Did the driver shoot Kennedy?....

page: 6
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 28 2006 @ 06:44 PM
link   


Perhaps you meant glare?


Glare...reflection...whatever. Why are you arguing semantics? Okay, let's call it glare. In your world, is it still not there? or....can you see the "glare" off the top of the guy's head?



Ox

posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   
Ok.. I'll stop arguing semantics..
Alright.. what do I see? Personally... And this is opinion not fact.. so ... take it easy.. I see glare coming from the roll bar in the middle of the car... Not off of the guys head.. This is after viewing the footage a dozen times, blown up and cleaned up a little and in slow motion.. So.. that's just what I see.. I'm not stating fact.. Just my personal opinion.. I could be wrong.. Who knows.. That's all any of this is.. It's opinion.. Neither yours nor mine is wrong.. Neither of us were there.. Neither of us were the trigger man.. So.. we dont really know, do we?



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 07:19 PM
link   


Frame #310 of the Z film....

We can see "glare" off the passenger's head (what has given some the illusion of a gun), we can see "glare" off the driver's head...we can see glare off of Connally's forehead...etc.....We can see "glare" on everyone because the sun was out!

The "glare" off the passenger's head is what some think is a gun and the curb is what some think is the driver's arm holding the gun....but, it is just an illusion. No gun. The driver DID NOT shoot Kennedy!



posted on Jan, 29 2006 @ 08:10 PM
link   
I agree, it would be also be completely implausible for the driver to have orders to shoot kennedy unless every person in the car was in on the conspiracy.

Besides, how in the world would the driver shoot him? He's concentrating on driving and it would take much too long for him to turn around, aim the gun, and fire it without the senator trying to stop him or Kennedy trying to dodge him. Plus, if the driver did shoot him, then he would have picked a horrible time to do so. The car was just coming up on a curve in the road, and if the driver got distracted or his timing was thrown off, he would have drove right into the sidewalk drawing all the attention onto himself. Why didn't the CIA just employ the the guy sitting next to him to fire the gun, instead of creating too many variables and too many incidents for something to go wrong.

Instead, the simple fact is that the driver turned around because he heard the gunshot come from behind him and Kennedy's wife screaming. Would it make more sense for the driver to just continue on driving calmly without checking behind him or even taking a glance? You guys have to consider the variables and psychology of the situation before making up insinuations.

Consider this too, the CIA knew that the day of the asassination would be extremely crucial if it was to work without any faults. The CIA also knew that dozens of cameras would be focusing on the presidential limousine and everyone inside of it. If you were the leader of the CIA faction, would you say "Hey everyone, since every camerman and their grandma will be focusing on the presidential limousine, who should we pick to shoot the President of the USA? Hmm.. How about somebody inside the focal point??? Nobody will notice the asassin if he's hidden in plain sight, right? Hey, I've got an even better idea! The asassin should be in front of the president so that everyone in the car can notice him and either stop him or dodge him! Oh, and he should be distracted too so that his aim can get easily thrown off, like with driving! Brilliant, now hand that man a gun and lets get rolling!"



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 01:12 AM
link   
I have 2 copies of the Zapruder film, and both clearly show the driver looking straight ahead with hands on the wheel at the time of Kennedy's head shot. Sorry people, there is no "smoking gun" at the wheel of the presidential limo. However, I would like to know exactly who it was that instructed the driver to cruise through Deeley Plaza at such a low rate of speed ------ a speed I might add which was far below that which is strictly enforced for all presidential motorcades by the Secret Service Agency. Things that make you go, "Hmmmmmmm".



posted on Jan, 31 2006 @ 07:01 AM
link   


I would like to know exactly who it was that instructed the driver to cruise through Deeley Plaza at such a low rate of speed ------ a speed I might add which was far below that which is strictly enforced for all presidential motorcades by the Secret Service Agency. Things that make you go, "Hmmmmmmm".


Something stinks there for sure. The limo crawled until the final head shot and THEN it sped off. You would think one shot would have been enough for it to take off. The drive may have been in the know, but he didn't shoot JFK!!



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   
i think that would be very probable, if every one else in the area was on his side and there was a set up/fake shooter then yes i think it could of happend.

--YOURS TRULY--

cooldude76



posted on Feb, 1 2006 @ 04:35 PM
link   


i think that would be very probable, if every one else in the area was on his side and there was a set up/fake shooter then yes i think it could of happend.


Could you help us out by explaining what you are talking about or responding too? Thank you!



posted on Feb, 12 2006 @ 08:38 AM
link   
I posted this on another JFK-related thread, but I have to throw it in here as well.
Looking at the new stabilised version of the Zapruder film - can anyone explain why - if you spool the film back and forth repeatedly and just watch the movement of the bodies in the car (not JFK and Jackie) - at the moment where the car allegedly is 'speeding up' after the shots - both the driver/person alongside, AND Connoly and his wife in the seat behind, jerk forward, exactly as if the car has braked to a stop.
Yet visually, the car is 'accelerating'.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but its simply not possible for 4 out of the 6 people in the car's bodies to lurch forward at the same time like that - if the car is allegedly accelerating, as the rest of the visual appears to show?

This is post shooting, so they arent all flinching at shots (at the same time either) using their entire bodies to move forward.. they're all doing something which generally speaking, isn't really possible in a rapidly speeding up car..



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 03:06 PM
link   
My answer is that the film is fake as mounting evidence is showing. More and more people are coming to that conclusion daily and yet there is an "old guard" fighting tooth and nail to keep the staus quo and say the film is real.

Why would that be..well that answer is simple, if the film is proved to be fake, the FBI and other government orgs have much to answer for including charges of high treason and keeping all the people fooled and lied to for many many years.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   


My answer is that the film is fake as mounting evidence is showing. More and more people are coming to that conclusion daily and yet there is an "old guard" fighting tooth and nail to keep the staus quo and say the film is real.

Why would that be..well that answer is simple, if the film is proved to be fake, the FBI and other government orgs have much to answer for including charges of high treason and keeping all the people fooled and lied to for many many years.


Who are the "more and more people" coming to that conclusion daily?

Whether the film is fake or not, the FBI, CIA, etc....and our government on the whole do have much to answer for including charges of high treason. The film being faked or not doesn't matter. The fact remains that our government was involved in JFK's assassination, RFK's and MLK's and it doesn't matter if the film was faked or not. Do you understand that Mayet?

You know Mayet...there is actually other evidence besides the damn Zaprueder film......



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 07:20 PM
link   
btw its spelt Z-A-P-R-U-D-E-R



of course there is other evidence, haven't you read my posts
especially the ones that talk of people holding much stock in using the zapruder film as an accurate chain of events. If the film is fake then we can discount that as evidence and people can get on to the real evidence as I have pointed out many many times.



posted on Feb, 15 2006 @ 08:55 PM
link   
*ack* There is no huge conspiracy! There is no government cover-up! There are no extra gunmen! There are only ignorant conspiracy theorists that are magnifying every inch of this so called "conspiracy" to the point that all of the self-created "facts" are nothing but embellishments and exaggerations!! Try taking a step back and looking at the picture as a whole!!

Every single shred of evidence that conspiracy theorists bring up has been refuted and disproved!! The magic bullet? The second gunman? The badgeman? All of these have been retorted!! We've even recreated the entire magic bullet scenario with one ordinary bullet!! What more actual evidence must you need?! We have a motive, a rifle, DNA evidence, several letters of pre-meditated murder, and a confession from the shooter himself! Take a step back from magnifying this whole case and look at the entire picture instead!! You should be mourning the loss of our president, not playing ring-around-the-conspiracy! Now stop flogging this dead horse or else I'll call P.E.T.A. on you!!

Despite this rant, I know that people will never give up their hopes on finding the "true" killer... It's just human nature and we're just humans...



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 12:33 AM
link   
Hell there Mr new Member..

I must be in the wrong place, I thought this WAS a conspiracy website... I should never think it leads me to all sorts of bizzare conclusions *grins


oh and the HSCA report which seems to have been conveniently missed in your assessment there stated there WAS a second gunman.. oh and the HSCA also stated it WAS a conspiracy....therefore cancelling out the sole gunman theory and the coverup/missfired report of the Warren Commission....

This is just one extract from a recent posting to the JFK conspiracy club


A rifle was recovered from the Book Depository along with three empty casings. The greatest assist to the investigation also appeared. This was the Zapruder film (the only recovered film of the assassination). Within a day of the assassination newspapers joined the TV and radio accounts with their publications. Magazines covered the story in their weekly publications. Life Magazine acquired the Zapruder film and included a series of frames in their issue. All of the media had arriver at one story that was backed up (or proven) by the Zapruder film. The story was: three shots were fired from the Book Depository with the first bullet hitting the President in the back. A second shot hit Governor Connally and the third bullet hit the President in the head. END OF STORY.

Now we all know this was not the end of the story. Why?

The story did not end here because before the Life issue reached the streets it was revealed that a bullet had impacted the street curb near the triple underpass and a man was cut by concrete shards as a result. The concrete from the curb had hit the man in the face. This was known by some of the investigators early on but the reports were slow in being read. Now we have a dilemma. The end of the story has been written and a new bullet is introduced - a fourth bullet?



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 06:20 AM
link   


btw its spelt Z-A-P-R-U-D-E-R

of course there is other evidence, haven't you read my posts especially the ones that talk of people holding much stock in using the zapruder film as an accurate chain of events. If the film is fake then we can discount that as evidence and people can get on to the real evidence as I have pointed out many many times.


A. Thanks for the spelling lesson...Zapruder...Zaprueder....whatever. Do you feel special now that you gave me the spelling lesson like this:

Z-A-P-R-U-D-E-R.....Personally I don't C-A-R-E...did you know what I was talking about or did the extra E throw you off?

B. It seems everyone HAS gotten on to the other evidence EXCEPT you Mayet. You talk so much about the damn film, you should marry it!



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 06:38 AM
link   
oh dear.. how rude. I never realised it was allowed here on ats to attack other members and what they have to say.


Mod Note: You Have a U2U- Click Here.




[edit on 16-2-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 08:42 AM
link   


oh dear.. how rude. I never realised it was allowed here on ats to attack other members and what they have to say.


I did not attack you in any way. I responded to your need to give me a spelling lesson (which is a dig on your part) and your constant discussion of the Z film like there is no other evidence of a conspiracy. I just wish you would get on with it and discuss some other evidence other than the Z film. Again as I said, if it was tampered with, so what? Even without the film there is a ton of evidence of a conspiracy...the film is not even needed....whether real, tampered with or otherwise!

[edit on 16-2-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

Mod Note: You Have U2U- Click Here.

[edit on 16-2-2006 by DontTreadOnMe]



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by spyderone

... Plus the bullets were of a high calibur not a hand gun...


Many rounds used in rifles are smaller 'calibur' than handguns...

Think 5-7mm, .22, .30...

Now for handguns, think .22, 9mm, .40, .45

Sure, some rifle rounds are larger than some handgun rounds, but it can just as easily be the other way around.

So I don't think saying that the driver didn't have a (sniper) rifle excludes any possibility he fired on JFK.

And making an attempt to state the caliber(s) of rounds used on JFK would be extremely, extremely difficult with the countless variables.



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 09:10 PM
link   
Ack there was no fourth bullet!! The bullet that hit Kennedy in the neck also hit the governor and shattered his wrist. Yes Mayet, it is possible for a bullet to hit two targets consecutively, its even been recreated 3x with the exact same scenario, seating positions, and rifle.
So in other words, one hit the president's back, one hit the president's neck and governor, and one ricocheted off the curb. 3l\lI) 0f $+0ry



posted on Feb, 16 2006 @ 09:12 PM
link   
Btw, this account is new because my old "TheBlueSoldier" account got messed up with me getting a new comp and so on and so forth. To any moderator out there, can i plzzzzzzzzzz get my ATS pointz back???





new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join