RICHARD VAN NOORD SAID:
If you take a look at Dr. Chapman's research (something VB [Vincent Bugliosi] does not do in his tree-killing spree), you will see he said CE544 has indications of being a partial dud. He said the projectile would be fired at low velocity.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Yeah, I always enjoy hearing from conspiracy theorists about the proverbial "low velocity" type of bullets and weapons that were evidently (per those CTers) being used by the professional "Mob" assassins in a very important PRESIDENTIAL ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT in November of 1963.
Allow me to borrow a certain hilarious remark concerning this incredibly silly "low velocity" topic, which is a remark that was made in April 2006 by a fellow LNer (Bud), and I've never forgotten this hysterical comment and the spot-on accuracy of it:
"The assassins choose bullets that inflict non-lethal, 1-inch-deep wounds? Instead of feeding JFK to lions, they decided to nibble him to death by ducks?" -- Bud; April 1, 2006
RICHARD VAN NOORD SAID:
The autopsy doctors admitted on 11/22 there was CLEARLY no point of exit and they can only trace the wound to the knuckle on their pinky. .... David, it's not hard to understand.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
No, it's not hard to understand, Richard. I agree with you.
President Kennedy's back muscles had stiffened and the path that bullet CE399 had taken through Kennedy's body had (in effect) "closed" itself up between 12:30 PM and the time of the "pinky probe" (which was sometime after 8:00 PM EDT on November 22nd).
That's certainly a more reasonable explanation (given the "NO DAMAGE OR BULLETS INSIDE KENNEDY'S NECK AND BACK" sum total of evidence) than to believe that TWO bullets ("low velocity" or otherwise) went into John F. Kennedy's body, never exited, then disappeared, with neither of those two bullets causing any substantial bodily damage whatsoever.
So, you're right, Richard.....it's not hard to understand at all. All you need is some common sense. I'd suggest borrowing some from a friend (preferably not a fellow rabid conspiracy theorist, however).
David Von Pein
October 16, 2007
