Zapruder's testimony to the WC = conspiracy

[Steve Barber]

wait...? so you put the 1^st shot at Z 151-161?

have you considered where the car is in relation to the window at that point?
..and how wide that window is open?

 No. I don't "put the first shot" anywhere. The evidence does.  The shot missed the limousine.  Haven't you been keeping up with this? 

[Steve Barber]

There were witnesses who saw a rifle in the 6th floor window an instance after the shots were fired and some CTers still take issue with an assassin firing from that location.  And yet they selectively pick testimony of someone who says they were uncertain but thought the shots came from a certain location as proof of their conspiracy.  It is hopeless.

 Precisely.  That's their game.  This entire fiasco is nothing but a game to these people.

[Steve Barber]

I'll try this again...

have you considered where the car is in relation to the window at that point?
..and how wide that window is open?

Certainly. Have you considered that Oswald was 61-plus feet high?  And have you considered that he more than likely had tunnel vision and wasn't paying any attention to the tree foliage?  Have you ever been on the sixth floor of that building? 

[Steve Barber]

yes I have
and I'm not talking about tree foliage

Ok. We'll forget the tree foliage. Have you ever seen the are is question through a scope? 
Why don't you just say what you have to say?

[John Iacoletti]

It never ceases to amaze me when people take someone's WC testimony and twist it into things that they actually think happened. 

First of all, President Kennedy obviously was not hit circa Z frame 190.

It never ceases to amaze me when people think that their own interpretations of what's going on in the Z film are "obvious".

[John Iacoletti]

There were witnesses who saw a rifle in the 6th floor window an instance after the shots were fired and some CTers still take issue with an assassin firing from that location.

Tell me again how just seeing some kind of projection sticking out of a window proves that it was a rifle that was just fired?

[John Iacoletti]

No. I don't "put the first shot" anywhere. The evidence does.  The shot missed the limousine.  Haven't you been keeping up with this?

I'll bite.  What exactly is the evidence that there was a shot that missed the limousine?

[John Iacoletti]

Was it hit-miss-hit or miss-hit-hit?
the WC never told us.

Or hit-hit-hit like the FBI thought. Or hit-hit like Andrew Mason thinks.

How can something so supposedly "obvious" be interpreted in so many different ways?