It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


The "Smoking Gun"... Literally

page: 3
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 11:59 PM
OP, Fascinating read.

15 mystery JFK deaths: 21,230,606,601,227,800 to 1 it was no coincidence


"""Assuming there were 1000 witnesses, the probability that at least 15 would die UNNATURAL deaths in the year following the assassination is: 1 out of 21,230,606,601,227,800.
(or 1 out of 21,230 trillion, 606 billion, 601 million, 227 thousand, 800)

This result is the same order of magnitude of a famous prior, though slightly different, study: An actuary engaged by the London Times in 1963 computed the probability that 18 material witnesses would die (of any cause) within 3 years of the assassination as:
1 out of one hundred thousand trillion.

For the mystery deaths, I used this table:

For the odds of death in each category, I used this table of 1999 mortality data: """""

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 12:53 AM
Great thread RA, full of interesting stuff on a subject that I'm not overly familiar with, S+F.

My only comment at this point would be consider the photo of "Badgeman" again:

That photo, in my opinion, shows "Badgeman" quite clearly standing in the Weaver Stance

In my mind, it's relatively concrete; the man in that photo is firing a firearm.

Another picture of the weaver stance for comparison:

edit on 1/9/11 by Death_Kron because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 02:46 AM
Just to clear up a few misconceptions from the start:

Originally posted by lonegurkha
Great thread as always RA. I think that the movement of JFK's head to the left and back proves by the physics alone that the shot had to come from the knoll. The momentum of the bullet would impart the witnessed head movement if the shot came from the knoll.

This is not true, there are many experiments that recreate this motion identically. A tapered bullet traveling at high velocities exerts very little force as it pierces an object. Imagine stabbing a needle into a watermelon; it's simply going to displace the rind of travel right in without hardly moving the watermelon at all. The bullet works in a similar fashion, piercing the skull without pushing the head back a significant amount.

As the bullet continues through the skull, displacing the soft brain tissue and exiting the back of the head, it creates a vacuum that causes brain matter to be pulled behind the bullet and spray out the exit wound. This jet stream rocketing out the back of the skull propels the head forward after the slight initial jerk back from the bullets entry.

Originally posted by Nucleardiver
Not to mention that it would have been impossible for Oswald to fire 3 shots in 5 seconds from his 6.5 mm Carcano Model 91/38 bolt-action rifle. Oswald did obtain the score of "sharpshooter" while in the Marines in 1956. However to make such extraordinary shots at a moving target in that short of a time frame would be of astronomical odds. Even world reknown marksmen have called the shots impossible.

Five seconds is actually a very realistic span of time to get off three shots. The 'moving target', as you say, was actually moving quite slowly, that depending on the angle the movement would have been insignificant during 5 seconds. If you were directly perpendicular to the road, the cars movement would be exaggerated. However if you were looking closer to parallel with the street, the movement would be almost non-existent in 5 seconds, he would only be slightly smaller in the same location.

The shooter also would have been firing down from a distance of less than 140 feet, not a long shot by any means. In this time frame, from the shooters perspective, he would have hardly moved at all and it would be within reason to expect that someone could have gotten 3 shots off while steadying the gun on the window.

I know many of you disagree with Penn & Teller's on many subjects, but the following demonstration is pretty indisputable that the one shooter scenario is possible, or at the very least not ruled out by these two arguments.

Google Video Link

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:00 AM
reply to post by Death_Kron

But the problem is that's not what the original photo shows. That's what the photo shows after some significant creative liberties were taken to not only define the shapes of people, but also color them in.

Here is the area in question, before any manipulation or 'enhancements':

Do you still see 3 people there? You could just as easy manipulate and color in the photo to show an elephant if that's what you were trying to find. There might be people there, but that rendering certainly doesn't prove it. To me, it's similar to people blowing up photos of stars beyond recognition and coloring them in to see spaceships that may or may not really be there.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:17 AM
reply to post by Akasirus

I don´t know ... wasn´t Jackie chasing a piece of JFK´s brains at the backside of the limousine? It would seem likely that it was ejected from the back of the head with a shot from the front.

I agree with the photo, it´s inconclusive. A shooter at the Grassy Knoll is likely though, IMO. All in all I think a triangular setup was employed.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:33 AM

Originally posted by expat2368
All very interesting, but it does not address anything but what happened at the scene.

The real question is who was behind it.

The answer to that is LBJ and GHWB.

If you want to discuss who was behind it, start a thread about that...

This thread is looking at where the fatal shot came from.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:39 AM
reply to post by NewsWorthy

I appreciate the amount of work going into this thread but come on guys just let the JFK thing go already...

Sigh, there's one in every single JFK thread.

If you don't want to discuss it, move onto something else. This is one of the biggest conspiracies on this website, and one of the most obvious ones too. People, like myself, want to discuss it because we know we've been lied to about what happened and we can just about prove it. Surely that would be cause for further discussion?

No ones forcing you to join in the discussion here. You chose to do that. If you feel this is all a waste of time, then feel free to save your own time and bypass this, or any other JFK thread. Pretty simple really.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:39 AM
Rogue intelligence agents, right-wing politicians, greedy capitalists, and free-lance assassins plot and carry out the JFK assassination in this speculative agitprop.

Executive Action (1973)

Burt Lancaster, Robert Ryan and Will Geer

Totally a must-see for conspiracy enthusiasts.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:47 AM
reply to post by galdur

15 mystery JFK deaths

15? Try over 100 of them: The Forgotten Victims to a Genuine Conspiracy

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 03:58 AM
reply to post by Rising Against

Really ?

OK, since the odds of 15 dying of unnatural causes was 21 QUADRILLION to 1

I guess we´re up to the SEPTILLIONS to 1 area.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:13 AM
reply to post by Akasirus

Do you still see 3 people there? You could just as easy manipulate and color in the photo to show an elephant if that's what you were trying to find.

This was the image produced by Jack White and Gary Mack:

So yeah, your above quote is an exaggeration to say the least. There's 3 apparent figures in this image. 2 of which are clearly holding something up towards their faces - the man to the far left more than likely being Gordon Arnold holding up a camera.

It's not the greatest image, but there's no denying that figures can be made out still. And colorizing the image makes a lot of sense as well.

I strongly suggest you take the time to watch this Interview with Gordon Arnold once more, White and Mack begin discussing their work on the Moorman photo at around 02:57.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 04:16 AM
reply to post by Akasirus

This is not true, there are many experiments that recreate this motion identically.

Ok, well, can you at least show some of those experiments where a shot from behind causes an object to somehow travel back towards the gun and then to the left hand side using the same conditions Oswald would've had?

That's the only way anything is going to be proven here.
edit on 1-9-2011 by Rising Against because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 05:21 AM
Has the scenario ever been reenacted?
Drive a remote controlled car down the street
either with cadavars or silicone substitutes,
and place one of the military's or police's finest sharpshooters
where Oswald was claimed to have been,
with the same weapon and ammunition,
to see if the grouping of hits was even possible to a moving target.

If this was not done,
it should have been done as part of the investigation.

Great thread as I remember watching this,
and the funeral on TV when I was a child,
along with JFK's little son giving a salute,
these memories stay with me always.

The bastards that organised and carried out the assassination,
may they rot in hell for all eternity.
edit on 1/9/11 by Donegal_TDI because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:09 AM
Good post as usual RA.

I found some some more pictures of the smoke from the JFK Lancer Forums which might interest you.

Bill Miller took some frames from the Wiegman film and created an animated gif.

If you focus your attention on the smoke, you can see the smoke moving away from the Grassy Knoll towards Elm Street. There are also no motorcycles or cars in this location that could have caused this smoke.

Mr. Miller also looked at the Zapruder film, and at the same frame/location where the smoke appeared on the Wiegman film he also saw smoke in the Z film:

Combined with the eyewitness testimonies you mentioned and the reports on gunpowder smells in this area, it seems highly probable the smoke was from a rifle discharge from the Grassy Knoll area.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 06:51 AM
Awesome details and information RA, I've read your writings and theyre great.
I would bet Barbara Bush could tell us what really happened.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 07:02 AM
reply to post by Akasirus

Clearly your mind is made up so why did you post here. what you say makes little sense. A mellon is not a skull ,nore is it a reasonable substitute. Penn and Teller are very poor examples to demonstrate some one shooting. Are they expert marksmen? I don't think so. They fail to take into account the recoil of the gun and reaquiring the target after the shot. When these things are taken into account even expert marksmen have said that the shots cannot be made.

Not to mention that Oswald wasn't a very good shot. The weapon used was poorly maintained and did not function as smoothly as the one in the video.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 07:14 AM
Great thread OP, i have always heard little snippets of info regarding JFK but that puts a lot more detail into it.

I wonder if its simply a case of the police getting the wrong location from the start of where the shots came from, quickly realised their mistake and rather than admitting that when the president was assasinated on their watch, they looked in the wrong place first, they just stuck with their original story and framed oswald for it.

The problem with conspiracies that happened many years ago is that people who were there, sometimes manage to edit what they saw and heard in their heads so it can no longer be 100% believed. Also there cant be too many too many credible witnesses still alive after nearly 60 years, so we may never know what actually happened unless whoever has the facts, decides to release them, but thats not very likely

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:09 AM
reply to post by Nicolas Flamel
That 'puff' of smoke is fairly large for a rifle, which would fit in with my conjecture that the kill shot from the grassy knoll was a rifle chambered for a case with a large powder capacity.

Watching the Zapruder film, the President's head literally explodes when the kill shot hits him. That could be the effects of an explosive bullet, but a hit man would rather use a very fast bullet that has the same effect through hydrostatic shock. Explosive bullets are not 100% effective and given the options, I would say that a professional would choose the most effective means.

Given the distance involved and the effects seen on the film, I would guess that the bullet used was either a pointed soft point or possible hollowpoint weighing in at under 125 grains, depending on the caliber used.

edit on 1-9-2011 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:13 AM
reply to post by galdur
Very interesting... I've heard all this stuff before in my own investigations dating from 1979, but I've never heard of this film from 1973. I can't believe it. I was 15 in that year and I can't believe I missed seeing that.

posted on Sep, 1 2011 @ 08:24 AM
reply to post by Rising Against

JFK, The movie by Oliver Stone is a great lesson in US history...

Good Post OP.

I highly recommend anyone who wasn't aware of the depth of the conspiracy concerning JFK's assassination to watch Oliver Stone's Movie "JFK" if you have never seen it.

I watched it the other day and it really opens your eyes to the depth that the Govt. will go to cover something up.

It will also remind you very much of the 911 Coverup that is taking place at this very moment.

For example all of the files related to the JFK investigation were sealed until FOIA allowed.

The movie is about a New Orleans DA who discovers ties to the local Mob (Jack Ruby) & CIA to the JFK Assassination conspirators that took place in neighboring Dallas, TX.

It opens with a woman dumped out of a car, who when taken to the hospital keeps yelling" They're going to KILL the President"...

These were actually drug runners, she herself was a mule (used to carry drugs) and this is what ties into the New Orleans Mob....and Jack Ruby. The person who ended up shooting Lee Harvey Oswald.

Lee Harvey Oswald also had an interesting past with ties to the CIA, he was a political exile and lived in Russia for almost 10 years....and returned to the US unscathed. Normal US Citizens would be jailed for Treason after denouncing the US Govt and after having lived in exile.

These mobsters with the help of the CIA were behind the providing of arms to a group of ex cubans who were anti castro and planned an invasion of CUBA to overthrow Castros Regime. With crack assassins IMA, intended to assassinate Castro.

These guys, all part of the Bay of Pigs organization, disliked JFK because JFK didn't want the military called in to support them on their mission to overthrow Castro when they suffered a major beat down by Castro's military

And furthermore and up the conspiracy chain, JFK was disliked primarily due to his lack of support for the Vietnam War and actually wanted to pull US Troops out.

On JFK's side, had he called in the US Military called in in support of the CIA backed Rebels it would have most likely started a war between the US and Cuba and Russia.

So this is the basis of the grievance with JFK vs the CIA and the conspirators.

But anyway, it's a great movie, great story with great actors and acting.

Kevin Kostner
Sissy Spacek
Tommie Lee Jones
Kevin Bacon
Joe Pesci

.....just to name a few.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in