Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

NG: Why did she shoot him?

Expand Messages
  • mariuslab2002
    http://2003.novayagazeta.ru/nomer/2003/90n/n90n-s00.shtml] The represented frames (and the whole [video] film with sound) explain nothing in the story of the
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 1, 2003
    • 0 Attachment
      http://2003.novayagazeta.ru/nomer/2003/90n/n90n-s00.shtml%5d


      The represented frames (and the whole [video] film with sound)
      explain nothing in the story of the Nord-Ost. The only add more
      riddles.

      This episode (on the film there are other ones that also require
      answers) generates a whole series of questions.

      If this was a prisoner and [he was] alive (he was in the handcuffs),
      was it necessary to shoot him?

      If it was - then why? Was he a some wittness...?

      If he was the witness, then of what?

      If he was dead, why he was carried out of the building, when not all
      the hostages were evacuated from the hall yet (evidently [this can be
      seen] on the film), and later to shoot him?

      True, some were carrying [him away] (in camouflage, helmets, also,
      with submachine guns), a woman from others was shooting (those in the
      black jackets with the white arm-bands and pistols)...

      Forty years ago, just by chance, the fotographer Zapruder had taken
      on his amateur camera President Kennedy's murder. It became obvious:
      there was more shots than they declared officially, and there were
      several killers. *His film showed that there was a plot, but it
      proved nothing.

      It's possibly, this film will also prove nothing, but it will show
      that in the official version not everything [is clear] ...

      Is it?

      Why [what for] did she shoot at him?


      Novaya Gazeta

      1.12. 2003

      ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      *That must be a personal opinion of an author of this unattributed
      article.

      FYI I'm still sticking with the lone gunman theory (to my knowledge,
      Zapruder tape hasn't proved that there was a plot), and I believe
      that only Lee Harvey Oswald was responsible for Kennedy's murder.

      Of course, that's beside the point, and it shouldn't matter one way
      or another, as here, we're dealing with a completely different case.
      M.L.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.