim that bullet means nothing because it was planted which will then blow a big hole in the (your) Lone Gun Man theory. The choice is yours. ,
> forced
> brain matter through the exit wound right after
> the fragments.
as well, that action would be a fundamental energy transfer from a collision which does NOT produce thrust, especially magic countering thrust on the target object.
>
> "The two large fragments exited with nearly the
> same trajectories and went on to hit the
> windshield and chrome strip and bounce back into
> the front seat.
>
> "Meanwhile, the brain matter pushed radially
> outward by the tunneling bullet continued toward
> the walls of the cranium. A "temporary cavity"
> formed and oscillated
I'd bet that oscillation somehow sounded just like a jet engine being wound up !!!! IF only we could get a recording of it !!!
(LOL!!!!)
> in size for several
> milliseconds. At some point, probably the first
> maximum, the high pressure exploded the cranium
> and formed the large wound at the right side and
> top of the head.
>
> "The explosion hurled large pieces of skull upward
> and forward. They were followed by large amounts
> of brain matter in the same general direction. The
> largest such piece, the Harper fragment, exited
> rapidly (313), slowed down as it rose (313),
> reached an apex (314), and then began to fall
> (315). A second shower of fragments exited at a
> lower angle, but also forward. A broad, diffuse
> cloud of smaller fragments existed from at least
> 313 to 315.
even so, poor Jackie goes onto the rear deck lid of the Lincoln Pres Limo to collect fragments of Jack's shattered head, even though the primary fragments went forward according to Rahn
>
> "The exiting brain matter covered the limousine
> and passengers in front of Kennedy. The forward
> momentum given to it by the explosion was balanced
> by rearward momentum given to the body.
So... the energy transfer of impact that occurred on the head somehow magically acted in the lower area of the body so the action could be made to match the events ? A truly amazing statement coming from a person who made this statement in his foreward. QUOTE And most importantly, they should commit themselves to learning the truth, wherever it lies. UNQUOTE
......so interesting that Con Man Rahn ended up saying that the truth lies.....
how about just following the facts where ever they lead instead of making them "lie"
> This
> momentum accelerated the body rearward to a speed
> of about 0.8 feet per second (at the top of the
> head). This ended the mechanical phase of the head
> shot.
>
> "The body continued to accelerate rearward during
> the next few frames, but at a much smaller rate.
what did the back of the seat have to say about that ???
> The cause could not have been a continuing recoil
> from the rear shot or any effect of a frontal
> shot. The only reasonable remaining possibility is
> a reflexive stiffening of the back muscles.
Said the guy who did a lot of (Mis applied) calculations on bullet energy and conservation of momentum while also ignoring it, AND who also has ZERO empirical data on force /energy of muscle contractions that he then goes on to invoke and depend on ...........when he is not relying on his "jet effect" theory.
From section 8 of Rahn's treatise.
QUOTE
When all is said and done, the plausibility arguments show that a WCC/MC bullet from Oswald's rifle can easily explain the forward snap. That should come as no surprise. They also show that the bullet can easily explain the initial part of the rearward lurch, via the phenomenon commonly known as the "jet effect."
UNQUOTE
In order for the Rahn's invoked (so called) "jet effect" to function/operate to move JFK's head backwards toward the source of the bullet, JFK's head has to become an effective Pressure Containment Vessel, as that effective PCV JFK's head is able to effectively contain HIGH pressure the likes of which are necessary to induce substantial jet thrust needed to make the PCV move very abruptly at the right moment, even though the PCV is pierced at an entry point by a High Speed Projectile / Bullet. With in the confines of the PCV the HSP imparts its very directional Kinetic Energy to the material (brain matter) contained inside the PCV. As the HSP is slowed by the contained material, the HSP's kinetic energy is consumed and converted to potential energy by compressing ......and "oscillating" the contained material. While that dynamic exchange process is going on, the bulk of PCV is temporarily able to somehow completely resist the natural tendency of moving in the same direction that the HSP is traveling. The slowed HSP projectile finally passes through the PCV to where the HSP punctures the wall of the PCV for a second time (at the front of JFK's head) for the HSP to exit from the PCV. The contained material is stationary except for wild oscillations, while being compressed ....even though the HSP is racing through it, and it is highly compressed as well as stationary. Given the release of an exit point breech in the PCV made by the exiting HSP, the stationary contained material begins to rapidly accelerate out of the created exit hole. The compressed contained material very selectively avoids using the HSP entry hole into the PCV as an exit. The subsequent accelerating flow of formerly contained material out the properly selected exit channel then creates thrust that turns out to be much greater than the original KE energy of HSP, demonstrated by how rapidly it moves the PCV in the opposite direction as the HSP is moving. The PCV (JFK's fractured head) that was completely resistant to moving forward now then will move backward like a tightly filled untied balloon that has just been turned loose.
Yah! that could happen !!!
> "Kennedy then bounced off the rear seat and fell
> forward toward his wife.
>
> "Oswald hurriedly left the building,
while also taking time to drink a soda pop according to other accounts
> went to his
> rooming house and picked up his pistol, killed
> Officer J.D. Tippit in cold blood, and then tried
> to kill again in the Texas Theater.
Where Oswald completely failed to be lethal even as Oswald had been quite lethal in killing Officer Tippits and horrendously, stunningly lethal at the much more difficult task of gunning down JFK in a moving car
yah, that makes sense !!!!!!
> "This simple scenario is now complete for all
> practical purposes. Two shots from Oswald's rifle
> did everything at Dealey Plaza; four shots from
> Oswald's pistol on the street in Oak Cliff. No
> help was needed or allowed by the physical
> evidence. There is no any physical evidence that
> any was given. This is now the documented story of
> the Dallas assassinations. Anything more has
> remained speculation for nearly 40 years."
> _____.
the self declared and self emphasized academic Rahn-g has said so !!!
>
> That's it, "Smirk."
"It" certainly is, but you left out two key letters just ahead of the "it"
> Wipe the smirk off your face, re-read and absorb.
>
>
> There will be a test.
There was a test and Con Man Rahn failed it !!!, as the lone gun man theory has far more holes in it than JFK's corpse.
FTR the apex of goofiness in your claims is centered
on created "propellant-like" "jet" thrust generated between the miraculous interaction of the incoming bullet and JFK's Pressure Containment Vessel head and brain matter based thrust medium that so effectively overwhelmed and counter acted the energy of the bullet as Kennedy's head was effectively moved in the opposite direction that the bullet was traveling.
but I have to give you credit for having a ready made butt load of logic pulling explanation-like material, as concocted by some one else to save you the trouble. I bet that speeds up your typing rate just like the "jet effect" that Rahn talked about.
Too bad that the magic bullet did not manage to collide with Rahn's head to create another example of some momentum reversing "jet effect" using Rahn's own head so Rahn could be an even bigger ex spurt (right out the exit hole in his head) on the topic.
Con man Rahn probably has some extensive calculations on how fart gas and the gravitational pull from the spin of Saturn also play into JFK's backwards head movement as JFK was killed from a shot from behind, among all his other basically meaningless because he can not really keep track of what is what number plays.
was part of the conspiracy the cover of the conspiracy.
Smirk,I read Posner's book and was not that impressed either. One example.Oswald was found shortly after the shots were fired several floors down calmly drinking a Coke. Critics say he could not have gotten there that fast or been so calm. Instead of addressing that issue, Posner asserts that it couldnt have been Oswald because Oswald was a Dr. Pepper drinker. Gee, maybe the witness mistook it for a Coke, maybe the machine was out of Coke or Oswald pushed rhe wrong button or maybe the witness called all soft drinks Coke.I know people who do. Maybe Oswald wanted something different that time. I am a Coke drinker, but sometimes I.buy other drinks . It is also possible it wasnt Oswald, but that particular Posner argument was stupid. Admittedly, not all his points were that laughable , but many were still open to interpretation
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 08:59PM by bona dea.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 08:59PM by bona dea.
. . . on matters where the actual physics at play are outpacing your outmoded conspiracy claims.
(By the way, I type fast, and edit accordingly. Don't take it as you being special).
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2017 06:46AM by steve benson.
(By the way, I type fast, and edit accordingly. Don't take it as you being special).
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2017 06:46AM by steve benson.
steve benson Wrote:
> No, Smirk, you're not flattered.
It seems like I would know/ be an expert on that matter, but do not let my opinion on that matter get in the way of (your) over riding "propellant-like" theories and explanations, that have failed to push or PULL me into them.
> You just don't like being
> challenged
(you speak) AS IF I had ZERO inkling that there would be a Steve Benson style onslaught to my statements. SO, who is really being prematurely presumptuous in a self centered kind of way, or am I not allowed to pose such a question?
....How ironic that I ended up just like Oswald, ending up with no one to blame but myself for an undoing /demise, one that I never suspected would come along in my case !!!
...-------------------------------------------------------
> . . . on matters where the actual physics at play
> are outpacing your outmoded conspiracy claims.
>
> (By the way, I type fast, and edit accordingly.
> Don't take it as you being special).
Since how you type (so) fast and you know more about physics than I (and physics) do, go ahead and whip up a real thorough treatise on the attractive /pulling force you mentioned ("propellent-like") that managed to pull Kennedy's head backwards as he was shot by from behind by Oswald. Feel free to use many explanation-like statements that pull on logic the same way that Oswald's bullet from behind managed to "yank" /pull JFK's backwards into the path and direction of the bullet. Do not forget to explain how some driving (pushing) forces can be so powerful that they completely counteract and even fully reverse themselves.
Poor physics scientists have struggled for years with notion that their entire deal has boiled down to a realization that there are only a couple of very mysterious attractive forces which are not well understood. What (an even greater) tragedy that Oswald as such a wizard of attractive forces was silenced before he could explain how he so craftily created and used attractive / pulling forces. Oswald was such a nasty player, not explaining that kind of stuff to scientists, killing JFK all by himself instead, and then ducking out of life before could be the greatest physics /scientific windfall ever (so much like Jesus who mastered magic, healing, and even personal resurrection and then just disappeared instead of spreading that astounding talent and benefit around in society) apparently (by pulling on explanation-like logic) by dynamically pulling a bullet into himself right through the barrel of Jack Ruby's snub nose pistol .....just as Oswald pulled Ruby down to the Dallas police station ......instead of pulling the jail doors open to let himself out. ......thank goodness that we have the Warren Commission and POS Posner .....and you, all who were not sidetracked by Oswald's crazy jumble of single handed sinister (and suicidal) antics that included managing to get himself shot and killed ....by some one else.
Since Oswald -who would NOT let on anyway just as he never took credit/ blame for killing JFK .......even though he was pathologically obsessed with getting attention, is also departed, it is left up to experts like you and the other WCR report apologists (geniuses) to use explain-like logic-like to explain and illuminate the anti physics physics of the JFK assassination including Oswald using a projectile to "yank" JFK's head back toward him ....... just as Oswald was able to (so conveniently) pull himself into a job at the Dallas TSBD.
Since you are the expert on what Oswald really did and why AND what I am really doing and why, I am quite interested in knowing by being informed by you whether or not I am anxiously awaiting your reply.
> No, Smirk, you're not flattered.
It seems like I would know/ be an expert on that matter, but do not let my opinion on that matter get in the way of (your) over riding "propellant-like" theories and explanations, that have failed to push or PULL me into them.
> You just don't like being
> challenged
(you speak) AS IF I had ZERO inkling that there would be a Steve Benson style onslaught to my statements. SO, who is really being prematurely presumptuous in a self centered kind of way, or am I not allowed to pose such a question?
....How ironic that I ended up just like Oswald, ending up with no one to blame but myself for an undoing /demise, one that I never suspected would come along in my case !!!
...-------------------------------------------------------
> . . . on matters where the actual physics at play
> are outpacing your outmoded conspiracy claims.
>
> (By the way, I type fast, and edit accordingly.
> Don't take it as you being special).
Since how you type (so) fast and you know more about physics than I (and physics) do, go ahead and whip up a real thorough treatise on the attractive /pulling force you mentioned ("propellent-like") that managed to pull Kennedy's head backwards as he was shot by from behind by Oswald. Feel free to use many explanation-like statements that pull on logic the same way that Oswald's bullet from behind managed to "yank" /pull JFK's backwards into the path and direction of the bullet. Do not forget to explain how some driving (pushing) forces can be so powerful that they completely counteract and even fully reverse themselves.
Poor physics scientists have struggled for years with notion that their entire deal has boiled down to a realization that there are only a couple of very mysterious attractive forces which are not well understood. What (an even greater) tragedy that Oswald as such a wizard of attractive forces was silenced before he could explain how he so craftily created and used attractive / pulling forces. Oswald was such a nasty player, not explaining that kind of stuff to scientists, killing JFK all by himself instead, and then ducking out of life before could be the greatest physics /scientific windfall ever (so much like Jesus who mastered magic, healing, and even personal resurrection and then just disappeared instead of spreading that astounding talent and benefit around in society) apparently (by pulling on explanation-like logic) by dynamically pulling a bullet into himself right through the barrel of Jack Ruby's snub nose pistol .....just as Oswald pulled Ruby down to the Dallas police station ......instead of pulling the jail doors open to let himself out. ......thank goodness that we have the Warren Commission and POS Posner .....and you, all who were not sidetracked by Oswald's crazy jumble of single handed sinister (and suicidal) antics that included managing to get himself shot and killed ....by some one else.
Since Oswald -who would NOT let on anyway just as he never took credit/ blame for killing JFK .......even though he was pathologically obsessed with getting attention, is also departed, it is left up to experts like you and the other WCR report apologists (geniuses) to use explain-like logic-like to explain and illuminate the anti physics physics of the JFK assassination including Oswald using a projectile to "yank" JFK's head back toward him ....... just as Oswald was able to (so conveniently) pull himself into a job at the Dallas TSBD.
Since you are the expert on what Oswald really did and why AND what I am really doing and why, I am quite interested in knowing by being informed by you whether or not I am anxiously awaiting your reply.
But, hey, what does the National Academy of Sciences and the FBI know? You live on Kolob. I've been on that wacky side of the grassy knoll fence. Trouble is, you're still stuck there. It's your own version of the miraculous TBM mindset.
And you're not anxiously awaiting my reply. You're just anxious.
Did you have as much of a hard time giving up the moronic Joseph Smith Smith Myth as you are in abandoning the contorted claptrap of the JFK Conspiracy Cult?
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2017 10:02AM by steve benson.
And you're not anxiously awaiting my reply. You're just anxious.
Did you have as much of a hard time giving up the moronic Joseph Smith Smith Myth as you are in abandoning the contorted claptrap of the JFK Conspiracy Cult?
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2017 10:02AM by steve benson.
In politics, everybody hates somebody. Basic tribalism.
The irony is that nearly all are supporting the same thing - more government intervention, just in different areas.
So the core belief is the same - government will solve our problems, if we just adhere to its mandates and spend enough money.
The irony is that nearly all are supporting the same thing - more government intervention, just in different areas.
So the core belief is the same - government will solve our problems, if we just adhere to its mandates and spend enough money.
I may be one of the few people on the board who saw JFK in person. I saw him in an open motorcade as he passed by on a road near where I lived as a child. I have to wonder how long that was before Dallas. It was a much more innocent age. Looking back, my impression of him (if I could have stated it as such,) was that he was youthful, good looking, and glamorous. He caught your eye. We haven't had anyone like that since.
My parents were staunch Republicans, but even my mom was excited to see President Kennedy in person. She also met Eleanor Roosevelt, and had a great respect for her. She found Mrs. Roosevelt to be very kind, deeply interested in people, and hard-working.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 08:05AM by summer.
My parents were staunch Republicans, but even my mom was excited to see President Kennedy in person. She also met Eleanor Roosevelt, and had a great respect for her. She found Mrs. Roosevelt to be very kind, deeply interested in people, and hard-working.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 08:05AM by summer.
They said they fought against him in the War in Heaven, where he had aligned himself with the Devil and the Democrats.
Instead of being thrown out of heaven after losing out to Jesus and the GOP, they said Satan made him a Destroying Angel and sent him to earth to support such wicked notions as Social Security, the United Nations, equal rights for Black people and school lunches for poor kids.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 02:09PM by steve benson.
Instead of being thrown out of heaven after losing out to Jesus and the GOP, they said Satan made him a Destroying Angel and sent him to earth to support such wicked notions as Social Security, the United Nations, equal rights for Black people and school lunches for poor kids.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 02:09PM by steve benson.
and MORmON Jesus missed giving JFK the curse of black skin after all of that contracting with the devil that JFK had done? Even as a MORmON, I would have to say that was MORmON Jesus' fault.
Well I have been to the Dealey murder scene numerous times during the three years I lived in Dallas.
Of all the photos I took there my favorite is of my 14 year old son standing on Elm street beneath the 6th floor window. At that time he was the same age I was in 1963. Since then he has acquired more knowledge about the assassination than I ever will. I only hope he lives long enough to see all the pertinent files finally made public.
Although I would agree with much of what Smirk has said I am loathe to turn the thread into a shouting match that would do little to honor JFK's memory.
I'll simply say that if it really was the act of a deranged lone nut, why has so much of the vital documentation been secreted away from the eyes of a bewildered world?
Of all the photos I took there my favorite is of my 14 year old son standing on Elm street beneath the 6th floor window. At that time he was the same age I was in 1963. Since then he has acquired more knowledge about the assassination than I ever will. I only hope he lives long enough to see all the pertinent files finally made public.
Although I would agree with much of what Smirk has said I am loathe to turn the thread into a shouting match that would do little to honor JFK's memory.
I'll simply say that if it really was the act of a deranged lone nut, why has so much of the vital documentation been secreted away from the eyes of a bewildered world?
Just ask Joseph Smith.
(P.S.: Speaking truth is a good thing. In this case, it involves reclaiming it from the nut jobs in order to honor JFK's memory. Which means challenging Smirk on his tenuous grasp of assassination physics).
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 02:52PM by steve benson.
(P.S.: Speaking truth is a good thing. In this case, it involves reclaiming it from the nut jobs in order to honor JFK's memory. Which means challenging Smirk on his tenuous grasp of assassination physics).
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 02:52PM by steve benson.
Shummy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of all the photos I took there my favorite is of
> my 14 year old son standing on Elm street beneath
> the 6th floor window. At that time he was the same
> age I was in 1963. Since then he has acquired more
> knowledge about the assassination than I ever
> will. I only hope he lives long enough to see all
> the pertinent files finally made public.
Would not that be nice !!!!
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of all the photos I took there my favorite is of
> my 14 year old son standing on Elm street beneath
> the 6th floor window. At that time he was the same
> age I was in 1963. Since then he has acquired more
> knowledge about the assassination than I ever
> will. I only hope he lives long enough to see all
> the pertinent files finally made public.
Would not that be nice !!!!
Oh please.
JFK was killed by the Comedian, as everyone who has seen the opening sequence of the "Watchmen" documentary knows.
JFK was killed by the Comedian, as everyone who has seen the opening sequence of the "Watchmen" documentary knows.
Thanks Steve.
That is one of the first questions I intend to ask HJ when I get to the CK.
The burning question would be of course, who really killed our 35th president?
That is one of the first questions I intend to ask HJ when I get to the CK.
The burning question would be of course, who really killed our 35th president?
He wasn't all that good at avoiding his own.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 02:54PM by steve benson.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 02:54PM by steve benson.
That could have been because Joe's bodyguards were up all night carousing like Kennedy's Secret Service detail did the night before in Ft Worth.
And we Americans point with pride to our legal tradition of the accused's right to trial by a jury of one's peers.
Ever wonder how LHO was instantaneously convicted without the least pretense of due process?
Ever wonder how LHO was instantaneously convicted without the least pretense of due process?
. . . he could get a trial.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 05:10PM by steve benson.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/27/2017 05:10PM by steve benson.
Lone nut advocates would be well advised to avoid calling on Posner as any sort of credible authority.
If he lied to congress, why wouldn't he lie to the rest of us?
http://whokilledjfk.net/POSNER.htm
He was also forced to resign as investigative reporter for the Daily Beast due plagiarism.
http://www.newsweek.com/gerald-posner-4-popular-excuses-plagiarism-75219
Rather than rely on the word of a hack journalist, perhaps one should consider the conclusion of the US congress who determined that there were more than 3 shots fired that day in Dealey Plaza.
If he lied to congress, why wouldn't he lie to the rest of us?
http://whokilledjfk.net/POSNER.htm
He was also forced to resign as investigative reporter for the Daily Beast due plagiarism.
http://www.newsweek.com/gerald-posner-4-popular-excuses-plagiarism-75219
Rather than rely on the word of a hack journalist, perhaps one should consider the conclusion of the US congress who determined that there were more than 3 shots fired that day in Dealey Plaza.
. . . as to its initial and now debunked claim that Kennedy was "probably" killed by a conspiracy, based on its faulty analysis of a Dallas police motorcycle Dictabelt recording that led to the Committee's subsequently-demonstrated false conclusion (rooted soley in its monumental misread of the Dictabelt recoding) that a second gunman was involved in the JFK assassination.
_____
"John F. Kennedy Assassination Dictabelt Recording"
"The John F. Kennedy assassination Dictabelt recording was a recording from a motorcycle police officer's radio microphone stuck in the open position that became a key piece of evidence cited by the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in their conclusion that there was a conspiracy behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963.
"Made on a common Dictaphone dictation machine that recorded sounds in grooves pressed into a thin vinyl-plastic belt, the recording gained prominence among Kennedy assassination conspiracy theorists from 1978, in which the HSCA used it to conclude that there was a 'high probability' that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone and that the Kennedy assassination was the result of a conspiracy. Later scientific examination discredited this interpretation of the evidence.
"The recording was made from Dallas Police Radio Channel 1, which carried routine police radio traffic (Channel 2 was reserved for special events, such as the presidential motorcade). The open-microphone portion of the recording lasts 5.5 minutes, and begins about 12:29 p.m. local time, about a minute before the assassination.[1][2][3][4][5] Verbal time stamps were made periodically by the police radio dispatcher and can be heard on the recording.
"House Select Committee on Assassinations
"In December 1978, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) had prepared a draft of its final report, concluding that Lee Harvey Oswald had acted as the lone assassin. However, after evidence from the Dictabelt recording was made available, the HSCA quickly reversed its conclusion and declared that a second gunman had fired the third of four shots heard. HSCA chef counsel G. Robert Blakey later said, 'If the acoustics come out that we made a mistake somewhere, I think that would end it.' Despite serious criticism of the scientific evidence and the HSCA's conclusions, speculation regarding the Dictabelt and the possibility of a second gunman persisted.
"Investigators compared 'impulse patterns' (suspected gunshots and associated echos) on the Dictabelt to 1978 test recordings of Carcano rifles fired in Dealey Plaza from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository and from a stockade fence on the grassy knoll forward and to the right of the location of the presidential limousine.
"On this basis, the acoustics firm of Bolt, Beranek and Newman concluded that impulse patterns 1, 2, and 4 were shots fired from the Depository, and that there was a 50% chance that impulse pattern 3 was a shot from the grassy knoll. Acoustics analysts Mark Weiss and Ernest Aschkenasy of Queens College reviewed the BBN data and concluded that "with the probability of 95% or better, there was indeed a shot fired from the grassy knoll."[7][not in citation given]
"Dr. James E. Barger of Bolt, Beranek, and Newman (BBN) testified to the HSCA that his statistical analysis of the impulse patterns captured on the Dallas police recordings showed that the motorcycle with the open microphone was approximately '120 to 138 feet' behind the presidential limousine at the time of the first shot.
"When the HSCA asked Weiss about the location of the motorcycle with the open microphone--'Would you consider that to be an essential ingredient in the ultimate conclusion of your analysis?=--Weiss answered, 'It is an essential component of it, because, if you do not put the motorcycle in the place that it is—the initial point of where it was receiving the [sound of the gunfire]--and if you do not move it at the velocity at which it is being moved on paper in this re-creation, you do not get a good, tight pattern that compares very well with the observed impulses on the police tape recording.'
"The HSCA, using an amateur film shot of the motorcade, concluded that the recording originated from the motorcycle of police officer H. B. McLain, who later testified before the committee that his microphone was often stuck in the open position.
"However, McLain did not hear the actual recording until after his testimony, and upon hearing it he adamantly denied that the recording originated from his motorcycle. He said that the other sounds on the recording did not match his movements. Sirens are not heard on the recording until more than two minutes after what is supposed to be the sound of the shooting; however, McLain accompanied the motorcade to Parkland Hospital immediately after the shooting, with sirens blaring the entire time. When the sirens are heard on the Dictabelt recording, they rise and recede in pitch (the Doppler effect) and volume, as if passing by. McLain also said that the engine sound was clearly from a three-wheeled motorcycle, not the two-wheeler that he drove: 'There's no comparison to the two sounds.'
"Other audio discrepancies also exist. Crowd noise is not heard on the Dictabelt recording, despite the sounds generated from the many onlookers along Dallas's Main Street and in Dealey Plaza (crowd noises can be heard on at least ten channel-2 transmissions from the motorcade). Someone is heard whistling a tune about a minute after the assassination. No one actually heard gunshots on the recording.
"The only evidence that HSCA had for a second shooter was the Dictabelt sound recording.Four of the twelve HSCA members dissented to the HSCA's conclusion of conspiracy based on the acoustic findings, and a fifth thought a further study of the acoustic evidence was 'necessary.' Dissenting members of the committee included Congressmen Samuel L. Devine, Robert W. Edgar, and Harold S. Sawyer. Responding to a question asking how he would handle the Committee's report if he were at the Justice Department, Sawyer replied: 'I'd file it in a circular file.'
"Criticism
"Richard E. Sprague, an expert on photographic evidence of the assassination and a consultant to the HSCA, noted that the amateur film the HSCA relied on showed that there were no motorcycles between those riding alongside the rear of the presidential limousine and H.B. McLain's motorcycle, and that other films[21][not in citation given] showed McLain's motorcycle was actually 250 feet behind the presidential limousine when the first shot was fired, not 120 to 138 feet. No motorcycle was anywhere near the target area.
"The adult magazine 'Gallery' published a pull-out laminated cardboard recording( like those on the back of Cereal boxes) of the Dictabelt recording in its July 1979 issue.[23] An assassination researcher named Steve Barber listened to that recording repeatedly and heard the words 'Hold everything secure until the homicide and other investigators can get there' at the point where the HSCA had concluded the assassination shots were recorded. However, those words were spoken by Sheriff Bill Decker about 90 seconds after the assassination, so the shots could not be when the HSCA claimed.
"The Technical Services Division of the FBI studied the acoustical data and issued a report on December 1, 1980 (dated November 19, 1980). The FBI report concluded that the HSCA failed to prove that there were gunshots on the recording and also failed to prove that the recording was made in Dealey Plaza. In fact, using the techniques of the previous investigators, the FBI matched a gunshot recorded in Greensboro, NC in 1979 with the sound that was supposedly a shot from the grassy knoll--proving that the initial investigation's methods were invalid.
"National Academy of Sciences
"After the FBI disputed the validity of the acoustic evidence, the Justice Department paid for a review by the National Academy of Sciences, an organization operating with a Title 36 congressional charter.
"On May 14, 1982, the panel of experts chaired by Harvard University's Norman Ramsey, released the results of their study.[26] The NAS panel unanimously concluded that:
"'The acoustic analyses do not demonstrate that there was a grassy knoll shot, and in particular there is no acoustic basis for the claim of 95% probability of such a shot. The acoustic impulses attributed to gunshots were recorded about one minute after the President had been shot and the motorcade had been instructed to go to the hospital.
"'Therefore, reliable acoustic data do not support a conclusion that there was a second gunman.'
"According to Ramsey, noises on the Dictabelt were 'probably static.' Louis Stokes, a member of the United States House of Representatives who chaired the HSCA, commented that the report 'raised new and serious questions about our conclusions that need to be resolved.'
"Dr. Barger, the HSCA's acoustics expert, when asked about this discovery and the NAS analysis, replied:
"'Barber discovered a very weak spoken phrase on the DPD Dictabelt recording that is heard at about the time of the sound impulses we concluded were probably caused by the fourth shot. The NAS Committee has shown to our satisfaction that this phrase has the same origin as the same phrase heard also on the Audograph recording.[29] The Audograph recording was originally made from the channel 2 radio. The common phrase is heard on channel 2 about a minute after the assassination would appear, from the context, to have taken place. Therefore, it would seem . . . that the sounds that we connected with gunfire were made about a minute after the assassination shots were fired. Upon reading the NAS report, we did a brief analysis of the Audograph dub that was made by the NAS Committee and loaned to us by them. We found some enigmatic features of this recording that occur at about the time that individuals react to the assassination. Therefore, we have doubt about the time synchronization of events on that recording, and so we doubt that the Barber hypothesis is proven. The NAS Committee did not examine the several items of evidence that corroborated our original findings, so that we still agree with the House Select Committee on Assassinations conclusion that our findings were corroborated.'
"An analysis published in the March 2001 issue of 'Science & Justice' by Dr. Donald B. Thomas used a different radio transmission synchronization to put forth the claim that the National Academy of Sciences panel was in error. Thomas' conclusion, very similar to the HSCA conclusion, was that the gunshot impulses were real to a 96.3% certainty. Thomas presented additional details and support in the November 2001 and September and November 2002 issues. Commenting on Thomas's study, G. Robert Blakey said: 'This is an honest, careful scientific examination of everything we did, with all the appropriate statistical checks.'
"'In 2005, Thomas' conclusions were rebutted in the same journal. Ralph Linsker and several members of the original NAS team, (Richard Garwin, Herman Chernoff, Paul Horowitz, and Ramsey) reanalyzed the timings of the recordings and reaffirmed in an article in 'Science & Justice' the earlier conclusion of the NAS report that the alleged shot sounds were recorded approximately one minute after the assassination.
"Further Analysis
"The Justice Department reviewed the HSCA report and the National Academy of Science's study of the acoustical evidence. It reported to the Judiciary Committee on March 28, 1988, and rebuked the HSCA's conclusion of a probable conspiracy.
"In 2003, an independent researcher named Michael O'Dell reported that both the National Academy and Dr. Thomas had used incorrect timelines because they assumed the Dictabelt ran continuously. When corrected, these showed the impulses happened too late to be the real shots even with Thomas's alternative synchronization. In addition, he pointed out that the 95% or higher probability of a shot from the grassy knoll referred only to random noise (which all earlier research acknowledges), while the impulse could have been something else, he identifies it as speech, ignoring that the analysis that the impulse is from a shot is based on timing of echos.
"A November 2003 analysis paid for by the cable television channel 'Court TV' concluded that the putative gunshot impulses did not match test gunshot recordings fired in Dealey Plaza any better than random noise. In December 2003, Thomas responded by pointing out what he claimed were errors in the November 2003 Court TV analysis.
"Digital Restoration
"In 2003, ABC News aired the results of its investigation on a program called 'Peter Jennings Reporting: The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy.' Based on computer diagrams and recreations done by Dale K. Myers, it concluded that the sound recordings on the Dictabelt could not have come from Dealey Plaza, and that Dallas Police Officer H.B. McLain was correct in his assertions that he had not yet entered Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination.
"In the March 2005 issue of 'Reader's Digest,' it was reported that Carl Haber and Vitaliy Fadeyev were assigned with the task of digitally restoring Dictabelt 10 by Leslie Waffen from the National Archives. Their method consisted of using sensors to map the microscopic contours of the tracks of old sound recordings without having to play them using a stylus, which would further degrade the sound. Dictabelt 10 was worn from countless playings and cracked due to improper storage.[40] By 2010 digital restoration of the Dictabelt seemed a more distant prospect, with both funding and final approval for the project unlikely to be secured in the near future.
"Possible Origins
"Left unanswered by the professional analyses was the question of whose open microphone captured the sounds recorded on the Dictabelt, if not Officer H.B. McLain. Jim Bowles, a Dallas police dispatcher supervisor in November 1963, and later Dallas County Sheriff, believes it originated from a particular officer on a three-wheeled motorcycle stationed at the Dallas Trade Mart, the original destination of President Kennedy's motorcade, along the same freeway to Parkland Hospital, which would account for the sound of sirens rushing by.
"McLain himself believes that it was from a different officer on a three-wheeler near the Trade Mart, who was known for his whistling. When interviewed by author Vincent Bugliosi, the officer acknowledged that his microphone could have been stuck in the open position (he did not recall hearing any transmissions for several minutes), and could later have become unstuck after he followed the motorcade to Parkland Hospital."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_Dictabelt_recording
*******
HSCA, RIP.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2017 12:36AM by steve benson.
_____
"John F. Kennedy Assassination Dictabelt Recording"
"The John F. Kennedy assassination Dictabelt recording was a recording from a motorcycle police officer's radio microphone stuck in the open position that became a key piece of evidence cited by the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) in their conclusion that there was a conspiracy behind the assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963.
"Made on a common Dictaphone dictation machine that recorded sounds in grooves pressed into a thin vinyl-plastic belt, the recording gained prominence among Kennedy assassination conspiracy theorists from 1978, in which the HSCA used it to conclude that there was a 'high probability' that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone and that the Kennedy assassination was the result of a conspiracy. Later scientific examination discredited this interpretation of the evidence.
"The recording was made from Dallas Police Radio Channel 1, which carried routine police radio traffic (Channel 2 was reserved for special events, such as the presidential motorcade). The open-microphone portion of the recording lasts 5.5 minutes, and begins about 12:29 p.m. local time, about a minute before the assassination.[1][2][3][4][5] Verbal time stamps were made periodically by the police radio dispatcher and can be heard on the recording.
"House Select Committee on Assassinations
"In December 1978, the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) had prepared a draft of its final report, concluding that Lee Harvey Oswald had acted as the lone assassin. However, after evidence from the Dictabelt recording was made available, the HSCA quickly reversed its conclusion and declared that a second gunman had fired the third of four shots heard. HSCA chef counsel G. Robert Blakey later said, 'If the acoustics come out that we made a mistake somewhere, I think that would end it.' Despite serious criticism of the scientific evidence and the HSCA's conclusions, speculation regarding the Dictabelt and the possibility of a second gunman persisted.
"Investigators compared 'impulse patterns' (suspected gunshots and associated echos) on the Dictabelt to 1978 test recordings of Carcano rifles fired in Dealey Plaza from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository and from a stockade fence on the grassy knoll forward and to the right of the location of the presidential limousine.
"On this basis, the acoustics firm of Bolt, Beranek and Newman concluded that impulse patterns 1, 2, and 4 were shots fired from the Depository, and that there was a 50% chance that impulse pattern 3 was a shot from the grassy knoll. Acoustics analysts Mark Weiss and Ernest Aschkenasy of Queens College reviewed the BBN data and concluded that "with the probability of 95% or better, there was indeed a shot fired from the grassy knoll."[7][not in citation given]
"Dr. James E. Barger of Bolt, Beranek, and Newman (BBN) testified to the HSCA that his statistical analysis of the impulse patterns captured on the Dallas police recordings showed that the motorcycle with the open microphone was approximately '120 to 138 feet' behind the presidential limousine at the time of the first shot.
"When the HSCA asked Weiss about the location of the motorcycle with the open microphone--'Would you consider that to be an essential ingredient in the ultimate conclusion of your analysis?=--Weiss answered, 'It is an essential component of it, because, if you do not put the motorcycle in the place that it is—the initial point of where it was receiving the [sound of the gunfire]--and if you do not move it at the velocity at which it is being moved on paper in this re-creation, you do not get a good, tight pattern that compares very well with the observed impulses on the police tape recording.'
"The HSCA, using an amateur film shot of the motorcade, concluded that the recording originated from the motorcycle of police officer H. B. McLain, who later testified before the committee that his microphone was often stuck in the open position.
"However, McLain did not hear the actual recording until after his testimony, and upon hearing it he adamantly denied that the recording originated from his motorcycle. He said that the other sounds on the recording did not match his movements. Sirens are not heard on the recording until more than two minutes after what is supposed to be the sound of the shooting; however, McLain accompanied the motorcade to Parkland Hospital immediately after the shooting, with sirens blaring the entire time. When the sirens are heard on the Dictabelt recording, they rise and recede in pitch (the Doppler effect) and volume, as if passing by. McLain also said that the engine sound was clearly from a three-wheeled motorcycle, not the two-wheeler that he drove: 'There's no comparison to the two sounds.'
"Other audio discrepancies also exist. Crowd noise is not heard on the Dictabelt recording, despite the sounds generated from the many onlookers along Dallas's Main Street and in Dealey Plaza (crowd noises can be heard on at least ten channel-2 transmissions from the motorcade). Someone is heard whistling a tune about a minute after the assassination. No one actually heard gunshots on the recording.
"The only evidence that HSCA had for a second shooter was the Dictabelt sound recording.Four of the twelve HSCA members dissented to the HSCA's conclusion of conspiracy based on the acoustic findings, and a fifth thought a further study of the acoustic evidence was 'necessary.' Dissenting members of the committee included Congressmen Samuel L. Devine, Robert W. Edgar, and Harold S. Sawyer. Responding to a question asking how he would handle the Committee's report if he were at the Justice Department, Sawyer replied: 'I'd file it in a circular file.'
"Criticism
"Richard E. Sprague, an expert on photographic evidence of the assassination and a consultant to the HSCA, noted that the amateur film the HSCA relied on showed that there were no motorcycles between those riding alongside the rear of the presidential limousine and H.B. McLain's motorcycle, and that other films[21][not in citation given] showed McLain's motorcycle was actually 250 feet behind the presidential limousine when the first shot was fired, not 120 to 138 feet. No motorcycle was anywhere near the target area.
"The adult magazine 'Gallery' published a pull-out laminated cardboard recording( like those on the back of Cereal boxes) of the Dictabelt recording in its July 1979 issue.[23] An assassination researcher named Steve Barber listened to that recording repeatedly and heard the words 'Hold everything secure until the homicide and other investigators can get there' at the point where the HSCA had concluded the assassination shots were recorded. However, those words were spoken by Sheriff Bill Decker about 90 seconds after the assassination, so the shots could not be when the HSCA claimed.
"The Technical Services Division of the FBI studied the acoustical data and issued a report on December 1, 1980 (dated November 19, 1980). The FBI report concluded that the HSCA failed to prove that there were gunshots on the recording and also failed to prove that the recording was made in Dealey Plaza. In fact, using the techniques of the previous investigators, the FBI matched a gunshot recorded in Greensboro, NC in 1979 with the sound that was supposedly a shot from the grassy knoll--proving that the initial investigation's methods were invalid.
"National Academy of Sciences
"After the FBI disputed the validity of the acoustic evidence, the Justice Department paid for a review by the National Academy of Sciences, an organization operating with a Title 36 congressional charter.
"On May 14, 1982, the panel of experts chaired by Harvard University's Norman Ramsey, released the results of their study.[26] The NAS panel unanimously concluded that:
"'The acoustic analyses do not demonstrate that there was a grassy knoll shot, and in particular there is no acoustic basis for the claim of 95% probability of such a shot. The acoustic impulses attributed to gunshots were recorded about one minute after the President had been shot and the motorcade had been instructed to go to the hospital.
"'Therefore, reliable acoustic data do not support a conclusion that there was a second gunman.'
"According to Ramsey, noises on the Dictabelt were 'probably static.' Louis Stokes, a member of the United States House of Representatives who chaired the HSCA, commented that the report 'raised new and serious questions about our conclusions that need to be resolved.'
"Dr. Barger, the HSCA's acoustics expert, when asked about this discovery and the NAS analysis, replied:
"'Barber discovered a very weak spoken phrase on the DPD Dictabelt recording that is heard at about the time of the sound impulses we concluded were probably caused by the fourth shot. The NAS Committee has shown to our satisfaction that this phrase has the same origin as the same phrase heard also on the Audograph recording.[29] The Audograph recording was originally made from the channel 2 radio. The common phrase is heard on channel 2 about a minute after the assassination would appear, from the context, to have taken place. Therefore, it would seem . . . that the sounds that we connected with gunfire were made about a minute after the assassination shots were fired. Upon reading the NAS report, we did a brief analysis of the Audograph dub that was made by the NAS Committee and loaned to us by them. We found some enigmatic features of this recording that occur at about the time that individuals react to the assassination. Therefore, we have doubt about the time synchronization of events on that recording, and so we doubt that the Barber hypothesis is proven. The NAS Committee did not examine the several items of evidence that corroborated our original findings, so that we still agree with the House Select Committee on Assassinations conclusion that our findings were corroborated.'
"An analysis published in the March 2001 issue of 'Science & Justice' by Dr. Donald B. Thomas used a different radio transmission synchronization to put forth the claim that the National Academy of Sciences panel was in error. Thomas' conclusion, very similar to the HSCA conclusion, was that the gunshot impulses were real to a 96.3% certainty. Thomas presented additional details and support in the November 2001 and September and November 2002 issues. Commenting on Thomas's study, G. Robert Blakey said: 'This is an honest, careful scientific examination of everything we did, with all the appropriate statistical checks.'
"'In 2005, Thomas' conclusions were rebutted in the same journal. Ralph Linsker and several members of the original NAS team, (Richard Garwin, Herman Chernoff, Paul Horowitz, and Ramsey) reanalyzed the timings of the recordings and reaffirmed in an article in 'Science & Justice' the earlier conclusion of the NAS report that the alleged shot sounds were recorded approximately one minute after the assassination.
"Further Analysis
"The Justice Department reviewed the HSCA report and the National Academy of Science's study of the acoustical evidence. It reported to the Judiciary Committee on March 28, 1988, and rebuked the HSCA's conclusion of a probable conspiracy.
"In 2003, an independent researcher named Michael O'Dell reported that both the National Academy and Dr. Thomas had used incorrect timelines because they assumed the Dictabelt ran continuously. When corrected, these showed the impulses happened too late to be the real shots even with Thomas's alternative synchronization. In addition, he pointed out that the 95% or higher probability of a shot from the grassy knoll referred only to random noise (which all earlier research acknowledges), while the impulse could have been something else, he identifies it as speech, ignoring that the analysis that the impulse is from a shot is based on timing of echos.
"A November 2003 analysis paid for by the cable television channel 'Court TV' concluded that the putative gunshot impulses did not match test gunshot recordings fired in Dealey Plaza any better than random noise. In December 2003, Thomas responded by pointing out what he claimed were errors in the November 2003 Court TV analysis.
"Digital Restoration
"In 2003, ABC News aired the results of its investigation on a program called 'Peter Jennings Reporting: The Kennedy Assassination: Beyond Conspiracy.' Based on computer diagrams and recreations done by Dale K. Myers, it concluded that the sound recordings on the Dictabelt could not have come from Dealey Plaza, and that Dallas Police Officer H.B. McLain was correct in his assertions that he had not yet entered Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination.
"In the March 2005 issue of 'Reader's Digest,' it was reported that Carl Haber and Vitaliy Fadeyev were assigned with the task of digitally restoring Dictabelt 10 by Leslie Waffen from the National Archives. Their method consisted of using sensors to map the microscopic contours of the tracks of old sound recordings without having to play them using a stylus, which would further degrade the sound. Dictabelt 10 was worn from countless playings and cracked due to improper storage.[40] By 2010 digital restoration of the Dictabelt seemed a more distant prospect, with both funding and final approval for the project unlikely to be secured in the near future.
"Possible Origins
"Left unanswered by the professional analyses was the question of whose open microphone captured the sounds recorded on the Dictabelt, if not Officer H.B. McLain. Jim Bowles, a Dallas police dispatcher supervisor in November 1963, and later Dallas County Sheriff, believes it originated from a particular officer on a three-wheeled motorcycle stationed at the Dallas Trade Mart, the original destination of President Kennedy's motorcade, along the same freeway to Parkland Hospital, which would account for the sound of sirens rushing by.
"McLain himself believes that it was from a different officer on a three-wheeler near the Trade Mart, who was known for his whistling. When interviewed by author Vincent Bugliosi, the officer acknowledged that his microphone could have been stuck in the open position (he did not recall hearing any transmissions for several minutes), and could later have become unstuck after he followed the motorcade to Parkland Hospital."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy_assassination_Dictabelt_recording
*******
HSCA, RIP.
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2017 12:36AM by steve benson.
I was what Mormons would claim to be in the pre-existence when JFK was shot, but both of my parents were raised by Democrats at the time and nevermo. My dad was from an Irish Catholic family, so naturally, JFK was almost like a saint in that house.
As for the conspiracy theories, I think the reason they exist is that people don't like to think about a President being assassinated by a single sniper while in a motorcade. I'm more likely to believe that Oswald wasn't part of a conspiracy, but that's just my opinion.
As for the conspiracy theories, I think the reason they exist is that people don't like to think about a President being assassinated by a single sniper while in a motorcade. I'm more likely to believe that Oswald wasn't part of a conspiracy, but that's just my opinion.
Well ya know what Smirk?
Cog-dis isn't limited to religion.
Oswald's imaginary friend George deMohrenschildt wasn't part of any conspiracy.
http://covert-history.wikia.com/wiki/George_de_Mohrenschildt
Cog-dis isn't limited to religion.
Oswald's imaginary friend George deMohrenschildt wasn't part of any conspiracy.
http://covert-history.wikia.com/wiki/George_de_Mohrenschildt
That alone is suspicious
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2017 03:54PM by bona dea.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/28/2017 03:54PM by bona dea.
Well I'm sure that our lone-nutty professor will put up another wall of text that explains it all away.
Relax, all is well.
Relax, all is well.
in their tool kit ladders of logic to climb with.
I read my way out of maniacal mumbo-jumbo Mormonism, just like I did out of the woo-woo world of Kennedy-killing conspiracy brain cramp camp. And I've got the large personal library to prove it. In order to understand the fallacies of both kooky camps, I specialized in reading their epistles of apologetics first. To that, I then applied the counterweight of applied science.
Try it sometime.
Bawls about "text walls" seem to often be made by folks averse to reading for long stretches. I see the same reluctance among true believers in Mormonism who are not committed very vigorously to reading rigorously. Like a Benson family members, for instance, who, at a family reunion, when I was questioning the veracity of the Kinderhook plates, simply declared, "Well, I just follow the General amAuthorities."
In the name of no more of them text walls. Amen.
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2017 10:17AM by steve benson.
I read my way out of maniacal mumbo-jumbo Mormonism, just like I did out of the woo-woo world of Kennedy-killing conspiracy brain cramp camp. And I've got the large personal library to prove it. In order to understand the fallacies of both kooky camps, I specialized in reading their epistles of apologetics first. To that, I then applied the counterweight of applied science.
Try it sometime.
Bawls about "text walls" seem to often be made by folks averse to reading for long stretches. I see the same reluctance among true believers in Mormonism who are not committed very vigorously to reading rigorously. Like a Benson family members, for instance, who, at a family reunion, when I was questioning the veracity of the Kinderhook plates, simply declared, "Well, I just follow the General amAuthorities."
In the name of no more of them text walls. Amen.
Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2017 10:17AM by steve benson.
lol
Well ya know Steve, I didn't start this thread to convince you. I've known you way too long to have any delusion of doing that, trust me my good friend.
Mind you, I still strive to keep an open mind but to me the facts just don't add up. Too many 'coincidences', too many loose ends, too many witnesses who wound up dead.
I'm just grateful that we now have a forum where we can exchange ideas no matter how crazy they might be.
I think we can agree that Kennedy would have gone on to make America greater than it ever was before.
Mind you, I still strive to keep an open mind but to me the facts just don't add up. Too many 'coincidences', too many loose ends, too many witnesses who wound up dead.
I'm just grateful that we now have a forum where we can exchange ideas no matter how crazy they might be.
I think we can agree that Kennedy would have gone on to make America greater than it ever was before.
Out, damn text!
I will nonetheless agree with you that Kennedy was on his way to becoming a great president in matters of civil rights and foreign policy (despite, in the latter case, his Bay of Pigs fiasco; he was a quick study and a quick learner--A bonafide war hero who had grave misgivings about deeper US involvement in Vietnam).
On the whole, he was an astute, intelligent, articulate and inspiring leader.
That said, however, his reckless personal life made him vulnerable to potential blackmail, and that's where his hormones dangerously got in the way of hisc better judgment.
In short, JFK was a mixed bag of imperfect humanness and well-earned glory.
But if you believe that JFK was assassinated by some big, dark and impenetrable conspiracy of which Oliver Stoned movies are made, the Mormon Church has some gold plates to sell ya.
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2017 10:10AM by steve benson.
I will nonetheless agree with you that Kennedy was on his way to becoming a great president in matters of civil rights and foreign policy (despite, in the latter case, his Bay of Pigs fiasco; he was a quick study and a quick learner--A bonafide war hero who had grave misgivings about deeper US involvement in Vietnam).
On the whole, he was an astute, intelligent, articulate and inspiring leader.
That said, however, his reckless personal life made him vulnerable to potential blackmail, and that's where his hormones dangerously got in the way of hisc better judgment.
In short, JFK was a mixed bag of imperfect humanness and well-earned glory.
But if you believe that JFK was assassinated by some big, dark and impenetrable conspiracy of which Oliver Stoned movies are made, the Mormon Church has some gold plates to sell ya.
Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 05/29/2017 10:10AM by steve benson.
Sorry, you can't reply to this topic. It has been closed. Please start another thread and continue the conversation.