JFK Files

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The discovery of a rifle 22 Nov 1963 and this report by the HSCA. years later, are separate events! I don't see the correlation between the two events?

Capt Fritz was a high ranking Dallas police officer. How did he misidentify the weapon stamp of Mauser 7.65? Roger Craig Deputy Sheriff, he too got it wrong really? All 4 police officers who found the rifle said it was a Mauser 7.65 rifle found.

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I want not there that day either was you. Least two of the police officers who found the rifle was convinced it was a Mauser 7.65 rifle.

Stop lying. Just stop it. You literally can't remember your own lies within an hour of each other.

Weitzmans "at a glance" opinion have already been covered. Heres Fritzs.

Mr. BALL. Was there any conversation you heard that this rifle was a Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. I heard all kinds of reports about that rifle. They called it most everything.
Mr. BALL. Did you hear any conversation right there that day?
Mr. FRITZ. Right at that time?
Mr. BALL. Yes
Mr. FRITZ. I just wouldn't be sure because there were so many people talking at the same time, I might have; I am not sure whether I did or not.
Mr. BALL. Did you think it was a Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I knew--you can read on the rifle what it was and you could also see on the cartridge what caliber it was.
Mr. BALL. Well, did you ever make any---did you ever say that it was a 7.65 Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I am sure I did not.
Mr. BALL. Or did you think it was such a thing?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I did not. If I did, the Mauser part, I won't be too positive about Mauser because I am not too sure about Mauser rifles myself. But I am certainly sure that I never did give anyone any different caliber than the one that shows on the cartridges.


You are the worst sort of conspiracy theorist. Light on facts and then when presented with them they're ignored.

Things you've completely ignored:

You said the JFK back wound was lower i the back. Picture posted sowing that it was higher. Ignored.

You wondered why there was no brain matter shooting into the air at the headshot. I posted a picture showing that. Ignored.

My questions about bullet wipe on JFKs jacket. Ignored.

The tumbling bullet wound on Connolly. Ignored.

You said the Carcano wasnt identified until 24 hours after. I showed a picture of it that day. Ignored.

Fairly sad to be honest.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Stop lying. Just stop it. You literally can't remember your own lies within an hour of each other.

Weitzmans "at a glance" opinion have already been covered. Heres Fritzs.

Mr. BALL. Was there any conversation you heard that this rifle was a Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. I heard all kinds of reports about that rifle. They called it most everything.
Mr. BALL. Did you hear any conversation right there that day?
Mr. FRITZ. Right at that time?
Mr. BALL. Yes
Mr. FRITZ. I just wouldn't be sure because there were so many people talking at the same time, I might have; I am not sure whether I did or not.
Mr. BALL. Did you think it was a Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I knew--you can read on the rifle what it was and you could also see on the cartridge what caliber it was.
Mr. BALL. Well, did you ever make any---did you ever say that it was a 7.65 Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I am sure I did not.
Mr. BALL. Or did you think it was such a thing?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I did not. If I did, the Mauser part, I won't be too positive about Mauser because I am not too sure about Mauser rifles myself. But I am certainly sure that I never did give anyone any different caliber than the one that shows on the cartridges.


You are the worst sort of conspiracy theorist. Light on facts and then when presented with them they're ignored.

Things you've completely ignored:

You said the JFK back wound was lower i the back. Picture posted sowing that it was higher. Ignored.

You wondered why there was no brain matter shooting into the air at the headshot. I posted a picture showing that. Ignored.

My questions about bullet wipe on JFKs jacket. Ignored.

The tumbling bullet wound on Connolly. Ignored.

You said the Carcano wasnt identified until 24 hours after. I showed a picture of it that day. Ignored.

Fairly sad to be honest.

You seem to be unable to read? He said right there in the transcript you posted why he thought it was a Mauser.

Mr. BALL. Did you think it was a Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I knew--you can read on the rifle what it was and you could also see on the cartridge what caliber it was.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You seem to be unable to read? He said right there in the transcript you posted why he thought it was a Mauser.

Mr. BALL. Did you think it was a Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I knew--you can read on the rifle what it was and you could also see on the cartridge what caliber it was.

Mr. BALL. Well, did you ever make any---did you ever say that it was a 7.65 Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I am sure I did not.
Mr. BALL. Or did you think it was such a thing?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I did not.

So despite seeing "Mauser" on the rifle he didn't think it was a Mauser? This is getting ridiculous now.

What Fritz is referring to, what he read on the rifle, was "Italian Made", ie he can read that it didn't say Mauser.

The CTs have taken a hyphen in the text, after Fritz says "No, sir; I knew" and ran with that. Which is utter lunacy. But thats the CT MO. Fritzs wasn't a written testimony.

Do you really believe the Captain of police admitted they found a different rifle than the murder weapon, one which didn't belong to Oswald, and they just ignored that fact and carried on?!

Here they are walking the weapon through the police station a few hours after the shooting. Listen to the end. "Its an Italian make". That is the Carcano. Been confirmed as the Carcano for 54 years.

So, answer this. You said it wasnt identified until 24 hours later. Explain please, when the video above is from that evening.

And you've still ignored all the other facts I've posted.

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Mr. BALL. Well, did you ever make any---did you ever say that it was a 7.65 Mauser?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I am sure I did not.
Mr. BALL. Or did you think it was such a thing?
Mr. FRITZ. No, sir; I did not.

So despite seeing "Mauser" on the rifle he didn't think it was a Mauser? This is getting ridiculous now.

What Fritz is referring to, what he read on the rifle, was "Italian Made", ie he can read that it didn't say Mauser.

The CTs have taken a hyphen in the text, after Fritz says "No, sir; I knew" and ran with that. Which is utter lunacy. But thats the CT MO. Fritzs wasn't a written testimony.

Do you really believe the Captain of police admitted they found a different rifle than the murder weapon, one which didn't belong to Oswald, and they just ignored that fact and carried on?!

Here they are walking the weapon through the police station a few hours after the shooting. Listen to the end. "Its an Italian make". That is the Carcano. Been confirmed as the Carcano for 54 years.

So, answer this. You said it wasnt identified until 24 hours later. Explain please, when the video above is from that evening.

And you've still ignored all the other facts I've posted.

Are the documents below fake? The Rifle only was a Carcano when the FBI gave the rifle back to the Dallas Police! You seem unable to grasp this point. The Warren Commission questioning was awful. The next question should have been what did you see written on the rifle Capt Fritz? We have a dilemma and the mixing up of statements? Capt Fritz seems to contradicting himself. This would be evidence of a cover up.

I have not ignored things you said. Some of things you said was idiotic so i just skipped over it. You do know where the back of your head is located? The Second bullet the Side of the head above the right ear exploded.There no sign of a entry bullet at the back of the head

#

Cheerful Spring

First Gif is a test of a Carcano bullet when it hits the wrist area only Ignoring other Injuries Connolly and Kennedy/ had to back, chest, and thigh



It just not that believable this bullet caused all the damage?

Cheerful Spring

Observe Kennedy is hit.You do see any movement from Connolly. His not showing any sign he was hit. The Speed of a bullet he be hit instantly and would feel pain or the jolt.



Kennedy hands are now raised further to the throat area. Still Connolly face front




Connolly with his own testimony said he looked around because he heard a rifle shot.. Kennedy is already hit so the single bullet theory is junk a wasteland.

Connolly turning for the first time.

Charmeleon

Why do you think JFK would shoot Connolly a second or two after he himself was shot?

Unless a bullet can wind its way around Kennedy like a heat-seeking missile, if could not have hit Connolly from the rear unless it passed through JFK first. JFK completely blocked Connolly's back area entry wound.

Cheerful Spring

Charmeleon wrote: »

Why do you think JFK would shoot Connolly a second or two after he himself was shot?

Unless a bullet can wind its way around Kennedy like a heat-seeking missile, if could not have hit Connolly from the rear unless it passed through JFK first. JFK completely blocked Connolly's back area entry wound.

There is a time lapse. When Kennedy was first hit, Connolly would be hit at the same time. A bullet is supersonic it travels the speed of sound. It not going to take a rest break!

The fact Connolly looking ahead unfazed and Kennedy hit ( with the supposed magic bullet) is a sure sign the single bullet theory is just junk.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

There is a time lapse. When Kennedy was first hit, Connolly would be hit at the same time. A bullet is supersonic it travels the speed of sound. It not going to take a rest break!

The fact Connolly looking ahead unfazed and Kennedy hit ( with the supposed magic bullet) is a sure sign the single bullet theory is just junk.

Connolly and JFK are both hit at the same time. Ill post this again. Actually watch it this time.

As for the rifle, last time Ill ask this. Are you saying that the rifle in the police station on the evening of the assassination - the one in the video above and the pictures I posted - is not a Carcano?

And for the bullet, here it is being fired through 3 foot of wood and coming out the other side unblemished. From about 23 mins.

You still havent addressed the bullet wipe on JFKs jacket, JFKs wound position or Connollys wound which could only have been made by a bullet thats already passed through something. Why are you avoiding those questions?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

Connolly and JFK are both hit at the same time. Ill post this again. Actually watch it this time.

As for the rifle, last time Ill ask this. Are you saying that the rifle in the police station on the evening of the assassination - the one in the video above and the pictures I posted - is not a Carcano?

I have to ask. Have you got your eyes checked recently? Did you even look at the Zaprauder frames i posted? Kennedy is clearly hit by a bullet and Connolly is not hit with the same bullet. I don't see the point continuing this debate if you unable to see things that are conclusive.

The Nal

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I have to ask. Have you got your eyes checked recently? Did you even look at the Zaprauder frames i posted? Kennedy is clearly hit by a bullet and Connolly is not hit with the same bullet. I don't see the point continuing this debate if you unable to see things that are conclusive.

How is that conclusive? They we hit in different places, they both react differently but at the same time. You're posting blurry pictures. Im posting videos and accurate 3D reconstructions, with accurate timings.

How in the name of God does this blurry picture prove anything apart from a few people sitting in a car?




Did you watch the videos above? If so, do you disagree with them and why?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal wrote: »

How is that conclusive? They we hit in different places, they both react differently but at the same time. You're posting blurry pictures. Im posting videos and accurate 3D reconstructions, with accurate timings.

How in the name of God does this blurry picture prove anything apart from a few people sitting in a car?




Did you watch the videos above? If so, do you disagree with them and why?

I just watched the Dale Myers 3D video, you posted. I had to laugh. They've completely ignored the sequence of events between the skipping of frames from 224 to 230. Connolly is still looking ahead unfazed how do you explain this if both men are hit by the same bullet from the same gun? What happened did the bullet take a lunch break?

And this guy on your video completely ignores John Connolly testimony. Connolly clearly says he only turned around when he heard a gun shot. He did not turn a direction as he was hit by a bullet. This is why Skeptics should be ignored they leave out things that don't fit their narrative.

Cheerful Spring

Regarding the Rifle.

Mauser 7.65 ( first picture) and second picture was the Rifle the officer held over his head at the Police station. I think both weapons look identical. The Mauser just missing a scope.I not a rifle expert so i could be wrong?

Tipsy McSwagger

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

I just watched the Dale Myers 3D video, you posted. I had to laugh. They've completely ignored the sequence of events between the skipping of frames from 224 to 230. Connolly is still looking ahead unfazed how do you explain this if both men are hit by the same bullet from the same gun? What happened did the bullet take a lunch break?

And this guy on your video completely ignores John Connolly testimony. Connolly clearly says he only turned around when he heard a gun shot. He did not turn a direction as he was hit by a bullet. This is why Skeptics should be ignored they leave out things that don't fit their narrative.

This really proves how stupid you are. How is someone who believes there was no conspiracy a skeptic?

Cheerful Spring

The Nal Have read of this it debunks all the stuff you support. Including the bullet undamaged when it hit Wood.


http://themysteriesofdealeyplaza.blogspot.ie/2013/11/nova-cold-case-jfk-case-study-in-cherry.html

Cheerful Spring

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

This really proves how stupid you are. How is someone who believes there was no conspiracy a skeptic?

You clearly not on the internet long. Have you ever posted on Skeptic forum?

pitifulgod

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The CIA does document activities and plans to carry out terrorism acts against foreign leaders and countries.The Files withheld are JFK related files. There is no reason to keep 50 year old information secret still. You only do this to hide stuff from the public.

Foreign operations are literally the role of the CIA, any domestic operations would be incredibly illegal. One in which they assassinate their president, a thousand times worse. So they keep the records?

Cheerful Spring

pitifulgod wrote: »

Foreign operations are literally the role of the CIA, any domestic operations would be incredibly illegal. One in which they assassinate their president, a thousand times worse. So they keep the records?

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/jfk-docs-cia-plotted-to-bomb-miami-kill-refugees-and-blame-castro-9782696

pitifulgod

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/jfk-docs-cia-plotted-to-bomb-miami-kill-refugees-and-blame-castro-9782696

An idea that wasn't executed being documented versus the assassination of a president are substantially different.

Tipsy McSwagger

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

You clearly not on the internet long. Have you ever posted on Skeptic forum?

No because i'm not a skeptic. I believe the Warren Commisions findings. If i was a skeptic i would believe in a conspiracy.

Ipso

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

No because i'm not a skeptic. I believe the Warren Commisions findings. If i was a skeptic i would believe in a conspiracy.

Or you are skeptical of conspiracy theories.

Whiplash85

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

This really proves how stupid you are. How is someone who believes there was no conspiracy a skeptic?

Post reported.

Chrongen

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

No because i'm not a skeptic. I believe the Warren Commisions findings. If i was a skeptic i would believe in a conspiracy.

Why is being a skeptic an issue?

If you are told something that you don't really believe and you say that you are not convinced, does your expression of doubt warrant that you be demeaned and silenced or ignored?

Charmeleon

I think this is worth watching, shows roughly what Oswald would have seen through his scope, all three shots are very easy.

Link in case embedded video isn’t working: https://youtu.be/tU69lMs2FMg

Are Am Eye

Whiplash85 wrote: »

Post reported.

Post reported.

Cheerful Spring

Here is another reason why the single bullet theory is wrong.

Gov Connolly is still holding his cowboy hat with with his right hand.




According to the Warren Commission a bullet has by now hit his right wrist and hit his left thigh. If so why has he not dropped the Hat?

Cheerful Spring

Chrongen wrote: »

What about the 6 witnesses who testified that there was a bullet hole on the windshield, including the guy who was tasked with swapping it out in Detroit and replacing it with a new windshield before the car was returned to Washington?

Yes you correct. Eyewitnesses all reported a cracked window. We have photographic evidence also.

Cheerful Spring

pitifulgod wrote: »

An idea that wasn't executed being documented versus the assassination of a president are substantially different.

My believe is rogue members of the CIA are involved in the assassination plot. The CIA agency after finding out the truth has covered it up since then. I just think it odd they would come in and wave the flag of national security and tell President Trump you can't release those files? Jfk was killed in 1963, what relevance has 50 year old information have today?

Dohnjoe

Anyone come up with the alternative shooter(s), name(s), how many bullets were fired, what weapons/ammunition with substantiated evidence yet?

Charmeleon

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Here is another reason why the single bullet theory is wrong.

Gov Connolly is still holding his cowboy hat with with his right hand.




According to the Warren Commission a bullet has by now hit his right wrist and hit his left thigh. If so why has he not dropped the Hat?

Clenching your fists, and most other muscle groups, is a natural reaction to sudden painful trauma. Dale Myers walkthrough of the second bullet shows Connolly’s jacket bulges out at the same instant JFK is seen reacting to his wounds, so both men show signs of being hit almost simultaneously.