Each one is two parts......and coupling this with the straight line thru JFK and Connelly explains who and where the shooter was located. It is also obvious that if there had been a shooter he would have missed and would not have been a trained sniper.
Some viewer criticisms:
"What BS !!...Saying they proved there was no shooter from the "grassy knoll"....they were "Estimating" the angle of the shot. That head shot WAS from Kennedy's front-right. I've been a deer hunter for over 30 years...I've killed dozens of deer and been involved in even more hunts that deer were shot. (tracking and recovery) Ever since the first time I saw the film of Kennedy getting shot, I knew where the shot came from. If you've had the experience of watching or seeing the "scene" of a deer kill, you'd know by the direction of anything blown out, would be the same as the bullet's path.....AND the direction a human head would be thrown, "Back and to the Left" !"
"they openly acknowledge the carcano rifle was not accurate so they used a different rifle? Lol. First flaw there."
"Shoot a moving target shoot a moving target for goodness sake !!! Why keep showing this still target bullshit and so-called rewriting history to prove lee or single assassin did this. Its just sooo dishonest."
"I'm telling you James files did it" (full detailed confession)
"James Files, used a Remington XP 100 Fireball, from the grassy knoll."
"The problem with how the grassy knoll shot was conducted is that James Files (the man who claimed that he took the shot there) used a type of revolver. Obviously a rifle is going to blow someone's brains out because rifles are more powerful than revolvers. Also, the narrator of this video commits a slippery slope fallacy by saying that if there was a shooter at the grassy knoll, the head would have been completely obliterated. Actually, the only conclusion that we can make is through what is given - using a RIFLE in that spot would have obliterated his head, because they just demonstrated it. Also, I don't even care if Oswald took the first shot. I care about the direction of the blood spatter and the direction Kennedy's head went in regard to the shot that blew his brains out. Anyone who studies forensics should know a fundamental rule about blood spatter - if blood goes in a general direction, that means the force that caused it to move in that direction came from the opposite direction (there is another rule that says if blood is on a surface and the force goes into the wall, the blood will bounce off in the same general direction because it has nowhere else to go; that doesn't apply in Kennedy's situation). This is reaffirmed by the laws of physics - if I smack the right side of my head with my right hand, my head is going to move left. From that same logic, I can conclude that if I shoot someone on the right side of their head, their head will move left. This is consistent with JFK's actual head movement when his brains blew off - his head CLEARLY moves left. Not only that, but the blood spatter goes in the same direction as well. Not only does this reaffirm James Files' description of what happened when he shot Kennedy, but also he said he was aiming for Kennedy's right eye and he missed and hit his temple! No shit the brains are going to blow up, he got shot in the temple. As far as I'm concerned, all the evidence (the rule of forensics which is supported by the laws of physics) points to the grassy knoll shot. If anyone wants to listen to James Files' testimony of how he killed JFK, there's a great hour and fifty minute video of it right here on YouTube. It blew my mind; I mean really - you just can't make that stuff up."
"Nothing is really proved without considering other weapons and calibers from the grassy knoll location. If a grassy knoll sniper existed, he (or even she) almost certainly wasn't using a traditional rifle. That sniper would almost certainly be firing something with a shorter barrel, and a shorter barrel would mean a slower bullet. The jacketed soft point would completely eliminate the head if fired from a higher-power rifle, but that's a huge assumption. At the very least, the producers of this video should tell what caliber they used so that we know what assumption they make. If a grassy knoll sniper existed and was shooting a .22 long rifle caliber with a lead hollowpoint bullet, the round would not destroy the head completely. I doubt that a .223 Remington hollowpoint would destroy the head completely. Some people have speculated that the round from the grassy knoll could have come from that short-barreled XP gun firing a .222 Remington round. I don't remember the numbers on that round, but I think that they are a bit less than the power of a .223 Remington. I'm very skeptical of the idea of a grassy knoll assassin, but this test is badly flawed. Another flaw in this test is that the skull that they create has no holes at all. In real life, a skull does have some openings that would dissipate at least some of the hydrostatic force."
"I know what weapon was used on the grassy knoll location...scientists found a bullet she’ll by the fence...a .22 bullet casing...one man could have used this type of bullet...Sirhan. The gun that was used was a .22 Long Rifle... Also...the bullets that Lee Harvey Oswald used was a 6.5 caliber....looks like they might have to do this again..haha"
"Brought to you by the CIA."
This goes on and on.. just one of the videos first part. These are so many solid criticisms, yet these flawed re-enactments you use to (largely/partly) base your conclusion on.