The First Shot

[John Tonkovich]

Obviously I completely disagree with your opinion on this and provide what evidence I can to determine when the first shot took place. The arguments I have presented in this thread have left me with the opinion that the first shot passes through both JFK and JBC at z223.
If there is a specific point about any of the arguments have presented that you believe is erroneous I would be happy to discuss it with you.

Mr O: JFK not being visible from Z208 to Z221 is a fact, not an opinion.
You can only guess what is going on behind the sign.
Why, exactly, would the SS and the FBI provide Mr West with a Z207 hit location, which he surveyed in on his plat at their direction?
You know better than them? 47 years later?
Ok.

[Dan O'meara]

Mr O: JFK not being visible from Z208 to Z221 is a fact, not an opinion.

That is quite correct John, however, it was quite disingenuous of you to leave out this part of your sentence:

" it's impossible to know exactly when he started reacting to being shot"

This is an opinion and, as I stated, I disagree with your opinion. The difference is that I have the decency to provide testable arguments to support my opinion.

You can only guess what is going on behind the sign.

This is correct and irrelevant

Why, exactly, would the SS and the FBI provide Mr West with a Z207 hit location, which he surveyed in on his plat at their direction?

You are the one constantly championing this shot timing. You tell me what they based it on. Do you know or have you just swallowed it up without question?

[John Tonkovich]

That is quite correct John, however, it was quite disingenuous of you to leave out this part of your sentence:

" it's impossible to know exactly when he started reacting to being shot"

This is an opinion and, as I stated, I disagree with your opinion. The difference is that I have the decency to provide testable arguments to support my opinion.

This is correct and irrelevant

You are the one constantly championing this shot timing. You tell me what they based it on. Do you know or have you just swallowed it up without question?

Ha!
Mr O: I was unaware of my " indecency". I have begun a search for it. I'll let you know what I find.

Again, you have no idea what is going on behind that sign. Nor, it seems, do you have any desire to find out. Instead, you have defaulted to the " official story".
Enjoy.

[Dan O'meara]

Ha!
Mr O: I was unaware of my " indecency". I have begun a search for it. I'll let you know what I find.

Again, you have no idea what is going on behind that sign. Nor, it seems, do you have any desire to find out. Instead, you have defaulted to the " official story".
Enjoy.

"The Official Story of What Went On Behind the Stemmons Sign"

Sounds like a thriller. Can't wait to get my hands on it.

[John Tonkovich]

"The Official Story of What Went On Behind the Stemmons Sign"

Sounds like a thriller. Can't wait to get my hands on it.

Mr O:  your posts indicate you already possess it, as both your version and the official version are identical, i.e. nothing of import occured behind the sign.
Again, this version contradicts both the FBI's and SS's initial version.
What prompted the Warren Commission to revise their initial findings?
That's the " $64,000 Question" .

[Dan O'meara]

Mr O:  your posts indicate you already possess it, as both your version and the official version are identical, i.e. nothing of import occured behind the sign.
Again, this version contradicts both the FBI's and SS's initial version.
What prompted the Warren Commission to revise their initial findings?
That's the " $64,000 Question" .

The "$64,000 Question" is how did the SS/FBI reach their conclusions regarding the timing of the shots.

[John Tonkovich]

The "$64,000 Question" is how did the SS/FBI reach their conclusions regarding the timing of the shots.

Mr O: answering a question with a questions a nice trick; nevertheless, it still leaves the first question unanswered. Try to stay on topic, please.
Ball's in your court.

[Dan O'meara]

Mr O: answering a question with a questions a nice trick; nevertheless, it still leaves the first question unanswered. Try to stay on topic, please.
Ball's in your court.

Firstly John, I've not answered a question with a question. What I wrote is not a question, it was a reminder that you've yet to answer the question about how the SS/FBI came to their conclusions about the timing of the shots. And that's the topic of this thread - the timing of the shots - NOT running off into the hills of speculation to search for the motivations of the WC or LBJ or the SS or.......
The topic is about the timing of the first shot and for all your bluster you've provided nothing but opinion.
Argue the arguments I present in this thread, where are they weak, where are they just downright wrong and if they're wrong why are they wrong. Contribute.