I am aware of the Warren Commission findings.But they did as they were told,Gerald Ford he is the one that move the bullet up 6 inches to make the story work.Doctors ,in the room,have always stated different fact,from the commission.And yet the doctors,that worked on Kennedy was never called to testify.
?The doctors that worked on Kennedy?, by which I assume you mean the Parkland doctors, never saw the wound on the back of Kennedy?s neck/back, because Kennedy was on his back while they were working on him.
Question:
How could the Parkland doctors have reported that the location of the back wound was six inches lower than what Gerald Ford said, if they never saw the back wound?It strikes me that CTers are bad at connecting the dots. If presented with a ?fact?, they don?t test the ?fact? out. They don?t think about what that ?fact? would imply. They simply accept the ?fact? as true.
If the neck/back wound was actually six inches lower than what Gerald Ford said, that would mean:
Gerald Ford?s location: 2 inches above the neck wound
Don Echols?s location: 4 inches below the neck wound
Using trigonometry, that would mean:
Gerald Ford?s vertical angle = arctan(-2/6) = -18 degrees
Don Echol?s vetical angle = arctan(4/6) = +33 degrees
Gerald Ford?s vertical angle makes sense, because that corresponds to the angle from the sniper?s nest to the neck. Don Echol?s vertical angle makes no sense, because that corresponds to a shot coming up from underneath the street, through the limousine and into Kennedy?s back.
Question:
How do you explain how it could be possible for Gerald Ford to have ?moved the bullet up 6 inches??
a. The back wound was an entrance wound and the neck wound was the corresponding exit wound. This would mean the bullet was angling upward at 33 degrees. Too steep even to have come from the lower part of the engine compartment of the following up Secret Service Limousine. Was the bullet fired from beneath the street, causing it to go through the pavement, go through the floor of the limousine, go through the seat that the Kennedy?s were sitting on and into Kennedy?s back? Was it fired from the trunk compartment?
b. The neck wound was an entrance wound, the neck wound was the corresponding exit wound. If so, this goes against the coat and shirt evidence that the Secret Service agents left at the Dallas Parkland Hospital. Plus, what tall building to the front could this bullet be fired from? Why didn?t the bullet that exited the back go on to strike the seat Kennedy was sitting on?
c. There is no connection between the back wound and the neck wound. If so, where are the corresponding exit wounds to these two bullets? Why are rifle bullets being used that don?t go through a body? This would mean bullets that are less accurate, since they lack the speed necessary to go all the way across a body. And also, less deadly, since they stop after only a few inches? Why didn?t these bullets show up on X-Rays? And is it not an amazing coincidence that both bullets hit at roughly the same level, the neck level, and roughly in the center of the body. Using these bullets betray multiple shooters, unless the shooters are lucky enough that whenever there is a hit from the front, there is also a hit from the back at near the same place to make it look like it could be a hit from one direction.
d. You have never given the matter any thought.I suspect that ?d? is the real honest answer.
Looking at what a ?fact? means is the way one can judge which ?facts? may be true and which must be false. I believe that without the ability to ignore the implications of ?facts? is what allows a CTer to remain a CTer.
