DAVID EMERLING SAID:
I have a fairly lively discussion group on one of my YouTube channels. There has been frequent criticism by some who claim that Dale Myers's animation does NOT align with the actual Zapruder film. Of course, they are suggesting that he purposely is misrepresenting Kennedy and Connally's positioning to MAKE the Single Bullet Theory work. So, just for fun, I quickly put together this 2-minute video:
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Excellent, David. It looks like a perfect match to me. The critics, however, will still claim that Dale Myers fudged the positions of the victims when viewing his computer model from other angles, such as the overhead view and the Sniper's Nest view (both pictured below).
But Mr. Myers, whenever he decides to respond to the conspiracy clowns who are constantly calling him a liar, insists that it's impossible for one view of his 3D model to be way off while other parts are perfect, because they are locked into the exact same computer program. So it would be impossible to skew ANY of the angles. It's the SAME set of data points, only from different perspectives.
Conspiracy theorists, of course, refuse to believe anything Mr. Myers has to say about JFK's assassination. But we all know that CTers wouldn't buy the Single-Bullet Theory if Mr. Zapruder's camera had captured Lee Harvey Oswald's bullet in flight slicing through both victims with a neon light on the missile flashing "CE399".
DUKE LANE SAID:
Ah, but David, is not "The critics, however, will still claim that Dale Myers fudged the positions of the victims" essentially a correlary [sic] to "The apologists, however, claim that BB&N [Bolt, Beranek, & Newman] put the microphones in the wrong places, measured improperly, and interpreted the results incorrectly?"
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
It doesn't matter where BB&N put the microphones, because the "gunshots" on the Dictabelt weren't being recorded until a minute after the shooting.
How can anyone possibly think they can revive the dead horse known as "The Dictabelt Evidence Of A 4th Shot"?
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Looking at the above photo [this one], the bullet exited JFK's chest then?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Nope. ....
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Oh! This one is different than the photo above it.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
It's all based on the exact same computer model, Tom.
More pics can be found here, along with a 2013 interview with Dale Myers.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
I must be missing something. If you look at the cross hairs, it would exit his chest in the upper photo.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
I do think the crosshairs seen in this image might be just a tad bit low on Kennedy's back.
Here's another view from Mr. Myers' very same computer model:
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Maybe they should raise it up a bit and bunch his coat, shirt and t-shirt up some more.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
There is no "t-shirt".
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Who ever heard of a rich man with a designer shirt and a back brace not wearing a t-shirt?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Beats me, Tom. But JFK was not wearing a T-shirt on November 22.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
I'll bet he was.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
No, he wasn't.
If he had been wearing a T-shirt, Tom, we'd have another layer of clothing with a bullet hole in it. And we've only got the suit jacket and the dress shirt.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
This last photo seems to prove his exit wound came out his chest.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The neck in the FRONT of a person extends much lower than the neck on the BACK side of a person. I think many people forget that fact. And Vince Bugliosi points out that same thing in his book.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
But he wasn't shot [at] street level. Or was he?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
You think somebody was shooting at JFK from right there on Elm Street, at "street level"? Right out in plain sight? (Oh, yes, Umbrella Dude!)
As another LNer so humorously exclaimed --- "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?"
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Well, that autopsy photo shows JFK stretched out. More like a Ubangi. As far as the shallow penetrating wound, you'd have to ask the autopsy doctors. They came up with that.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The autopsy photos pretty much prove this --- The entry was physically HIGHER on the body than the EXIT wound in the throat:
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Once again, he's not sitting up with his shoulders and muscles slouched. And you'd have to believe the upper mark is the bullet hole.
[Tom also posted this link.]
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
What you just said makes very little difference, Tom. The fact remains what the pictures so readily show---the back wound was higher than the throat wound. And even Dr. Humes said so in his Warren Commission testimony -- "The wound in the anterior portion of the lower neck is physically lower than the point of entrance posteriorly" [James J. Humes; 1964].
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
He also said he burned his notes out of respect for JFK. He did what he was ordered to do. He should never have been there. They had the ability to call in first rate forensic pathologists. This was the president. They should have had the very best. They didn't bury him in a cut rate coffin.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Nobody TOLD Humes to burn anything. You're just making stuff up. He burned the notes because they had JFK's blood all over them. Nothing sinister there at all. And he didn't HIDE the fact he burned them. If Humes was a plotter/conspirator/cover-upper, he sure was a dumb one.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Do you really think he would have burned those notes without orders?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Dr. Humes absolutely DID burn those bloodied notes "without orders". And nobody can possibly prove otherwise. In fact, it's silly to think the original notes indicated something "sinister" or "conspiratorial". Because WHY would Humes be putting on paper something that he KNEW would later have to be burned? Or did Humes become part of the cover-up only LATER on--hours after he did the autopsy? It's silliness.
Also....
Tom Rozoff says Humes "should never have been there". Hindsight, of course, always permits perfect vision. In a perfect world, Quincy would have done JFK's autopsy. But the world is far from perfect.
Humes and Boswell were there and on duty at Bethesda, so they were called on to do the autopsy. Simple as that. Maybe we should blame Jacqueline Kennedy for the less-than-perfect autopsy. After all, she picked Bethesda.
CHUCK SCHUYLER SAID:
Tom Rozoff is one of those conspiracists who come from the "If-it-didn't-happen-the-way-I-think-it-should've-happened-I-get-to-believe-incredibly-stupid-stuff" school of conspiracy logic.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Chuck, nearly all Internet CTers belong to the fraternity you just described.
Per most CTers, the MORE evidence there is that shows Lee Harvey Oswald attempted THREE murders in the year 1963, the more INNOCENT he becomes of all three murder attempts.*
A strange philosophy indeed.
* And it's really four murder attempts, if we include Oswald pulling his revolver on Dallas policeman M.N. McDonald in the Texas Theater. And that count can be upped to five if you want to include the "Assault To Murder John Connally" charge that was, indeed, filed against Oswald on 11/23/63.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
"Living is easy with eyes closed".
CHUCK SCHUYLER SAID:
Open yours, Tom. Don't belong to the fraternity of the Cult of JFK Truthers.
DVP, a great book by Jonathan Kay describes the cult-like fraternity Tom Rozoff and others like him have been swept up into. The book is called Among the Truthers. It isn't about the JFK assassination per se, but you'll find JFK Truthers sprinkled throughout its pages.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
And MK/Ultra never existed. Our government (which you don't trust) would never hurt us.
Let's strap Bugliosi and Posner up to a lie detector and see what they really believe.
Can you at least admit that Oswald was a bright young man?
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Lee Oswald was certainly "bright" when it came to his favorite political topic -- Castro's Cuba. Other than that, I really have no idea whether he was very bright at all. Hard to know. He kept to himself most of his life. But apparently he was pretty darn good at pushing a two-wheeler around the Depository (per Wesley Frazier).
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Yes, here's the poor loner.....
Can you name one of his Communist friends in the U.S? I can name some of his anti-Communist friends.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Typical CT ploy above --- show the pic of the assassin in a Russian setting (years before 11/22/63), and then pretend his situation was exactly the same in Dallas in 1963.
By all accounts, Lee stayed in his closet-sized room most of the time during the last several weeks of his life. But Tom will just pretend not to know that.
It's just too bad Oswald didn't keep his sorry murdering ass in Russia. Maybe Khrushchev would have ended up being his target if he had.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Well, when your superiors call you home, you go home.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And his superiors ordered Marina to go home with him, right Tom?
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Well, she did go. I believe she's still here. And she doesn't believe Lee's a murderer. She must need to read those books [sic] Chuck mentioned. Or maybe read "A Family Of Secrets".
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Marina certainly thought Lee was a murderer in 1964...and in 1978.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Marina can speak more freely now. Although her best interest would still be to say Lee did it.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And you think Marina was still scared of being deported in 1978, Tom?
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
I think she was still scared.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
A thought occurred to me just recently concerning Marina Oswald that I don't ever recall being discussed by anybody in the past. And that is:
Why on Earth would it have been a fate worse than death if Marina Oswald HAD been forced to go back to Russia?
After all, she was RUSSIAN. And she had family and friends in RUSSIA. After Lee died, she pretty much had nobody in the USA. So why would going back to her own homeland be such a horrible disaster?
Ergo, the conspiracy theorists who constantly claim Marina "feared deportation" look mighty silly when viewing the situation from the point-of-view I just mentioned, don't they? I think they do.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
The simple answer is she wanted the American dream. Also, her youngest daughter was an American citizen. And maybe she was a sleeper agent and not supposed to return. They may not have been too happy to take her back if we had gone ahead and accused Russia of being behind the assassination.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
And she would, of course, be much much happier here in the United States, where she will always be scoffed at and hated by many Americans because she was the wife of the man who killed their President. Right, Tom? Yeah, makes perfect sense to me.
Now, I'm not saying that Marina DIDN'T want to stay in the United States after the assassination. I'm just saying that having to return to the country of her birth, where her family and friends were mostly located, certainly wouldn't have been the terrible and horrific event that some people seem to like to paint it as being.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Buell Frazier liked him [Lee Oswald]. George deMorenschildt [sic] liked him. The kids on the block liked him.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
So?
Buell, btw, never once socialized with Lee. Never. The only time Buell ever saw Lee was at work or in the car on the way to or coming home from the TSBD.
REPLAY:
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
The kids on the block liked him.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Well, that's the ballgame, fellows! The little kids on Ruth Paine's block liked Lee. That means he couldn't possibly have shot the President. Case closed.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Buell liked Lee.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Again, so what?
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
I guess the bottom line is after fifty years you can't even convince ten percent of the world that there was not a conspiracy. The Congress' approval rating is higher than that. So when you are talking about us "nuts', you are talking about the vast majority of people.
CHUCK SCHUYLER SAID:
Murder isn't about polls or popularity contests, Tom. Hard to convince someone who cannot be convinced like you, but the world keeps revolving, and it doesn't revolve around you.
STEVE ROE SAID:
Oswald was smart enough to learn Russian, but dumb enough to be a Patsy.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
The percentage of CTers is quite a bit lower now (circa 2013) than it was ten years earlier. About 75% in 2003; 61% in 2013 (per the Gallup Poll)....
http://www.pollingreport.com/news3.htm#Kennedy
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Those are fake figures. It's over ninety percent.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Great. Now GALLUP is part of the cover-up. Beautiful.
And, AFAIK, it's NEVER been "over 90 per cent". Never.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Do your own poll. It's there right now.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
If I did a poll of Internet users only, the percentage would probably be very high in the "OSWALD NEVER FIRED A SHOT" category indeed. Those people are fighting reality, of course.
CHUCK SCHUYLER SAID:
Crimes aren't solved by polls, Tom. Belief in a JFK conspiracy is a mile wide and an inch deep. If one was to sit down with the average person who only knows about the JFK assassination through the book 'Crossfire' or saw Oliver Stone's movie, and presented the ballistic evidence, autopsy report, etc., you'd convince a whole bunch of 'em that Oswald was a double murderer on 11/22/63.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
You know when I read 'Case Closed' by Gerald Pozner [sic], I thought perhaps Oswald did act alone. Then I found it was full of lies.
STEVE ROE SAID:
And the lies were????
CHUCK SCHUYLER SAID:
Tom, did you find any lies in Oliver Stone's movie, JFK?
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Not that I recall. He made a movie where he had to add all this stuff in a few hours. It's not the bible, but a great primer for someone without the knowledge of the Shaw trial.
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
Tom's last post says it all. He finds tons of "lies" in Gerald Posner's book, but can't find any in Oliver Stone's film full of flimflam. Incredible.
TOM ROZOFF SAID:
Here he is with his anti-social behavior again. Hey! Isn't that David Ferrie with him. No wonder those conspiracy nuts are nuts!!!!!....
Look at that loner. I believe this is right after he tried to shoot his teacher....
DAVID VON PEIN SAID:
This photo essay we're being treated to by Tom R., showing the "happy go lucky" Lee Oswald, is about as silly as Vince Bugliosi suggesting that George W. Bush should never have put on a happy face (ever) after the Iraq War began.
It's ridiculous to think that a person's outer demeanor is always in-sync with any emotional turmoil (or evil intentions) that that person might have relating to other parts of his life.
Lee Harvey Oswald was a double-murderer, yes. There can be no reasonable doubt about that fact. But does that mean he can never smile and be happy, at any time, as a FIFTEEN-YEAR-OLD kid? How silly.
And George W. Bush started the Iraq War based on a lie, yes. But does that mean he should always be sullen and morose every minute of every day after that war had begun? Again, silly.
(See there--I don't always have to agree with Vince B., do I?)
David Von Pein
February 4-5, 2015
