Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone

Not sure how Kennedy was sitting in his car, the angle of entry, if his shirt may have been too big for his body, what type of knot he had in his necktie, etc...a million variables dumbfuck.

What isn't debateable is this:

Oswald owned the fucking murder weapon.
Oswald worked in the fucking building where the bullets came from.
Oswald killed a fucking cop right after he killed Kennedy.

On any planet in any solar system that means he's guilty dumbass. You're hung up on some drawing done 50 years ago and screaming "ah-hah". Nobody buys it. Nobody cares. And everybody thinks you suck cock.

Shove that up your ass.

THE QUESTION, and the title of the thread is: Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone Unless you can explain to me in DETAIL how a bullet traveling on a downward trajectory that enters the President's back at at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie, and THEN somehow resume a downward angle, you have a second gunman.

There is NO getting around these wounds IF you are going to claim Oswald was the lone assassin. Your evidence does NOTHING but implicate Oswald in the shooting. But it DOESN'T prove he acted alone. You can call me all the names you want and send me more neg reps. You MUST explain these wounds, because the law of physics says it is impossible for this to occur.

Do you even know what wounds we are talking about on the autopsy face sheet? The one marked '7 x 4' on the posterior diagram is the alleged entrance wound at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae (in his BACK)

The one marked '6.5' on the anterior diagram is the alleged exit wound in his throat.

You need to step up to the plate and act and think like an adult. You childish rants are not working.

Wow great point..

According to your analysis the bullet was fired from the trunk of Kennedys car. Thats the only location you could fire from and have a bullet enter the President's back at at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie

You just cracked the case wide open

Actually, according to the autopsy, the back wound never entered the chest cavity, much less exited his throat:
-------------------------------
The bullet wound was not dissected, even though dissection is the only certain means of tracking a bullet's path through the body. At the trial of Clay Shaw in 1969, one of the autopsy pathologists, Dr. Pierre Finck, admitted that the autopsy team was ordered by a general or admiral not to dissect the back wound. Since no dissection took place, it is obvious that no bullet track was ever revealed at the autopsy.

Even though the wound was not dissected, the body was opened up during the autopsy. The autopsy pathologists noticed bruising of the strap muscles on the right side of the neck and also on the very top of the right lung. This led to the unproven assumption that the bruising was caused by the bullet as it passed from the back through the upper thoracic cavity and exited out of the throat. . . .

Furthermore, the air in the tissues, the bruising, the laceration are no more indicative of a bullet's going from back to front than they are of a bullet's going from front to back. The fact that the hole in the front of the throat was only half as large as the hole in the back suggested either that they were both entrance wound or that the hole in the throat was the wound of entrance and that in the back was the exit wound. (Kurtz, Crime of the Century, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1982, pp. 73-74)

The fact that the autopsy doctors did not observe a bullet path from the back wound to the throat wound is evident in their descriptions of the back and throat wounds. They said the back wound was "presumably" a wound of entrance, and the throat wound "presumably" a wound of exit. If they had seen a track from the back wound to the throat wound, they wouldn't have had to "presume" anything. Even lone-gunman theorist Dr. John Lattimer admitted there is only "circumstantial" evidence of a bullet track between the back wound and the throat wound. The back wound was not dissected, and only dissection of the wound through the body would have provided us with conclusive proof of the missile's path.

We know from released documents relating to the autopsy that on the night of the autopsy the pathologists were absolutely positive the back wound did NOT have an exit point. We also know they probed the wound repeatedly, that they removed the chest organs and probed the wound again and still saw no exit point, and that one of the medical technicians at the autopsy, James Jenkins, could see the end of the surgical probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity. Jenkins observed there was "no entry" into the chest cavity:

I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura [the lining of the chest cavity]. . . . You could actually see where it [the probe] was making an indentation . . . where it was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity. . . . No way that could have exited in the front because it was then low in the chest cavity. (In Anthony Summers, Not in Your Lifetime, New York: Marlowe and Company, 1998, p. 34)

Several doctors have noted there is no way a bullet could have gone from the back wound to the throat wound without smashing directly through the seventh cervical transverse process of the spine or without causing considerable lung damage (see, for example, Dr. David Mantik, "The JFK Assassination: Cause for Doubt," in James Fetzer, editor, Assassination Science, Chicago: Catfeet Press, 1998, pp. 102-103). Such damage is not mentioned in the autopsy report and is not seen on the autopsy x-rays.

Fact vs. Myth

BUT...the Warren Commission found a simple way of avoiding all these inconvenient forensic and physical 'issues'...THEY MOVED THE WOUND up to his neck...

CE386.jpg

Warren Commission Exhibit 386
 
THE QUESTION, and the title of the thread is: Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone Unless you can explain to me in DETAIL how a bullet traveling on a downward trajectory that enters the President's back at at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie, and THEN somehow resume a downward angle, you have a second gunman.

There is NO getting around these wounds IF you are going to claim Oswald was the lone assassin. Your evidence does NOTHING but implicate Oswald in the shooting. But it DOESN'T prove he acted alone. You can call me all the names you want and send me more neg reps. You MUST explain these wounds, because the law of physics says it is impossible for this to occur.

Do you even know what wounds we are talking about on the autopsy face sheet? The one marked '7 x 4' on the posterior diagram is the alleged entrance wound at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae (in his BACK)

The one marked '6.5' on the anterior diagram is the alleged exit wound in his throat.

You need to step up to the plate and act and think like an adult. You childish rants are not working.

Wow great point..

According to your analysis the bullet was fired from the trunk of Kennedys car. Thats the only location you could fire from and have a bullet enter the President's back at at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie

You just cracked the case wide open

Actually, according to the autopsy, the back wound never entered the chest cavity, much less exited his throat:
-------------------------------
The bullet wound was not dissected, even though dissection is the only certain means of tracking a bullet's path through the body. At the trial of Clay Shaw in 1969, one of the autopsy pathologists, Dr. Pierre Finck, admitted that the autopsy team was ordered by a general or admiral not to dissect the back wound. Since no dissection took place, it is obvious that no bullet track was ever revealed at the autopsy.

Even though the wound was not dissected, the body was opened up during the autopsy. The autopsy pathologists noticed bruising of the strap muscles on the right side of the neck and also on the very top of the right lung. This led to the unproven assumption that the bruising was caused by the bullet as it passed from the back through the upper thoracic cavity and exited out of the throat. . . .

Furthermore, the air in the tissues, the bruising, the laceration are no more indicative of a bullet's going from back to front than they are of a bullet's going from front to back. The fact that the hole in the front of the throat was only half as large as the hole in the back suggested either that they were both entrance wound or that the hole in the throat was the wound of entrance and that in the back was the exit wound. (Kurtz, Crime of the Century, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1982, pp. 73-74)

The fact that the autopsy doctors did not observe a bullet path from the back wound to the throat wound is evident in their descriptions of the back and throat wounds. They said the back wound was "presumably" a wound of entrance, and the throat wound "presumably" a wound of exit. If they had seen a track from the back wound to the throat wound, they wouldn't have had to "presume" anything. Even lone-gunman theorist Dr. John Lattimer admitted there is only "circumstantial" evidence of a bullet track between the back wound and the throat wound. The back wound was not dissected, and only dissection of the wound through the body would have provided us with conclusive proof of the missile's path.

We know from released documents relating to the autopsy that on the night of the autopsy the pathologists were absolutely positive the back wound did NOT have an exit point. We also know they probed the wound repeatedly, that they removed the chest organs and probed the wound again and still saw no exit point, and that one of the medical technicians at the autopsy, James Jenkins, could see the end of the surgical probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity. Jenkins observed there was "no entry" into the chest cavity:

I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura [the lining of the chest cavity]. . . . You could actually see where it [the probe] was making an indentation . . . where it was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity. . . . No way that could have exited in the front because it was then low in the chest cavity. (In Anthony Summers, Not in Your Lifetime, New York: Marlowe and Company, 1998, p. 34)

Several doctors have noted there is no way a bullet could have gone from the back wound to the throat wound without smashing directly through the seventh cervical transverse process of the spine or without causing considerable lung damage (see, for example, Dr. David Mantik, "The JFK Assassination: Cause for Doubt," in James Fetzer, editor, Assassination Science, Chicago: Catfeet Press, 1998, pp. 102-103). Such damage is not mentioned in the autopsy report and is not seen on the autopsy x-rays.

Fact vs. Myth

BUT...the Warren Commission found a simple way of avoiding all these inconvenient forensic and physical 'issues'...THEY MOVED THE WOUND up to his neck...

CE386.jpg

Warren Commission Exhibit 386

Gee..was the cause of death ever in doubt? I guess you'll say he was hit with anthrax or sarin now? Oh well, we'll never know the truth about the chemical weapons attack that killed Kennedy. It was probably zionist sarin at that.
 
THE QUESTION, and the title of the thread is: Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone Unless you can explain to me in DETAIL how a bullet traveling on a downward trajectory that enters the President's back at at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie, and THEN somehow resume a downward angle, you have a second gunman.

There is NO getting around these wounds IF you are going to claim Oswald was the lone assassin. Your evidence does NOTHING but implicate Oswald in the shooting. But it DOESN'T prove he acted alone. You can call me all the names you want and send me more neg reps. You MUST explain these wounds, because the law of physics says it is impossible for this to occur.

Do you even know what wounds we are talking about on the autopsy face sheet? The one marked '7 x 4' on the posterior diagram is the alleged entrance wound at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae (in his BACK)

The one marked '6.5' on the anterior diagram is the alleged exit wound in his throat.

You need to step up to the plate and act and think like an adult. You childish rants are not working.

Wow great point..

According to your analysis the bullet was fired from the trunk of Kennedys car. Thats the only location you could fire from and have a bullet enter the President's back at at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie

You just cracked the case wide open

Actually, according to the autopsy, the back wound never entered the chest cavity, much less exited his throat:
-------------------------------
The bullet wound was not dissected, even though dissection is the only certain means of tracking a bullet's path through the body. At the trial of Clay Shaw in 1969, one of the autopsy pathologists, Dr. Pierre Finck, admitted that the autopsy team was ordered by a general or admiral not to dissect the back wound. Since no dissection took place, it is obvious that no bullet track was ever revealed at the autopsy.

Even though the wound was not dissected, the body was opened up during the autopsy. The autopsy pathologists noticed bruising of the strap muscles on the right side of the neck and also on the very top of the right lung. This led to the unproven assumption that the bruising was caused by the bullet as it passed from the back through the upper thoracic cavity and exited out of the throat. . . .

Furthermore, the air in the tissues, the bruising, the laceration are no more indicative of a bullet's going from back to front than they are of a bullet's going from front to back. The fact that the hole in the front of the throat was only half as large as the hole in the back suggested either that they were both entrance wound or that the hole in the throat was the wound of entrance and that in the back was the exit wound. (Kurtz, Crime of the Century, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1982, pp. 73-74)

The fact that the autopsy doctors did not observe a bullet path from the back wound to the throat wound is evident in their descriptions of the back and throat wounds. They said the back wound was "presumably" a wound of entrance, and the throat wound "presumably" a wound of exit. If they had seen a track from the back wound to the throat wound, they wouldn't have had to "presume" anything. Even lone-gunman theorist Dr. John Lattimer admitted there is only "circumstantial" evidence of a bullet track between the back wound and the throat wound. The back wound was not dissected, and only dissection of the wound through the body would have provided us with conclusive proof of the missile's path.

We know from released documents relating to the autopsy that on the night of the autopsy the pathologists were absolutely positive the back wound did NOT have an exit point. We also know they probed the wound repeatedly, that they removed the chest organs and probed the wound again and still saw no exit point, and that one of the medical technicians at the autopsy, James Jenkins, could see the end of the surgical probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity. Jenkins observed there was "no entry" into the chest cavity:

I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura [the lining of the chest cavity]. . . . You could actually see where it [the probe] was making an indentation . . . where it was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity. . . . No way that could have exited in the front because it was then low in the chest cavity. (In Anthony Summers, Not in Your Lifetime, New York: Marlowe and Company, 1998, p. 34)

Several doctors have noted there is no way a bullet could have gone from the back wound to the throat wound without smashing directly through the seventh cervical transverse process of the spine or without causing considerable lung damage (see, for example, Dr. David Mantik, "The JFK Assassination: Cause for Doubt," in James Fetzer, editor, Assassination Science, Chicago: Catfeet Press, 1998, pp. 102-103). Such damage is not mentioned in the autopsy report and is not seen on the autopsy x-rays.

Fact vs. Myth

BUT...the Warren Commission found a simple way of avoiding all these inconvenient forensic and physical 'issues'...THEY MOVED THE WOUND up to his neck...

CE386.jpg

Warren Commission Exhibit 386

Sounds like we got us a magic bullet there...

Goes in and never comes out.....yet we have another magic bullet in his throat....went in and never came out

But wait....Theres more
We got a THIRD magic bullet that hit Connaly and was never found either

Got evidence?
 
Last edited:
Wow great point..

According to your analysis the bullet was fired from the trunk of Kennedys car. Thats the only location you could fire from and have a bullet enter the President's back at at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie

You just cracked the case wide open

Actually, according to the autopsy, the back wound never entered the chest cavity, much less exited his throat:
-------------------------------
The bullet wound was not dissected, even though dissection is the only certain means of tracking a bullet's path through the body. At the trial of Clay Shaw in 1969, one of the autopsy pathologists, Dr. Pierre Finck, admitted that the autopsy team was ordered by a general or admiral not to dissect the back wound. Since no dissection took place, it is obvious that no bullet track was ever revealed at the autopsy.

Even though the wound was not dissected, the body was opened up during the autopsy. The autopsy pathologists noticed bruising of the strap muscles on the right side of the neck and also on the very top of the right lung. This led to the unproven assumption that the bruising was caused by the bullet as it passed from the back through the upper thoracic cavity and exited out of the throat. . . .

Furthermore, the air in the tissues, the bruising, the laceration are no more indicative of a bullet's going from back to front than they are of a bullet's going from front to back. The fact that the hole in the front of the throat was only half as large as the hole in the back suggested either that they were both entrance wound or that the hole in the throat was the wound of entrance and that in the back was the exit wound. (Kurtz, Crime of the Century, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1982, pp. 73-74)

The fact that the autopsy doctors did not observe a bullet path from the back wound to the throat wound is evident in their descriptions of the back and throat wounds. They said the back wound was "presumably" a wound of entrance, and the throat wound "presumably" a wound of exit. If they had seen a track from the back wound to the throat wound, they wouldn't have had to "presume" anything. Even lone-gunman theorist Dr. John Lattimer admitted there is only "circumstantial" evidence of a bullet track between the back wound and the throat wound. The back wound was not dissected, and only dissection of the wound through the body would have provided us with conclusive proof of the missile's path.

We know from released documents relating to the autopsy that on the night of the autopsy the pathologists were absolutely positive the back wound did NOT have an exit point. We also know they probed the wound repeatedly, that they removed the chest organs and probed the wound again and still saw no exit point, and that one of the medical technicians at the autopsy, James Jenkins, could see the end of the surgical probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity. Jenkins observed there was "no entry" into the chest cavity:

I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura [the lining of the chest cavity]. . . . You could actually see where it [the probe] was making an indentation . . . where it was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity. . . . No way that could have exited in the front because it was then low in the chest cavity. (In Anthony Summers, Not in Your Lifetime, New York: Marlowe and Company, 1998, p. 34)

Several doctors have noted there is no way a bullet could have gone from the back wound to the throat wound without smashing directly through the seventh cervical transverse process of the spine or without causing considerable lung damage (see, for example, Dr. David Mantik, "The JFK Assassination: Cause for Doubt," in James Fetzer, editor, Assassination Science, Chicago: Catfeet Press, 1998, pp. 102-103). Such damage is not mentioned in the autopsy report and is not seen on the autopsy x-rays.

Fact vs. Myth

BUT...the Warren Commission found a simple way of avoiding all these inconvenient forensic and physical 'issues'...THEY MOVED THE WOUND up to his neck...

CE386.jpg

Warren Commission Exhibit 386

Sounds like we got us a magic bullet there...

Goes in and never comes out.....yet we have another magic bullet in his throat....went in and never came out

But wait....Theres more
We got a THIRD magic bullet that hit Connaly and was never found either

Got evidence?

I'm beginning to think that the Zapruder film had the Kennedy firing squad photoshopped out. Musta been Photo Shop v 0.00000000000000000000000000000001
 
Wow great point..

According to your analysis the bullet was fired from the trunk of Kennedys car. Thats the only location you could fire from and have a bullet enter the President's back at at the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie

You just cracked the case wide open

Actually, according to the autopsy, the back wound never entered the chest cavity, much less exited his throat:
-------------------------------
The bullet wound was not dissected, even though dissection is the only certain means of tracking a bullet's path through the body. At the trial of Clay Shaw in 1969, one of the autopsy pathologists, Dr. Pierre Finck, admitted that the autopsy team was ordered by a general or admiral not to dissect the back wound. Since no dissection took place, it is obvious that no bullet track was ever revealed at the autopsy.

Even though the wound was not dissected, the body was opened up during the autopsy. The autopsy pathologists noticed bruising of the strap muscles on the right side of the neck and also on the very top of the right lung. This led to the unproven assumption that the bruising was caused by the bullet as it passed from the back through the upper thoracic cavity and exited out of the throat. . . .

Furthermore, the air in the tissues, the bruising, the laceration are no more indicative of a bullet's going from back to front than they are of a bullet's going from front to back. The fact that the hole in the front of the throat was only half as large as the hole in the back suggested either that they were both entrance wound or that the hole in the throat was the wound of entrance and that in the back was the exit wound. (Kurtz, Crime of the Century, Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 1982, pp. 73-74)

The fact that the autopsy doctors did not observe a bullet path from the back wound to the throat wound is evident in their descriptions of the back and throat wounds. They said the back wound was "presumably" a wound of entrance, and the throat wound "presumably" a wound of exit. If they had seen a track from the back wound to the throat wound, they wouldn't have had to "presume" anything. Even lone-gunman theorist Dr. John Lattimer admitted there is only "circumstantial" evidence of a bullet track between the back wound and the throat wound. The back wound was not dissected, and only dissection of the wound through the body would have provided us with conclusive proof of the missile's path.

We know from released documents relating to the autopsy that on the night of the autopsy the pathologists were absolutely positive the back wound did NOT have an exit point. We also know they probed the wound repeatedly, that they removed the chest organs and probed the wound again and still saw no exit point, and that one of the medical technicians at the autopsy, James Jenkins, could see the end of the surgical probe pushing against the lining of the chest cavity. Jenkins observed there was "no entry" into the chest cavity:

I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe . . . through the pleura [the lining of the chest cavity]. . . . You could actually see where it [the probe] was making an indentation . . . where it was pushing the skin up. . . . There was no entry into the chest cavity. . . . No way that could have exited in the front because it was then low in the chest cavity. (In Anthony Summers, Not in Your Lifetime, New York: Marlowe and Company, 1998, p. 34)

Several doctors have noted there is no way a bullet could have gone from the back wound to the throat wound without smashing directly through the seventh cervical transverse process of the spine or without causing considerable lung damage (see, for example, Dr. David Mantik, "The JFK Assassination: Cause for Doubt," in James Fetzer, editor, Assassination Science, Chicago: Catfeet Press, 1998, pp. 102-103). Such damage is not mentioned in the autopsy report and is not seen on the autopsy x-rays.

Fact vs. Myth

BUT...the Warren Commission found a simple way of avoiding all these inconvenient forensic and physical 'issues'...THEY MOVED THE WOUND up to his neck...

CE386.jpg

Warren Commission Exhibit 386

Sounds like we got us a magic bullet there...

Goes in and never comes out.....yet we have another magic bullet in his throat....went in and never came out

But wait....Theres more
We got a THIRD magic bullet that hit Connaly and was never found either

Got evidence?

Hey, I didn't create this forensic and physical evidence. It has always been there. But it always leads to a dead end because the ONLY evidence the Warren Commission had was provided by J Edgar Hoover's FBI. The Warren Commission didn't do an independent investigation.

Hoover, LBJ and the Justice Dept. decided a few days after the assassination that (after Oswald was dead):

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

2. Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists.


History Matters Archive - 11-25-63 Katzenbach to Moyers (105-82555-18th NR 50), pg


The autopsy doctors, who were pencil pushers that had never done an autopsy were not even AWARE of the alleged exit wound in the President's throat. They assumed it was just a tracheotomy performed in Dallas. They found out about the wound in a phone call with Dr. Malcolm Perry the next day. Dr. Perry was the attending physician that tried to save the President's life. Perry's description of the wound in the President's throat before the Warren Commission: "This was situated in the lower anterior one-third of the neck, approximately 5 mm. in diameter." (3H372) BTW, 5 mm is the size of the tip of your baby finger.

Various descriptions of the small hole in the President's throat were given at Parkland Hospital by the doctors who saw it before a tracheotomy incision erased its outline. . . . [A]ll seemed to agree on the size of the hole. It was small — so small, in fact, that one doctor believed it was too small to be even the entry hole of a high velocity bullet (6H56). Dr. Perry described it over the phone to Commander Humes as between 3 and 5 millimeters in diameter (17H29). This is half the diameter of an ordinary pencil, much too small to be he exit wound of a transiting bullet. (p. 51, emphasis in original)

So both Marrs and Thompson repeat the "3 to 5 mm." figure in the notes Commander Humes made when he talked to Dr. Perry the morning after the autopsy.

But the descriptions of the wound in fact varied quite a bit. The following are all the estimates of the size of the wound given by Parkland staff in Warren Commission testimony:

* Dr. PERRY: This was situated in the lower anterior one-third of the neck, approximately 5 mm. in diameter. (3H372)
* Dr. CARRICO: This was probably a 4-7 mm. wound, almost in the midline, maybe a little to the right of the midline, and below the thyroid cartilage. (6H3)
* DR. CARRICO: There was a small wound, 5- to 8-mm. in size, located in the lower third of the neck, below the thyroid cartilage, the Adams apple. (3H361)
* Dr. PERRY: I determined only the fact that there was a wound there, roughly 5 mm. in size or so. (6H9)
* Dr. JONES: The wound in the throat was probably no larger than a quarter of an inch in diameter. . . . t was a very small, smooth wound. (6H54)
* Nurse HENCHLIFFE: It was just a little hole in the middle of his neck. . . . About as big around as the end of my little finger. (6H141)
JFK Assassination Firearms Factoids -- The Small Throat Wound
 
-Show me how a shot was fired from the trunk of JFKs car

- Show evidence of more than three shots coming from different angles. Show me bullets recovered from a different gun. Show me accoustic evidence of more than 5 gunshots. Show me autopsy results claiming entry points from the front and back

That is your claim...show me
 
-Show me how a shot was fired from the trunk of JFKs car

- Show evidence of more than three shots coming from different angles. Show me bullets recovered from a different gun. Show me accoustic evidence of more than 5 gunshots. Show me autopsy results claiming entry points from the front and back

That is your claim...show me

Glad you didn't quote him. Get ready for the next edition of bfgn smokescreen!
 
-Show me how a shot was fired from the trunk of JFKs car

- Show evidence of more than three shots coming from different angles. Show me bullets recovered from a different gun. Show me accoustic evidence of more than 5 gunshots. Show me autopsy results claiming entry points from the front and back

That is your claim...show me

There was never a shot fired from the trunk of the car. I never claimed that...YOU did. As I said before, I didn't create the physical and forensic evidence, but it EXISTS...AND I didn't conduct the investigation, the FBI did. I already gave you evidence Hoover, LBJ and the Justice Dept. decided a few days after the assassination that the public must be convinced Oswald acted alone and there was not a Communist or right wing conspiracy. The reasons why are not hard to grasp.

You ask for proof from someone that didn't conduct the investigation. I had no control on what was and was NOT investigated. What I CAN provide are the numerous anomalies and evidence that does NOT add up to the single bullet theory being possible.

You stated:

Oswald read in the paper one day that JFK was coming to Dallas and that the motorcade would pass by his window at work.
So he brought his gun to work and fired three shots, one of which blew JFKs brains out.

IF what you say is true, please explain why someone impersonating Oswald visited the Soviet embassy and the Cuban consulate in Mexico City in October 1963 and made phone calls to those two agencies linking Oswald to a known KGB assassin - Valery Kostikov - whom the CIA and FBI had been following for over a year?
 
-Show me how a shot was fired from the trunk of JFKs car

- Show evidence of more than three shots coming from different angles. Show me bullets recovered from a different gun. Show me accoustic evidence of more than 5 gunshots. Show me autopsy results claiming entry points from the front and back

That is your claim...show me

There was never a shot fired from the trunk of the car. I never claimed that...YOU did. As I said before, I didn't create the physical and forensic evidence, but it EXISTS...AND I didn't conduct the investigation, the FBI did. I already gave you evidence Hoover, LBJ and the Justice Dept. decided a few days after the assassination that the public must be convinced Oswald acted alone and there was not a Communist or right wing conspiracy. The reasons why are not hard to grasp.

You ask for proof from someone that didn't conduct the investigation. I had no control on what was and was NOT investigated. What I CAN provide are the numerous anomalies and evidence that does NOT add up to the single bullet theory being possible.

You stated:

Oswald read in the paper one day that JFK was coming to Dallas and that the motorcade would pass by his window at work.
So he brought his gun to work and fired three shots, one of which blew JFKs brains out.

IF what you say is true, please explain why someone impersonating Oswald visited the Soviet embassy and the Cuban consulate in Mexico City in October 1963 and made phone calls to those two agencies linking Oswald to a known KGB assassin - Valery Kostikov - whom the CIA and FBI had been following for over a year?

Oh for Christ sake...

You stated a bazilliion times the bullet traveled upward according to the path it took through the anatomy and the autopsy notes.

The only place you claim the shot could have come from is the trunk or some place under the car firing up through the gas tank and the trunk you dumbass.

Now you say you're not saying that at all.

Which is it shitbrains?
 
-Show me how a shot was fired from the trunk of JFKs car

- Show evidence of more than three shots coming from different angles. Show me bullets recovered from a different gun. Show me accoustic evidence of more than 5 gunshots. Show me autopsy results claiming entry points from the front and back

That is your claim...show me

There was never a shot fired from the trunk of the car. I never claimed that...YOU did. As I said before, I didn't create the physical and forensic evidence, but it EXISTS...AND I didn't conduct the investigation, the FBI did. I already gave you evidence Hoover, LBJ and the Justice Dept. decided a few days after the assassination that the public must be convinced Oswald acted alone and there was not a Communist or right wing conspiracy. The reasons why are not hard to grasp.

You ask for proof from someone that didn't conduct the investigation. I had no control on what was and was NOT investigated. What I CAN provide are the numerous anomalies and evidence that does NOT add up to the single bullet theory being possible.

You stated:

Oswald read in the paper one day that JFK was coming to Dallas and that the motorcade would pass by his window at work.
So he brought his gun to work and fired three shots, one of which blew JFKs brains out.

IF what you say is true, please explain why someone impersonating Oswald visited the Soviet embassy and the Cuban consulate in Mexico City in October 1963 and made phone calls to those two agencies linking Oswald to a known KGB assassin - Valery Kostikov - whom the CIA and FBI had been following for over a year?

Oh for Christ sake...

You stated a bazilliion times the bullet traveled upward according to the path it took through the anatomy and the autopsy notes.

The only place you claim the shot could have come from is the trunk or some place under the car firing up through the gas tank and the trunk you dumbass.

Now you say you're not saying that at all.

Which is it shitbrains?

Is it possible all this time you have absolutely NO CLUE what I am talking about? When I said:

You need to explain to me in DETAIL how a bullet traveling on a downward trajectory that enters the President's back at a the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie, and THEN somehow resume a downward angle?

I was not saying it happened, I am saying IT CAN'T happen, AND that YOU NEED to explain how it did, because THE SINGLE BULLET THEORY completely relies on that happening and if it didn't happen as I CLAIM, there HAD TO BE A SECOND GUNMAN.
 
There was never a shot fired from the trunk of the car. I never claimed that...YOU did. As I said before, I didn't create the physical and forensic evidence, but it EXISTS...AND I didn't conduct the investigation, the FBI did. I already gave you evidence Hoover, LBJ and the Justice Dept. decided a few days after the assassination that the public must be convinced Oswald acted alone and there was not a Communist or right wing conspiracy. The reasons why are not hard to grasp.

You ask for proof from someone that didn't conduct the investigation. I had no control on what was and was NOT investigated. What I CAN provide are the numerous anomalies and evidence that does NOT add up to the single bullet theory being possible.

You stated:



IF what you say is true, please explain why someone impersonating Oswald visited the Soviet embassy and the Cuban consulate in Mexico City in October 1963 and made phone calls to those two agencies linking Oswald to a known KGB assassin - Valery Kostikov - whom the CIA and FBI had been following for over a year?

Oh for Christ sake...

You stated a bazilliion times the bullet traveled upward according to the path it took through the anatomy and the autopsy notes.

The only place you claim the shot could have come from is the trunk or some place under the car firing up through the gas tank and the trunk you dumbass.

Now you say you're not saying that at all.

Which is it shitbrains?

Is it possible all this time you have absolutely NO CLUE what I am talking about? When I said:

You need to explain to me in DETAIL how a bullet traveling on a downward trajectory that enters the President's back at a the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie, and THEN somehow resume a downward angle?

I was not saying it happened, I am saying IT CAN'T happen, AND that YOU NEED to explain how it did, because THE SINGLE BULLET THEORY completely relies on that happening and if it didn't happen as I CLAIM, there HAD TO BE A SECOND GUNMAN.

Where? Firing upward so it could nick the top of a tie?
This is your proof of that...nicking ties.

I giggle when I think about how much of your life has been consumed with such trivia.
 
Oh for Christ sake...

You stated a bazilliion times the bullet traveled upward according to the path it took through the anatomy and the autopsy notes.

The only place you claim the shot could have come from is the trunk or some place under the car firing up through the gas tank and the trunk you dumbass.

Now you say you're not saying that at all.

Which is it shitbrains?

Is it possible all this time you have absolutely NO CLUE what I am talking about? When I said:

You need to explain to me in DETAIL how a bullet traveling on a downward trajectory that enters the President's back at a the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie, and THEN somehow resume a downward angle?

I was not saying it happened, I am saying IT CAN'T happen, AND that YOU NEED to explain how it did, because THE SINGLE BULLET THEORY completely relies on that happening and if it didn't happen as I CLAIM, there HAD TO BE A SECOND GUNMAN.

Where? Firing upward so it could nick the top of a tie?
This is your proof of that...nicking ties.

I giggle when I think about how much of your life has been consumed with such trivia.

Member: candycorn
Total Posts: 1,436
Forums posted in: 1 - Conspiracy Theories

EVERY single post you have made on this board is in ONE forum...Conspiracy Theories

You have an obsession. Does your mommy know this little boy?
 
Is it possible all this time you have absolutely NO CLUE what I am talking about? When I said:

You need to explain to me in DETAIL how a bullet traveling on a downward trajectory that enters the President's back at a the level of the third thoracic vertebrae can exit a wound in his throat, 4-6 inches higher anatomically, nicking the top of his tie, and THEN somehow resume a downward angle?

I was not saying it happened, I am saying IT CAN'T happen, AND that YOU NEED to explain how it did, because THE SINGLE BULLET THEORY completely relies on that happening and if it didn't happen as I CLAIM, there HAD TO BE A SECOND GUNMAN.

Where? Firing upward so it could nick the top of a tie?
This is your proof of that...nicking ties.

I giggle when I think about how much of your life has been consumed with such trivia.

Member: candycorn
Total Posts: 1,436
Forums posted in: 1 - Conspiracy Theories

EVERY single post you have made on this board is in ONE forum...Conspiracy Theories

You have an obsession. Does your mommy know this little boy?

I would like to think so, she's dead. Debunking fools is sport for me and you should make me work harder for my enjoyment.
 
Where? Firing upward so it could nick the top of a tie?
This is your proof of that...nicking ties.

I giggle when I think about how much of your life has been consumed with such trivia.

Member: candycorn
Total Posts: 1,436
Forums posted in: 1 - Conspiracy Theories

EVERY single post you have made on this board is in ONE forum...Conspiracy Theories

You have an obsession. Does your mommy know this little boy?

I would like to think so, she's dead. Debunking fools is sport for me and you should make me work harder for my enjoyment.

You have debunked nothing. You don't even show an understand of what I'm talking about. You can't read and comprehend. You're too busy thinking about what you are going to say. You have not exhibited an adult level of intelligence.
 
Member: candycorn
Total Posts: 1,436
Forums posted in: 1 - Conspiracy Theories

EVERY single post you have made on this board is in ONE forum...Conspiracy Theories

You have an obsession. Does your mommy know this little boy?

I would like to think so, she's dead. Debunking fools is sport for me and you should make me work harder for my enjoyment.

You have debunked nothing. You don't even show an understand of what I'm talking about. You can't read and comprehend. You're too busy thinking about what you are going to say. You have not exhibited an adult level of intelligence.

You're the one asking about my dead mother...so much for my preconception of dealing with an adult or at least a classy teenager.

You won't come out and say what you're trying to say which is the standard MO for all conspiracy kooks.

Somehow Oswald kills a cop, is photoed with the murder weapon which he bought by the way, works in the place where the gunshots came from and that isn't good enough for you. You're talking about nicks in ties and other hogwash.

PS: Fuck you.
 
I gotta tell this story it's so funny.

When my oldest was 11, we were browsing the movies at the video store. After a while, we got separated and then I heard him in the distance "dad what does this movie have to do with the Kennedy assasination?".

I walked over to where he was standing. There on the shelf was "The Roswell Incident".

I said "Oh- you must be thinking of Lee Harvey Roswell".

His reply:

"Yeah".

:D
 
I gotta tell this story it's so funny.

When my oldest was 11, we were browsing the movies at the video store. After a while, we got separated and then I heard him in the distance "dad what does this movie have to do with the Kennedy assasination?".

I walked over to where he was standing. There on the shelf was "The Roswell Incident".

I said "Oh- you must be thinking of Lee Harvey Roswell".

His reply:

"Yeah".

:D

Something happened to me once that was pretty strange concerning this topic as well. I have a sibling who was, at one time, very interested in making money in real estate. So much so, dozens and dozens of video tapes were purchased on the subject. The time was the mid 1980's and I was still in school and I had to do a school report on Kennedy's assassination. As the song goes, "We didn't have no internet...." and really the only piece of technology we had was a VCR on which the tapes would be watched over and over. Well, what-do-you-know; one evening a movie comes on called "Executive Action" which is a dreadful movie from top to bottom.

Supposedly when the movie came out in 1973 the promoters said it would "clear the air" about the Kennedy assassination. From what I heard Leonard Maltin say..."it was better at clearing out theaters."

Anyway; I was taking the pro-conspiracy side doing my report as most fourth graders would likely do and I, having seen the movie before, wanted the quote that is at the end of the movie (linked here) Executive Action (1973) - Memorable quotes

TV Commentator: In the three years after the murders of John F. Kennedy and Lee Harvey Oswald eighteen material witnesses died, 6 by gunfire, 3 by motor accidents, 2 by suicide, 1 by a cut throat, 1 by a karate chop to the neck, 3 by heart attacks, 2 from natural causes. An actuary engaged by the London Sunday Times concluded: On November 22, 1963, the odds of these witnesses being dead by Feb. 1967 are one hundered thousand trillion to one.

So I took one of the prized video tapes (there was this series of like 20 tapes by this one financial wizard Tom Vu) , put some scotch tape over the little tab so I could use it to record, and voilah, I had my quote. I played it over and over while typing it out on a manual Brother typewriter. I carefully put the VHS tape back into the specially constructed holder then put the holder back into the cabinet that held all of these scheme tapes and proudly turned in my report having forgotten all about the recording.

Well a few months go by and my sibling realizes that Tom Vu is full of crap so much so that he is now playing poker for a living in Vegas (Vu, not my sib). A suggestion is made by yours truly that to make money, have the materials and tapes duplicated then sell them in the newspaper. So we visit a local place that does just that. They call my sibling on the day that they are dubbing the tapes--the ones where I had recorded the little bit of the TV announcer giving that silly stat (the odds of any random group of 18 people dying in 3 years is astronomically high although I will admit the methods of death are suspect). When I get home from school, lets just say I'm confronted with the evidence of my indiscretion.

What is funny about this is that once my sibling gets into a topic, the topic is all engrossing. The tapes and get-rich-quick-real esate schemes of Tom Vu, Albert Lowry, and Tony Hoffman took up entire book shelves. When my sib got interested in the Kennedy Assassination; the same thing happened, the bedroom in the house where I grew up looked like something out of "A Beautiful Mind". So the phone call from the A/V shop took place when my sib's paranoia about Kennedy was at it's zenith and boy did this cause a stir until I revealed what I had done...about six months after being confronted.

That was an enjoyable time. Got an A on the paper.
 
I would like to think so, she's dead. Debunking fools is sport for me and you should make me work harder for my enjoyment.

You have debunked nothing. You don't even show an understand of what I'm talking about. You can't read and comprehend. You're too busy thinking about what you are going to say. You have not exhibited an adult level of intelligence.

You're the one asking about my dead mother...so much for my preconception of dealing with an adult or at least a classy teenager.

You won't come out and say what you're trying to say which is the standard MO for all conspiracy kooks.

Somehow Oswald kills a cop, is photoed with the murder weapon which he bought by the way, works in the place where the gunshots came from and that isn't good enough for you. You're talking about nicks in ties and other hogwash.

PS: Fuck you.

Thank you for admitting the truth, even though you are obtuse to admitting it.

You have a big problem with me because I refuse to follow YOUR script. I'm supposed to make wild accusations that tie JFK's assassination to Bigfoot, 9/11, the Loch Ness monster and aliens.

I would have NO problem with Lee Harvey Oswald being the lone assassin of President Kennedy, IF THAT is what the evidence proves... but it doesn't.

I told you in the beginning on another thread that I would GIVE you Oswald firing on the motorcade, but he could not have created all the wounds in the President and the Governor.

What I need to see from you is a tiny glimmer that you even understand what I am talking about. So, explain to me Newton's Law of motion and HOW it applies to the two body wounds in the President.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top