Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

William Seger

(11,235 posts)
2. The origin of the shot is not an "assumption"
Mon Dec 17, 2012, 04:03 AM
Dec 2012

That origin of the shot can be inferred directly by from path of the bullet through the body, which was downward into the limo at a slight angle. Not at all surprisingly, it points back fairly precisely to where Oswald's gun, which apparently fired it, was found. You seem to be proposing yet another "magic bullet theory" that says the bullet came from somewhere else but somehow curved around and only appeared to come from where Oswald's gun was found.

And you bring up yet another "magic bullet theory": that the forward head-snap that we see in the Zapruder film in the first frame after the hit was magically caused by a bullet from the front-right, but the "back and to the left" that we see two frames later was caused by some magical delay in transferring momentum from the bullet.



(Much more: http://www.google.com/search?q=jfk+forward+head+snap)

> The official assertion that shots were only fired from a 6th floor window at the rear has always struck me as a bald-faced lie.

Applying actual physics to an accurate observation of what the Zapruder film actually shows, the assertion that the shot came from anywhere other than behind strikes me as a bald-faced lie. There are several possible explanations for the "back and to the left" motion which came later, but since momentum from the bullet would be transferred instantaneously, it is not on that list of possible explanations.



Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

There was no trace.... Frank_Norris_Lives Dec 2012 #1
The origin of the shot is not an "assumption" William Seger Dec 2012 #2
Oh my Gawd.... Frank_Norris_Lives Dec 2012 #3
Posner, depending on where he is... says different things about this... MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #5
Well, you're the one who brought up the "jerk & jettison to the rear" nonsense William Seger Dec 2012 #6
Contributing to the tedious nature of discussion concerning the Kennedy assassination are people... cherokeeprogressive Dec 2012 #8
Ok, I'll bite..... Frank_Norris_Lives Dec 2012 #9
In your own words... cherokeeprogressive Dec 2012 #10
I see.... Frank_Norris_Lives Dec 2012 #15
Nope William Seger Dec 2012 #17
If I look.... Frank_Norris_Lives Dec 2012 #18
Nope William Seger Dec 2012 #20
No witty retort? cherokeeprogressive Dec 2012 #11
Have been.... Frank_Norris_Lives Dec 2012 #12
Happy Holidays to you as well. n/t cherokeeprogressive Dec 2012 #13
Let's back up here for a second... Frank_Norris_Lives Dec 2012 #14
It's the two frames immediately before and after the hit William Seger Dec 2012 #16
This is dependent... Frank_Norris_Lives Dec 2012 #19
Your explanation doesn't work William Seger Dec 2012 #21
Who said that? MrMickeysMom Dec 2012 #4
Well, there's a profound observation William Seger Dec 2012 #7
Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2020 #22
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Creative Speculation»Arlen Specter did not pro...»Reply #2