JFK Assassination: Driver Shot him

[7forever]

Are you saying that the driver and not Oswald shot Kennedy?

The geometry does clearly show that it came from the driver's seat and not the rear. Kennedy was sitting rear right. Greer was front left, and aimed over his right shoulder, firing with his left hand (he passed the "gun" between frames 241-278 and the fake reflection was proven so 2.5 years ago but I digress....) If Kennedy had an entrance wound in the rear with an exit wound on the right forehead, that would make sense in a Oswald did it scenario. However, the shot came from the driver and not Kennedy's right rear.

There was always clear evidence of a gun in Greer's hand and the nickel plated revolver has been confirmed by proving that Greer's left arm extended over his shoulder in both other films.

In the "Nix film", realtime shows that Greer braked and fired a handgun over his right shoulder which he passed 4 seconds before he shot jfk. If you are still one of the ******s who supports the WC or HSCA that some other trolls are still promoting and were convinced by giving it too much thought, it's time to let it go. It wasn't Oswald. It's an easy answer and I understand how you were swayed, but it's easily debunked with clear pics and some simple facts which debunk any headshot fired from the rear. If you're really interested in finding out what happened to Kennedy, let the Oswald thing go, it's bunk. A hoax. That's it.

[7forever]

Zapruder Frames - Costella Combined Edit
Greer passed the gun in Zapruder before the shot and it's seen after the shot in frame 319. The passenger, Roy Kellerman reaches way to his left and retreives the gun after jfk is assassinated. He apparently braced his left arm on the seat and grabbed the gun with his right hand. The arrows indicate his head and upper right arm.

[7forever]

Increase your screen size to 200% and watch the area over Greer's right shoulder. It pops in unison with the headshot. It's most noticeable at normal speed.



This old copy shows the same recoil/jolt backward but with video fakery. The second gif shows Roy's head functioning as the gun with emitting muzzle blast smoke before it extends in sync with the front right entrance and fake mist. The gun was really at the level of his right shoulder hidden by Kellerman's head. Also, notice the all-important splice in Zapruder after the shot.

[7forever]

Quote:
Originally Posted by yyy123
Except... I was not addressing the hand. I was addressing your ignorance regarding reflections. You were very clear in indicating that the reflection from the front passenger's head was faked because it did not show up in a photograph taken from a different angle. As any 5 year old knows... change the angle and a reflection is no longer visible.
You're not much of a sleuth if you are tripped up by what is obvious.

Also, in all this time you have yet to prove the Greer shot is even possible. Your case is based upon the hypothesis that an over the shoulder shot, in the space of 1 second or less, while driving a vehicle is even possible.

The film being altered to make it look like his left arm didn't cross is the evidence that Greer shot jfk. The alteration would NOT have been committed for any other reason. Connnally's reflection is depicted the same in the polaroid and Zapruder but Roy's head is without the fake blob in the polaroid, nix, and muchmore. The muchmore cap is the moment of entrance to jfk's right forehead.

In addition, it recoils and does all kinds of impossible things only a cartoon could produce. It's fake and you have nothing but making blanket statements of fact, which are impossible. Unless the sun disappears when filmed from the other side of a reflection, but depicts the same reflection on Connally but not Kellerman. The Moorman pic was taken at Zapruder frame 309 and shows no fake reflection on Roy's head, but frame 312-313 of Z shows the fake reflection causing the headshot. Connally's reflection is the same in the pic and Zapruder. Defeated liars like yourself must ignore Connally's consistent reflection and impose fictional fantasies. The nix film depicts no fake reflection, and Roy's head snaps back swiftly (just like you'd expect of someone trying to hide that the driver was shooting the President), the complete opposite of the perfectly altered movement seen in Zapruder.

[7forever]

I'd love to taste a philly cheese steak. I heard they should be good.

Hey, I accept you are ******ed and laugh at your tenacity for such activity, but you won't find out that you are wasting your time discussing issues because you've discussed nothing. You will tow the Government-line no matter what. Nothing you say will ever change anyones mind. You are not so rabid about defending Government lies because you've never defended these or any government lies.

You just spend way too much time on a Conspiracy Theory Forums NOT defending Government lies. So, one can only assume you do it because you are stupid and pathetic. But hey, some like your ****** style. You really are silly. But fortunately, you're wasting time and accomplish nothing. Your purpose is to post single sentences of pure nonsense and promote ignorance and stupidity.

[7forever]

Originally Posted by Walter Ego
Robert posted this on a different forum.



I would fix that by striking one word.



Robert is a True Believer. He really doesn't need any proof that there was a conspiracy's to kill JFK but in order to argue on a skeptical forum that his beliefs are true he needs some talking points. All of the "truths" on his flashcards come from his small collection of conspiracy books (totaling no more than 3 or 4 volumes as far as I can tell) or from whatever conspiracy websites he happens to surfing at any given moment.

He also faces a dilemma. Since he has no facts or evidence on his side, he must falsify the actual evidence of the case even if he has to do so in preposterous and ridiculous ways. He must prevaricate. He must dissemble. He must use disingenuous methods like quote mining. All in the higher service of fidelity to his "truth."

The rationalist (the term I prefer to skeptic) on the other hand does not have to stoop to deception. If the conspiracy advocates could come up with some convincing evidence and logical arguments for a conspiracy, the rationalist would concur with their conclusions with no loss of self-esteem. The True Believer, however, would face a loss of self-esteem by admitting his cherished beliefs are wrong because of his emotional investment in his "truth."

That the conspiracy advocates have had almost half a century to prove their case and have utterly failed to do so is telling. That they must resort to dishonestly and denial of reality in the service of their "truth" is merely sad, some would say pathetic.

Speaking only for myself, whether Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone shooter or there was a conspiracy is not a matter of great importance. The evidence points to Oswald as the sole culprit. Robert's frantic, though impassioned, efforts to prove otherwise have failed to impress... to put it mildly.



Walter does not believe Oswald shot jfk, but promotes it publicly. He doesn't need any proof that there wasn't a conspiracy to kill JFK, but in order to argue on a skeptical forum that his beliefs are true he needs some talking points. All of the "lies" on his flashcards come from his small collection of nonsense books or from whatever websites he happens to be surfing at any given moment.

He also faces a dilemma. Since he has no facts or evidence on his side, he must point to the fake evidence of the case even if he has to do so in preposterous and ridiculous ways. He must prevaricate. He must dissemble. He must use disingenuous methods like changing the subject and ignoring whoppers of proof. All in the higher service of fidelity to his "lies."

The rationalist (the term I prefer to skeptic) on the other hand does not have to stoop to deception. If the government crapologists could come up with some convincing evidence and logical arguments for the lone nut, the rationalist would concur with their conclusions with no loss of self-esteem. Walter, is a simple denialist, therefore faces no obvious shame when spewing nonsense about a report that was debunked by the Hsca.

That the kooks have had almost a half century to prove their case and have utterly failed to do so is telling. That they must resort to dishonesty and denial of reality in the service of their "lies" is merely sad and very pathetic.

Speaking only for myself, whether Lee Harvey Oswald fired any shots, he did not fire the fatal shot because Greer did. The evidence proves beyond all doubt that Greer shot jfk. Walter's frantic, though impassioned, efforts to prove otherwise have failed to impress... to put it mildly.

[7forever]

The rear skull gaping and detaching is most obvious in this gif.

[7forever]

Greer shooting JFK is a valid theory. He sure as hell brings his left hand up, over the right shoulder while looking back and POP there goes the skullshot in perfect synch. That would be one hell of a coincidence to explain away. What better assassin to employ than the SS? And that fits the definition of "Gonzo" - doing something so openly and blatantly horrific that nobody would dare think it is even possible. Perfect way to take out the president with all the sniper shots going off to confuse witnesses. I don't think that the planners would rely on a shot of many dozens of meters if they could find another way. . . Like a point blank headshot from the driver.

Very few people on the boards were willing to state the obvious because it's so easy to see who did it once someone pointed it out. It's politically incorrect to place blame on Government when the evidence is so direct and conclusive.

It's as simple as showing Greer's left arm really extended over with the headshot and the absurdity of the fake hand in Zapruder. The whole limo jolts upward in unison with the headshot.

[Elie]

why wouldn't Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis come out and say the driver did it?

[Targaryen]

What a fittng day to bump such a brilliant topic.