Gun toting Jewess Jackie Kennedy shoots JFK
Protagonists of the Jews’ conspiracy for world control arranged the assassination of Roman Catholic layman and first Roman Catholic U.S. President John F. Kennedy, primarily because his foreign policy favoured the Arabs when the state of Israel was being illegally expanded just prior to the ‘67 Six-Day War.
Kennedy supported Algerian independence from France, which ran contrary to the Jews’ plot to use the callous recruits of the French Foreign Legion to torture and kill Muslim enemies of the Jews in Algeria, so that the Jews in that country and abroad could continue to trade off the nation’s vast oil deposits.
The Kennedy family generally disliked Jews, and JFK’s father admired Adolf Hitler who famously opposed the Jews’ conspiracy for world control and the stranglehold they had on finance in Europe as a lead up to WW2. JFK generally endorsed his father’s views on Hitler in literature he published, and was pro-Egypt when Nasser was plotting to attack Israel. Kennedy also wisely sought to end Israel’s plans to develop nuclear weapons, and fell out of favour with the Jews for insisting that Prime Minister David ben Gurion should shed light on Israel’s plans to develop Dimona’s nuclear reactor.
Kennedy sought to undo the power the Jews had in America through the CIA, by firing leaders of the agency and installing his brother Robert as the CIA’s director; after he had discovered that agents of the Jew controlled CIA had deliberately bungled their Bay of Pigs raid on Soviet backed communist Cuba to ensure that Castro remained in power and had a pretext for and a permanent symbol of Cuban resistance to American ‘aggression’.
Kennedy also sought to undo the Jewish money power in America by ending the borrowing of Federal Reserve Notes from the Federal Reserve; and he authorized the issue of interest free United States Notes (the ‘63 “red note” series) on the credit of the United States.
Kennedy’s successor, Lyndon B. Johnson, rescinded the Presidential Executive Order to return the U.S. government to issuing currency without going through the Rothschild controlled Federal Reserve; and he did so on the Air Force One flight from Dallas to Washington on the same day as JFK’s assassination. Lyndon Johnson had Jewish forebears – his great-grandparents on his mother’s side were Jewish and the line of Jewish mothers in his pedigree went back three generations.
Lyndon B. Johnson of Jewish pedigree conspires with the Jews to kill JFK
Lyndon B. Johnson of Jewish pedigree sworn in as president
Johnson was also an ardent Zionist and in on the Jews’ underground conspiracy to gain world control, and he gained lasting notoriety among honest Americans for ordering the President of the Navy Court of Inquiry to accept the blatant lie that Israel’s callous and vicious attack on the surveillance vessel USS Liberty, in international waters during the ‘67 Six-Day War, wasn’t murdering American sailors and simply “a case of mistaken identity”.
Johnson’s Jewish lineage, the opportunity he had to take the presidency, and the fact that he wanted revenge for the humiliation of his planned impeachment under JFK’s regime, made him a willing agent of the Jews in their assassination plot. After being sworn in following the death of JFK, President Johnson even phoned Parkland Hospital to try to force a death-bed ‘confession’ from the Jews’ patsy Lee Harvey Oswald, to further consolidate the Jews’ plot to conceal their complicity in the assassination they and their many agents and acolytes wickedly perpetrated.
Leading Jews of the ilk of Nahum Goldman, President of the World Jewish Congress, in collusion with US Vice President Lyndon B. Johnson ordered Kennedy’s assassination after conferring with Israel’s Prime Minister David ben Gurion; and they commissioned a former British intelligence officer contracted to the CIA to organize the criminals and the Jews’ assets who carried it out.
On 22 November 1963, two assassins took up positions on the sixth floor in a building in Dealey Plaza, Dallas, Texas; and the other (“last resort”) assassin was the Jewess Jacqueline Kennedy seated next to her husband and armed with a pistol or revolver.
Jackie holding a handgun or single shot pistol? Perhaps. But what about the revolver she slips down the back of the seat of the limo in a subsequent frame where the film is tampered with by editing and splicing?
One assassin in the building behind the President’s motorcade fired the shot that hit the curb of the pavement leaving a bystander with a light facial wound, and the other assassin in the building fired the shot that struck Kennedy in the back of the neck, leaving him holding his throat with both hands and with his elbows raised high. No assassin was in a drain to the right front of the motorcade, nor was there an assassin on the grassy knoll or behind the concrete retaining wall or stockade fence on the rise to the right front of the motorcade, as so many theorists have believed. The attention drawn to the grassy knoll was a false flag op on the day and has been hyped up ever since by the perpetrators of the atrocity.
The fatal shot that obviously entered the lower centre back and exited from the right front of Kennedy’s skull was fired by his Jewish wife seated next to him, using a revolver that is plainly seen in a clip of the Zapruder film on a video that follows. This is consistent with the frames from the Zapruder film that show blood, brain, and skull matter moving upwards and forward from the right front of JFK’s head, and would explain why there was no morbid debris of that sort on the back of the vehicle, where an exit wound from the back of the president’s head would have liberally scattered it.
Claims that there was morbid debris on the trunk, even including a piece of JFK’s skull that Jackie ostensibly scrambled across the trunk to pick up, cannot be substantiated by bona fide photographic evidence, and are blatant falsehoods, fabrications, and lies. It has been argued that JFK’s head movement at the time of the fatal shot is not consistent with the thesis that Jackie fired the fatal shot; but that doesn’t allow for the editing and splicing of the Zapruder film at the critical moment of the bullet’s impact, which is deliberately designed to conceal Jackie as the perpetrator.
The blood, brain, and skull matter that was obviously ejected both UPWARDS and FORWARD from JFK’s head obviously also precludes the possibility that the fatal shot was fired from either the front or from behind the stockade fence or concrete retaining wall on the grassy knoll to the right front of the motorcade, which is the standard story-line on the JFK assassination.
Why would the Jewess Jackie Kennedy want to kill her husband? Well as a Jew she would have been more easily coerced into participating in the crime than a Gentile, but there’s also reason to believe she had fallen out with her husband by that time.
To quote one blogger at this site …
Here’s a preliminary list of possible MOTIVES as to why Jackie Kennedy would have committed this crime in conjunction with the political conspiracy to assassinate him followed by a government cover-up:
1. JFK’s indiscretions with other women from the very beginning of their marriage. Perhaps Jackie was fed up, and possibly planning to divorce him anyway, so when she learned of the conspiracy (through Onassis?) to assassinate him, she volunteered. It’s reported in Peter Evan’s book, “Nemesis: The True Story of Aristotle Onassis, Jackie O, and the Love Triangle That Brought Down the Kennedys…”, that Jackie had begun an affair with Onassis just months before the assassination, and that the Kennedy marriage was in such shambles that divorce was almost inevitably going to happen after the next election. The Kennedys did not share the same hotel room in Texas the night before the murder.
2. She was threatened by the conspirators. Perhaps she was told that if she refused to cooperate and deal the fatal blow that would ensure her husband’s death, there would be a bullet in it for her. Or maybe harm to her children. They would have told her they planned to shoot to kill JFK anyway, so what difference would it make if she participated. An extensive cover-up of her involvement, to the extent of doctoring and falsifying autopsy documents and eye witness reports, was promised.
3. She was in love with Aristotle Onassis and did it at his behest with promises of a future life with all of the benefits millions of dollars can buy. Jackie did vacation – without her husband - on Ari’s private yacht to recuperate from her baby’s death just months before the assassination.
4. Aristotle Onassis and other new world order advocates took advantage of her post-traumatic stress syndrome following the sudden death of her baby in order to utilize hypnosis and/or mind control techniques much like those reportedly used with Sirhan Sirhan. Evidence that links Onassis to the assassination of Bobby Kennedy has been brought forward (See Peter Evans’ book, “Nemesis,” for details.)
5. Jackie’s mother was Jewish. Perhaps Jackie, although Roman Catholic herself, had a loyalty to the state of Israel and cooperated with the Zionist objective to protect its interests in maintaining Israel as the site of their proposed future world government under a world leader of their choosing.
6. Jacqueline Bouvier was a C.I.A. agent assigned to infiltrate the Kennedy clan as they moved up in political circles. Here’s an excerpt from an online biography of Jackie (among others) that cites the fact that she did work for the C.I.A.! ”Jackie attended boarding schools and then went off to Vassar. After two years, though, she got tired of it and spent her junior year studying at the Sorbonne in Paris. When she got back to the US she did not want to go back to Vassar, so she enrolled in George Washington University in Washington, DC, graduating in 1951. She took a job at the CIA and in January of 1952 went to work at a Washington newspaper, where she was a photographer. During an assignment she met U.S. Senator John F. Kennedy . They were married on September 12, 1953. Their first child, who lived, was Caroline Kennedy, born November 27, 1957.” [Emphasis mine.] The entire biography can be read here. Jackie may have been merely following the orders of her superiors to hit their target.
Jackie’s and her mother’s long association with George DeMorenschildt, a known CIA asset, closest friend of Lee Harvey Oswald, acquaintance of George H.W. Bush, LBJ, Abraham Zapruder (!) and others leads me to wonder if he was, perhaps, Jackie’s (and maybe her mother’s) “handler,” as well as Lee Harvey Oswald’s! Here’s an excerpt from a site dealing with a publication called, “Timeline Chart,” discussed on this Education Forum: “I first started researching the 26 volumes of the Warren Commission for clues, when I came across George De Mohrenschildt. I thought it was strange that a man who visited Jacqueline Kennedy’s mother on a regular basis would also befriend the alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald. In the first several years of my research, I even had a nightmare that Jackie Kennedy had been involved in the assassination. I began to look at this or the possibility that her mother Mrs. Hugh D. Auchincloss was involved. But I concluded, that no one in their right mind would have placed themselves or their daughter in an open convertible with a possibility of being shot, for Jackie sat three feet away from JFK on that fateful November 22, 1963.
De Mohrenschildt testified that before Oswald was even born he visited with Jackie and her mother in 1938 on a daily basis at Easthampton, New York. You may, like myself, find this hard to digest.”
7. Jackie and Lyndon Johnson were in collusion. They had something in common: they had both been pushed out of the loop of John F. Kennedy’s personal life. Perhaps their individual bitterness over the way JFK treated them caused them to come to an agreement to aid each other in punishing and removing the source. LBJ was aware that Republicans wanted to look into his possible bribe-taking, and Jackie was undoubtedly aware that her husband’s tryst with a possible communist spy. Ellen Rometsch (as well as his secret marriage to Durie Malcolm) was about to become public knowledge. Tape recorded phone calls between LBJ and Jackie from shortly after the assassination reveal an over-familiarity on LBJ’s part that could possibly stem from his knowledge of what she had done that fateful day in Dallas. It sounds like he was using it for all it was worth to coerce Jackie into a more intimate relationship with him. Jackie reportedly did not know she was being recorded but seems to take care in choosing her responses, perhaps due to CIA training and political savvy.
And this one at this site …
I got talking to an old American guy tonight in an old London Pub.
He was a normal,likeable chap who seemed very honest and proud of his work,he didnt seem like a lier and was quite humble and quiet as we chatted.
He claimed he worked for the CIA from 1960 to 69 and as the night went on I brought up the 911 issue.I’de say he was about 80ish.
He was silent and almost sheepish as I brought up inconsistencies in the official story,so I changed the conversation about what he was doing in London and advice on decent restaurants.
He quickly changed the subject to the JFK assasination and stated Jackie shot him with a small weapon that was hidden up her sleeve.
He said she was a MKultra victim and the best way to take him out “was in full view to dazzle the spectators,in plain view”!!!! WTF!
He said it was captured in the Zapruder film and was amazed it still hasnt been spotted.
It was a kinda weird conversation,he wasnt drunk as he was drinking pints of water!
Then he left(with a full pint,of water!)quickly and silently without even a bye.
Im still kinda spooked!
What freaks me out mostly as he was smoking a really fat cigar and the people behind the bar didnt even bat an eyelid,,,,I tried to have a cigarette with him but was promptly told to go to the garden! Amost like he owned the place,or was invisible to the new smoking laws!
Creepy.
And this one at this site …
I think it’s peculiar that she insisted on wearing the bloodied clothing, especially after reading later that she was so insistent on not sleeping on the same sheets twice!!
Plus there was quite a bit of ‘back story’ with Jack and Jackie that has gotten very little exposure since his tragic death…. They were ‘reported’ to be not on very good terms in the months leading up to the Dallas trip.
My Grandmother was an avid ‘gossip’ follower and had read a newspaper article about Jack ‘ordering’ Jackie to return to the US from an extended trip……so she would be there for the Dallas appearence …..
During the trip, she had received the gift of a horse from some high level ‘admirer’, and Jack had demanded that she return it…..she refused. I believe that same horse served as the ‘riderless’ mount in Jack’s funeral procession….( I have read a differing account from some sources, but have also found some that confirm the riderless horse was hers.)
No, not proof….but perhaps some motive?
For unusual and controversial insights into the life of Jackie Kennedy, see these quotes …
http://fatboy.cc/fatboy%20quotes.htm
For photos and articles on controversial episodes in the lives of the Kennedys, see this link …
http://fatboy.cc/Kennedygirls%20G%20Rated.htm
For highly controversial pictures of Jackie Kennedy, see this R-RATED link (viewer discretion advised) …
http://fatboy.cc/Kennedygirls%20R%20Rated.htm
The first part of the following clip of the Zapruder film makes it very plain that the fatal bullet did indeed enter angled slightly upwards from the lower back of the president’s head, ejecting blood, brain, and skull matter forward and upwards, and not from the rear of his head as the official story-line goes. The thesis propounded in the rest of the video that JFK was hit in the head twice should, however, not be taken seriously, because it doesn’t allow for the editing and splicing of the Zapruder film …
Here are the official reports on the fatal shot …
A SLIGHTLY UPWARDS, RIGHT front EXIT wound also precludes the possibility that the fatal shot came from the Texas School Book Depository building; and it means that it could only have come from the left rear of the motorcade from someone standing pretty close to the pavement, which is hardly likely because the cops on bikes were on that side, or from the Jewess Jackie Kennedy who just happens to be in exactly the right position to discharge a firearm to produce that sort of exit wound and has body movements quite consistent with the thesis that she pulled the trigger on JFK.
Blood, brain, and skull matter ejected UPWARDS and FORWARD from the right front of JFK's head with Jacqueline holding the discharged hand gun at the base of his head
The following image shows the Jew Zapruder verifying that the bullet EXITED from the right front of the president’s head in an interview on WFAA-Television a little less than two hours after the assassination …
This animated clip (i.e., @ comment #20 by Anders Lindman) from the Zapruder film, and reproduced but not always working below, shows quite clearly Jacqueline Kennedy keeping an eye on Governor Connally before placing a pistol or revolver at the base of her husband’s head when Connally starts to turn away, and then discharging it, before dropping it down the back of the seat and scrambling out of the limousine.
These three consecutive frames from the Zapruder film clearly show a puff of smoke rising from the vicinity of Jacqueline’s hand behind JFK’s head, as if to indicate that she had indeed discharged a small firearm – no smoke without fire right!
The Jew Abraham Zapruder knew in advance of the Jews’ plot to kill the President and was commissioned to provide a film of the event so that it could be altered afterwards to provide some confusion as to what really were the real events on the day; and to exonerate the Jews who planned the atrocity by making it look like the Jew Zapruder was the good guy and had done the American people a patriotic favour by telling the truth about a right front EXIT wound as the fatal shot.
This so-called ‘undamaged’ (i.e., unedited) version of the Zapruder film doesn’t have some of the distortions the other version has, but it’s still cut and spliced at the critical point when Jackie slips the revolver down the back of the seat of the limousine …
If you want a plain view of the pistol or revolver used by Jackie Kennedy to kill JKF, play this video, and when you get to the frame showing her concealing the weapon behind the seat “click and hold” repetatively on the circular progress gauge on the progress bar of the video to get replays of the critical frame. If you do this about 10 times at about frames 330-335 you’ll be left without any reasonable doubt that the film is indeed edited and spliced at the critical point to provide a double take, showing in the first take Jackie putting something down the back of the seat that may not have been a revolver, but in the second take, which is too close to the first movement of her arm that deposited an object down the back of the seat to not be edited and spliced, she deposits something that is very much like a revolver down the back of the seat …
The following video makes it plain that the Zapruder film was indeed tampered with by developers after being left with Secret Service Agents, especially by overlaying one of the frames with a lampost so that the line of sight to the actual event of Jackie pulling the trigger on JFK is obscured …
This video makes it equally plain that the Zapruder film was tampered with, especially by cutting, editing, splicing, or removing frames as the limousine goes in front of the large grey sign, just moments before the fatal shot …
Zapruder didn’t want to botch his record of the event, so he used Kodak Kodachrome II safety film and was assisted by Marilyn Sitzman who was commissioned to “steady him if he got dizzy”. The “Zapruder film” was altered by developers after being received by Dallas Secret Service head Forrest Sorrels, primarily by removing and layering frames, and putting artificial obstacles in the line of sight, making it more difficult to see Jacqueline Kennedy discharging the fatal shot.
Here’s a recent article by OpEdNews.com that’s relevant:
“During the past dozen years, substantial evidence of the Zapruder film’s alteration has accumulated in a research effort that became serious in 1996 during a symposium at the JFK Lancer Conference in November.
Fetzer brought together numerous experts on the film, including Jack White, David W. Mantik, and Noel Twyman, the author of Bloody Treason (1997), which includes scientific studies of the film’s authenticity. Twyman, a retired engineer, had noticed that the driver of the President’s limousine, SSA William Greer, had turned to look at JFK and then turned back with preternatural speed.
He hired a professional tennis player to study how fast human head turns could be made and determined that Greer’s head turns were approximately twice as fast as humanly possible. That might not sound like much initially, but it would be like converting a 4 minute mile into a 2 minute mile. Based upon this research, Twyman had discovered objective evidence of the removal of frames from the film.”
Here’s the Jew Zapruder on WFAA-Television explaining JFK’s head wound, stating correctly and ‘patriotically’ that the fatal bullet had EXITED from the right front of the skull, and which ran contrary to Parkland doctors’ reports that said the POSTERIOR cerebral tissue and some cerebellar tissue was missing from the President’s head, and that the skull wound was a large wound in the right occipitoparietal region, where the occipital lobe appears just above the cerebellum of the brain …
One would expect the Parkland doctors’ reports on REAR, right side, EXIT head wounds to be correct, but it should be remembered that they also differed from autopsy reports, and did not agree with the anaesthetist Dr Giesecke who said: “the vertex to the left ear, and from the browline to the occiput on the left-hand side of the head to the cranium (i.e., as the point of exit of the fatal shot), was entirely missing.”
Here’s an article at this link that provides some insights into Jackie’s mental and emotional trauma after slaying her husband …
Fr McSorley, a Jesuit priest who was a longtime friend of Robert and Ethel Kennedy, was brought in by the family to help Mrs Kennedy to cope with her grief. Concerned over her deteriorating mental health, they persuaded her to talk to him under the guise of giving her tennis lessons.
He kept her secrets until shortly before his death last year, when he agreed to be interviewed for Edward Maier’s book The Kennedys: America’s Emerald Kings, which concentrates on the family’s Irish-Catholic heritage.
He also granted the author, an investigative reporter with Newsday, exclusive access to his diaries, which detail his long talks with Mrs Kennedy and letters from her.
In one letter, she describes how lonely she was and how she worried that it would be much worse “when the children go away to school”.
At one point, she asks Fr McSorley if John and Caroline would not be better off being looked after by Ethel.
“I’m no good to them,” she said. “I’m so bleeding inside.”
Maier writes: “McSorley gently chastised her for worrying about the future … ‘It’s the devil’s work. Today’s problem is just to live through today, and to do the best you can today’.”
When Mrs Kennedy asked him: “Will you pray that I die?”, the priest “looked Jackie in the eyes. He felt compelled to dissuade her from thoughts of suicide, but he would not try to stop her from wishing for death itself”.
And he reiterated that “for Catholics, committing suicide meant God’s eternal damnation”.
Lee Harvey Oswald was a CIA asset, and a Marxist confederate with the CIA-commissioned assassins who fired the shots from the Library Building behind the president’s motorcade; but he was framed by the Jews and their assets as the sole assassin (“lone nut”) who slew JFK.
The Jew Jack Ruby (real name Jacob L. Rubenstein) was an accomplice in the Jews’ conspiracy to slay Kennedy; and he was commissioned to allay any suspicion that might be cast on Jews for the atrocity, by slaying the man the CIA had framed as the President’s sole assassin. Ruby was a Jewish gangster with U.S. government/CIA/FBI/‘mafia’ connections; and he had accomplices in the Dallas Police Department working for him at the time of the President’s assassination.
The Jew Ruby’s snow job after killing Oswald …
John J. King, a Dallas oil industry mogul involved with lucrative Israeli oil projects, was a close friend of Jack Ruby; and one of King’s business partners, Bernie Cornfield, was the protégé of and front man for Rabbi Tibor Rosenbaum, a leading financier of Permindex, a joint CIA/‘mafia’ front that played a major role in JFK’s assassination. Clay Shaw, the Mossad asset unsuccessfully prosecuted for JFK’s assassination by the New Orleans DA in 1969, served on the board of Permindex, and may have given Lee Harvey Oswald a job with the Leon Israel Company, a family enterprise run by the Jew Samuel Israel III, an East Coast hedge fund operator and scion of a distinguished Jewish family of New Orleans.
Senator Albert Thomas winks at LBJ after the swearing in on the Air Force One flight with LBJ's wife looking smug about something she's not telling and Jackie Kennedy like she could have killed her husband
Julia Ann Mercer testified before the Warren Commission, with a disproportionate number of Jews among its assistant counsel and staff members, that she saw the Jew Jack Ruby drop off a man carrying a rifle in a case near the grassy knoll at Dealey Plaza, about an hour prior to the arrival of the presidential motorcade and where witnesses later heard gunshots, and where Dallas policemen arrested three men after the attack on the motorcade as if they thought they were involved.
There is reason to believe, however, that Mercer witnessed a Secret Service Agent being dropped off in anticipation of arrival of the president’s motorcade, which would be consistent with the fact that she said there were three uniformed men (policemen) standing on the overpass near the grassy knoll, who showed no apparent interest in the man with the rifle.
Oswald’s wife speaks somewhat prophetically of the awesome consequences of leaving the JFK assassination unsolved (note the last few words of her interview) …
For the source of some of the images and inspiration behind this article go to the research of Neville T. Jones, PhD at http://www.realityreviewed.com/JFK%20murder.htm
24 Comments
Why do you spout such filth?
You only sent us your inane, anonymous, and angry Jew comment because you know that REALLY IS a hand gun Jackie is slipping down the back of the seat, didn’t you.
You people are sick.
Back again? Must have got a hold on you, huh.
You’ve spent a lot of time on this, put in a lot of work.
But, you are way out there, man. Come back to Earth. This is just nuts.
We all still see a handgun slipped down the back seat of the limo though, don’t we.
Ok, so it wasn’t the Mafia, KGB, CIA, FBI, Cubans, Communists, Anti-communists, left-wing, right-wing, Oswald, Roscoe White, Files, Big Oil, Big Gas, Big Coffee, Military-industrial complex, etc. etc. etc?
It was Jackie O? Lol, my goodness, you have truly fallen off your rocker. I thought I’d heard every conspiracy theory when I read about the zombie CIA conspiracy, but this one takes the cake.
It seems absolutely credible to me. The video speaks for itself. The trajectory of the bullet implicates Jackie big time.
To be honest, Im in a little bit of a shock right now.
The author of this site gives no credit at all for the material taken from Dr. Neville Thomas. Jones’
http://www.realityreviewed.com/JFK%20murder.htm
That is disgraceful!
I began researching this subject late in 2008, and I now recall getting help from a Web site like the one you’ve cited above; but it didn’t provide anything like the bulk of the content of my post, as readers can plainly see.
You now have a credit line; but I object to the tone of your comment and attempt to denigrate my character.
I take it that you’re a bit pissed that I eclipsed that presentation and put up one of the best overall presentations of who really killed JFK on the Web, while most people out there didn’t have clue.
The murder of JFK by Jackie is shortly going to go wild in the media, because it’s the plain truth, and ties in with what the Jews have been doing to subvert and destroy Christian America from the beginning.
Readers should check out the discussion at David Icke’s forum …
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=74729
JR,
You should give the credit line to
Neville T. Jones, PhD not to me.
The bulk of his research analysis
went live on the internet on
September 2, 2008
I posted Neville’s research right away on some forums and some websites posted it also. Other websites it was like pulling teeth
to get them to post it.
Some examples from memory
and google search.
1.wakeupfromyourslumber
2.libertyforum
3 realjewnews
4 iamthewitness
5.theinfounderground
6. judicial
Kind Regards,
Bernard Brauer
This is pretty interesting. I was just a baby when JFK was assassinated. It does look like Jackie is pushing something behind the seat.
Truth is INDEED stranger than fiction. But a deceived public will never believe it.
“Many people today don’t want honest answers insofar as honest means unpleasant or disturbing. They want a soft answer that turneth away anxiety.” – Louis Kronenberger
Looks like you’re one of the “many people today who don’t want honest answers insofar as honest means unpleasant or disturbing”, if your Web site with its denial of a literal burning, sulphurous hell for the unrepentant and unbelieving sinner is anything to go by.
No, JR, what is “unpleasant or disturbing” is finding out that we have been duped into believing these lies, whether it be the false pagan doctrine of an eternal hell, the JFK murder, the fake moon landing, or the idea that some cave-dwelling goat-herders from Afghanistan armed with box-cutters really brought down the twin towers on 911. It really is laughable! And religion is no different than government. It’s just another means of control. The apostle Peter said it best:
“While they [false teachers] promise them liberty, they themselves are slaves of corruption; for by whom a person is overcome, by him also he is brought into bondage.” (II Peter 2:19)
This is true of both our religious as well as our government leaders. They both promise us liberty, but only succeed in bringing us further into bondage. You can keep on putting your trust in these deceivers if you wish, but only the Truth can set you free from these deceptions. And one day you WILL learn the truth, for it will be testified to ALL “in due time” (I Timothy 2:6).
Peace
The truth that “makes you free” is the written word of God in the Bible, exemplified and and personified by the Lord Jesus Christ incarnate, crucified, risen, ascended, and now seated at the right hand of God.
Jesus Christ, as the truth, said there was a place of fiery torment for the wicked after death; where it’s written: “If thy hand or foot offend thee, cut them off, and cast them from thee: It is better for thee to enter into life halt or maimed, rather than having two hands or two feet to be cast into everlasting fire.
“And if thine eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee; it is better for thee to enter into life with one eye, rather than having two eyes to be cast into hell fire”.
“And I say unto you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do.
“But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear. Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.”
“The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity. And shall cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.”
Hence to deny the doctrine of the sinner’s conscious eternal torment in a fiery hell after death is to call into question the veracity of the written word of God and call Jesus Christ a liar, and by that condemn yourself before God as both a heretic and a blasphemer.
Sinners wouldn’t find these things “unpleasant and disturbing”, and wouldn’t try to laugh them off, if they didn’t think there was some substance in them. People are burned alive left, right, and center, and in house and car fires before death, so what makes you think sinners don’t suffer that sort of thing in a body forever after death, resurrection, and judgment day?
Religion has been used as “a means of control”. But if it’s based on the words of the Bible and what Jesus Christ taught that’s not a curse but a blessing, because it will get you to heaven and deliver you from God’s wrath to come.
the black peaceful movement killed wtf-jfk for the Kwanzaa holiday as Bishop Desmond Tootoo admitted in 1998
all other assumptions are wrong
JR: You are sadly mistaken if you think your precious King James Bible is the “inerrant” Word of God. It is not. It is merely a ‘TRANSLATION’ of the Hebrew and Greek scriptures, and not a very accurate one at that.
Didn’t Jesus warn us to “Beware the leaven of the Pharisees”? And didn’t Paul say that it only takes a LITTLE leaven to leaven the whole lump? Of course they did. But you probably don’t have a clue as to what they were referring to, because you obviously haven’t “studied the scriptures to show yourself approved.” If you had, then you would know that a) the word ‘HELL’ does not even belong in the Bible, and b) the word ‘EVER-lasting’ really means ‘AGE-enduring.’ The biblical concept of punishment takes on a whole new meaning when we learn that there is actually a righteous purpose FOR it:
“For when Your judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.” (Isaiah 26:9b)
As Isaiah has just explained, the purpose for God’s judgment is so man WILL LEARN righteousness. He does not sadistically torture His creation for no good reason. Pagan depictions of eternal hellfire and suffering are merely the vain imaginations of reprobate minds. But monarchs like King James I of England knew how to use fear to rule the people back then just as monarchs do today. There is nothing new under the sun. After all, that’s why he “authorized” this version himself.
“Where once a tyrant had to wish that his subjects had but one common neck that he might strangle them all at once, all he has to do now is to ‘educate the people’ so that they will have but one common mind to delude.” – Richard Mitchell (1929-2002) Professor, author
Here’s what one very highly esteemed Hebrew scholar had to say about the new authorized version after he had read it:
“The late bible was sent to me to censure: which bred in me a sadness that will grieve me while I breathe, it is so ill done. Tell His Majesty that I had rather be rent in pieces with wild horses than any such translation by my consent should be urged upon poor churches. The new edition crosseth me. I require it to be burnt.” – Hugh Broughton
In closing, I just want to say that I had no intention of hijacking this thread and turning this debate into a theological one like you have, because I assumed that all comments made here are supposed to be about the Zapruder film. So I won’t comment any further. Besides, I have already answered every one of your theological concerns on my website. And anyone who is willing with an open mind to further research this issue can do so by clicking on my name. I highly suggest that the first place you go is to the video interview with the late biblical language scholar Louis Abbott. Listen to what a true scholar has to say about hell. Think outside your little comfortable box. You might learn something.
“Minds are like parachutes – they only function when they are open.” – Sir James Dewar (1842-1923) Chemist, physicist
Peace
I find it hard to believe that the teeming millions of true Christians down through the last twenty centuries have suffered from “vain imaginations and reprobate minds”, as believers of the words of Jesus who preached a gospel of salvation and warned the impenitent and unbelieving of an eternal fiery damnation.
The English word “hell” derives from a Saxon word, helan, and means the “covered” or “hidden” place, and hence is quite consistent with the doctrine of the damnation of the wicked as provided throughout scripture.
There are two words in the Greek, aionios and aidios, that are translated in the Bible as “eternal” and “everlasting” respectively. Aionios negatives the end either of space of time or of unmeasured time, and aidios excludes interruption and lays stress upon permanence and unchangeableness.
Aionios describes duration, either undefined but not endless in three places in the Bible or UNDEFINED BECAUSE ENDLESS in 67 places in the New Testament.
Aionios is also used to define sin “that hath never forgiveness” and the judgment of God from which there is no appeal, and the fire which is one of the instruments of the judgment of God, and which is specifically said to be “unquenchable” – the use in the latter context indicates that the purpose of the judgment of God is NOT REMEDIAL (as you would have us believe) but retributive, not temporary, and final …
“It is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.”
“Set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”
“The devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet ARE [i.e., present, continuous tense], and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.”
God doesn’t “sadistically torture his creation for no good reason” – God doesn’t sadistically torture anyone, period – he has “no pleasure in the death of the wicked”; but he does consign the impenitent and unbelieving sinner to an eternal fiery hell, because he is righteous, will in no wise clear the guilty, and must isolate depraved things in fire to keep the redeemed from harm and to sanctify his throne.
You would have us believe God will leave the hoards of unrepentant, unforgiven fornicators, sorcerers, murderers, abortionists, blasphemers, and molesters free to roam the universe in the resurrection, and hence at liberty to approach the throne of God’s glory without meeting the protocol of the death of his Son.
We all sow and reap in this life, but we also all reap in the place we’re consigned to by God in the resurrection based on our works and choices in this life.
Concerning the KJV as “authorized by the king”, I like to think of it, spiritually speaking, as authorized by the King, Jesus, as given by inspiration of God. The doctrine of words translated by inspiration of God is biblical, beginning with the miraculous translation of tongues at Babel, and endorsed by the translated speech of Balaam’s ass, and the miraculous tongues given to the disciples on the first day of Pentecost after Christ’s resurrection (Acts. 2.4-11).
Wikipedia says Hugh Broughton “went to Germany, where he frequently engaged in discussions both with Roman Catholics and with the Jewish scholars whom he met at Frankfort and elsewhere.
“In 1591 he returned to England, but his Puritan leanings incurred the hostility of John Whitgift. Accordingly in 1592 he once more went abroad, and cultivated the acquaintance of the principal scholars of Europe, including Joseph Justus Scaliger and Rabbi Elias. Such was the esteem in which he was held, even by his opponents, that he might have had a cardinal’s hat if he had been willing to change his faith.”
Perhaps his collusion with Jews and Roman Catholics explains why King James didn’t engage him among the 47 scholars that translated the KJV, which may, in turn, explain why Hugh Broughton came up with the nasty bit of hyperbolical vitriol you’ve cited above.
Minds don’t only function when they’re open – there is such a thing as a closed mind, which works for many people most of the time. Parachutes don’t only function when they’re open – they work quite well on your back unopened by letting you enjoy a sky-dive, by giving you the assurance you need that you won’t shortly get squashed – isn’t that what faith in the gospel is all about – believing God has redeemed you by Jesus and won’t let you end up in hell – “the eternal God is thy refuge, and underneath are the everlasting arms”.
JR, there is not one comment you have made in defense of your pagan doctrine of hell that cannot be scripturally refuted:
// I find it hard to believe that the teeming millions of true Christians down through the last twenty centuries have suffered from “vain imaginations and reprobate minds” //
That’s because you don’t know what Jesus truly meant by “Many are called, FEW are chosen.”
// … as believers of the words of Jesus who preached a gospel of salvation and warned the impenitent and unbelieving of an eternal fiery damnation. //
Different gospel, different Jesus.
“For the Son of man has come to seek and to SAVE that which was lost” (Luke 19:10).
But you refuse to believe that Jesus will accomplish that which He was sent here to do. What Good Shepherd will not go after that last lost sheep until it is found and brought safely home? Will the love of God fail? According to you it WILL, despite scripture which testifies to the contrary (see I Corinthians 13).
// The English word “hell” derives from a Saxon word, helan, and means the “covered” or “hidden” place, and hence is quite consistent with the doctrine of the damnation of the wicked as provided throughout scripture. //
Wrong, paleface. The Hebrew word SHEOL means GRAVE, which IS the concealed or hidden place God’s word is referring to. And there is NO consciousness in death:
“There is no work or device or knowledge or wisdom in the grave where you are going.” (Ecclesiastes 9:10)
“His breath goes forth, he returns to his earth; in that very day his thoughts perish.” (Psalm 146:4)
“For the wages of sin is DEATH.” (Romans 6:23a)
If the penalty for sin is eternal conscious torment in some subterranean torture chamber, then why didn’t Paul say so? Because it isn’t true, that’s why. Vain imaginations…
// Aionios describes duration, either undefined but not endless in three places in the Bible or UNDEFINED BECAUSE ENDLESS in 67 places in the New Testament. //
Since when can any adjective in ANY language ever describe more than the noun from which it is derived? If I earn $12 a HOUR (n) I earn an HOURLY (adj) wage. If I get paid every WEEK (n) I earn a WEEKLY (adj) wage, etc. An AION is an AGE: a period of time with both a beginning and an end. Hence, the adjective AIONIOS can only be describing that which is relevant to AGES. So if I make $750,000 during the course of my LIFETIME (n) is this an ETERNAL (adj) salary??
// “It is better for thee to enter halt into life, than having two feet to be cast into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched: where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched.” //
The term “unquenchable fire” does not mean one that never goes out. But you have to compare scripture with scripture before you can know this. Look up …
II Kings 22:17
II Chronicles 34:25
Isaiah 34:9-10
Jeremiah 7:17-20
Jeremiah 17:27
Ezekiel 20:47-48
… and tell me how many of these fires are still burning today, ETERNALLY?
// “Set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.” //
“Eternal” (166) AIONIOS = AGE-ENDURING. Are the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah still on fire today? No. Or were any of these people warned that not only would they die for their sins, but that they would also be punished in death, endlessly? No, of course not. Not a word. Where then did the Church get the teaching that God punishes the wicked AFTER death and IN death? Not from the Hebrew scriptures, that’s for sure.
// “The devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone… //
“The Lake of Fire and Brimstone signifies a fire burning with brimstone; the word ‘brimstone’ or sulphur defines the character of the fire. The Greek word THEION translated ‘brimstone’ is exactly the same word THEION which means ‘divine.’ Sulphur was sacred to the deity among the ancient Greeks; and was used to fumigate, to purify, and to cleanse and consecrate to the deity; for this purpose they burned it in their incense. In Homer’s Iliad (16:228), one is spoken of as purifying a goblet with fire and brimstone. The verb derived from THEION is THEIOO, which means to hallow, to make divine, or to dedicate to a god (See Liddell and Scott Greek-English Lexicon, 1897 Edition). To any Greek, or any trained in the Greek language, a ‘lake of fire and brimstone’ would mean a ‘lake of divine purification.’ The idea of judgment need not be excluded. Divine purification and divine consecration are the plain meaning in ancient Greek. In the ordinary explanation, this fundamental meaning of the word is entirely left out, and nothing but eternal torment is associated with it.” – Charles Pridgeon, from his scholarly work on ‘BRIMSTONE’
And this is exactly how Malachi describes God on the day of judgment: as a REFINING FIRE:
“But who may abide the DAY of his coming? [Judgment Day] and who shall stand when he appeareth? [will sin be able to stand in His presence?] for he is like a REFINER’S FIRE, and like FULLERS’ SOAP: And he shall sit as a REFINER and PURIFIER of silver: and he shall PURIFY the sons of Levi, and PURGE them as gold and silver, that they may offer unto the LORD an offering in righteousness. Then shall the offering of Judah and Jerusalem be pleasant unto the LORD, as in the days of old, and as in former years. And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false swearers, and against those that oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and that turn aside the stranger from his right, and fear not me, saith the LORD of hosts. For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob ARE NOT CONSUMED.” (Mal 3:2-6)
// You would have us believe God will leave the hoards of unrepentant, unforgiven fornicators, sorcerers, murderers, abortionists, blasphemers, and molesters free to roam the universe in the resurrection, and hence at liberty to approach the throne of God’s glory without meeting the protocol of the death of his Son. //
Wrong again, paleface. As the scriptures have just testified, mankind will be purged and purified by the all-consuming fire of God’s judgment.
“All flesh shall see the salvation of God.” (Luke 3:6)
What part of ‘ALL’ do you not understand?
“And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw [Gk: DRAG] all men unto me.” (John 12:32).
This flies in the face of current theology, which states that He will cast most men away.
“For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive.” (I Corinthians 15:22)
Again, what part of ‘ALL’ puzzles you?
“Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.” (I Corinthians 15:28)
Hmmm… Paul sees ahead to a day when God will be ALL IN ALL. Please explain to me how this agrees with Christianity’s HELL, which by their own definition is a place of eternal separation APART FROM GOD??
Inquiring minds really DO want to know…
BTW: Did you take the time to watch the video I recommended… and IF not, then WHY not?
Peace
Getting angry and using names like “paleface” to vent your frustration with your inadequacy doesn’t make your convoluted, antichristian propaganda any more convincing and you personally any more endearing.
By attacking and denigrating the person opposite to you rather than just addressing convincingly the specific issues is a hallmark of a loser in a debate; and it has left me with no option other than to ban further comments from you, lest I be seen to condone a heretic and be guilty of casting that which is holy to dogs and my pearls before swine.
I know you’re a dupe of Satan and will be damned to a low hell if you die in your present case. Simply denying the hell hundreds of millions of people much more excellent than yourself have believed in won’t make it any less real for you when you arrive in it after you die the death – even the devils believe in it and tremble at the very thought of it …
“Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he said, Legion: because many devils were entered into him. And they [the devils] besought him that he would not command them to go out into the deep [i.e., Gk. abussos, the abyss, the bottomless pit]” (Lk. 8.30-31).
Scripture does say God will ultimately purify and purge a remnant of the sons of Levi for the service of God during the millennial reign of Jesus Christ; but scripture DOES NOT say ALL of the sons of Jacob are “not consumed”, in the sense that some among them are not separated to suffer an eternal fiery hell.
Did not the earth open her mouth and swallow up the family and tabernacle of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, and “they and all that pertained to them, went down alive into the pit, and the earth closed upon them, and they perished from among the congregation” (Nu. 16. 31-34).
You ask, how is that God will ultimately subject all things to himself, that he may be all in all, and yet at the same time leave many separated from him in hell and the lake of fire.
Well, have you not read that God has highly exalted his Son Jesus, and given him a name that’s above every name, “that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, AND THINGS UNDER THE EARTH” (Philippians 2.9-10)
C.f., there is an exclusion of things “under the earth” among the RECONCILED to God in Colossians 1.20, because there’s no reconciliation for those who have died in their sins, but they are subject to God and do bow to the name of Jesus in their torment in hell and the lake of fire beneath the earth.
Places touched by lightning leave a sulphurous smell, and the way sulphur has been used for purification can, doubtless, be reconciled to some extent with the way the lake of fire and brimstone (i.e., that which is sulphurous) sets the sinner apart from what is of God and sanctifies his throne, as I pointed out in my other comment.
You should repent and believe the simple gospel of your salvation, before it’s too late and you join the unrepentant and unbelieving in that ghastly place called hell that’s mentioned throughout scripture, and was preached by Jesus and the apostles, and is a fundamental tenet of Christianity.
You have obviously never witnessed a headshot. When a bullet traveling at such speeds strikes a skull, it creates a pressure wave within the skull. Upon creating an exit wound, the built up pressure within the skull forces fluids to be blown out of the exit wound. Snipers call it “pink mist”. This is not smoke that you are seeing, but is instead bits of brain, skull and blood being blown into the air. The Zapruder film is shot in such poor quality and fps that you can barely see anything clearly. Jackie’s hand was on JFK’s arm/wrist, trying to pull his hands away from his initial wound on his neck. I cannot believe that I am arguing with you, since your website is so ridiculous and you are clearly psychotic. I bet that your mom is a Jew whore and that you are just bitter because you were born with a small penis and an ugly jew fro. I can’t wait to see your response.
I’ve heard of and seen videos of the “pink mist” scenario from a high-powered rifle, and it certainly doesn’t agree with the discharge of blood, bone, and brain matter that we can ACTUALLY see in the film, which is more consistent with a discharged handgun; and it certainly hasn’t convinced me that the puff of gunsmoke isn’t for real.
Also you haven’t even begun to provide a convincing explanation for the way Jacqueline’s body movements agree with the assertion that she shot her husband, let alone answer why she slipped that handgun onto the back seat of the limo after shooting her husband.
You’re obviously quite upset that someone has finally exposed the wicked Jewess Jacqueline Kennedy as a conspirator and murderer of the worst sort; but it’s not clear why you’re upset, as you don’t come across as a Jew. Perhaps you could enlighten us.
Here’s the “pink mist” scenario …
Readers must DEFINATELY AVOID people like DAVID ICE or ALEX JONES, because these people are the conrtolled opposition, shills, and disinformation gurus.
Elders of Zion Protocol 12.11
“In the third rank we shall set up our own, to all appearance, opposition, which, in at least one of its organs, will present what looks like the very antipodes to us. Our real opponents at heart will accept this simulated opposition as their own and will show us their cards.”