Board footer

James

 Rep: 664 

Re: JFK assassination

James wrote:

I was curious what everyones thoughts are on this case. I read tons of books years ago, but last month while watching the zapruder and nix films, noticed things that I had not seen before. World needs to take a fresh look at this case.

James

 Rep: 664 

Re: JFK assassination

James wrote:

I'm on my phone at the moment. Can someone post youtube clips of the zapruder and nix footage?

Neemo

 Rep: 485 

Re: JFK assassination

Neemo wrote:

been a while since i watched any of this stuff..maybe i will when the kids go to bed, was always of the opinion that there was 2 or 3 gunmen

Axlin16

 Rep: 768 

Re: JFK assassination

Axlin16 wrote:

One thing is very certain... the story we got is a complete fabrication.

I believe the exact same thing with United 93. Total bullshit, even Rumsfeld slipped up on the story a couple times.

James

 Rep: 664 

Re: JFK assassination

James wrote:

When watching the Zapruder film, the focus is always JFK for obvious reasons. Even the experts focus mainly on the fatal shot & direction of the bullet.

Forget JFK & watch Jackie & Connally during the entire film.

Notice anything odd?

Olorin

 Rep: 268 

Re: JFK assassination

Olorin wrote:

So whats the explanation given for the blood exploding out the fornt of his head?

James

 Rep: 664 

Re: JFK assassination

James wrote:

Supposedly an entrance wound(grassy knoll) but that would require violating the laws of physics. Official version would have it coming from Oswald, which is unlikely.

Sucks that the autopsy was a sham & his wounds possibly tampered with.

James

 Rep: 664 

Re: JFK assassination

James wrote:

An unedited copy of Zapruder would be a game changer. Never seen publicly but the few who viewed it(including Dan Rather) once mention the car completely stopping, JFK shot TWICE in the head & violently lunging FORWARD. None of this is seen on Zapruder.

James

 Rep: 664 

Re: JFK assassination

James wrote:

It took 12 yrs for the film to be shown to the public, & when it was shown it showed a slightly different version of what really happened. This tells us that the answers to all the questions are in that film. Shocking that the few who saw it werent killed

slashsfro

 Rep: 53 

Re: JFK assassination

slashsfro wrote:

I read a couple of books about the topic like 10-15 years ago and I remember one thing:  the evidence doesn't match the story that the government gave out. The forensics and general laws of physics don't support the government story at all.  There is no way that one fucking bullet could have hit JFK then exited his body and then injured the Texas governor. 

Now that you do mention, I remember how the books said the autopsy was suspect and not consistent.  This one was a definite government coverup and conspiracy.  I'm pretty sure that I remember reading that most of the witnesses who had other evidence that differs from the government narrative ended up dead.

Which leads to another question:  Who would want JFK dead and for what reasons?