• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
jargon buster said:
Robert, are you now switching horses to try and establish a shooter from the front as opposed to a grassy knoll shooter from the right?
Click to expand...
I'm intrigued to learn exactly how many shooters Robert will finally end up alleging. Perhaps an entire battalion, by the time we're done?!
 
Robert Prey said:
Hank wrote:

"How about the windshield damage photo I cited? How about the damage to the chrome photo I cited?"

Comment:
How about it? Several witnesses observed a bullet hole on the windshield, but the hole was described as inny, not an outy -- a shot from the front. Naturally the FBI did to this crucial piece of evidence what they did to all other crucial pieces of evidence --- they had it destroyed. Among those witnesses, Dr. Evangelea Glanges:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vClwuJ0yuWM

" Her description matches the Ford Manager who saw the limo glass with the bullet hole fired from the front. It also tends to confirm the medical observation at Parkland that JFK's neck wound was a shot from the front."
Click to expand...

Now you're agreeing with 7forever? LOL. You aren't very good at keeping track of the gibberish you post, are you?

Oops! Two questions!
 
Robert Prey said:
The first shot that hit JFK was not necessarily the first shot that was shot. And as to where the bullet ended up, you yourself are assuming what you have yet to prove, that the shot came from the back, yet all of the Parkland docs initially said the neck wound was a wound of entrance. Where did the bullet go? The autopsy docs didn't bother to look. Nor is it necessary to assume that the Tague bullet was shot by Oswald. That is more circular reasoning on your part. AS far as using the WC drawing, it is shown merely to prove how inconsistent the Warren conclusion is with their own fictional drawings.
Click to expand...


lol. You know the words, but not the music, Robert.

I've never advanced a theory that JFK was shot from the front. The autopsists had JFK's body x-rayed, no bullets were found in the body.

If it's your theory the Parkland doctors were correct about the neck wound being a wound of entry, you just added a third magic bullet to YOUR list.

You got some explaining to do:
1. What happened to the bullet that hit JFK in the back?
2. What happened to the bullet that hit JFK in the neck?
2. What happened to the bullet that hit Connally?

That's THREE magic bullets you have to explain. I personally think you're going in the wrong direction if you're trying to eliminate a magic bullet. Do you want to go for FOUR magic bullets?

If you're advancing a theory that Tague was struck by a bullet fired from other than the sniper's nest, you need to explain why Tague, the curb, the limo at the time of the head shot and the sniper's nest form almost a straight line. You also need to provide some material evidence of a second shooter.

You did advance the Warren Commission drawing - which is illustrative of the wound to the head but not a medical drawing like the Ida Cox one for the HSCA - to eliminate the Tague shot coming from the remnants of the bullet hitting JFK in the head. If you're now claiming that wasn't the purpose, then the Tague wound coming from the bullet that struck JFK in the head is back on the table.

Hank
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
Hank wrote:

"How about the windshield damage photo I cited? How about the damage to the chrome photo I cited?"

Comment:
How about it? Several witnesses observed a bullet hole on the windshield, but the hole was described as inny, not an outy -- a shot from the front. Naturally the FBI did to this crucial piece of evidence what they did to all other crucial pieces of evidence --- they had it destroyed. Among those witnesses, Dr. Evangelea Glanges:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vClwuJ0yuWM

" Her description matches the Ford Manager who saw the limo glass with the bullet hole fired from the front. It also tends to confirm the medical observation at Parkland that JFK's neck wound was a shot from the front."
Click to expand...


The windshield damage was photographed on the evening of 11/22/63 at the Secret Service garage. I provided that photograph. Are you again saying eyewitness recollections take prededence over photographic evidence?

You are wrong. There is no hole. There is damage from a strike from the interior side of the windshield (back-to-front), not from the exterior side (front to back).

The Altgens photo taken at Z255 confirms there is no damage to the windshield at that time (the famous one with Lovelady in the doorway). This is after JFK already has his hands up to his neck region and his elbows splayed outward. The next Altgens photo (after the head shot) shows damage to the windshield. This was pointed out in 1966 by Josiah Thompson in SIX SECONDS IN DALLAS. He's a conspiracy author, but he also was honest enough to try to dispel some myths, too.

Hank
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
...The first shot that hit JFK was not necessarily the first shot that was shot...
Click to expand...


That's correct. We agree on something. JFK was hit by the second shot.

Connally was hit by the second shot, as he testified and his wife testified (or are you going to argue now they were both wrong, and Connally was hit by the THIRD shot?).

JFK was struck in the head by the third shot.

Tague was hit by a fragment from the head shot bullet.

Three shots, two hits on JFK, one incidental strike on Tague, and one non-target (Connally) struck when the bullet passed through JFK.

Hank
 
HSienzant said:
This was pointed out in 1966 by Josiah Thompson in SIX SECONDS IN DALLAS. He's a conspiracy author, but he also was honest enough to try to dispel some myths, too.
Click to expand...
And there's the rub: some CTists have a modicum of honesty, indeed much more in many, albeit misguided, cases; others simply haven't, and choose to peddle their woo ad nauseum (that's not yet another variant of 'ad hominem', Robert, in case you're wondering!).
 
Southwind17 said:
And there's the rub: some CTists have a modicum of honesty, indeed much more in many, albeit misguided, cases; others simply haven't, and choose to peddle their woo ad nauseum (that's not yet another variant of 'ad hominem', Robert, in case you're wondering!).
Click to expand...

I've worked on a number of JFK projects with Josiah Thompson, and even though we have a different set of beliefs, (I'm more of a JFK agnostic, mainly just interested in the photo claims) he has an open mind and is really just seeking truth.

To that end part of a team I worked on with Josiah included Joe Durnavich, who if you know him, is NOT at JFK CT.

Josiah is as honest as you will find.
 
HSienzant said:
That's correct. We agree on something. JFK was hit by the second shot.

Connally was hit by the second shot, as he testified and his wife testified (or are you going to argue now they were both wrong, and Connally was hit by the THIRD shot?).

JFK was struck in the head by the third shot.

Tague was hit by a fragment from the head shot bullet.

Three shots, two hits on JFK, one incidental strike on Tague, and one non-target (Connally) struck when the bullet passed through JFK.

Hank
Click to expand...

As previously stated, and proved, Connally insisted till the day he died he was hit by a separate bullet. That fact alone, if true, proves conspiracy.
 
Last edited:
As previously stated, and proved, Connelly insisted till the day he died he was hit by a separate bullet. That fact alone, if true, proves conspiracy. As to first, second or third, it really doesn't matter.
Click to expand...
It wasnt a fact ,it was a claim he made.

You are again mixing up what people claim and what is actually real, a bit like your alledged 40 plus witnesses.
 
Hank wrote:

"What happened to the bullet that hit JFK in the back?"

Comment:
The record shows that all Humes did was stick his finger in the hole and it went nowhere. There was no tracking of that alleged bullet.
 
Hank wrote:


2. What happened to the bullet that hit Connally?

That's THREE magic bullets you have to explain. I personally think you're going in the wrong direction if you're trying to eliminate a magic bullet. Do you want to go for FOUR magic bullets?

Comment: There were zero magic bullets. Connelly was hit by a separate bullet.
 
Southwind wrote:

The LHO/Obama square chin comparison is arguably the best example of those assertions of yours that have convincingly been quashed.

Comment:
In your dreams. A = A, B = B, and Square chin in three separate photos = square chin. Deal with it.
 
HSienzant said:
lol - you are citing a drawing! That's your evidence? And you call it a fictional bullet path! And call it a phony WC drawing! Destroying your own argument! Why do you cite what you yourself called fictional and phony? Do you not know what evidence is? Hint - it's not something you should describing as fictional.

How about the windshield damage photo I cited? How about the damage to the chrome photo I cited? How about the Harper fragment that went forward and to the left of the limo (in the same direction as the Tague shot would have gone) and the large explosion of blood and brains seen blasting up and forward in the Zapruder film (including the Harper fragment)?

Didn't you yourself cite the statement of a motorcycle officer (Bobby Hargis) riding to the right of JFK who got hit with blood and brain matter? Didn't that go up from the head, not down into the car? Do you even know what your point is from week to week?

Nothing went that high? You ignore the evidence and cite a drawing you yourself call phony. Spectacular. Do you have anything left below the knee?

Can you cite Tague's opinion that it was a missed shot that went over the limo?

Hank
Click to expand...

One question at a time, please.
 
Originally Posted by Robert Prey
No. He says it was definitely a separate shot from the one that hit Kennedy. And I don't need Nellie to affirm that, he affirms it himself. And that makes the "magic" bullet just another bullet.


HSienzant said:
Quote him saying that, Robert.
You know you can't.
Click to expand...

"'Mr. Specter: In your view, which bullet caused the injury to your chest, Governor Connally?

"'Governor Connally: The second one.

"'Mr. Specter: And what is your reason for that conclusions, sir?

"'Governor Connally: Well, in my judgment, it just couldn't conceivably have been the first one because I heard the sound of the shot . . . and after I heard the shot, I had the time to turn to my right and start to turn to my left before I felt anything. It is not conceivable to me that I could have been hit by the first bullet.'
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom