The shots that didn't come from TSBD and DalTex either ...

[Kirk]

Wow! Thanks Joe,I never noticed that was a truck. Geez, I seem to have stared at this pictures for years, and still I miss so much.KirkDealey Joe wrote:What do you guys think about the pickup that was parked up on the TSBD road then was imediatly gone?Any shooting from that truck would have been from the side.It might account for the 45 slug that was found on the ground across the road.Notice the truck with someone standing beside itseconds later it is gone?

[Phil Dragoo]

Don Roberdeau has a great deal of excellent data, diagrams, photos on his site.http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/6800 ... 9.htmlJohn Ritcheson did some killer work before his suspicious death in 2005:http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v3 ... 1.pdfHorne indicates the windshield was shot through from the front, and Ritcheson says this is where the (.22 cal.?) hit JFK in the throat. I know Files says he was the only frontal shooter but I think he got the temple shot with the mercury which of course left the high arc of light on the Left-Right skull x-ray, but is covering for the throat shooter. Because he is a stand-up guy, and the throat shooter must still be alive.There was a sabot shell on the roof of the Records Building found circa 1975 by air conditioning repair tech.Here's a discussion of that: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/lofiv ... 2388.htmlI think there were silenced rounds; certainly ten shots minimum, JFK back, back of head, temple, throat, two in Connally, one in windshielf frame, one for Tague, several in the grass. Ballistic missiles can MIRV and maneuver but we are limited to real bullets, not magic.

[ChristophMessner]

Thanks a lot for the interesting links, Phil. The only problem I have still is with the statement that the throat wound would have come by a front shot. Where did this bullet exit then? Was it's velocity decreased by the windshield? How could there be a full penetration in the windshield when then the photo just shows a crack? Wasn't it too dangerous to hit the driver from the south knoll or overpass area? Chris

[Bob]

Phil Dragoo wrote:Don Roberdeau has a great deal of excellent data, diagrams, photos on his site.http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/6800 ... 9.htmlJohn Ritcheson did some killer work before his suspicious death in 2005:http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v3 ... 1.pdfHorne indicates the windshield was shot through from the front, and Ritcheson says this is where the (.22 cal.?) hit JFK in the throat. I know Files says he was the only frontal shooter but I think he got the temple shot with the mercury which of course left the high arc of light on the Left-Right skull x-ray, but is covering for the throat shooter. Because he is a stand-up guy, and the throat shooter must still be alive.There was a sabot shell on the roof of the Records Building found circa 1975 by air conditioning repair tech.Here's a discussion of that: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/lofiv ... 2388.htmlI think there were silenced rounds; certainly ten shots minimum, JFK back, back of head, temple, throat, two in Connally, one in windshielf frame, one for Tague, several in the grass. Ballistic missiles can MIRV and maneuver but we are limited to real bullets, not magic.Phil...Don Roberdeau is very underrated in the CT community in terms of the great information he has provided.I think there may have been another shooter from the front in Dealey Plaza that day besides Files, but I definitely believe that the throat wound was not an entry wound. I believe it was a fragment that exited the throat area from the mercury round that Files fired from his Fireball.The biggest question I have about the supposed throat wound is this...where is the exit wound? There is none. Ther area of the wound was a soft tissue area. Listen to Thom Robinson, who was at Bethesda for the pre-autopsy procedure that altered the head wounds on JFK as well as the actual autopsy. He is a key witness in Douglas Horne's book (Inside the Assassination Records Review Board: The U.S. Government's Final Attempt to Reconcile the Conflicting Medical Evidence in the Assassination of JFK ). Robinson is the mortician that Wim has mentioned before in other posts. Here is one of those posts by Wim...Lastly, what you don't know is that I have an interview with Thom Robinson, wherein he states that the gaping hole in JFK's skull was probed with a tiny probe and that one of those probes from INSIDE the skull came out at the throat wound! That's why he told me that he has always been very quiet about this, but that he has chuckled for all those years at the conspiracy buffs who claim JFK was shot in the throat from the front. He knew better since 1963. And I know better since I spoke to him. I should have known better earlier by listening to Jimmy, instead of to the JFK research community, and what they have brainwashed themselves with. I too was a victim of what I wanted to believe, and looked so self-evident.Again, Robinson was PRESENT at the pre-autopsy procedure that altered JFK's wounds as well as the autopsy. Horne talks about all the problems at the autopsy in his book.

[ThomZajac]

Bob and the gang,I promised myself a while back that I would not get overly involved in discussions regarding what shots were fired when from where and where they hit and when because although we can individually reach certain conclusions with a high degree of confidence, a consensus is not likely to ever be achieved and the arguing leads to discord among people who generally agree on the nature of the plot and who orchestrated it- which to me is far more important.That said, I must point out that Thom Robinson did not see JFK's body until several hours after it was stolen away by the Secret Service- and by that time the pristine nature of the JFK body had been compromised in a most significant and troubling way. The bullet route Thom saw may very well have been as he said- but how it got there is another question entirely.THE BEST EVIDENCE regarding the throat wound would have come from the Parkland doctors who saw the president's body in it's pristine (evidence wise) state. ALL of them determined it to be a wound of entrance- not merely because of its small size, but because of its DIRECTION.As to why there was no exit wound found, well, there can't very well have been an exit wound in the back if Lee harvey Oswald was firing from the rear! My point is that the conspirators wouldn't have allowed any exit wound evidence to exist (note back of head massive blowout) if indeed there was one caused by the throat wound. But another possibility exists; that the bullet did not exit. Why not, you ask? Low velocity rifle perhaps, angle of entry (not horizontal, but downward) perhaps). And if a missile not fired from Oswald's rifle were recoverd from JFK's body, do you think the conspirators would have allowed that to be known?In conclusion, I'm not saying you're wrong about the throat wound being one of exit, only that the evidence indicating it was a wound of entrance is stronger in my view. Others will disagree, and that's fine. I'm just asking those who disagree not to be righteous about it (not that you are, Bob)- that would be, well, stupid.Thom

[Bob]

ThomZajac wrote:Bob and the gang,I promised myself a while back that I would not get overly involved in discussions regarding what shots were fired when from where and where they hit and when because although we can individually reach certain conclusions with a high degree of confidence, a consensus is not likely to ever be achieved and the arguing leads to discord among people who generally agree on the nature of the plot and who orchestrated it- which to me is far more important.That said, I must point out that Thom Robinson did not see JFK's body until several hours after it was stolen away by the Secret Service- and by that time the pristine nature of the JFK body had been compromised in a most significant and troubling way. The bullet route Thom saw may very well have been as he said- but how it got there is another question entirely.THE BEST EVIDENCE regarding the throat wound would have come from the Parkland doctors who saw the president's body in it's pristine (evidence wise) state. ALL of them determined it to be a wound of entrance- not merely because of its small size, but because of its DIRECTION.As to why there was no exit wound found, well, there can't very well have been an exit wound in the back if Lee harvey Oswald was firing from the rear! My point is that the conspirators wouldn't have allowed any exit wound evidence to exist (note back of head massive blowout) if indeed there was one caused by the throat wound. But another possibility exists; that the bullet did not exit. Why not, you ask? Low velocity rifle perhaps, angle of entry (not horizontal, but downward) perhaps). And if a missile not fired from Oswald's rifle were recoverd from JFK's body, do you think the conspirators would have allowed that to be known?In conclusion, I'm not saying you're wrong about the throat wound being one of exit, only that the evidence indicating it was a wound of entrance is stronger in my view. Others will disagree, and that's fine. I'm just asking those who disagree not to be righteous about it (not that you are, Bob)- that would be, well, stupid.ThomThom...you know I appreciate and respect your opinion here. There is definitely a grey area in terms of the throat wound. I would think the medical staff at Parkland that saw the small size of the throat wound and the nick in the tie would surmise it was an entrance wound. However, a tiny fragment from the frontal head shot ( a mercury load) that came from inside out so to speak, also makes a lot of sense. I don't intend to sound righteous, but I do love The Righteous Brothers...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhs3Rj71gpo

[ThomZajac]

I can't believe the Righteous Brother weren't black.You rarely come across as righteous Bob, and when you do it's always been right on.I guess I'm still licking my wounds from previous times when I opined on this forum that the throat wound was one of entrance. No one at Parkland saw a back wound on the president, not even the nurses who removed his clothing and washed off the blood prior to it being wrapped in sheets. And the back wound of entry is vital to explain the president's elbows-out reaction to being hit SOMEWHERE. I suppose they could have missed it, but your argument would be a lot stronger if they had observed such a wound.Bottom line: The direction of the throat wound is something we will almost certainly never know for sure.Love you madly,Thomps. I might be in your neighborhood later this month, hoping I can buy you a few beers.

[Bob]

Doubting Thomas...nobody loved more madly than these guys...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvtZTkl0qWgThere is another thing about the back wound that didn't make it appear too obvious. The wound itself did not have an exit area out of JFK's chest. The wound only went in a few inches. One of the two FBI agents at the autopsy surmised that an ice bullet may have been used. Also, remember JFK was also wearing a cumbersome back brace, that kept JFK upright for the kill shot. Keep me appraised of your trip to FLA my friend.

[Dealey Joe]

I want someone to explain an ice bullet

[ThomZajac]

Bob wrote:Doubting Thomas...nobody loved more madly than these guys...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvtZTkl0qWgThere is another thing about the back wound that didn't make it appear too obvious. The wound itself did not have an exit area out of JFK's chest. The wound only went in a few inches. One of the two FBI agents at the autopsy surmised that an ice bullet may have been used. Also, remember JFK was also wearing a cumbersome back brace, that kept JFK upright for the kill shot. Keep me appraised of your trip to FLA my friend.Hey, maybe the entry wound to the throat was caused by an ice bullet? (What's good for the goose is good for gander or something like that....)