The Shifting Single-Bullet Theory--It Always "Works" No Matter What

[Jack Nessan]

Question (not a gotcha one either). How do you handle/see Jack Bell's description of the number of shots? He was the AP reporter riding alongside Merriman Smith and fought with him over the use of radio telephone.

Bell: "I grabbed the radiophone [from Smith], got the operator, gave the Dallas bureau number, heard someone answer. I shouted that three shots had been fired at the President’s motorcade. The phone went dead and I couldn’t tell whether anyone had heard me. Frantically, I tried to get the operator back. The phone was still out."

When he arrived at Parkland he again phoned in his report of hearing three shots.

More here: https://archives.cjr.org/fiftieth_anniversary/the_assassination_the_reporter.php

Interesting, Bell could be the first person to be recorded as having been influenced by the news media—Merriman Smith.

According to Merriman Smith, Jack Bell’s first statement upon arriving at Parkland was that he wasn’t sure if any shots had been fired. (Sloyan, American Journalism Review, May 1997). By 12:41 PM, just four minutes after arriving at Parkland. Bell called in a report to the AP stating that three shots had been fired.  He went from not knowing to three shots. The car Smith and Bell were riding in was the first Press Pool car and was responsible for briefing the other reporters.

Additionally, Senator Yarborough made a statement to a large group of reporters at Parkland that he “thought” he heard three shots. Sen. Yarborough is not sure himself but now is briefing the press that three shots were fired.

Charles Roberts of Newsweek heard only two shots. In his 1967 book, The Truth About The Assassination, (p,20) Roberts said on the flight from Dallas to Washington on Air Force One on the afternoon of the assassination, a dispute broke out among the passengers, including Merriman Smith and Secret Service Agents, about how many shots had been fired. 

A number of Secret Service Agents are not only two shot witnesses but were eyewitnesses which Merriman Smith was not. Once again, the media’s influence on witnesses can be seen in the odd explanations and narratives of some of the SS agents testimonies courtesy of Merriman Smith and his three shot belief.

[Andrew Mason]

Really, all this terrible outcome just because I do not want to babysit you anymore. I think everybody has seen the quotes countless times and it is pointless to post it again. I know you cannot and will not post what Nellie, Jackie, and JBC confirmed in their statements. For someone who claims to be incredibly knowledgeable about witness testimonies, you sure are playing the dumb card on this, but for good reason.

If you do not want to address what these witnesses really stated and confirmed in each other’s statements and instead press forward once again with this fantasy nonsense go for it. The statements of Nellie, Jackie and JBC cross confirming each other have been posted a myriad of times. The fact you choose to ignore them says it all.

I just asked for a simple cite. We all know there are none. You have admitted as much by your refusal to provide any.

[Jack Nessan]

I just asked for a simple cite. We all know there are none. You have admitted as much by your refusal to provide any.

Cite what? No, there is nothing new here. You are well aware of what these witnesses stated. Ignoring the key parts of the witness statements and pretend they did not say them. Doing it with Mary Woodwards as well as Nellies, Jackies, and JBC’s. All in an attempt to promote this bizarre theory. For the umpteenth time you expect to have your hand held and be walked through it.

[Andrew Mason]

Cite what? No, there is nothing new here. You are well aware of what these witnesses stated. Ignoring the key parts of the witness statements and pretend they did not say them. Doing it with Mary Woodwards as well as Nellies, Jackies, and JBC’s. All in an attempt to promote this bizarre theory. For the umpteenth time you expect to have your hand held and be walked through it.

It would take fewer typing strokes to just provide a cite to where JBC and/or Nellie said that JBC was hit in the back by the first shot.... But I can understand the difficulty in doing that.  Either admit that there is no such source and save us time of responding to your posts, or provide the source.

For the purposes of this discussion, my "theory" is simply that JBC was hit in the back by the second shot. How is that bizarre?  You may disagree with it, but that does not make it bizarre.  What is bizarre is maintaining that JBC and Nellie both said that JBC was hit in the back by the first shot but being unable to provide a source...

[Jack Nessan]

It would take fewer typing strokes to just provide a cite to where JBC and/or Nellie said that JBC was hit in the back by the first shot.... But I can understand the difficulty in doing that.  Either admit that there is no such source and save us time of responding to your posts, or provide the source.

For the purposes of this discussion, my "theory" is simply that JBC was hit in the back by the second shot. How is that bizarre?  You may disagree with it, but that does not make it bizarre.  What is bizarre is maintaining that JBC and Nellie both said that JBC was hit in the back by the first shot but being unable to provide a source...

This is just flat out pathetic. Actually, it is beyond pathetic but totally typical of your interpretive skills. Given how many times their collective corroborating statements have been posted you now are pretending you don’t know anything about their testimonies, but yet you just quoted JBC.

Just like Mary Woodward’s statement about the first shot after JFK turned and faced forward, once again being ignorant is your go to response.

[Andrew Mason]

This is just flat out pathetic. Actually, it is beyond pathetic but totally typical of your interpretive skills. Given how many times their collective corroborating statements have been posted you now are pretending you don’t know anything about their testimonies, but yet you just quoted JBC.

Just like Mary Woodward’s statement about the first shot after JFK turned and faced forward, once again being ignorant is your go to response.

Is it that hard to give us a cite for a statement by JBC stating that he was hit in the back on the first shot and not the second? 

If such a statement exists as you say, it should take you much less time to provide it than it takes to think up new epithets for my beyond pathetic lack of interpretive skills. Besides it is not about interpreting his statements.  He spoke English.  It is about reading what he said. 

[Jack Nessan]

Is it that hard to give us a cite for a statement by JBC stating that he was hit in the back on the first shot and not the second? 

If such a statement exists as you say, it should take you much less time to provide it than it takes to think up new epithets for my beyond pathetic lack of interpretive skills. Besides it is not about interpreting his statements.  He spoke English.  It is about reading what he said.

If you are not interested enough to educate yourself then let it go. It was pointed out to you many times.

[Andrew Mason]

If you are not interested enough to educate yourself then let it go. It was pointed out to you many times.

I would have thought that a statement by Governor Connally or Nellie stating that he was hit in the back by the first shot would have been such a remarkable find that you would have no trouble finding it. 

Or perhaps I am misinterpreting your posts.  Are you saying that I am supposed to interpret your posts saying that they said he was hit in the back by the second shot to mean that they didn't actually say this but said the opposite AND I am supposed to interpret their statements as if they meant the opposite of what they said.

Unfortunately, my interpretive skills are too pathetic to do that.  So just give us the cite.