Did Jackie Kennedy kill JFK?

Sledge said:
Anders, if everything you're going to cite as proof of your claim is "I think" or "it looks to me," then you're going to need to explain why your analysis of some film nearly half a century after the fact is more likely to be accurate than that of trained investigators who examined the evidence.
Click to expand...

Ok, the man with what I think is a motion film camera could be a still picture camera, and the man with what I think is a tape recorder plus microphone could be another type of still photo camera, and that the man stops filming could be that I mistake a reflex of light for him lowering the camera. Still, I'm not convinced that my interpretation is entirely wrong.

Here are two frames from the Zapruder film:

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z341.jpg

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/z354.jpg

All frames can be found here: http://www.assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Meadmaker; said:
Tip to Anders: When Soily says your theory is ridiculous, you should listen.
Click to expand...
Thats right Anders, I have spent the last week correcting some of the absolute cobblers Mead and his chums have been advocating in the other JFK threads. Your absurd theory is more ridiculous than what they claim, but not by much.
 
Sledge said:
Anders, if everything you're going to cite as proof of your claim is "I think" or "it looks to me," then you're going to need to explain why your analysis of some film nearly half a century after the fact is more likely to be accurate than that of trained investigators who examined the evidence.
Click to expand...

I have already posted saying that this in not my theory. Here is an example of this theory already having been described: http://www.realityreviewed.com/JFK murder.htm

Why have not many other conspiracy researchers come up with this theory? Because 1) it is an example of a big lie tactics, 2) it is a 'hidden in plain sight' assassination, and 3) because the really professional conspiracy researchers are controlled opposition, spreading messy conspiracy theory baits for all the other small-time conspiracy researchers to follow and endlessly chew on.
 
Soily said:
Thats right Anders, I have spent the last week correcting some of the absolute cobblers Mead and his chums have been advocating in the other JFK threads. Your absurd theory is more ridiculous than what they claim, but not by much.
Click to expand...

It sounds like this is the first time the theory about Jackie killing JFK has been posted here. Interesting. Conspiracy baits being followed into detours leading nowhere and endlessly chewed on a lot I reckon.
 
How about this: You produce a weapon that produces the same damage pattern to a human analogue head/brain system, with the same (non-existent) recoil, and the same (invisible) shape and size as the imaginary weapon you fantasize Jackie used to shoot JFK. Not wild speculation, show us this weapon being used to produce the same characteristics as you fantasize.
 
Anders Lindman said:
I have already posted saying that this in not my theory. Here is an example of this theory already having been described: http://www.realityreviewed.com/JFK murder.htm
Click to expand...

And yet all your evidence consists of things not looking right to you, or things that you think should be possible. Given we've shown how wrong your views on firearms are, why should we think your opinions on anything else are going to be any better? Why, in short, should we take your word over that of experts in their fields who examined the evidence?
 
TheRedWorm said:
How about this: You produce a weapon that produces the same damage pattern to a human analogue head/brain system, with the same (non-existent) recoil, and the same (invisible) shape and size as the imaginary weapon you fantasize Jackie used to shoot JFK. Not wild speculation, show us this weapon being used to produce the same characteristics as you fantasize.
Click to expand...

But don't you think it looks like a puff of gunsmoke appearing around JFK's head exactly at the time of the headshot? http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6524804&postcount=17

Smoking gun?
 
Anders Lindman said:
What a load of crock!
Click to expand...


I'll see your load of crock and raise you a case of bowl!

Now, I kid people who have trouble with idioms, but seriously, let me let you in on some secrets known only by a relatively small percentage of the human race:

1. A magic trick that you can't figure out isn't necessarily evidence of the supernatural.

2. Some bold feat of human imagination, skill and hard work (e.g., the moon landings) that you can't envision yourself conceiving and/or carrying out isn't necessarily evidence of a hoax.

3. Some random bit of noise within the larger signal of a complex, tragic event like the JFK assassination that you may interpret as evidence of a government conspiracy, isn't necessarily evidence.
 
Stephen King killed him.
Reptilian overlords gave King the knowledge on how to imbue cars with evil spirits
(he writes about this in his book Christine) and he used JFK's car to do the killing for him.
Anachronistic? I think not.

If you have more questions about this interesting subject feel free to make up your own answers.
 
Its a shame we all can't read the handbook on how to act when anything extraordinary happens. Have you had bad stuff happen, did you rect in any way normal? What is normal? How many people react normally, is there a study on this?
 
jhunter1163 said:
Do not hotlink images (using IMG tags). Direct links to the pictures on the sites where they are posted are OK.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: jhunter1163
Click to expand...

"ImageShack is an intuitive and easy-to-use free media hosting service. It can be used to upload images, flash files, and movies, and share them with friends using any imaginable means."

http://imageshack.us/content.php?page=faq

jfk.png
 
Again, show the type of weapon and the type of ammunition that is incredibly destructive, yet has absolutely no recoil in an impossibly small gun.
 
TheRedWorm said:
Again, show the type of weapon and the type of ammunition that is incredibly destructive, yet has absolutely no recoil in an impossibly small gun.
Click to expand...

As I wrote, the recoil could have affected mostly Jackie's left arm (which is not much visible in the Zapruder film). It looks like she is holding the weapon with both hands. And her right elbow (held in a very rigid position just before the head shot) jerks slightly at the time of the shot (or maybe even slightly before the shot happens).
 
for all your apollo hoax debunking needs go to www.apollohoax.net
I am sure the residents would enjoy showing you the problems with your theory of how JFK was killed as apart of a hoaxed apollo program.
 
Last edited:
MG1962 said:
The car did it
Click to expand...

Can we be serious...

Obviously it was suicide.

Kennedy was in a state of depression after the Bay of Pigs, and realised that the situation in Vietnam was spiralling out of control and he would go from darling of the Left to hate figure. Obviously, he took the opportunity of the open-top car-ride to admit his multiple infidelities to Jackie, to make his confession like a good Catholic, and then shoot himself.

I believe Dallas can do this to people.

The 'reason' 'everyone' has 'bought into' the 'so-called' 'assassination' is that Americans are a God-fearing people and, even if Kennedy was a left-footer, they don't want him to be in the Big G's bad books for taking his own life. Therefore the MASS SELF DELUSION they've perpetuated for all this time.

Come on people, open your eyes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!




:boxedin:
 
Alferd_Packer said:
Actually, JFK was not killed by a bullet.

It was the flag ship of the interstellar exploration fleet from Antares. Unfortunately, they lost control of their ship as they came in for a landing and crashed into the president's head. The flagship was destroyed. When the second in comand, "Zaphog 'eha riwooo," (his friends call him 'hog) realized what had happened, he withdrew the fleet in shame and humiliation and fear, since they had not until that time realized that the Planet Earth was settled by intergalactic race known as siertests (i.e. the common dandelion). The Antarians had just concluded a long and devastating war with the siertests and they were in mortal fear of violation the terms of the peace agreement.
Click to expand...

Evidence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom