I've never seen it, but it could. Bullets often measure smaller diameter than they're listed as. If memory serves bullets also shed size while they travel down their barrel.
Society JFK Assassination - Please don´t let me be a flat earther
- Thread starter regular john
- Start date
also seems like these riots meaasure the flesh compared to JFK's hard ass skull, when the object is harder, I would think it would maintain the original size
Sure, that range for the M16 is 550 yards or so. Obviously the closer you are the more energy the bullet has because, because speed kills.
So 6 mm would be larger than the bullets actual size.
i think the distance and where it impact matters (like what type of material the target is)
I presume hard object would maintain it's original size compared to soft human flesh
but you're probably right about bullet changing shapes as it leaves the barrel
I think most kinetic energy is where most consistent trajectory will be.
if it's closer, especially with a weapon like m16, the bullet arises as it leaves the barrel and there is a distance where it takes on more straight flight path
yea I'm just butchering everything right now, about to go to bed actually
what i meant to say is on a hard target, enter wound could be slightly larger than the size of the bullet
completely different context though. There was one good video of JFK getting shot and (according to what I've read so far) the CIA was able to withhold that video for years due to their close contact with media tycoon Henry Luce who bought the video from Jacob Zapruder and never released it until the mid 70's. There is a source in a video where someone says that even then the Zapruder film was manipulated the weekend of the assassination. in the context of the 1960's, that's it, video proof is gone forever. With 9/11 cell phones were not that big yet but still, you get it, it's a different context regarding information flow. much harder to control evidence.
I'm not taking sides either way, never read in-depth about 9/11 conspiracies. Overall though I tend to believe that unspeakable powers always take advantages of these larger than life events, not necesarily control them. Let's see though. Feel free to point me towards interesting stuff about 9/11.
it is technically plausible but also extremely convenient to established powers. "someone fucked up, that's it, let's go on"... it also doesn't address the "back and to the left" motion iirc.
Read between the lines, don't take things so literally. I'm asking for verification of conspiracy theories that I just learnt about from reading two books. it sounds like I discovered the holy grail, like flat earthers think they do. I'm confident most people understand the reference right away.
NO
U read between the lines budda
I was making joke, I don't take any of the internet seriously
don't be mad about the gun discussion and hold that against meeeeee, I still luv u
and yes JFK was whacked, and it wasn't a lone gunman
It was one of a few major coups on american liberties
you one of the gun guys? I only marked out a couple gun guys, you weren’t one of them. Why bring it up?NO
U read between the lines budda
I was making joke, I don't take any of the internet seriously
don't be mad about the gun discussion and hold that against meeeeee, I still luv u
and yes JFK was whacked, and it wasn't a lone gunman
It was one of a few major coups on american liberties
You think it was the cia? Do you agree with the military-industrial complex narrative? Have you ever seen the video where the driver turns backwards with a big long gun and shoots over his shoulder? I want someone to tell me that is a homemade montage.
I value the 2nd amendment, that is important
I think it was a collaboration of entities and individuals...an entire squad of hitmen and a couple patsies...He was ruffling feathers of many powerful people all at once, tons and tons of motives.
Not very familiar with the driver video, I will look into it.
I do think James Files version of the events leading up to and of the assassination have some truth to them, not that I trust him entirely.
I suppose you could look at it like that, or you could say that it's extremely inconvenient to those who want to believe in some sort of darker conspiracy
if that was the case when why was bush Sr caught lying about his location on the day of the "accident"?I suppose you could look at it like that, or you could say that it's extremely inconvenient to those who want to believe in some sort of darker conspiracy
I'll add to my last post, to state Hanlon's razor:
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
Seems quite fitting in this case.
"Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."
Seems quite fitting in this case.
I wish I could get on board with that
But the agenda switched on a dime when JFK got iced...he had to go
this quote is awesome but in this case it's just not one person being stupid - it's an endless string of inconsistencies in the official story and evidence pointing towards a totally different scenario. Several people who could've provided info "committed suicide"; The presidential commission that investigated the assassination did the sloppiest job ever; The police department that would've investigated the crime didn't do it; the supposed lone killer had a long history with the CIA, etc. etc.