The KENNEDY Thread

[Nickdfresh]

I think the thing to remember is that programs like THE MEN WHO KILLED KENNEDY are not purported to be 6 hours of facts... It's more like a plethora of possible evidence and possible holes in the official story. Yes, the hitmen mentioned in the second episode has been, for all intents and purposes, disproved as a real suspect.

I think they put forth their own explanation that on balance, was far more ludicrous than "Oswald acting alone." Much of their evidence debunked and they clearly failed to look for holes in their own theories....

Secondly, I'm pretty sure the Warren Commission never had the pretension of having the whole story...

Other evidence, however, such as the November 9 Miami recording of a possible conspirator describing the upcoming assassination attempt cannot be discounted. Nor can the testimony of those present at the autopsy.

A lot of it is discredited though. The two photos of JFK's autopsy, one with his brains out and the one with his head largely reconstructed was also "touted" as smoking gun evidence. The simple explanation is that they reconstructed his scalp afterward...

And I agree with ELVIS (though I myself have never fired a gun)...that looks like a gun entering from the front. It's not even the motion backward that gets me...it's the fact that the shot looks like it's an entry...not an exit. It's like a little spittle of blood going from the front and a giant explosion heading behind...more towards Jackie. It was Jackie and the police officer behind that were covered in brains and blood. If the bullet had come from behind, it would have been more prevalent on the front car window and Connelly... Just look at the footage again...it just does not look in any way that the shot is coming from behind.

As I heard it, the bullet (a higher velocity, smaller caliber 6.5mm) did not strike his head dead center (another assumption) but ricocheted to the side which is why the footage is so graphic, the flap of scalp is torn off his skull by essentially a grazing action.

As for "Badgeman"...I think it's a fascinating photo. If the knoll theory is true, then it would be consistent. I don't think it is in any way, however, conclusive evidence.

Photographic analysis using modern computer tech and using objects and people for perspective has shown if the "figure" in the photo were a man, he'd of been tiny.

It is interesting that the only witness filming towards the knoll actually up close to the motorcade, a woman who says she would have had a nice filmed shot of the entire grassy knoll at the precise moment of the assassination, gave her film to the FBI the next day (undeveloped...she never watched it) and never received it back and never heard from FBI agents again. And the footage has never been seen since. Maybe coincidence...but sure as shit annoying. That would have been an even more important shot that the Zapruder film. I forgot the woman's name...

So, she has no evidence you are saying?

[hideyoursheep]

Bullshit! Have you ever shot an animal in the head with a rifle while hunting ?? I didn't think so...

Definitely not while the animal was driving away from me...

You see the exit wound in the front of JFK's head...as the round travels through the right rear, it expands, causing the nasty damage you see in the film...giving the appearance that the shot came from that direction.

Factor in the forward movement of the vehicle, and you have Jackie scrambling to the trunk..that was sick...

It didn't help silence the naysayers showing false photos of the autopsy.

The same twisted mindset that killed Dimebag and bombed Oklahoma City did Kennedy in....some asshole thought he was doing the world a favor.

[LoungeMachine]

some asshole thought he was doing the world a favor.

see also: George W. Bush

[hideyoursheep]

Photographic analysis using modern computer tech and using objects and people for perspective has shown if the "figure" in the photo were a man, he'd of been tiny.

I thought the opposite was true, that he would have to had been about 7 feet tall?

[hideyoursheep]

see also: George W. Bush

He was doing himself a favor.

[Redballjets88]

Per usual, the point sails over your "hire a teenager while they still know everything" head.

Why am I not surprised at any of this?

You're a snot nosed punk who is constantly trying to seem hip to the convo, and get pissed and all "cockboy" anytime anyone, especially me point it out.

Your Obama SS thread ringing any bells?

First, no one here thinks it was "cool" you and your moronic friends drove thru Dealy on your way to the Burger King Drive Thru. Get over yourself.

So instead of chastising us on what we should post, perhaps it is you who should think about what you post.

See, that's why we have vocabulary, so that when you're speaking online you have many different words from which to choose. Allow me to help you, although I see no reason to.

"Yeah, my friend Wayne and I were driving to Burger King to pick up our checks, and discusssed how strange it is that the largest tourist attraction is where JFK was murdered."


"Yeah, my friend Wayne and I were driving to Burger King to pick up our checks, and discusssed how interesting it is that the largest tourist attraction is where JFK was murdered."


"Yeah, my friend Wayne and I were driving to Burger King to pick up our checks, and discusssed how odd it is that the largest tourist attraction is where JFK was murdered."



Don't fret. Being called "cockboy" by a 20 year old who only recently flew the nest, and parks cars for a living is funny to me.


But yes, I too am shocked more of us weren't impressed with your incredibly thought provoking dicussion with your friend.

I would however had been impressed had you and your friend been discussing Obama's policy on the future solvency of Social Security.

But then when you want to know those facts, you just simply start a thread
asking us for the answers. Why? Because we know more than you.

Goddamnit, I guess I'll never attempt sarcasm ever again on the boards, because I guess everyone takes me every post with th utmost seriousness. Fuck. Lounge, my entire post in response to you was sarcasm, I don't give a shit what you say to me, none of it pisses me off. I learned to put emotions aside around here a long time ago.

And since the site has come back I really do not feel as if I have said anything moronic. I have stated my opinion here and there, and a few times you agreed. I never said anything about Obama SS, you must have me mistaken there.

–adjective
1. providing fun; causing amusement or laughter; amusing; comical: a funny remark; a funny person.
2. attempting to amuse; facetious: Did you really mean that or were you just being funny?
3. warranting suspicion; deceitful; underhanded: We thought there was something funny about those extra charges.
4. Informal. insolent; impertinent: Don't get funny with me, young man!
5. curious; strange; peculiar; odd: Her speech has a funny twang.
–noun
6. Informal. a funny remark or story; a joke: to make a funny.
7. funnies,
a. comic strips.
b. Also called funny paper. the section of a newspaper reserved for comic strips, word games, etc.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/funny...Just because I didn't use the most common definition of "funny" doesn't mean I am wrong either.

[LoungeMachine]

. I never said anything about Obama SS, you must have me mistaken there.

–

Really?

http://www.rotharmy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=53574

[hideyoursheep]

I don't give a shit what you say to me, none of it pisses me off. I learned to put emotions aside around here a long time ago.

Liar.


(watch this)



Suck 'Em=Overrated piece of football team.

[chefcraig]

From the film Kentucky Fried Movie, a parody of a JFK board game called "Scot-Free". Although funny, some disturbing truths are mentioned as well.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/L7e3RK_xSvc&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/L7e3RK_xSvc&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[hideyoursheep]

I remember it well...

[Rikk]

But with all of the historic ramifications this tragedy held, and the impact it had on generations to come, at least it gave redballjets and his friends something to laugh about on the way to work.

[Rikk]

So, she has no evidence you are saying?

No...she sure as shit HAD evidence that she was filming the motorcade. There is no doubt of this because there are countless photographs of her right next to the President during the kill shot with a film camera in her hand.

As for the autopsy shots being altered, you have doctors that were in the hospital testifying that the back of his head was blown off and photographs (not scalp reconstruction) that looks altered.

The thing is...it's always been the official story that looks pseudo-scientific...not the conspiracy. The thing about the conspiracy is that there is no one story...it's truer science. People simply conclude that things don't work in the official story.

Holding on to the official story, however, for the sake of "officialness" is far more unscientific and pig-headed. It is full of holes, ignored evidence, a plethora of ignored witnesses and facts that don't make sense. It isn't so much that people know what really happened. It's more that they can be pretty confident about what DIDN'T happen.

As for the kill shot, nobody denies that the shot looks blown sideways...in fact, that's more consistent with the grassy knoll theory.

[Redballjets88]

Liar.


(watch this)



Suck 'Em=Overrated piece of football team.

woah thats a different story. The Longhorns are something I defend vehemently. But still I'm not pissed.



And Lounge, I thought you were saying I compared Obama with the SS.

I don't understand why that thread pisses you off so much.

[LoungeMachine]

I don't understand why that thread pisses you off so much.

Because instead of getting your information DIRECTLY FROM THE SOURCE, you started a thread asking us to give you the crib notes on something you claimed was important to you.

So you added laziness to your ignorance, and then get pissy when you got called out on it. The 20-something trifecta.

Do your own fucking research for once, and then come start a thread telling US what YOU learned and think.

Tired of you expecting us to do your homework for you.

[Nickdfresh]

Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

By HOLLY RAMER (AP) – 2 days ago

CONCORD, N.H. — The infamous photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding a rifle in his backyard would have been nearly impossible to fake, according to a new analysis by a Dartmouth College professor.

Oswald, who was shot to death days after being charged with the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, claimed the photo of him holding a rifle in one hand and Marxist newspapers in the other had been doctored. Over the years, many others have pointed out what appear to be inconsistent lighting and shadows.

But Hany Farid, director of the Neukom Institute for Computational Science at Dartmouth, said the shadows are exactly where they should be.

"You can never really prove an image is real, but the evidence that people have pointed to that the photo is fake is incorrect," Farid said Thursday. "As an academic and a scientist, I don't like to say it's absolutely authentic ... but it's extremely unlikely to have been a fake."

Farid, whose work using digital forensic tools to analyze images often has been used by law enforcement, said he has been getting requests from conspiracy theorists to analyze the photo for years. He said he held off until he had the appropriate software to create three-dimensional models of Oswald's head and surroundings.

With the modeling software, he was able to show that a single light source could create both a shadow falling behind Oswald and to his right and one directly under his nose. Farid admits even he was skeptical before starting his research.

"When I looked at the photo, I didn't understand it. I didn't understand the shadows, and I do this for a living," he said.

But Farid's latest finding, which will be published in the journal Perception, is in keeping with his earlier research that showed the human visual system does a poor job at judging whether cast shadows are correct, he said.

"It turns out we're really bad at it. Even though our visual system is very, very good ... we are really bad at judging shadows," he said. "I'm bad at it and this is what I do for a living."

He spent about two months off and on analyzing the Oswald photo.

"I felt because it's the Kennedy assassination and because there's so much history about this, you really want to answer this correctly," he said. "You don't want to make a mistake on something of this magnitude."

The Associated Press: Dartmouth scientist says Oswald rifle photo real

Copyright &#169; 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.