Why did Jackie shoot JFK?

Because he fucked anything that moved.

This one is zoomed in so you can see it more clearly.

So that DataLounge could have a meme called Jackie On Assistance.

Has Op's video been authenticated? If it has/is, Jackie's immediately climbing onto the car's trunk with lightening speed is horrifying. A normal person would frozen because of the trauma.

she and rafel cruz were having an affair, and they wanted to live happily ever after on a secluded farm in alberta?

Boy, that brain explosion was pretty rude.

r4, If Jackie Kennedy wanted to kill her husband, she could have orchestrated it better than riding in a parade with millions watching in the middle of Texas.

R4 nails it.

Ridiculous shit. R7 I was about to say about this. Why shoot him in private when I can shoot him in broad daylight with a million witnesses?

Differences between the Zapruder film and the Secret Service reconstruction of the event in 1963

Also, a lady really doesn't want her name in the papers more than two or three times.

Major zoom in on Jackie shooting him from the official Zapruder footage

DL has become exhausting lately

[quote] This copy of the film was made before Life magazine damaged frames in their copy. Except for the damaged areas, the two versions are identical.

Unless you think every single copy of the Zapruder film has somehow been altered, then, yes, this is the authenticated original footage used in every investigation of the assassination.

No, OP. Jackie did not shoot her husband. Just stop it.

Who keeps starting these inane threads? Discussion is one thing; these ridiculous topics are another. CUT IT OUT.

Because after popping out three children, he had the nerve to say that I had gained a bit of weight!

Because when I did my televised tour of the White House, the cheap fuck wouldn't shell out to have it filmed in color.

OK, if this is bullshit, please, show me a copy of any footage of the assassination in which it *does not* appear that Jackie blew his head off. Because I can't find one.

Marie Muchmore's footage shows the same thing from a different angle

This thread is weirdly compelling

Here are a dozen different films of the assassination, taken that day, as it happened, from varying angles. And they *all* show Jackie shooting Jack in the head.

LOL. OP! Look at the footage again, dude. When he first brings his two fists up to his throat, which was the first shot contact, she places her right gloved hand on his left forearm to push it down. She is then trying to find out what the fuck is going on by dividing her attention between him and Gov Connelly. She's still talking to Connelly when she then leans her head into his, and that's when the fatal shot takes place. I don't blame her one bit for saying "FUCK THIS SHIT! I'M OUT!" I do not believe that she was attempting to retrieve part of his skull on the trunk. I believe that she immediately jumped into self-preservation mode and tried to bolt from the scene. She did NOT shoot her husband.

Is Melania Trump reading this?

r24, I don't know what your native language is, but the meaning of your post is unclear in English.

In the footage:

1) JFK is hit in the throat and his arms go up to hold his throat

2) he leans left into Jackie and she holds him

3) Jackie moves forward and bends over to look at him from the front, she repositions her arms, her left arm goes under his head and then his head is blown off from bottom to top, the top of his head spurting blood and bits.

Are you on assistance R26? Do you get workman's comps for being tinfoil hat conspiracy theorist?

r27 are you blind?

Is this a new conspiracy? Why didn't Oliver Stone cover this?

WHAT IN THE FUCK?!?!? Is this real, OP???? I AM SHOOK.

r29...One answer to that question is: because at the time Stone made his film, all the footage of Dealey Plaza had not yet been Mandela Affected. *No one* remembers Jackie ever being even suspected of being a shooter...and, yet, the footage that exists today shows her to clearly be the most likely source of the 2nd & final shot.

I realize this is probably too many conspiracies at once for people unfamiliar with the Mandela Effect. That's fine. Just provide footage of the event which shoes something other than Jackie shooting JFK in the head.

shoes = shows

What about the grassy knoll? Jackie climbed on the back of the car, as someone upthread stated, as an instinct of self-preservation.

r33, bends over him, puts her hand under his head and then his head explodes with an upward trajectory exit wound. No one on the grassy knoll would be able to shoot him from the angle to make that happen. Unless there was someone crouched down between the seats, I don't see how the final shot could have come from anyone but Jackie.

Hiding the gun behind the seat afterward

[quote]Why did Jackie shoot JFK?

Exactly. And why did the Allies let Hitler escape to South America in 1945?! Why do people keep pretending the earth is round?

Why doesn't anyone think of the children kidnapped and sold into slavery by Hillary?!

For OP, R26, who is also R28

r36, r37, I've asked repeatedly for naysayers to provide footage that shows something other than Jackie firing the final shot, but you haven't provided any footage at all. Your derision does not serve the place of any photographic evidence that contradicts the 12 sets of independent footage showing Jackie shoot JFK that I've offered up.

BOOM BOOM BOOM

The better question is why hasn't Melania shot Trump?

I thought it was Kristin. On Youtube it's Kristin.

But Trump said Ted Cruz's father did it.

BTW: Jackie was actually a Muslim terrorist born in some shithole country in Affica or the Middle East.

Because slow poisoning is better, R40.

...because she put up with his pubic sex at parties and Marilyn but wouldn't tolerate him fooling around with an Auchincloss. Way too close to home. They threw her an Onassis as payment.

Op this board is not your blog. No one here is interested in any of the inane half-thoughts that pass through your pinhead.

r45 is a plagiarist! You can't even come up with your own insults. Pathetic.

[quote]Is this a new conspiracy? Why didn't Oliver Stone cover this?

Forget Oliver Stone. What about Stephen Sondheim? Assassins now needs a female to play the Balladeer. Will Jackie's songs be legit or belt?

Jackie? OP, surely you jest! Everyone knows JFK shot himself and only Jackie's quick actions saved herself and many others from his murderous, catholic rampage.

We all knew he would go bad eventually. That whole family is/was whacko.

Jackie was likely subjected to CIA/MKULTRA mind control. Connelly was her handler, hence her focus on him as she fired the kill shot.

^Hahahahahaha. Staaaaaahp it!

That pill box hat was really a pill box....for a mini machine gun. Bitch had game.

^If she really had game, then she'd have sported a big afro wig and hid a revolver inside the afro like Pam Grier aka Foxy Brown.

Too obvious, R52....girl was a subtle killer with soft tricks

Well, my dearests, I spent several hours with Mrs. Kennedy toward the beginning of President Kennedy's term in office. I found her to be most agreeable, if not a bit sullen and withdrawn. For some odd reason, she appeared to have the slightest look of discomfort on her face the entire time we were in one another's company. At one point, I'd thought I heard her call me a dirty name under her breath. When I asked her to repeat it she only asked me "Do you HUNT?" I would have never assumed her to be responsible for her husband's murder, but it WAS rumored years later that she DID have negro blood coursing through her veins going generations back. Would anyone care for some Tang?

BOOM, behind the seat, just like that. BOOM, behind the seat, just like that.

Don't be fooled. Did you watch The Crown? In that scene where Liz is out at Windsor and Jackie comes to visit her? The scene in the show was not how it really went down. They didn't talk about raising children and governing. Liz put the hit on JFK and taught Jackie how to carry a pistol inside her glove. Jackie was just the shooter. It was Big Liz that was the brains behind the whole deal. With chaos in the US, Big Liz was poised to take back the US for Great Britain. Unfortunately, Lady Bird Johnson had grown up shooting, so Liz had to back off when she realized that LB knew how to use a six shooter.

I'm convinced OP-- although I do think we've entered a parallel reality at some point.

With how QUICKLY and ADEPTLY JKO scaled the back of a moving car, without being injured or without assistance (no pun intended), is, indeed, horrifying. Gurl IMMEDIATELY bolted ala Milla Jovovich in Resident Evil.

Jackie O~ Ninja Assassin: on the next american crime story. Brought to you by Ryan Murphy. Casting?

Is there any merit to this? DL scholars please let me know.

I'm willing to reprise my role as Jackie for Emmy consideration.

r60, Please, find footage of Dealey Plaza that day that shows something other than Jackie shooting JFK in the head. And share it with us. I would love to see it. My memory is that there were only four people in the car and no glass pane behind the front seats and that the driver turned around in such a way that indicated it would have been [italic]possible[/italic] that he fired the final shot. That is, obviously, no longer the case. There was nothing in the footage that I first saw which gave any indication of Jackie firing the final shot and, yet, in all the current footage she's clearly the shooter.

Because of a bullet's velocity, the damage/trauma is more visible at the trauma's exit wound.

r63, right. And in all the footage we know to be available, at this point, the exit wound is the top right side of his head; Jackie appears to shoot him from under his chin on the left side and from an angle that would make sense in causing the bullet to travel at a tight diagonal angle. Or are you suggesting her movements and the timing of the shot are a coincidence and that you see the trajectory coming from elsewhere?

Duh, R60. Of course there isn't. It's just the usual delusional blather of a conspiracy theorist who is determined to hang on to their illusions at all costs.

She did it to be with me!

I feel like The House of Yes should be featured at every year's DataLounge Film Festival.

If this is real, then it could have been a double, JKO could have been knocked out somewhere, to be retrieved later, and a special agent did the kill.

What is happening? Is this even real. WTF

r68 if it's real? It's the Zapruder film and every other inch of footage of the assassination at Dealey Plaza that day. If you know of additional footage, to the 12 different home movies of the event that I posted above, which show something other than Jackie blowing off JFK's head, please, share it with us. I would love to see footage that resembles my original memory of the shooting. I can't find anything that fits with my memory, the first hand narratives of what people saw and heard, or even the "standard" conspiracy theories about who shot him.

The event seems to have "changed".

It was Rosemary, disguised as Jackie, and desperate for revenge.

why are we still covering up the fact that Obama killed JFK? It's a fact that the 2 and 1/2 year old Obama was smuggled in from Kenya to perform this dastardly deed. he hid in the back knee well of the limo and when they entered Dealy Plaza he jumped up and shot JFK with the pistol provided by the Communist Chinese. He hopped over the door, was caught by the Cuban agent waiting for him and was spirited off to first Havana, then Jakarta where he was schooled in revolutionary tactics then placed at Occidental College. From there....the rest is history

For the kneejerk naysayers who didn't even bother to watch the linked footage before farting up this elevator:

Blows my Mind! Pun Intended.

He must’ve made one comment too many about her size 11 feet...

Maybe it was Joan Crawford dressed up as Jackie.

Wow, I am starting to think this is for real. The MKUltra tie in resonates, and I am NOT a conspiracy theorist nutter.

r77, what's the other option? Other than it being real? It's all the footage of the assassination.

[quote]Wow, I am starting to think this is for real.

You really believe Jackie Kennedy would kill her husband in front of millions of witnesses? She would have done something more clever like that Twilight Zone murder where the woman whacks her husband with a frozen lamb chop.

I know r78 it's just a big fucking thing to wrap one's mind around. We've been indoctrinated for so long. I wonder if this is why she put the lockdown on the release of her diaries until all of us are way past dead.

R79 MKUltra was a real thing. Mind control experiments. Add to that the natural inclination toward disbelief that his own wife would, let alone could, kill him in front of witnesses is an extra boost toward plausible deniability. Though this footage does not lie. Her jetting the fuck out of there like that too, she wasn't looking for chunks of his skull, she was just doing what she was told to do and fuck did she do that pronto. Most people would be too stunned to move. Or would remain in the car freaking out. This also puts some muscle behind why the whole Warren Commission findings were so hinky.

r81 I'm not sure how you're making the leap to mkultra from footage that...has no indication of having anything to do with mkultra. I agree with the fact that the program existed. That's public knowledge both the Canadian and US governments have released. However, to try to tie footage of Jackie blowing out John's brains to that disclosed program, apropos of absolutely nothing, makes you sound like someone who is trying to discredit the obvious by association with something considered fringe by the mainstream. In other words, you sound like a "disinfo agent", a term I'm sure you're familiar with. Everything is not actually related to everything else. Most real conspiracies, if you think about, by their very nature, stand in isolation.

[quote]She would have done something more clever like that Twilight Zone murder where the woman whacks her husband with a frozen lamb chop.

FFS, you can only kill a 2 y.o. with a fucking lamb chop. It was a leg of lamb dumbass

OP it was r49 who made my mind go there. And there it remains, at least for now.

What I find most provocative about this is the sheer unlikelihood of something as obvious as what the footage shows going completely unnoticed for 60ish years. This is footage people have obsessively pored over for decades. These films have been scrutinized frame by frame in microscopic details. No one could ever live long enough to read all the books written about this assassination. There have been more conspiracy theories about who killed JFK than about anyone else who has been murdered in all of history. And, yet, never, was, "Wow, it looks like Jackie blew his brains out!" part of the conversation. Looking at the footage, today, it seems plain as day. So, how do we reconcile the incompatible scenario of the most pivotal and analyzed moment of footage plainly showing something no one saw for more than half a century? It doesn't compute. And it's not what I (or many other people) remember having previously seen. It changed.

It was an aneurysm. There's nothing to indicate that a bullet was anywhere near his head when that happened.

lol, r86

Brain fart. Thread closed.

as I mentioned up thread, we have entered a parallel dimension. How else do you explain what's happening to the world over the last few years?. Jackie DID kill JFK in this dimension- but did not in the previous one. This is why we can now see the truth that was previously obscured. also how else do you explain T Rump?

Why ? He gave her VD.

I am so fucking intrigued by this I keep hitting refresh for more posts and insights. I swear I'm going to dream about this tonight.

She shoved the gun up her snatch and held it there past when Johnson took oath of office till she got back to the White House and could dispose of it in Caroline's toy chest.

Why would you dream about this? Jackie clearly asked John a complex question, resulting in a brain fart, which caused an aneurysm. Why this has been touted as some mystery for so long is beyond me.

Here's "residue" of a theory that only works if it was a 4 person car, with Connelly in the front passenger seat, as so many recall:

Thanks for feeding my beast r94!

As they began the motorcade, he told her that pink gaberdine made her look hippy, and she lost it.

This person poses a good question about whatever it is that is going on and how it operates:

[quote] If you had asked me 2 weeks ago I would have said 4 people in the car. But replaying the video with 6 people now, without reading all of this, I also would have also thought I made a mistake (and still think I could have) because my focus has always been on what was happening in the back of that car. And honestly, even looking to see now the 6 people vs. 4, it is still easy for me not to pay attention to the front drivers as most of the footage and my focus is on the back 4 people, and especially the president and Jackie. Now that aside, [bold]this now footage with Jackie possibly holding a gun makes no sense. I can't formulate it in my mind how that could happen without any questions directed towards her before now-because it most certainly would have been discovered and accusations thrown at her, if not a full blown arrest and trial, before now and before her lifetime ended. So I guess my question is, [italic]if this video has changed and showing this, wouldn't the past events have changed as well?[/italic] Wouldn't the video evidence have subsequently ended in her arrest ? I mean one of the going things here is parrallel universes crossing over-so if that is the case in this video shouldn't there be some group of people saying that they also remember this video as well as Jackie being the suspect in his death, confusing the rest of us who have no memory of such a thing? Or if the theory of time travel changing the past is true, why would it have only altered the video and not other things- like we should also be confused because all the sudden everybody says Jackie was arrested but found innocent, but none of us remember...[/bold]all of this is hurting my head.

...is this even Jackie? Doesn't it sort of look like a dude in a wig and kabuki makeup? Her hand looks huge. Is [italic]any[/italic]thing real?

The program referenced by R79 is an episode of Alfred Hitchcock Presents titled “Lamb To The Slaughter” not the Twilight Zone.

Facts do matter, especially when douching out on another poster R83.

Synopsis Mary Maloney is a devoted wife and an exceptional housekeeper. One day, her police chief husband tells her he's leaving her for another woman. An angry Mary accidentally kills him by hitting his head with a frozen leg of lamb. She calls the police and tells them she was at the store when the murder took place. The investigating officer is further frustrated when he cannot find the murder weapon. Knowing of the long and hard hours spent looking into the case, Mary invites the officer and his men for a bite to eat. They dig into Mary's leg of lamb. The officer says, "For all we know, it (the murder weapon) might be right under our very noses." (TV.com)

To be honest, there's something very fake about the lighting on her arms, as if this was altered footage. Did you have this totally saved offline previously, OP? Because everything online can be altered after the fact, vids replaced if someone is unethical enough.

What's especially weird, is that elder President Bush was on secret service duty that day. The same Elder Bush who later became President and who Reagan was threatened into taking on as a Vice President.

Because jack didn't make enough money to satisfy the venal, disgusting whore. She wanted more money to spend on crap and spent her life spreading her legs in 2 time zones to get it. The best part is she grubbily accepted gifts from her many social acquaintances then spewed nasty comments about them the minute they were out if earshot. She was vile.

Forgot to add, the whole Kennedy family were putrid scum, despite the ridiculous media worship of them

The truth is that's not Jackie, that's Little Edie. Big Edie had the real Jackie trapped at Grey Gardens, held hostage by a swarm of angry raccoons. It was a make good for years of thwarted hope. Little Edie was really just meant to enjoy the ride but it all went horribly wrong. The sky was so blue that day.

Considering that Jack shook their baby to death, of course it was all covered up, crib death being what it was in the 60s, I wouldn't blame Jackie.

Bump

No silly, Little Edie was paid off to position herself at the grassy knoll. Girl could pull off a G-man suit with aplomb. She did make the mistake of being seen, but quickly slipped off her pants and slipped back into her housecoat and scarf.

[quote]And, yet, never, was, "Wow, it looks like Jackie blew his brains out!" part of the conversation.

That's probably because it's a genuinely stupid theory, not backed up by anything other than your fevered imagination.

R105, it was that bitch or me. Oswald was supposed to hit me.

OP has the absence of taste. Hideous taste. JFK had already been nipped or something. Jackie leans in and then the kill shot.

FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS. FUCK YOU TROLLS. INCLUDING RUSSIAN TROLLS:. AND DEPLORABLE TROLLS.

Did you take your Seroquel today R110?

Why ask, R111? The answer is obvious.

I would like to subscribe to your newsletter R72.

Bob Hope. And Shirley Booth.

Are there actually idiots entertaining the idea that Jackie shot Jack? People, as time has gone on, have been getting dumber and dumber.

R68 so who the fuck was on the plane with Johnson when he took the oath of office. Moron.

it's just unfunny trolling. Jackie could be a cunt but she doesn't deserve this.

[quote]People, as time has gone on, have been getting dumber and dumber.

—Anonymous

yes, it's called reverse evolution

Well if you believe the Warren commission you are deluded. A bullet does not change trajectory 2-3 times in the course of flight.

"My wife is a very strong woman." - JFK

"As we both sat outside the trauma room, I looked over at her (Jackie) with one recurrent thought in mind - that this was a very, very strong woman." - Nellie Connelly

Well she shot him, she didn't bench press him.

Per the Zapruder footage, he gets hit in the neck while they are behind the sign. After the car passes the sign, his arms go to his neck. Jackie tries to pull his left elbow down. He leans left, into her. She leans forward and around him and blows his fucking brains out, tucks the gun behind the seat, pushes him down and climbs onto the the trunk of the car.

I must assume that anyone who does not see this has not actually watched the Zapruder film anytime after 2016, which is when people first began to notice the change and that the driver-as-gunman theory was now impossible.

Again, I invite & welcome anyone who disputes that the footage I have linked is authentic to provide footage they believe to be authentic, which shows something other than Jackie making the kill shot. I cannot find any such footage, despite my memory (and the memories of many other people) of the event being quite different than what is now shown in the 12 known & available sets of 'home movies' taken in Dealey that day. Other widely discussed discrepancies between the existing footage and people's memories of the footage include: 4 vs. 6 seater car, Conally being in the the front passenger seat vs. the middle right jump seat, Conally wearing a hat vs. no hat, the car being white vs. black, the existence of a bullet proof partition behind the front seat (in a topless car) vs. no partition, etc.

Please, if you dispute that the footage I've shown is valid, rather than screaming insults like a drunken troll, provide alternate footage or even still frames that show something other than Jackie shooting JFK.

r100 - No, I don't have my own private home collection of assassination videos. Other people who have been confounded by the change in the footage have reported that old magazines with retrospectives of the event have had their photos altered to show a 6 seater car rather than the 4 seater most recall. That's the issue with the Mandela Effect: when something is changed, whether it is the E to A in what was The Berenstein Bears or who shot JFK, *most* of the physical remnants change with it. Hence, the "leaky" parallel universe theories, collapsing universe theories, simulation theories, psyop theories, etc. Sometimes there is "residue" of what the majority of people remember left behind. This will often be in the form of things made by hand like hand-written drawings or letters, but occasionally people have found footage and photographs that match the common memory.

Residue:

She killed him because she was pregnant with Aristotle's child and loved his money.

[quote]She leans forward and around him and blows his fucking brains out, tucks the gun behind the seat, pushes him down and climbs onto the the trunk of the car,

marries A. Onassis, buries A. Onassis, becomes an editor and lives for 30 some years.

Dear god you are insufferable OP.

A lot of people turned up dead in the days, weeks, months and even years after JFK's assassination. People who knew too much. Jackie knew too much, believe it. And she was targeted after the assassination. I believe it was in an RFK biography that I'd read of an actual scenario when he had to haul ass over to her home to calm her down. The place was crawling with law enforcement as someone had called her with a bogus bomb threat AGAIN. The Kennedys knew who was responsible. "THEY got Jack" was repeated among them from the time the assassination occurred. Again, I stress that she was targeted afterwards.

I'm really fascinated by the life a conspiracy theorist. Tell me, are you able to hold down a full-time job? Are you able to live on your own or are you in some sort of assisted living facility? Do you usually see things that are not really there in any other films or photos? Thanks for answering my questions OP. I appreciate it!

r124, do you have alternate footage that shows something other than the Zapruder film?

OP, thanks for the laugh of the day. Seriously, you’re funnier than Henny Youngman.

I'll show you my footage OP if you tell me if there are other films and/or photos that you seem to see something that no else does? Then I'll post my footage.

[quote]r124 do you have alternate footage that shows something other than the Zapruder film?

As your mother, I feel no need to show you anything.

If the footage is fake, it should be pretty easy for you trolls claiming such to provide the real footage.

[quote]Please, if you dispute that the footage I've shown is valid, rather than screaming insults like a drunken troll, provide alternate footage or even still frames that show something other than Jackie shooting JFK.

Moron, we don't necessarily dispute the footage; we dispute your ... creative ... interpretation of that footage. In other words, it's not us; it's you.

Holy shit.. the second shot, with half his head blown off.. still shocking when you see it.

Its definitely a Bounty moment, R133.

You idiot R131. It's not the footage but I like how R132 said 'creative interpretation." It's the same footage that's been seen for years. Get back on your meds.

My take from all this is how timeless are Chanel suits and the 1963 Continental. The whole thing is just very classy.

r132, okay, then provide a plausible alternate explanation for the trajectory of the exit wound through the top right side of his head. None of you screamy drunken insult trolls provide any threories or evidence to the contrary of the obvious, which that Jackie leans over and shoots JFK under his chin. What do you see in that footage?

r133/r134 - frame 313 the exploding brain frame was "suppressed" until last year, as were additional frames. There are still about 50 missing frames from the Z film, most of which would have shown the car pausing behind the sign and, later, a more extended exchange between Jackie and the agent on the trunk. You can see the tail-lights in the Nix & Muchmore films and the account given by Secret Service Agent in the car of JFK's announcement "I've been shot" and his rising up in his seat are clearly missing.

r132 - again, it's not the "same" footage that's been seen for years, whether you believe in the Mandela Effect or not. Many frames including "the kill shot" were withheld from the public until the recent release of a large bulk of JFK materials. But you just keep making an ass of yourself.

cuz she was CIA

[quote]But you just keep making an ass of yourself.

Oh, the irony....

Okaaaay R137..

Well, OP, you titled this thread "Why did Jackie shoot JFK?" Yet the first poster R49 who mentioned a possible MKULtra tie in, and then myself r77 and r80 who thought that resonated you dismissed right out of hand, and in my case quite rudely. You keep banging on about how the footage is genuine, and fine I think many of us believe you. So, answer your own question. Why did she do it? And don't discount our ideas when we do indeed try to answer genuinely.

Oh, I don't think you need to warn anyone, R140. This OP is nutty enough that all anyone will ever do with them is either laugh or cross to the other side of the street to avoid them, carefully avoid eye contact.

OP, is this you?

R136, sooooooo true.

Like an ice sculpture.

Maybe because Jackie isn't holding a gun in the film you lunatic??

Told you I was hardcore.

R143 Great find. Hah! What a twat. I guess in his timeline it was Lyndon B "Johnston" being sworn in.

I say it was the first action of the Hale Bopp cult. NASA. Rothschilds. Masons.

They both reached for the gun! I seen it when I was zipping him up.

OP before this did you believe Nellie Connally was driving them around Dallas?

There were MAJOR diamonds and precious stones sewn into that Chanel Suit. It was a set up by Middle Eastern royalty. This is why Jackie didn't take it off. She needed to be back at the White House to hid the stones.

r143/r147 - ???? Nope, that's not me. If you're not interested in the thread, you can just ignore it rather than trying to gaslight everyone who sees what's obvious and slinging insults around like trolls/schoolyardbullies/republicans.

r77/r80 - Okay, fair enough. I don't feel I was rude, but yes I guess "MKUltra" is a partial explanation. It doesn't explain why the CIA would use Jackie rather than one of their trained assassins nor why it was decided to do this in broad day light, given the risks involved, but okay "she was brain washed" is a kind of spare explanation. What are you further thoughts on that, to flesh out your theory?

r138, there are lots of theories about why the CIA (etc.) wanted to take Kennedy out. Why do you believe they wanted him dead?

So OP why do YOU think she shot him?

The morgue/autopsy photos are all over the internet, and there is no entrance wound where OP insists Jackie "shot" JFK.

Because she was dickmatised by Latin big cock and Irish curse JFK couldn't fulfill her. She had tasted all that HOT Italian cock!!!!!!!!!! Also I suspect Black Jack was hung and Jackie liked the big dick energy. Fortunately JFK Jr got the Bouvier cock genes. Had some swagger. Not much for brains but whatever he was rich beautiful and a stud.

That's not an exit wound we see as the fatal shot. He was hit from a distance at the top right of his skull by someone to his right, perhaps a distance forward.

I'm just adding this video for anyone who's never seen it before.

[quote]OP before this did you believe Nellie Connally was driving them around Dallas?

Nellie Connally kept passing her more ammo. She couldn't hide a semi in under that seat.

R157 Deaf, mute eye witness and with a "new" story?! This whole thing just gets weirder and weirder.

It's telling that none of the trolls hurling metaphorical molotov cocktails in the form of rants and insults and gaslighting can offer anything in the way of alternative footage, explanations for why it looks like Jackie shoots him if she didn't and were completely oblivious to the fact that frame 313 (amongst others) was only recently released to the public. Clearly, you can't even be bothered to pretend not to be trolls. There's not even an attempt to engage in discussion and your tone is more fitting for 4Chan than DL. But it should be equally clear to you by now that you're not going to rile me up.

r155, first of all, this isn't about me saying anything. This is about what the video shows. Secondly, there were major issues with conflicting reports from the Dallas and Bethesda staff who dealt with his body, including refutations that the most-mortem photos were accurate.

[quote] Although the HSCA, composed predominantly of lawyers, looked at the body of evidence and declared officially that they had palpated the pulse of conspiracy, the HSCA’s physician consultants, and the legal diagnosticians who worked the medical/autopsy part of the investigation, acted as if they disagreed with that diagnosis. The HSCA reported, for example, that, as per the autopsy photographs, there was no evidence of any damage to the backside of JFK’s head.

[quote] Those pictures show that the back of Kennedy’s head was without a blemish, except for a small red spot near the top of the back of the head. This spot, the HSCA decided, marked the site where the entering, fatal bullet had struck. The photos also seem to show a large blowout wound toward the right front part of JFK’s skull. The pictures were in stark contrast to the doctors who had treated JFK in Dallas, who had all said JFK’s gaping skull wound was not in front, but in the back.

[quote] To refute the Dallas doctors, the HSCA presented its own, better witnesses. The HSCA said that 26 witnesses who saw JFK’s autopsy had endorsed the photographs, and thus endorsed the theory a bullet had entered the back of JFK’s skull and blew out of the right front.[14] But, as we will show, the opposite was true: Declassified files prove that, by both word and diagram, autopsy witnesses had refuted the pictures, not endorsed them. What did the HSCA do? In addition to misreporting on them, it suppressed the witness interviews and the explicit autopsy diagrams they’d prepared. [As with its treatment of Dr. Burkley, not even the HSCA’s own autopsy experts were allowed to see the HSCA’s interviews with the autopsy witnesses.] Thus, witnesses who had actually challenged Oswald’s guilt were cited as corroborating it.

[quote] And there were other disturbing revelations in suppressed files, too. The HSCA also reported that its experts had authenticated the controversial autopsy pictures. Like its claim regarding the 26 autopsy witnesses, that wasn’t exactly true either. In a once-secret letter, the HSCA’s chief counsel Robert Blakey reported that tests by his experts had proved that JFK’s autopsy camera did not match Kennedy’s autopsy photos. Continuing the pattern set with Burkley and the inconvenient autopsy witnesses, that letter was similarly withheld from the gaze of the HSCA’s forensic experts and the public.

[quote]It's telling that none of the trolls hurling metaphorical molotov cocktails in the form of rants and insults and gaslighting can offer anything...

It's telling that you're seeing things that aren't there, cannot defend your views, and cannot come up with a single explanation as to why Jackie did this nor why she picked such a public place and method to do this. It's also telling that others have pointed out errors in your ... creative ... interpretation which you have subsequently ignored because they don't fit into this supremely idiotic view of yours.

[quote]There's not even an attempt to engage in discussion and your tone is more fitting for 4Chan than DL.

LOL.... Oh, the irony.... Serious questions we take seriously. Questions like yours we laugh at or ignore.

[quote]But it should be equally clear to you by now that you're not going to rile me up.

We don't give a shit, dear. You're just here for our amusement; nothing more. Nobody takes you seriously.

[quote]this isn't about me saying anything. This is about what the video shows.

No, dear, it's what you [italic]claim[/italic] the video shows, despite the fact that it doesn't show any such thing.

OP, why do you keep dodging the most direct question of all? Why do YOU think she shot him? Enough about footage, enough about how everyone is out to get you (they aren't) enough about 4bloodychan, enough about "disinfo". Enough already. One simple question: why do YOU think she shot him?

The kill shot came from the front on the right at a distance. The bullet came in at an extreme angle and exited out the back of his head. The first shot came from the back right, entering near the top left tip of the right shoulder blade and exited through his wind pipe. This is when he brought his two fists to this throat. There was also a shot which hit Gov Connally.

The Warren Commission report is akin to same commission telling us all that the sky is actually brown and we all just nod our heads in agreement. "Okay!"

He couldn't keep it zipped, he had the clap, he had that 'best friend' around all the time, his voice was annoying, his mother was, ironically, from hell and the rest of his family wasn't far behind. The question is why wouldn't she shoot him?

"PTSD"

Why do you keep saying that R160 when everyone can see she isn't holding anything in that film?

Elevator? Swamp? What's the difference?

....

Because they're so heavily invested in their theory, R167. As with all conspiracy theorists, it's practically a religious view. The OP now takes it on faith that their view is true and that view cannot be challenged, no matter how ridiculous it is.

OP knows he was found out. Won't even contribute to his own question.

Well this was fun while it lasted. Completely obvious now how stupid this all was by how the OP refused to answer his own simple question. Now I am quite sure he is the sad mess posted above at r149

Well, you're wrong. Cause I posted it and I'm not OP. So better luck next time, Jessica.

r162, I don't think she shot him. That should be obvious, by now, from most of my responses. I think the footage has been Mandela Affected. I have no idea why a Jackie Kennedy in this timeline or whatever this is would want to shoot JFK. I don't know anything about this Jackie. The Jackie Kennedy I'm familiar with would never have done what the woman in that video clearly does: blow her husband's brains out during a parade. So, this question is like asking me why my coworker would rob a bank after his twin brother robbed a bank.

None of you naysaying trolls have provided alternate footage that shows something other than Jackie shooting JFK. None of you have provided even semi-plausible explanations for where else a bullet with an upward trajectory that blew off a third of his head could have come from. None of you have bothered to even engage in discussion at all: it's all hit and run ad hominem attacks and deflection. So, you're clowns. You're not to be taken seriously. You're neither capable of nor worthy of any serious person bothering to engage you about any topic. And, unfortunately, you've accomplished your goal of scaring off the people who did want to discuss the situation with your bullying of me. So, awesome: you're the Brett Kavanaugh's of DataLounge. Congratulations. Why are you even on a fucking discussion board, if you're incapable of the critical thought required to conduct a discussion? Unless, you're here entirely to make sure those discussions get derailed. Gestapo thread stomping aside, your most obnoxious flaw is that you're boring.

Damn you OP, now I'm going to have to find my copy of JFK on VHS, then find a friend with a television that I can hook up my VCR to... I haven't owned a television in years.

You have sent me down a tedious rabbit hole, but I'm too curious to turn back now.

Except in the footage you posted OP, she doesn't shoot him. Everyone can see that. You're full shit tin hatter. And I also like 'creative interpretation.' LOL.

r175, if it's been Mandela Affected, the VHS footage (along with all the footage) will have been changed to approximately match the Z films I've linked to. As I mentioned, additional frames (including the gory 313) which were withheld from the public until recently *should* not appear in a copy of the film made prior to this release.

And, trolls, I've blocked anyone who said (or screamed!) something asinine to me in this thread so don't bother continuing to respond: I won't see it. Or, knock yourselves out and keep shouting into the void.

When JKO immediately bolted to climb atop the car's trunk, what was she after to immediately grab/conceal? The incident had happening so quickly, yet she was able to compose herself to immediately climb out of a moving vehicle to collect something very important.

r178, many of those frames of Jackie on the trunk are still being withheld. For instance, the Nix and Z films do not match up with regard to positioning/length of time on the trunk and interaction with the secret service agent. An agent, whose account of what happened, does not match any of the available footage, ran toward the car from one closely trailing it after he heard the "first" shot. He climbed onto it. Interacted with Jackie. Fell off. Climbed back up. They exchanged something. She sat back down.

I’m sure there is some fucky conspiracy stuff proposed here that’s true, but I’m just not seeing Jackie shoot Jack. Sorry, OP.

Wouldn’t there be some kind of recoil? Even handguns need to be gripped with both hands. Even a very small gun would have a degree of recoil.

So did Nelson Mandela shoot him? He certainly got around! Was he a pawn of those awful Afrikaans or an agent for the Zulu Nation?

r180, what do you see?

Argosy magazine was the first publication I saw publish frame 313. I saw it in 1976 in a used bookstore. The cover was from a photograph facing the schoolbook depository. You can see Jackies white glove when JfK was holding his arms up to his throat. You can also see the secret servicemen looking towards the depository.

A weird coincidence too big to be one. The aristocratic Russian emigre George de Mohrenschildt had been one of Janet Auchinclosses’ lovers. He lived in Dallas and helped out Lee Harvey Oswald.

My theory is old Janet put the hit out. Onassis wanted to marry Jackie and Janet approved because he had a lot more money than JFK.

Doesn't it seem like way too many factions supposedly wanted JFK dead who would have been better served by figuring out how to manipulate and blackmail him?

R99 - Actually, it was from Roald Dahl’s “Tales of the Unexpected”, not Alfred Hitchcock Presents.

Actually it was from Alfred Hitchcock Presents 1958 and was later remade for Tales Of The Unexpected 1979.

Though it was written by Dahl which admittedly I did not know until now.

Still the television debut was with Hitchcock.

One big fucking problem. There is no gun visible.

Also guns fired that closely leave residue on their users.

But was she wearing the gloves later in the day? I searched for images of LBJ being sworn in and the photo is cropped so you can't see her hands. Later re-creations show her gloveless.

[quote]None of you naysaying trolls have provided alternate footage that shows something other than Jackie shooting JFK.

We didn't have to; your own footage showed that she didn't kill him.

[quote]None of you have bothered to even engage in discussion at all:

Duh. That's like "engaging in discussion" with someone who insists that the moon landing was fake or that the earth is flat. There's nothing to discuss. All that's warranted is mockery and laughter at the stupidity.

[quote]So, you're clowns. You're not to be taken seriously. You're neither capable of nor worthy of any serious person bothering to engage you about any topic.

ROFL.... Oh, the irony... and the projection....

[quote]And, unfortunately, you've accomplished your goal of scaring off the people who did want to discuss the situation with your bullying of me.

Dear heart, nobody was ever going to want to "discuss the situation" with you because you're so obviously insane that no "discussion" is possible. And if you don't like our posts, there's an easy solution: block them.

[quote]Gestapo thread stomping aside, your most obnoxious flaw is that you're boring.

I repeat: Oh, the irony... and the projection....

I'll try to find the pix later. But in the shooting footage when she climbs on the trunk you can see blood on the ass of her suit and later there's only blood on the front of the skirt and her legs and in some photos only on her legs at all.

[quote]Or, knock yourselves out and keep shouting into the void.

LOL.... Because it's all about you. Dear heart, you're just here for our entertainment. We don't give a shit whether you read our stuff or not. But you're lying, of course, as your every post makes clear. You do read this stuff and it bothers the shit out of you.

The OP seems to have a thing for this supposed "Mandela Effect." I did love the explanation above, though, that this is some sort of Jackie Kennedy from an "alternate timeline," as though this is something we're supposed to take seriously.

[quote]I have no idea why a Jackie Kennedy in this timeline or whatever this is would want to shoot JFK. I don't know anything about this Jackie. The Jackie Kennedy I'm familiar with would never have done what the woman in that video clearly does: blow her husband's brains out during a parade. So, this question is like asking me why my coworker would rob a bank after his twin brother robbed a bank.

So, the OP is clearly a clown, not to be taken seriously, neither capable of nor worthy of any serious person bothering to engage them about any topic.

R98, Jackie was a tall woman with the hands and feet of a linebacker. That’s her...

and won't all you doubters eat crow when the alternate timeline FACT is revealed to the masses. You sound like climate change deniers. Elon Musk sorted it out and revealed the truth and now he is paying for it. Just look around you and you will see the evidence.

Wait! I've got it! The Jackie who shot JFK was (wait for it) Jackie On Assistance! That wasn't just a spell-check error that led to the Datalounge meme; it was the universe trying to tell us that our beloved Jackie had been replaced by an alternate timeline Jackie, a desperate woman, broke and hungry, who volunteered for the assassination mission so that she could take herself off of assistance.

OP she is not holding a gun

Maybe in the other timeline it's not really Jackie in the car but a woman named Hattie who looks just like her.

[quote] In the board's effort to expand and clarify the record, details surfaced suggesting that two brain examinations may have been conducted at the Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Md., raising questions about the authenticity of the brain examined.

[quote] Also unresolved were discrepancies between how doctors at Parkland Hospital in Dallas described the head injury immediately after the shooting and how it was later described by pathologists in Bethesda.

[quote] 'There are questions about the supplemental brain exam and the photos that were taken. There are inconsistencies in the testimony of the autopsy doctors about when that exam took place.'

[quote] Three military pathologists agreed that they conducted an autopsy of Kennedy's entire body at Bethesda immediately after it was flown back from Dallas. But they offer conflicting recollections about the timing of a subsequent examination of the brain.

[quote] Two doctors, J. Thornton Boswell and James Humes, told the review board that the brain examination occurred two or three days after the death. Dr. Humes told the Warren Commission that he, Dr. Boswell and a third pathologist, Dr. Pierre Finck, were present when the brain was examined. But when he testified to the review board in 1996, Dr. Humes did not list Dr. Finck among those present. Dr. Boswell maintains that Dr. Finck was not there.

[quote] But Dr. Finck says the brain examination occurred later. In a memorandum he wrote to his commanding officer 14 months after the assassination, Dr. Finck said Dr. Humes did not call him until Nov. 29, 1963 -- seven days after Kennedy was killed -- to say it was time to examine the brain. Dr. Finck wrote that all three pathologists examined the brain together and that 'color and black-and-white photographs are taken by the U.S. Navy photographer.'

[quote] The conflicting testimony caused Douglas Horne, chief analyst for military records, to conclude that two separate brain examinations might have been conducted, 'contrary to the official record as it has been presented to the American people.'

[quote] In a telephone interview, Dr. Boswell said the only photographs of the brain were taken at the autopsy.

It was Magneto.

I love how our conspiracy nut has to go back to a 1998 article to try to make the case that Jackie shot JFK. And it still doesn't support the case.

That R202 and the fact that film OP posted doesn't show a gun in her hand.

Details, details.... Jackie was probably replaced by an alien who killed with a telekinetic burst. Problem solved.

Because he never let her take a turn at the White House glory hole, OP.