I see as always,you have no evidence or facts to refute anything that has been posted by this thread starter.ah such childish insults when cornered and cant refute facts.the frustration is emerging.
Like I said, when faced with critical rebuttal to your stupidity, you retreat to stupid childishness.
yep thats what you do alright.i am not th one ignoring what experts said that day.YOU are.hahahahahaa you sure are getting desperate.hee hee.
http://jfkassassination.net/russ/m_j_russ/comp1.htm#con_j The bullet that hit jfk in the throat passed right over Connally's left shoulder and face. That is shown clearly by his startle reaction, not to the sound of the shot but the shock of a bullet whizzing past his head. Remember, both men reacted to the the first shot that missed, then the second shot went past Connally, and finally the Governor was hit by his own admission somewhere between 231-234. Mr. SPECTER. What is the best estimate that you have as to the time span between the sound of the first shot and the feeling of someone hitting you in the back which you just described? Governor CONNALLY. A very, very brief span of time. Again my trend of thought just happened to be, I suppose along this line, I immediately thought that this--that I had been shot. I knew it when I just looked down and I was covered with blood, and the thought immediately passed through my mind that there were either two or three people involved or more in this or someone was shooting with an automatic rifle. These were just thoughts that went through my mind because of the rapidity of these two, of the first shot plus the blow that I took, and I knew I had been hit, and I immediately assumed, because of the amount of blood, and in fact, that it had obviously passed through my chest. that I had probably been fatally hit. So I merely doubled up, and then turned to my right again and began to--I just sat there, and Mrs. Connally pulled me over to her lap. She was sitting, of course, on the jump seat, so I reclined with my head in her lap, conscious all the time, and with my eyes open; and then, of course, the third shot sounded, and I heard the shot very clearly. I heard it hit him. I heard the shot hit something, and I assumed again--it never entered my mind that it ever hit anybody but the President. I heard it hit. It was a very loud noise, just that audible, very clear. Immediately I could see on my clothes, my clothing, I could see on the interior of the car which, as I recall, was a pale blue, brain tissue, which I immediately recognized, and I recall very well, on my trousers there was one chunk of brain tissue as big as almost my thumb, thumbnail, and again I did not see the President at any time either after the first, second, or third shots, but I assumed always that it was he who was hit and no one else. I immediately, when I was hit, I said, "Oh, no, no, no." And then I said, "My God, they are going to kill us all." Nellie, when she pulled me over into her lap----
The first shot didn't miss! Phillip Willis stated the first shot hit the president, Willis' daughter said the first shot hit the President, James Altgens stated the first shot hit the President, Agents in the follow up car stated the first shot hit the President, Zapruder stated the first shot hit the President, most of the close witnesses near the Stemmons Freeway sign that heard the first shot, stated the President reacted to that shot. Mrs. Connally stated that the first shot hit the President and the second shot hit her husband.
http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,7787.0.html Connally was shot in the back immediately after jfk was shot from the front. That proves two shooters hit their target in less than one second. How many gunshot victims are asked to determine when they were shot by watching a video of when they were shot? The Governor knew when he was shot, and there is no person or group that can make a logical argument to the contrary. Source: Warren Commission Testimony of Governor John Bowden Connally, Jr. on April 21, 1964 - 4H, 145 Mr. SPECTER. I have just one other question, Governor. With respect to the films and the slides which you have viewed this morning, had you ever seen those pictures before this morning? Governor CONNALLY. I had seen what purported to be a copy of the film when I was in the hospital in Dallas. I had not seen the slides. Mr. SPECTER. And when do you think you were hit on those slides, Governor, or in what range of slides? Governor CONNALLY. We took - you are talking about the number of the slides? Mr. SPECTER. Yes. Governor CONNALLY. As we looked at them this morning, and as you related the numbers to me, it appeared to me that I was hit in the range between 130 or 131, I dont remember precisely, up to 134, in that bracket. Mr. SPECTER. May I suggest to you that it was 231? Governor CONNALLY. Well, 231 and 234, then. Mr. SPECTER. The series under our numbering system starts with a higher number when the car comes around the turn, so when you come out of the sign, which was - Governor CONNALLY. It was just after we came out of the sign, for whatever that sequence of numbers was, and if it was 200, I correct my testimony. It was 231 to about 234. It was within that range.
That's inconsistent with both jfk and Connally reacting to the shot that missed around frames 140-170. Jfk appears to react first.
Simply look at who is making the claims and decide for yourself who has more to gain from their respective stories. One, who is a former Ford executive, says he saw the JFK limousine being stripped of all evidence of the shooting (door panels, upholstery, carpeting, etc.) and the windshield was destroyed. What does he gain by lying about what he saw? Why would he state such a lie? Wouldn't he stand to lose much by accusing his former employer of covering up the Kennedy murder, both legally and professionally? On the other hand look at the Warren Commission and their various apologists, spin doctors and disinformationists, that all claim that any evidence that does not conform to the official report of the Kennedy crime is a liar, crazy or sadly mistaken. What do they have to gain by contradicting the eye witness? Everything as their whole reputation and reason for being is wrapped up in proving that a deranged man and poor marksman, at best, killed the president with a horrible, mis-sighted mail order antique rifle, as his limousine passed by his place of employment in Dallas, Texas one day.
The first shot missed the president. Over 180 witnesses were present. We know this because slightly more than 180 were identified and questioned. However photographic evidence show several who never were identified and questioned which is failrly normal. The point is 180 witnsses is many witnsses and no GROUP of witnesses ever get their story straight. They will disagree on many details and even contradict each other. The vast majority of the witnesses present clearly report hearing a shot with no visible sign of impact on the president and then two more shots ending with the head shot. The physical evidence cleary supports those witnesses.
That statement by a former ford executive is hearsay and reported by a conspiracy theorist who had much to gain by using circumstantial evidence. Also people often lie with nothing discernable to gain. Oswald was a good marksman at best. The rifles sights were not " mis - sighted " whatever that means. It was not the best rifle but it was more than adequate to the task. Also play your own game and ask what the ford museum woudl have to gain by covering up for the government. Cuts both ways.
Not hearsay. Stop repeating this lie. It makes you seem like a cheap disinformation artist. All you have to do is prove that's the case here. This guy had much more to lose by coming out with his testimony than gain. His Marine Corps scores were barely (barely) average at their very best. Testimony from fellow Marines rates him as a very unexceptional marksman (and that's being kind to Lee). http://themanfrom2063.com/lee-harvey-oswalds-marksmanship/ It means the scope was misaligned. http://richardcharnin.wordpress.com...that-oswald-killed-jfk-you-must-believe-that/ Point number 24 is applicable here though every single point is a very good one, for people not already lobotomized by their allegiance to the Warren Report. Incidentally, why did paraffin tests preformed on Oswald on 11/22 indicate he had not fired any weapons at all on that day (#19)? You seriously wonder why a giant corporation would not want to play ball with the government?
It is not a lie the claim by the former ford executive is second hand hearsay and that has been proven fact which you cannot refute. It is you lying about it. Once again even if he did see what some say he described he was not knowledgable about bullet holes or whether the windshield he saw removed was the original. My statement about people sometimes lying for no reason was in response to a general question from you about why would SOMEONE lie. Not a specific lie of any kind therefore the only issue is why do some people lie for no reason which they sometimes do. Barely average scores in the USMC makes one a very fine shot. Barely avarage means as compared to his fellow marines. The USMC has the absolute best basic rifle marksmanship training program in the military and the average Marine is a very fine shot compared to most people. So thanks for supporting the fact that he was a good shot. The only fellow marine ( SINGULAR NOT MORE THAN ONE ) who testified that he was in a bad shot was shown to be assigned to a different company that Oswald was at Camp Pendleton and therefore was in no position to view his performance on the range. In fact it is doubtful he even knew Oswald at all. As any Marine will tell you a Marine recruit spends nearly all of his time with his platoon and a little with other platoons from the same company. Little personal freedom exists and one is VERY unlikely to get to know someone from a different company. All factual and all showing that testimony to be very unreliable especially in light of Oswald's rifle marksmanship score which was sharpshooter which also places him in the average. Unexceptional does not mean bad. FInally the skill needed to shoot Kennedy as Oswald did was not very high. It was a very easy shooting feat with little difficulty. All told he had the skill to do it with little effort. The scope was found to be mis - aligned only after it was dis - assembled and re - assembled at the Dallas Police department and FBI. Therefore this misalignment rests on those technicians and investigators who dis -assembled and re - assembled it and we have no way of proving or even reasonably speculating that it was misalinged when Oswald fired it. Furthermore it is irrelevant. Oswald was well trained by the USMC to shoot without a scope and would have had no problem hitting the target with the weapons integral iron sights. The scope was mounted in such a manner that the shooter could easily disregard it and use the iron sights instead. This is one very logical explanation for why he missed the first shot and hit with the second. In other words it is quite feasible he aimed with the scope on the first shot, missed then sighted in with the iron sights for the next two shots and hit with both. Can't prove he did that but it makes much more sense than claiming the misalinged scop which was the fault of law enforcement after the fact points to a conspiracy. Point number 24 is irrelevant here what is relevant is that the weapon was proven to be very accurate out to distances of about 200 yards in fact just as accurate at that range than an M14 or M1 Garand which are two legendary US military rifles. The expert marksmen who tested it and matched or exceeded Oswalds shooting testified to this fact and demonstrated it. Outside of 200 yards it lost a great deal of accuracy but that is irrelevant to the shooting of Kennedy since the target was less than 100 yards from Oswald for all 3 shots. The paraffin test did not indicate any such thing. This indicates a lack of understanding of what they test for. A paraffin test can only confirm that someone DID recently fire a weapon and even then the test is not very reliable. In fact it was not even admissible in court and even J Edgar Hoover instructed the FBI to disregard such tests because of it's lack of reliability. He gave those instructions BEFORE the Kennedy shooting. A paraffin test detects small particles of gun powder and bore residue left on the shooters skin after firing a weapon the problem is these particles are not adhered to the skin and brush or wipe off very easily or even blow off in the wind. Shoot a pistol, then stick your hand in your pocket. take your hand out and you just removed the particles necesary for a positive reaction. This is why it can only confirm that someone fired a weapon very recently it cannot. Indicate a negative as in that they DID NOT fire one. I asked what they had to gain not if anyone ever plays ball with someone else in general.
BTW. Point number 24 in your link is absolutely false. The expert marksmen employed by the government were easily able to match and exceed Oswalds performance with the same rifle in less time. In addition the Warren Commision also employed average marksmen ( as opposed to expert ) from the ranks of the Army and they were able to do the same thin. Match or beat Oswald's performance with the same rifle. Ratyher amusing to claim superiority over others who you claim show blind allegiance to the warren commision report. The fact is you have no idea what the Warrenj commision report said, you never read it. You are blind in allegiance to a host of people who tell you what to think.
Proof please.... http://jfkaccountability.typepad.com/reclaiming_history/2007/07/bugliosi-fails-.html
Proof of what? This link provides information which is in synch and supports what I said. Paraffin tests with a positive result offer evidence that a person may have recnetly fired a gun which is what was determined. Paraffin tests with a negative tests do not offer evidence of anything one way or the other. That is fact which your link and you ignore. A negative paraffin tests proves nothing a positive one suggests that the subject handled and fired a weapon. I am consistent and so was Bugliosi It is you and others trying to twist the facts by claiming a negative result on the test proves something which it does not.
Proof that the Warren Commission was able to use average Army marksmen to duplicate the alleged shooting feats of Oswald in Dallas. That's absolutely false. Absolutely. "Craig Roberts was a former Marine sniper who later wrote a book on the JFK assassination called Kill Zone. Roberts visited the 6th floor window of the Texas School Book Depository and instantly realized that Oswald could not have performed the shooting feat because he knew that he himself could not. And he was a professional." You are an absolute hack apologist for a massive lie propagated by the government. Don't bother replying.
Craig Roberts Was not in the Warren Commision report.. Craig roberts had a motive to lie which is to publish a book. The Warren commision employed Experts and other to include average non expert Army infrantry men. Both were abel to match or exceed Oswald's performance quite easily . Those are proven facts the details of which are listed in the Warren Commision report which you have never read. Try reading it rather than relying on what others tell you about it. Roberts is full of crap regardles sof what qualifications he claims to have. Having been there myself I can state the shooting was not difficult. No one is claiming that ANYONE could have done it but it was clearly well within the skill possessed by the average Marine, Or Soldier, Or deer hunter. Notice the facts which Roberts avoided. He relied on his self proclaimed " expertise " as evidence. The facts prove objective evidence. One fact is the target was very close. Less than 100 yards for all three shots which is easy and comfortable range for any Marine and well within the accurate range of the rifle he used. The time he took to fire 3 shots has never been positively established, the best estimates range from 5.6 second to 8.8 seconds. Even the lowest time of 5.6 seconds is enough time to fire the aimed shots as Oswald did. Thousands of people have tried it ( including me ) with identical rifles and it is very easy to do. The target was moving but the fact is contrary to what most imply the movement was negligible. It is all a matter of perspective when aiming at a moving target and from the perspective of someone in the snipers nest the target would have barely appeared to be moving which means it would not have made the shot any more difficult. Tjose are all facts and they ruin your gullible and naive faith in fiction. There is no proof of this lie you claim but massive proof you are wrong
So what? Without evaluating Robert's book you cannot possibly claim he lied unless you yourself are lying which is exactly what is going on. I had original printings of the Warren Report and actually recall the live Sunday morning news feed from the Dallas jail when Jack Ruby silenced Lee Oswald on national tv. I've forgotten more about the assassination than you'll ever know and I can tell you for a fact that the Warren Commission NEVER found anyone able to remotely duplicate Oswald's alleged act of murder. "The Warren Commission’s tests were equally bad. The WC paid 3 expert riflemen to duplicate Oswald’s alleged feat. These shooters fired 18 rounds using Oswald’s gun and scope. They fired 3 rounds with just the iron sites. These shooters missed the head and neck area of the target 18 out of 18 times using the telescopic sight and 2 out of 3 times when they used the iron sites. Some of the shots missed the target completely. They were able to take as long as they wanted for the first shot. They were firing from a height of only 30 feet. Oswald fired from a height of 60 feet. They were also shooting at stationary targets instead of a moving limousine." http://themanfrom2063.com/lee-harvey-oswalds-marksmanship/ You were invited to provide proof of what you claim and you failed miserably therefore anything you have to add is garbage. Still to this very day, with dozens of specialists trying, NO ONE has duplicated Oswald's feat in the time allotted, with the rifle Oswald was alleged to have used (it was a Mauser found in the Dallas School Book Depository, by the way, by the first officers on the scene....not the alleged Manlicher Carcano antique rifle), and from the cramped vantage point where Oswald was alleged to have made his shots. Lots of people have tried (The CBS Reenactment Test CBS news did a reenactment in 1967 involving several expert riflemen firing from a 60 foot tower at a moving sled using a similar Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. None of these expert riflemen hit the target twice on their first try and 7 of them failed to do so on any try. They also were able to fire several practice rounds before the test) and they all have failed. You have too.
I never sad he lied I said he had a motive to and the facts proved him wrong. You never read the report even if you claim to have had a copy of it you have no clue what information it contains. You are dead wrong the experts and non experts employed by the Warren commision were easily able to match or exceed the shooting performance of Oswald. That fact has been in the report since it was published. Thelie is being told by many who state the opposite. They do so because they are confident ( and rightfully so ) that gullible people ( such as you ) will not fact check their clims by examining the Warren Commision report which proves them wrong. Your claim to be educated on the assassination ( implied by saying you have forgotten more ) is a lie which has already been proven alie. You only know one side of it which is what select theorists have told you. You have never bothered to look at the other side of the issue and you engage only in knee jerk responses. The proof is in the Warren Commision report you can deny it all youlike but until you examine it you are simply denying fact and evidence which I have provided. I have not failed I have proven how gullible and out of touch you are. I have stated facts which you cannot and have not refuted and they crush you. I never alluded to a CBS re- enactement I stated other tests prove i you wrong and they do.
again why do you bother with him when he cripples his own arguments with his own posts? He cripples them right there obviously cluless that three of the members on the warren commission themselves did not believe the magic bullet theory. honestly I have never seen someone who so much loves to get so many ass beatings in their life.its like someone going up to a guy they cant beat in a fight and say- i cant get enough of you beating up on my body,beat me up some more. he'll never read roberts book.what an expert sniper who says who had several kills in vietnam and was a decorated sniper means nothing to him.only what the CIA media tells him that he worships as gospel truth means anything to him.the fact that not even half the warren commission members themselves not believing it doesnt mean anything to him. he should start a comedy club.
he has failed in every post in this section since day one,so what else is new? also every post of his has always been garbage since then so what else is new? he always ignores the fact that even the best marksmen in the world said he could not duplicate the feat,that they cut down the tree that was blocking his view on elm back then always saying it didnt block it and crap like that,then ignoring the fact that none of the three marksmen could dupicate his feat,that none of them practiced on moving targets and did not have to work with a badly misalined scope.Its obvious what his agenda is around here. yeah he always ingores that fact as well that the first rifle they found was a mauser,that 3 police officers identified it as that,one even had a part time job as a gun owner who sold guns and had an extrem knowledge of guns knowing the difference in what they looked like.the mauser also looks NOTHING like the carcano,and even roger craig,the one officer they could not get to recant it was a mauser even saying that he looked at the rifle and saw on it that it said MAUSER on it,ended up getting death threats later on and eventually lost his life. notign but drivel and idiotic ramblins do the magic bullet theorists ever post when they are cornered with these facts ye you still waste your time with them? he never has any answers for any of these facts either by the way.so why do you talk to a brick wall? http://assassinationofjfk.net/the-warren-commission-a-brilliant-deception/
