Quake3World

not sure of the whole story behind it, but I do believe that Oswald was a lone gunner and popped a cap in his ass.

I've been to the building, sat in the window, not that hard of a shot really. I've had no formal training and I'd give myself a 1 in 3 chance of scoring a headshot from there.

I could never understand how hundreds of years of ballistics 'history' was authoritatively and succinctly thrown out the window when they (chief medical surgeon) said that the rather large hole in the back of his head meant he was shot from behind even though they could trace the path from the small wound at the front with a pencil/rod.

scared? wrote:i never did...and u can't show as much cuz ur lying...ur a sad little man

It ain't just a river in Egypt, Cleopatra.

Slow the film down to frame by frame. You will CLEARLY see that Jackie fired the shot that blew out the back of his skull. The cover up lay in that her cia bosses were covering THAT up.

Kat wrote:I could never understand how hundreds of years of ballistics 'history' was authoritatively and succinctly thrown out the window when they (chief medical surgeon) said that the rather large hole in the back of his head meant he was shot from behind even though they could trace the path from the small wound at the front with a pencil/rod.

From the first time I watched the Zapruder film I thought the headshot came from Kennedy's front right. Out of curiosity, where did you hear/read the 'chief medical surgeon's' statement about the origin of the shot?

Peenyuh wrote:Slow the film down to frame by frame. You will CLEARLY see that Jackie fired the shot that blew out the back of his skull. The cover up lay in that her cia bosses were covering THAT up.

Geoof's handling the idiotic comments in this thread quite well, thanks.

Maiden wrote:
I've been to the building, sat in the window, not that hard of a shot really. I've had no formal training and I'd give myself a 1 in 3 chance of scoring a headshot from there.

oh, well then that settles it.

my butt your face there fella....
not trying to settle anything, just saying that shot was not as hard as the tin foil folk or the movie made out

Maiden brings up a very good point regarding some of the 'facts' put forth by conspiracy theorists as gospel.
1. Oswald was a terrible shot - Untrue, he shot 218 out of 250 right before he left the Corps, making him a pretty fucking good shot.
2. Three shots in that amount of time was impossible and no one could duplicate it. - Also untrue, not only was it repeated by one Spec. Miller of the US Army, he actually bettered Oswald's time.

I still don't buy the headshot coming from behind, though.

Why?

As I said, looking at the footage and knowing what I do about ballistics, it seems completely illogical to me to think that that wound would be caused by a bullet entering the back of his head.

Nightshade wrote:From the first time I watched the Zapruder film I thought the headshot came from Kennedy's front right. Out of curiosity, where did you hear/read the 'chief medical surgeon's' statement about the origin of the shot?

edit: let me rephrase, I'm confusing myself....

I think I may have been discussing a friend's opinion in the instance to which you refer, because I feel as you do. The hydrostatic shockwave propagates from the point of impact of the bullet, as such you get a very large exit wound from a small entrance wound. I'm not sure if the 6.5mm cartridge performs the way the 5.56mm does, but they tumble when the hit something, so it makes a big mess on the way out. To my knowledge there's simply no way to get a huge entrance wound and a tiny exit wound.

Okay, that's what was confusing me. Because I had already typed out my post - then after posting and reading it I immediately thought "Wait, that doesn't sound right, because what he's saying completely agrees with me."

You sneaky bastard.

Do much hunting? I've shot a shitload of guns and hunted all my life (small and large game). I know the norm is to have a small entrance wound and a large exit wound, but that isn't always the case. I've killed many, many deer with high powered rifles. Sometimes the round begins to spin while its in the air and the entrance wound can be just as bad. This is just coming from my own experiences.

Just as bad is not the same as bigger.

Ok, let me rephrase, I've seen an entrance wound bigger than its exit wound.

Nightshade wrote:

Kat wrote:I could never understand how hundreds of years of ballistics 'history' was authoritatively and succinctly thrown out the window when they (chief medical surgeon) said that the rather large hole in the back of his head meant he was shot from behind even though they could trace the path from the small wound at the front with a pencil/rod.

From the first time I watched the Zapruder film I thought the headshot came from Kennedy's front right. Out of curiosity, where did you hear/read the 'chief medical surgeon's' statement about the origin of the shot?

It's on YouTube somewhere, some chap (old guy) standing in a private library being interviewed - not sure how long after the incident it was, he was presented as being one of the senior physicians at the autopsy and he point blank said that [paraphrasing] "the wound to the head indicated that he was shot from the behind". I'll see if I can track it down.

xer0s wrote:Ok, let me rephrase, I've seen an entrance wound bigger than its exit wound.

In that instance that would mean that both the front and back of his head having the same and/or similar sized wounds wouldn't it? i.e. he'd have no face left.

xer0s wrote:Do much hunting? I've shot a shitload of guns and hunted all my life (small and large game). I know the norm is to have a small entrance wound and a large exit wound, but that isn't always the case. I've killed many, many deer with high powered rifles. Sometimes the round begins to spin while its in the air and the entrance wound can be just as bad. This is just coming from my own experiences.

Some, not much. Fired a lot of weapons, but not killed a ton of critters. I can certainly believe large entrance wounds from a tumbling bullet, but not a smaller exit wound. I'm not saying it's completely impossible, just highly unlikely.

Nightshade wrote:I think I may have been discussing a friend's opinion in the instance to which you refer, because I feel as you do. The hydrostatic shockwave propagates from the point of impact of the bullet, as such you get a very large exit wound from a small entrance wound. I'm not sure if the 6.5mm cartridge performs the way the 5.56mm does, but they tumble when the hit something, so it makes a big mess on the way out. To my knowledge there's simply no way to get a huge entrance wound and a tiny exit wound.

This.

xer0s wrote:Do much hunting? I've shot a shitload of guns and hunted all my life (small and large game). I know the norm is to have a small entrance wound and a large exit wound, but that isn't always the case. I've killed many, many deer with high powered rifles. Sometimes the round begins to spin while its in the air and the entrance wound can be just as bad. This is just coming from my own experiences.

Erratic bullet performance can often be explained by over or under stabilization of the bullet, either too much, or not enough twist in the rifling. Assuming thats not the issue, Im not sure where youve done your deer hunting, but in a woodland environment, even a small twig in the bullets path can destabilize it resulting in bullet yaw, or even an end over end tumble. This could result in the bullet entering broadsided, and exiting either nose or tail first. Either way its much more a chance occurrence than the norm. Aside from that, I really dont know.

Aside from the fact that you can't read, is it the 'fuck' or the 'off' that you're having trouble with?
You've proven yourself to be a complete moron, and many people here have told you so. Why are you under the impression that anyone wants you posting here?

Nightshade wrote:Maiden brings up a very good point regarding some of the 'facts' put forth by conspiracy theorists as gospel.
1. Oswald was a terrible shot - Untrue, he shot 218 out of 250 right before he left the Corps, making him a pretty fucking good shot.
2. Three shots in that amount of time was impossible and no one could duplicate it. - Also untrue, not only was it repeated by one Spec. Miller of the US Army, he actually bettered Oswald's time.

I still don't buy the headshot coming from behind, though.

I'm in agreement with you.

I've been to the building, too.

But there is too much medical evidence for a shot from the front.

Now the last reading I did on this was years ago, and then I could find no information on what happened to JFK's brain. Has anyone since?

Nightshade wrote:Aside from the fact that you can't read, is it the 'fuck' or the 'off' that you're having trouble with?
You've proven yourself to be a complete moron, and many people here have told you so. Why are you under the impression that anyone wants you posting here?

I dont recall reading anywhere in the forum rules that I need your blessing to be here. I merely agreed with your post, and that might indeed make me a complete moron. Give up the jealous little school boy act.

You're more than garden variety stupid, aren't you? I fail to see how me pointing out that you're an idiot equates to 'jealous schoolboy' behavior, but then again, you ARE a moron.