JFK assassination and the Orange Lady theory

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Discovery Channel just showed "JFK: Beyond the Magic Bullet". They did the most indepth analysis of the Zapruder Film I've seen yet, down to recreating the sounds of the day, and recreating the "magic bullet shot" using the same gun, from the same distance, with almost identical results. They proved that you CAN shoot the gun that was used in the Book Depository as fast as it was shot, and it WAS accurate. The only difference between the real shot, and their shot was that in the test, it skipped off two ribs when it went through the "Governor" instead of one rib, so it didn't penetrate his leg as it did in real life. Other than that it was identical.

I also watched most of the show and thought it was very well done. I particularly liked the part where the fired a bullet into a solid pine log and it traveled several meters with basically no damage, proving FMJ round can penetrate thru solid wood or lots of flesh with basically no damage.

I also liked the 3d simulation or model of how JFK and the governor where sitting in the car, and how the bullet struck them. They made the point which most people aren't aware of that governor is sitting approx 6 inches in from the door, and much lower than JFK in the back as the gov is on a low riding jump seat.

One thing I didn't like about the part on Badge man on the knoll is when they measured him with the computer and said that it couldnt be a man since its only like 2.5ft tall in the photo so he would have to be tiny. Did they ever think if he was laying prone, sitting or even crouched down?

Originally posted by Zaphod58
She shot something from her waist? Man I'm IMPRESSED! It's hard enough to hit a moving target with your arm extended actually using the sites, let alone shooting from the hip blindly.

There seems to be much ridicule here over shooting from the hip, interestingly enough in 1996, a left handed intellectually disabled man shot from the right hip with 20 head shots, reloading his second clip with one round left.

He killed 22 people and wounded 12 in less than five minutes.

Incidentally said man could not even load a weapon correctly the month before according to witnesses.

Port Arthur Massacre



[edit on 24-1-2006 by Mayet]

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Mayet]

Originally posted by Zaphod58
Discovery Channel just showed "JFK: Beyond the Magic Bullet". They did the most indepth analysis of the Zapruder Film I've seen yet, down to recreating the sounds of the day, and recreating the "magic bullet shot" using the same gun, from the same distance, with almost identical results. They proved that you CAN shoot the gun that was used in the Book Depository as fast as it was shot, and it WAS accurate. The only difference between the real shot, and their shot was that in the test, it skipped off two ribs when it went through the "Governor" instead of one rib, so it didn't penetrate his leg as it did in real life. Other than that it was identical.

Im slightly confused about this discovery channel "movie". Wasn't the magic bullet theory officially thrown out by the HSCA. The House Select Committee on Assassinations. Didnt the HSCA conclude there was more than one shooter?

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Mayet]

The Discovery channel DOCUMENTARY was looking at the assassination in detail, down to adding sounds to the Zapruder film based on what witnesses were seen doing, and interviews with people there. It was an attempt to use scientific analysis (something that not many people bother to do anymore) to show that it was possible that the events happened exactly as was stated, and there was only one shooter, or if there had to be more than one.

As far as shooting from the hip, there are probably 1 in 100 people that can do that and actually hit their target. ESPECIALLY a target that is in a moving vehicle, and turning his head back and forth, and moving in a non-patterned way.

[edit on 1/24/2006 by Zaphod58]

If its the lady in the red coat on the left side of frame 310 then its Jean Hill as I previously asked.

Her testimony is readily available all over the net. She already has a name and is famous as "the woman in red"

I don't know about any lady in red. This lady is wearing orange!

As far as shooting from the hip, there are probably 1 in 100 people that can do that and actually hit their target.

1 in 100? Try more like 1 in 1,000,000. You'd be amazed at what a well trained sniper is capable of doing! But 1 in 100 is way off.....

Wasn't the magic bullet theory officially thrown out by the HSCA. The House Select Committee on Assassinations. Didnt the HSCA conclude there was more than one shooter?

The magic bullet theory doesn't prove there is only one shooter. It only proves (or tries to) that one bullet went into the president's back, came out and hit Connally in the back and wrist wasn't it? The film or documentary they speak of actually gives pretty sound evidence that this was "possible." The "pristine" bullet that was found was certainly found to be planted. But this only accounts for one shot. It doesn't account for the shot to the neck or the headshot or the at least 3 other shots that missed their target.

So Mayet...I'm a bit surprised at you here with all your research.....thinking that the "magic bullet" theory is supposed to prove there was only one gunman. They (the Warren Commission) did try to use it to say that a total of three shots were fired and that was possible for one person to do in the amount of time the three shots (at least) that landed required. But the "magic bullet" was the cause of only one of the three known injuries to Kennedy. And today, again, we know that there were at least three shots that missed.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
The Discovery channel DOCUMENTARY was looking at the assassination in detail, down to adding sounds to the Zapruder film based on what witnesses were seen doing, and interviews with people there. It was an attempt to use scientific analysis (something that not many people bother to do anymore) to show that it was possible that the events happened exactly as was stated, and there was only one shooter, or if there had to be more than one.

As a matter of fact many many serious researchers do use scientific analysis of the whole assassination. An in depth look at all the JFK related sites will soon show that. The Zapruder film has also been scientifically debunked by many of those same scientific researchers. Including the scientific impossibility of Charles Brehms son, darting out from behind him to stand next to him and begin clapping his hands all within a time span of 1/2 a second.

As far as shooting from the hip, there are probably 1 in 100 people that can do that and actually hit their target. ESPECIALLY a target that is in a moving vehicle, and turning his head back and forth, and moving in a non-patterned way.

Speaking of odds. What would be the odds of a sniper or asassinator who could shoot almost sideways or on a svere angle, through trees, out a window on a sixth floor building at a moving car target and a moving person inside the car and shoot them in the head over such a distance.

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy
1 in 100? Try more like 1 in 1,000,000. You'd be amazed at what a well trained sniper is capable of doing! But 1 in 100 is way off.....

The magic bullet theory doesn't prove there is only one shooter. It only proves (or tries to) that one bullet went into the president's back, came out and hit Connally in the back and wrist wasn't it? The film or documentary they speak of actually gives pretty sound evidence that this was "possible." The "pristine" bullet that was found was certainly found to be planted. But this only accounts for one shot. It doesn't account for the shot to the neck or the headshot or the at least 3 other shots that missed their target.

As to the first part, try reading what I was talking about. A well trained sniper can easily hit more than that, BUT NOT SHOOTING FROM THE HIP. I suggest you try it some time. Go down to your local pistol range and put a gun by your hip and pull the trigger. It's a LOT harder than you make it out to be.

As far as the pristine bullet being planted, I suggest you watch the documentary I was talking about. They shot a full metal jacket round into a chunk of wook, and it went deep into the wood, and came out in pristine condition. Considering that wood is much harder than flesh, I'd have to say the chances of it going through a body and coming out the same way are pretty good.

Originally posted by Mayet
Speaking of odds. What would be the odds of a sniper or asassinator who could shoot almost sideways or on a svere angle, through trees, out a window on a sixth floor building at a moving car target and a moving person inside the car and shoot them in the head over such a distance.

Considering that snipers have hit people walking at over a mile, I'd have to say a LOT better than hitting the same person, shooting from the hip.

[edit on 1/24/2006 by Zaphod58]

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy

I don't know about any lady in red. This lady is wearing orange!

Can you just tell me from the still I posted which particular lady you mean.

Heres another taken from behind to clarify for you, is this the lady you are speaking of, the lady in the red coat?

So Mayet...I'm a bit surprised at you here with all your research.....thinking that the "magic bullet" theory is supposed to prove there was only one gunman.

But once again you are missquoting me.

I did not say that at all. I asked a question. I will now take this opportunity to ask you politely to stop misquoting me.

Im slightly confused about this discovery channel "movie". Wasn't the magic bullet theory officially thrown out by the HSCA. The House Select Committee on Assassinations. Didnt the HSCA conclude there was more than one shooter?

Didn't misquote you Mayet. You ask "wasn't the magic bullet theory thrown out by the HSCA?" and then "Didn't the HSCA conclude there was more than one shooter?" So, you are saying that the "magic bullet theory" to be believed requires a belief in one shooter. The "magic bullet" was just one bullet. There were at least 5 others!

Heres another taken from behind to clarify for you, is this the lady you are speaking of, the lady in the red coat?

Mayet...the quality of that picture is so horrible I can't tell who or what anything in the picture is....In fact, the figure closest to the camera looks like an astronaut with his/her helmet on!

As to the first part, try reading what I was talking about. A well trained sniper can easily hit more than that, BUT NOT SHOOTING FROM THE HIP. I suggest you try it some time. Go down to your local pistol range and put a gun by your hip and pull the trigger. It's a LOT harder than you make it out to be.

I'm not a trained shooter, so going down to my local pistol range and trying it out is going to prove nothing. A well trained sniper can handle just about any shot (if they are trained for it) plus, we're only talking a distance of about what? 10 feet? Nothing to a trained professional!! I also said the shot may have missed!

As far as the pristine bullet being planted, I suggest you watch the documentary I was talking about. They shot a full metal jacket round into a chunk of wood, and it went deep into the wood, and came out in pristine condition. Considering that wood is much harder than flesh, I'd have to say the chances of it going through a body and coming out the same way are pretty good.

Maybe so, but you forget that the bullet shattered Connally's wrist. Pretty hard to do that and still remain "pristine."

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

[edit on 24-1-2006 by Excitable_Boy]

The mechanics of shooting from the hip are COMPLETELY different. Even for a trained sniper. There are SO many different factors between what a sniper is trained to do and shooting from the hip.

The bullet they shot into a block of wood shouldn't have come out pristine either, but it did.

The bullet they shot into a block of wood shouldn't have come out pristine either, but it did.

Shouldn't have? Meaning what? According to the laws of physics or nature? Then maybe it was faked. It could easily have been faked on that show to prove the point they wanted to prove. That would probably be easier to do than shoot from the hip, right?

Well let's see excitable. You're taking an object made out of lead, that's designed to flatten and tumble when it enters an object, firing it at several hundred feet PER SECOND, into an object that's denser than the human body that it's designed to flatten inside. And getting it out pristine. Does this mean it's faked? No. It just means that for some reason it didn't react the way you expected it to. It happens sometimes. What purpose would they have in faking it? None at all. It was an independant study and test, with no agenda except to get to the bottom of what happened.

[edit on 1/24/2006 by Zaphod58]

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy

The bullet they shot into a block of wood shouldn't have come out pristine either, but it did.

Shouldn't have? Meaning what? According to the laws of physics or nature? Then maybe it was faked. It could easily have been faked on that show to prove the point they wanted to prove. That would probably be easier to do than shoot from the hip, right?

You asked the same exact questions about why it shouldn't have I was going to and even hit the next one right on about how it could have been faked for the show

What purpose would they have in faking it? None at all. It was an independant study and test, with no agenda except to get to the bottom of what happened.

Oh right...kind of like The Warren Commission.

The Warren Comission was appointed by the gov't. This was a group of people that was interested in what happened that day and set out to try to figure it out. See the difference here? Or is it because they believe differently than you do they had to have faked it? Or because it was on tv it's gotta be faked?

[edit on 1/24/2006 by Zaphod58]

Or is it because they believe differently than you do they had to have faked it? Or because it was on tv it's gotta be faked?

I only said what I said because YOU said the one shot into the wood SHOULDN'T have been pristine either. It has nothing to do with what I believe or because it was on TV. It was simply based on YOUR statement.

And there are a lot of things that SHOULDN'T happen but sometimes DO. Doesn't mean they're faked or anything else. Just means that they didn't react the way we expected them to.

Originally posted by Excitable_Boy

Im slightly confused about this discovery channel "movie". Wasn't the magic bullet theory officially thrown out by the HSCA. The House Select Committee on Assassinations. Didnt the HSCA conclude there was more than one shooter?

Didn't misquote you Mayet. You ask "wasn't the magic bullet theory thrown out by the HSCA?" and then "Didn't the HSCA conclude there was more than one shooter?" So, you are saying that the "magic bullet theory" to be believed requires a belief in one shooter.

No I didnt say that at all.


Speaking of the Zapruder film, did you know that Zapruder said he started filming as they entered the street. It is rather strange that the film cuts to the limo well after it turned into the street.


www.assassinationscience.com...

If you want more details, please read The Great Zapruder Film Hoax. It contains much more information about the Zapruder film and its forgery. An earlier book, Murder in Dealey Plaza, has more information about the whole assassination and its cover-up.
In the end, you have to decide for yourself what to believe.

But don’t just believe what the U.S. Government tells you!

[edit on 25-1-2006 by Mayet]

Speaking of the Zapruder film, did you know that Zapruder said he started filming as they entered the street. It is rather strange that the film cuts to the limo well after it turned into the street.

Wrong. That 40 years of research did not serve you too well Mayet. Look at frame #1 from the Z film:



It is as Zaprueder said it was, he starts filming as the motorcycles in front of the limo enter the street. You can't even see the limo yet!

source: www.assassinationresearch.com...

you still haven't answered my question, who an which is the lady in orange you are talking of in your thread here. I am sure if you can post a link of the Zapruder film stills showing one thing, you could clarify who your orange lady is by posting a zapruder still with her in it so the members and guests can see who you are talking of.