Ten years after the coup d e'tat in Dallas, the HSCA determined that President Kennedy had been murdered by a group ( unnamed) of conspirators. There has been ship loads of evidence uncovered that lead to the undeniable conclusion that Lee Oswald was merely a hapless kid who fancied himself to be a budding Herb Philbrick, who allowed himself to be suckered into the role of scapegoat .
All of us have learned of the many nefarious and devious plots hatched by the CIA in their efforts to stir up trouble and start wars. There can be no denial of these facts. So why do some folks refuse to believe that Lee Oswald was simply a "Patsy", who was used by US intelligence agents? Do those folks truly believe the Warren Report? ( It hard to to believe that any intelligent reasoning adult would embrace the Warren Report as the truth) Do they know the truth, and simply lack the guts to face the truth....or are they in reality agents of the conspiracy? Still struggling after all these years to try to keep the truth hidden.
Walter,
KGB-boy Vladimir Putin loves you (and Mark Lane, and Jim Garrison, and Oliver Stone, and Roger Stone, and James "Jumbo Duh" DiEugenio at the so-called Education Forum, et al.) for what you do.
Keep up the good work, Comrade.
-- MWT ;)
Tommy ...you are a good example of someone who would buy Sea shore property in Arizona.......
People deny UFO’s and Bigfoot for the same reasons. Lack of hard, credible, undisputed evidence.
Just putting this up here. Tom...Bill...Paul...John M -- care to at least try to explain how the so-called through and through shot that never was hit where the lower white mark is on the stand in and supposedly came out on the other side where the white mark on the neck area is?
Keep in mind that these are your heroes - FBI agents - during the official reenactment of the case several months after 11/22.
No "well, what about this?" or "what about that?" Explain please.
***
Here's one of my all-time favorite photos. The official investigation has begun. Investigators have marked the Kennedy stand-in's back and we're in Dealey Plaza to boot. The marks on the back are based on the measurements from the official autopsy and all are very accurate.
I would love to have been a fly on the wall during this reenactment listening in:
GMan 1: "How in the hell was that back shot [which was a shallow wound and no through and through exit per the autopsy] supposed to come out his neck like we got it marked here?"
GMan 2: "Beats me."
LOLOLOL!
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4gdWxEAnONc/XdgYq04sAqI/AAAAAAAAFdE/5vYcXgq0EgU1pGsHfVT67PHfvbXREt7JQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/1964_FBI_REENACTMENT_color4.jpg)
Just putting this up here. Tom...Bill...Paul...John M -- care to at least try to explain how the so-called through and through shot that never was hit where the lower white mark is on the stand in and supposedly came out on the other side where the white mark on the neck area is?
Keep in mind that these are your heroes - FBI agents - during the official reenactment of the case several months after 11/22.
No "well, what about this?" or "what about that?" Explain please.
***
Here's one of my all-time favorite photos. The official investigation has begun. Investigators have marked the Kennedy stand-in's back and we're in Dealey Plaza to boot. The marks on the back are based on the measurements from the official autopsy and all are very accurate.
I would love to have been a fly on the wall during this reenactment listening in:
GMan 1: "How in the hell was that back shot [which was a shallow wound and no through and through exit per the autopsy] supposed to come out his neck like we got it marked here?"
GMan 2: "Beats me."
LOLOLOL!
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4gdWxEAnONc/XdgYq04sAqI/AAAAAAAAFdE/5vYcXgq0EgU1pGsHfVT67PHfvbXREt7JQCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/1964_FBI_REENACTMENT_color4.jpg)
Connally's jumpseat was lower than the one in the re-enactment car. Also the "Kennedy" stand-in couldn't get himself as far to the right as Kennedy actually did. When you adjust for those things, the SBT trajectory at ca.Z223 works out fine.
Jerry and Bill...
You're both basically just throwing stuff up here. Neither of you have explained how the FBI, knowing the wound positioning based on the autopsy, put stickers almost precisely where the wounds are located (wound on the back and one on the throat showing on the back of the neck) and yet neither of these wound stickers reconcile with one another.
Why are both of you talking about the raising and lowering of the seat(s)? Whether Kennedy or JBC were sitting higher or lower, it makes no difference as it does NOT explain how a supposed shot from 90 feet high in the air would hit Kennedy's back and exit ABOVE a bullet with a downward trajectory. Precisely where the marks are on the stand-in.
You're going to have to do much, much better than that.
Connally's jumpseat was lower than the one in the re-enactment car. Also the "Kennedy" stand-in couldn't get himself as far to the right as Kennedy actually did. When you adjust for those things, the SBT trajectory at ca.Z223 works out fine.
Why don't you show us how the MB trajectory worked out fine. Point 2 lasers at each other as depicted below and get in between them ANY WAY YOU LIKE, and duplicate the entrance/exit wounds on JFK.
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/2lasers.jpg)
Cheap and easy way to convince yourself and everyone the MB trajectory works fine. Mytton couldn't do it, but maybe you'll have better luck.
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/2lasers.jpg)
Sure. Whatever. A cartoon outline figure equates Kennedy's seated position in the motorcade.
???
The shooter used a laser gun? Okay, sure...
Anyway, Oswald showed how it worked out fine
???
The jump seat makes all the difference. Take a look at the images showing the actual placement of the two all along the parade route. Dude, FFS already..
The top sticker indicates the twofer either exited the mouth or Kennedy had his tie and shirt pulled up over his chin.
???
The shooter used a laser gun? Okay, sure...
Anyway, Oswald showed how it worked out fine
Now you're just being disingenuous here, Bill. Put another way, you're just being an asshat here now, Bill.
Based on these particular photos, and with the stand-in more upright than Kennedy, ...Cue Cakebread to point out the car, stand-ins and where car is currently stopped are not the same as those on the day of the assassination.
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Bullet enters base of the back of
"Kennedy's" neck (mark on jacket).
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Goes downward to exit at level of tie knot.
Uh, no, Bill. It doesn't. What does make a difference are the markings on the stand-in's backside there. Explain how a bullet heading downward would exit *above* on the other side like the marks show. That's an official reenactment (your heroes) you see there, Bill, and they're going by the autopsy findings, also official.
I don't see any markings on anyone's backside
I don't see the Kennedy vehicle
I don't see the JFK/JBC stand-ins seated properly
What I see is a shabby reenactment
What I see is the top marking having Kennedy spitting chicklets upon exit
Sure, Bill, sure. So what you're basically saying here is the US government's investigation of the murdered president was "shabby," right?
FINALLY - some truth from the Oswald Did It crowd!
Thumb1:
I don't agree with the methodology of this particular reenactment. You're the one presenting a reenactment, that is missing the proper ingredients, as the be-all and end-all of official government findings.
The jump seat makes all the difference whether you like it or not.
EDIT: 2:00pm EST
The Warren Commission Report attempted to summarize the autopsy:
"The autopsy examination further disclosed that, after entering the President, the bullet passed between two large muscles, produced a contusion on the upper part of the pleural cavity (without penetrating that cavity), bruised the top portion of the right lung and ripped the windpipe (trachea) in its path through the President's neck. The examining surgeons concluded that the wounds were caused by the bullet rather than the tracheotomy performed at Parkland Hospital. The nature of the bruises indicated that the President's heart and lungs were functioning when the bruises were caused, whereas there was very little circulation in the President's body when incisions on the President's chest were made to insert tubes during the tracheotomy."
The takeaway here being that there was no bruising caused by the tracheotomy, which meant that JFK was already dead. So unless JFK was struggling to breath, why perform one? And why not insert the trach tube into the bullet hole instead of creating a ragged mess? Was that standard procedure?
"No bone was struck by the bullet which passed through the President's body. By projecting from a point of entry on the rear of the neck and proceeding at a slight downward angle through the bruised interior portions, the doctors concluded that the bullet exited from the front portion of the President's neck that had been cut away by the tracheotomy."
Looks like the missile passed thru bone to me, T1 to be specific.
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/x-ray_mb.gif)
I guess they were covering for the intact condition of CE-399 before they were informed it magically created multiple wounds in JFK and Connally, smashing thru at least 3 bones before dropping onto the wrong stretcher without a trace of blood, tissue or bone on it in "swimming pool" condition.
"Concluding that a bullet passed through the President's neck, the doctors at Bethesda Naval Hospital rejected a theory that the bullet lodged in the large muscles in the back of his neck and fell out through the point of entry when external heart massage was applied at Parkland Hospital. In the earlier stages of the autopsy, the surgeons were unable to find a path into any large muscle in the back of the neck. At that time they did not know that there had been a bullet hole in the front of the President's neck when he arrived at Parkland Hospital because the tracheotomy incision had completely eliminated that evidence. While the autopsy was being performed, surgeons learned that a whole bullet had been found at Parkland Hospital on a stretcher which, at that time, was thought to be the stretcher occupied by the President. This led to speculation that the bullet might have penetrated a short distance into the back of the neck and then dropped out onto the stretcher as a result of the external heart massage."
Wherein the Magic Bullet was born. "..dropped out onto the stretcher as a result of the external heart massage". Sure, onto the wrong stretcher. It defies logic to think CE-399 wasn't planted.
"Further exploration during the autopsy disproved that theory. The surgeons determined that the bullet had passed between two large strap muscles and bruised them without leaving any channel, since the bullet merely passed between them. Commander Humes, who believed that a tracheotomy had been performed from his observations at the autopsy, talked by telephone with Dr. Perry early on the morning of November 23, and learned that his assumption was correct and that Dr. Perry had used the missile wound in the neck as the point to make the incision. This confirmed the Bethesda surgeons' conclusion that the bullet had exited from the front part of the neck."
The surgeons' official conclusion was that the magic bullet struck JFK right of center at the T1 vertebrae and exited center of the throat at the C7 vertebrae, without touching bone. However, there are at least 2 things wrong with those assumptions:
1) The missile path could not have avoided the T1 vertebrae (see x-ray above).
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/MRI_MB_T1_8b.png)
2) There wasn't a straight line trajectory from the 6th floor of the TSBD striking JFK's back at T1 and exiting at C7. Given the geometric parameters as established by the WC we have the following scenario:
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/C7_17deg.jpg)
The ONLY way to support the Magic Bullet Theory is to sit in between 2 lasers pointed at each other at a 17 degree angle and reproduce JFK's back/throat wounds then post the results.
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/2lasers.jpg)
I've been waiting for years now and still no takers.
Your "high-tech" laser test will always produce false positives.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/bf/3c/wdf8qvo1_o.png)
Reasonable person with a legitimate interest in the truth of the case don't want to be misled by magician tricks from conspiracy loons with set-agendas.
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/MRI_MB_T1_8b.png)
That's misleading. The bullet exit through the midline (or slightly left of same) at the lower neck at the front. This graphic has the bullet going through the frontal midline of the trachea.
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/x-ray_mb.gif)
Not missing bone. But thanks for highlighting the air in the missile passage the HSCA consultants said was there.
First you claim about the re-enactment photo: "The marks on the back are based on the measurements from the official autopsy and all are very accurate." Now you say "there is no report at all of any rear neck wound as marked in the area above the upper back wound in that reenactment photo".
We're trying to follow what you say but you throw out contradictions and now you've added an autopsy picture.
Now you're talking about the autopsy photo (I guess). Have you allowed for the back surface in the autopsy photo being photographed at a much more oblique angle than the re-enactment photo was taken at? A reasonable person wouldn't just take an autopsy photo and slap it onto some other photo without determining if the camera angles were similar.
That an autopsy photo was taken at a different camera angle than a motorcade photo seems a "real life" consideration. That Kennedy's posture in the motorcade was different than "perfect posture" seems a legitimate reflection of "real life".
I don't agree with the methodology of this particular reenactment. You're the one presenting a reenactment, that is missing the proper ingredients, as the be-all and end-all of official government findings.
The jump seat makes all the difference whether you like it or not.
EDIT: 2:00pm EST
Your "high-tech" laser test will always produce false positives.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/bf/3c/wdf8qvo1_o.png)
Reasonable person with a legitimate interest in the truth of the case don't want to be misled by magician tricks from conspiracy loons with set-agendas.
How did the jump seat affect the MB bullet path thru JFK? If it can be shown that the trajectory of the MB thru JFK does not match the trajectory from the 6th floor of the TSBD, then Houston, we have a problem (smoking gun), which all you LNers conveniently ignore, for obvious reasons.
We're through the looking glass here. This comes down to basic geometry and proof that Oswald was not responsible for the MB.
Bump.
Sure, Bill, sure. So now we're into the methodology of it. LOL. And proper ingredients. Sounds rich. You can't have it both ways, Bill. You can't buy all into it while also disagreeing with methodologies and proper ingredients, Bill. If that's the case, what about the methodologies and proper ingredients of the Magic Bullet doing all it supposedly did? And so on...
We're getting into Patty Cake territory now. Sure, Bill, sure.
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/610inNLHtIL.jpg)
:D You mad fools! You STILL don't get it. No wonder you're LNers, you have no sense of logic or critical thinking.
I can't show you that the MB can't be done. That would be trying to prove a negative and you would accuse me of not trying hard enough. Only you can prove it was possible and you sure as hell can't do it with drawings and graphics. You guys have to get off the pot and conduct a real live physical experiment for once in your lives.
If you are so damned sure that JFK's slouch allowed the MB to "work fine", then bloody well show it with a re-enactment. Slouch in your chair just like JFK did (or find someone who can) and position yourself so that the high laser strikes you 2 inches right of the spine at the T1 vertebrae and the low laser strikes you in the throat at the C7 vertebrae. Then take a couple of photos showing your body position and the 2 laser dots that makes the MB work fine. You don't even have to post the photos. They are your own personal proof that the MB was possible and no one can take that away from you! ;)
As for Mytton, he's just barely competent enough to know the significance of doing this laser re-enactment, which is why he did it long ago hoping to make me eat crow. I'm still waiting.
Why do people keep referring to Croft when nobody believes that the alleged single bullet hit JFK at the time of Croft?
Croft was taken at Zapruder frame 161.
This GIF is the Zapruder film from Z161 through to after Kennedy emerges from behind the sign.
Why do people keep referring to Croft when nobody believes that the alleged single bullet hit JFK at the time of Croft?
Trojan's experiment is right out of Rube Goldberg.
Imagine using a protractor on a laser. And do you need positional mounts for the lasers? Do you mount the back laser on the wall or ceiling?
Instead of two lasers, you only need one. Position the laser and take a photo with no one there, and without moving the camera, take another with a person breaking the beam. Then superimpose the pictures.
But first you need to measure the laser beam angle on the photo until it gets to 17-degrees, assuming the camera is at a right angle to the laser beam. That's just the technical set-up. One has to figure out the posture requirements, which renders the whole experiment subjective.
:D You mad fools! You STILL don't get it. No wonder you're LNers, you have no sense of logic or critical thinking.
I can't show you that the MB can't be done. That would be trying to prove a negative and you would accuse me of not trying hard enough. Only you can prove it was possible and you sure as hell can't do it with drawings and graphics. You guys have to get off the pot and conduct a real live physical experiment for once in your lives.
If you are so damned sure that JFK's slouch allowed the MB to "work fine", then bloody well show it with a re-enactment. Slouch in your chair just like JFK did (or find someone who can) and position yourself so that the high laser strikes you 2 inches right of the spine at the T1 vertebrae and the low laser strikes you in the throat at the C7 vertebrae. Then take a couple of photos showing your body position and the 2 laser dots that makes the MB work fine. You don't even have to post the photos. They are your own personal proof that the MB was possible and no one can take that away from you! ;)
As for Mytton, he's just barely competent enough to know the significance of doing this laser re-enactment, which is why he did it long ago hoping to make me eat crow. I'm still waiting.
Jerry, why aren't you getting this? The set up couldn't be easier or clearer. You just need to understand geometry a little better than you do. You can easily angle the low laser 17 degrees by using a tiny bit of trig to work out the opposite and adjacent sides of the triangle. The opposite side is where you position the high laser and you position it exactly where the red dot from the low laser strikes it. Then you aim the high laser at the low laser so that they have a coincident alignment of their beams. With this the set up is complete.
And yes, you do need 2 lasers to simulate the straight line path thru your body to identify the entrance and exit wounds. You can't do that with a single laser because you need simultaneous red dots on your body estimating the MB wounds. You certainly can't take one photo, move the laser and take another photo and expect your body to be in the exact same position as the 1st photo. Comprende?
When you find a solution that works fine, note your body position and compare that to JFK's. If you think you have a match then post the results and make me eat crow.
2 leveling lasers cost me $35 bucks, I found an old protractor from grade school (even though you can use trig instead), I used a camera tripod for the high laser and it took me about 10 minutes to set the whole thing up. And after many minutes of work, I just couldn't make the MB work for me. Maybe you will have better luck. As for JFK, he must have had a grossly disfigured spine or he was bent over so far he could kiss his own ass goodbye.
We can poo-poo each other's graphics until the cows come home, and rightly so, but you can't effectively argue against a re-enactment with a surrogate based on valid geometry. EOS.
Surely, it's already been proven to be possible as that's what happened on 22nd November, 1963 so there's no need for a re-enactment.
If you're saying the shot didn't come from the 6th floor of the Texas Book Depository, where are you suggesting it came from then? Or are you disregarding the majority of every witness in Dealey Plaza that day's testimony? Where did your non-existent laser experiment pin point the shot to come from?
You can't re-enact this with levelling lasers that cost you $35 bucks. You can't re-enact it by shooting real bullets through ram's heads or silicon wrapped in animal skin. The shot, the bullet, the rifle, the angle, the reaction of the live human body muscles as the bullet makes contact, the ricochet off human bone, etc. make the shot truly unique and totally impossible to re-enact.
No matter how many times you do it, no matter whether you shoot at a living person or synthetic you WILL NOT get an accurate or identical outcome so why bother to argue that it didn't happen?
"..already proven possible..because it happened". Not very scientific or logical of you to see no need for a re-enactment, and don't call me Shirley. ;D
What the laser experiment demonstrates to you is that at the moment that JFK was struck by the MB it could not have taken a straight line path into JFK's back and out his throat if the shot came from the 6th floor of the TSBD. Otherwise, conduct the experiment yourself and prove me wrong. Don't just tell me I'm wrong because you don't understand the experiment.
Given the angle of the MB thru JFK, its only valid trajectory was from the 2nd floor of the Dal-Tex building. You asked. ;)
Why are you so convinced that nobody on here understands the concept of your experiment? I do understand it but, as stated elsewhere on this topic thread, it's impossible to re-enact a once in infinity occurrence.
Assuming that you did get President Kennedy's posture correct, your laser experiment then presumes that absolutely nothing interfered with the bullet's trajectory from the moment the shot was fired until the bullet exited the President's throat. A laser cannot measure the exact angle the bullet left the rifle, the conditions in Dealey Plaza that day, how the bullet reacted when ripping through live human muscle and flesh, etc. Even the most unbelievably minuscule slight movement would effect the outcome. The reaction of a live bullet traveling through a live human body cannot be measured by a laser and even shooting a live person through the back of the neck from the same angle wouldn't have the same outcome. It just doesn't work like that.
It already happened, that's it you can't recreate it. You can't ask someone to re-enact something like this.
Conspiracy theorists don't believe two planes flying into the World Trade Centre would cause both towers to collapse but it happened. I suppose you'd ask someone to re-enact that t prove it's possible too?
I'm using your LNer criteria to test the MB, which doesn't include any ricochet off JFK's bones. Humes concluded the bullet took a straight line path thru JFK without touching bone. That's why the MB was pristine and showed up on the wrong stretcher. Forget that it smashed thru Connally's bones and according to you, ricocheted off JFK's spine.
What my experiment tells you is that it couldn't have happened the way the WC said it did. Isn't that worth a re-enactment?
:D you talk like Mytton.
Surely, it's already been proven to be possible as that's what happened on 22nd November, 1963 so there's no need for a re-enactment.
Surely, it's already been proven to be possible as that's what happened on 22nd November, 1963 so there's no need for a re-enactment.
Circular argument (n.): see circular argument
You can't re-enact this with levelling lasers that cost you $35 bucks. You can't re-enact it by shooting real bullets through ram's heads or silicon wrapped in animal skin. The shot, the bullet, the rifle, the angle, the reaction of the live human body muscles as the bullet makes contact, the ricochet off human bone, etc. make the shot truly unique and totally impossible to re-enact.
No matter how many times you do it, no matter whether you shoot at a living person or synthetic you WILL NOT get an accurate or identical outcome so why bother to argue that it didn't happen?
I didn't say to have a model in the picture before ensuring there appeared a 17-degree beam angle in the picture. You start doing model shots with a site-fixed camera AFTER the beam angle is set. Preferably having someone on the camera directing the model. Someone aware of Kennedy's actual position in the motorcade.
Great. When are we going to see your laser-experiment photos to compare your body position to JFK's?
(https://images2.imgbox.com/bf/3c/wdf8qvo1_o.png)
This represents "a grossly disfigured spine" and/or Olympic-style contortion?
No one's disputing the ability to construct a 17-degree laser beam and take a picture of someone sitting in its path. When we now need to do is see how close your body position is to Kennedy's in the motorcade. If off, we can declare your own personal experiment, rather than the MB, a failure. What you're doing is declaring the MB a failure based on a personal experiment that hasn't been vetted.
Not only that, but also a contradiction, when one considers this is what he said next...
How in the world can Baxter argue that the shot has been proven, when next he says that it's impossible to re-enact the shot?
It's classic LN crap again; "I say the shot happened that way and since you can not prove it didn't happen, I win by default" Pathetic!
Not quite sure what you're point is here, Weidmann. It's comes across as if you're saying that the shot can't be proven to have happened simply because I've said it's impossible to accurately re-enact it. Maybe you need to reword your argument because at the moment that clearly just doesn't make any sense.
I'm not personally saying the shot happened that way, clearly I haven't done my own investigation into it and I'm nowhere even near qualified to do so even if I wanted to, but this was the official verdict given by a team of respected professionals who were qualified to do such an investigation. Now, when you take everything into account and the evidence and facts that have been laid out on this matter, I personally choose to believe that that was the way it happened.
Even the majority of CTs have long dismissed the magic bullet argument and acknowledge that Oswald (most likely) shot bullet CE399 from the 6th floor TBD window. Its the third and fatal shot that is where most people disagree.
All you seem to do is refute everyones opinion by saying "Facts? Where are your facts that this is 100% what happened?" offering absolutely no facts or counter argument yourself to prove otherwise. Yeah, I know you're going to come back with your usual "You said something so you need to prove it, I don't have to provide evidence to say it's not true" which is all very repetitive, lazy and extremely convenient for you, isn't it?
What do you actually believe? All you go on about is needing "facts" and considering there are very few 100% dead cert facts in this entire case people come to their own conclusions based on what information is out there. Are you totally on the fence with no opinion one way or the other until someone finally comes up with actual hard evidence?
All I've ever seen you do is dismiss everything you don't agree with by asking for "proof" and "evidence" without ever making any decent points or counter arguments yourself. Basically, Weidmann, you're just very boring.
Laddie boy, we're all getting onto you.
Oh, I'm pretty sure you're incapable of convincing PhotoShopping. What I believe is that your photos are authentic but they conflict with the President's posture in the motorcade. Perhaps we'll all see what controls are present, like a camera-operator and still model.
Evidently a surrogate can sit anyway he wants and proclaim results without documentation. As far as we know, this is how you posed and the extent of your camera angle.
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/2lasers.jpg)
This sets a new standard. I can do 3D work and simply proclaim my results without publishing.
"What my experiment tells you is that it couldn't
have happened the way the WC said it did."
We've gone thru the looking glass, alright.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/bf/3c/wdf8qvo1_o.png)
Wow. It's now a cheat to utilize motorcade photos to demonstrate actual body positions. You're not Andrew Mason?
Not quite sure what you're point is here, Weidmann.
Now, there's a surprise...
but this was the official verdict given by a team of respected professionals who were qualified to do such an investigation.
Are you serious or just oblivious to the facts? The Magic Bullet theory (it's not called that for nothing) was Arlen Specter's invention when they ended up with only two bullets to account for all the wounds. The alternative would have been more that three bullets and thus a conspiracy. And they didn't want to go there...
I personally choose to believe that that was the way it happened.
Great. That means what you believe can also be wrong which in turn means that anything you claim like "the shot has been proven" is just your belief and not worth a damn thing.
Even the majority of CTs have long dismissed the magic bullet argument and acknowledge that Oswald (most likely) shot bullet CE399 from the 6th floor TBD window.
Really? That's strange, because most CTs I know don't even believe that the bullet now in evidence as CE399 was fired that day or ever was at Parkland Hospital.
All you seem to do is refute everyones opinion by saying "Facts? Where are your facts that this is 100% what happened?" offering absolutely no facts or counter argument yourself to prove otherwise.
Having an opinion is one thing, presenting it as fact (as most, if not all LNs do) is an entirely different matter. Facts always trump opinions. Don't claim something happened if you can't back it up with factual evidence.
Yeah, I know you're going to come back with your usual "You said something so you need to prove it, I don't have to provide evidence to say it's not true" which is all very repetitive, lazy and extremely convenient for you, isn't it?
Yes, it's also the way it should be. You make a claim, you prove it. What is it with guys like you? You just want to make wild and unsupported claims without being able to back them up with evidence? Ain't gonna happen!
What do you actually believe?
I believe that Kennedy and Tippit were both murdered and that there are (on both sides of the argument) individuals who are not able or willing to honestly discuss the case and who are only defending their biased opinions
All you go on about is needing "facts" and considering there are very few 100% dead cert facts in this entire case people come to their own conclusions based on what information is out there.
That's fair enough as long as those conclusions are not presented as "fact" and there is a willingness to discuss those conclusions with an open mind.
Are you totally on the fence with no opinion one way or the other
Yes, I have no predetermined opinion and in many ways, at this point in time, I couldn't care less if Oswald did it alone or if there was a conspiracy. I just want to try to find out for myself what actually happened. Not that it will make a damn bit of difference one way of the other, in the bigger scheme of things. Oswald has been dead for 56 years, history books have been written and the world keeps on turning regardless of my opinion. Which is exactly why I never give my opinion. I just want to examine the details of the case and for that I need facts!
All I've ever seen you do is dismiss everything you don't agree with by asking for "proof" and "evidence" without ever making any decent points or counter arguments yourself.
If that's all you've ever seen, than you haven't looked well and far enough. The notion that I dismiss something because I don't agree with it is absurd. I ask for proof and evidence to learn more about the substance of the argument being made. And as for "decent points or counter arguments", you really should check my posting history. When you do, you will not only find that you are wrong, but also that LNs very quickly run from the actual facts simply because they can not answer simple questions.
Basically, Weidmann, you're just very boring.
:D
YAWN! ::)
So as suspected, you "conveniently" never give your opinion and instead just act all high and mighty and holier-than-thou by just shooting down anyone who gives theirs. Considering your non-committal to either camp, it's odd how you only really seem to refute LNs arguments with your "FACTS! FACTS!" stance.
As said previously, there are very little concrete, set in stone FACTS on the case which is why forums like this exist and why it has been possible for thousands of varying books to written on the case.
Everyone knows that and nobody really tries to present arguments as FACTS on here. It's their opinion followed by why they think that. You're the only one that takes everything so literal. You really need to take that stick out of your arse and chill out. Criticising people for how they word something rather than for what they're actually saying is boring and that's all I really see you do.
And do people really still use the twisting and turning magic bullet theory as an argument? I was under the impression that went out about the same time as the argument that the world was flat.
Everyone knows that and nobody really tries to present arguments as FACTS on here. It's their opinion followed by why they think that.
Laddie boy, we're all getting onto you.
Oh, I'm pretty sure you're incapable of convincing PhotoShopping. What I believe is that your photos are authentic but they conflict with the President's posture in the motorcade. Perhaps we'll all see what controls are present, like a camera-operator and still model.
Evidently a surrogate can sit anyway he wants and proclaim results without documentation. As far as we know, this is how you posed and the extent of your camera angle.
(http://www.readclip.com/JFK/2lasers.jpg)
This sets a new standard. I can do 3D work and simply proclaim my results without publishing.
"What my experiment tells you is that it couldn't
have happened the way the WC said it did."
We've gone thru the looking glass, alright.
(https://images2.imgbox.com/bf/3c/wdf8qvo1_o.png)
Wow. It's now a cheat to utilize motorcade photos to demonstrate actual body positions. You're not Andrew Mason?
It's now a cheat to utilize motorcade photos to demonstrate actual body positions
>>> Absolutely. After all, those motorcade photos were all faked, planted or altered in some way.
And Kennedy was stark naked, sitting bolt-upright on a whoopy cushion. And JBC didn't exist.
Thanks again for your always-useful input.
;)
Great line, bro
Who would of thought that you, of all people, could have come up with such wit
Oh, wait...
Unlike you, I’m not here for the sole purpose of trying to be “witty” (and failing miserably).
Now your claim is conditional, but before ...
"What my experiment tells you is that it couldn't
have happened the way the WC said it did."
So if one does the experiment and the laser strikes match the wound sites from the JFK autopsy, one simply proclaims it and doesn't have to show their pictures?
What are you talking about? Map-making?
Well, we tried to show you that the subject in the autopsy photos was the same man with the same hair, but you argued that he must have been given a haircut during the autopsy. ( Link (https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,2303.msg68783.html#msg68783) )
56 years later... and the single bullet theory is still the stupidest theory ever proposed. A miraculous shot with a miraculous bullet miraculously "found" miraculously intact!
Bill,
Please take it easy on John.
After all, he's been so busy in his garden that all he can see now are blobs.
-- MWT ;)
Bill,
Please take it easy on John.
After all, he's been so busy in his garden that all he can see now are blobs.
-- MWT ;)
nobodyWalt believes that the alleged single bullet hit JFK at the time of Croft?
Mr Iacoletti ..... I'm not sure how precise you are being when you say the single bullet hit JFK at the instant that Croft snapped the shutter.....But I believe that Croft snapped the shutter a split second after the bullet passed through JFK's throat .....However my name is not Nobody.....
The Croft photo was taken 3.33 sec before Z223. It's the best-quality semi-profile image we have of Kennedy and Connally prior-to-and-including Z223-226. Since there is no obvious change in posture between the two points, it's reasonable to use the Croft photo to determine the President's posture.
It's pretty close but it's unclear if they've adjusted for the jacket bunch. The Commission was aware of the bunch at some stage because it's in theBibleReport.
Willis 05 and Betzner--sometimes used to show no bunch--lack the resolution to show something as subtle as a jacket collar line;
The bunch is more-readily seen in the Towner and Croft photos.
A lot can happen in 3.33 seconds.
From Love Field through to Croft 120,000+ seconds later there is absolutely no evidence that Kennedy's jacket wasn't bunched but as a last desperate grasp of conspiracy you unrealistically rely on "A lot can happen in 3.33 seconds". Lame, very lame.
From Love Field through to Croft 120,000+ seconds later there is absolutely no evidence that Kennedy's jacket wasn't bunched but as a last desperate grasp of conspiracy you unrealistically rely on "A lot can happen in 3.33 seconds". Lame, very lame.
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcR4G7TX9qvMbpAyjBBmFP2w9MI9ZXsCmR70fxwa6cDOIw3LDfhz)
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcQBtAlT6NXYdu2mBP0itCGdPD4a8l36Hhx5v_lJQVgWAYH6svO9)
Here's the Zapruder film from Croft through to after JFK emerges from behind the sign and all JFK can be seen doing is lifting his right arm and waving.
(https://i.postimg.cc/9Q1rnDFp/zap-z161-z230.gif)
JohnM
You know what’s a lame argument? The idea that “there’s no evidence the jacket wasn’t bunched” is somehow an argument for it actually being bunched at the time he was shot.
Not so fast, John
A lot can happen in 33.3 seconds
'The Picard Maneuver', for instance:
It could have been even MORE bunched at the time he was hit.. yes, a lot can happen in those 33.3 seconds
Has Chapman ever posted anything relevant?
Coulda, woulda, shoulda.
Probably.
So, no evidence that his jacket and shirt were equally bunched at the time of the back shot, but oh look here are some YouTube clips from Star Trek and Terminator movies.
Ten years after the coup d e'tat in Dallas, the HSCA determined that President Kennedy had been murdered by a group ( unnamed) of conspirators. There has been ship loads of evidence uncovered that lead to the undeniable conclusion that Lee Oswald was merely a hapless kid who fancied himself to be a budding Herb Philbrick, who allowed himself to be suckered into the role of scapegoat .
All of us have learned of the many nefarious and devious plots hatched by the CIA in their efforts to stir up trouble and start wars. There can be no denial of these facts. So why do some folks refuse to believe that Lee Oswald was simply a "Patsy", who was used by US intelligence agents? Do those folks truly believe the Warren Report? ( It hard to to believe that any intelligent reasoning adult would embrace the Warren Report as the truth) Do they know the truth, and simply lack the guts to face the truth....or are they in reality agents of the conspiracy? Still struggling after all these years to try to keep the truth hidden.
https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1974/2/6/the-rise-and-fall-of-big/
The Rise and Fall of Big Jim G.
Politics
By Nicholas Lemann,
February 6, 1974
ONE OF THE OLDEST saws about Southern politics runs something like this: If only a politician in the South could run with the united support of blacks and blue-collar whites, he would be unbeatable. And since he wouldn't be tied to the rich whites who control the South, he could really change things. Only a very few Southern politicians have been able to put together this mythical coalition, but Jim Garrison, the six-and-a-half foot tall New Orleans district attorney who lost his third reelection campaign in December, remained politically powerful in New Orleans for years with a loyal black and blue-collar white constituency. ...
......
https://jfkfacts.org/provocative-prolific-joan-mellen/#comment-869223
......Quotehttps://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Unredacted_-_Episode_1_-_Transcript.html.....
Unredacted Episode 1: Transcript of Interview with Joan Mellen
Joan Mellen is the author of A Farewell to Justice: Jim Garrison, JFK’s Assassination, and the Case That Should Have Changed History. This interview was conducted on 22 Feb 2006. Tyler Weaver provided the introduction, and the interview was conducted by Rex Bradford.
…….
REX: I – I think –
JOAN: – when (Atty Edward) Baldwin was present, he was a CIA asset, his brother (David) worked for the International Trade Mart and Clay Shaw, David Baldwin, and these, these are CIA people….
.........In the course of attempting to determine if my new fact checked research details were actually original, I found identical details, by author of a biography of Clay Shaw,
Donald H Carpenter.-
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-knckgt3ASNI/Vrd2i7xQ1aI/AAAAAAAACvc/m_y25b9LkuA/s512-Ic42/BaldwinFirstCousinCarpenter.jpg)
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-6e7iexAG0lM/Vrds4GJIGUI/AAAAAAAACvM/3WomDDWJrMw/s512-Ic42/BaldwinLemannStepsisterCarpenter.jpg)
https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/806/603/1747985/
Russo v. Conde Nast Publications, 806 F. Supp. 603 (E.D. La. 1992)
US District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana - 806 F. Supp. 603 (E.D. La. 1992)
November 17, 1992
......UNDISPUTED FACTUAL BACKGROUND:
In its January, 1992 issue, GQ Magazine published an article entitled "The Case Against Jim Garrison" (hereafter the "GQ article"). The GQ article was written by Nicholas B. Lemann, a New Orleans native and winner of numerous awards for his books and articles. The GQ article was a personal memoir[1] of Lemann's recollections of growing up in New Orleans during District Attorney Jim Garrison's prosecution of Clay Shaw for allegedly conspiring to assassinate JFK.
The 1991 movie release, JFK sparked renewed interest in the assassination as well as the prosecution itself of Clay Shaw. The film was purportedly based on Garrison's book, On the Trail of Assassins, and sympathetically portrayed Garrison.
The GQ article published by Lemann took a different slant, expressing his view that Shaw's prosecution was built on flimsy evidence and was a tremendous embarrassment to the city.[2] The thrust of Lemann's article was his opinion countering that expressed by Stone in his film release JFK, to wit:
......
The FBI, JFK and JIm Garrison
By James DiEugenio, Wednesday at 12:26 PM in JFK Assassination Debate
This was my presentation at CAPA.
I had not been to one of these in about three years. But since Oliver went, so did I. As most of you know, I have been working on Kennedy's foreign policy for about the last 5-6 years. Since Oliver was there, I switched back to my old topic. There are some things in this that I had never brought up at any conference.
https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-fbi-jfk-and-jim-garrison
.pdf version : https://kennedysandking.com/images/pdf/FBI-JFK-Garrison-2019.pdf
The FBI, JFK and Jim Garrison
CAPA November in Dallas, 11/22/2019
Jim DiEugenio with help from Malcolm Blunt
(http://jfkforum.com/images/DiEugenioCAPAcarpenter112219.jpg)
http://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?…d=176&tab=page
2of2 Garrison 06/67 letter to FCC comm. Rosel H. Hyde
(Top of right side column)
…It should be added that the last described endeavor has been accomplished not by members of the station (WDSU) itself, but by an attorney closely connected with the station who has previously been known to disperse funds in the New Orleans area in behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency….
http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=6761&search=lemann#relPageId=152&tab=page
The Case Against Jim Garrison
The ex-D.A.’s theory on who murdered JFK
reassessed and shot full of holes
By Nicholas Lemann….
JFK: The Book of the Film (https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&source=hp&ei=wvjlXf2bDcSMggeum7LQCQ&q=Evidently+GQ+has+forgotten+one+of+the+fundamental+rules+of+American+journalism%3A+&oq=Evidently+GQ+has+forgotten+one+of+the+fundamental+rules+of+American+journalism%3A+&gs_l=psy-ab.3...1442.1442..2305...0.0..0.89.89.1......0....2j1..gws-wiz.fLV58dB7kXo&ved=0ahUKEwj9hIa45ZjmAhVEhuAKHa6NDJoQ4dUDCAc&uact=5): the Documented Screenplay
By Oliver Stone, Zachary Sklar
…..Evidently GQ has forgotten one of the fundamental rules of American journalism: Give the readers both sides of the story. The case for Jim Garrison is not to be found in your pages. Lemann’s glib charges are so sweeping that it’s impossible to respond to all of them in a letter. I suggest anyone interested in Garrison’s case read On the Trail of the Assassins, the former New Orleans district attorney’s own account of his investigation. As the editor of this book, and co-screenwriter of Oliver Stone’s JFK, I take issue with several of Lemann’s unfounded assertions…..
http://jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com/2018/09/walter-machann-interview-excerpts.html
Monday, September 24, 2018
Walter Machann Interview Excerpts
Gayle Nix Jackson's Interview Excerpts with Walter Machann.
For the complete interview - see "Pieces of the Puzzle" (by Gail Nix Jackson 2017)
GAYLE: How did you become the head of the Dallas Catholic Cuban Relief Program?
……The problem here is that the official Warren Commission records indicate that it was not Hosty, but Secret Service Inspector Thomas Kelley, who questioned Machann in New Orleans about the Odio incident. According to these documents, the investigator had Machann call Sylvia Odio on the phone and ask her once again about her visitors. And according to the official report, Odio then said one of the visitors was Rogelio Cisneros, but she later denied saying that.
And then we don’t hear from Machann for many years. When I tracked Machann’s family to Texas and talked to his sister on the phone, she said her brother was in Thailand, where he moved to after leaving the priesthood. I imagined he had continued his theological musings and became a monk, but boy was I wrong.
Machann says that, “My first real job other than being a priest or throwing a newspaper route was working at the Mental Health Halfway house (in New Orleans).”
World Travel—Thailand
After leaving New Orleans, Machann says, “I worked in Florida for a few years in the mental health field. I didn’t like the commercialization of Florida. I lived in West Palm Beach where the rich people were … I traveled throughout Russia with a travel group. It was a break in the Cold War. They wouldn’t let you read just any book, so you had to be careful which books you carried. I bought a Volkswagen in Hamburg in 1968 and drove all the way through the Baltic States, the Czech Republic and the Coast of Spain. I was sleeping in the car and eating just to stay alive. I ran out of money and had to come back home.”
“When I was in New York, I was having a hard time finding a job. I had put in applications to many overseas jobs and WHO just happened to hire me. I moved to Thailand and lived there many years. In fact, I had my son there. Yes, I have a son … Unfortunately, his mother died when he was seven of dengue fever. He basically grew up as an orphan. He had no mother. But he always was interested in philosophy as well. I don’t know how much of who we are is genetic, environment or education, but he was mesmerized by Greek books at a very young age … He did a few tours in Iraq and came back a different man. He tried to find peace here, but eventually moved back to Thailand. I’m going to see him soon.”
“I haven’t talked much about my low points in life, because you don’t go through traumatic changes in your life without discussing your philosophy, emotions, mental state and the like. My wife dying forced me to come back to Texas. That’s when I also found that in life after 40, you become unemployable in the states. My friends tried to get me jobs. Incidentally, one was a medical director at UT Southwestern. He hated the Kennedys. What came out was, he had a tremendous hatred for the Kennedys even though he was from the north. I was kind of shocked. He was one of these New England Harvard graduates, I don’t know. But I knew I didn’t want to work there.”….
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/5347-father-mcchann-and-odios/?tab=comments#comment-44700
William Kelly - Posted November 9, 2005
….
Here's some excerpts from Lafontaine's book regarding McChann, and have read Maryanne Sullivan's book, "Kennedy Ripples - A True Love Story" (1994, San Clemente, Calf.), which Lafontaine calls the "Harlequin Romance" version of the Kennedy assassination, which follows McChann to New Orleans and Florida, but not to Tailand.
Peter Dale Scott has been spending a lot of time in Thailand, and he's awaiting my review of Max Holland's KAT, and I'll ask him about McChann.
Bill Kelly
Bary Kampjfk3@yahoo.com
Machann, Walter Michael, Father –
Also spelled phonetically as MaChann, McCann, McKann and McChan.
From: Oswald Talked – The New Evidence in the JFK Assassination
by Ray and Mary La Fontaine, (Pelican Publishing Co. , Gretna, 1996).
[p.264-265]: “The last time Father Machann was seen in his public role as shepherd of the city’s Catholic exile community was the Tuesday night of October 1, 1963. On that evening, he and other prominent members of the resettlement committee had shared the stage of Highland Park Town Hall with a guest speaker, John Martino, a fifty-two-year-old American and Mafia associate who was on a Bircher-paid tour to talk about his recently published book, ‘I Was Castro’s Prisoner.’ Martino had been imprisoned in Cuba for some thirty-nine months (during which time he befriended Silvia Odio’s father, Amador), and his three-hour book talk dwelled on the barbarism of his confinement by the revolutionary regime – balm to the ars of the gathered refugees and their circle of benefactors on the Town Hall stage…”
......
.........“…investigator Harold Weisberg had also heard that Father Machann entered ‘a home to rest’ following the assassination.”
Page 251: “….A few weeks before the assassination (Fr. Walter M. Machann) had mysteriously dropped out of sight, perhaps from a breakdown, in the city where he had been a lifelong resident. Some weeks later, after the assassination, he quietly left town and has not lived in Dallas since, though returning occasionally to visit his mother. He was last seen in (1993) in Bangkok. (Machann’s mother told Mary in a recent interview that he was visited by the Secret Service or other government investigators as recently as 1992 or 1990.).”
“But in the spring of 1964, Father Machann hadn’t yet made it to Bangkok. That April, apparently at he behest of the Western general counsel J. Lee Rankin, the Secret Service had launched an all-out search for the unusual padre, who was rumored to have bedded a number of women parishioners during his denture as assistant pastor at the Catholic church in east Dallas. After agents failed even to identify the father in Miami (where he had received his training as a Cuban refugee adviser), Secret Service inspector Thomas Kelly managed to locate Machann in New Orleans, interviewing him on Thursday, April 30.”
“The former Dallas priest (he was now on indefinite leave) had been attending classes at LOYOLA UNIVERSITY, and was, as he told Kelly, a frequent visitor of Silvia’s uncle, Dr. Agustin Guitart, a physics professor at the university. Cuitart, it may be recalled, happened also to be a friend of Carlos Bringuier’s, and had attended the New Orleans court hearing of Lee Harvey Oswald following his ‘street scuffle’ with Bringuier and two other members of the local chapter of the Student Revolutionary Directorate (DRE) the previous summer.”
“It wasn’t, of course Machann’s vow-breaking proclivities that interested assassination investigators like Kelley, but the role he was said to have played from 1961 through most of 1963 as chaplain of a Dallas group assisting Cuban refugees; for if rumors were flying concerning the priest’s sexual liaisons, they were even more rampant on a more relevant matter, the possible participation of Cubans – whether pro- or antic-Castro one couldn’t say – in the assassination of the president. On the latter matter, Machann had been in a position to be an invaluable informant.” .....
Stephen B. Lemann, uncle of Nicholas B. Lemann and step-brother of Mildred Lyons Baldwin, and owner of more than ten percent interest in WDSU,
described by Garrison as WDSU outside counsel distributing "CIA funds".....
December 21, 1991, JFK, the movie, is released in theaters.:
January, 1992 issue of GQ Magazine:
No disclosure in Nicholas’s rebuttal to Zachary Sklar, or from Sklar about Lemann’s conflicts/background:
Were Sklar and Stone unaware of critic Nicholas's background because Garrison kept the editor of his biography, Zachary Sklar, as well as Oliver Stone, in the dark?
Here's that Dallas priest, again.... In April, 2016, I received an email from the author Gayle Nix Jackson, whose grandfather made the Nix film. She had contacted Walter Machann and he had agreed to meet with her. He was located through details in his mother's obituary in DMN.
She asked me for suggestions of questions to ask the former priest. The meeting took place but he refused to discuss anything related to the period before he worked on foreign assignment for the U.N. in Asia.
May 26, 1957 DMN article
(http://jfkforum.com/images/OswaldFatherMachann1957.jpg)
(http://jfkforum.com/images/OswaldFatherMachannubans.jpg)
(http://jfkforum.com/images/OswaldStephenLemannMentalHealth.jpg)
(http://jfkforum.com/images/OswaldFatherMachannStephenLemann.jpg)
Bless me, Fadduh, for I have sinned, and have never given a confession, coz' nobody listens anyway.
Great findings (again), Tom. Oh, bytheway....... I see Cardinal Stone has anointed St. Judyth of Bradenton with his Most Holy Oil (from his scalp, maybe?) Got Brylcreem?
33.3 seconds. Seriously, Chapman? So you think your “two-fer” happened on Stemmons Freeway then?
Oops. Just corrected that, TypoSuckJohnny.
You call what I post irrelevant: Tell us why I should engage a contrarian in your interminable blablafuckinbla when I can get my point across in one powerful image.
So after all of the blather here with photos of skinny guys in underwear and photos of the murder taken much earlier but somehow magically being synced up with the Z film. And of faulty methodologies and proper ingredients (or better ingredients if you eat Papa John - LOL), I ask here again:
Here's the FBI reenactment photo down on the ground. The G Men got the wound positioning correct based on the autopsy:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-HB1iPBCsDgI/Xd1Uxg_e6EI/AAAAAAAAFdg/eB3aG9ckbQcdoVnMZxY2O8RNsZPsg8oUwCLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/fbi-and-autopsy.jpg)
And then of course they went ahead and filmed this reenactment from the so-called [throw down] sniper's nest:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-S2-6e9Xgh18/XeJSqIm6fiI/AAAAAAAAFeA/08VQ5up9VcE_DHHDsoT0DIZOHYXEnrPHACLcBGAsYHQ/s1600/not%2Bpossible.png)
You can tell the cast of characters in the first photo are the same as the second during the filmed reenactment. You can also see the sticker exactly where it's supposed to be. One of the Oswald Did It believers here agrees with this.
Now there's going to be more blathering here. The seat heights weren't the same in the limo...it's a Cadillac vs. the Lincoln limo. My hunch is that the G Men didn't care about this because they figured the main thrust here was to see where the bullet from the 6th floor was going to go from start to finish. After all, they did get the wound placement right based on the stickers. Further, the JBC stand-in is slightly inboard from the JFK one which is also right.
And yet - look at that second photo. How did it exit from Kennedy's throat? It's impossible logically and plausibly.
And as the text says in the image, the wound terminated, meaning it was not a through and through exit [based on the autopsy].
So...commence the debate [or excuses], please.
Just a rule reminder for Chapman.
"Behave at all times, no swearing, racism or personal insults."
Nice. Very nice. Like this one. I'm still waiting for one of the geniuses here to tell me how in the XXXX that bullet went upward and out of the neck...
What point? You refuse to engage in the details because you are woefully ignorant of them. You’re here to play games and try to look “clever”.http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/autopsy-descriptive-sheet-0
I'm still waiting for one of the geniuses here to tell me how in the XXXX that bullet went upward and out of the neck...
The bullet never went upward. It's trajectory was always downward.If that is true...according to the autopsy notes above....the bullet should have gone downward into the center of the chest.
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/autopsy-descriptive-sheet-0
If that is true...according to the autopsy notes above....the bullet should have gone downward into the center of the chest.
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/neckwound/bunch/necktransitbunch.gif) (http://www.paulseaton.com/jfk/diagrams/spine.jpg)
This graphic by unknown appears to show the missile channel would
have passed by the spine at the T1 level. But it's obvious the skull
overlay is too small, which draws upward the cervical vertebrae.
I see Jones confirming the tracheotomy cut had been large to allow exploration and that the head wound was on the upper top right.
McClellan was standing over Kennedy and could see the gaping wound was at the back of Kennedy's skull? Not possible. Jenkins is keeping Kennedy's head face-up.
I see Jones confirming the tracheotomy cut had been large to allow exploration and that the head wound was on the upper top right.
McClellan was standing over Kennedy and could see the gaping wound was at the back of Kennedy's skull? Not possible. Jenkins is keeping Kennedy's head face-up.
All the measurements apply to the mid-line and so are on the same plane. Practically no distortion.
Why can't one do photogrammetry and allow for perspective?
Show us one of those "flatten" out 2D images.
No reason you can't place a properly-scaled 3D model on an unaltered 2D photo and match the photo's field-of-view.
You have a graphic example of that?
[snip image]
In the above image, the President's head is approximately in profile and its plane is similar to the film plane. We can add measurements at the head's midline that will be on the same plane as the head seen in the photo and the film plane. All three planes coincide. OK, I'll concede 2% "distortion (but that's a lot less distortion than your laser test).
"Manipulate graphically". What are you talking about? The 3D model exists as scaled (usually 1:1) and in its own file. It should come very close to matching the same subject and its position unique to the photo. Often-times, it will match close-to-perfect, depends on facet-count and so forth.
Supposedly not having your photos from your own test allows everyone to "buy it". LOL.
Orthorectification is a process used in map-making where everything has to appear on the same-scaled plane, as if the satellite or plane that took the photo was always directly above specific areas in the photo. It relies on ground control points (GCPs).
So the "flattened out" images you referred to earlier are used to draw maps. And you're likening that to 3D models applied to life photos? Amazing.
Scaled in the same XYZ dimensions as the subject matter. And typically using 1:1 units of measure.
The measurements are known parameters fixed in the 3D model and the life subject itself. If they parallel, there should be matching points. In the case of the autopsy left-profile photo, a coincidence of planes ensured accuracy.
Map-making and video games. You CTs really think outside the box.
You, nor I have the info needed to ortho-rectify 2D images you find on the internet. That is my point.
Yes there is, which is why you can't assume anything you know nothing about. And what does "properly scaled" mean?
Any 2D image is not suitable for this. You can't "concede" a % of distortion, you have to measure and rectify it. And there is zero distortion on my 3D laser test, because it is already in 3D.
I thought you understood the concept of manipulating a digital 3D model. It's how video games work. A 3D model is rendered in 2D using hidden lines and projection algorithms. You hamstring yourself by converting everything from 3D to 2D and then expect us to believe you got it right.
For that, you fail since you have no interest in the truth. Carry on LNer.
For that, you fail since you have no interest in the truth. Carry on LNer.
>>> With that, you've just lost the argument
Stephen B. Lemann, uncle of Nicholas B. Lemann and step-brother of Mildred Lyons Baldwin, and owner of more than ten percent interest in WDSU,
described by Garrison as WDSU outside counsel distributing "CIA funds".....
December 21, 1991, JFK, the movie, is released in theaters.:
January, 1992 issue of GQ Magazine:
No disclosure in Nicholas’s rebuttal to Zachary Sklar, or from Sklar about Lemann’s conflicts/background:
Were Sklar and Stone unaware of critic Nicholas's background because Garrison kept the editor of his biography, Zachary Sklar, as well as Oliver Stone, in the dark?
Here's that Dallas priest, again.... In April, 2016, I received an email from the author Gayle Nix Jackson, whose grandfather made the Nix film. She had contacted Walter Machann and he had agreed to meet with her. He was located through details in his mother's obituary in DMN.
She asked me for suggestions of questions to ask the former priest. The meeting took place but he refused to discuss anything related to the period before he worked on foreign assignment for the U.N. in Asia.
May 26, 1957 DMN article
(http://jfkforum.com/images/OswaldFatherMachann1957.jpg)
(http://jfkforum.com/images/OswaldFatherMachannubans.jpg)
(http://jfkforum.com/images/OswaldStephenLemannMentalHealth.jpg)
(http://jfkforum.com/images/OswaldFatherMachannStephenLemann.jpg)