• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JFK Conspiracy Theories: It Never Ends

Status
Not open for further replies.
vtbub said:
Exactly how does that show a shot to the back of the head?
Click to expand...

Beause a wound to the top of the head wouldn't bleed all over the place like that, obviously.;)

I really don't understand what RP is thinking sometimes.
 
bynmdsue said:
Beause a wound to the top of the head wouldn't bleed all over the place like that, obviously.;)
Click to expand...

Well, since Jackie cradled JFK's head in her lap on the ride to Parkland Hospital, there would be a lot of blood on the seat. Interestingly, there is no blood or tissue visible on the top of the seat or on the trunk were, if Robert's theory of an exit wound on back of JFK's head is correct, there should be.


I really don't understand what RP is thinking sometimes.
Click to expand...

And neither apparently does he. Otherwise we wouldn't be seeing these repeated self-inflicted foot injuries.
 
It's pretty obvious that Robert has no original idea on what happened since he has yet to share anything besides a grassy knoll shooter to be revealed later.

Just a whole bunch of denials.
 
JohnG said:
Robert: Why in your opinion did the conspirators go to all the trouble of framing a lone "patsy" who was supposed to be firing a certain kind of gun from a very specific location when there were other shooters at other locations, presumably with other kinds of guns? All it would take is a bullet strike in a place that Oswald couldn't possibly have hit, a photo or film taken of one of the other gunmen by any of a hundred witnesses and the lone gunman story falls apart almost immediately. Why not just rely on one sharpshooter in the TSBD?

Why kill Kennedy in such a public fashion where so much could have gone wrong? As others have pointed out, Kennedy was not in the best of health. Surely there was some more subtle way to kill him without involving so many eyewitnesses?

Why kill him at all? What exactly was at stake for your conspirators to consider such a treasonous and foolhardy scheme?

Are you sure you haven't attached yourself to your unwieldy and bizarre narrative (made even more unwieldy and bizarre by trying to bring Ruby, the Tippet murder and Oswald's actions in the theater into account) because you find it more sexy and satisfying than the dismal and depressing tale of a lone nobody who decided to shoot his way into the history books?


BTW: The name of the melon is "honeydew", not "honeydoo".
Click to expand...


Robert Prey said:
Just one question at at time, please.
Click to expand...

Fair enough:

Why in your opinion did the conspirators go to all the trouble of framing a lone "patsy" who was supposed to be firing a certain kind of gun from a very specific location when there were other shooters at other locations, presumably with other kinds of guns? All it would take is a bullet strike in a place that Oswald couldn't possibly have hit, a photo or film taken of one of the other gunmen by any of a hundred witnesses and the lone gunman story falls apart almost immediately.
 
JohnG said:
Fair enough:

Why in your opinion did the conspirators go to all the trouble of framing a lone "patsy" who was supposed to be firing a certain kind of gun from a very specific location when there were other shooters at other locations, presumably with other kinds of guns? All it would take is a bullet strike in a place that Oswald couldn't possibly have hit, a photo or film taken of one of the other gunmen by any of a hundred witnesses and the lone gunman story falls apart almost immediately.
Click to expand...


Who says the patsy fired a gun? Not me.
 
Walter Ego said:
Well, since Jackie cradled JFK's head in her lap on the ride to Parkland Hospital, there would be a lot of blood on the seat. Interestingly, there is no blood or tissue visible on the top of the seat or on the trunk were, if Robert's theory of an exit wound on back of JFK's head is correct, there should be.
Click to expand...

I think you can find all the blood want here. And figure out how it could have got there other than flowing down from the wound in the back of the head.


 
The whole car ride to Parkland he was laying on either his left side or back. Blood cannot defy gravity. Is the blood from the wound on top of his head supposed to rise into space?
 
Robert Prey said:
I think you can find all the blood want here. And figure out how it could have got there other than flowing down from the wound in the back of the head.


[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_526994ec45694aacda.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Is that the one he was wearing while slumped over to the left on Jackie?

Do you live in a place called Opposite Land, by any chance?



ETA: The shot you are claiming came from the front, did it occur after the end of the Zapruder film so that we don't see it? What about the shot from the rear that caused the exit wound in the right front of his head that we do see in the Zapruder film?
 
Last edited:
Robert Prey said:
I think you can find all the blood want here. And figure out how it could have got there other than flowing down from the wound in the back of the head.
Click to expand...

From the large gaping exit wound in the back of Kennedy's head that cannot be see at all in the Zapruter film? That wound?

Kennedy was also shot in his upper back in case you've forgotten. Assuming the photo is authentic, that's the more likely source of the bloodstains.
 
Last edited:
Y'know the Zapruder film is so very inconvenient to the fantasists. Yet another reason to trip JFK down the WH stairs instead of a wildy complicated multi shooter public execution.
 
JohnG said:
Why in your opinion did the conspirators go to all the trouble of framing a lone "patsy" who was supposed to be firing a certain kind of gun from a very specific location when there were other shooters at other locations, presumably with other kinds of guns? All it would take is a bullet strike in a place that Oswald couldn't possibly have hit, a photo or film taken of one of the other gunmen by any of a hundred witnesses and the lone gunman story falls apart almost immediately.
Click to expand...

Robert Prey said:
Who says the patsy fired a gun? Not me.
Click to expand...

Note here how Robert completely avoids answering the question JohnG asked.
 
Robert Prey said:
Who says the patsy fired a gun? Not me.
Click to expand...


Well thank heavens I added the qualifier "supposed to be firing a certain kind of gun...". Let's try again, third time's the charm.

Your conspirators went to a lot of trouble constructing a lone gunman narrative. For that narrative to be accepted all evidence had to point to Oswald being the one and only shooter from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Why would the conspirators even bother with such a narrative when the actual shooter (or shooters) was positioned in a place other than the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository? If the shooter was caught in the act or fired a shot that couldn't possibly have come from the TSBD, the Oswald as lone gunman narrative falls apart.
 
As an aside, I was watching WATCHMEN earlier and in the opening credit sequence when it shows The Comedian killing JFK, he's crouched in front of the stockade fence on the knoll. IN FRONT OF. Like right out in the open, no missing him at all. If the Moorman photo existed in that universe then BLAMMO! He'd be right there, bold as brass.
 
bynmdsue said:
As an aside, I was watching WATCHMEN earlier and in the opening credit sequence when it shows The Comedian killing JFK, he's crouched in front of the stockade fence on the knoll. IN FRONT OF. Like right out in the open, no missing him at all. If the Moorman photo existed in that universe then BLAMMO! He'd be right there, bold as brass.
Click to expand...

They could at least have put him in the "Badgeman" location.
 
Noztradamus said:
They could at least have put him in the "Badgeman" location.
Click to expand...

But that would have made the Watchman Universe Nixon, who was still in power in the 80s considerably less evil. It would mean he thought he needed to try and hide his gambits.
 
JohnG said:
Well thank heavens I added the qualifier "supposed to be firing a certain kind of gun...". Let's try again, third time's the charm.

Your conspirators went to a lot of trouble constructing a lone gunman narrative. For that narrative to be accepted all evidence had to point to Oswald being the one and only shooter from the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository. Why would the conspirators even bother with such a narrative when the actual shooter (or shooters) was positioned in a place other than the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository? If the shooter was caught in the act or fired a shot that couldn't possibly have come from the TSBD, the Oswald as lone gunman narrative falls apart.
Click to expand...

That is why it had to have been a conspiracy. Because at least one of the shots was not fired from the TSBD, but from the front. Most likely, the Grassy Knoll. The idea was to get Kennedy dead and the cover-uppers in positions of power would take care of the aftermath with some kind of cacamammy story that the public would swallow.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom