I do doubt that it is a bullet though.

It's not a dot (311; more like a sumdge), but I still believe that the dot in 312 was infact Jackie's hair reflecting light from the sun, as previous frames show the reflected area countinues to shift. But we can never rule out that the dot could be a bullet.

Well...it may be a reflection of something, but the sun was to the left of the motorcade ( somewhat behind Jackie ), not to the right ( all the other frames will bear this out)...

maynardsthirdeye...

I don't see conclusive evidence of a head shot to the back of the head from those pics...

But I'm glad you brought up the autopsy photos...

Notice the back picture in the link you gave...

Photo of the president's back, oddly taken from below the body. The Warren Commission's report located this wound at the back of the neck, though you can clearly see that the wound is to the back.

If this is an entrance wound ( the one that was supposed to exit the throat ), it's too low, it would have to travel up to exit from the throat ( too me it looks like the exit wound from the throat, meaning the shot came from the front )...




[Edited on 21-1-2004 by Yoda]

Unless of course is Kennedy was bending over which is contradicted by almost all photo evidence.

Originally posted by Yoda
maynardsthirdeye...

I don't see conclusive evidence of a head shot to the back of the head from those pics...

But I'm glad you brought up the autopsy photos...

Notice the back picture in the link you gave...

Photo of the president's back, oddly taken from below the body. The Warren Commission's report located this wound at the back of the neck, though you can clearly see that the wound is to the back.

If this is an entrance wound ( the one that was supposed to exit the throat ), it's too low, it would have to travel up to exit from the throat ( too me it looks like the exit wound from the throat, meaning the shot came from the front )...




[Edited on 21-1-2004 by Yoda]

Send me your e-mail U2U. I put the one of the autopsy pictures in paint and circled the large hole that I see. I can send you it.

Well, if Oswald was the shooter, I'm curious about a few things. Why not take the straight-on shot as Kennedy's car is traveling down Elm Street? Why wait for a trickier shot after he made the turn onto Houston?

The Nix film, while not as famous as the Zapruder, was taken from a different angle and actually shows that the brake lights on the limousine remained on until after the head shot struck the President.

The comment was made that we "know" that Oswald was a Marxist and that he defected. True. He did. And he was welcomed back with open arms - the State Department actually gave him money for the transportation home! With his new Russian wife! At a time when having attended one Communist or Socialist meeting was enough to get you blacklisted to the point where you had to change careers. Doesn't sound right to me.

In addition, there is the troubling matter of the bullet trajectories, as several posters have indicated. Kennedy's head exploded to the rear, spattering the motorcycle patrolmen riding behind the car with blood and brain tissue. This would be indicative of a frontal shot, with the exit wound blowing out the back of the skull.

Personally, I believe it was a coup d'etat, carried out by military intelligence operatives, with or without the direct auspices of their individual agencies. I believe the shooters themselves knew nothing more than their target and the amount of their payday. I think the problem with all the pet "theories" is that they fail to acknowledge the really disturbing truth - virtually all of the domestic suspects were interrelated, and so the motive becomes clouded by the individual motives of all the possible participants.

Fundamentally, however, the events of November 22, 1963 altered the course of American (and possibly world) history. Certainly the succession of LBJ meant that certain Kennedy policies would never be implemented, and the argument goes on about whether or not Kennedy would have pursued the war in Vietnam. But more important than any of those direct results, arguable as they may be, 11/22/1963 can be marked as the day that Americans stopped trusting their government.

Without the assassination of JFK, Watergate might have sunk without a trace. The Iran-Contra hearings might never have happened. Theories about CIA involvement in running drugs, guns, and killers all over the world might never have come into the public eye. The government had engaged in coverups before, fudged the truth here, intimidated a witness there, to keep the status quo. Look at Roswell in 1947 (and, no, I'm not saying there were or weren't alien bodies or anything like that...I'm only talking about the changing government stories).

But after Dallas in 1963, the American people started to realize that not only SHOULD we be asking questions about the things we're told....we HAVE to.

Well, if Oswald was the lone shooter, he probably didn't shoot Kennedy as he was coming towards him because many witnesses would have seen him shooting. Everyone was facing that direction to look at the President. Also, several armed Secret Service men would have been looking directly at him.

Originally posted by PuPP
There were many reasons to have JFK killed, here's 2 below.

1) Executive order 11110, abolishing the privately controlled federal reserve.

2) disclosure of CIA activities and alien involvement.

"The high office of President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office I must inform the Citizen of his plight."
~ President John F. Kennedy - Assassinated 10 days later!

3) the Vietnam war--Kennedy wanted to pull th troops

4) Kennedy was against having NATO troops be involved in mind control experiments

Coincidentally, Abraham Lincoln was assassinated almost 100 years earlier. He also tried to take power from the Federal Reserve by having the government print its own money!!!!!!!