Timothy--

In another thread you wrote:

"I’m not a conspiracy theorist by any stretch, but I am probably the only person in America who has actually read the entire Warren Commission Report on the Assassination of President Kennedy.

"Its fairly f**ked up, at worst, and ridiculously speculative, at best, but the most telling part of the so-called 'investigation' can be found in Chapter 1: Summary and Conclusions - Conclusions: Section 3:

“'Although it is not necessary to any essential findings of the Commission to determine just which shot hit Governor Connally, there is very persuasive evidence from the experts to indicate that the same bullet which pierced the President’s throat also caused Governor Connally’s wounds.'

"Not necessary to any essential findings? … Uh, it is when your entire case rests on it!"

"In that same vein, I read with increasing frequency on this board how mainstream christianity (whatever the hell that is) largely ignores or no longer recognizes the old testament as bona-fide scripture. Really? . . . "

("Old Testament no longer recognized as 'factual' by mainstream christianity?," posted by "Timothy," on Recovery from Mormonism" bulletion board, 27 February 2011, 1:59 p.m., at: http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,124734)
_____


Since you brought up this aspect of the assassination of JFK as an example of an essential factor in case-making, here's something you might find interesting, given that it relates directly to your mention of a particularly important element of the President's murder:

I happened to be in the Dallas area with a colleague of mine for a 20-year high school reunion for students of Richardson High School (Richardson is a North Dallas suburb, where I attended RHS through my junior year).

My friend John Stanley (who was not a RHS alumni but who was also interested in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy) and I decided to go down to Dealey Plaza, where I was standing across from Elm Street in the late afteroon, looking toward the Texas School Book Depository (where accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald worked).

I had my camera out, when someone came up to me and earnestly informed me that former Texas Governor John Connally was over at the Depository building.

I crossed Elm Street and went over to the Depository, where a black stretch limo was parked at one corner of the building--and out of which had stepped Governor Connally.

I had with me at the time a facsmile copy of the findings of the Warren Commission.

("Warren Commission Report: The official report presented to President Lyndon B. Johnson on September 21, 1964, By the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy," as "Delivered by Executive Order No. 1130 on September 24, 1964" (New York: Marboro Books Corp., a division of Barnes and Noble Books, Inc., 1992, 888 pp.)


I asked Governor Connally if I could have my photograph taken with him. He graciously agreed. (I still have that photo, which shows Governor Connally and myself standing next to his limo, with the parking lot of the Depository building and the railway operator's tower in the background, with me holding at my side my personal copy of the Warren Commission Report).

At my request, Governor Connally signed the book, writing, "John Connally Oct '92."

I asked Governor Connally if I could ask him a question and he said I could.

I inquired of him whether he had been shot with the same bullet that struck President Kennedy.

He quietly but firmly replied that he had not. He told me that he heard a shot, turned in an attempt to look at President Kennedy (who was sitting in the back seat) grabbing for his throat after having been struck by a bullet, then was himself (Connally) hit by another (i.e., a different) bullet.

It was a short, pleasant conversation. I thanked him and left.

Governor Connally died the following June, eight months after we spoke.



Edited 29 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 07:01AM by steve benson.

That Warren Report struck me as a cover up.

I recall watching a news event on the Warren Report that came out right after it was issued, and Connally's claims have remained consistent... And this was before Mark Lane published "Rush to Judgment" or Jim Garrison made his outrageous charges against New Orleans businessman Clay Shaw and the CIA...

The Warren Commission was aware of the Governor's beliefs, and they issued their report regardless...

Some years ago I watched the video linked here and available from Amazon. It laid to rest any doubts I had that Oswald acted alone... The late Peter Jennings hosted the program, and every aspect of that horrific day is examined in detail...

http://www.amazon.com/ABC-News-Presents-Kennedy-Assassination/dp/B0001BFDKU

I think the reviews are illuminating... Here's one...

>It's easy to be swayed by all the misinformation that's out there. I myself had no idea the extent to which Oliver Stone LIED in his ridiculous movie. But this documentary shows in impeccable detail Oswald's personal history leading up to the assassination (including his attempted assassination of a racist leader about 6 months before Kennedy). With interviews of his own family members, it becomes clear that Oswald did this on his own for his own reasons. Another key part of the documentary is its de-mythologizing of the so-called "magic bullet." Oliver Stone and other conspiracists must lie about that in order to make their case, but in this documentary we see the truth-- the supposed impossible pathway becomes absolutely possible when you match Kennedy's and Governor Connely's positions in the car, and the fact that Connelly's seat was 3 inches lower than Kennedy's.

For a broad and either generally or strongly sympathetic view of "lone gunman" perspective, 12 volumes, in particular (alphabatized by author):

--1. David W. Belin, "Final Disclosure: The Full Truth About the Assassination of President Kennedy" (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1988), 249 pp.

--2. Jim Bishop, "The Day Kennedy Was Shot: An Uncensored Minute-by-Minute Account of November 22, 1963" (New York: Funk & Wagnalls, 1968), 713 pp.

--3. Vincent Bugliosi, "Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy" (New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2007), 1,612 pp.

--4. Robert J. Donovan, comp., "A Concise Compendium of the Warren Commission Report on the Assassination of John F. Kennedy: The Conclusive Findings of the Official Investigation into the Most Shocking Crime of Our Century" (New York: Popular Library, 1964), 637 pp.

--5. James P. Hosty, Jr., "Assignment: Oswald--From the FBI Agent Assigned to Investigate Lee Harvey Oswald Prior to the JFK Assassination" (New York: Arcade Publishing, 1996), 328 pp.

--6. Norman Mailer, "Oswald's Tale: An American Mystery" (New York: Random House, 1995), 791 pp.

--7. William Manchester, "The Death of a President: November 20-November 25, 1963" (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1967), 710 pp.

--8. Bonar Menninger, "Mortal Error--The Shot That Killed JFK: A Ballistic Expert's Astonishing Discovery of the Fatal Bullet That Oswald Did Not Fire" (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1992), 361 pp.

--9. Jim Moore, "Conspiracy of One: The Definitive Book on the Kennedy Assassination" (Fort Worth: The Summit Group, 1990), 217 pp.

--10. Carl Oglesby, "The JFK Assassination: The Facts and the Theories" (New York: Signet, published by the Penguin Group, 1992), 319 pp.

--11. Gerald Posner, "Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK" (New York: Random House, 1993), 607 pp.

--12. Chief Justice Earl Warren, Senator Richard B. Russell, Senator John Sherman Cooper, Representative Hale Boggs, Representative Gerald R. Ford, Mr. Allen W. Dulles, Jr. and John J. McCloy, "Warren Commission Report: The Official Report Presented to President Lyndon B. Johnson on September 21, 1964, by the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy," as "Delivered by Executive Order No. 1130 on September 24, 1964" (New York: Marboro Books Corp., a division of Barnes and Noble Books, Inc., 1992), 888 pp.
____


For a broad and either generally or strongly sympathetic view of the "conspiracy" perspective, I suggest 12 volumes, in particular (alphabatized by author):

--1. G. Robert Blakey and Richard N. Billings, "Fatal Hour: The Assassination of President Kennedy by Organized Crime," published in hardcover as "The Plot to Kill the President" (New York: Berkley Books, 1981), 465 pp.

--2. Charles A. Crenshaw, M.D., "JFK: Conspiracy of Silence" (New York: Signet, published by the Penguin Group, 1992), 205 pp.

--3. James W. Douglass, "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters" (New York: Touchstone, a division of Simon & Schuster, 2008). 518 pp.

--4.James H. Fetzer, Ph.D., ed., "Assassination Science: Experts Speak Out on the Death of JFK" (Chicago: Catfeet Press, 1998), 463 pp.

--5. L. Fletcher Prouty, "JFK: The CIA, Vietnam and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy" (New York: Birch Lane Press, published by Carol Publishing Group, 1992), 366 pp.

--6. Sam Giancana and Chuck Giancana, "Double Cross: The Explosive, Inside Story of the Mobster Who Controlled America" (New York: Warner Books, 1992), 366 pp.

--7. Robert J. Groden, "The Killing of a President: The Complete Photographic Record of the JFK Assassination, the Conspiracy and the Cover-Up" (New York: Viking Studio Books, published by the Penguin Group, 1993), 223 pp.

--8. John M. Newman, "JFK and Vietnam: Deception, Intrigue and the Struggle for Power" (New York; Warner Books, Inc., 1992), 506 pp.

--9. Dick Russell, "Hired to Kill Oswald and Prevent the Assassination of JFK, Richard Case Nagell is the Man Who Knew Too Much" (New York: Carrol & Graf Publishers, Inc., 1992), 824 pp.

--10. Anthony Summers, "Conspiracy: The Definitive Book on the J.F.K. Assassination" (New York: Paragen House, 1989), 657 pp.

--11. Alan J. Weberman and Michael Canfield, "Coup d' E'tat: The CIA and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy," revised ed. (San Francisco: Quick American Archives, 1992), 382 pp.

--12. Harold Weinberg, "Case Open: The Omissions, Distortions and Falsifications of 'Case Closed'" (New York: Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc., 1994), 178 pp.

*****


That should be enough for starters.

Having lived in the Dallas area for six years, I have a particular interest in the JFK assassination and therefore have collected over time an extensive array of both books and videos on the President's murder from a variety of perspectives.

I tend to prefer the books. As a rule, they provide more in-depth treatment and are more fully referenced, although certainly not all of them are fully believable.

The above-provided list covers a significant range of interpretations of the JFK assassination. Over the years, competing sides in the debate have presented what I regard in varying degrees to be credible and persuasive arguments in their own right (although, in my opinion, much of what has been offered post-1963 by so-called "assassination buffs" has been insanely speculative and outrageous).
_____


P.S.--You can't borrow them, Cabbie, although I may be up in Utah in a few weeks and could possibly let you look at a few.

If you're interested, you might want to bring your speed readers. :)



Edited 22 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 06:17AM by steve benson.

Nano thermite. Bin Laden's connections to the CIA and Bush family. Building 7 going down. The Pentagon hit by a remote drone and not a plane. Airliners flown by remote control.

We've been talking about the Kennedy assassination for decades and still debate it. 9/11 is the same. Put it this way, if you are powerful enough to pull that stuff off, you are powerful enough to cover it up and keep it covered.

Power does what it wants.

Rubicon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Power does what it wants.


that doesnt say much for Bill Clinton does it?

couldn't even cover up a simple BJ

Wrt to what happened in Dealy Plaza and why, I'd recommend reading James W. Douglass' book "JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Died and Why It Matters". This is in my opinion the best, most credible, and most readable of the books on the Kennedy assassination.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 04:50AM by steve benson.

This is sure enough some weird stuff on this bulletin. Did you know that one time a theory was concocted that had Oswald just trying to shoot Governor Connally? It's known that Oswald had a beef with the Gov. because of having been denied veteran's benefits. I read it with great interest, and it answered every question except one: Why did Jack Ruby shoot Oswald?

Ruby claimed at the end of his life that he was not part of any master plan. Maybe he wasn't. There sure was plenty of blood spilled though. As for the claim that Oswald could not have done the shooting from his position, that's bunk. The logistics of the shooting have been repeated. They even did it on Mythbusters!

And SLCabbie is right about the bullet path. The "grassy knoll" is a red herring.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 05:20AM by steve benson.

. . . I don't think (given the right conditions) it would have been beyond the realm of possibility for a shooter in that location to hit his mark, even if it was with a relatively primitive, repeating, bolt-action, Italian-made Mannlicher-Carcano rifle of the type that Oswald purchased through mail order--and especially if the rifle was outfitted with a 4x scope for use at such relatively close range.

That, however, does not resolve what looks like from the Zapruder film of the actual assassination (too brutal to post a link to here) to have been the fact that Connally did begin to turn around in his seat in an effort to see Kennedy after Kennedy had been shot in the throat--a reaction on Connally's part that one would not expect from a man who was suppsedly in that moment being grievousy wounded by a high-powered bullet that had just passed through Kennedy and was tearing into Connally's torso.

Connally, of course, did respond to a round that did strike him (Connally) which, given the delay between Kennedy's reaction to being hit and Connally's reaction to being hit, strongly suggests that Connally was wounded via a separate and subsequent bullet.

As Harold Weinberg points out in his book, "Case Open: The Omissions, Distortions and Falsifications of [Gerald Posner's] 'Case Closed,'" timing is everything in determining what actually happened during the Kennedy assassination, and accuses Posner of misrepresenting Connally's reactions during the seconds in which the Governor and the President were shot.

Writes Weinberg:

"He [author Posner] says that . . . 'Governor Connally's recollections and actions confirm a shot was fired before Frame 166.' He cites no page numbers for that testimony.

"There is no such 'confirmation.' There is no such testimony. Posner makes it up. When Connally testified in regard to frame numbers, he was firm in saying that he was shot later than Posner says he was . . . .

"Remember, Connally was alive long after Posner was down in Texas working on his book, Posner boasts of his 200 interviews. HE DOES NOT SAY HE INTERVIWED CONNALLY [original emphasis]. Instead, he invents what he wants to have believed, and he attributes that to the now-deceased Connally."

(Weinberg, "Case Open," Chapter Three, "The 'Enhancement' of Posner's Book," p. 23)


Author Gaeton Fonzi also stressed the importance of the shooting of Connally in undermining the findings of the Warren Commission in his book,"The Last Investigation: A Former Federal Investigator for the House Select Committee on Assassinations Breaks His Oath of Silence and Tells What Insiders Know about the Assassination of John F. Kennedy," Chapter Two, "Haunting Questions" (New York: Thunder Mouth Press, 1993, pp. 20-21).

Writes Fonzi:

"If a separate shot did hit the Governor between the two that hit the President, the shots would have had to be evenly spaced within less than six seconds. But the Commission conceded that '. . . a substantial majority of witnesses stated that the shots were not evenly spaced. Most witnesses recalled that the second and third shots were bunched together.'

"Then there is Governor Connally's testimony, during which [single-bullet theory author Arlen] Specter himself inadvertently develoed one of the strongest contetions AGAINST the single-bullet theory [original emphasis]:

"'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.'

"The Zapruder film itself supports Connally's assertion. As the Presidential car begins to pass from view behind a road sign, about frame 185, the President is waving with his right hand and smiling. Less than a second and a half later, at frame 207, the car is completely beind the sign but the President's face is still visible above it. On frame 225 it is obvious that Kennedy has begun to clutch at his throat. By frame 235, Connally has begun to turn to his right, against--according to the Commission's version--the force of the bullet which had shattered his right fifth rib, smashed his right wrist and punctured his left thigh. Actually, there is no indication that Connally is hit until frame 292, a little more than three and one half seconds later, when he begins to fall back into his wife's lap.

"When I asked Specter about this discrepancy, he couldn't explain it. 'You can't tell from the films when Connally was hit. . . . What you have on the Zapruder film is, naturally, two dimensional. The Governor is turning around and at some point he's hit. There's the question of reaction time. But I watched--and the Governor watched those films--which, by the way, was fascinating to see--that is, his response as he watched that film for the first time when he was at the Commission the day he testified--and even he can't tell exactly when he was hit, you know.'

"But Connally had testified that he had time to turn around twice AFTER he heard the first shot fired [original emphasis]. Mrs. Connally supported her husband, saying she did not see him get hit when she heard the first shot. In order to reach the single bullet conclusion, that testimony had to be ignored."


James H. Fetzer, in his book, "Assassination Science," quotes contributing author Ron Hepler's analysis, entitled "The Wounding Of Governor John Connally," in casing doubt on the single-bullet theory.

Writes Hepler:

"In this commonly accepted view, the Governor was wounded shortly after the throat shot to the President, but long before the fatal headshot. Yet, two-thirds of all ear witnesses of three shots, including Secret Service Agents William Greer and Roy Kellerman seated in the front of the limousine, tell a story diamterically opposed to this. These witnesses heard a single shot followed by a pause, then two shots in rapid succession. . . .

"Governor Connally told the Warren Commission, 'I was turning to look back over my left shoulder into the back seat, but I never got that far in my turn. I got about in the position I am in now facing you, looking a little bit to the left of center; and then I felt like someone had hit me in the back.' He elaborated to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA):

"' . . . [S]o I was in the process of, at least I was turning to look over my left shoulder into the back seat to see if I could see him [Kennedy]. I never looked. I never made the full turn. About the time I turned back where I was facing more or less straight ahead, the way the car was moving, I was hit. I was knocked over, just doubled over by the force of the bullet. It went in my back and came out my chest about two inches below and to the left of my right nipple. The force of the bullet drove my body over almost over double and when I looked, immediately I could see I was just drenched with blood.'

"This sequence of events where the Governor turns to the left just prior to being hit is also reported by Mr. S.M. Holland, who was standing on the triple overpass, in Mark Lane's documentary film, 'Rush to Judgment: The Plot to Kill Kennedy':

"'The first bullet, the President slumped over and Governor Connally made his turn to the right and then back to the left and that's when the second shot was fired and knocked him down to the floorboard.'

"Mrs. Nellie Connally supported her husband's description in her testimony to the House Select Committee:

"'Mr.Dodd: "So, you are still looking at the President and it is your recollection that you then heard what sounded like a second shot?"

"'Mrs. Connally: "Yes."

"'Mr. Dodd: "Is that correct?"

"'Mrs. Connally: "Yes. What was a second shot."

"'Mr. Dodd: "At that point your husband, Governor Connally, slumped over in your direction?"

"'Mrs. Connally: "No, he lunged forward and then just kind of collapsed."

Comments Hepler:

"What the Governor, his wife, and Mr. Holland aptly describe is Newton's Law of Conservations of Momentum. It says that when an object in motion collides with a stationary one, all momentum will be conserved or, in other words, all momentum will be accountable after the collision. This conservation of momentum results in the deceleration of the bullet, accelerating the torso as the bullet penetrates the body impacting bones, and so forth. . . .

"When I learned of these statements concerning the impact of the bullet, it was immediately apparent that such forward motion would pinpoint the time of the impact within one frame of the Zapruder film, so I decided to look for that motion.

"At frame 234, the time of [Connally's] [l]apel [f]lap there is no motion that matches the description given by the Governor. So I looked at Frame 236, the shoulder drop [of Connally], surely if the bullet drove his shoulder down it would have driven him forward; but no. What about frame 238, the puffing of the [Governor's] cheeks? Still no forward motion. Rather than accept that the Governor was not yet wounded, most researchers choose to ignore the statements of the two people most intimate with the event, the wounded man and his wife who was seated next to him at the time of the shooting. . . .

"Contrary to popular belief, Governor Connally does not appear to have been wounded until AFTER the fatal headshot to the President [original emphasis]. . . .

"The key to determining the actual timing of the Governor's wounding is the transfer of the bullet's momentum to the torso as it impacts the rib bone. This momentum transfer is visible immediately after the headshot to the President. Both bullets that wounded the Governor were part of a final volley that probably included four shots in a little over one second."

(Hepler, "The Wounding of Governor John Connally," in Fetzer, pp. 239-41, 246-47)


Whether one agrees in all details with the above analyses, it nonetheless underscores why Timothy makes a valid point as to the importance of Connally's claims about the timing of him (Connally) being shot when assessing the credibility of the Warren Commission's final report.



Edited 20 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 05:48PM by steve benson.

Several times, and I don't feel a need to revisit it...

And again, recalling from the review (I believe it was on CBS) which would've come out when we were in junior high, the order of the first two shots was questioned; the suggestion was made there was a "miss," then the shot that hit Kennedy's throat and passed into the governor, and then the fatal third shot...

I like that hypothesis, that Connally turned in response to the first shot and did witness President Kennedy being hit in the throat...

Bullets travel considerably faster than the speed of sound, and the claim is you don't hear the shot that kills you until after you're dying... A bit of "macabre Zen," I know, but...

I don't think there are many out there with experience being shot, which is where the issue of "perceptions" come in... How long does it take someone to react to the realization one has been hit? I'm speaking of course of the "mental realization," not the immediate physical reactions to the assault of thousands of foot pounds of energy on a body...

In Connally's case, I believe it's obvious to suggest his reactions were an admixture of both...

Cabdriver Confession: While the rest of you--I know this is true of Steve--were being good little Mormon deacons and teachers, I was carrying around a doggeared copy of Playboy magazine with the Jim Garrison interview (this would'be been around '68). At the time, I thought it was gospel... The entire "conspiracy movement" was just gaining energy by then; Playboy had published an earlier interview with others, including Mark Lane, whose book I also read...

Having learned much more about the New Orleans D.A., I've concluded, at least to my satisfaction, that Garrison was an opportunitistic sociopath with little regard for anything but a delusional vision of his role in history that he decided to fashion...

I think there are lessons to be learned from that story, but they are not pleasant ones...

No doubt there are others, probably including Oliver Stone, who would disagree with that assessment, but I think most, including many who reject the Oswald-as-lone assassin-theory, are content to have seen Garrison thrown under the bus of history on that one...

And I'm a fan of books, too, for the most part, but the Peter Jennings video is particularly powerful and I believe it to be a worthwhile addition to the assassination body-of-information.

BTW, my dad--whom Steve's met--was a superb marksman when he was younger, and he's also visited the Dallas site. He commented that it would take "a good shot," but that's all.

However, despite allegations of my being addicted to polemics, this is all I'll have to say on the subject. The video was that persuasive for me...

Garrison was something of a nut (who, it has been alleged, largely turned a blind eye to the New Orleans Mafia), so he didn't get any keyboard clicks of credibility from me.

But as to that inconvenient Zapruder film, well, I can understand why you choose to attempt a dodge from that missile--since, as amply demonstrated by Connally's non-reaction alone to the Commission's lone-round scenario, it tends to blow a gaping hole in your single-bullet premise.



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 09:20AM by steve benson.

My "single bullet premise"? Seriously... I simply find that explanation more credible than the logical consequences--Garrison being one example thereof--of hypothesizing there were more than three shots fired that day. It is hardly "mine," however... As Timothy points out, the idea originated with Arlen Specter, who, as we know, suffered horrible karma from his wishy washy ways and ended his career as a failed Pennsylvania politician...

You ought to at least assign it to Peter Jennings, who, as nearly as I can tell, was a pretty fair journalist...

And what does a large piece of inscribed Ptolemic-era basalt discovered during the Napoleonic period have to do with a smallish bit of mid 20th century celluloid?

That attempt at a metaphor lays an egg... A tabloid-shaped one, to boot...

I laid out some reasonable parameters for consideration on the subject, and those are what being ignored... I, for one, not having read the entire Warren Report, although plenty of excerpts from it, of course (as well as the spin by the drama llamas who persist in using the term magic when bullets are anything but magic) would like to see more about "the shot that missed." That's an area of discussion I'm completely unfamiliar with. But I would be far more interested in forensic reports about the Mountain Meadows victims than this possible bit of academic dialogue...

Now, as for the Zapruder film--and Timothy has a couple of credentials I'm going to exploit momnetarily--I first saw it as a video-taped copy of the original and not the digiized versions now available...

Timothy, as a film maker, can perhaps give us a report on the following... Note: to squeamish: There is one replay of the third, fatal head shot...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nh6LbpTZ5Qk

Also, as a former military man, perhaps he would oblige us with a report on that nature of the bullet in the M/C 6.5 cartridge... Hint: It warn't a hollow point...

Class dismissed...

. . . the bullet that also supposedly had just ripped through Kennedy and was now supposedly digging its way into and out of Connally's body, I don't find your support of your single-bullet premise (or the Warren Commission's or Jennings') to be particularly plausible on that score alone.

As Timothy notes, the Commission simply chose to ignore Connally on this.

I'm with House Committee on Assassinations federal investigator Gaeton Fonzi on this one.

And I've read a ton on this, Cab, from all kinds of directions.

Class dismissed, indeed.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 04:01PM by steve benson.

. . . and I don't (as I have noted in this thread already) disgree that it can be done (in fact, it has been done in recreated scenarios by capable marksmen).

I am not, however, satisfied with the Commission's decision to ignore the Connally physical evidence (based on the Governor's on-film, observable reactions or lack thereof to that single bullet scenario, not to mention his own testimony as an experienced hunter), but instead (looking at the film) regard it as being quite possible that Connally was struck by a separate bullet--not the single, so-called "magic" one, for the documented reasons I have also laid out in some detail in this thread already.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 04:02PM by steve benson.

This one offers a solid--repeated no less, after an earlier episode was criticized--scientific replication of what happens when a body is struck by a bullet...

They make the case against those Hollwood special effects where someone is "blown back" by the round striking their body...

Of course they were referring to the Zapruder film, albeit obliquely...

Edit: BTW, I'm an experienced hunter myself although I'm not likely to do much of it again. In my bloodthirsty youth, I killed four deer (we did take care of the venison and eat it all in each instance). There was a fifth, however, the "one that got away." All of the deer I killed were at close range since I would station myself in likely spot and keep quiet for as long as need be (freezing my hiney off, but I was young and tough once).

This was the first one, and wanting to save meat, I went for a neck shot with .243 at perhaps 30 or 40 yards, maximum. The .243 is a 6 mm cartridge; Oswald used a 6.5 mm, and it was a solid jacketed military round (military rounds were generally designed to maim rather than kill because wounded soldiers put more burden on the enemy's infrastructue than dead ones).

The hollow point went right through the animal's neck without expanding, and it went down, but in the manner the Mythbusters described... I was able to approach it, and as I bent over, it was suddenly resurrected and ran down the hill to where another hunter took it out with a shoulder shot from an '06...

My youthful protests that "this was my deer" went unheard...

I took some comfort that it was an old man--doubtless now long gone--who'd barely been able to make a fifty yard walk up the hill off the trail who obviously delighted in showing off his hunting prowess to his grandchildren...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 04:17PM by SL Cabbie.

. . . defies the eyewitness testimony from the Stemmons overpass, it is undermined by Specter's own admisson that he can't explain it himself and it defies what Connally told me.

And, Cabbie, please try to get this through your head (no pun intended): I am not talking about the President's reaction to the headshot.

This thread is not, per se, about the fatal shot to Kennedy's cranium.

Rather, it's about Timothy's original point regarding the unlikelihood that Kennedy and Connally were struck by the same, single bullet.

Keep your head in the game here. :)



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 06:08PM by steve benson.

Newton: A body at rest tends to remain at rest; a body in motion tends to remain in motion...

The small area where a bullet strikes is, as noted, subjected to a horrific assault of thousands of foot pounds of energy, but only in that small area. Scant millimeters away there is no effect...

A pity you moved to Texas, although you were possibly spared some gorish moments. Had you remained in Utah and attended the junior high I did, you would've seen the Holocaust films of people being executed at close range. I've mentioned that TBM mentor of mine, my old geography teacher, who showed them. Your family might've been delighted, however, because he also included films of Soviet atrocities, and the evils of Communist totalitarism were fully exposed as well.

Okay, the laws and prophesies of Good Ol' Godwin have been fullfilled on this one...

Notes Fonzi:

"The Zapruder film itself supports Connally's assertion. As the Presidential car begins to pass from view behind a road sign, about frame 185, the President is waving with his right hand and smiling. Less than a second and a half later, at frame 207, the car is completely beind the sign but the President's face is still visible above it. On frame 225 it is obvious that Kennedy has begun to clutch at his throat. By frame 235, Connally has begun to turn to his right, against--according to the Commission's version--the force of the bullet which had shattered his right fifth rib, smashed his right wrist and punctured his left thigh. Actually, there is no indication that Connally is hit until frame 292, a little more than three and one half seconds later, when he begins to fall back into his wife's lap.

"When I asked Specter about this discrepancy, he couldn't explain it. 'You can't tell from the films when Connally was hit. . . . What you have on the Zapruder film is, naturally, two dimensional. The Governor is turning around and at some point he's hit. There's the question of reaction time. But I watched--and the Governor watched those films--which, by the way, was fascinating to see--that is, his response as he watched that film for the first time when he was at the Commission the day he testified--and even he can't tell exactly when he was hit, you know.'

"But Connally had testified that he had time to turn around twice AFTER he heard the first shot fired [original emphasis]. Mrs. Connally supported her husband, saying she did not see him get hit when she heard the first shot. In order to reach the single bullet conclusion, that testimony had to be ignored."
_____


And, if you're going to invoke principles of physics, from Fetzer's book:

"What the Governor, his wife, and Mr. Holland aptly describe is Newton's Law of Conservations of Momentum. It says that when an object in motion collides with a stationary one, all momentum will be conserved or, in other words, all momentum will be accountable after the collision. This conservation of momentum results in the deceleration of the bullet, accelerating the torso as the bullet penetrates the body impacting bones, and so forth. . . .

"When I learned of these statements concerning the impact of the bullet, it was immediately apparent that such forward motion would pinpoint the time of the impact within one frame of the Zapruder film, so I decided to look for that motion.

"At frame 234, the time of [Connally's] [l]apel [f]lap there is no motion that matches the description given by the Governor. So I looked at Frame 236, the shoulder drop [of Connally], surely if the bullet drove his shoulder down it would have driven him forward; but no. What about frame 238, the puffing of the [Governor's] cheeks? Still no forward motion. Rather than accept that the Governor was not yet wounded, most researchers choose to ignore the statements of the two people most intimate with the event, the wounded man and his wife who was seated next to him at the time of the shooting. . . .

"Contrary to popular belief, Governor Connally does not appear to have been wounded until AFTER the fatal headshot to the President [original emphasis]. . . .

"The key to determining the actual timing of the Governor's wounding is the transfer of the bullet's momentum to the torso as it impacts the rib bone. This momentum transfer is visible immediately after the headshot to the President. Both bullets that wounded the Governor were part of a final volley that probably included four shots in a little over one second."
____


And spare me your cheap references to the Holocaust, Cabbie.

I have been to Yad Vashem in Jerusalem (Israel's sobering museum to the horrors of the Nazi Holocaust), where I have lingered in my own horror over the films and photographs of execution and torture.

One of my good personal friends is Abe Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, who was rescued as a baby from a Nazi concentration camp by a Catholic nun.



Edited 13 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 05:53PM by steve benson.

... as a former AF jet engine mech, I'm well versed and formally trained in Newton's laws on motion as they, along with Bernoulli's stuff, make said devices go. Suck, burn, blow and go, as we used to say.

Let's start with the film record.

8mm cameras of the day (I think the Zapruder film is pre-Super 8 days) ran at anywhere from 14 to 24 frames per second. I believe Abe's was in the 18 FPS range.

As mentioned, when the limo emerges from behind the sign, Kennedy is already clutching at his throat which, given the speed of a bullet, would, according to the single-bullet theory, also have Connally in a wee bit of visible pain seeing as how, according to the Warren Commission Report, the same bullet that struck Kennedy blew-out a fair portion of the Gov's ribs, shattered his wrist and lodged in his thigh.

What we see in the film, however, is Connally holding tight to his Stetson with the same wrist which, according to the Warren Commission, is supposedly shattered while turning in the car toward Kennedy who, as mentioned, is already clutching at his throat.

All of a not-so-sudden, Connelly’s hair becomes disheveled and he can be seen exhaling a rather generous amount of air from bloated cheeks much like a person would if punched in the gut. Understanding that folks often react slowly to such wounds "mentally" is one thing, but the physical reactions, such as disheveled hair, occur immediately. Even to the naked eye at regular speed, one can see the delay. Counting the frames serves as confirmation.

Officer Teague was struck by concrete fragments from a bullet that hit the curb of the triple overpass which was reported in the paper and confirmed by the Commission and what makes the single-bullet theory the only theory that can account for a single-assassin. Too many wounds for two bullets, so one bullet has to do double duty. The evidence as well as Connally's testimony deny this, but the Commission made it the basis of its report, then said its not necessary to any "essential" findings.

Call it what you will, but you know my word for it.

As for Mythbusters debunking the "back and to the left" thang, they are correct in noting that, according to Newton's Third Law, the assailant would also be blown-back with equal force. What they didn't note is the fact that had they fired an object of equal size of the dummy at the dummy, said dummy would have been most decidedly blown back. When you fire a gun, the bullet moves in one direction and the gun moves in the opposite direction. That's Newton's third Law in action. When the projectile hits, say, a president's skull, the following laws all apply:

1.Every object in a state of uniform motion tends to remain in that state of motion unless an external force is applied to it.

2.The relationship between an object's mass (m), its acceleration (a), and the applied force (F) is F = ma. Acceleration and force are vectors (as indicated by their symbols being displayed in slant bold font); in this law the direction of the force vector is the same as the direction of the acceleration vector.

3.For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction (that would be the brain matter moving in the opposite direction of the bullet).

And that's all I know about that.

The Commission performed a test using a human skull perched atop a step-ladder which a marksman shot from behind with Oswald's rifle at the same distance. The skull did, in fact, move backward, but only after both the skull and ladder rocked forward and the ladder hit the skull in the jawbone (I'll try to dig that one up). hardly conclusive - as a matter of fact, a joke - but the test was accepted by the Commission as scientific proof.

Was there a conspiracy? I'm inclined to think along those lines. There's no doubt that the official report is a work of fiction. As for what really happened? Arlen Specter may be the last living person who knows.

Timothy



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 05:08PM by Timothy.

But as I recall, this whole thread began in response to your point about Connally, not about Kennedy, did it not?

:)



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 05:55PM by steve benson.

... in my opinion, tend to suggest a frontal shot. The "opposite and equal" thang applies, but I seriously doubt Oswald's head reacted like Kennedy's when the shot was fired.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

As for the shot that supposedly wounded Kennedy and Connally ? ... I don't think so.

Timothy



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 05:58PM by Timothy.

It's clear you're not an expert on physics, either, however...

Nor am I... I did however petition a certain PhD physicist for a bit of "peer" review, and I'll stand by his analysis, as well as the Mythbusters (any forensic firearms folks around? My last consultant on that one took offense at a post being pulled and left). In the meantime you two watch that Mythbusters video again, okay? As well as the bit from the other video that notes Connally's suit "puffs up a bit" coincident with Kennedy reacting to his wound (and note Kennedy is not propelled forward).

And I'm a confessed coward; I wouldn't have sought review if I weren't certain of validation...

As for Steve's belief that I've downplayed the Holocaust, hardly... I was mocking the self-identified authorities on the Internet, not the the nearly incomprehensible horror of Hitler's Final Solution... As one of those with "Authorities Anonymous" tendencies, I recognize I'm vulnerable to that one as well, but if you're gonna play in that arena, better bring a laser or a light saber or two... I keep my own under the seat of the ol' police interceptor...

Anyway, when Simon Wisenthal died, I posted a tribute to him on this site (possibly on the old off-topic social board when it was also administered here). I noted I was privileged to have heard Wisenthal speak at the U of U around '84, and I first read his biography as a teen-ager...

A genuinely awful sort made some obnoxious replies to that one...

I eventually ran him out of Dodge-er RFM, and I'm unrepentant... My nickname for him, BTW, was "shellshocked" if that'll jog some memories...

In the Zapruder film when the limo emerges from behind the sign, we see Kennedy already clutching at his throat while Connally is turning toward the president BEFORE reacting to a gunshot wound. The film more-than-obviously confirms Connally's recollections but is inconsistent with the magic-bullet theory (first proposed by Arlen Specter, btw). As it turns out, the Commission didn't totally dismiss the Texas Governor's testimony. It just ignored his testimony.

My point is that when folks base an argument on a premise, then abandon that premise due to inconvenience but continue the argument anyway, they're pretty much blowing smoke out their collective asses. If, as Jim Huston reports, only a handful of the christian population place stock in the validity of bible tales, old or new, then the vast majority who don't are, as mentioned, blowing smoke out their collective asses.

Add the dillusional handful to the smoke blowin' majority and you get 100% that don't know what they're talkin' about, yet willingly continue to fund and perpetuate the oldest, richest and least productive industry the world has ever known!

From my chair here in the bible belt, I don't buy it for a second.

This is the Gospel according to Timothy ... Never trust a god or a government.

Timothy



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 10:52AM by Timothy.

how could he get off three shots in that amount of time (9 seconds?) with a bolt action rifle.

That's not enough time to aim for shots 2 and 3. ANd yet both of them were lethal.

Damn lucky, or damn good.

Semper fi!

I can get off three aimed shots in 9 secs with a 98k and if my MN91/30 is cooperating probably as well thats with just the sights and not a scope. Never fired a mannlicher whatever before so dont know how they are.

Actually, the time for reloading and aiming is just before shots 2 and 3. So four seconds each. Don't know how much time was spent on the first shot, but it missed big time.

not saying it's impossible. He was just either damn lucky or damn good.

Did he have any known rifle training or expertise beyond basic?

Growing up in the Bronx, I can't imagine it was second nature to him.

. . . the latter assertion being based upon Oswald's actual Marine range score sheets that have surfaced.

Having fired weapons on the police range (with various types of Glocks, and once in academy training with a shotgun), I can attest to the fact that some days you can be "on," and other days not.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 06:26PM by steve benson.

I've always been fascinated by the assassination and all the loose ends that just can't seem to be tied together.

I don't go in for the conspiracy idea either but so many deaths are tied to those connected to November 22, 1963.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/deaths.htm

I've often wondered if some other nut was in the Dal-Tex Building shooting at the same time Oswald was shooting from the Texas School Book Depository but got away.

It's an ad hominem, but a nice and subtle one...

>This theme was first taken up by Penn Jones, Jr., publisher of the Midlothian Mirror, a small-town Texas paper. The most widely cited current list of "mystery deaths" was published by author Jim Marrs (who also recently released the book Alien Agenda about UFOs).

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/28/2011 03:55PM by steve benson.

Guys, guys, why is this still a subject of conjecture?

Howard Hunt gave a deathbed confession, on tape, to his son. In those tapes, Hunt lays out the CIA structure by name of the assassination group. Some of the names that were always suspected; some surprises.

So for Hunt's tapes not to be true, you'd have to believe that this career CIA guy who spent a lot of time denying allegations of a conspiracy larger than Oswald, and even fighting allegations in civil court, on his deathbed suddenly deciding to lie about it.