Moderated JFK conspiracy theories: it never ends III

Status
Not open for further replies.
Didn't people only see or hear LHO after the shots were fired? I've read about reports of people smelling gun powder, never saw the actual reports though. Got a link to any?

Ranb
 
Jango said:
Didn't people see LHO in the window though? Also, wasn't there reports of people smelling gun powder near the knoll/at ground level?
Click to expand...

If you wouldn't run away from reading posts and answering questions, you'd know that the gunpowder smell has already been discussed.

Maybe you should rethink your running away?
 
Jango said:
Didn't people see LHO in the window though? Also, wasn't there reports of people smelling gun powder near the knoll/at ground level?
Click to expand...

Did I say he hadn't been seen? My point was that, in comparison to the fence at ground level, it was a more concealed location- one where you'd think any sensible conspiracy would put their actual shooter, not an innocent patsy. Context matters, Jango. CTism is an exercise in robbing events of any but the "theory."
 
turingtest said:
Thank you. This is what I was getting at, that anybody who had ever been to Dealey Plaza would know right away that no sensible conspiracy would ever put a shooter there. Why would they put someone they wanted fingered as a patsy up in a not-easily-seen location like the Book Depository, and the actual shooter that they wanted concealed in a place he'd almost certainly be seen? This is an aspect of CTism that fascinates me- in an effort to make a conspiracy, they make one that makes no sense. Anything but the evidence-backed mainstream narrative is to be preferred, even if it's something that no reasonable conspirator would have any part of. There's something almost religious about this thought process...
Click to expand...

I'll never forget my trip to the plaza and the TSBD.

One of my buddies that came along had an observation that we thought was incredibly funny based on another one of our friends that wasn't there - his statement was that "Manny could have killed him with a lime!" based on the fact that Manny once threw a lime so far we couldn't see exactly where it landed, and when we told Manny about it he got a kick out of it too.
 
Last edited:
Jango said:
Lol. Please. What post/page has this been discussed where I've previously been involved?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry. what? You ask this question in the very thread in which you are participating?

OK, this one. Out of the multifarious other CT threads in which you are deeply involved.
 
Pope130 said:
If I may, I will comment on the relevance of an actual visit to the crime scene. I have been there. Stayed longer than expected and received a parking ticket to prove it.



What impressed me immediately is that the place was much smaller than expected. The plaza photographs large, but in fact is a very tight space.



I walked the grounds, and visited the Sixth Floor museum. At that time the location of the bubble top at the time of each known shot was marked on the pavement, making reconstruction easy for visitors. The shot set-up from the sixth floor is quite good. At the time of the last shot the distance to target is not great, target is moving almost directly away from the shooter at low speed. This is not a difficult shot.



By contrast, the behind the fence location is much more problematic. It is actually quite exposed. The shooter would have been visible from several angles. Not a location a professional would have chosen, in my opinion. This is a "passing shot", with the target moving laterally, with a variable speed. At the time of the final shot a shooter at that location would have been at a high angle to the right of target, giving a trajectory that does not match the injuries to the head.



My opinions on the shooting aspects are based on my experience as a trained military shooter, weapons and tactics NCO and civilian small arms instructor.
Click to expand...


Thanks. You wrote this better than I would have.

From the 6th floor, with the limo driving directly away at slow speed, you could have made that shot with a deer rifle. Maybe even a pistol. From the hill, it would have been a much tougher shot in a much shorter time window and afterwards you'd be standing there essentially with your dick in your hand and a thousand angry witnesses.

Jango-- Does this information in the above posts influence your opinion about the JFK assassination in any way? Again it's a yes or no question, so you can spare me the drama of me "hounding" you with this simple yes or no question. Four keystrokes max on your part. Thanks in advance.
 
carlitos said:
Thanks. You wrote this better than I would have.

From the 6th floor, with the limo driving directly away at slow speed, you could have made that shot with a deer rifle. Maybe even a pistol. From the hill, it would have been a much tougher shot in a much shorter time window and afterwards you'd be standing there essentially with your dick in your hand and a thousand angry witnesses.

Jango-- Does this information in the above posts influence your opinion about the JFK assassination in any way? Again it's a yes or no question, so you can spare me the drama of me "hounding" you with this simple yes or no question. Four keystrokes max on your part. Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

I understand what's being said, however, I'd like to hear his views on the headshot itself, namely, President Kennedy's movements and whether or not he believes that it is consistent with being shot in the back of the head. Furthermore, to me at least, an explanation for this requires covering the actions of Mrs. Kennedy as she goes after the ejecta from her husband's head on the trunk of the car.

If those areas are covered in a logically satisfactory manner, yes, it would change my opinion.
 
Jango said:
Furthermore, to me at least, an explanation for this requires covering the actions of Mrs. Kennedy as she goes after the ejecta from her husband's head on the trunk of the car.
Click to expand...


Yes!

I asked you where you see ejecta on the trunk of the car in the Z-film (as you narrated the Z-film), and where you see damage to the back of JFK's head in that film.

Remember? You can see it here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=10684063#post10684063

You appear to be assuming what you need to prove. Let me know when your answers will be forthcoming.

Thanks,

Hank
 
Last edited:
Jango said:
I understand what's being said, however, I'd like to hear his views on the headshot itself, namely, President Kennedy's movements and whether or not he believes that it is consistent with being shot in the back of the head. Furthermore, to me at least, an explanation for this requires covering the actions of Mrs. Kennedy as she goes after the ejecta from her husband's head on the trunk of the car.
Click to expand...
Again, perhaps if you weren't so prone to running away from answering questions? Where specifically from the front do you think JFK was shot? What ejecta on the back of the car?

If those areas are covered in a logically satisfactory manner, yes, it would change my opinion.
Click to expand...
What is your opinion?
 
Jango said:
If those areas are covered in a logically satisfactory manner, yes, it would change my opinion.
Click to expand...

As that information can be obtained by you - why is it necessary for people here to spoon feed it to you on an individual basis? The information on the above has been available for over 40+ years and the fact that you haven't read appears to be your own personal problem.

So, why don't you go research the question then come back and tell us why it's wrong or that it is right.
 
Thanks Jango.

As for JFK's brain "ejecta" on the trunk of the car being recovered by the First Lady, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Maybe you could share some evidence here.

Either way, if you think that the shots came from somewhere else (like by the fence), what would be helpful is for you to put together a somewhat cohesive theory with a timeline. I'm sure that everyone here would like to read that. It would also help you get your story together and see if there are any flaws
 
carlitos said:
Thanks Jango.

As for JFK's brain "ejecta" on the trunk of the car being recovered by the First Lady, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Maybe you could share some evidence here.

Either way, if you think that the shots came from somewhere else (like by the fence), what would be helpful is for you to put together a somewhat cohesive theory with a timeline. I'm sure that everyone here would like to read that. It would also help you get your story together and see if there are any flaws
Click to expand...

Certainly you jest sir! Here in conspiracy land our Lord Jango assigns homework and pronounces whether its conclusions are acceptable to him - burden him not with lowly research!

lol
 
carlitos said:
As for JFK's brain "ejecta" on the trunk of the car being recovered by the First Lady, I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. Maybe you could share some evidence here.
Click to expand...

It was a skull fragment:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8UUkcagNE4

It appears to fly backward, but what is really happening is that it flew straight up and the limousine passed underneath it.
 
Jango said:
I understand what's being said, however, I'd like to hear his views on the headshot itself, namely, President Kennedy's movements and whether or not he believes that it is consistent with being shot in the back of the head. Furthermore, to me at least, an explanation for this requires covering the actions of Mrs. Kennedy as she goes after the ejecta from her husband's head on the trunk of the car.

If those areas are covered in a logically satisfactory manner, yes, it would change my opinion.
Click to expand...

Assuming I am the "he" in your question. The reaction shown by the President to the final shot in the Zapruder film appears entirely consistent with a strike from behind by a high power rifle round. Unlike the reaction seen in Hollywood movies, there is very little transfer of momentum from a bullet to a soft target. In some cases a head shot will result in movement of the head toward the entry wound. This is caused by reaction to the explosive evulsion of tissue from the exit wound.

I have no relevant opinion concerning the intentions of Mrs. Kennedy. It's my understanding that she had no recollection of that part of the incident. It would certainly not surprise me if she reacted irrationally, having just seen her husband shot through the head at (for her) contact distance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom