it so f...up to see a great person been assassinated like
as much as one wants to be tough it brings great sadness to see him taken out in that manner...wished we could've gotten those bastards responsible. i felt like part of all of us died when he died.....will there ever be another great man like him...if that ever happens again, this time we must be more vigilant and aware of this bastards evil intentions against a great man of good...peace out.
PAUL GIBSON, ONE OF OUR SCHOOL'S BIG THIRD GRADERS WENT TO DALLAS, TEXAS OVER THE WEEKEND AND ASSASSINATED OUR BIG-BIG-BIG MR. PRESIDENT KENNEDY BETTER KNOWN TO OUR SCHOOL KIDS AS PRESIDENT DOUBLE OO SPIDER! (Kindle VIP2RIP)
But u missed with your overt C. Act. F** up. Told to.put majic b on gurney outside bathroom. Jfk's, meantime gurneys got swapped, jfk's moved away from be door one up, New empty gurney total.unrelated put by BR door. U came, set on wrong one. So truth will out . Lower level stupid do show plan mess..some be silent 4 ever some put hoof in plan. Glad me not Be Bad with gurney BOO BOO.
Connally found majic bullet at end of his try at hosp room. Fell out on table from thigh area in pieces. Aha, magic.Nurse put in evid env,seal,initial and name,doctor sign,to give to Dpd."fed type suit of Fed run in4 bullit,grab. Leave. At WC,"its not my initials.name, erased stuff" can't be in evid:no custody chain. Majic bullit from wrong gurney,nearest 2 bathroom next2 jfk's..oops,ThisIS A+majicNoScratchBunk.dictionary df- conspiracy.read it.
We never land on the earth. We never land a probe on Mars. Hubble never send us pictures from the univers. God is a hoax. LBJ commissioned the assassination of JFK. Beethoven was gay and we dont care.
The single-bullet theory is defensible if and only if the three F.B.I. reports (November 26, December 9 and January 13) are completely WRONG on their statements of the autopsy. Why? Because these three reports all state that the first bullet did not go completely through Kennedy and therefore it could not have gone on to hit Connally, who was seated in front of Kennedy.
Look at the driver!!!! He's the one that made the head shot. This is the clearest video of it yet!! JFK was shot in the back first, then the kill shot was from the DRIVER! Watch...it is plain as day.
@dol44christ he got shot in the back is when he first got shot. look at the governor(the guy in front of him) turns around and JFK leans over a bit. the next shot was through his head. it went through and hit the governor in the lung. how could the limo driver shoot him if it went through the governors lung?
The FBI found the two bullet fragments from the third kill shot in the front of the limo. These fragments hit the windshield next to the rear view mirror, causing a star crack, and the chrome trim around the windshield. The third shot could have only come from LHO in the TSBD, lazer technology has proven this. Finally two witneses in the window directly beneath LHO heard all three shots fired and the shell casings hit the floor.
@johnamac123 "Finally two witneses in the window directly beneath LHO heard all three shots fired and the shell casings hit the floor."
only one of the three men on the 5th floor claimed to have heard the shells hit the floor .
"The third shot could have only come from LHO in the TSBD, lazer technology has proven this"
so if a person stood on the knoll and pointed a laser at the head of an actor playing jfk sat in a limo wouldnt the laser point directly at the head also? .-------
@johnamac123 its easy to point a laser that proves nothing more than shots could be fired from that window and thats not in dispute .norman on the 5th floor hearing shells drop proves only that shots came from there ,it doesnt prove who fired the shots . as for the fragments there are numerous small fragments and no way to tell which bullet they came from .
@johnamac123 I remember reading about the HSCA in 77 or 78 found that the lead fragments in connally's leg and wrist matched the "magic bullet" exactly. They used a method called Neutron Activation Analysis, where they bombarded the bullet and remaining fragments with neutrons, and made a sort of fingerprint which matched perfectly with each other, to the exclution of all bullets in the world. I wouldn't be surprised if you had read that also.
@johnamac123 I remember reading about the HSCA in 77 or 78 found that the lead fragments in connally's leg and wrist matched the "magic bullet" exactly. They used a method called Neutron Activation Analysis, where they bombarded the bullet and remaining fragments with neutrons, and made a sort of fingerprint which matched perfectly with each other, to the exclution of all bullets in the world. I wouldn't be surprised if you had read that also.
The assassination of JFK was the most hideous coup d'etat in history where the government of the people,for the people and by the people was mocked by the CIA, FBI and the pentagon under the command of Lyndon Johnson, Edgar Hoover and others.
JFK was a men of honour, who fought for a better world, for a more humane society. His words resound through the walls of time to warn us about the new world order, who he called the ruthless and monolitic conspiracy
THE ASSASSIN SAVED MORE LIVES THAN WHAT ANY GOD HAS ON EARTH INCLUDING JESUS. NEXT DAY JFK OO SPIDER ORDERS NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST ESTIMATED CASUALTIES 600 MILLION--PRAY TO ASSASSINS TO SAVE YOUR LIFE!
So let me get this straight. There was a shooter on the triple overpass -- with a high-powered rifle & target scope -- and no witnesses saw him, standing there with his rifle in broad daylight -- or heard the gunshots -- and he shot THROUGH the windshield of JFK's car -- without breaking the glass! -- or hitting anyone in the car who was sitting in FRONT of JFK -- and hit JFK's head -- in a way that no one could prove where the shot came from.
Only a total moron would watch this and not see that the fatal shot came from the front. Nobody may ever know the truth of who killed him and why, but one thing is undeniable, Oswald was not the only shooter, if he even hit him at all.There was another shooter in front of the car and that shot killed him.
@ThreesharpsA Why don't you share your forensic and medical expertise with Dr. Michael Baden who lead the 8 other forensic pathologists for the HSCA in 1979. All of them said there was no evidence of JFK being struck from the front or side. Perhaps they missed something. perhaps you should contact Dr. Baden at point out those things your keen, medically trained eye picked up that 9 other pathologists missed. I'm sure he'll appreciate hearing from you.
One thing that is never properly explained is, if Kennedy was hit in the back, why is he clutching his throat? If he were hit in the back first, there would have been a reaction.
You have to dismiss the rantings of a YouTuber who posted that a professional wrestler would have made an excellent expert witness at the Oswald trial.
@fobrien1 I wish Ventura was called as an expert witness. Bugliosi would have dismantled him they way he did with all the defense witnesses.
It would have been a laugh and a half to see Ventura saunter into the courtroom wearing one of his showy wrestling costumes.
Sorry to burst your fantasy bubble but because someone was a former Seal does not automatically make them a weapons expert qualified to give opinions and finding in court.
@autoad "It would have been a laugh and a half to see Ventura saunter into the courtroom wearing one of his showy wrestling costumes"
its really sad that as someone who supposedly has researched the case that all you can come up with is the comment above .ive seen bugliosi and ventura debate and bugliosi came off second best ,bugliosi threw his toys out of the pram and refused to speak with ventura on camera . yes in a court room a slick lawyer like bugliosi can tear shreds ------------
@fobrien1 Jesse Ventura is an entertainer. That's what he was when he wrestled, that's how he ran for Gov. and that's the way he appeared on his "conspiracy" television program. An honest investigation follows the evidence and doesn't treat rumors, speculation and conjecture as "fact". That's where Jesse gets goofy and folks like Bugliosi have no time for childish antics and dealing with the "when did you stop beating your wife" type questions Ventura asks.
@autoad of course ventura in the wwf was an actor but he wouldnt be the only actor to run for office would he ? or maybe your forgetting a certain mr reagan former us president . if your going to argue that because a person was formerly an actor or enterainer has no credibility that what does that say about the former president . whatever bugliosi could be called (and there are quite a few things) no one could call him a fool ,but i believe he underestimated venturas --------------------
@autoad he in a condesending manner in so many words tried to tell ventura he didnt know what he was talking about because he hadnt read anything (he had no idea what ventura read ) ventura retorted immediately "ive read a lot" next thing we know bugliosi throws his toys out of the pram and refuses to speak on camera . speaks vollumes about the kind of man bugliosi is . but all this is dancing around things here bugliosi /ventura etc can only offer their opinion
@autoad opinions are not evidence /facts or truth just opinions what a person believes . what we need to do here is forget all this BS and get down to the business of debating the evidence /facts /witnessess etc etc these are the things that prove or disprove not opinions .your right an honest investigation follows the evidence and that comment of yours begs the question why didnt the warren commission call dorothy garner as a witness .
@autoad off a witness (thats what slick lawyers do everyday ) for example OJs lawyers made a perfectly good forensics guy look totally incompetent . so in a court of law im sure bugliosi would pull out every slick trick in the book to make ventura or who ever look incompetent /ridiculous or what ever term you care to use . he uses the same slick lawyer tricks to make people believe his "p-ss doctor " /chiropractor etc are ballistics and physics experts . in a court of law ------------
@autoad where the case revolves around whether it was possible to fire a poorly maintained rifle in the manner that the warren commission said oswald did the defence would be perfectly entitled to call expert marksmen as witnesses .
@fobrien1 That's not the issue whatsoever. Science put the rifle that fired the bullets that killed JFK into the hands of LHO. The fact the Caracno is a crummy rifle is meaningless.
@autoad "That's not the issue whatsoever" the rifle was poorly maintained corroded and had a badly misaligned scope and that is quite important and more certainly one of the important issues in this case .
"Science put the rifle that fired the bullets that killed JFK into the hands of LHO"
exactly how did science do that ? the only thing you can be referring to is a palm print which day says he lifted but he never bothered to give this info -------------
@autoad to the fbi or even mention it to them .the fbi checked the rifle and found only one print on the left trigger guard which couldnt be identified .according to day the rifle had to be disassembled to retrieve the palm print which means the print wasnt there as a result of oswald having just fired the rifle and strangely the dpd having had this vital information failed to mention finding the print untill after oswald had been murdered .we know as fact that -----------------------
@autoad agents (one must assume they were fbi) visited the mortuary after oswalds death and finger and palm printed him ,how do we know this ? because the ink had to be cleaned from oswalds hands ,only after this do we hear a print was found .
"The fact the Caracno is a crummy rifle is meaningless"
we are talking about two different things here ,your talking about a rifle being cheap and im talking about the poor condition of the rifle on 22/11/63.
@fobrien1 If there was ink on his hand at the mortuary it means they took his finger/handprints. It does not mean they put his prints on the rifle. Besides, his prints were lifted off the rifle on the same day he was apprehended and he was very much alive on November 22nd.
@autoad "Besides, his prints were lifted off the rifle on the same day he was apprehended"
i guess we will have to take days word on that one .
"If there was ink on his hand at the mortuary it means they took his finger/handprints. It does not mean they put his prints on the rifle"
theres no if, there was ink all over his hands . your correct it means that his prints were lifted not that they put his hand on the rifle in order to leave prints .we know this because a dead body ------
@autoad cant leave prints simply by placing a dead hand on a rifle (unless if the person has just died ) oswald had been dead hours at that stage . but they did lift his prints that night ,so why go to the mortuary out of hours and lift prints from a dead oswald when they allready had prints taken from the living oswald . if they allready had his prints (which they did) they didnt need them again did they so the visit to the mortuary makes no sense . -------------------------
@autoad can you offer any reason why they would feel the need to go to the mortuary off hours and lift prints from oswald that they allready had ? , do you not agree there was a reason for this ? . i mean one must assume if day did indeed lift oswalds palm print from the rifle on 22/11/63 and matched it to oswalds palm print that he could only match it if he had oswalds palm print to match it with .
Because I can't offer a reason does not mean something criminal had taken place.
In the meantime, I'll do some research to see if the story about the "midnight mortuary visit" was a legitimate one. The pro-conspiracy advocates do not have a good reputation when it comes to discriminating between fact and fantasy.
@autoad "In the meantime, I'll do some research to see if the story about the "midnight mortuary visit" was a legitimate one"
try looking at reclaiming history (im sure youve got it ) bugliosi ackowledges it happened as of course he has to as the mortician not only saw the agents but had to claen the ink off the hands.
@autoad of course you will and i expect nothing less .no need to jump down my throath , i was simply saying you can find mention of it in reclaiming history ,i could help page wise but now i wont . ive never posted one lie or untruth when talking with you or any LN (whether you believe it or not ) nor will i ever post any lies or untruths tho you may want people to believe i did . and you LNs say CTs are un trusting ,i guess now we see who is untrusting .
@autoad "Science put the rifle that fired the bullets that killed JFK into the hands of LHO" HAHAHAHA what the hell does that mean??? It's like you haven't even considered the possibility that Oswald was a patsy and that the evidence was planted.
Science isn't worth 2 pieces of shit in this case.
@autoad -- Science has NOT established bullets shot @ JFK were from TBD-found Carcano rifle, OR that LHO fired it. Nitrate test soon after arrest showed NO firing residue. FBI found NO fingerprints on rifle until after LHO was killed (as autoload pointed-out). Hospital orderly Mr. Tomlinson found bullet on WRONG gurney, claimed it was pointy like .30 cal -- NOT round-nose 6.5 mm. Johnson saw another bullet fall on floor in his room, retrieved & pocketed by nurse. Ballistics test inconclusive.
cont: ASSUMING LHO didn't have poor eyesight & his rifle proficiency was better than when he barely-qualified w/ bottom-ranked Marksman, WHY would he depend on such a poorly-designed obsolete rifle that tended to misfire w/ rapid-firing & had a misaligned scope? WHY, when he could have walked into any pawnshop, sport or hardware store & bought an accurate, smooth-shooting deer-rifle 30-06, 7mm, .243, etc for under $100? BECAUSE mail-order left a paper-trail -- like 'arrested' for disturbance.
@starmanskye Lee Oswald was poor. He didn't have the money to purchase an expensive rifle. The Carcano was something he could afford. Furthermore, he bought it under the name of Hidell to disguise his identity.
His shooting skills were high enough to qualify him as a Sharpshooter and Marksman. His skills for rapid fire were excellent. He scored 48/49 out of 50 at 200 yards. The longest shot in Dealey Plaza was 88 yards.
@starmanskye Science has indeed identified the rifle that fired the. It identified the fingerprints of the person who held it. It identified the fibers of the blanket it was wrapped in at Ruth Paine's house. It identified the fresh fibers between the butt plate and stock to the shirt LHO was wearing. Ballistic tests and neutron activation process ID'd the bullets to the rifle and the bullet fragments to the bullets fired. LHO is guilty as sin. Game. Set. Match. Case Closed.
@starmanskye LHO's Carcano was fired three times by three different people and each on of the nitrate tests said none of them had not fired a rifle. The nitrate tests were notoriously inaccurate. The vast majority of your "facts" are wrong. It's time you began reading something that's not immersed in some silly conspiracy theory.
Kennedy was shot in the head from the sewer, there is a small documentary on this. The car even slows down near the sewer (cannot be seen from this side). There were other shooters obviously
@thisphotoisproof First Ladies should be trained in security procedures. In the situation she was the only person who could have and had time to save his life by pulling him down. That must have haunted her for the rest of her life.
@MrThorntonboy But there's no medical or physical evidence that supports a frontal or side shot theory. Forensics say he was struck twice from above and behind.
@IEllis6 When a bullet strikes a person in the head, the result is the head moving about 2 inches in the same direction of the bullet. Keep this in mind; bullets do not transfer their energy; the bullet is designed to penetrate the target and not push it. When the Z-film is examined at frame 313 (the head strike) at frame 314,315,316 you'll see JFK's head move forward about 2-3 inches. The "back and to the left" motion is a result of a neuromuscular reaction from the destruction of the brain.
@autoad everyone wondering if the fatal shot could have come from behind has to read this post as this is the exact truth and there are plenty of independent studies that have proved it was perfectly likely to have come from behind
@MrBlackoralive The only place the shots that struck JFK came from were above and behind him. There is zero forensic, ballistic, physical or medical evidence shots struck him from the front or side.
@autoad The evidence is voluminous that he was hit in the head from the front. There is a hole in the high forehead above his right eye in the pre-autopsy photo. All the Dallas doctors saw the huge exit wound at the back of his head! Macolm Kilduff and Abraham Zapruder both point to the same spot on the skull that the autopsy photo shows. The forgery of the head x-rays is easily seen in that they don't agree with one another! The wound is reversed in the side x-ray. The photos are fake!
@tregoj1 I have an idea, why don't you contact Dr. Michael Baden. He lead the team of pathologists (including Dr. Cyril Wecht) and tell him that a majority of people say there's "voluminous evidence" JFK was struck from the front. Tell him that he and the other 8 pathologists were wrong. I'm sure he'll be impressed with your medical/forensic credentials. I bet he'll send you a thank you note and want to include you on the next investigation:)
@autoad Who got to examine the original evidence? Not the Warren Commission. Not the HSCA! Nope! About a dozen Dallas doctors saw Kennedy. Wouldn't things be different if the above mentioned doctors had examined the body and the brain! It was stolen! Check the pre-autopsy photo and the little hole in the frorehead! His face is intact. A hit from behind would have destroyed his face! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. What are YOUR credentials? Wecht favors two hits.
@tregoj1 The brain wasn't stolen. The HSCA concluded it was in the possession of Bobby Kennedy and was burind with JFK was he was re-intered.
Cyril Wecht was disassembled by Vincent Bugliosi during the Oswald trial and various other events. Wecht stands alone from every other forensic pathologist.
@autoad Bugliosi is famous for prosecuting a slam dunk case! The Oswald trial was a joke since3 Mark Lane was best qualified. Robert Kennedy, if he possessed the brain, was in violation of the law. It's forensic evidence not personal property. If it's buried it can be exhumed. Jesse Ventura destroyed Bugliosi on Conspiracy Theory. Cyril Wecht is one of the top forensic pathologists. You can tell the bad ones when they call the tracheostomy a "tracheotomy" - removal of the trachea.
@tregoj1 Lane wasn't at the trial because he wasn't present at the assassination and could not offer testimony. His "testimony" would have been hearsay and it would not have been accepted by the court. Plus, his credibility is lacking Jesse Ventura? He's got a pro-conspiracy TV show. He's a performing clown..like a pro wrestler. Cyril Wecht was Spence's best witness and Bugliosi took him apart. And Wecht stands all by himself and has no support from any pathologists. Is this your best? LOL!
@autoad the "trial" was fake. Mark Lane should have represented "Oswald" not testify! Spence did a poor job. Mark Lane did a better job in Rush to Judgment. Jesse Ventura was the Governor of Minnesota and a Navy SEAL! It is only an opinion concerning Bugliosi. What was shown were HIGHLIGHTS and not the whole trial. What was skipped? Watch how bad that rifle works! What pathologists? Who agrees that a bullet will suffer no damage? Nobody could produce a pristine bullet! James Fetzer!
@tregoj1 You have absolutely no idea about witness testimony, facts and evidence. Jesse Ventura could have been the President of the US but that does not qualify him as a witness. What did he witness?? Nothing. What credentials does he have to be an expert witness in anything related to the case? Nothing. What was Jesse doing in 1986 when the trial was held? He was "play acting" in the WWF. You'd have a professional wrestler as an expert witness for Oswald? LOL!!!! That's hysterical!!! LOL!!!!
@tregoj1 Who else should have been on your "expert witness" list? Sine the Z-film was alleged to have been faked, put Mickey Mouse on the stand!! LOL! He's had years of experience in film!! Your ballistic and firearm expert could be Elmer Fudd. He's been blasting away at the "wascally wabbit" for decades!!! LOL!! I'm still laughing at your Jesse Ventura-expert witness idea!!! A professional wrestler as an expert witness!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!! You're a sketch!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!
@fobrien1 Lane wasn't an expert witness. There's nothing he could offer the court in terms of what he personally knew about the assassination. It doesn't matter if he interviewed all the witnesses in Dealey and testified about what they told him. That's hearsay and not admissible in court. At the time of the trial Jesse Ventura was in the WWF "playing" a wrestler. So what if he was a Seal. That does not make him an expert witness about the assassination and the related events.
@autoad "Lane wasn't an expert witness. There's nothing he could offer the court in terms of what he personally knew about the assassination"
on a personal level he had no connection to the assassination meaning he wasnt a witness to it ,however he was hired by oswalds mother to represent her son and he was a warren commission witness . i have to assume you dont understand the hearsay law ,lane could have produced film of some of the witnesses he spoke to --------------------
@autoad the jury would have then seen and heard what the witnesses had to say ,so lane producing film of the witnesses saying what they saw and heard would in know way be hearsay .
@fobrien1 It is absolutely hearsay.There would have been no way to verify the what the other people told Lane. He could have made up stores (which he did anyway in other venues) and committed perjury. If you didn't like the witnesses in the trial then take your complaints to Gerry Spence. He realized quickly that his credible witness pool was vastly limited due to the lack of credibility of the "witnesses" who changed or embellished their stories for 33 years.
@autoad "If you didn't like the witnesses in the trial then take your complaints to Gerry Spence"
i could care less about the trial and witnesses spence called as the trial was a joke and had little or nothing to do with getting at the truth ,and lets be fair bugliosi has shown the truth is not top of his list of priorities .
@fobrien1 Your comments about Bugliosi are predictable and laughable. In the opinion of many responsible people he's written THE definitive book on the assassination. It comes as no surprise that you'd want to diminish his work because he's produced something that destroys the hallowed propaganda of the CTer community.
@autoad "Your comments about Bugliosi are predictable and laughable"
whats laughable is that people like you accuse certain people of things such as lying and when asked to back up their words with proof we get a big fat zero. youve called atleast one person a liar and like all your ilk when asked if you would back up that claim you offer nothing ,youve said redheads quote is unreliable but again you offer nothing to back up that claim but your opinion .=====================
@autoad if you are of the opinion that the quote is questionable or unreliable in some way then prove it to be so ,thus far you have been unwilling or unable to offer anything to support your opinion ,unless you can do that really no more needs to be said about it .
@fobrien1 You copy and pasted a quote off a website, that came from a book about the producer of the Oswald trial, Mark Redhead, claiming the jury had voted to acquit Oswald.
@autoad ill ask again ,i thought you read the article ? well if you did you would see some 4 books named (ill give you a little hint its one of those books ) and for those that actually read the article the author was even kind enough to give a page number where the quote is located .now when your ready to move on and discuss the real evidence (such as how oswald got past garner ) instead of time wasting let me know and ill be happy to debate with you .
@autoad "It comes as no surprise that you'd want to diminish his work because he's produced something that destroys the hallowed propaganda of the CTer community"
bugliosi needs no help from me in diminishing his work he did a good job of that all by his self ,and unlike you i dont have to resort to posting claims i cant back up because all i need to show bugliosis dishonesty are his own words .
@fobrien1 Of course you care about the Oswald trial. You posted a quote of questionable origins insunuating the trial was fixed, Then complained for the defense not having Mark Lane and Jesse Ventura as "expert witnesses". Then you questioned why certain witnesses for the prosecution weren't called. And now you say you "could not care less about the trial and witnesses"? Your comments betray your supposed disinterest.
@autoad "Of course you care about the Oswald trial. You posted a quote of questionable origins insunuating the trial was fixed"
why would i care about a mock trial when i have access to information from a real trial and access to information from various commissions and numerous files and documents ? ,so you can keep your mock trial and ill keep study the factual stuff. -------------------------------------------
@autoad "Since LHO never had a real trial, the material you claim to have in your possession is useless."
the warren commission /the hsca /the shaw trial /all sworn affidavits and fbi statments /all documents released under the freedom of information act and documents released by the arrb etc and all this you say is useless ,
@autoad "You posted a quote of questionable origins insunuating the trial was fixed"
ill ask again other than your opinion do you have any proof that the quote i posted is questionable or unreliable ? if youve got proof post it, ill be here waiting .secondly if you can point to any comment of mine where i claimed the trial was fixed please do so .
@autoad "Then complained for the defense not having Mark Lane and Jesse Ventura as "expert witnesses". "
um no i didnt .
"Then you questioned why certain witnesses for the prosecution weren't called"
again your incorrect ,you said spence struggled for credible witnesses that he could call because (to use your words) they changed or embelished their stories and i said i guess that would explain why bugliosi didnt call marina and markham .
@autoad "He realized quickly that his credible witness pool was vastly limited due to the lack of credibility of the "witnesses" who changed or embellished their stories for 33 years."
i guess that explains why bugliosi never called two of the warren comissions star witness marina oswald or helen markham .
@autoad "It is absolutely hearsay.There would have been no way to verify the what the other people told Lane. He could have made up stores (which he did anyway in other venues) and committed perjury"
so now your accusing lane of being a liar of making stuff up ,so do you care to back that accusation up with any hard evidence ? or are you just basing this on brehms comments ?.
@autoad "lack of credibility of the "witnesses" who changed or embellished their stories for 33 years."
lets see here ,warren reynolds at the time of tippits killing said he couldnt ID the man he saw (he later gets shot in the head ) and suddenly oswald was the man he saw .markham told agent odum the killer was about 18 with black hair (which she denied saying ) she told lane that the killer was short a little bit heavy with bushy hair (again she denied saying this )---------------
@autoad even when played a recording of her own voice giving lane this description she denied her own voice ,not to mention she told the warren commission (having seen a line up which included oswald ) that she didnt know or recognise anyone in the line up. gee it seems bugliosi had the very same problems that you say spence had but i wouldnt expect you to tell people that .
@autoad "At the time of the trial Jesse Ventura was in the WWF "playing" a wrestler. So what if he was a Seal. That does not make him an expert witness about the assassination and the related events"
so what if he was in the wwf i could care less ,im talking about a man who was a seal and held and still holds the highest rifle qualification ,and his opinion is based on the fact that he couldnt fire a carcano as oswald is supposed to have done .
@autoad the bugliosi mock trial jury according to producer mark redhead first voted in favour of acquital ,but i bet bugliosi doesnt mention that .
"as Rose notes, the prosecution presented 14 witnesses, twice as many as the defense's seven. But in spite of all that, Remington reveals that the jury's first verdict was 7-5 for acquittal. And he got this right from the source, producer Mark Redhead. (p. 303)"
@fobrien1 I'd like to know where you read about Mark Redhead. I've learned the hard way that blindly accepting quotes made by others to be accurately repeated by pro conspiracy advocates is a mistake. You and your CTer brethren have built a poor reputation in such matters.
Please let me know where the Mark Redhead quote came from. I want to read it for myself.
@autoad "I'd like to know where you read about Mark Redhead. I've learned the hard way that blindly accepting quotes made by others to be accurately repeated by pro conspiracy advocates is a mistake"
i think your mistaking me for people like posner and bugliosi ,everything i quote i quote verbatim . what i quoted is easily available on the internet if you choose to look for it .
@fobrien1 I already know where you got the quote. But there's no source information as to the origins of the quote and there lies the issue. You and your follow pro-conspiracy friends love to quote "facts" from material that's highly suspect and questionable. Your previous posting maintains the CTer unfavorable reputation.
@autoad "You and your CTer brethren have built a poor reputation in such matters"
firstly you once before falsely accused me of trying to mislead and when i asked you to show proof of your claim you offered none ,because there was none . truth and accuracy are most important and people get both from me ,sadly the same cant be said of all all LNs .secondly in all the comments between you and i or me and others i have offered not one theory conspiracy or otherwise .
@autoad "I see that you got this supposed quote from Mark Redhead from the CTKA website. The quote is completely unreliable. It offers no source material as to the origins of the quote. A CTer using an unverifiable quote. This is not the first time it's happened."
im sure you have some thing to offer other than your "opinion" that the quote is unrelible ? ,i guess not as if you had you would have posted it . but if you come across some thing let me know.
look at 1:32 you can clearly see, that kennedy's head and torso move forward at the moment the bullet strikes, before the corset he was wearing, pushs him back.
you also see, that the exit wound is clearly on the upper right of his head and his forehead, because his head was leaning to the front. so the shot went in at the back of his head and went out between the top and the forehead.
There is no doubt, that the bullets came from anywhere else but from behind Kennedy.
@LuckiZero Look at 1:32 you can clearly see the Z film is a fraud.
you also see that the exit wound is clearly NOT on the upper right side of his forehead because the Z film was altered. so the shot went in at the top front of the head and went out the rear of his head.
There is no doubt, that the bullet came from anywhere else but from in front of Kennedy.
@LuckiZero The first problems are the non-fatal wounds! Dr. Humes felt inside the back wound and it was maybe an inch deep! It is not the exit wound from the frontal neck wound, which the Dallas doctor said was one of entrance. Those two are separate wounds-from different directions. The angle if they were linked would be close to on the level, not from a high shot. You have conspiracy without the head shots. He was NOT leaning the way the WC artists fake it! Back wound made neck!
"felt inside the back wound and it was maybe an inch deep"
i doubt, that anybody tried to stick something through the entire wound.
the statements of the medical staf, that examined the body of kennedy first, are in my opinion not realy reliable, because they were made in a hurry and since there was no doubt, that the headshot was the one that killed kennedy, they didnt focus on the other wounds.
In the Zapruder film, you see, that Kennedy and Connally are hit at the same time
@LuckiZero don't think so...the head shot came from the grassy knoll whether you like it or not...you can't shoot someone in the front side of the head from that far back in the where Oswald was...there was 4 shots so get used to it
@GeorgeVreelandHill It's idiotic to ignore everything from a missingh brain to a switched rifle. Three people who saw the gun up close saw the word Mauser on it! Chains of evidence were repeatedly broken and police failed to seal off the depository and the gun and shells had the cops hands all over them. Dallas police were gross amateurs. People had their films stolen, Johnson destroyed evidence, and the body was taken illegally from Texas. Hoover hated the Kennedys.
The driver and the SS, were all told what to do, it's only when the head shot and just before it happen's the driver almost comes to a stop, 2 thing's why, waiting for the kill shot, or he noticed that the SS officer was trying to get on the car. In anycase, whats the point, unless the people responsable are brought to Justice , it's funny, as time moves forward, a lot of website's that had pictures, that the average person could see on US Government Websites are now gone.
@1239jer people have stated that jfk used to wear a back brace due to his addisons....im wondering if he wore a back brace on nov 22nd and if so was there any bullet holes in it.this would clearly indicate that shots did come from behind.but im convinced the throat wound was from the front.i think a few doctors at parkland have stated this.
@RandyMarsh911 Yes, he wore a back brace, but the back wound was above the brace. The Bethesda autopsy carried out sophisticated tests on the back wound and the rear head entry wound - and found coagulation necrosis of the tissues there, proving these were indeed entry wounds. The Parkland doctors weren't investigating the wounds per se, and did not even see the back wound, so they were merely stating an opinion.
@RandyMarsh911 the brace was for his bad back and if he didn't have that brace may have been able to be pulled over/ fallen over before the third fatal shot, all of which were from the TSBD..
Haywood: It should be underlined that though he heard the shots, he was well back in the motorcade and did not know where the shots came from. He stopped his motorcycle where some were laying on the ground, he testified. He asked people where the shots came from. Several said they didn't know, then one told him shots came from the Depository building. This account was confirmed when a recording of an officer call sign 142 (his sign) was played saying witnesses said TSBD.
if u are hit anywhere on your body....u have an immediate reaction to use your hands to rub the pain....ie if u bump your head or if u hit shin on something.....its instinct and a normal human reaction.the president grasped at his throat after being hit.....not the back of his neck but his throat.indicating frontal wound in my eyes.
@RandyMarsh911 Bad example. It's not unusual for someone to be shot and not know it. Reports of soldiers being shot and not realizing they have are commonly reported. President Reagan was shot in the chest and he didn't know he'd been struck
@RandyMarsh911 He was wounded in the throat - and an exit wound there may have been more painful than the back wound. His hand movements are an obvious reaction to a gunshot but, obviously, he couldn't reach that wound.
@SUSSTURUCU The Z-film is legitimate. The film has not been faked or altered. The film was developed within hours of the assassination and the film was in the possession of Zapruder the entire time. After it was developed 3 copies were made immediately afterwards. The film has not been altered in any way because there wasn't the technology available at the time-there wasn't time enough to make any alterations-all the other film and photos taken in Dealey Plaza would have to be altered to match
@MrWantedBeast Yeah she was so much in shock she still had her husband's blood and brain matter on her clothes, when they were swearing in Johnson as president on the plane, which was going back to Washington.
There were 8 people, including a police officer, standing on the triple underpass. Do you realize nobody on the overpass heard or saw anyone with them firing a rifle?
Do you realize 9 forensic pathologist for the HSCA said there was no medical, physical, ballistic or forensic evidence to support theories of shots from the front or side?
The conspiracy loons are making up more and more crap regularly.
@autoad A lot of people off their meds auto.....while a conspiracy may be possible as to the motive, Oswald did the shooting, at 2:20 here you see Zapruder standing on pedestal with his secretary, right above agent Hill's head. Ya know, agent Clint Hill of the SECRET SERVICE.... Here the first shot, the miss has just been fired. The second is being fired...
@fobrien1 Oswald didn't do anything...he was a Patsy and was all set up to make it look like he did it so get over it...CIA did it and LBJ was behind it
@cwc27 im not acusing anyone of anything ,and im quite sure your misunderstanding my question to irish89055 . i asked how oswald got past garner ,if oswald was the shooter he had to pass garner and garner who saw baker and trully never saw him and thats a big problem for the LNs.
Jacqueline Kennedy was acting on instinct. She wasn't trying to escape or take refuge in the arms of the charging sercret service man Clint Hill. Rather, she was retrieving a section of JFK's skull that had been shot off.
Fidel Castro wanted the hit, that's why Oswald wanted to go to Cuba via Mexico City. He was refused and lost it mentally, and was kicked out of Mexico for being weird. So the Mob who had ties to Castro, set it up for Oswald. As soon as Oswald took the head shot to Kennedy, everyone split to leave Oswald to fend for himself. That's why he said he was a "Patsy".
I think he was already dead or dying before the final shot, frames 280 - 290 show a huge bulge around the right side of his face bottom of his right ear to the bottom of his jaw, and his hands are kind frozen around his chest. Question is why would jackie go and fetch something from the trunk of the car instead of either grasping her dead husband or ducking for cover
it so f...up to see a great person been assassinated like
as much as one wants to be tough it brings great sadness to see him taken out in that manner...wished we could've gotten those bastards responsible. i felt like part of all of us died when he died.....will there ever be another great man like him...if that ever happens again, this time we must be more vigilant and aware of this bastards evil intentions against a great man of good...peace out.
mephisto88x 23 hours ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PAUL GIBSON, ONE OF OUR SCHOOL'S BIG THIRD GRADERS WENT TO DALLAS, TEXAS OVER THE WEEKEND AND ASSASSINATED OUR BIG-BIG-BIG MR. PRESIDENT KENNEDY BETTER KNOWN TO OUR SCHOOL KIDS AS PRESIDENT DOUBLE OO SPIDER! (Kindle VIP2RIP)
inspectorcritic 1 day ago
But u missed with your overt C. Act. F** up. Told to.put majic b on gurney outside bathroom. Jfk's, meantime gurneys got swapped, jfk's moved away from be door one up, New empty gurney total.unrelated put by BR door. U came, set on wrong one. So truth will out . Lower level stupid do show plan mess..some be silent 4 ever some put hoof in plan. Glad me not Be Bad with gurney BOO BOO.
skitsy17 4 days ago
Connally found majic bullet at end of his try at hosp room. Fell out on table from thigh area in pieces. Aha, magic.Nurse put in evid env,seal,initial and name,doctor sign,to give to Dpd."fed type suit of Fed run in4 bullit,grab. Leave. At WC,"its not my initials.name, erased stuff" can't be in evid:no custody chain. Majic bullit from wrong gurney,nearest 2 bathroom next2 jfk's..oops,ThisIS A+majicNoScratchBunk.dictionary df- conspiracy.read it.
skitsy17 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We never land on the earth. We never land a probe on Mars. Hubble never send us pictures from the univers. God is a hoax. LBJ commissioned the assassination of JFK. Beethoven was gay and we dont care.
TheAlonetogether 4 days ago
I know who killed jfk: a bullet.
TheMercenaryMexican 5 days ago
y is jfk's blood orange?
Attributions1 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@susan908u
The single-bullet theory is defensible if and only if the three F.B.I. reports (November 26, December 9 and January 13) are completely WRONG on their statements of the autopsy. Why? Because these three reports all state that the first bullet did not go completely through Kennedy and therefore it could not have gone on to hit Connally, who was seated in front of Kennedy.
bobzeda 1 week ago
@dol44christ why does the driver and front passenger duck then at :14
AequitasSaints 1 week ago
Look at the driver!!!! He's the one that made the head shot. This is the clearest video of it yet!! JFK was shot in the back first, then the kill shot was from the DRIVER! Watch...it is plain as day.
dol44christ 1 week ago
@dol44christ he got shot in the back is when he first got shot. look at the governor(the guy in front of him) turns around and JFK leans over a bit. the next shot was through his head. it went through and hit the governor in the lung. how could the limo driver shoot him if it went through the governors lung?
gusbus2013 1 week ago
The FBI found the two bullet fragments from the third kill shot in the front of the limo. These fragments hit the windshield next to the rear view mirror, causing a star crack, and the chrome trim around the windshield. The third shot could have only come from LHO in the TSBD, lazer technology has proven this. Finally two witneses in the window directly beneath LHO heard all three shots fired and the shell casings hit the floor.
johnamac123 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@johnamac123 "Finally two witneses in the window directly beneath LHO heard all three shots fired and the shell casings hit the floor."
only one of the three men on the 5th floor claimed to have heard the shells hit the floor .
"The third shot could have only come from LHO in the TSBD, lazer technology has proven this"
so if a person stood on the knoll and pointed a laser at the head of an actor playing jfk sat in a limo wouldnt the laser point directly at the head also? .-------
fobrien1 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@johnamac123 its easy to point a laser that proves nothing more than shots could be fired from that window and thats not in dispute .norman on the 5th floor hearing shells drop proves only that shots came from there ,it doesnt prove who fired the shots . as for the fragments there are numerous small fragments and no way to tell which bullet they came from .
fobrien1 2 weeks ago
@johnamac123 I remember reading about the HSCA in 77 or 78 found that the lead fragments in connally's leg and wrist matched the "magic bullet" exactly. They used a method called Neutron Activation Analysis, where they bombarded the bullet and remaining fragments with neutrons, and made a sort of fingerprint which matched perfectly with each other, to the exclution of all bullets in the world. I wouldn't be surprised if you had read that also.
Cahulawassee 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@johnamac123 I remember reading about the HSCA in 77 or 78 found that the lead fragments in connally's leg and wrist matched the "magic bullet" exactly. They used a method called Neutron Activation Analysis, where they bombarded the bullet and remaining fragments with neutrons, and made a sort of fingerprint which matched perfectly with each other, to the exclution of all bullets in the world. I wouldn't be surprised if you had read that also.
Cahulawassee 1 week ago
The assassination of JFK was the most hideous coup d'etat in history where the government of the people,for the people and by the people was mocked by the CIA, FBI and the pentagon under the command of Lyndon Johnson, Edgar Hoover and others.
JFK was a men of honour, who fought for a better world, for a more humane society. His words resound through the walls of time to warn us about the new world order, who he called the ruthless and monolitic conspiracy
KateMaxRealty 2 weeks ago 6
@KateMaxRealty Sadly you summed it all up pretty much perfectly.
20MOJO20 2 weeks ago
@KateMaxRealty thats what the Native Americans and Blacks have been saying for centuries...nothing new.
neilzep 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
THE ASSASSIN SAVED MORE LIVES THAN WHAT ANY GOD HAS ON EARTH INCLUDING JESUS. NEXT DAY JFK OO SPIDER ORDERS NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST ESTIMATED CASUALTIES 600 MILLION--PRAY TO ASSASSINS TO SAVE YOUR LIFE!
inspectorcritic 3 weeks ago
So let me get this straight. There was a shooter on the triple overpass -- with a high-powered rifle & target scope -- and no witnesses saw him, standing there with his rifle in broad daylight -- or heard the gunshots -- and he shot THROUGH the windshield of JFK's car -- without breaking the glass! -- or hitting anyone in the car who was sitting in FRONT of JFK -- and hit JFK's head -- in a way that no one could prove where the shot came from.
Boy, that's REALLY a "Magic Bullet Theory"
RSLindsay 3 weeks ago
forward and too the left
6047223521 3 weeks ago
jfk slumped like he had been shot in his side or something firstly,
the first lady had her hand resting on jfk shoulder ,
his head and blood flew away from the face of the first lady, enough said
dizztruckshin 3 weeks ago 3
@dizztruckshin looks like you got all figured out..
danieltij3 6 days ago
@danieltij3 you first need to be intoxicated to see what i see lol
dizztruckshin 5 days ago
Only a total moron would watch this and not see that the fatal shot came from the front. Nobody may ever know the truth of who killed him and why, but one thing is undeniable, Oswald was not the only shooter, if he even hit him at all.There was another shooter in front of the car and that shot killed him.
ThreesharpsA 4 weeks ago
@ThreesharpsA Why don't you share your forensic and medical expertise with Dr. Michael Baden who lead the 8 other forensic pathologists for the HSCA in 1979. All of them said there was no evidence of JFK being struck from the front or side. Perhaps they missed something. perhaps you should contact Dr. Baden at point out those things your keen, medically trained eye picked up that 9 other pathologists missed. I'm sure he'll appreciate hearing from you.
autoad 4 weeks ago
One thing that is never properly explained is, if Kennedy was hit in the back, why is he clutching his throat? If he were hit in the back first, there would have been a reaction.
SuperJackmehoffer 1 month ago
@SuperJackmehoffer the shot went through his back and neck.
mikelynn99 1 month ago
You have to dismiss the rantings of a YouTuber who posted that a professional wrestler would have made an excellent expert witness at the Oswald trial.
I'm still laughing about this!! :)
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad when it comes to handling and firing rifles he (ventura) would be considered an expert .people bugliosi used as experts are
Chad ZImmerman (chiropractor) a back doctor and bugliosi used him as a ballistics and autopsy expert .
dr lattimer (urologist ) or as Cyril Wecht so memorably labels him, "the p-ss doctor"
vincent guinn (phd in chemistry) bugliosi introduces him (RH p.488) as an expert in PHYSICS .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 I wish Ventura was called as an expert witness. Bugliosi would have dismantled him they way he did with all the defense witnesses.
It would have been a laugh and a half to see Ventura saunter into the courtroom wearing one of his showy wrestling costumes.
Sorry to burst your fantasy bubble but because someone was a former Seal does not automatically make them a weapons expert qualified to give opinions and finding in court.
autoad 4 weeks ago
@autoad "It would have been a laugh and a half to see Ventura saunter into the courtroom wearing one of his showy wrestling costumes"
its really sad that as someone who supposedly has researched the case that all you can come up with is the comment above .ive seen bugliosi and ventura debate and bugliosi came off second best ,bugliosi threw his toys out of the pram and refused to speak with ventura on camera . yes in a court room a slick lawyer like bugliosi can tear shreds ------------
fobrien1 4 weeks ago
@fobrien1 Jesse Ventura is an entertainer. That's what he was when he wrestled, that's how he ran for Gov. and that's the way he appeared on his "conspiracy" television program. An honest investigation follows the evidence and doesn't treat rumors, speculation and conjecture as "fact". That's where Jesse gets goofy and folks like Bugliosi have no time for childish antics and dealing with the "when did you stop beating your wife" type questions Ventura asks.
autoad 4 weeks ago
@autoad of course ventura in the wwf was an actor but he wouldnt be the only actor to run for office would he ? or maybe your forgetting a certain mr reagan former us president . if your going to argue that because a person was formerly an actor or enterainer has no credibility that what does that say about the former president . whatever bugliosi could be called (and there are quite a few things) no one could call him a fool ,but i believe he underestimated venturas --------------------
fobrien1 4 weeks ago
@autoad he in a condesending manner in so many words tried to tell ventura he didnt know what he was talking about because he hadnt read anything (he had no idea what ventura read ) ventura retorted immediately "ive read a lot" next thing we know bugliosi throws his toys out of the pram and refuses to speak on camera . speaks vollumes about the kind of man bugliosi is . but all this is dancing around things here bugliosi /ventura etc can only offer their opinion
fobrien1 4 weeks ago
@autoad opinions are not evidence /facts or truth just opinions what a person believes . what we need to do here is forget all this BS and get down to the business of debating the evidence /facts /witnessess etc etc these are the things that prove or disprove not opinions .your right an honest investigation follows the evidence and that comment of yours begs the question why didnt the warren commission call dorothy garner as a witness .
fobrien1 4 weeks ago
@autoad off a witness (thats what slick lawyers do everyday ) for example OJs lawyers made a perfectly good forensics guy look totally incompetent . so in a court of law im sure bugliosi would pull out every slick trick in the book to make ventura or who ever look incompetent /ridiculous or what ever term you care to use . he uses the same slick lawyer tricks to make people believe his "p-ss doctor " /chiropractor etc are ballistics and physics experts . in a court of law ------------
fobrien1 4 weeks ago
@autoad where the case revolves around whether it was possible to fire a poorly maintained rifle in the manner that the warren commission said oswald did the defence would be perfectly entitled to call expert marksmen as witnesses .
fobrien1 4 weeks ago
@fobrien1 That's not the issue whatsoever. Science put the rifle that fired the bullets that killed JFK into the hands of LHO. The fact the Caracno is a crummy rifle is meaningless.
autoad 4 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "That's not the issue whatsoever" the rifle was poorly maintained corroded and had a badly misaligned scope and that is quite important and more certainly one of the important issues in this case .
"Science put the rifle that fired the bullets that killed JFK into the hands of LHO"
exactly how did science do that ? the only thing you can be referring to is a palm print which day says he lifted but he never bothered to give this info -------------
fobrien1 4 weeks ago
@autoad to the fbi or even mention it to them .the fbi checked the rifle and found only one print on the left trigger guard which couldnt be identified .according to day the rifle had to be disassembled to retrieve the palm print which means the print wasnt there as a result of oswald having just fired the rifle and strangely the dpd having had this vital information failed to mention finding the print untill after oswald had been murdered .we know as fact that -----------------------
fobrien1 4 weeks ago
@autoad agents (one must assume they were fbi) visited the mortuary after oswalds death and finger and palm printed him ,how do we know this ? because the ink had to be cleaned from oswalds hands ,only after this do we hear a print was found .
"The fact the Caracno is a crummy rifle is meaningless"
we are talking about two different things here ,your talking about a rifle being cheap and im talking about the poor condition of the rifle on 22/11/63.
fobrien1 4 weeks ago
@fobrien1 If there was ink on his hand at the mortuary it means they took his finger/handprints. It does not mean they put his prints on the rifle. Besides, his prints were lifted off the rifle on the same day he was apprehended and he was very much alive on November 22nd.
autoad 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "Besides, his prints were lifted off the rifle on the same day he was apprehended"
i guess we will have to take days word on that one .
"If there was ink on his hand at the mortuary it means they took his finger/handprints. It does not mean they put his prints on the rifle"
theres no if, there was ink all over his hands . your correct it means that his prints were lifted not that they put his hand on the rifle in order to leave prints .we know this because a dead body ------
fobrien1 3 weeks ago
@autoad cant leave prints simply by placing a dead hand on a rifle (unless if the person has just died ) oswald had been dead hours at that stage . but they did lift his prints that night ,so why go to the mortuary out of hours and lift prints from a dead oswald when they allready had prints taken from the living oswald . if they allready had his prints (which they did) they didnt need them again did they so the visit to the mortuary makes no sense . -------------------------
fobrien1 3 weeks ago
@fobrien1 I don't know.
Are you suggesting something nefarious had taken place?
autoad 3 weeks ago
@autoad can you offer any reason why they would feel the need to go to the mortuary off hours and lift prints from oswald that they allready had ? , do you not agree there was a reason for this ? . i mean one must assume if day did indeed lift oswalds palm print from the rifle on 22/11/63 and matched it to oswalds palm print that he could only match it if he had oswalds palm print to match it with .
fobrien1 3 weeks ago
@fobrien1
No.
Because I can't offer a reason does not mean something criminal had taken place.
In the meantime, I'll do some research to see if the story about the "midnight mortuary visit" was a legitimate one. The pro-conspiracy advocates do not have a good reputation when it comes to discriminating between fact and fantasy.
autoad 3 weeks ago
@autoad "In the meantime, I'll do some research to see if the story about the "midnight mortuary visit" was a legitimate one"
try looking at reclaiming history (im sure youve got it ) bugliosi ackowledges it happened as of course he has to as the mortician not only saw the agents but had to claen the ink off the hands.
fobrien1 3 weeks ago
@fobrien1 I'll read for myself what Bugliosi has to say about the event rather than rely on others telling me what he said.
autoad 3 weeks ago
@autoad of course you will and i expect nothing less .no need to jump down my throath , i was simply saying you can find mention of it in reclaiming history ,i could help page wise but now i wont . ive never posted one lie or untruth when talking with you or any LN (whether you believe it or not ) nor will i ever post any lies or untruths tho you may want people to believe i did . and you LNs say CTs are un trusting ,i guess now we see who is untrusting .
fobrien1 3 weeks ago
@autoad unless they needed the prints for another reason .
fobrien1 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "Science put the rifle that fired the bullets that killed JFK into the hands of LHO" HAHAHAHA what the hell does that mean??? It's like you haven't even considered the possibility that Oswald was a patsy and that the evidence was planted.
Science isn't worth 2 pieces of shit in this case.
frankmat 3 weeks ago
@autoad -- Science has NOT established bullets shot @ JFK were from TBD-found Carcano rifle, OR that LHO fired it. Nitrate test soon after arrest showed NO firing residue. FBI found NO fingerprints on rifle until after LHO was killed (as autoload pointed-out). Hospital orderly Mr. Tomlinson found bullet on WRONG gurney, claimed it was pointy like .30 cal -- NOT round-nose 6.5 mm. Johnson saw another bullet fall on floor in his room, retrieved & pocketed by nurse. Ballistics test inconclusive.
starmanskye 3 weeks ago
cont: ASSUMING LHO didn't have poor eyesight & his rifle proficiency was better than when he barely-qualified w/ bottom-ranked Marksman, WHY would he depend on such a poorly-designed obsolete rifle that tended to misfire w/ rapid-firing & had a misaligned scope? WHY, when he could have walked into any pawnshop, sport or hardware store & bought an accurate, smooth-shooting deer-rifle 30-06, 7mm, .243, etc for under $100? BECAUSE mail-order left a paper-trail -- like 'arrested' for disturbance.
starmanskye 3 weeks ago
@starmanskye Lee Oswald was poor. He didn't have the money to purchase an expensive rifle. The Carcano was something he could afford. Furthermore, he bought it under the name of Hidell to disguise his identity.
His shooting skills were high enough to qualify him as a Sharpshooter and Marksman. His skills for rapid fire were excellent. He scored 48/49 out of 50 at 200 yards. The longest shot in Dealey Plaza was 88 yards.
autoad 3 weeks ago
@starmanskye Science has indeed identified the rifle that fired the. It identified the fingerprints of the person who held it. It identified the fibers of the blanket it was wrapped in at Ruth Paine's house. It identified the fresh fibers between the butt plate and stock to the shirt LHO was wearing. Ballistic tests and neutron activation process ID'd the bullets to the rifle and the bullet fragments to the bullets fired. LHO is guilty as sin. Game. Set. Match. Case Closed.
autoad 3 weeks ago
@starmanskye LHO's Carcano was fired three times by three different people and each on of the nitrate tests said none of them had not fired a rifle. The nitrate tests were notoriously inaccurate. The vast majority of your "facts" are wrong. It's time you began reading something that's not immersed in some silly conspiracy theory.
autoad 3 weeks ago
Jack ruby did it
subtleobscurity 1 month ago
ALL OF U ARE BLIND.. HIS DRIVER SHOT HIM LOOK AT WUTS RIGHT IN FRONT OF U
NFDUBMusik760 1 month ago
@NFDUBMusik760 Go watch the digitally enhanced version of the zapruder film and you shall see its clearly not.
MrBlackoralive 1 month ago
He would have been a great President to bad
Tomsouthrock 1 month ago
you can tell the clip was doctored: what are the chances that the fatal shot came right on frame # 313?
pgpeachess 1 month ago
if u pause it at 1:33, you can see a black box imposed over the back of his head.
66ott7 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@66ott7 There's no black box placed over his head.
autoad 1 month ago
Kennedy was shot in the head from the sewer, there is a small documentary on this. The car even slows down near the sewer (cannot be seen from this side). There were other shooters obviously
Kristyannepeterpan 1 month ago
Kenndy did get shot in the front because if you can see on 15 sec it looks like another shooting threw the glass window into his chest
KilluminatiTupac96 1 month ago
@KilluminatiTupac96 How do you explain the HSCA report that says there was no medical evidence of JFK having been shot from the front or side?
autoad 1 month ago
miss kenedy is amazing
crawling to save her husbands skull piece?
refusing to take off her bloody dress
she obviously loved him
thisphotoisproof 1 month ago
@thisphotoisproof First Ladies should be trained in security procedures. In the situation she was the only person who could have and had time to save his life by pulling him down. That must have haunted her for the rest of her life.
ironpirites 1 month ago
The slow motion first shot to the throat is more likely a front shot from the overpass. That's where the angle would make sense.
MrThorntonboy 1 month ago
@MrThorntonboy But there's no medical or physical evidence that supports a frontal or side shot theory. Forensics say he was struck twice from above and behind.
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad How was he struck from behind when in this video you can infer the shot comes from the right of the cameraman.
IEllis6 1 month ago
@IEllis6 When a bullet strikes a person in the head, the result is the head moving about 2 inches in the same direction of the bullet. Keep this in mind; bullets do not transfer their energy; the bullet is designed to penetrate the target and not push it. When the Z-film is examined at frame 313 (the head strike) at frame 314,315,316 you'll see JFK's head move forward about 2-3 inches. The "back and to the left" motion is a result of a neuromuscular reaction from the destruction of the brain.
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad everyone wondering if the fatal shot could have come from behind has to read this post as this is the exact truth and there are plenty of independent studies that have proved it was perfectly likely to have come from behind
MrBlackoralive 1 month ago
@MrBlackoralive The only place the shots that struck JFK came from were above and behind him. There is zero forensic, ballistic, physical or medical evidence shots struck him from the front or side.
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad The evidence is voluminous that he was hit in the head from the front. There is a hole in the high forehead above his right eye in the pre-autopsy photo. All the Dallas doctors saw the huge exit wound at the back of his head! Macolm Kilduff and Abraham Zapruder both point to the same spot on the skull that the autopsy photo shows. The forgery of the head x-rays is easily seen in that they don't agree with one another! The wound is reversed in the side x-ray. The photos are fake!
tregoj1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tregoj1 I have an idea, why don't you contact Dr. Michael Baden. He lead the team of pathologists (including Dr. Cyril Wecht) and tell him that a majority of people say there's "voluminous evidence" JFK was struck from the front. Tell him that he and the other 8 pathologists were wrong. I'm sure he'll be impressed with your medical/forensic credentials. I bet he'll send you a thank you note and want to include you on the next investigation:)
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad Who got to examine the original evidence? Not the Warren Commission. Not the HSCA! Nope! About a dozen Dallas doctors saw Kennedy. Wouldn't things be different if the above mentioned doctors had examined the body and the brain! It was stolen! Check the pre-autopsy photo and the little hole in the frorehead! His face is intact. A hit from behind would have destroyed his face! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that out. What are YOUR credentials? Wecht favors two hits.
tregoj1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tregoj1 The brain wasn't stolen. The HSCA concluded it was in the possession of Bobby Kennedy and was burind with JFK was he was re-intered.
Cyril Wecht was disassembled by Vincent Bugliosi during the Oswald trial and various other events. Wecht stands alone from every other forensic pathologist.
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad Bugliosi is famous for prosecuting a slam dunk case! The Oswald trial was a joke since3 Mark Lane was best qualified. Robert Kennedy, if he possessed the brain, was in violation of the law. It's forensic evidence not personal property. If it's buried it can be exhumed. Jesse Ventura destroyed Bugliosi on Conspiracy Theory. Cyril Wecht is one of the top forensic pathologists. You can tell the bad ones when they call the tracheostomy a "tracheotomy" - removal of the trachea.
tregoj1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tregoj1 Lane wasn't at the trial because he wasn't present at the assassination and could not offer testimony. His "testimony" would have been hearsay and it would not have been accepted by the court. Plus, his credibility is lacking Jesse Ventura? He's got a pro-conspiracy TV show. He's a performing clown..like a pro wrestler. Cyril Wecht was Spence's best witness and Bugliosi took him apart. And Wecht stands all by himself and has no support from any pathologists. Is this your best? LOL!
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad the "trial" was fake. Mark Lane should have represented "Oswald" not testify! Spence did a poor job. Mark Lane did a better job in Rush to Judgment. Jesse Ventura was the Governor of Minnesota and a Navy SEAL! It is only an opinion concerning Bugliosi. What was shown were HIGHLIGHTS and not the whole trial. What was skipped? Watch how bad that rifle works! What pathologists? Who agrees that a bullet will suffer no damage? Nobody could produce a pristine bullet! James Fetzer!
tregoj1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tregoj1 You have absolutely no idea about witness testimony, facts and evidence. Jesse Ventura could have been the President of the US but that does not qualify him as a witness. What did he witness?? Nothing. What credentials does he have to be an expert witness in anything related to the case? Nothing. What was Jesse doing in 1986 when the trial was held? He was "play acting" in the WWF. You'd have a professional wrestler as an expert witness for Oswald? LOL!!!! That's hysterical!!! LOL!!!!
autoad 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@tregoj1 Who else should have been on your "expert witness" list? Sine the Z-film was alleged to have been faked, put Mickey Mouse on the stand!! LOL! He's had years of experience in film!! Your ballistic and firearm expert could be Elmer Fudd. He's been blasting away at the "wascally wabbit" for decades!!! LOL!! I'm still laughing at your Jesse Ventura-expert witness idea!!! A professional wrestler as an expert witness!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAH!! You're a sketch!! HAHAHAHAHAHA!
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad "Lane wasn't at the trial because he wasn't present at the assassination and could not offer testimony"
i think you will find that dr wecht wasnt an assassination witness either .
"Jesse Ventura? He's got a pro-conspiracy TV show"
and that makes his opinion wrong how exactly ? ventura is a former navy seal he held and still holds the highest rifle qualification .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 Lane wasn't an expert witness. There's nothing he could offer the court in terms of what he personally knew about the assassination. It doesn't matter if he interviewed all the witnesses in Dealey and testified about what they told him. That's hearsay and not admissible in court. At the time of the trial Jesse Ventura was in the WWF "playing" a wrestler. So what if he was a Seal. That does not make him an expert witness about the assassination and the related events.
autoad 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "Lane wasn't an expert witness. There's nothing he could offer the court in terms of what he personally knew about the assassination"
on a personal level he had no connection to the assassination meaning he wasnt a witness to it ,however he was hired by oswalds mother to represent her son and he was a warren commission witness . i have to assume you dont understand the hearsay law ,lane could have produced film of some of the witnesses he spoke to --------------------
fobrien1 1 month ago
@autoad the jury would have then seen and heard what the witnesses had to say ,so lane producing film of the witnesses saying what they saw and heard would in know way be hearsay .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 It is absolutely hearsay.There would have been no way to verify the what the other people told Lane. He could have made up stores (which he did anyway in other venues) and committed perjury. If you didn't like the witnesses in the trial then take your complaints to Gerry Spence. He realized quickly that his credible witness pool was vastly limited due to the lack of credibility of the "witnesses" who changed or embellished their stories for 33 years.
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad "If you didn't like the witnesses in the trial then take your complaints to Gerry Spence"
i could care less about the trial and witnesses spence called as the trial was a joke and had little or nothing to do with getting at the truth ,and lets be fair bugliosi has shown the truth is not top of his list of priorities .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 Your comments about Bugliosi are predictable and laughable. In the opinion of many responsible people he's written THE definitive book on the assassination. It comes as no surprise that you'd want to diminish his work because he's produced something that destroys the hallowed propaganda of the CTer community.
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad "Your comments about Bugliosi are predictable and laughable"
whats laughable is that people like you accuse certain people of things such as lying and when asked to back up their words with proof we get a big fat zero. youve called atleast one person a liar and like all your ilk when asked if you would back up that claim you offer nothing ,youve said redheads quote is unreliable but again you offer nothing to back up that claim but your opinion .=====================
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1
Then site the source of the quote you posted that's attributed to Redhead.
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad if you are of the opinion that the quote is questionable or unreliable in some way then prove it to be so ,thus far you have been unwilling or unable to offer anything to support your opinion ,unless you can do that really no more needs to be said about it .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 You copy and pasted a quote off a website, that came from a book about the producer of the Oswald trial, Mark Redhead, claiming the jury had voted to acquit Oswald.
What's the name of the book?
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad i thought you saw the quote in an article on ctka (did you not read the article ? ) i guess not .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 You don't know the name of the book, do you?
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad ill ask again ,i thought you read the article ? well if you did you would see some 4 books named (ill give you a little hint its one of those books ) and for those that actually read the article the author was even kind enough to give a page number where the quote is located .now when your ready to move on and discuss the real evidence (such as how oswald got past garner ) instead of time wasting let me know and ill be happy to debate with you .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@autoad "It comes as no surprise that you'd want to diminish his work because he's produced something that destroys the hallowed propaganda of the CTer community"
bugliosi needs no help from me in diminishing his work he did a good job of that all by his self ,and unlike you i dont have to resort to posting claims i cant back up because all i need to show bugliosis dishonesty are his own words .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 Of course you care about the Oswald trial. You posted a quote of questionable origins insunuating the trial was fixed, Then complained for the defense not having Mark Lane and Jesse Ventura as "expert witnesses". Then you questioned why certain witnesses for the prosecution weren't called. And now you say you "could not care less about the trial and witnesses"? Your comments betray your supposed disinterest.
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad "Of course you care about the Oswald trial. You posted a quote of questionable origins insunuating the trial was fixed"
why would i care about a mock trial when i have access to information from a real trial and access to information from various commissions and numerous files and documents ? ,so you can keep your mock trial and ill keep study the factual stuff. -------------------------------------------
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 Since LHO never had a real trial, the material you claim to have in your possession is useless.
autoad 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "Since LHO never had a real trial, the material you claim to have in your possession is useless."
the warren commission /the hsca /the shaw trial /all sworn affidavits and fbi statments /all documents released under the freedom of information act and documents released by the arrb etc and all this you say is useless ,
fobrien1 1 month ago
@autoad "You posted a quote of questionable origins insunuating the trial was fixed"
ill ask again other than your opinion do you have any proof that the quote i posted is questionable or unreliable ? if youve got proof post it, ill be here waiting .secondly if you can point to any comment of mine where i claimed the trial was fixed please do so .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 Looks like I'm going to have to hold your hand every step of the way. I said you insinuated the trial was fixed.
The proof you quoted an unreliable source is the absence of any footnotes/sourcing on the webpage you copy and pasted your comment from.
autoad 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "Then complained for the defense not having Mark Lane and Jesse Ventura as "expert witnesses". "
um no i didnt .
"Then you questioned why certain witnesses for the prosecution weren't called"
again your incorrect ,you said spence struggled for credible witnesses that he could call because (to use your words) they changed or embelished their stories and i said i guess that would explain why bugliosi didnt call marina and markham .
fobrien1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "He realized quickly that his credible witness pool was vastly limited due to the lack of credibility of the "witnesses" who changed or embellished their stories for 33 years."
i guess that explains why bugliosi never called two of the warren comissions star witness marina oswald or helen markham .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@autoad "It is absolutely hearsay.There would have been no way to verify the what the other people told Lane. He could have made up stores (which he did anyway in other venues) and committed perjury"
so now your accusing lane of being a liar of making stuff up ,so do you care to back that accusation up with any hard evidence ? or are you just basing this on brehms comments ?.
fobrien1 1 month ago
@autoad "lack of credibility of the "witnesses" who changed or embellished their stories for 33 years."
lets see here ,warren reynolds at the time of tippits killing said he couldnt ID the man he saw (he later gets shot in the head ) and suddenly oswald was the man he saw .markham told agent odum the killer was about 18 with black hair (which she denied saying ) she told lane that the killer was short a little bit heavy with bushy hair (again she denied saying this )---------------
fobrien1 1 month ago
@autoad even when played a recording of her own voice giving lane this description she denied her own voice ,not to mention she told the warren commission (having seen a line up which included oswald ) that she didnt know or recognise anyone in the line up. gee it seems bugliosi had the very same problems that you say spence had but i wouldnt expect you to tell people that .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@autoad "At the time of the trial Jesse Ventura was in the WWF "playing" a wrestler. So what if he was a Seal. That does not make him an expert witness about the assassination and the related events"
so what if he was in the wwf i could care less ,im talking about a man who was a seal and held and still holds the highest rifle qualification ,and his opinion is based on the fact that he couldnt fire a carcano as oswald is supposed to have done .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@autoad the bugliosi mock trial jury according to producer mark redhead first voted in favour of acquital ,but i bet bugliosi doesnt mention that .
"as Rose notes, the prosecution presented 14 witnesses, twice as many as the defense's seven. But in spite of all that, Remington reveals that the jury's first verdict was 7-5 for acquittal. And he got this right from the source, producer Mark Redhead. (p. 303)"
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 I'd like to know where you read about Mark Redhead. I've learned the hard way that blindly accepting quotes made by others to be accurately repeated by pro conspiracy advocates is a mistake. You and your CTer brethren have built a poor reputation in such matters.
Please let me know where the Mark Redhead quote came from. I want to read it for myself.
autoad 1 month ago
@autoad "I'd like to know where you read about Mark Redhead. I've learned the hard way that blindly accepting quotes made by others to be accurately repeated by pro conspiracy advocates is a mistake"
i think your mistaking me for people like posner and bugliosi ,everything i quote i quote verbatim . what i quoted is easily available on the internet if you choose to look for it .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 I already know where you got the quote. But there's no source information as to the origins of the quote and there lies the issue. You and your follow pro-conspiracy friends love to quote "facts" from material that's highly suspect and questionable. Your previous posting maintains the CTer unfavorable reputation.
autoad 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "I already know where you got the quote. But there's no source information as to the origins of the quote and there lies the issue"
as i say if you can offer some thing other than your opinion that the quote is unreliable please do so .ill be here waiting .
"You and your follow pro-conspiracy "
again i invite you to locate and post a comment of mine on youtube where i put forward a theory of conspiracy or otherwise ,ill be here waiting .
fobrien1 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "Your previous posting maintains the CTer unfavorable reputation."
would you please point this posting out so we can figure out what ever it is your trying say .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@autoad "You and your CTer brethren have built a poor reputation in such matters"
firstly you once before falsely accused me of trying to mislead and when i asked you to show proof of your claim you offered none ,because there was none . truth and accuracy are most important and people get both from me ,sadly the same cant be said of all all LNs .secondly in all the comments between you and i or me and others i have offered not one theory conspiracy or otherwise .
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 I see that you got this supposed quote from Mark Redhead from the CTKA website.
The quote is completely unreliable. It offers no source material as to the origins of the quote.
A CTer using an unverifiable quote. This is not the first time it's happened.
autoad 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@autoad "I see that you got this supposed quote from Mark Redhead from the CTKA website. The quote is completely unreliable. It offers no source material as to the origins of the quote. A CTer using an unverifiable quote. This is not the first time it's happened."
im sure you have some thing to offer other than your "opinion" that the quote is unrelible ? ,i guess not as if you had you would have posted it . but if you come across some thing let me know.
fobrien1 1 month ago
@tregoj1
look at 1:32 you can clearly see, that kennedy's head and torso move forward at the moment the bullet strikes, before the corset he was wearing, pushs him back.
you also see, that the exit wound is clearly on the upper right of his head and his forehead, because his head was leaning to the front. so the shot went in at the back of his head and went out between the top and the forehead.
There is no doubt, that the bullets came from anywhere else but from behind Kennedy.
LuckiZero 1 month ago
@LuckiZero Look at 1:32 you can clearly see the Z film is a fraud.
you also see that the exit wound is clearly NOT on the upper right side of his forehead because the Z film was altered. so the shot went in at the top front of the head and went out the rear of his head.
There is no doubt, that the bullet came from anywhere else but from in front of Kennedy.
10Faenor 1 month ago
@LuckiZero The first problems are the non-fatal wounds! Dr. Humes felt inside the back wound and it was maybe an inch deep! It is not the exit wound from the frontal neck wound, which the Dallas doctor said was one of entrance. Those two are separate wounds-from different directions. The angle if they were linked would be close to on the level, not from a high shot. You have conspiracy without the head shots. He was NOT leaning the way the WC artists fake it! Back wound made neck!
tregoj1 1 month ago
@tregoj1
"felt inside the back wound and it was maybe an inch deep"
i doubt, that anybody tried to stick something through the entire wound.
the statements of the medical staf, that examined the body of kennedy first, are in my opinion not realy reliable, because they were made in a hurry and since there was no doubt, that the headshot was the one that killed kennedy, they didnt focus on the other wounds.
In the Zapruder film, you see, that Kennedy and Connally are hit at the same time
LuckiZero 1 month ago
@LuckiZero don't think so...the head shot came from the grassy knoll whether you like it or not...you can't shoot someone in the front side of the head from that far back in the where Oswald was...there was 4 shots so get used to it
cwc27 1 month ago
@autoad Not according to Cyril Wecht.
tregoj1 1 month ago
Oswald killed Kennedy and he did it by himself.
There is NO proof to say otherwise.
George Vreeland Hill
GeorgeVreelandHill 1 month ago
@GeorgeVreelandHill Are you that blind give me a break.
DRidgway1 1 month ago
@GeorgeVreelandHill Wow, I have to wonder what would satisfy you.
MrPaulByron1 1 month ago
@GeorgeVreelandHill It's idiotic to ignore everything from a missingh brain to a switched rifle. Three people who saw the gun up close saw the word Mauser on it! Chains of evidence were repeatedly broken and police failed to seal off the depository and the gun and shells had the cops hands all over them. Dallas police were gross amateurs. People had their films stolen, Johnson destroyed evidence, and the body was taken illegally from Texas. Hoover hated the Kennedys.
tregoj1 1 month ago
The driver and the SS, were all told what to do, it's only when the head shot and just before it happen's the driver almost comes to a stop, 2 thing's why, waiting for the kill shot, or he noticed that the SS officer was trying to get on the car. In anycase, whats the point, unless the people responsable are brought to Justice , it's funny, as time moves forward, a lot of website's that had pictures, that the average person could see on US Government Websites are now gone.
7071t6 2 months ago
@1239jer people have stated that jfk used to wear a back brace due to his addisons....im wondering if he wore a back brace on nov 22nd and if so was there any bullet holes in it.this would clearly indicate that shots did come from behind.but im convinced the throat wound was from the front.i think a few doctors at parkland have stated this.
RandyMarsh911 2 months ago
@RandyMarsh911 Yes, he wore a back brace, but the back wound was above the brace. The Bethesda autopsy carried out sophisticated tests on the back wound and the rear head entry wound - and found coagulation necrosis of the tissues there, proving these were indeed entry wounds. The Parkland doctors weren't investigating the wounds per se, and did not even see the back wound, so they were merely stating an opinion.
1239jer 2 months ago
Comment removed
irish89055 1 month ago
@RandyMarsh911 the brace was for his bad back and if he didn't have that brace may have been able to be pulled over/ fallen over before the third fatal shot, all of which were from the TSBD..
irish89055 1 month ago
Haywood: It should be underlined that though he heard the shots, he was well back in the motorcade and did not know where the shots came from. He stopped his motorcycle where some were laying on the ground, he testified. He asked people where the shots came from. Several said they didn't know, then one told him shots came from the Depository building. This account was confirmed when a recording of an officer call sign 142 (his sign) was played saying witnesses said TSBD.
1239jer 2 months ago
most shocking footage; the shot at 0:35 didn't come from behind i think, it would have injured Jacquie. i looked at it over and over again.
Ja14111948 2 months ago 2
if u are hit anywhere on your body....u have an immediate reaction to use your hands to rub the pain....ie if u bump your head or if u hit shin on something.....its instinct and a normal human reaction.the president grasped at his throat after being hit.....not the back of his neck but his throat.indicating frontal wound in my eyes.
RandyMarsh911 2 months ago
@RandyMarsh911 Bad example. It's not unusual for someone to be shot and not know it. Reports of soldiers being shot and not realizing they have are commonly reported. President Reagan was shot in the chest and he didn't know he'd been struck
autoad 2 months ago
@RandyMarsh911 He was wounded in the throat - and an exit wound there may have been more painful than the back wound. His hand movements are an obvious reaction to a gunshot but, obviously, he couldn't reach that wound.
1239jer 2 months ago
Was zapruder film TRUE ???? I think we never know this..
Why did Abraham Zapruder wait to 1975 ???
I think CIA changed and designed to Zapruder film...
SUSSTURUCU 2 months ago
@SUSSTURUCU He didn't wait till 1975, that was when Good Morning America showed it, it was pretty much public from the day it was filmed.
ert94464isback 2 months ago
@SUSSTURUCU The Z-film is legitimate. The film has not been faked or altered. The film was developed within hours of the assassination and the film was in the possession of Zapruder the entire time. After it was developed 3 copies were made immediately afterwards. The film has not been altered in any way because there wasn't the technology available at the time-there wasn't time enough to make any alterations-all the other film and photos taken in Dealey Plaza would have to be altered to match
autoad 2 months ago
@SUSSTURUCU the altered Z-film.
Theories that say the film was faked are totally absurd and should be dismissed as complete lunacy.
autoad 2 months ago
@MrWantedBeast No to lie down in the limousine as she did do, after the CIA bodyguard had tod her so was the best thing.
Professor6871 2 months ago
CIA man was telling Jackie to lie down in the car after Kennedy was shot. Lucky for her because if she hadn't she could have been shot as well.
Professor6871 2 months ago
@MrWantedBeast Yeah she was so much in shock she still had her husband's blood and brain matter on her clothes, when they were swearing in Johnson as president on the plane, which was going back to Washington.
Professor6871 2 months ago
There were 8 people, including a police officer, standing on the triple underpass. Do you realize nobody on the overpass heard or saw anyone with them firing a rifle?
Do you realize 9 forensic pathologist for the HSCA said there was no medical, physical, ballistic or forensic evidence to support theories of shots from the front or side?
The conspiracy loons are making up more and more crap regularly.
autoad 2 months ago
@autoad A lot of people off their meds auto.....while a conspiracy may be possible as to the motive, Oswald did the shooting, at 2:20 here you see Zapruder standing on pedestal with his secretary, right above agent Hill's head. Ya know, agent Clint Hill of the SECRET SERVICE.... Here the first shot, the miss has just been fired. The second is being fired...
irish89055 2 months ago
@irish89055 how did the miss make it all the way down to james tague?????
migo53333 2 months ago
@migo53333 get a photo or video from the window and you'll see the trajectories..
irish89055 1 month ago
@irish89055 "while a conspiracy may be possible as to the motive, Oswald did the shooting"
how did oswald get past garner ?.
fobrien1 1 month ago
@fobrien1 Oswald didn't do anything...he was a Patsy and was all set up to make it look like he did it so get over it...CIA did it and LBJ was behind it
cwc27 1 month ago
@cwc27 im not acusing anyone of anything ,and im quite sure your misunderstanding my question to irish89055 . i asked how oswald got past garner ,if oswald was the shooter he had to pass garner and garner who saw baker and trully never saw him and thats a big problem for the LNs.
fobrien1 1 month ago
Anyone notice, in Call of Duty, when you get shot in the face, you do the same hand movements?
Shabaka87 2 months ago
Jacqueline Kennedy was acting on instinct. She wasn't trying to escape or take refuge in the arms of the charging sercret service man Clint Hill. Rather, she was retrieving a section of JFK's skull that had been shot off.
robert91364 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Fidel Castro wanted the hit, that's why Oswald wanted to go to Cuba via Mexico City. He was refused and lost it mentally, and was kicked out of Mexico for being weird. So the Mob who had ties to Castro, set it up for Oswald. As soon as Oswald took the head shot to Kennedy, everyone split to leave Oswald to fend for himself. That's why he said he was a "Patsy".
spreadeagle311 2 months ago
I think he was already dead or dying before the final shot, frames 280 - 290 show a huge bulge around the right side of his face bottom of his right ear to the bottom of his jaw, and his hands are kind frozen around his chest. Question is why would jackie go and fetch something from the trunk of the car instead of either grasping her dead husband or ducking for cover
goosemon80 2 months ago