Post by Gil JesusDo you deny that Z226 is the frame that both men started raising their arms or do you deny that one or both are reacting to being shot at that frame.
I deny that both men were hit by the same shot. Whether it was 224, 225 or 226. Doesn't matter.
That wasn't the question. The question was whether you see both men raise their arms at Z226. You lack the guts to deal
with that. If you denied it, you would look like a fool and if you acknowledged it, you would be conceding a powerful piece of
evidence that both had been shot at the same time. So you do what you always do with the difficult questions. You dodge it.
Post by Gil JesusLet me understand this: you're saying that a bullet allegedly travelling in a downward path forced Connally's arm to move upward ?
Yes, that's how reflexive responses work. An outside stimulus triggers an impulse in the nerves which cause an involuntary
response by the surrounding muscle groups. It's the same kind of response that causes your lower leg to kick upward when
the doctor taps your knee with a hammer. The following article explains the reflexive response much better than I could, not
that you are going to be capable of understanding it.
https://www.verywellhealth.com/what-is-a-reflex-2488718#:~:text=The%20most%20familiar%20reflex%20is%20the%20patellar%20reflex%2C,that%20could%20otherwise%20cause%20it%20to%20fall%20over.
Post by Gil JesusI'm hardly the first one to notice that. In fact I learned about it from DVP's excellent webpage devoted to the SBT. Prior to
seeing that, I like most people thought JFK was already reacting to being shot when he reappeared at frame Z225. What
DVP's webpage showed is that JFK's right arm was still moving downward from Z224-225. It wasn't until Z226 that both
arms started moving upward in reaction to the shot. Z226 is also the frame we see JBC's arm start upward. You won't
acknowledge that but it is undeniably true. Yu can disagree his arm movement is a reaction to being shot but if you deny
his right arm started moving upward at that frame, you are denying reality.
Well, if an expert like David Von Pein says it, it must be true.
The question isn't whether other people are aware that both men began raising their arms at Z226. The question is whether
that is what happened. Anyone with a functioning pair of eyes who toggles between the frames can see without question
that is what happened.
And Connally's movement could only have been caused by a bullet ? Prove it.
I am willing to entertain a plausible alternative explanation for why JBC suddenly flipped his arm rapidly upward just two
frames after we see his coat bulge outward. Do you have any such explanation.
Post by Gil JesusAnyone with a functioning pair of eyes can see that Connally isn't expressing any pain at Z-230.
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/z230.png
There's no reason to believe he would be exhibiting such an expression that quickly. Cognitive responses take slightly longer
than reflexive responses.
Post by Gil JesusPost by Gil JesusZapruder frame 230 proves that Connally had not been hit prior to that time.
It proves no such thing.
It certainly does.
No, that is your opinion.
Post by Gil JesusYou seem oblivious to the difference between reflexive and cognitive response. The former has very little time lag from
stimulus to response. Both JFK and JBC exhibit an almost immediate reflexive response to the bullet that passed through
them in the Z223-224 time frame. A cognitive response involves a pain signal being sent to the brain and the brain returning
and impulse. This happens very rapidly too, but not as quickly as a reflexive response. Connally felt the bullet strike him in the
back, which he described as feeling as if somebody punched him in the back. It was after Z230 that he began to exhibit the
pain from the bullet that had struck him less than a half second earlier.
Even Connally testified that he wasn't struck before Z-231. His testimony was that he was hit between Z231 and Z 234. ( 4 H 145 )
Totally consistent with his reaction at Z-236.
Connally was wrong.
Post by Gil JesusPost by Gil Jesushttps://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/z230.png
You are operating under the erroneous misconception that a cognitive response happens immediately following a stimulus.
Post by Gil JesusGovernor Connally himself said in and interview with ABC's NIGHTLINE that he and the President were hit by separate shots.
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/connally-nightline-sbt.mp4
Connally was wrong.
Post by Gil JesusThat would be significant if he knew when JFK had been hit but since he had his back to JFK when the were both hit, he had
no way of knowing whether they had been hit by the same shot. He was adamant that he had been hit by the second shot. He
had been led to believe that the first shot had hit JFK because that was the earliest theory but that is not what happened.
Nellie Connally DID see the President after he was hit and testified that they were hit by separate shots.
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/WC_Vol4_147-nellie.gif
Nellie thought JFK clutched his throat. The Z-film shows that never happened. Hardly the best witness available.
Post by Gil JesusPost by Gil JesusWitness S.M.Holland was looking down inside the car from the railroad overpass and saw the President and Governor hit by separate shots.
http://youtu.be/oNZ2xCrzulI
Oh, that's a great source. A guy watching from a distance looking through the two SS agents in the front seat.
What do you men, "looking through two SS agents", was he standing in the street, or positioned up on the elevated overpass looking down into the car ?
Elm Street goes downward in order to go under the overpass. The overpass isn't much above where the limo was when JFK
was first shot. The triple underpass was constructed in 1936. Prior to that time, Elm, Main, and Commerce streets crosse
the railroad tracks at grade which was at the same level as Houston St. At the time of the single bullet, the limo had only
gone slightly downgrade from Houston.
Post by Gil JesusYou do this every time this subject comes up. You lie about what I have said. I did not say they were shot at Z226. I said they
reacted at Z226 to a bullet that had struck both of them a few frames earlier. Why can't you refute what I write honetly?
223, 224, 225, 226, who gives a shit ? You're saying that they both react to a shot at 226 but you haven't PROVEN it.
You've posted no citations, no documents, no testimony, no exhibits, no witness videos, no photographs, no links......NOTHING to support your position.
Only your own opinions and observations.
NO PROOF, as usual.
DVP has produced this video which nicely summarizes the evidence supporting simultaneous reactions by JFK and JBC
just two frames after the visual evidence of the bullet strike at Z224.
DVP's blog deals with the SBT in much greater detail here:
https://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2011/04/index.html#Single-Bullet-Theory
I'd love to see your explanation that takes into account all these observable facts but I know I won't because you don't have
one.
Post by Gil JesusYour own Warren Commission was quite clear that there was no identical reaction by both men.
It blamed the difference in their reaction times as a "delayed reaction" on the part of Connally.
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=946#relPageId=136&search=%22delayed_reaction%22
You can't even understand your own cites. The page you have cited does not say anything about JFK and JBC reacting at
the same time. They are dealing with whether it was theoretically possible for JBC to have been hit by the first shot when he
believed he was hit by the second shot. It doesn't even address whether both could have been hit by the second shot. That is
dealt with elsewhere. The WC never came to a conclusion as to whether the single bullet was the first or second shot. They
allowed either was possible. The delayed reaction was only necessary to explain a first shot single bullet. Based on what we
have learned since 1964, we can safely dismiss that possibility and therefore it is not necessary to consider that JBC had a
delayed reaction.
Post by Gil Jesushttps://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/12/shaw-gov-reaction-immediate.mp4
Like you, Shaw seems oblivious to the simultaneous arm movements by both men at Z226. Unlike you, Shaw can be
forgiven because apparently no one pointed that out to him.
Post by Gil JesusPost by Gil JesusName one document from either the Warren Commission or the HSCA that concluded that Kennedy and Connally were hit by the same bullet at Z-226.
Name one exhibit from either the Warren Commission or the HSCA that concluded that Kennedy and Connally were hit by the same bullet at Z-226.
Name one witness from either the Warren Commission or the HSCA that testified that Kennedy and Connally were hit by the same bullet at Z-226.
Why would you expect there to be a document, exhibit, or a witness to something that didn't happen?
Now you're saying that they both weren't hit at the same time ?
Christ, your are dumbfuck. They were hit at the same time. They weren't hit at Z226. That is your piss poor reading
comprehension kicking in again.
Post by Gil JesusIt would be pretty stupid for them to have written that because that isn't what happened. The WC concluded that the single
bullet struck in the Z210-225 time frame. I bullet strike in the Z223-224 time frame and a reaction beginning at Z226 fits
perfectly with that conclusion.
The Commission reported that "the PRESIDENT was PROBABLY shot through the neck between frames 210 and 225" ( Report, pg. 105 )
But the evidence shows that Connally wasn't hit until after frame 231.
The evidence shows no such thing. Connally remembers his cognitive reaction of doubling over and by looking at still frame
blow ups, he saw that happened after Z231. He never looked for when his right arm flipped upward because he had no
memory of that reflexive, involuntary reaction. In fact, he wasn't even aware that his right arm had been struck until after
he came out of surgery.
Post by Gil JesusPost by Gil JesusAnd until you can prove it, make sure when you repeat it, you say it's your opinion.
Because until it's proven, it's not fact.
When have you ever stated your goofy ideas are your opinion. You present Sam Holland's opinion that the two men were hit by separate shots as if it were a proven fact.
It's called an eyewitness account and it becomes evidence when it's corroborated by other witnesses like the ones I've already listed.
It's evidence but eyewitness evidence doesn't establish anything as a fact because eyewitnesses frequently get things
wrong.
Post by Gil JesusI'll gladly put my observation of what the Z-film shows up against his naked eye observation from a distance.
What David Von Pein and you think you see in the Zapruder film against an eyewitness who was present and whose account is corroborated by other witnesses ?
Absolutely. Anybody who looks at even the unenhanced Z-film gets a much better view of the assassination than what Sam
Holland observed from the overpass. It is laughable that you think Sam Holland's account is reliable.
It's nice to see you agree with my last statement.
Post by Gil JesusYour "observation" doesn't trump the testimony of John Connally.
Yes it does. My observation is based on a factual viewing of the Z-film using modern enhancement technologies.
Post by Gil JesusYour "observation" doesn't trump the testimony of Nellie Connally.
Yes it does. My observation is based on a factual viewing of the Z-film using modern enhancement technologies.
Post by Gil JesusYour "observation" doesn't trump the opinion of a medical expert like Dr. Robert Shaw.
Yes it does. Shaw could not possibly determine when Connally was struck nor was he qualified to determine whether
the bullet that struck Connally's wrist had passed through JFK and JBC first.
Post by Gil JesusYour "observation" doesn't trump the accounts of eyewitnesses who were present during the assassination and whose accounts are corroborated by other witnesses.
Yes it does. Looking at the Z-film countless times gives me a much better viewing of what any witness saw with the naked
eye in real time. That is the reason the use of video replay is used in sports now. Being able to see plays in video review with
slow motion and stop action gives a much more reliable view than a human official can see in real time.
Post by Gil JesusYour "observation" doesn't trump the conclusion of the Warren Commission that there was no identical reaction by both men.
Quote the WC saying that.
Post by Gil JesusYour "observation" doesn't trump the conclusion of the FBI that both men were hit by separate bullets.
Yes it does. The FBI issued its report early on base on the fact that there were three shots, two striking JFK and one striking
Connally. They never considered whether one bullet could have hit both men because that idea wasn't developed until after
the SBT was developed.
Post by Gil JesusYour observation doesn't trump Hoover telling LBJ that both men were hit by separate shots.
https://gil-jesus.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/hoover-to-lbj-3-shots-3-hits.mp4
Yes it does because Hoover was woefully uninformed about the facts of the case but he pretended to LBJ that he knew
more than he actually did.
Post by Gil JesusYou source is David Von Pein and now youre claiming his "observation" as your own ?
As usual, you're lying Gil. I have made no such claim. I cited DVP as a source. His website allows us to toggle between
frames. Toggling between Z223-224 shows us JBC's jacket suddenly bulge outward, indicating that is the time frame
the bullet struck. Toggling between Z224-225 shows us JFK's right arm was still moving downward between those frames,
indicating that although he had just been struck by the bullet, his reflexive action had not yet begun. Toggling between
Z225-226 shows us that is when JFK's reflexive raising of his arms began at Z226, the same frame JBC's reflexive flipping
of his right arm upward began. You won't address any of these facts because you know they are powerful evidence of the
validity of the SBT. Instead you obfuscate by diverting to far less reliable indicators of what happened.
Post by Gil JesusHere's some more news for the two of you: your observations aren't evidence of ANYTHING.
What we observe is evidence and you refuse to address or even acknowledge what the video evidence clearly shows.
Post by Gil JesusThey're opinions and nothing more.
You won't even address the facts. If you deny what I have observed is factual, tell us which frame JFK's arms start moving
upward. Tell us which frame JBC's right arm starts moving upward. You won't answer either question because you lack the
guts to do so.
