It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

JFK new video proof?

page: 3
39
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Regarding the driver shooting Kennedy, if that was a weapon in his hand I'm more inclined to think along the lines that it was what some claim it to be, a gun used by the CIA that shoots a dart full of shellfish toxin. This being strictly for the purpose of making sure the job got done.

Here's a Time Magazine article on it:

Link


To illustrate his testimony, Colby handed a pistol to Committee Chairman Frank Church. Resembling a Colt .45 equipped with a fat telescopic sight, the gun fires a toxin-tipped dart, almost silently and accurately up to 250 ft. Moreover, the dart is so tiny—the width of a human hair and a quarter of an inch long—as to be almost indetectable, and the poison leaves no trace in a victim's body.


Colt .45? Silent? Seems logical to me.

Peace


[edit on 23-6-2008 by Dr Love]




posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr Love
 


I understand that the job had to get done. but the guy was practically a sitting duck. Was it really necessary to go to that length? The final shot when the driver turns around blows the presidents brain out. So if the driver had a gun at all, he was the one responsible for that and I doubt a Colt .45 with some toxin in it, did that.

But im on the other side of the fence on the driver anyways, so im a little biased



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


No, I think the main head shot came from the sewer to the right of the limo and not the grassy knoll. I'm just saying, IF the driver shot anything at Kennedy, it would more likely be a weapon like that (the dart gun), and not a regular pistol.

Yes, I believe the driver was in on it.

Peace



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
reply to post by Badge01
 


Not a basis for an assination, a bit of 'womanizing'. There just has to be more to it, than a couple of dozen pecadillos.....


Huh? Surely no one could be that dense and you are joking.

To put it another way, the conspirators needed to find a way to get SS complicity. They needed some disgruntled SS agents, particularly those in charge, and they needed an angle.

JFK's agents had to sit there and allow the womanizing, the partying, the drug taking, all ilegal activities, not just once but nearly -every- night on JFK's trips and tours.

They felt he was disrespecting them, and the law, but they couldn't do anything about it individually.

David Lifton, noted researcher, is highly critical of the actions of William Greer, Roy Kellerman and Winston G. Lawson. Lawson drove the presidential motorcade's lead car. Greer drove the Queen Mary with the Kennedys and the Connellys.

Also potentially involved was SSA Emory Roberts. Here's a link to an articlle by Vince Palamara. Roberts was the SA in the follow car who recalled an agent who was going to go up and ride the bumper and he also caused SA Rybka to be left behind at the airport.

The Strange Action (and Inaction of Agent) Emory Roberts

So, again,nobody shot JFK because of his womanizing, but JFK's flaunting of his behavior caused a lot of resentment among the Secret Service. Add to this other reasons and methods to get the complicity of a few top SS agents and you have a method to get their "cooperation by inaction"



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Dr Love
 


I see what you are saying. But the frame periods of when the driver turns is when kennedy receives his fatal blow. so unless the driver shot the dart gun at the same time JFK got his head shot, the timing wouldnt allow for the driver to be a shooter.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:24 PM
link   
For anyone interested in potential SS complicity by inaction read Vince Palamara's book Survivor's Guilt

Though Vince stops short of making an accusation, he poses many questions concerning the events of that day and other events before and after and did a lot of interviews with agents over the years.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


It was also "proven" in a Court Of Law that OJ did not kill his ex wife an Goldman.
Just cause "they" say it's been proven, does'nt make it so.

MS



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by MadSigntist
 


Uh, a little different dont you think? OJ compared to the driver of Kennedy's limo? Through video technology they showed that the driver never had a gun, it was connely's head. Look I could be wrong. Im on the fence, but severely leaning on the side that it wasnt the driver.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


It was a reflection off of SA Kellerman's forehead. not Connally's head who was in the jump seat behind him.

Here's a link at JFK Lancer which methodically and specifically debunks that silly myth.

HTH.



[edit on 23-6-2008 by Badge01]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Badge01
 


Thank you. Knew I was wrong about calling it COnnely's head. But I knew it was a reflection



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
The guy at 1:12 running away at the end of the video is kind of interesting... Not that he shot the guy but he sure looks a bit strange all the way out there from the front shot area?



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Plus in the cleaned up version, we see the SS driver having to drive the car with his hands, he shoots???? and then immediately drive with two hands again. we would have seen him take his gun out and put it back if that were the case



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 05:03 PM
link   
I've always wondered if the driver was the shooter, AND if Jackie Kennedy SAW the driver shoot JFK. It could explain why she's trying to get the hell out of the car, away from the driver... and then this guy in black blocking her way, telling her to get the hell back in the seat, then they had a 'chat' in that tunnel (or was it under a bridge?), telling Jackie she would be gone if she blabbed.

Maybe just a wild thought but I wouldn't discount it.

[edit on 23-6-2008 by star in a jar]



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by star in a jar
 


The driver didnt do it. go to the jfk lancer site posted above. it puts that theory to rest. WE should get back to the implications of oswalds window being shut.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 05:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by rachel07
security guards inept behaviour

This is an interesting video clip of the guards on the motorcade, it is strange how they don't seem to interested in guarding the president. It looks like the assassination was an inside job.

I think I remember reading somewhere that he was going to come clean on UFO's to the public, and that was the reason he was executed.



Yep, he was going to spill the beans on Area 51.

Although, my great grand father swore up and down that he knew the mob boss (My great grandfather ran numbers for an Italian mafia in NY) who hired Oswald to kill Kennedy. This same mob boss had ties to Jack Ruby as well.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   
I'm going to play Devil's Advocate, here.

Wouldn't it have been easier for the guy in the passenger seat to pull the trigger instead of the driver? The driver would have to take at least one hand off the wheel, turn around, pull the trigger, then turn back around and make like he did nothing.

Plus, when Kennedy gets hit with the head shot, both the driver and the passenger duck...which, if they were shooting or expecting a shot, they probably wouldn't have done.



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:05 PM
link   
Hmm... Nice find here.
Star and Flag.
Digg too.

-Jimmy



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 06:44 PM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


I'm not sure how the hell it happened, because it shows you're offline, but your OP info is WAY different from the first time I saw it. What happened to the story about the guys eating lunch on the floor below Oswald? I call HOAX!

The photo looks fishy, if one looks closely enough. Please forgive me if I'm wrong... First, are we to assume the large black area is the ground floor (narrow) garage? From the ground (1st) floor, check the top border of the far right window 3rd floor. It's an unnaturally white line. The top left corner of the 4th floor window above it appears to be the same (though less certainly). What's up with a different look to each window? What's with the oval-shaped clearing in the window to the left of the open one? So forgive my ignorance of the Oswald story, but the 5th floor, 2nd-from-right window is open. Which one should it be?



posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 07:05 PM
link   
guys, no matter how long we talk about this, we'll find out the truth in a few decades thanks to the FOIA.
Anyway, there is ONE THING we never thought of. This one thing is the element the NWO hides from us. Call it open window, driver or anythinG. I have the feelmin, after reading way too many books about this case, that the biggest clue is right before our eyes, but we can't see it.

If I had to give my 2c about it , i'd say a remote-controlled gun in the backseat. The second shot comes to finish the job.




top topics



 
39
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join