JFK Assassination: Doesn't it seem strange???

[KokomoJojo]

Such as a Presidential limo.


Likely because it was going in that direction anyway just before he was shot and didn't have any further control over the extremity.


She wasn't shot and was facing the other way.


Don't be silly.



Would you at least agree that one is not mutually exclusive of the other? I mean, someone can get shot without their head snapping back and someone can have their head snap back without being shot...right?

Okay.

So we know the car sped up at some point to get JFK out of the area; agreed?

Is it totally impossible that if you have a lifeless body in the back seat of a car that a car lurching forward as it is accelerating would cause the body's head to lurch backward?

Set a styrofoam cup on the dashboard with water in it and gun the engine. It will lurch backward.

If you look at the video, instead of making it fit your assumptions, you will see that the president's head snaps back from what appears to be the bullet impact (from the spray you see at the time his head jerks back) and since no one else in the car seems to have had their head jerked back or the fact the the car does not seem to speed up at that time, I would think you are trying to spread disinformation to those who do not question what they see or read. The world is full of people like you, trying to persuade others that left is right and day is night. I ask you a question, and you keep trying to say "believe me" but you give no clear evidence to dispute what one can see with their own eyes. Take off you blinders and look again.

Okay...tell us all what you think happened in reasonable detail....No vids or cut and pastes....just lay out your case.

did I make that call or fucking what!

Um, hey candy he already did! LMAO

 

[ranfunck]

Such as a Presidential limo.


Likely because it was going in that direction anyway just before he was shot and didn't have any further control over the extremity.


She wasn't shot and was facing the other way.


Don't be silly.



Would you at least agree that one is not mutually exclusive of the other? I mean, someone can get shot without their head snapping back and someone can have their head snap back without being shot...right?

Okay.

So we know the car sped up at some point to get JFK out of the area; agreed?

Is it totally impossible that if you have a lifeless body in the back seat of a car that a car lurching forward as it is accelerating would cause the body's head to lurch backward?

Set a styrofoam cup on the dashboard with water in it and gun the engine. It will lurch backward.

If you look at the video, instead of making it fit your assumptions, you will see that the president's head snaps back from what appears to be the bullet impact (from the spray you see at the time his head jerks back) and since no one else in the car seems to have had their head jerked back or the fact the the car does not seem to speed up at that time, I would think you are trying to spread disinformation to those who do not question what they see or read. The world is full of people like you, trying to persuade others that left is right and day is night. I ask you a question, and you keep trying to say "believe me" but you give no clear evidence to dispute what one can see with their own eyes. Take off you blinders and look again.

Okay...tell us all what you think happened in reasonable detail....No vids or cut and pastes....just lay out your case.

Your not very good that this are you? Don't try and turn the table on me. I came here asking one question the answer you gave does not match what any one can clearly see if you open your fucking eyes and look. Handjob might be farting around here but you are slinging bullshit.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Such as a Presidential limo.


Likely because it was going in that direction anyway just before he was shot and didn't have any further control over the extremity.


She wasn't shot and was facing the other way.


Don't be silly.



Would you at least agree that one is not mutually exclusive of the other? I mean, someone can get shot without their head snapping back and someone can have their head snap back without being shot...right?

Okay.

So we know the car sped up at some point to get JFK out of the area; agreed?

Is it totally impossible that if you have a lifeless body in the back seat of a car that a car lurching forward as it is accelerating would cause the body's head to lurch backward?

Set a styrofoam cup on the dashboard with water in it and gun the engine. It will lurch backward.

If you look at the video, instead of making it fit your assumptions, you will see that the president's head snaps back from what appears to be the bullet impact (from the spray you see at the time his head jerks back) and since no one else in the car seems to have had their head jerked back or the fact the the car does not seem to speed up at that time, I would think you are trying to spread disinformation to those who do not question what they see or read. The world is full of people like you, trying to persuade others that left is right and day is night. I ask you a question, and you keep trying to say "believe me" but you give no clear evidence to dispute what one can see with their own eyes. Take off you blinders and look again.

after 4 years I have never known candy corn to do anything different.

amen to that.
WHY people waste their breath on candyass is beyond me. how many times does it got to be repeated around here to these folks that foolishly take his bait and give him the attention that he seeks,that he is a government agent sent here by his handlers to troll the boards to derail any truth discussion about government corruption. why they argue with someone who knows perfectly as well as we do that the CIA killed JFK is beyond me.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

If you look at the video, instead of making it fit your assumptions, you will see that the president's head snaps back from what appears to be the bullet impact (from the spray you see at the time his head jerks back) and since no one else in the car seems to have had their head jerked back or the fact the the car does not seem to speed up at that time, I would think you are trying to spread disinformation to those who do not question what they see or read. The world is full of people like you, trying to persuade others that left is right and day is night. I ask you a question, and you keep trying to say "believe me" but you give no clear evidence to dispute what one can see with their own eyes. Take off you blinders and look again.

Okay...tell us all what you think happened in reasonable detail....No vids or cut and pastes....just lay out your case.

Your not very good that this are you? Don't try and turn the table on me. I came here asking one question the answer you gave does not match what any one can clearly see if you open your fucking eyes and look. Handjob might be farting around here but you are slinging bullshit.

why do you think my posts consists of fart jokes to these government hack trolls.Thats the ONLY reply they are worthy of in the fact they always evade the facts and change the subject when they are cornered and cant refute facts.therefore the fart jokes are the ONLY posts these paid trolls are worthy of.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

a puff of smoke ? What kind of ammo uses powder that emits smoke ? Are you claiming he was shot with a flintlock or something ?

dude hate to break this news to you but many witnesses saw a puff of smoke rise up over the picket fence and witnesses on the knoll INCLUDING a trained combat officer heard shots so close to them they said they were coming from behind the picket fence,saying they were coming from directly over their shoulders behind them which is why many of them immediately hit the ground instantly as the live films shot that day show.

Like all magic bullet thoerists,I see you selectively only read PARTS of posts only commenting on parts of it instead of the entire post evading critical facts that oswald wasnt the shooter.

but but but they are politically incorrect witnesses and dont count!!!!

 

[daws101]

I don't know what kind of a car you have but to get your head to snap back like that your going to need some big horse power.

Such as a Presidential limo.


Likely because it was going in that direction anyway just before he was shot and didn't have any further control over the extremity.


She wasn't shot and was facing the other way.


Don't be silly.

Don't know if you have seen that part of the footage but you can clearly see when the bullet hit and his head snapped back.

Would you at least agree that one is not mutually exclusive of the other? I mean, someone can get shot without their head snapping back and someone can have their head snap back without being shot...right?

Okay.

So we know the car sped up at some point to get JFK out of the area; agreed?

Is it totally impossible that if you have a lifeless body in the back seat of a car that a car lurching forward as it is accelerating would cause the body's head to lurch backward?

Set a styrofoam cup on the dashboard with water in it and gun the engine. It will lurch backward.

If you look at the video, instead of making it fit your assumptions, you will see that the president's head snaps back from what appears to be the bullet impact (from the spray you see at the time his head jerks back) and since no one else in the car seems to have had their head jerked back or the fact the the car does not seem to speed up at that time, I would think you are trying to spread disinformation to those who do not question what they see or read. The world is full of people like you, trying to persuade others that left is right and day is night. I ask you a question, and you keep trying to say "believe me" but you give no clear evidence to dispute what one can see with their own eyes. Take off you blinders and look again.

asked and answered..

Because the bullet caused massive destruction of what are called the long tracts of the spine, cauing massive involuntary contraction of the muscles of the back of his spine. This caused his body to lurch backward, involuntarily. Since his brain was struck on the right side, the involuntary contractions would be stronger on the left and he would lurch to that side. The 'second gunman' theory was caused by ignorance of neuroanatomy.

 

[candycorn]

If you look at the video, instead of making it fit your assumptions, you will see that the president's head snaps back from what appears to be the bullet impact (from the spray you see at the time his head jerks back) and since no one else in the car seems to have had their head jerked back or the fact the the car does not seem to speed up at that time, I would think you are trying to spread disinformation to those who do not question what they see or read. The world is full of people like you, trying to persuade others that left is right and day is night. I ask you a question, and you keep trying to say "believe me" but you give no clear evidence to dispute what one can see with their own eyes. Take off you blinders and look again.

Okay...tell us all what you think happened in reasonable detail....No vids or cut and pastes....just lay out your case.

Your not very good that this are you?

Hey, according to many, I get paid big bucks to come in here and slap you around so I must be very good at it. According to some, I've been doing it for 10 years now....probably the length of time since you were scheduled to exit puberty but missed the bus.

Don't try and turn the table on me.

Not sure how just asking you what you think happened and expecting you to recite it on a message board is "turning the table" on anyone. Unless you're like some here who, once they lay out their scenario, can't believe it themselves.

I came here asking one question the answer you gave does not match what any one can clearly see if you open your fucking eyes and look.

I answered pretty cleanly. When you gun the engine in a car, the unsecured occupants are thrust backwards into their seats. When one of them is lifeless, there is no muscle command given to keep your head upright, sit up straight etc...

As for as "not matching"...Ms. Kennedy was actually halfway out of the vehicle reaching for her husband's ear on the trunk...you don't think that is indicative of a car lurching forward. A secret service agent was trying to mount the back of the vehicle at the same time and had to try again to make up for the increase in speed. It matches perfectly.

Where you're having a problem with a logical explanation (for someone "just asking a question"--you seem pretty dis-interested in answers) is that you can't fathom two events happening at once; dead President, accelerating automobile.

Handjob might be farting around here but you are slinging bullshit.

Oh puh-leeze. Rimjob has agreed with Oliver Stone's version of events AND a jerkoff that came in here and claimed the driver of the limo that JFK was the assassin. He agrees with both versions.

If you want to have a keen insight into Rimjob's modus operandi; ask him about the 48 videos that explain 9/11; all of which contradict one another.

 

[candycorn]

If you look at the video, instead of making it fit your assumptions, you will see that the president's head snaps back from what appears to be the bullet impact (from the spray you see at the time his head jerks back) and since no one else in the car seems to have had their head jerked back or the fact the the car does not seem to speed up at that time, I would think you are trying to spread disinformation to those who do not question what they see or read. The world is full of people like you, trying to persuade others that left is right and day is night. I ask you a question, and you keep trying to say "believe me" but you give no clear evidence to dispute what one can see with their own eyes. Take off you blinders and look again.

Okay...tell us all what you think happened in reasonable detail....No vids or cut and pastes....just lay out your case.

did I make that call or fucking what!

Um, hey candy he already did! LMAO

Koo Koo...in which of his 4 posts did he lay out what he thought happened? In fact, did you ever do it? Hmmm...wonder why?

 

[ranfunck]

Okay...tell us all what you think happened in reasonable detail....No vids or cut and pastes....just lay out your case.

Your not very good that this are you?

Hey, according to many, I get paid big bucks to come in here and slap you around so I must be very good at it. According to some, I've been doing it for 10 years now....probably the length of time since you were scheduled to exit puberty but missed the bus.


Not sure how just asking you what you think happened and expecting you to recite it on a message board is "turning the table" on anyone. Unless you're like some here who, once they lay out their scenario, can't believe it themselves.

I came here asking one question the answer you gave does not match what any one can clearly see if you open your fucking eyes and look.

I answered pretty cleanly. When you gun the engine in a car, the unsecured occupants are thrust backwards into their seats. When one of them is lifeless, there is no muscle command given to keep your head upright, sit up straight etc...

As for as "not matching"...Ms. Kennedy was actually halfway out of the vehicle reaching for her husband's ear on the trunk...you don't think that is indicative of a car lurching forward. A secret service agent was trying to mount the back of the vehicle at the same time and had to try again to make up for the increase in speed. It matches perfectly.

Where you're having a problem with a logical explanation (for someone "just asking a question"--you seem pretty dis-interested in answers) is that you can't fathom two events happening at once; dead President, accelerating automobile.

Handjob might be farting around here but you are slinging bullshit.

Oh puh-leeze. Rimjob has agreed with Oliver Stone's version of events AND a jerkoff that came in here and claimed the driver of the limo that JFK was the assassin. He agrees with both versions.

If you want to have a keen insight into Rimjob's modus operandi; ask him about the 48 videos that explain 9/11; all of which contradict one another.[/QUOTE

I am not having a problem with a logical explanation I just haven't got one yet, your answers contradict each other and are idiotic at best. As fare as you slapping me around not on your best day. You on the other hand have had your ass handed to you. Rimlob or Koo Koo would one of you please put up the vid of JFK getting that bullet to the front of his head maybe this bitch will look at it. I cant post it haven't been here long enough yet. Bitch Take your head out of your ass and open your eyes.

 

[daws101]

Your not very good that this are you?

Hey, according to many, I get paid big bucks to come in here and slap you around so I must be very good at it. According to some, I've been doing it for 10 years now....probably the length of time since you were scheduled to exit puberty but missed the bus.


Not sure how just asking you what you think happened and expecting you to recite it on a message board is "turning the table" on anyone. Unless you're like some here who, once they lay out their scenario, can't believe it themselves.


I answered pretty cleanly. When you gun the engine in a car, the unsecured occupants are thrust backwards into their seats. When one of them is lifeless, there is no muscle command given to keep your head upright, sit up straight etc...

As for as "not matching"...Ms. Kennedy was actually halfway out of the vehicle reaching for her husband's ear on the trunk...you don't think that is indicative of a car lurching forward. A secret service agent was trying to mount the back of the vehicle at the same time and had to try again to make up for the increase in speed. It matches perfectly.

Where you're having a problem with a logical explanation (for someone "just asking a question"--you seem pretty dis-interested in answers) is that you can't fathom two events happening at once; dead President, accelerating automobile.

Handjob might be farting around here but you are slinging bullshit.

Oh puh-leeze. Rimjob has agreed with Oliver Stone's version of events AND a jerkoff that came in here and claimed the driver of the limo that JFK was the assassin. He agrees with both versions.

If you want to have a keen insight into Rimjob's modus operandi; ask him about the 48 videos that explain 9/11; all of which contradict one another.[/QUOTE

I am not having a problem with a logical explanation I just haven't got one yet, your answers contradict each other and are idiotic at best. As fare as you slapping me around not on your best day. You on the other hand have had your ass handed to you. Rimlob or Koo Koo would one of you please put up the vid of JFK getting that bullet to the front of his head maybe this bitch will look at it. I cant post it haven't been here long enough yet. Bitch Take your head out of your ass and open your eyes.

learn to use the quote function it looks like candy corn is talking to herself..
rookie mistake.....

 

[candycorn]

I am not having a problem with a logical explanation I just haven't got one yet, your answers contradict each other and are idiotic at best.

Actually it's physics. Objects in motion tend to stay in motion; objects at rest tend to stay at rest. When a body speeds up it adjusts to the increase in velocity. Or it doesnt.

As fare as you slapping me around not on your best day. You on the other hand have had your ass handed to you. Rimlob or Koo Koo would one of you please put up the vid of JFK getting that bullet to the front of his head maybe this bitch will look at it. I cant post it haven't been here long enough yet. Bitch Take your head out of your ass and open your eyes.

What happens if I don't? You will use more profanity? Seems like a plan.

 

[ranfunck]

I am not having a problem with a logical explanation I just haven't got one yet, your answers contradict each other and are idiotic at best.

Actually it's physics. Objects in motion tend to stay in motion; objects at rest tend to stay at rest. When a body speeds up it adjusts to the increase in velocity. Or it doesnt.

As fare as you slapping me around not on your best day. You on the other hand have had your ass handed to you. Rimlob or Koo Koo would one of you please put up the vid of JFK getting that bullet to the front of his head maybe this bitch will look at it. I cant post it haven't been here long enough yet. Bitch Take your head out of your ass and open your eyes.

What happens if I don't? You will use more profanity? Seems like a plan.

It doesn't matter, you have made it clear that your are not interested in the truth. You are here just to sling bullshit and get your ass handed to you. Like I said before your not very good at this

 

[candycorn]

I am not having a problem with a logical explanation I just haven't got one yet, your answers contradict each other and are idiotic at best.

Actually it's physics. Objects in motion tend to stay in motion; objects at rest tend to stay at rest. When a body speeds up it adjusts to the increase in velocity. Or it doesnt.

As fare as you slapping me around not on your best day. You on the other hand have had your ass handed to you. Rimlob or Koo Koo would one of you please put up the vid of JFK getting that bullet to the front of his head maybe this bitch will look at it. I cant post it haven't been here long enough yet. Bitch Take your head out of your ass and open your eyes.

What happens if I don't? You will use more profanity? Seems like a plan.

It doesn't matter, you have made it clear that your are not interested in the truth.

When I asked you to explain to me what you think happened in reasonable detail--to inform me of "the truth" as you see it--you went ape shit crazy accusing me of "turning the tables".

Most of the time, conspiracy whackjobs complain that they aren't given a proper forum to, in an unedited way, explain their theories from toe to tip.

As you recall, I asked you to do exactly that...without vids or cut and pastes...so we get YOUR view of "the truth". But you resisted. My theory is that you are not comfortable explaining yourself in total because, if you do, you realize that you have to defend your writings. It's much easier (and much lazier of course) to try to hone in on something and just hammer away at it; even after it's explained to your bitch ass. Hence the shrill cries from you.

You are here just to sling bullshit and get your ass handed to you. Like I said before your not very good at this

Oh really? Who is handing me my ass? Rimjob is the longest running joke on this board now that Terral has left. Koo Koo is a moron who will be gone in a few weeks when he figures out how to get back on whatever other site he was recently kicked off of.

As for the JFK assassination, 100% of all evidence points to LHO being the lone gunman in Dallas on that day. If you have new evidence, it would be very kind of you to list it. Feel free sonny.

I am of the opinion that he was likely on the CIA payroll at some point (likely not at the time of the assassination) and instead of having this brought to light, LBJ buried it.

Either that or something far more shocking; Fidel Castro had Oswald kill JFK which, of course, is the ultimate act of war and LBJ had to decide to go balls deep into Cuba with the CMC fresh in the minds of the Russians and likely plunging us into nuclear war or simply take the hit and preserve both the nation and the world. I wouldn't find it shocking that Castro orchestrated it (Oswald visited embassies in Mexico City right before the assassination); I would find it shocking that we had the proof of Oswald acting on behalf of Cuba and we didn't go balls deep into Cuba.

But there is no doubt that Oswald was the lone gunman.

 

[daws101]

I am not having a problem with a logical explanation I just haven't got one yet, your answers contradict each other and are idiotic at best.

Actually it's physics. Objects in motion tend to stay in motion; objects at rest tend to stay at rest. When a body speeds up it adjusts to the increase in velocity. Or it doesnt.

As fare as you slapping me around not on your best day. You on the other hand have had your ass handed to you. Rimlob or Koo Koo would one of you please put up the vid of JFK getting that bullet to the front of his head maybe this bitch will look at it. I cant post it haven't been here long enough yet. Bitch Take your head out of your ass and open your eyes.

What happens if I don't? You will use more profanity? Seems like a plan.

It doesn't matter, you have made it clear that your are not interested in the truth. You are here just to sling bullshit and get your ass handed to you. Like I said before your not very good at this

typical conspiracy nut sack yammering....

 

[ranfunck]

Actually it's physics. Objects in motion tend to stay in motion; objects at rest tend to stay at rest. When a body speeds up it adjusts to the increase in velocity. Or it doesnt.



What happens if I don't? You will use more profanity? Seems like a plan.

It doesn't matter, you have made it clear that your are not interested in the truth. You are here just to sling bullshit and get your ass handed to you. Like I said before your not very good at this

typical conspiracy nut sack yammering....

I am so sorry if asking a simple question threatens you. All I asked for was an answer that explained what happened in a video. The answer I received is not supported by the video I saw. People ask what my theory is, and frankly I don't have one, which is why I ask questions. People whose beliefs are threatened by questions are either hiding something or are ignorant. I refuse to believe someone because they have an answer--the answer needs to be supported. So now that I didn't use profanity, can we get back to the real issue at hand instead of belittling my choice of words?

 

[candycorn]

It doesn't matter, you have made it clear that your are not interested in the truth. You are here just to sling bullshit and get your ass handed to you. Like I said before your not very good at this

typical conspiracy nut sack yammering....

I am so sorry if asking a simple question threatens you. All I asked for was an answer that explained what happened in a video. The answer I received is not supported by the video I saw. People ask what my theory is, and frankly I don't have one, which is why I ask questions. People whose beliefs are threatened by questions are either hiding something or are ignorant. I refuse to believe someone because they have an answer--the answer needs to be supported. So now that I didn't use profanity, can we get back to the real issue at hand instead of belittling my choice of words?

You do seem threatened by a simple question come to think of it. Wonder what you are hiding.

 

[daws101]

It doesn't matter, you have made it clear that your are not interested in the truth. You are here just to sling bullshit and get your ass handed to you. Like I said before your not very good at this

typical conspiracy nut sack yammering....

I am so sorry if asking a simple question threatens you. All I asked for was an answer that explained what happened in a video. The answer I received is not supported by the video I saw. People ask what my theory is, and frankly I don't have one, which is why I ask questions. People whose beliefs are threatened by questions are either hiding something or are ignorant. I refuse to believe someone because they have an answer--the answer needs to be supported. So now that I didn't use profanity, can we get back to the real issue at hand instead of belittling my choice of words?

your assumption that I feel threatened and am hiding something/ignorant is just more conspiracy nut sack yammering.
everyone has seen the Zapruder film...what's happening in it has been explained to you in detail..and those details are correct, whether or not you choose to believe them is your problem.

 

[candycorn]

typical conspiracy nut sack yammering....

I am so sorry if asking a simple question threatens you. All I asked for was an answer that explained what happened in a video. The answer I received is not supported by the video I saw. People ask what my theory is, and frankly I don't have one, which is why I ask questions. People whose beliefs are threatened by questions are either hiding something or are ignorant. I refuse to believe someone because they have an answer--the answer needs to be supported. So now that I didn't use profanity, can we get back to the real issue at hand instead of belittling my choice of words?

your assumption that I feel threatened and am hiding something/ignorant is just more conspiracy nut sack yammering.
everyone has seen the Zapruder film...what's happening in it has been explained to you in detail..and those details are correct, whether or not you choose to believe them is your problem.

Yeah but you see...he's special.

He's the only (wink) adult in the history of mankind to not have a theory about what happened in Dallas on 11/22/63. But somehow, he knows the Warren Commission is "full of shit" or however he characterized it and that some "don't want to know the truth". But he has no theory..(wink, wink).

 

[Rockland]

You are here just to sling bullshit and get your ass handed to you. Like I said before your not very good at this

You just inadvertently described yourself to a T, noob.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

four farts in a row from the agent trolls.