Here's a correction OP for 50 Reasons, 50 Years OP

[William Seger]

69. Point by point

> a) you made two self-contradictory arguments that 1) witnesses can be wrong about where sounds come from and 2) most people heard shots from the TSBD area.

Say what? Those are not "contradictory arguments"; they're both facts. The fact that witnesses can be wrong about where gunshot sounds came from means that we cannot use the "ear-witnesses" to locate the source of shots, and the fact that the ear-witnesses disagree is just another reason why. We need more reliable evidence to locate the shooter(s).

We have convincing physical evidence that the two known shots that hit JFK and Connally came from behind; that they came from a rifle found in the TSBD; and that they were fired from the 6th floor "sniper's nest."

There is no convincing evidence for another shooter.

If you can actually disprove either of those assertions, then you will actually have something. Until then, you're just blowing smoke like Oliver Stone.

> b) I thought you were joking or being sarcastic by inferring the people may have been running up the knoll to retrieve their parked cars. I would think better of you if you were joking.

In the later movies included in that silly blackops video, yes, I do believe that's exactly what we are seeing. I would think better of you if you attempt an actual rebuttal.

> c) since the autopsy was handled so horrendously, no one really knows where bullets struck JFK.

That's one of the claims that led to the HSCA being established, so it was a major focus, but their findings were:

Since the Warren Commission completed its investigation, two other Government panels have subjected the X-rays and photographs taken during the autopsy on President Kennedy to examination by independent medical experts. A team of forensic pathologists appointed by Attorney general Ramsey Clark in 1968,(9) and a panel retained by the Commission on CIA Activities Within the United States (Rockefeller Commission) in 1975,(10) reached the same basic conclusion: the President was struck by two bullets from behind.
...
The forensic pathology panel {of the HSCA} concluded that President Kennedy was struck by two, and only two, bullets, each of which entered from the rear. 1 The panel further concluded that the President was struck by one bullet that entered in the upper right of the back and exited from the front of the throat, and one bullet that entered in the right rear of the head near the cowlick area and exited from the right side of the head, toward the front. This second bullet caused a massive wound to the President's head upon exit. There is no medical evidence that the President was struck by a bullet entering the front of the head,(19) and the possibility that a bullet could have struck the President and yet left no evidence is extremely remote.

> The backwards movement is obvious and visceral. No one sees that and thinks "oh he was obviously hit from behind" or "oh that is obviously the result of the jet effect which is happening this one time only in the history of the world". No, people see a body reacting to a shot striking from the front. That's why Life Magazine and the Warren Commission both felt they needed to reverse the frames when printing the sequence.

As the old saw goes, I can explain it to you but I can't understand if for you: When the Zapruder film is examined carefully and real physics are applied, it shows that the fatal shot came from behind, and it also shows that the back-and-to-the-left motion happens too late to be explained by momentum from the bullet. It just doesn't matter who or how many people don't understand why that's so or what misconceptions they have formed from a cursory examination and cartoon physics. But whether you understand it or not, the Zapruder film is completely consistent with all the other evidence that the fatal shot came from behind.

> By the way, I forgot to add d) to my three issues at 3PM Dallas time day of the assassination.

d)Dr Perry at Parkland Hospital said during a press conference that the president had suffered a wound of entrance in his throat

Given your apparent knowledge of the subject, I'm pretty sure you know that when he made that statement, he was unaware of the back wound, and that after discussing the back wound with Dr. Humes in Bethesda, Perry agreed that the throat wound was the exit wound. (Unlike certain JFK conspiracy hucksters, Perry apparently dismissed the possibility that both were entrance wounds caused by magic disappearing bullets.) I'd bet that you also know that the throat wound was right at a buttoned shirt collar and tied necktie, which just might explain why the wound might not have looked like a typical exit wound. But no, Perry's statement in the press conference is the story you like and you're sticking to it.

> As to the investigations:
> A couple of Dallas police officers went up to the picket fence area after the shots, and more police officers combed through the railway yard and parking lot, but once the shell casings were discovered shortly after 1 PM the Dallas police did nothing but focus on the TSBD as the sole source of shots.

Spin away, but they investigated those areas and found no evidence to indicate that there had been a shooter there. What exactly would you expect them to do to "focus" on that nothingness -- contemplate their navels?

> The FBI was told to look into all leads... for twenty-four hours. At that point Hoover wrote a memo declaring Oswald the sole assassin and field agents were instructed to stop any investigation not involving Oswald. In that 24 hours the FBI did very little, if anything, related to shots from the knoll area.

Sorry, I can't find any such memo, and I have to suspect that your appraisal of it might be a tad biased.

> The Warren Commission started from the premise that Oswald was the sole shooter and did everything in its power to downplay, suppress, and disappear any contradicting information.

Unspun: The Warren Commission didn't find any credible evidence of a second shooter. Never mind that over the last half-century, the conspiracy hucksters haven't found any credible evidence of a second shooter, either, because we can just blame it on the Commission for "disappearing" all the good stuff.

> The HSCA developed a lot of information pointing to a high level conspiracy and classified most of it, on its way to a weak conclusion that there was "probably" two shooters but the second guy missed and Oswald did it.

After the HSCA report, for the second time in my life I was a JFK conspiracy believer, myself. The acoustic evidence seemed to be scientific enough to count as credible evidence. But that debate has gone back and forth a couple of times now, and the latest study strongly indicates that the study the HSCA relied on in reaching the second-shooter conclusion (and hence the "probable conspiracy" conclusion) was incorrect.

> I pointed out four solid leads or reasons pointing to a shot from the knoll existing at 3PM Dallas time - including eyewitness, photographic,and expert - and they were all ignored and you don't seem to think anything is wrong with that picture.

Hmmm... that's not the way I remember it. Please post these "solid leads or reasons" again and we'll see if I missed any. If so, I'll be happy to give you some feedback.