View Full Version : The Coup D'etat of November 1963
Bubblehead1980
11-18-13, 09:37 PM
Coming up on the 50th Anniversary of JFK's assassination, amazes me how many people still believe the "official" story when all the evidence clearly contradicts the story. Amazes me how many people have not bothered to research. JFK went up against the power structure of this country, the Military Industrial Complex that Eisenhower warned about, and was murdered for this, Federal Reserve had a hand it in, being part of the power structure threatened by Kennedy.Used to write all this off as conspiracy theory myself but it makes much more sense than that single shooter, like Oswald said, he was just a Patsy. Aside from the reasons, the ballistics just do not back up the one shooter theory.Sad part is, no one will ever be held accountable for this, those involved are dead or will be soon.Those who orchestrated it, Lyndon Johnson, Allen Dulles, dead.Truth needs to come out though so that those involved can be scorned by history, not praised.Johnson was a thug, and should be remembered as such.
Cybermat47
11-18-13, 09:45 PM
Well, it's Doctor Who's 50th Anniversary on the 23rd, so it's not all bad.
R.I.P. JFK.
And Bubbles, do you really have to blame the US government for everything?
Bubblehead1980
11-18-13, 09:51 PM
Well, it's Doctor Who's 50th Anniversary on the 23rd, so it's not all bad.
R.I.P. JFK.
And Bubbles, do you really have to blame the US government for everything?
No, but it happens that they are at fault for vast majority of our problems, so they deserve it.
Sailor Steve
11-18-13, 10:01 PM
Sorry, but it has been shown that everything that happened could have been done by one man, and easily so. I agree, Johnson was a thug. That doesn't mean he did it, or Castro, or the CIA, or anybody else. Unfortunately once again all you have is allegation and innuendo, and not a single shred of real, concrete evidence.
Bubblehead1980
11-18-13, 10:51 PM
Sorry, but it has been shown that everything that happened could have been done by one man, and easily so. I agree, Johnson was a thug. That doesn't mean he did it, or Castro, or the CIA, or anybody else. Unfortunately once again all you have is allegation and innuendo, and not a single shred of real, concrete evidence.
Really? The magic bullet? really? lol no way it could do that. That bullet, being in pristine condition after hitting dense bone etc? don't think so.Governor Connolly was hit in the wrist, Sorry, there is just too much that shows one man, with that slow firing rifle, a moving target, could have did all that damage with two shots(one missed if I recall). The triangulation of crossfire make more sense, with Oswald, thinking he was "in" but was not, set up as the patsy.There are just too many loose ends, and suddenly people started getting knocked off.The guy Tommy Lee Jones played in JFK, Clay Shaw, later confirmed by Richard Helms to have worked for the CIA.
The motives, means, and opportunity were there and ballistics support multiple shooters, as well as various witnesses, some who were suppressed and others who died mysteriously, it all fits and makes much more sense than a lone nut managed to pull off shots many skilled marksmen could not.Seriously, how did they ID Oswald so quickly? never made any sense.No prints were found on the gun initially, then suddenly after Oswald is dead, they found a palm print.
Kennedy was standing up to the old guard in the CIA and the federal reserve, etc they decided to off him, Johnson was probably not the ringleader but believe he knew about it and signed off on it.Kennedy was screwing with power and money, possibly naive on the dangerous it presented to himself or figured they would never go "that far" or perhaps since he felt he would never live to be an old man anyways due to health problems, did not scare him to push it as much.
Motives aside, the ballistics just don't make any sense for a single shooter, where as a triangulation of crossfire, would account for so much, and thus means this was much more than a lone nut with a cheap rifle, making some impossible shots.
Armistead
11-18-13, 11:09 PM
I have to agree with Bubble, the entire thing stinks.
"A Congressional Investigation from 1976-1979 found a "probable conspiracy" in the assassination of John F. Kennedy and recommended the Justice Department investigate further. As of 1991, the Justice Department has done nothing. The files of the House Select Committee on Assassinations are locked away until the year 2029."
If it was just Oswald, strange the files won't be released until everyone involved is long dead. It certainly has no bearing on our national security now.
Bubblehead1980
11-18-13, 11:59 PM
The big thing is the ballistics and reality of what happened.Really, the official version is three shots fired, two hit Kennedy, one missed.The second bullet fired hit Kennedy in the throat and third was the head shot, the fatal shot.Yet Oswald would be behind him at this point, but the shot clearly hit him from the front and blew out the back of Kennedy's head.The fatal shot likely came from grassy knoll, where as many witnesses claimed gunfire came from.The limo had holes in front also and was immediately cleaned up and repaired.
No doubt's about multiple shooters, triangulation of crossfire. The motives seem to be mostly with the old guard taking out Kennedy as he posed a threat.
A second likely scenario is that the Cubans/Soviets were behind it, a massive intelligence failure occurred and a cover up was made to avoid the masses pushing for war over this.I find the former much more likely but the later is possible.
The Professor in this video, puts things together well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65N3eP2yvbQ
Armistead
11-19-13, 12:15 AM
Anyone that shoots know that head shot was from the front.
Wolferz
11-19-13, 12:18 AM
Most don't consider exactly who the Kennedy brothers were trying to take down at the time. I won't mention any names because offering no proof kind of rankles Steve a bit. I know why it rankles you Steve, even if you don't.
In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't really matter that the government has been stolen from the people by weasels. Blame it on George Washington. He started it when he recruited our first spies.
http://i205.photobucket.com/albums/bb295/Wolferz_2007/330px-Nathan-hale-cityhall.jpg
Nathan Hale
Sailor Steve
11-19-13, 12:28 AM
Really? The magic bullet? really? lol no way it could do that. That bullet, being in pristine condition after hitting dense bone etc?
Several test bullets were fired into a variety of materials during the investigation and since, and most of them were in similar condition. Yes way it could do that lol. (Yes, I'm mocking your style and attitude, but not your thesis).
Governor Connolly was hit in the wrist, Sorry, there is just too much that shows one man, with that slow firing rifle, a moving target, could have did all that damage with two shots(one missed if I recall).
Not at all. Jacketed rifle bullets are perfectly capable of penetrating two bodies.
The triangulation of crossfire make more sense
Then you have the problem of where the other shot(s) was fired from. Every other position has been shown to be either populated or out of the line of fire.
The motives, means, and opportunity were there and ballistics support multiple shooters
Only because you want them to. In fact they can easily support either supposition.
as well as various witnesses, some who were suppressed and others who died mysteriously
Very convenient. How "mysteriously" is mysteriously?
it all fits and makes much more sense than a lone nut managed to pull off shots many skilled marksmen could not.
There you are totally off base. Oswald qualified as a sharpshooter while in the marines. In a later test his rating was reduced to marksman. He also practiced with that rifle at the local range.
Second, the range is given as 88 yards. I have put five bullets into a target at 100 yards in a handful of seconds, with my Springfield, with no scope. I consider myself an average shot at best, but with a scope I'm confident that I could have made those shots.
Third, the event has been recreated many times, and every time a trained marksman was able to make the shots. So your claim of "a skilled marksman could not" has been proven wrong more than once.
Seriously, how did they ID Oswald so quickly? never made any sense.
When the police sealed off the building they interrogated several employees, including the boss, who all saw Oswald in the building around the time of the assassination. When they took a head count Oswald's superviser noted that Oswald was the only empoyee missing.
No prints were found on the gun initially, then suddenly after Oswald is dead, they found a palm print.
The partial palm print was found on the underside of the upper barrel, which is covered by the stock. This is consistent with Oswald handling the rifle while disassembled. Nothing unusual at all for someone who likely took the gun apart on a regular basis.
Of course in the interest of the other side anyone could have used the rifle to do the shooting, and Oswald's print would have been there all along. Also it is certainly possible that the print was a plant made after the fact, or that it was never there at all.
Kennedy was standing up to the old guard in the CIA and the federal reserve, etc they decided to off him, Johnson was probably not the ringleader but believe he knew about it and signed off on it.Kennedy was screwing with power and money, possibly naive on the dangerous it presented to himself or figured they would never go "that far" or perhaps since he felt he would never live to be an old man anyways due to health problems, did not scare him to push it as much.
All conjecture.
Motives aside, the ballistics just don't make any sense for a single shooter, where as a triangulation of crossfire, would account for so much, and thus means this was much more than a lone nut with a cheap rifle, making some impossible shots.
Again, the shots were not only possible, but fairly easy for someone with Oswald's training. Also you need to show where the other shooters could be in the heavy population watching the motorcade. So far it's all been speculation.
Don't get me wrong. I don't deny that any conspiracy is possible, but I like to see more evidence than just "could haves". Once again you seem to be absolutely convinced of your claims and unwilling to accept any other possibility.
Sailor Steve
11-19-13, 12:33 AM
Anyone that shoots know that head shot was from the front.
"Anyone"? I don't, and I know others more experienced than I am who also don't "know" that.
Most don't consider exactly who the Kennedy brothers were trying to take down at the time. I won't mention any names because offering no proof kind of rankles Steve a bit. I know why it rankles you Steve, even if you don't.
Then you know nothing. It doesn't bother me a bit. That's a nice way of getting around the fact that if you don't have proof you don't have anything.
But I'll bite. Why does it "rankle" me?
Stealhead
11-19-13, 12:39 AM
Not at all. Jacketed rifle bullets are perfectly capable of penetrating two bodies.
Indeed anyone who thinks other wise has not fired very many firearms jacketed rounds will penetrate multiple bodies all day long especially higher velocity ones.
Even expanding rounds can over penetrate in fact it not a 100% guarantee that an expanding round will be able to expand at close range the velocity can be too high to allow for expansion in time.
Furthermore a single round can hit bone other solid object and deflect even shatter and the fragments can still be deadly for several feet.
All of that is highly likely to occur at the range Oswald fired from.
I must agree with Sailor Steve I have been shooting for years and I would not be able to tell by how the head and body reacted what direction a hit came from.I fail to see how being a shooter some how automatically make you an expert at how the human body reacts to bullets beyond the obvious facts like when a person is hit in the right place they drop like jello and in other places they lie down and die and others they crawl away and bleed out.
Bubblehead1980
11-19-13, 01:15 AM
Steve, I have considered other possibilities, for a long time I believed in the single shooter theory, but based on research etc, just does not make sense.
Sorry, yes bullet impacts can make human body do weird things, but the Kennedy head wound entering from the back , exploding the back of his head, coming out the front with a neat hole? reversing the entrance and exit wounds? lol come on now.The film is there, he clearly recoils back from taking a hit to the forehead/temple area, bullet exits out the back.Bullet was damaged, mangled from what I have read.Yet the supposed second shot from Oswald, the magic bullet, hit Kennedy in the back, exited his throat, went through hit Governor Connolly, did some zigs like it had a tiny rocket motor in it, exited, his his wrist and survived intact? come on now.
Like anything, government has a weak explanation that it peddles to contradict the truth.RFK allegedly made the statement "If the truth about Dallas came out, there would be blood in the streets"
This professor gives a great run down, you would enjoy the detail he goes into, mentions many who died in suspect manners in the years after, those who could put holes in the official story, including a mistress of JFK.Holds an interview with LBJ's former mistress.One man who is in prison claims to be the grassy knoll shooter and the professor provides great explanation of why he believes him.Mentions E Howard Hunt's deathbed confession.
Really, if it were one person or two but it's many, some stayed quiet out of fear, others were silenced long ago, just watch the video, it is worth it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65N3eP2yvbQ
Cybermat47
11-19-13, 01:26 AM
I just saw some footage of the JFK assassination. It looks like it's the right side of his face that exploded, not the back.
Bubblehead1980
11-19-13, 01:36 AM
I just saw some footage of the JFK assassination. It looks like it's the right side of his face that exploded, not the back.
Post a link? The Zapruder Film clearly shows him jerk back then forward to the left, slumped, back of his clearly blown out.There are autopsy photos that show back of his head blown out, the exit wound of the mangled bullet.
Cybermat47
11-19-13, 01:45 AM
Post a link? The Zapruder Film clearly shows him jerk back then forward to the left, slumped, back of his clearly blown out.There are autopsy photos that show back of his head blown out, the exit wound of the mangled bullet.
Found a much better one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GL1qSGk8oMQ
At 1:43. The bullet seems to hit or exit the right side of his head.
Bubblehead1980
11-19-13, 02:06 AM
Found a much better one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GL1qSGk8oMQ
At 1:43. The bullet seems to hit or exit the right side of his head.
I can see how would look like that first glance, but if it came from the back, he would have lurched forward from the violent impact.The head shot came from the grassy knoll is most logical explanation, hit him front, perhaps with a little deflection, around temple area, exited out the back, caused side/back blowout of the skull and the mangled bullet.The bullet impacted coming from the front, caused him to go back, then slump down to the left after the fatal head shot.This was the point of triangulation of crossfire, bullets coming from all directions, created chaos.Some 50 people reported gunfire from the grassy knoll.
Bubbles you are talking bollocks again
Have a read of Mortal Error then report back. Secret Service Agent Hickey in the chase car is still the most likely candidate for the one who fired the fatal round. The ballistic evidence outlined in that book is far more compelling and comprehensive than any other ive seen. It also adequately explains that the so called pristine bullet was certainly not pristine. Also the so called magic bullet was not magic at all and followed a trajectory from Oswalds window through Kennedy the jump seat in front of him amd Governor Connelly.
This site outlines the evidence nicely: http://www.sbs.com.au/thesmokinggun
The Secret Service haste to move the body and the way the autopsy was carried out and the presidents brain going missing are far more important facts than the fictional shooter on the grassy knoll or some bloke with an umbrella.
Dread Knot
11-19-13, 07:50 AM
Meh. Color me unimpressed.
What strikes me is that in 50 years no conspiracy theorist has come any closer to solving Kennedy's murder. That's because they are adamant in saying it is not their goal to do so. Instead they opt for the exoneration of Lee Harvey Oswald and the indictment of some massive, multi-headed, overlordly conspiracy that they can't even agree on. They pick away at the admittedly flawed Warren Commission but can never come up with a narrative of their own that explains all, or find the smoking gun ( or memo or deathbed confession) that finally blows the lid off. I predict 50 years from there will still be JFK conspiracy theories and Oswald will still be the only known culprit. Just less people will care.
Why, if the "Powers That Be" determined that the President must die, did they do so in full view of the public where it could be independently observed and recorded, in a way that conspiracy theorists claim was so very obviously a murder?
There are other methods for taking down a president you don't like.
Food poisoning. Scandal. Accident.
This is what I find so silly about the whole JFK assassination scenario as a conspiracy. It's not that the alleged conspirators chose the silliest way to shoot the President in public; it's that they chose the silliest way to get rid of him -- by shooting him in public.
Tribesman
11-19-13, 07:53 AM
But who framed Roger Rabbit?
Dread Knot
11-19-13, 07:55 AM
But who framed Roger Rabbit?
Oswald Rabbit obviously. :D
http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/088/1/1/Oswald_The_Lucky_Rabbit_by_darren72.jpg
Oswald Rabbit obviously. :D
http://fc07.deviantart.net/fs70/i/2010/088/1/1/Oswald_The_Lucky_Rabbit_by_darren72.jpg
Now that's funny, can't seem to get a word in edge wise here server always busy or is that another,, con spear assiey,,, I'm well,, glad, some took up the good fight,,, I salute you carry on. and how about getting that Pt done I don't want to die of old age before that's done Nic.
I don't believe that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. Oswald acted alone, tried and got a shot on target. Hickey s shot was an accident. Was there then a conspiracy to cover up the accident?
We'll never know. The ballistic evidence doesn't support there being a single gunman using the same ammunition. The angle and bullet behavior of the head shot is inconsistent with a jacketed round fired from the book depsitory window, but wholly consistent with a smaller caliber frangible round being fired from the chase car.
Again we can only speculate and will still be doing so 100 years from now.
Subnuts
11-19-13, 08:47 AM
25 reasons why the assassination of John F Kennedy was a HOAX!
1. A bullet fired from the book depository would have have run out of fuel before it actually hit Kennedy.
2. If the gun that Lee Harvey Oswald supposedly used to assassinate Kennedy was real, it would have been so powerful it would have exploded.
3. When Oswald fired the rifle, it should have left a charred blast crater on the back of the book depository.
4. Oswald didn't possess sufficient computing power to navigate a bullet into Kennedy's head.
5. The bullet that struck Kennedy was powerful enough to blow off part of his head, but Jackie Kennedy survived completely intact.
6. The radiation generated by the heat of the gun fired would have been sufficient to kill Oswald in minutes.
7. If a bullet fired from a 44-caliber handgun can kill someone in a single shot, a bullet fired from a 6.5 mm Carcano Model 91/38 rifle should have killed everyone in the limousine.
8. The shadows of the gunmen on the grassy knoll cast nonparallel shadows.
9. There was no handle to open the doors on the presidential limo from the inside.
10. It was so hot in Dallas that day, that Zapruder's movie camera would have been melted and all of the people lining the streets would have burst into flame.
11. No one had assassinated the president while he was in a moving vehicle before. How could it have worked the first time?
12. If American politicians were being assassinated 50 years ago, we would still be doing so today.
13. If you slow down the footage of the actual bullet strike four times, it's just a dead squirrel being blown up with a firecracker superimposed onto footage of JFK's inauguration.
14. If the assassination were real, Lyndon Johnson would have had Lee Harvey Oswald hanged.
15. There are thousands of shooting ranges throughout the United States, where the assassination could have easily been hoaxed.
16. The 6.5 mm Carcano was such an inaccurate rifle, that most of the rounds fired by it would have flown back and struck Oswald.
17. The presidential limo had an engine in front, which would have prevented anyone from exiting it.
18. The American flags in the Zapruder film are blowing in the wind, even though it was too hot that day for any wind to blow.
19. You can see the strings suspending the bits of "brain matter" when JFK is fatally shot, and everyone in the limo turns into a rod puppet for a couple of frames.
20. The presidential limo was not big enough to store enough fuel for Kennedy's scheduled tour.
21. The autopsy pictures of Kennedy were of another body that had been baked in a radiation oven at 5,000 degrees.
22. If there had been a solar flare that day, Kennedy would have been killed by it, driving around with the top down.
23. We should have heard the gun firing in the Zapruder film, but the entire event seems curiously silent.
24. The presidential limo would have put out thick, black exhaust and left tire marks on the road wherever it traveled.
25. The presidential limo was so big and heavy, the driver could have never compensated for it's changing center of gravity as it burned fuel.
I think I might be getting my conspiracy theories mixed up. :hmmm:
Armistead
11-19-13, 09:09 AM
I don't believe that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. Oswald acted alone, tried and got a shot on target. Hickey s shot was an accident. Was there then a conspiracy to cover up the accident?
We'll never know. The ballistic evidence doesn't support there being a single gunman using the same ammunition. The angle and bullet behavior of the head shot is inconsistent with a jacketed round fired from the book depsitory window, but wholly consistent with a smaller caliber frangible round being fired from the chase car.
Again we can only speculate and will still be doing so 100 years from now.
I could accept one of two "ifs", but this case is full of them. Too many odd events that suggest something more. I think Oswald was part of it, but believe it highly possible others were involved.
Still, isn't it something Oswald was who he was, just happened to work at the perfect place when Kennedy came by.
25 reasons why the assassination of John F Kennedy was a HOAX!
1. A bullet fired from the book depository would have have run out of fuel before it actually hit Kennedy.
2. If the gun that Lee Harvey Oswald supposedly used to assassinate Kennedy was real, it would have been so powerful it would have exploded.
3. When Oswald fired the rifle, it should have left a charred blast crater on the back of the book depository.
4. Oswald didn't possess sufficient computing power to navigate a bullet into Kennedy's head.
5. The bullet that struck Kennedy was powerful enough to blow off part of his head, but Jackie Kennedy survived completely intact.
6. The radiation generated by the heat of the gun fired would have been sufficient to kill Oswald in minutes.
7. If a bullet fired from a 44-caliber handgun can kill someone in a single shot, a bullet fired from a 6.5 mm Carcano Model 91/38 rifle should have killed everyone in the limousine.
8. The shadows of the gunmen on the grassy knoll cast nonparallel shadows.
9. There was no handle to open the doors on the presidential limo from the inside.
10. It was so hot in Dallas that day, that Zapruder's movie camera would have been melted and all of the people lining the streets would have burst into flame.
11. No one had assassinated the president while he was in a moving vehicle before. How could it have worked the first time?
12. If American politicians were being assassinated 50 years ago, we would still be doing so today.
13. If you slow down the footage of the actual bullet strike four times, it's just a dead squirrel being blown up with a firecracker superimposed onto footage of JFK's inauguration.
14. If the assassination were real, Lyndon Johnson would have had Lee Harvey Oswald hanged.
15. There are thousands of shooting ranges throughout the United States, where the assassination could have easily been hoaxed.
16. The 6.5 mm Carcano was such an inaccurate rifle, that most of the rounds fired by it would have flown back and struck Oswald.
17. The presidential limo had an engine in front, which would have prevented anyone from exiting it.
18. The American flags in the Zapruder film are blowing in the wind, even though it was too hot that day for any wind to blow.
19. You can see the strings suspending the bits of "brain matter" when JFK is fatally shot, and everyone in the limo turns into a rod puppet for a couple of frames.
20. The presidential limo was not big enough to store enough fuel for Kennedy's scheduled tour.
21. The autopsy pictures of Kennedy were of another body that had been baked in a radiation oven at 5,000 degrees.
22. If there had been a solar flare that day, Kennedy would have been killed by it, driving around with the top down.
23. We should have heard the gun firing in the Zapruder film, but the entire event seems curiously silent.
24. The presidential limo would have put out thick, black exhaust and left tire marks on the road wherever it traveled.
25. The presidential limo was so big and heavy, the driver could have never compensated for it's changing center of gravity as it burned fuel.
I think I might be getting my conspiracy theories mixed up. :hmmm:
:har:
Sailor Steve
11-19-13, 10:26 AM
Steve, I have considered other possibilities, for a long time I believed in the single shooter theory, but based on research etc, just does not make sense.
So you keep saying. I would suggest doing a little research.
Sorry, yes bullet impacts can make human body do weird things, but the Kennedy head wound entering from the back , exploding the back of his head, coming out the front with a neat hole? reversing the entrance and exit wounds? lol come on now.
As I said, you seem to be latching onto the favorite theories without doing the slightest bit of investigation yourself.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/head.htm (warning: it's a bit graphic)
The film is there, he clearly recoils back from taking a hit to the forehead/temple area, bullet exits out the back.
I've just finished watching the film several times. Yes, his head snaps back. The spray, however, clearly flies forward, consistent with the passage being from rear to front.
Bullet was damaged, mangled from what I have read.Yet the supposed second shot from Oswald, the magic bullet, hit Kennedy in the back, exited his throat, went through hit Governor Connolly, did some zigs like it had a tiny rocket motor in it, exited, his his wrist and survived intact? come on now.
The bullet was mangled after travelling at an angle through the top of the skull. As to your "zigs like it had a tiny rocket motor in it"? Once again the slightest bit of research would show you otherwise.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-bullet_theory
Scroll down to see the pictures of possible bullet paths.
Like anything, government has a weak explanation that it peddles to contradict the truth.RFK allegedly made the statement "If the truth about Dallas came out, there would be blood in the streets"
You have the temerity to say "Come on now"? [Citation please].
This professor gives a great run down
First, the video starts with James Files, who apparently is not even believed by the conspiracy theorists. That's not good.
you would enjoy the detail he goes into
He does spin a good tale, I'll give him that. His talk about the lunchroom doesn't take into account the fact that Oswald was the only employee who left the building before the police cordon was set up. The fact remains that Oswald killed officer J.D. Tippit when Tippit stopped him for questioning.
Really, if it were one person or two but it's many, some stayed quiet out of fear, others were silenced long ago
Again, nothing but conjecture on your part. How would you, or anyone, know they stayed quiet out of fear? Maybe they stayed quiet because they had nothing to say. How would you, or anyone, know others were silenced? They died. Some say the circumstances were suspicious. Were they? If they were, what does that prove?
Again, I'm not denying anything, or even taking sides. Of course the conspicacy theorists may be right. The problem is that they have yet to show a single bit of evidence that can't be explained by the accepted story.
Bubblehead1980
11-19-13, 10:40 AM
Meh. Color me unimpressed.
What strikes me is that in 50 years no conspiracy theorist has come any closer to solving Kennedy's murder. That's because they are adamant in saying it is not their goal to do so. Instead they opt for the exoneration of Lee Harvey Oswald and the indictment of some massive, multi-headed, overlordly conspiracy that they can't even agree on. They pick away at the admittedly flawed Warren Commission but can never come up with a narrative of their own that explains all, or find the smoking gun ( or memo or deathbed confession) that finally blows the lid off. I predict 50 years from there will still be JFK conspiracy theories and Oswald will still be the only known culprit. Just less people will care.
Why, if the "Powers That Be" determined that the President must die, did they do so in full view of the public where it could be independently observed and recorded, in a way that conspiracy theorists claim was so very obviously a murder?
There are other methods for taking down a president you don't like.
Food poisoning. Scandal. Accident.
This is what I find so silly about the whole JFK assassination scenario as a conspiracy. It's not that the alleged conspirators chose the silliest way to shoot the President in public; it's that they chose the silliest way to get rid of him -- by shooting him in public.
Watch the video I posted, it pieces everything together.
Why did they do it in full of public? Because they knew the American public was overall gullible and likely did not take into account people like Zapruder as home movie cameras were still not the norm back them.Not like today where everyone has HD video on their cell phones.Plus, the men who likely orchestrated this, LBJ, Dulles, Helms etc had a high degree of disdain for the public and knew that with smoke and mirrors, president in a hostile state, a proper story with a patsy, they could win, especially in those days when public still have a naive trust in the government, which unfortunately many still have today, much like an abused wife who just can't stop loving his abusive partner and will not leave, people who still trust the US government are much like that.I understand it, no one wants to believe something like this could happen in the United States, this happens everywhere else but no here.
Oh you are wrong, eventually the truth will come out.There are reasons files were sealed until 30 or so years into this century, to give people time to die off.Amazes me how people will still blindly support the one shooter theory when evidence contradicts it.There dozens of witnesses who report fire from grassy knoll, the ballistics dispute the "one bullet theory" and like Jim Garrison said in the JFK Movie "Government may try to explain this bullet with theoretical physics, but theoretical physics could prove than an elephant could hang off a cliff by his tail wrapped around a daisy" lol, it was junk science used to muddy the waters on an misinformed, naive public.Most people can not tell what the federal reserve is, what it does, how it was formed, and how powerful it is.Most people only know the name Dulles due to the airport, they don't understand just how hated JFK was by the establishment.They don't understand, mainly because so much time has passed just how powerful these men were.J Edgar Hoover hated JFK and RFK.LBJ hated them as both and certainly did the bidding of the powers that be once the coup was completed. This had to be an inside job, since parade route was also changed to what would be a suitable ambush site.
The most likely scenario is that JFK was murdered in a plot initiated by Dulles, Helms, and federal reserve with the approval of LBJ.The assassins were likely cia trained or even mafia assets.Oswald, who had been trained by the ONI, was likely lead to believe he was part of an operation, and made the patsy, perhaps realized it and thus why he fled as it was unlikely no evidence to support he actually fired a shot, the palm print LATER found on the rifle is highly suspect, no chain of custody.
One other plausible scenario, is that a massive intelligence failure occurred, the plot lead back to Castro or Soviets and to avoid what would be a demand for war, it was covered up, which could also explain the secrecy to this day.
Sad part is no one will ever really be held accountable for his murder and an overthrow of the elected US government but truth and come out, can ensure history books read correctly and make sure the legacies of men like LBJ, Dulles, etc depict them for the traitors and thugs that they were.
Bilge_Rat
11-19-13, 10:56 AM
I sort of agree with BH that there are a lot of unanswered questions about the assassination, including the "magic bullet" theory. Yes, it's possible, but it is a stretch.
Oliver Stone's "JFK", although it does go over the deep end does a good job about covering all the issues.
What has pretty much convinced me that Oswald acted alone is the fact that 50 years on, no documents or witnesses have appeared which support a conspiracy. Even in the Mafia or the Soviet Union, eventually someone talks about what happened.
p.s.- I am just barely old enough to remember the event. I was 8 at the time and did not understand what was going on, but I remember my parents having the TV on all the time and being very sad.
Dread Knot
11-19-13, 11:06 AM
What has pretty much convinced me that Oswald acted alone is the fact that 50 years on, no documents or witnesses have appeared which support a conspiracy. Even in the Mafia or the Soviet Union, eventually someone talks about what happened.
Same here. People talk. They become greedy or guilty or disenchanted. Loyalties shift. Death threats don't work on people who are already dead or about to die. A substantial number of people who would have had to be in on such a conspiracy have died. Yet among these, we find no safe deposit boxes with incriminating photos, memos or documents, no accounts of deathbed confessions. No such evidence sent abroad to a foreign nation where they could get an airing.
Aktungbby
11-19-13, 01:01 PM
It was da' mob; Bobby was makin' waves and when da patsy didn't croak on schedule, in goes Jack Ruby?!!(the real smoking gun) ta finish da' job keep his omerta and die of cancer conveniently; LBJ and the military industrial complex were just 'Collateral beneficiaries' ala Teddy Roosevelt or the Radical Republicans when two previous presidents were whacked"! Business as usual in the land o' the free. I suspect too that the sins of the father(bootlegger Boston thug Joseph P.) were visited on the son(s) here as well...:shucks:
I was thinking of starting thread about JFK, however I would first have done this on either Thursday or Friday.
This case have intrigued me a lot, have read books and seen many documentary, even those conspiracy videos(and the funny ones from Red Dwarf)
Who's expert on this?? I'm not, so how did it?
Was LHO acting by him self?
Was LHO, being used as an scapegoat?
Was LHO a part of a bigger issue?
Some month ago I listen to Coast To Coast and in this show I heard that Hoffa, was erased from the earth because of his knowledge about the assassination of JFK. That was new to me.( of course this information is placed under the suspicious conspiracy stuff)
The most intersting book I have read is Jim Garrisons book.
Personally I have it hart to believe that LHO acted on his own.
Being a part of a group-yes, but alone- no.
I have a lot of information from all these books and videos, but what is real and what's not.
Is it real that the "tour of Dallas" was changed in the last moment? So instead of driving straight ahead, the car turned to the left and drove down the road on which he was shot? If this is true, how could LHO have know this.
So in this case I will not say that Bubble is not that wrong-not this time
One thing though It was not a Coup D'etat.
Markus
Jimbuna
11-19-13, 02:14 PM
Again we can only speculate and will still be doing so 100 years from now.
Yep, works for me...speculation ad nauseum.
Wash, spin, dry and repeat.
Sailor Steve
11-19-13, 02:28 PM
I understand it, no one wants to believe something like this could happen in the United States, this happens everywhere else but no here.
No, you don't understand it at all. A great many of us believe something like this could happen here. We're just waiting for the people who insist on this to show some actual proof. Fifty years on all they have is still smoke and mirrors of their own.
Amazes me how people will still blindly support the one shooter theory when evidence contradicts it.
And it amazes me how people like you will blindly support the conspiracy theory when evidence contradicts it. I've shown the studies of the skull wound, and you'll barge on without answering it. You believe this because you want to, and once again you are exactly like the people you claim to be against.
There dozens of witnesses who report fire from grassy knoll
Now let's look at some of those witnesses. Many of them gave conflicting testimony or made other claims that were patently false.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/witnesses.htm
the ballistics dispute the "one bullet theory"
I've already shown that to be false, and you continue to ignore it, as always.
and like Jim Garrison said in the JFK Movie "Government may try to explain this bullet with theoretical physics, but theoretical physics could prove than an elephant could hang off a cliff by his tail wrapped around a daisy"
Proof by dismissal through the statement of one non-scientist is no proof at all, except to you.
lol, it was junk science used to muddy the waters on an misinformed, naive public.
I've also shown that to be false, yet you continue to ignore it.
Most people can not tell what the federal reserve is, what it does, how it was formed, and how powerful it is.Most people only know the name Dulles due to the airport
And you get points of law wrong fairly consistently, along with historical data, yet you continue to make dismissive statements like that. You believe what you're told and what you want to believe just as much as the people you insult.
they don't understand just how hated JFK was by the establishment.
Do you have any proof of that, other than claims made after the fact by conspiracy theorists?
They don't understand, mainly because so much time has passed just how powerful these men were.J Edgar Hoover hated JFK and RFK.LBJ hated them as both and certainly did the bidding of the powers that be once the coup was completed.
Lots of people hate lots of people. They don't all kill each other (though some do) and that is only evidence to people like you who want to believe it.
This had to be an inside job, since parade route was also changed to what would be a suitable ambush site.
"Had to be"? Do you have the slightest evidence for that, other than your own opinion? Once again, you claim your opinion as fact. Nothing "has to be" anything.
The most likely scenario is that JFK was murdered in a plot initiated by Dulles, Helms, and federal reserve with the approval of LBJ.
Again, "likely"? It's the scenario that fits what you want to believe. Show some real evidence, please. So far it's all your opinion.
Bilge_Rat
11-19-13, 02:30 PM
Seinfeld's take on the "magic bullet"...:O:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBz3PqA2Fmc
Sailor Steve
11-19-13, 02:39 PM
Some month ago I listen to Coast To Coast
No offense intended toward you, but that is also a show that presents people claiming to have been abducted by aliens.
and in this show I heard that Hoffa, was erased from the earth because of his knowledge about the assassination of JFK. That was new to me.( of course this information is placed under the suspicious conspiracy stuff)
That's a nice speculation, but so far Hoffa's remains have never been found, so he is officially missing. No trace of when he died or how.
Is it real that the "tour of Dallas" was changed in the last moment? So instead of driving straight ahead, the car turned to the left and drove down the road on which he was shot? If this is true, how could LHO have know this.
The answer is that it's not true - the route wasn't changed at all.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/route.htm
Again people believe what they're told, and don't do the research for themselves. But it's not people believing the government, it's people believing the conspiracy buffs.
Here is the front page for the above link, and one of the best ones you'll read.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
Buddahaid
11-19-13, 03:01 PM
I believe this more than any of the "other" theories.
http://video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?p=red+dwarf+tikka+to+ride&vid=70d90d622f95ce14ac319a2c73947424&l=1%3A23&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts1.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DV.47 53817025185036%26pid%3D15.1&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DTE wcTBnrD6k&tit=Red+Dwarf%3A+Tikka+To+Ride+-+Kennedy+Assassination&c=0&sigr=11a2m6mdo&sigt=11gkb4fhp&back=http%3A%2F%2Fsearch.yahoo.com%2Fsearch%3Fei%3 DUTF-8%26p%3Dred%2Bdwarf%2Btikka%2Bto%2Bride%26fr%3Dyfp-t-900-s&sigb=12gb2eou7&ct=p&age=0&&tt=b
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tikka_to_Ride
Dread Knot
11-19-13, 03:17 PM
Oh you are wrong, eventually the truth will come out.There are reasons files were sealed until 30 or so years into this century, to give people time to die off.Amazes me how people will still blindly support the one shooter theory when evidence contradicts it.
I've been hearing that since the 1970s when at least most of the conspiracy theories seemed fresh and new. Back then I devoured paperbacks and magazines on the subject. Four decades on and we are still stuck in the same tired swamp of anomaly, gossip and innuendo. For me it's gotten old like Roswell and the Apollo hoax.
When the final files are unsealed and something incriminating is found I'll eat my words. However, if nothing new is found I guarantee conspiracy theorist won't. They will scream foul, followed by another round of fresh conspiracy theories. Probably enough to sell books and videos and whatever future media well into the 22nd century.
Most of us would be delighted to hear a new theory about who actually killed Kennedy, if not Lee Harvey Oswald. However, what monumentally disappoints us is old information presented as if it were new. Most conspiracism works this way. A new crop of gullible readers devours it and pretends that because it is new to them, it's new to everyone. Maybe I'm a burnout case, but it's forty years on for me and it's all become old hat.
Bilge_Rat
11-19-13, 03:21 PM
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/225-230.gif
Here is one of the problem with the "magic bullet" theory. It shatters Connally's right wrist, but he is still holding on to his Stetson with it.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jbchit.htm
We all have an opinion in this issue
It could be right it could be wrong who knows?
Are any one of you some kind of expert in the fields that have to do with murder a.s.o(can't remember all these words)
I'm not, so I for one will not mock, laugh at an another member here in this thread.
I just have hard time to believe that Oswald did it one his own. That's my belief
Markus
Most of us would be delighted to hear a new theory about who actually killed Kennedy, if not Lee Harvey Oswald. However, what monumentally disappoints us is old information presented as if it were new. Most conspiracism works this way. A new crop of gullible readers devours it and pretends that because it is new to them, it's new to everyone. Maybe I'm a burnout case, but it's forty years on for me and it's all become old hat.
If you're not too burned out I'd be interested to hear what you think of Donahues Mortal Error theory. From my reading since the 70s and 80s it's the only theory I've seen that adds up.
I doubt that the files opening will reveal anything new anyway and as you pointed out the CT crowd will continue to argue the toss even after they are opened.
Motive !
Came to think of an detective saying in an episode of FBI-files on Discovery that it was important to find the motive of a crime.
So what could be the motive behind the assassination of JFK??
Markus
Sailor Steve
11-19-13, 06:00 PM
We all have an opinion in this issue
I don't. My only objection is to people who insist I believe something. All the conspiracy theories may be true. I've been waiting for forty years to see some proof. So far they haven't shown any.
I just have hard time to believe that Oswald did it one his own. That's my belief
I've gone back and forth several times. It wasn't until I started studying critical thinking several years ago that I started questioning everything. I realized I don't know anything, and I've come to believe that people who think they do can be the most dangerous people on earth. Never trust someone who insists he's right, no matter what side of what argument he may be on.
I've seen ample proof that Oswald could have made the shots and could have made the walk that some people have said he couldn't. It may well have been a conspiracy, and Oswald may or may not have been involved. Yes, he could have done it. Those requirements have been satisfied time and time again. That doesn't mean he did. There could have been two or more shooters. Anything is possible. The conspiracy theories have revolved around the idea that he couldn't have done it. He could have. Today they revolve around several contentions that have been shown to be wrong. That means that there doesn't have to be a conspiracy. There still may be, but to me more proof is required.
I don't. My only objection is to people who insist I believe something. All the conspiracy theories may be true. I've been waiting for forty years to see some proof. So far they haven't shown any.
I've gone back and forth several times. It wasn't until I started studying critical thinking several years ago that I started questioning everything. I realized I don't know anything, and I've come to believe that people who think they do can be the most dangerous people on earth. Never trust someone who insists he's right, no matter what side of what argument he may be on.
I've seen ample proof that Oswald could have made the shots and could have made the walk that some people have said he couldn't. It may well have been a conspiracy, and Oswald may or may not have been involved. Yes, he could have done it. Those requirements have been satisfied time and time again. That doesn't mean he did. There could have been two or more shooters. Anything is possible. The conspiracy theories have revolved around the idea that he couldn't have done it. He could have. Today they revolve around several contentions that have been shown to be wrong. That means that there doesn't have to be a conspiracy. There still may be, but to me more proof is required.
When I say this to my friend IRL or on different forums, that I don't believe LHO acted by himself almost every one says like:
So you think the mob, government, CIA, etc did it?
My answer: NO! I do not know who did it.
There's a movie starring Burt Lancaster in the program scheduled for that evening the movie was named 3 bullets( I just can't find that movie on imdb)
When I saw this movie, I couldn't help thinking, could this be the reason? Money Just money nothing else.
Markus
Sailor Steve
11-19-13, 06:23 PM
There's a movie starring Burt Lancaster in the program scheduled for that evening the movie was named 3 bullets( I just can't find that movie on imdb)
It may have been renamed 3 Bullets for a foreign market. The US title was Executive Action.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070046/?ref_=nv_sr_3
It may have been renamed 3 Bullets for a foreign market. The US title was Executive Action.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0070046/?ref_=nv_sr_3
That's the one, thank you.
Markus
Agent Hickey in the chase car is still the most likely candidate for the one who fired the fatal round.
Interesting you say that TarJak, I just got around to watching a documentary that was screen here in the UK on CH5 a couple of weeks ago and they to concluded the kill shot was indeed a unfortunate accident by Hickey. His evidence was never heard at the warren commission, which just concluded a cover up.
I found the documentry very interesting.
Interesting you say that TarJak, I just got around to watching a documentary that was screen here in the UK on CH5 a couple of weeks ago and they to concluded the kill shot was indeed a unfortunate accident by Hickey. His evidence was never heard at the warren commission, which just concluded a cover up.
I found the documentry very interesting.
That's new to me. do you have a link to a youtube video or other streaming page, where this being displayed?
Edit found the link through TarJak
Markus
CH5 JFK'S Secret Killer: The Evidence
http://www.channel5.com/shows/jfks-secret-killer-the-evidence/episodes/jfks-secret-killer-the-evidence
Unable to fine it on youtube.
Dread Knot
11-19-13, 09:28 PM
If you're not too burned out I'd be interested to hear what you think of Donahues Mortal Error theory. From my reading since the 70s and 80s it's the only theory I've seen that adds up.
I doubt that the files opening will reveal anything new anyway and as you pointed out the CT crowd will continue to argue the toss even after they are opened.
What impresses me is that Donahue seems to have zero interest in any grand conspiracy. He basically approaches the whole issue from a ballistics background. Donahue was able to recreate situations where a bullet from a AR-15 striking a target caused the target to jump toward the shooter (Kennedy's head flying backward)
However, it does seem astounding that a accidental discharge from a secret service agent's weapon during an assassination attempt ended up being the fatal blow and that a random shot hitting such a relatively small spot ended up being the fatal one. Crazier things have happened in the heat of combat I suppose.
I know that diehard conspiracy thoerists hate this explanation because it replaces a vast shadowy cabal with a coincidental tragedy. I also fail to see why the Warren Commision would feel the need to cover up secret service incompetence. The agent in question (Hickey) sure didn't care for the book. :03:
Stealhead
11-20-13, 12:08 AM
Actually the truth is that the KGB upset a house cat from New Orleans name of Mr.Bojangles.
You see the KGB worked out a deal with Mr.Bojangles that they would rig it so that Mr.Bojangles and not JFK would receive the Democratic nomination to run for president in 1960.
Well the KGB backed out and of course JFK won the nomination not Mr.Bojangles and Mr.Bojangles was very angry at this slight
from the KGB and thus began his complex plot.
Long story short Mr.Bojangles the cat killed JFK.
What impresses me is that Donahue seems to have zero interest in any grand conspiracy. He basically approaches the whole issue from a ballistics background. Donahue was able to recreate situations where a bullet from a AR-15 striking a target caused the target to jump toward the shooter (Kennedy's head flying backward)
However, it does seem astounding that a accidental discharge from a secret service agent's weapon during an assassination attempt ended up being the fatal blow and that a random shot hitting such a relatively small spot ended up being the fatal one. Crazier things have happened in the heat of combat I suppose.
I know that diehard conspiracy thoerists hate this explanation because it replaces a vast shadowy cabal with a coincidental tragedy. I also fail to see why the Warren Commision would feel the need to cover up secret service incompetence. The agent in question (Hickey) sure didn't care for the book. :03:
This is what attracted my attention. Donahue was originally hired by a tv show as a known ballistics expert to look at the evidence and ti try to recreate the Oswald shooting theory.
His work on calculating the trajectories was also impressive and thorough and again presents a far more compelling picture than either the CT crowd or even the official reports.
One question is whether Hickey or the other agents even realised what had happened even quite a bit later.
The biggest is if they did would they have been able to keep a lid on it for 50 years.
The Warren Commission was full of holes in it's approach to witnesses and who was or wasn't called. Its arguable as to what their motives in their actions in presenting a particular case would have been. I prefer not to speculate as its largely unproductive.
One interesting fact that the book points out is that according to the interviewed agents, there was no procedure for the Secret Service team to account for rounds taken out on the job and rounds expended. According to Mennigers enquiries they checked the weapon in and out of the armoury in Washington but that procedure didn't count rounds in or out.
As I said earlier the theories are all speculation and that will continue without evidence.
One question is whether Hickey or the other agents even realised what had happened even quite a bit later.
I find it difficult to believe that a side arm could discharge without the carrier being very aware of it.
Dread Knot
11-20-13, 08:43 AM
I find it difficult to believe that a side arm could discharge without the carrier being very aware of it.
Not just a side arm, but an AR-15.
The theory has some weight from a certain source who may have been privy to some inside information. Approximately one year after the assassination, LBJ was quoted as saying to Frank Cormier, White House correspondent that, were he ever killed, it wouldn't be from an assassin's bullet, it would be from a Secret Service agent's mistake---
"I ever get killed, it won't be because of an assassin. It'll be some Secret Service agent who trips himself up and his gun goes off. They're worse than trigger-happy Texas sheriffs. "
Maybe he was dropping hints...but that's just idle speculation on my part. There is enough of that already in the JFK assassination universe.
Armistead
11-20-13, 08:58 AM
What I find amazing is the number of witnesses that died after Kennedy was killed. No, I don't believe the number is high as claimed and certainly many died natural causes, but it is strange of the several that had ties to Kennedy that were murdered or blamed on suicide.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKdeaths.htm
Not just a side arm, but an AR-15.
The theory has some weight from a certain source who may have been privy to some inside information. Approximately one year after the assassination, LBJ was quoted as saying to Frank Cormier, White House correspondent that, were he ever killed, it wouldn't be from an assassin's bullet, it would be from a Secret Service agent's mistake---
"I ever get killed, it won't be because of an assassin. It'll be some Secret Service agent who trips himself up and his gun goes off. They're worse than trigger-happy Texas sheriffs. "
Maybe he was dropping hints...but's that's just idle speculation on my part.
I imagine that a bunch of serious looking men carrying guns might look intimidating to a civilian. Then again he wouldn't be the first reporter to embellish what he sees. The point is that Secret Service agents are intelligent people, hand picked and highly trained.
Dread Knot
11-20-13, 09:23 AM
Then again he wouldn't be the first reporter to embellish what he sees. The point is that Secret Service agents are intelligent people, hand picked and highly trained.
The quote is from Frank Cormier's book, LBJ: The Way He Was.
Frank admits he did clean up the language a bit in some of LJB's more colorful quotes. :03:
It does seem odd that other secret service agents weren't on Agent Hickey like white on rice if it did happen.
Father Goose
11-20-13, 10:24 AM
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/225-230.gif
Here is one of the problem with the "magic bullet" theory. It shatters Connally's right wrist, but he is still holding on to his Stetson with it.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/jbchit.htm
An excellent observation and one that is always overlooked in debates and even in this thread. I've studied the assassination and have been to Dealy Plaza. Very interesting subject and one that will be debated forever.
I agree with Bubblehead, Armistead and the House Select Commmittee on Assassinations findings...not a one man job.
"The Men Who Killed Kennedy" is another good film.
My friends, so far we have only discussed who could have done it. But no one have discussed what could have been the motive(Sorry if I should have missed this, while reading every post in this thread)
Let me hear your proposal on what could have been the motive.
Markus
Sailor Steve
11-20-13, 10:35 AM
For a single shooter, the motive is obvious. For a multi-shooter conspiracy, Bubblehead1980 has proposed some reasonable ideas already.
For a single shooter, the motive is obvious. For a multi-shooter conspiracy, Bubblehead1980 has proposed some reasonable ideas already.
Or maybe two shooters one with a motive one without. :hmmm:
As to whether Hickey would or would not have been aware of an accidental discharge it's all speculation. Even if he knew that the weapon discharged, if it was accidental he could not have known where the bullet went. Ye himself could only speculate
The statements of a number of the Secret Service team mentioned they smelled gun smoke. Given the wind direction that should not have been possible from Oswalds position. From that I suspect that Hickey and some of the team knew the gun went off, a few members of the team suspected but none knew where the round went and could only speculate later. The autopsy results may have cemented the speculation.
Even as a group with a vested interest in not letting the story out I find it difficult to believe that no one would have broken ranks in the 50 years. But as well trained agents who are trained not to discuss a lot of things with the great unwashed and in particular never discuss speculative accusations that they failed in their sworn role, it's conceivable.
As to whether Hickey would or would not have been aware of an accidental discharge it's all speculation.
Well some speculation is a lot more likely. An accidental discharge is darn hard to ignore.
Even if he knew that the weapon discharged, if it was accidental he could not have known where the bullet went.
Again difficult to believe given the events unfolding around him. If he really did shoot the president, accidentally or not, he knew it.
PBS recently aired a "Nova" program dealing with the forensics of the gunshots that killed Kennedy. I found it very interesting:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/tech/cold-case-jfk.html
<O>
Bubblehead1980
11-21-13, 02:02 PM
The Hickey theory would be plausible if JFK was shot in the back of the head, but can clearly see the bullet impacted from the front, perhaps closer to the "edge" or temple, blew out the side/back of his head, he jerked back from the frontal impact. Hickey was behind correct?
I have always felt that it is difficult for people to accept the truth because this was not something that happens in the US.This would mean that our government, our current system and much of what has went on since 1963 has been a farce, a joke, and that even our great country at times is no better than places like the former Soviet Union etc I compare this struggle with my transition into being an atheist .My family was certainly never devoutly religious, but as I was growing up and becoming more and more skeptical on religion and the belief in any god, one thing I struggled with was how could people I love and respect be so wrong about something ? How could the majority of us, as human beings be so wrong? This took quite a while to understand but I get it, faith in a god etc has such deep roots in every society, esp families it is difficult for people to let go, it is happening slowly, very slowly but I get it.
I see the truth about our government and history to be the same thing.The fact that some behind the scenes in our government could have the President murdered in a coup d'etat involving LBJ, because he sought to remove them from power, is just incomprehensible and disturbing, it is easier for many to just ignore the truth. even though the evidence is there.Some of it is a lack of understanding by the masses of just how influential and dangerous the federal reserve is, how powerful men like Allen Dulles were, how the post WW II, early Cold War era CIA were, the environment of the cold war in the early 1960's . I would venture some involved in the plot did so out of patriotism(misguided) seeing Kennedy as soft on the communists, while others like Johnson were involved for personal gain and satisfaction.Oswald was just a patsy and is why he was conveniently taken out the next day by Jack Ruby, a mob/CIA connected guy, already dying of cancer.
The motives were plenty, the means were there, the opportunity was Dallas, it happened.
Also, RFK was taken out? RFK was hated as well, maybe more than JFK.I think RFK would have done a lot of damage as President, he was way too liberal but does not matter, he was murdered, mainly because those in power knew if he were President, he would use his power to push for the truth on JFK's murder.They were smart to get a lone nut to do it close up on RFK, they learned from the JFK debacle apparently.
Sailor Steve
11-21-13, 03:00 PM
The Hickey theory would be plausible if JFK was shot in the back of the head, but can clearly see the bullet impacted from the front, perhaps closer to the "edge" or temple, blew out the side/back of his head, he jerked back from the frontal impact. Hickey was behind correct?
I've already shown that to be false, yet you continue to bull your way on with this line. You seem to like to ignore any evidence that goes against your pet theories.
I have always felt that it is difficult for people to accept the truth because this was not something that happens in the US.[/quote]
It's not a matter of accepting the truth. It's a matter of accepting to be "true" that which is not proven. You have as much trouble accepting the truth as anyone.
I see the truth about our government and history to be the same thing.The fact that some behind the scenes in our government could have the President murdered in a coup d'etat involving LBJ, because he sought to remove them from power, is just incomprehensible and disturbing, it is easier for many to just ignore the truth.
It's not incomprehensible or disturbing. In fact nothing is beyond belief. We're just waiting for you to offer some real evidence.
Bilge_Rat
11-21-13, 03:33 PM
Oswald defected to the USSR and had decided communist/leftist tendencies. Why does every conspiracy theorist assume he would be part of or a "patsy" for a "right wing" coup.
If he was part of a larger conspiracy (and I said "if"), the most likely suspects would seem to me to be on the "left", i.e.: the USSR, Cuba or some left extremist group, not the U.S. Government.
More bollocks from you Bubbles. If JFK wasn't shot in the back of the head why was there a 6mm diameter entry wound in the back of his head? And why was the right side of his head shattered in the way it was? If you are going to make wild ass claims then at least back them up with some evidence. The autopsy reports, x-rays and photos don't support a frontal shot at all.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/JFK_posterior_head_wound.jpg/446px-JFK_posterior_head_wound.jpg
Exit wounds don't look like this. You can also see the flap of bone on the right side of the head FORWARD of the entry wound.
Plus: The autopsy report is pretty clear on where the large wound was really located -- it was "chiefly parietal" -- not "chiefly occipital". Seems pretty clear to me.
Moreover, those THREE THINGS (the autopsy photos, the X-rays, and the autopsy report) CORROBORATE EACH OTHER. They fit together like bread and butter, like a hand and a glove, or like Dave Healy and his crackpipe.
The pictures, X-rays, and autopsy report are the things that positively refute the notion that JFK had a big hole in the back of his head.
But of course as a dedicated CT pundit you will claim that this evidence is all faked. :nope:
Dread Knot
11-21-13, 03:48 PM
The Hickey theory would be plausible if JFK was shot in the back of the head, but can clearly see the bullet impacted from the front, perhaps closer to the "edge" or temple, blew out the side/back of his head, he jerked back from the frontal impact. Hickey was behind correct?
I have always felt that it is difficult for people to accept the truth because this was not something that happens in the US.This would mean that our government, our current system and much of what has went on since 1963 has been a farce, a joke, and that even our great country at times is no better than places like the former Soviet Union etc.
I hate to break it to you, but it's not like the US had a stainless and spotless reputation prior to 1963. There's persuasive evidence that the US army really did test potentially damaging chemicals by spraying them around poor neighborhoods of St Louis during the Cold War; the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment really did take place; a group of wealthy American businessmen probably really did discuss a coup to unseat FDR; the CIA really did covertly overthrow the governments Iran and a number of South American countries. One could go farther back to the acquisition of Hawaii and the whole Spanish-American War. the Indian wars. After Kennedy's killings in the 1970s Senator Frank Church’s committee unveiled a long dark history of CIA conspiracies—coups, killings, and other black-bag jobs—that only extremists had ever before imagined possible. I find it interesting that you accuse us of being sheeple who go on like latter day Peace Corps volunteers dreamily believing in the purity of the US government when most here would concede these facts because the proof is there and on record.
However, for most of these revealed conspiracies there is a narrative-- witnesses who have come forward and been heard. Documents and tapes produced. That after 50 years the sort of damning proof that spilled out under the pressure of time and age and uncovered these conspiracies has still not gained critical mass is quite telling. I concede the narrative of the US government isn't always a fairy tale, but I still require proof. Names,dates, documents. not just a shadowy cabal of the same suspects that shift with the political leanings of the conspiracy theorist. Much as I require proof for ongoing favorites like, 911 was an inside job, chemtrails, Apollo missions shot in a Hollywood studio, etc.
Madox58
11-21-13, 03:55 PM
Explosive effect of an exit wound can and often does result in a reversal of expected reactions.
One would expect the head to snap forwards at impact.
But the pressure is really at the exit point.
So when the exit point blows out?
That can cause the head to snap backwards from the release of pressures not present at entry.
That's why Hollywood shots showing someone getting blown backwards are wrong with a through and through shot.
It's really simple physics. Think about it.
:nope:
Who's right
Made a search for Zapruder and found this on Smithsonian.com
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/What-Does-the-Zapruder-Film-Really-Tell-Us-224928822.html
Markus
You guys really ought to check out the "Nova" progran I linked to in my previous post; a lot of what you are discussing here is covered in rather great detail in the program, with demonstrations....
<O>
You guys really ought to check out the "Nova" progran I linked to in my previous post; a lot of what you are discussing here is covered in rather great detail in the program, with demonstrations....
<O>
Would gladly have seen it, but...
"We're sorry, but this video is not available in your region due to right restrictions."
Markus
Pity that...
It's too bad programs that are informative are restricted, but you can still see the other crap US commercial television puts out; it just doesn;t seem fair...
I blame Obama (in before Bubbles)... :D
<O>
Who's right
Made a search for Zapruder and found this on Smithsonian.com
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/What-Does-the-Zapruder-Film-Really-Tell-Us-224928822.html
Markus
In trying to understand conspiracy theorists, I used to think that what conspiracy theorists were really doing on some level was grieving, their fantasies a form of displaced love for JFK, but I’ve come to think the love involved is mostly self-love, their self-congratulatory assertion of superiority over mere facts. By the way, yes, I do believe there were some real conspiracies in history—Julius Caesar’s assassination for instance—I just think they need to be proven, fact by fact, not by fantasy and supposition.
Read more: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/What-Does-the-Zapruder-Film-Really-Tell-Us-224928822.html#ixzz2lJv211F7
Follow us: @SmithsonianMag on Twitter
Best quote in the article!
So Bubblehead1980 mentioned many different motive to the assassin
Have not yet seen any mentioned the possibility that the motive could have something to do with the history of the Kennedy family
This could very well be the reason to why RFK also got killed.
I'm not saying this IS the correct motive behind the death of the two men from the Kennedy clan.
Markus
Bubblehead1980
11-21-13, 11:20 PM
I've already shown that to be false, yet you continue to bull your way on with this line. You seem to like to ignore any evidence that goes against your pet theories.
I have always felt that it is difficult for people to accept the truth because this was not something that happens in the US.
It's not a matter of accepting the truth. It's a matter of accepting to be "true" that which is not proven. You have as much trouble accepting the truth as anyone.
It's not incomprehensible or disturbing. In fact nothing is beyond belief. We're just waiting for you to offer some real evidence.[/QUOTE]
I watched the footage with my own two eyes, it reminds me of shooting cantaloupes when I was a kid, sometimes if bullet impacted right or left of center, it blew out the side and back, exactly what it looked like in this case.That combined with how he snapped back, indicating a bullet impact from the front, to the side, perhaps with a sharp angle.
http://www.celebritymorgue.com/jfk/jfk-autopsy.html
These photos clearly show the side/back of his head blown out, indicating an exit wound.Had the bullet entered from the back, the front and side would have been blown out.Kennedy's movements from the impact(back and slumped to the left) match the damage his head suffered.
The official story(like so many the government puts out) just makes no sense, it is inconsistent with the evidence.Putting the debate over the direction of the head shot, the magic bullet along with multiple accounts of shots coming from the grassy knoll, reports of hearing more than 3 shots, and the nearly impossible shots from where Oswald allegedly fired, proves a conspiracy, more than one shooter.
The government covered this up, hell one of the likely chief conspirators was on the warren commission(Allen Dulles), the misinformation campaign was partially successful but the evidence,witness reports and the zapruder film most of all, makes things obvious.
Bubblehead1980
11-21-13, 11:29 PM
So Bubblehead1980 mentioned many different motive to the assassin
Have not yet seen any mentioned the possibility that the motive could have something to do with the history of the Kennedy family
This could very well be the reason to why RFK also got killed.
I'm not saying this IS the correct motive behind the death of the two men from the Kennedy clan.
Markus
I have considered that but feel that JFK would have been killed before he made it to the oval office if that were true.The mafia was pretty sore at JFK and RFK and believe they were involved, can't deny Ruby's mafia connections nor some others.I believe the shooters were most likely mafia hitmen, mafia may have been contracted to carry out the hit.The movie JFK suggested they were likely flown in for the job, then quickly led out of the country.Mafia still had a solid and strong code of silence back in those days.They helped JFK get elected and were angry about him making RFK Attorney General and letting him go after the Mafia.
RFK's murder was much less "messy", they had a crazed nut do it, it was captured on live TV, could see it was one shooter, but have no doubt there was more to it.The establishment feared RFK, especially that if elected he would pursue a real investigation of his brother's murder, enact many of same policies.People just hate to imagine there are so many shadowy things going on in our country, but it happens.
Bubblehead1980
11-22-13, 12:03 AM
Best quote in the article!
I think some wild theories are a form of grieving.However, in the case of JFK a conspiracy is backed by the evidence.Many witnesses report shots from grassy knoll, report more than 3 shots.Those wounded could not have possibly been wounded by just two bullets. That is why one the zapruder film became public, there was such outcry.People saw something much different than they were told and evidence contradicts the government's story.I think most people(60% is a number I have seen thrown around) believe there was a conspiracy, now just need to clear up the details of who, and why.Fairly easy to establish this and believe the government knows, one day the full truth will perhaps see the light.I just want the record set straight so those involved like LBJ are seen for what they were and not given respect and honor, especially before enough time goes by that no one alive in that time period is around to tell the truth.
Sailor Steve
11-22-13, 12:28 AM
I watched the footage with my own two eyes, it reminds me of shooting cantaloupes when I was a kid, sometimes if bullet impacted right or left of center, it blew out the side and back, exactly what it looked like in this case.That combined with how he snapped back, indicating a bullet impact from the front, to the side, perhaps with a sharp angle.
Except for the part where in the film the spray is clearly flying forward.
These photos clearly show the side/back of his head blown out, indicating an exit wound.Had the bullet entered from the back, the front and side would have been blown out.Kennedy's movements from the impact(back and slumped to the left) match the damage his head suffered.
I already quoted the right-side photo. My quote showed diagrams of the head, and the part that was blown out was the center, neither front nor back. From that alone the bullet could have entered from either direction.
The official story(like so many the government puts out) just makes no sense, it is inconsistent with the evidence.
It only makes no sense to you because you are already convinced that you know the truth, and you don't. You've said that bit about inconsistency and evidence many times, yet you've failed to show the inconsistency. It's what you want to believe. As I've said, I don't pretend to know one way or the other, but what you keep claiming as "proof" is nothing of the kind.
Putting the debate over the direction of the head shot
Nothing proven. It has been shown that the shot could have easily come from either direction.
the magic bullet
Only "magic" if the subjects were sitting a certain way. It has been shown that it would be easy for them to be sitting in another position and the bullet suddenly travels in a straight line. Not "magic" at all.
along with multiple accounts of shots coming from the grassy knoll, reports of hearing more than 3 shots
Also multiple accounts of other things that couldn't possibly have happened, and from the same witnesses.
and the nearly impossible shots from where Oswald allegedly fired
What "impossible shots" would those be. It has been shown many times that Oswald could easily have made those shots, yet you keep ignoring that.
proves a conspiracy, more than one shooter.
Proves nothing at all. If there was proof, there wouldn't be all these people still trying to prove it. So far you have no proof at all, just the claims and the willingness to believe.
one of the likely chief conspirators
Again you have to resort to allegation, because there is nothing else. Either you have proof of a conspiracy or you don't. So far you don't, despite what you keep claiming.
makes things obvious.
Only to someone who already believes. Your mind is made up, and you keep arguing "facts" that have been shown to be wrong, or at least questionable, and ignoring everything to the contrary.
Bubblehead1980
11-22-13, 01:21 AM
Except for the part where in the film the spray is clearly flying forward.
I already quoted the right-side photo. My quote showed diagrams of the head, and the part that was blown out was the center, neither front nor back. From that alone the bullet could have entered from either direction.
It only makes no sense to you because you are already convinced that you know the truth, and you don't. You've said that bit about inconsistency and evidence many times, yet you've failed to show the inconsistency. It's what you want to believe. As I've said, I don't pretend to know one way or the other, but what you keep claiming as "proof" is nothing of the kind.
Nothing proven. It has been shown that the shot could have easily come from either direction.
Only "magic" if the subjects were sitting a certain way. It has been shown that it would be easy for them to be sitting in another position and the bullet suddenly travels in a straight line. Not "magic" at all.
Also multiple accounts of other things that couldn't possibly have happened, and from the same witnesses.
What "impossible shots" would those be. It has been shown many times that Oswald could easily have made those shots, yet you keep ignoring that.
Proves nothing at all. If there was proof, there wouldn't be all these people still trying to prove it. So far you have no proof at all, just the claims and the willingness to believe.
Again you have to resort to allegation, because there is nothing else. Either you have proof of a conspiracy or you don't. So far you don't, despite what you keep claiming.
Only to someone who already believes. Your mind is made up, and you keep arguing "facts" that have been shown to be wrong, or at least questionable, and ignoring everything to the contrary.
The "forward" spray is from the side/back blowout, some blew forward as his head snaps back, you know from the frontal impact. Any diagrams, esp ones put forth by the government are suspect, they do not match the photographic or video evidence nor correlate with the many of the eye witnesses testimony.
For a long time I accepted Oswald was the shooter until I looked into it.Once I understood about the old guard in the CIA at the time, Dulles, Helms etc, Kennedy taking on the old guard, the military-industrial complex, the federal reserve and the connections were made over the years.Understanding how dirty LBJ was and his connections to this, it makes a lot of sense.Much like in court, it's not always what you know, it is what you can prove.A lot of people tend to take the official word of the government and did until the zapruder film came out, so much has came out over the years.Evidence is pretty overwhelming showing a conspiracy, showing more than one shooter and the visual evidence clearly shows he was hit in the front/side of the head, despite the lies pushed by the officials.E Howard Hunt's deathbed confession.Congressman Hale Boggs of the Warren Commission(who died under mysterious circumstances) disagreed with the one shooter verdict of the commission.
Now you are just being ridiculous. Not a lot of what you are saying makes any sense at all. Your assertion that the shot came from the front flies in the face of the same evidence you claim proves your point.
You show an autopsy photo but ignore the actual testimony of the doctors that were there and a photo from the same procedure that clearly shows an entry wound in the back of Kennedy's head.
You make wild accusations of a conspiracy based on nothing other than your own belief in the conspiracy. Yet again you are showing yourself up as a self absorbed child without the maturity to look at something objectively.
As a lawyer in training you should pay better attention to the actual evidence rather than listening to the child inside that shouts that it knows everything and listens to nothing.
These photos clearly show the side/back of his head blown out, indicating an exit wound.Had the bullet entered from the back, the front and side would have been blown out.Kennedy's movements from the impact(back and slumped to the left) match the damage his head suffered.
Except for this one which clearly show sthe back of his head intact:
http://www.celebritymorgue.com/jfk/kennedy-back.jpg
The other photo's are consistent with an exit would from the entry wound in the back of his head.
Cybermat47
11-22-13, 02:21 AM
Yet again you are showing yourself up as a self absorbed child without the maturity to look at something objectively.
That reminds me of me.
Time to rethink my life :hmm2:
Sailor Steve
11-22-13, 02:29 AM
The "forward" spray is from the side/back blowout, some blew forward as his head snaps back, you know from the frontal impact.
No. Spray follows the path of the bullet that made it. It all blows forward in the film, not some.
For a long time I accepted Oswald was the shooter until I looked into it.
One has to wonder exactly how deeply you did look into it.
Understanding how dirty LBJ was and his connections to this, it makes a lot of sense.
Yes, it does make sense when looked at it the right way. That doesn't make it remotely true.
Much like in court, it's not always what you know, it is what you can prove.
Come again? You keep speaking of what you "know", and yet you can prove nothing.
Evidence is pretty overwhelming showing a conspiracy
Only if you already believe it. I've shown that the evidence in hand can be taken either way.
showing more than one shooter and the visual evidence clearly shows he was hit in the front/side of the head
Showing nothing of the kind, unless you already see it that way. The wound itself shows no frontal entry or rear exit. The damage is all on the side. It has been shown by shooters here that the head can snap either way when hit, especially by a bullet that passes through.
despite the lies pushed by the officials.
E Howard Hunt's deathbed confession.
The same E. Howard Hunt who had a long reputation for lying about various things, including forging documents? He could be telling the truth, or he might not have been.
Congressman Hale Boggs of the Warren Commission(who died under mysterious circumstances) disagreed with the one shooter verdict of the commission.
There's nothing mysterious about it. The plane he was on disappeared. It was never found. Whatever his relationship to the investigations, it happens all the time. Conspiracy theorists are convinced he was gotten rid of. There is no evidence at all one way or the other, no matter how "mysterious" you may find it.
Showing nothing of the kind, unless you already see it that way. The wound itself shows no frontal entry or rear exit. The damage is all on the side. It has been shown by shooters here that the head can snap either way when hit, especially by a bullet that passes through.
That and the fact that the was an entry wound in the back of Kennedy's head.
Betonov
11-22-13, 04:39 AM
There was a Mythbusters episode, where they showed that the target knocks back with the same force the gun kicks back at the shooter. Not much since guns don't usually knock back shooters.
A front shot would not have knocked JFKs head back that much.
Bubblehead1980
11-22-13, 05:42 AM
Except for this one which clearly show sthe back of his head intact:
http://www.celebritymorgue.com/jfk/kennedy-back.jpg
The other photo's are consistent with an exit would from the entry wound in the back of his head.
Look at his head, it is not intact
Bubblehead1980
11-22-13, 06:03 AM
Now you are just being ridiculous. Not a lot of what you are saying makes any sense at all. Your assertion that the shot came from the front flies in the face of the same evidence you claim proves your point.
You show an autopsy photo but ignore the actual testimony of the doctors that were there and a photo from the same procedure that clearly shows an entry wound in the back of Kennedy's head.
You make wild accusations of a conspiracy based on nothing other than your own belief in the conspiracy. Yet again you are showing yourself up as a self absorbed child without the maturity to look at something objectively.
As a lawyer in training you should pay better attention to the actual evidence rather than listening to the child inside that shouts that it knows everything and listens to nothing.
There you go again, getting personal.I have looked at the evidence from both sides, it why I switched my belief from the lone wolf, single shooter named Oswald to believing he was in fact a patsy for the actual assassins.I learned who Allen Dulles, Richard Helms were, I learned about the Federal Reserve, LBJ and others.The many who suddenly began dying, it's called tying up loose ends.Steve, where are thou? Personal attacks and all.
No, I base what I said here, on what I saw and my experiences with firearms etc. The evidence the government presented is garbage, it does not fit.The triangulation of fire is what clearly happened, I once bought the government's bs on this coup d'etat but it just does not fit.The house committee later found his assassination was a conspiracy.
Look at the photos I posted, back and right side of his head wiped out, skin flap held on part of the skull, his hair looks "wet", it's from the blood and brain matter blown out by the bullet, if bullet entered from the back, it would be the front and side of his head blown out, not the back and right side.Bullet entered around the temple, above it, perhaps right at or behind the harline.
The autopsy is questionable, they rushed him away from Dallas against Texas lawto let Doctors they could control, ie military perform the autopsy.Doctors who did see him at the hospital have told different stories.Then they "lost" his brain lol, that sure helps muddy the waters.This is classic disinformation crap, it apparently works on some people who smugly say "well I believe the government because you can't give me the exact evidence I want", the evidence that the government has hidden or destroyed.Even though there is a lot of evidence supporting multiple shooters, some continue to deny.Easier to live in the bubble I suppose..
Look at the photos I posted, back and right side of his head wiped out, skin flap held on part of the skull, his hair looks "wet", it's from the blood and brain matter blown out by the bullet, if bullet entered from the back, it would be the front and side of his head blown out, not the back and right side.Bullet entered around the temple, above it, perhaps right at or behind the harline.
You've never heard of gravity have you? By the time those photos were taken, the body was lying on its back for several hours giving plenty of time for fluids from the wounds to matt the hair. It didn;t have to have come from the moment the wound occurred and probably didn't given he was shot in the back of the head.
What caused the entry wound in the back of his head? You keep ignoring evidence where it doesn't suit you.
The autopsy is questionable, they rushed him away from Dallas against Texas lawto let Doctors they could control, ie military perform the autopsy.Doctors who did see him at the hospital have told different stories.Then they "lost" his brain lol, that sure helps muddy the waters.This is classic disinformation crap, it apparently works on some people who smugly say "well I believe the government because you can't give me the exact evidence I want", the evidence that the government has hidden or destroyed.Even though there is a lot of evidence supporting multiple shooters, some continue to deny.Easier to live in the bubble I suppose..
You can't have it both ways. Either the evidence from the autopsy is rubbish or not, yet you use the photos to support your conspiracy theory.
In order to believe in a JFK conspiracy, we'd probably also have to believe that every member of the Warren Commission panel was up to no good, with all of these guys rigging the Warren Report to paint Lee Oswald as a sole assassin (and the lone killer of Dallas city policeman J.D. Tippit as well).
And in such a "conspiracy mindset", it would also almost assuredly mean that many, many members of the House Select Committee On Assassinations in the late 1970s were also no-good, lying SOBs too -- because that committee came to the same basic conclusion that the Warren boys did in 1964, when it came down to the question of: "How Many Bullets Struck the victims; With the answer being:
only 2 shots hit any of the victims in the President's limousine; & both of those bullets came from behind the vehicle. The physical evidence backs that up regardless of what you think you know.
Stealhead
11-22-13, 12:04 PM
There was a Mythbusters episode, where they showed that the target knocks back with the same force the gun kicks back at the shooter. Not much since guns don't usually knock back shooters.
That is really just simple physics a person that never fired a gun in their life but that understood even basic physics would know that the recoil of a weapon is going to be equal (or roughly) to the bullets forward force.
Of course it seems that most people use Hollywood as a source for scientific fact and since in most films and TV shows the person gets blown across the room they assume that to be true.
With a living person or animal the reaction to a bullet strike can vary greatly depending on many factors.You can hit two deer in the heart with a .308 with the same rifle at the same range and they both will react differently drop differently or maybe they get of a few bounds before they expire and the other one does not you never know for sure.
Mr Quatro
11-22-13, 01:21 PM
In order to believe in a JFK conspiracy, we'd probably also have to believe that every member of the Warren Commission panel was up to no good, with all of these guys rigging the Warren Report to paint Lee Oswald as a sole assassin (and the lone killer of Dallas city policeman J.D. Tippit as well).
And in such a "conspiracy mindset", it would also almost assuredly mean that many, many members of the House Select Committee On Assassinations in the late 1970s were also no-good, lying SOBs too -- because that committee came to the same basic conclusion that the Warren boys did in 1964, when it came down to the question of: "How Many Bullets Struck the victims; With the answer being:
only 2 shots hit any of the victims in the President's limousine; & both of those bullets came from behind the vehicle. The physical evidence backs that up regardless of what you think you know.
Good points even bubblehead would have to yield to this wisdom. How many people would have to be in on the conspiracy in the last 50 years is mind boggling.
Someone would've left the truth in their will to be released upon their death by now, if there was a cover up that is.
I noticed that in all these years no one has included the "G" word on who to blame. The "G" word being God almighty of course.
Lets see now he and his brother (who was also assassinated) both shared the same woman Marilyn Monroe. That's called adultery with the reported fact of Marilyn calling the white house and informing Jackie that she was going to be the next first lady.
It has been reported that both JFK and Jackie used drugs while in the White House, not just little pills either. When someone told JFK this was wrong he responded with, "I don't care what it takes to get rid of this pain"
Did you know that as much as he deserved it that the president of South Vietnam had an order signed by President JFK to take him out (reads kill him) just two weeks before he himself was assassinated?
Did you know that Jack Ruby said right before he died that it was bigger than anything you can imagine, referring to why and how he killed Oswald?
I know many will think this was an organized crime connection due to Jack owning a strip club, but I think it had something to do with voices and voices can be deceiving with the person hearing them thinking it is God, but is really the devil.
Not to mention the Russian connection of Oswald visiting Russia, not to mention that Cuba has been our enemy ever since the Bay of Pigs ... through how many administration? Perhaps after Castro dies the state department will issue any hidden documents pertaining to that period of time.
Until then I would not discount the fact that God has in the past changed history and could very well be the one to blame, but then again how can you blame God for doing anything wrong?
Sailor Steve
11-22-13, 01:22 PM
Look at his head, it is not intact
But the back is indeed intact. The damage is all on the right side.
Every time I hear about JFK and every time I read a book or see a documentary about the assassin in Dallas I which we had the opportunity to time travel
Not to prevent the killing, but to see who did it and where they were when he/she or they shot Kennedy.
It's 50 years ago, so many of my cable channels are showing documentaries about Kennedy and the event in Dallas.
I had to program my box to record 3 program that starts at almost same time
Back to Lee
As mentioned in the movie JFK, in some of the books I have read(in Swedish) the author say almost the same thing. WHY!? Didn't lee shot in the forehead, when he was dring down the Houston Street? Why wait until the President had turned left and drove down Elm street.
Here's something that I only have from two movies JFK and executive action and from a book(which I forgot the title of) here it is said that the route was scheduled to follow Houston street to the end, but in the last minute they change the route so the turned left down Elm street.
I can't get any confirmation on that.
If it's true, the suspect(s) that could have killed Kennedy have decreased, How would have this information?? Lee? The Mafia??
If he was shot from the right, left, front, back, under or over is not of my interest, my interest is who did it and why.
Markus
Someone would've left the truth in their will to be released upon their death by now, if there was a cover up that is.
There was a 'deathbed confession' recorded by E. Howard Hunt, one of the Nixon Watergate era "plumbers" where he states there was a conspiracy, of sorts, and he, Hunt, was involved in the assassination along with several others he names. The tape does exist and is rather widely available. However, there has been controversy over the recording, not that it is not the voice of Hunt or that it is a false recording, but rather the manner and conditions in which it was recorded and the intent of the recorders (Hunt's two sons). There have also been alleged other 'confessions' by other individuals, but those are even more dodgy than the Hunt recordings...
<O>
But the back is indeed intact. The damage is all on the right side.
And there's a 6mm entry wound in the back of his head.
I have considered that but feel that JFK would have been killed before he made it to the oval office if that were true.The mafia was pretty sore at JFK and RFK and believe they were involved, can't deny Ruby's mafia connections nor some others.I believe the shooters were most likely mafia hitmen, mafia may have been contracted to carry out the hit.The movie JFK suggested they were likely flown in for the job, then quickly led out of the country.Mafia still had a solid and strong code of silence back in those days.They helped JFK get elected and were angry about him making RFK Attorney General and letting him go after the Mafia.
RFK's murder was much less "messy", they had a crazed nut do it, it was captured on live TV, could see it was one shooter, but have no doubt there was more to it.The establishment feared RFK, especially that if elected he would pursue a real investigation of his brother's murder, enact many of same policies.People just hate to imagine there are so many shadowy things going on in our country, but it happens.
Here's another one for you Bubblehead.
His wife, Mrs Jacqueline Kennedy .
Kennedy had so many sidestep, that Bill Clinton would look like a real nice man. Kennedy used the Secret Service as some kind of transport to take young woman to and from the White House. She knew about this.
(Personally I think this is not her she's is what I would call "a very low suspect")
Markus
Here's another thing, to think about
During his three days visit to Texas, the killer or killers had so many opportunity to get John F Kennedy, why wait until he was in Dallas??
Markus
Dread Knot
11-22-13, 03:21 PM
Here's another thing, to think about
During his three days visit to Texas, the killer or killers had so many opportunity to get John F Kennedy, why wait until he was in Dallas??
Markus
Exactly. Why the complicated public opportunity to kill Kennedy?
I've found it interesting how various tales come into and out of vogue over the years, some disappearing and some staying alive in spite of being debunked over and over again. Whenever a new proposal is proffered, it is always interesting to ask whether it actually solves anything or whether it actually less likely to occur than the scenario it supposedly supplants.
For example, it has been said that no one could have made the shots from the sixth floor window, and this is a "problem" for the single-assassin view. Since it is universally agreed that SOMEBODY was shooting from SOMEWHERE, where did the shots actually come from? What have been put forth as "solutions" are that there were one or more other shooters who were further away than Oswald, who had less visibility of the target, who had less time to fire, and who had far trickier shots to make. Since it has also been suggested that the goal was to frame Oswald and make him take the blame for the true assassins' crimes, these shooters would have to know in advance that they would not be seen at any time before, during or after the shooting, and that none of their bullets would ever be recovered in an examinable condition.
In other words, it was proposed that the "problem" was "solved" by a "solution" that brought more complexities than the original problem ever had. (And it turns out that the "problem" was not much of a problem in the first place; a trained shooter of Oswald's skill could have done the shooting from the window in question.)
The eternal paradox with many conspiracy theories. Their explanation is often much more complex, unlikely and full of holes than the explanation they wish to supplant.
Sailor Steve
11-22-13, 04:20 PM
As mentioned in the movie JFK, in some of the books I have read(in Swedish) the author say almost the same thing. WHY!? Didn't lee shot in the forehead, when he was dring down the Houston Street? Why wait until the President had turned left and drove down Elm street.
That dovetails with the complaint by the conspiracy theorists that Oswald sat casually at lunch not looking nervous at all. He might not have gotten back up to his position until the motorcade was already on the way.
Here's something that I only have from two movies JFK and executive action and from a book(which I forgot the title of) here it is said that the route was scheduled to follow Houston street to the end, but in the last minute they change the route so the turned left down Elm street.
I can't get any confirmation on that.
I've already pointed to the explanation of that. The route was not changed. They always planned to go down Elm Street. Go back and read post #36.
Bubblehead still hasn't answered that one.
That dovetails with the complaint by the conspiracy theorists that Oswald sat casually at lunch not looking nervous at all. He might not have gotten back up to his position until the motorcade was already on the way.
I've already pointed to the explanation of that. The route was not changed. They always planned to go down Elm Street. Go back and read post #36.
Bubblehead still hasn't answered that one.
Thank you and sorry for having forgot all about that( have so much in my head I forget things)
Markus
Sailor Steve
11-22-13, 04:33 PM
( have so much in my head I forget things)
I know the feeling. :sunny:
Either it's him or him or them a.s.o
Almost every one have an idea of who could have done it.
Could have missed it, so far I haven't seen or heard some one mention the probability that they could have worked together
Markus
I know the feeling. :sunny:
I think I know the feeling, but I'm not sure if I remember...
<O>
Interesting..........
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/Thony/Kennedy_zps0685de62.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Thony/media/Kennedy_zps0685de62.jpg.html)
Schroeder
11-22-13, 05:24 PM
Isn't that the same stuff they accuse Obama nowadays of?:hmm2:
:O:
:doh:
I didn't realize that Bubbles was a poster writer and that he was that old...
<O>
Interesting..........
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v138/Thony/Kennedy_zps0685de62.jpg (http://smg.photobucket.com/user/Thony/media/Kennedy_zps0685de62.jpg.html)
Interesting yes and yet it is no surprise. They were not the only ones who shared leaflets to the passing.
This also happens today when some American city is visited by president Obama.
That a person or group of persons hate a competent person, such as the president, is not the same as they will eliminate this person.
Markus
Bubblehead1980
11-22-13, 05:54 PM
Interesting yes and yet it is no surprise. They were not the only ones who shared leaflets to the passing.
This also happens today when some American city is visited by president Obama.
That a person or group of persons hate a competent person, such as the president, is not the same as they will eliminate this person.
Markus
Oh don't even try to compare Obama to Kennedy, whole different animal. Obama competent? LOL good one. Kennedy's policies had his faults, he was more fluff than substance but he was trying to do some good things(end vietnam, take on the federal reserve) for which he was killed.
Bubblehead1980
11-22-13, 05:56 PM
Isn't that the same stuff they accuse Obama nowadays of?:hmm2:
:O:
:doh:
Don't even, Obama is an entirely different animal.
Madox58
11-22-13, 06:22 PM
:hmmm:
It's all makeing sense now.
Aliens are mentioned on the poster and this.
http://www.examiner.com/article/kennedy-assassination-linked-to-ufos-and-cia
:haha:
:hmmm:
It's all makeing sense now.
Aliens are mentioned on the poster and this.
http://www.examiner.com/article/kennedy-assassination-linked-to-ufos-and-cia
:haha:
I knew it, after that, ET tried to phone home, just to tell them "job done"
Markus
Oh don't even try to compare Obama to Kennedy, whole different animal. Obama competent? LOL good one. Kennedy's policies had his faults, he was more fluff than substance but he was trying to do some good things(end vietnam, take on the federal reserve) for which he was killed.
What I was trying to tell you is that it's a big leap from hate / disagree with a politician and then do something very stupid to the very same politician
I was not trying to compare those two President, just giving an example.
Markus
Sailor Steve
11-22-13, 07:47 PM
Isn't that the same stuff they accuse Obama nowadays of?:hmm2:
:O:
:doh:
Exactly what I was going to say.
Don't even, Obama is an entirely different animal.
He didn't compare them, just what's being said. It's almost word for word.
It reminds me of several years ago when someone said that America was going to hell in a handbasket. I pointed out that that's been said by the losing side of every election for the past two hundred years. He replied "But now it really is!"
That has also been said by the losing side of every election for the past two hundred years.
"If Jefferson is elected, murder, rape, robbery, adultery and incest will be openly taught and practiced!"
Bubblehead1980
11-23-13, 05:09 AM
Some interesting things here....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aknLrdjqKDY
Sailor Steve
11-23-13, 09:35 AM
Also some interesting comments below the video.
It is said that science isn't exact and this couldn't be more true.
Yesterday I saw on Danish TV the documentary, which TarJak have beent talking about in this thread-(watch it through my HDDm had it recorded)
After have watching this documentary I watch an another one
"Inside the assassination of JFK"
In the first documentary it was said that the bullet came from behind
In the next documentary the speaker said that the bullet came from the front
(the shot that hit him in the throat)
I could continue with all the differences that was between those two documentary.
I really really wonder IF it isn't in the USA's interest to find out who did it and why.
Today I even saw a documatery movie-Even here it was not the same is in the first two program I talked about.
Markus
It is said that science isn't exact and this couldn't be more true.
Yesterday I saw on Danish TV the documentary, which TarJak have beent talking about in this thread-(watch it through my HDDm had it recorded)
After have watching this documentary I watch an another one
"Inside the assassination of JFK"
In the first documentary it was said that the bullet came from behind
In the next documentary the speaker said that the bullet came from the front
(the shot that hit him in the throat)
I could continue with all the differences that was between those two documentary.
I really really wonder IF it isn't in the USA's interest to find out who did it and why.
Today I even saw a documatery movie-Even here it was not the same is in the first two program I talked about.
Markus
The problem with documtaries that say the bullet came from the front is that they ignore the evidence of the entry wound in the back of Kennedy's head.
The problem with documtaries that say the bullet came from the front is that they ignore the evidence of the entry wound in the back of Kennedy's head.
According to the documentary you talked about, Lee's first shot missed. It was the second shot that hit JFK in the neck and went through his throat
In the second documentary it was the first shot that hit him in the neck
I must say that the documentary you have been talking about is an absolutely plausible possibility.
Could it be so simple at the murder of the century was a simple mistake by a Secret Agent !?
When you put the link here in this thread I couldn't watch it due to some kind of rights, so I was kind of glad when I understood that Danish TV was showing this documentary about this Australians police officer
Markus
Catfish
11-23-13, 03:02 PM
I did not watch it, but as usual it pays to ask cui bono ?
Kennedy, careful approach to the Soviet Union, a shorter cold war, maybe an earlier breakdown of the SU (or not)
Or a dead Kennedy, threat from outside, defence industry booming, harsher national laws against all those 'commie likers' and justification for s. services funding and not asking questions.
I would not find it astonishing at all if the US secret service had to do something with the assassination. But even if it was not influenced and only helped the hawks by chance, with all this smoke and mirrors 'we' will never know what really happened. One can of course think and decide for oneself, if we look at the history of mankind and compare.. cui bono.
I did not watch it, but as usual it pays to ask cui bono ?
Kennedy, careful approach to the Soviet Union, a shorter cold war, maybe an earlier breakdown of the SU (or not)
Or a dead Kennedy, threat from outside, defence industry booming, harsher national laws against all those 'commie likers'.
I would not find it astonishing at all if the US secret service did have to do something with the assassination. But even if it was not influenced and only helped the hawks by chance, with all this smoke and mirrors 'we' will never know what really happend. One can of course think and decide for oneself, if we look at the history of mankind and compare.. cui bono.
Here is what we know for sure.
JFK was hit by least two shot-here ends the unity. Read 20 different books and you will get 20 different possibility where the shot came from a.s.o
Markus
Madox58
11-23-13, 04:53 PM
He got hit in the throat from behind.
The back brace and bindings he wore stopped the ability to fall forwards once hit.
Those also stopped forwards movement when the head shot came in.
You can see the total effects in the clips!
:nope:
He got hit in the throat from behind.
The back brace and bindings he wore stopped the ability to fall forwards once hit.
Those also stopped forwards movement when the head shot came in.
You can see the total effects in the clips!
:nope:
I forgot about his back injury. Those braces would explain a lot of things.
Madox58
11-23-13, 09:15 PM
I forgot about his back injury. Those braces would explain a lot of things.
Ya. Crazy stuff eh?
You can see he can not fall forwards as he comes out from behind the sign where the throat shot came in.
You see a slight lean towards the left as the head shot comes in.
Then a slight move forwards as the round hits the back of the head.
The brace and bindings again stop forward movement and help with the rearward thrust from the rounds pressure on exiting the forward side of the head.
As for the other Guy not dropping his hat?
Sever or paralize the wrist muscles or tendons from a shock impact of that sort?
You wouldn't be able to control the reactions in such a short time frame.
Bubblehead1980
11-23-13, 09:31 PM
He got hit in the throat from behind.
The back brace and bindings he wore stopped the ability to fall forwards once hit.
Those also stopped forwards movement when the head shot came in.
You can see the total effects in the clips!
:nope:
Okay but he did not fall forward because as can see in zapruder film, he goes back do to the frontal/side impact.Really, if it were just the film suggesting this, okay but 50 or so witnesses reported shots from the grassy knoll, to the side and front of the car, where the likely head shot actually came from, which caused him to snap back from the impact, which blew the right front side and back of his head out as seen.Really, if it were just the video and one or two people saying shots came from other locations okay, but 50 or so.A Dallas Police Officer reported seeing a man fleeing scene of grassy knoll, who produced Secret Service Credentials, he let him go, turns out the man was not SS as all SS agents were accounted for and none were involved in the encounter.The visual, ballistic, physical evidence combined with the witnesses, loose ends, etc screams mulitple shoots, aka a conspiracy.There are many loose ends, too many, where there is smoke, there is fire.
Madox58
11-23-13, 09:37 PM
Blood spatter can not lie.
The stuff flies out of the forwards part of the skull.
Remind me never to have you as my Liar (I mean Lawyer).
Bubblehead1980
11-23-13, 10:05 PM
Blood spatter can not lie.
The stuff flies out of the forwards part of the skull.
Remind me never to have you as my Liar (I mean Lawyer).
Insult me all you want, shows you have doubts, resorting to that.Blood spatter can lie, there are cases where it has been "misinterpreted" by the so called "experts" , lead to wrong conclusions. The Zapruder film clearly shows the right side, sort of to the front, just behind the temple and back of his head blow out as he snaps back from the frontal impact.Doctor at Parkland Hospital said it looked like a bullet hit him from front, exited the side/rear of the skull, blowing it away. The so called "entrance wound" in the back of his head in some photos, there are claims these were altered to fit the story, I find it possible considering it conflicts with all other evidence.
Also, why did oswald not just shoot him when he was on Houston street when had a clear shot from front to the head? had a better shot there, they waited until Kennedy was in position where for triangulation of crossfire.This is like arguing with my father, we got into it yesterday about this, he believes in the lone nut, even with pretty clear evidence, refuses to accept kennedy was victim of a conspiracy because like many, just too hard to accept and since there is no one doing a cartwheel in the street saying I did it, I did it, they by default trust the government.Trusting the government by default is a dangerous thing, obamacare being a great recent example.
Madox58
11-23-13, 10:23 PM
I have seen all the stuff you have.
I have also seen first hand, shots just like that.
81 meters to hit a head in a slow moveing Car?
I take shots like that with Air Rifles on running critters and drop them.
:haha:
It's also easier to shoot someone in the back of the head.
They ain't looking at you that way.
Unless you've done it? You'll never really understand that part of it.
It's the eyes that get you. They never go away.
It could have been a plot. Don't know the answer to that.
But the shots came from behind. That I have NO doubts about.
sharkbit
11-24-13, 02:18 PM
Okay but he did not fall forward because as can see in zapruder film, he goes back do to the frontal/side impact.Really, if it were just the film suggesting this, okay but 50 or so witnesses reported shots from the grassy knoll, to the side and front of the car, where the likely head shot actually came from, which caused him to snap back from the impact, which blew the right front side and back of his head out as seen.Really, if it were just the video and one or two people saying shots came from other locations okay, but 50 or so.A Dallas Police Officer reported seeing a man fleeing scene of grassy knoll, who produced Secret Service Credentials, he let him go, turns out the man was not SS as all SS agents were accounted for and none were involved in the encounter.The visual, ballistic, physical evidence combined with the witnesses, loose ends, etc screams mulitple shoots, aka a conspiracy.There are many loose ends, too many, where there is smoke, there is fire.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/headwnd.htm
Expert on ballistic forensics explains how his head can snap back from a bullet impact in the [B]back[B] of his head, a bullet fired by Oswald. Some interesting testimony on how bodies can act when shot.
Then the autopsy picture of the back of Kennedy's head doesn't show it blown out. Only the entry wound.
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/headwnd.htm
Expert on ballistic forensics explains how his head can snap back from a bullet impact in the [B]back[B] of his head, a bullet fired by Oswald. Some interesting testimony on how bodies can act when shot.
Then the autopsy picture of the back of Kennedy's head doesn't show it blown out. Only the entry wound.
First of all I'm not any kind of expert on ballistics forensiscs
I have seen a couple of documentary in which such an expert says this and in an another says so
So who's right???
Markus
Sailor Steve
11-24-13, 04:19 PM
but 50 or so witnesses reported shots from the grassy knoll, to the side and front of the car, where the likely head shot actually came from, which caused him to snap back from the impact, which blew the right front side and back of his head out as seen.
It's already been shown that many of those witnesses also told tall tales about other things, and many more of them disagree on different points, yet you keep repeating that same vague charge over and over, without ever showing the actual testimony.
A Dallas Police Officer reported seeing a man fleeing scene of grassy knoll, who produced Secret Service Credentials, he let him go, turns out the man was not SS as all SS agents were accounted for and none were involved in the encounter.
And there were several agents of different kinds in the area, including military intelligence. While most of them have been discounted as the mysterious 'SS' agent, why did not one of them notice anyone shooting from a position very close to theirs?
The visual, ballistic, physical evidence combined with the witnesses, loose ends, etc screams mulitple shoots, aka a conspiracy.There are many loose ends, too many, where there is smoke, there is fire.
So you keep saying, but every single point you've tried to make can be shown to have other explanations, equally valid if not more so.
Insult me all you want, shows you have doubts, resorting to that.
It shows that he's grown tired of hearing the same claims over and over, and willful ignorance of other equal explanations. I wouldn't be surprised if he has doubts. I have doubts. It's been my long experience that it is the person who has no doubts who is usually wrong.
As far as insults go, you insult anyone who argues against you several times with your "lol"s and similar snide comments. The only difference is you manage to make it general, so everybody deserves laughing at in your book, not just one person. You also do this on a regular basis, in pretty much every political post you make.
The Zapruder film clearly shows the right side, sort of to the front, just behind the temple and back of his head blow out as he snaps back from the frontal impact.
It does show his head snap backward. It has been explained many times that it is a possible reaction for a body part to move in the direction from which it was hit. The film shows spray flying forward, and in no other direction. It does not show the temple or back of the head blown out.
Doctor at Parkland Hospital said it looked like a bullet hit him from front, exited the side/rear of the skull, blowing it away. The so called "entrance wound" in the back of his head in some photos, there are claims these were altered to fit the story, I find it possible considering it conflicts with all other evidence.
One thing the photo is clear about: the back of his head is intact; there is no "blowing out". That is all on the right side. You have changed your story on this several times, and yet managed to not address anything anyone has said.
Also, why did oswald not just shoot him when he was on Houston street when had a clear shot from front to the head? had a better shot there, they waited until Kennedy was in position where for triangulation of crossfire.
Perhaps because, as someone pointed out earlier, he was eating lunch and barely made it back in time.
This is like arguing with my father, we got into it yesterday about this, he believes in the lone nut, even with pretty clear evidence, refuses to accept kennedy was victim of a conspiracy because like many, just too hard to accept
That's pretty damned insulting to your father. Is he immune because he's not a Subsim member?
and since there is no one doing a cartwheel in the street saying I did it, I did it, they by default trust the government.
"cartwheel in the street"? There's no direct evidence at all. Everything you claim is built on everything else you claim. I've said many times that if you can provide one piece of evidence that stands alone, with no "ifs" or "maybes" then I'll listen. But so far you haven't.
Trusting the government by default is a dangerous thing, obamacare being a great recent example.
So now you presume to lecture everybody? And again you can't leave your pet hate out of it.
I'll wager that there is not one person here who trusts their government at all, let alone "by default". You keep trying to lump a group of intelligent, thoughtful and resourceful people into a category of "trusting", when we've shown you otherwise many times. Anyone who does not agree with you or shows you to be wrong is blindly trusting the government.
And you talk about other people insulting you.
Sailor Steve
11-24-13, 04:22 PM
First of all I'm not any kind of expert on ballistics forensiscs
I have seen a couple of documentary in which such an expert says this and in an another says so
So who's right???
Markus
We don't know. It could be either. I just grew tired decades ago of being told I have to believe one or the other with no concrete proof either way, or else I'm a stupid person who is a sucker for the official party line.
You see, the people here aren't trying to prove that Bubblehead is wrong for looking at that possibility, just that he's wrong for accepting blindly and then claiming that his "detractors" are doing the same and insisting that we're all dupes.
Insult me all you want, shows you have doubts, resorting to that.Blood spatter can lie, there are cases where it has been "misinterpreted" by the so called "experts" , lead to wrong conclusions. The Zapruder film clearly shows the right side, sort of to the front, just behind the temple and back of his head blow out as he snaps back from the frontal impact.Doctor at Parkland Hospital said it looked like a bullet hit him from front, exited the side/rear of the skull, blowing it away. The so called "entrance wound" in the back of his head in some photos, there are claims these were altered to fit the story, I find it possible considering it conflicts with all other evidence.
Also, why did oswald not just shoot him when he was on Houston street when had a clear shot from front to the head? had a better shot there, they waited until Kennedy was in position where for triangulation of crossfire.This is like arguing with my father, we got into it yesterday about this, he believes in the lone nut, even with pretty clear evidence, refuses to accept kennedy was victim of a conspiracy because like many, just too hard to accept and since there is no one doing a cartwheel in the street saying I did it, I did it, they by default trust the government.Trusting the government by default is a dangerous thing, obamacare being a great recent example.
And as predicted you resort to saying that the key evidence that disproves your theory was falsified or other wise altered. Have you read the autopsy reports? Seen the interviews of the doctors who examined the body? All state categorically that there was an entry wound in the back of his head and further that the large exit wound was chiefly parietal, ( above and forward of the right ear).
What did the parkland doctors really say?
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/faceup.htm
What is strange is the different behaviour of the two rounds. One which can be traced back to Oswalds rifle went through two bodies pretty much in one piece. This is the way the ammunition Oswald was using was designed to behave. A military round for causing maximum damage to as many of the enemy as possible by passing through the target and hitting additional targets beyond.
The other behaved very differently with multiple small fragments being left inside the front of Kennedy's skull. This is consistent with the frangible round being used by the Secret Service. This type of ammunition is designed to take down the target and not cause collateral casualties because it was likely to be used in a crowded environment where collateral damage was undesirable.
The shots heard from the grassy knoll can be explained by the echoes of the shots from a behind. Dealy Plaza is surrounded by hard surfaces which do echo. There is also no physical evidence of a gun, round or entry wound consistent with a frontal shot. As you've admitted the Zapruder film is inconclusive on the frontal shot but quite consistent with the two known rear shots that hit the president.
The last part of your post is incomprehensible. Obama care has nothing to do with something that happened 50 years ago.
We don't know. It could be either. I just grew tired decades ago of being told I have to believe one or the other with no concrete proof either way, or else I'm a stupid person who is a sucker for the official party line.
You see, the people here aren't trying to prove that Bubblehead is wrong for looking at that possibility, just that he's wrong for accepting blindly and then claiming that his "detractors" are doing the same and insisting that we're all dupes.
you are right in every word.
you are right in every word.
QFT.
Madox58
11-24-13, 06:16 PM
A little 'habit' many Combat Troopers had?
Hold on to a few live rounds and 'mod' them into frangible rounds.
The first rounds of standard ammo are your rangeing and POI rounds.
Then you send the 'modded' round for maximum damage to the intended target.
Oswald never had a chance to say anything so it makes as much sense as anything else I've read.
Bubblehead1980
11-24-13, 07:54 PM
We don't know. It could be either. I just grew tired decades ago of being told I have to believe one or the other with no concrete proof either way, or else I'm a stupid person who is a sucker for the official party line.
You see, the people here aren't trying to prove that Bubblehead is wrong for looking at that possibility, just that he's wrong for accepting blindly and then claiming that his "detractors" are doing the same and insisting that we're all dupes.
I used to be one of the people duped by the official line, I don't accept anything blindly.Just angers me to see so many willing to trust an entity(the government) that is not at all trustworthy.Citizens who hold faith in government remind me of an abused woman who stays with her abuser no matter what, and supports him no matter what.
The disinformation campaign has worked to a degree, it has muddied the waters enough t have 40% of american people believing the official story.Like Kevin costner said in JFK(as Jim Garrison) , government claims can prove the magic bullet etc with fancy physics.True, but theoretical physics can prove that an elephant can hang off a cliff with it's tail tied to a daisy. Used your own judgement and some common sense.The Zapruder film is what pushed me away from believing the official story, as it did many American's after the saw it, which is a reason it was kept from the public for so long.
The disinformation campaign to discredit people was wide ranging, much as is done today if someone stands up.Snowden is a great example, did a patriotic thing but the government and many in the media(on the government's take) tried to portray him as a traitor, most American's did not see him as that, but far too many do.This is how in this era they manage to make the good guys seem like the bad guys, they know there are a large part of the population who trust the officials, blindly in many cases.How people can watch that film and not see what 60% of americans see, I have no idea.
I trust my own judgement, based on what I see, the evidence there is, and the words of those who were there, and common sense.Usually when people have something to hide, they make things complicated and muddy the waters, hoping the truth gets lost in there.Age old tactic of the government, they have done it many times, most recent with obamacare.
Cool story bro... :shifty:
Sailor Steve
11-24-13, 08:36 PM
I used to be one of the people duped by the official line, I don't accept anything blindly.
Yet you are absolutely 100% convinced that there was a conspiracy. You have abandoned all impartiality, and can't discuss this rationally at all, and you can't examine or entertain the slightest possibility that you might be wrong. That is not true for me or for most of the people you're arguing with here.
Just angers me to see so many willing to trust an entity(the government) that is not at all trustworthy.Citizens who hold faith in government remind me of an abused woman who stays with her abuser no matter what, and supports him no matter what.
That may apply to a large portion of the population, and even to some of the people you talk to in your life. Are you saying it applies to the majority here? Are you saying it applies to me? Are you saying that not one of the people disagreeing with you here is capable of making his own observations? If not, then you need to look at all the options and discuss things less passionately and more rationally. If so, then you need to apologize to people for saying they insulted you, for if you see us that way then you insult a large number of individuals by lumping us together as a group; a group which you say is blindly following the government, which is patently not true.
The disinformation campaign has worked to a degree, it has muddied the waters enough t have 40% of american people believing the official story.
We're not talking about 40% of the American people. We're talking about Tarjak, August, Privateer, Steelhead, Dread Knot, Bilge Rat, Vienna, and Myself. Are you saying we (at least the Americans on that list) are all dupes blindly following the Government Line? If so, then you insult us. If not, then quit talking about people who mean nothing to any of us and stick with the point.
Like Kevin costner said in JFK(as Jim Garrison) , government claims can prove the magic bullet etc with fancy physics.
I've already shown you that it only takes a slight change in their positions and suddenly your "magic bullet" is travelling in a straight line. You didn't answer then, and I'm wondering if you'll ever take that bit of evidence and show that it's wrong. I have consistently addressed each of your points and shown that there are other possible answers, and reasonable ones. You have consistently avoided answering those points and gone right back to your derisive generic dismissals of anything that doesn't fit your personal take on the subject.
True, but theoretical physics can prove that an elephant can hang off a cliff with it's tail tied to a daisy.
Which is a nice diversion into the derisive dismissal I just mentioned. Are you capable of having a reasonable discussion without resorting to insult? The physics here aren't theoretical at all. The bullet was not magic, and no one but the conspiracy theorists are claiming it was. Just look again at the picture I posted.
Used your own judgement and some common sense.
Are you saying I'm not? Again, don't be accusing anyone else of insulting you when you resort to demeaning tactics like that. I say I've been using my own judgement all along. I don't believe the government, and I don't believe you. I don't know the answers, but you have failed time and again to prove your case. Tell me again why I should listen to you?
The Zapruder film is what pushed me away from believing the official story, as it did many American's after the saw it, which is a reason it was kept from the public for so long.
The Zapruder film was released almost immediately. What was withheld were the few crucial frames. The reason is most likely that they were considered far too graphic for public consumption.
The disinformation campaign to discredit people was wide ranging
I've read most of the testimony. A great many of those witnesses deserve to be discredited. Some do not, but many of their statements disagree with the others.
, much as is done today if someone stands up.Snowden is a great example, did a patriotic thing but the government and many in the media(on the government's take) tried to portray him as a traitor, most American's did not see him as that, but far too many do.This is how in this era they manage to make the good guys seem like the bad guys, they know there are a large part of the population who trust the officials, blindly in many cases.
Would you please stop wandering into other, off-topic discussions? You're trying to prove by example, and you're not doing a very good job of it. Stick to the real points.
How people can watch that film and not see what 60% of americans see, I have no idea.
And yet several people here have watched the film repeatedly over the last few days, and come to completely different conclusions than you have. How do you know you're not the one who is mistaken? Appealing to "60% of Americans" is appealing to the authority of the majority. The majority is often wrong, and saying that the majority is right or the minority is right is not a point at all. Opinion means nothing, only facts. You like to take that line of argument far too much.
I trust my own judgement, based on what I see, the evidence there is, and the words of those who were there, and common sense.
As do I. The difference is that you firmly believe that your judgement is the correct one and anyone who disagrees must be a dupe of the authorities, or just plain stupid. My point, as I've tried to tell you many times, is that you don't "know" any more than I do. You believe you do know, to the point of absolute insistence, and anyone who doesn't agree with you needs to be dismissed and insulted. You don't listen to anyone else's points, especially mine, and you come back again and again with the same claims, many of which have been shown to be explainable in a different context. You don't seem to care about getting at the truth, you are convinced you already have it. As I've said before, if you think you know anything you have removed all possibility of learning anything new. If you "know" you are right, you remove all possibility of ever finding out that you might be wrong.
Usually when people have something to hide, they make things complicated and muddy the waters, hoping the truth gets lost in there.Age old tactic of the government, they have done it many times, most recent with obamacare.
And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
And again you try to prove one thing by bringing up another. It proves nothing, and it makes you look desperate.
Desperate for attention IMO. It borders on trolling, stating the same old thing whilst refusing to consider any arguments to the contrary.
Armistead
11-24-13, 11:11 PM
I don't hold either is true, but I find a hard time believing Oswald acted alone.
One thing, for a man about to kill the President, seemed he hardly thought out his escape plan.
What I find amazing is the shot. A person would have to be nervous, his life is at stake in a place he would be lucky to escape from. That was some amazing shooting under the circumstances. Possible yes, probable...no.
Was he shot in the throat from the front, possible from the autopsy reports. Then the headshot...
Dr. Charles Crenshaw, surgeon at Parkland Hospital: The headwound was difficult to see when he was laying on the back of his head. However, afterwards when they moved his face towards the left, one could see the large, right rear parietal, occipital, blasted out hole, the size of my fist, which is 2 and a half inches in diameter. The brain, cerebreal portion had been flurred out and also there was the cerebrellum hanging out from that wound. It was clearly an exit wound from the right rear, behind the ear. A right occipital area hole, the size of my fist.""
The thing that is bothersome is too many strange factors, including the number of witnesses that died within the first 3 years. Different Drs. with different opinions....
We may never know, because it was done so it would always be a conspiracy.
I can't say who is to blame, but I don't believe Oswald was alone in this. However, I don't think it's a large govt. plan if one at all.
Admiral Halsey
11-25-13, 01:57 AM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the fact the Oswald had already botched one assassination attempt that would have been easier to pull off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Walker#Assassination_attempt
Don't know why people forget his attempt on Edwin Walker's life.
Sailor Steve
11-25-13, 02:24 AM
I came across it in my research for this thread. I didn't think it important so I didn't mention it.
Bubblehead1980
11-25-13, 02:32 AM
Desperate for attention IMO. It borders on trolling, stating the same old thing whilst refusing to consider any arguments to the contrary.
I have considered the others many times as mentioned, used to believe the official line, but no longer and yes, can not see how anyone still believes the garbage fed by the government.
Sailor Steve
11-25-13, 02:48 AM
I have considered the others many times as mentioned, used to believe the official line, but no longer and yes, can not see how anyone still believes the garbage fed by the government.
So you continue to accuse those who disagree with you of not having the ability to look at the evidence and come to a different conclusion on their own? It's not about believing the government, it's about making up our own minds. When are you going to figure that out?
I have considered the others many times as mentioned, used to believe the official line, but no longer and yes, can not see how anyone still believes the garbage fed by the government.
And Donohue's theory certainly does not follow the government line, garbage or otherwise. You're yet to show any hard facts relating to your theory that would stand up to scrutiny and yet your only defence for it is, that contrary evidence, (from the same source as some of yours), must have been falsified in some way.
Your theory doesn't hold water and you therefore merely dismiss everyone else as sheep blindly following a so called government lie. The theory I suggest is the most plausible from the evidence that I've looked at, including countless disproven conspiracy theories, is a long way off the government line, so doesn't fit your bleating defence.
Dread Knot
11-25-13, 06:39 AM
And Donohue's theory certainly does not follow the government line, garbage or otherwise. You're yet to show any hard facts relating to your theory that would stand up to scrutiny and yet your only defence for it is, that contrary evidence, (from the same source as some of yours), must have been falsified in some way.
That's the beauty of Donahue's theory. Essentially, when seen from outside a conspiracy to cover up an assassination is indistinguishable from a conspiracy to cover up a security screw-up.
But as I stated earlier, that's the problem too. It's too banal for the conspiracy industry. It's not a overlordy, shadowy plot you can pin on various institutions that you dislike ad infintium and never really have to prove.
So, I present a headline from The Onion to please all conspiracy theorists. Makes about as much sense as any of them do alone. :O:
http://o.onionstatic.com/images/articles/article/10584/11221963_101_Kennedy-Slain_jpg_445x1000_upscale_q85.jpg
Fro those with an interest in the medical evidence: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/medical.htm
Clear and concise explanations of most of the bunkum that conspiracy theorists put up as "evidence". Of course most of this follows the government line of shots coming from behind of which we are accused of sheepishly following by the OP.
Just for you Bubbles a few pictures from Zapruder (Frame 335), that might put you straight on a few of your "facts":
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/z335.jpg
I see the back of the presidents head intact and a gaping wound on the upper right side of his head. What do you see?
On the subject of the head being shocked backward by a bullet entering the front of his skull, here is what the two frames before and after impact of the head shot; Frames 309 to 313:
http://opendb.com/images/z309-313.gif
If that is backward movement, then I'll happily eat crow. His head does rock back after this, but well after impact.
What did the Parkland doctors say when they saw the autopsy reports, photos and x-rays?: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/novadocs.htm
What did Cmdr Dr. James J. Humes say when interviewed by Dan Rather about the autopsy in 1967?:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJBKDHpLSrg
Betonov
11-25-13, 08:38 AM
If that is backward movement, then I'll happily eat crow. His head does rock back after this, but well after impact.
When you say well after impact, could Jackie had to do something with his head rocking back. Not the bullet but the first lady panicking :hmmm:
When you say well after impact, could Jackie had to do something with his head rocking back. Not the bullet but the first lady panicking :hmmm:
Or/also the fact that the Limo driver floored the accelerator. :hmmm:
Betonov
11-25-13, 08:48 AM
Or/also the fact that the Limo driver floored the accelerator. :hmmm:
Even more plausable
Sailor Steve
11-25-13, 08:50 AM
So, I present a headline from The Onion to please all conspiracy theorists. Makes about as much sense as any of them do alone. :O:
Right after the movie JFK came out I was discussing it with my friend Rocky. He quipped that there must have been 20 people blazing away from the grassy knoll. I said "No, nobody shot from there. There were twenty people all doing this..." I then pantomimed a guy reaching into his coat, freezing, looking around at all the other people doing the same, then pushing his gun back into the holster under his coat, putting his hands behind his back and trying to look nonchalant
Dread Knot
11-25-13, 09:17 AM
Right after the movie JFK came out I was discussing it with my friend Rocky. He quipped that there must have been 20 people blazing away from the grassy knoll. I said "No, nobody shot from there. There were twenty people all doing this..." I then pantomimed a guy reaching into his coat, freezing, looking around at all the other people doing the same, then pushing his gun back into the holster under his coat, putting his hands behind his back and trying to look nonchalant
Funny! :D
My favorite blooper from the film. Jim Garrison (played by Kevin Costner) and Lou Ivon (played by Jay O. Sander) walk the floor of the Texas Book Depository after the assassination and look out the windows. Lou has a Mannlicher-Carcano in his hand with a sight and clip. We see Oswald's supposed view of the limousine as he pulls the trigger. Now, innocuous traffic goes by, but the iris of the camera tightens into a sniper's scope.
Ivon--
The Zapruder film establishes 3 shots in 5.6 seconds. Here. I'm Oswald. Time me.
Lou cocks the Mannlicher for the first shot. Jim looks at his watch. Lou assumes the Oswald pose, crouched at the window aiming out.
Garrison--
Go!
Lou pulls, quickly recharges the bolt, fires, recycles, fires.
Lou--
Time?
Garrison
Between six and seven seconds.
The problems here. Jay O. Sanders just did get off three shots in under six seconds -- 5.6 seconds, to be precise if you watch the footage.
More importantly, the Warren Commission never stated that Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots in under six seconds.
Armistead
11-25-13, 10:26 AM
So you continue to accuse those who disagree with you of not having the ability to look at the evidence and come to a different conclusion on their own? It's not about believing the government, it's about making up our own minds. When are you going to figure that out?
I think he looked at the govts evidence and with other evidence found it not credible and made up his own mind.
Sailor Steve
11-25-13, 11:23 AM
I think he looked at the govts evidence and with other evidence found it not credible and made up his own mind.
That's fine. Now if he would give the same credence to me, we could actually have a conversation.
Armistead
11-25-13, 12:47 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned the fact the Oswald had already botched one assassination attempt that would have been easier to pull off. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Walker#Assassination_attempt
Don't know why people forget his attempt on Edwin Walker's life.
What I find strange is this attack seemed much more thought out and he still missed at 100 ft and planned his escape. Seems there was also another person involved.
Still, I don't think the govt was involved, I think it possible info they didn't release may have exposed Kennedy in some way they thought would endanger NS or embarrass his family and the nation. I think if any theory is true, it's mob related. Course I don't doubt at all that many in govt were elated he was dead.
http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/channel/killing-kennedy/articles/jfks-secret-mafia-history/
"The House assassination committee's chief counsel and staff director, G. Robert Blakey, told the New York Times in 1979 that in his own mind, the link was much clearer. "I think the Mob did it," he said."
The problem with the mob theory is the complete lack of credible evidence.
The problem with the mob theory is the complete lack of credible evidence.
Well, except for Jack Ruby that is...
Catfish
11-25-13, 03:51 PM
Oh theer has always been good connections between 'the Mob' and the CIA. Anyone remember the drug deals in the pre-Castro era ..
Well, except for Jack Ruby that is...
Really? Except there is ample evidence from people who actually knew Ruby that says his mob involvement was very peripheral at best:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/ruby.htm
http://www.jfk-online.com//rubydef.html
Oh theer has always been good connections between 'the Mob' and the CIA. Anyone remember the drug deals in the pre-Castro era ..
And your point is? What credible evidence is there of CIA involvemen?
Armistead
11-25-13, 06:23 PM
The problem with the mob theory is the complete lack of credible evidence.
It's a better theory when you look at the history of the JFK family and it's mob issues, better than the govt. did it theory....Seems rather reasonable when you look at all the players and other issues.
If we had complete evidence, it wouldn't be a theory....:D
Really? Except there is ample evidence from people who actually knew Ruby that says his mob involvement was very peripheral at best
The perfect choice wouldn't you say? He hardy could have been a "made man".
But relying on hearsay and witnesses without any credibility makes it harder to believe than simpler explanations for which the forensic and ballistic evidence is substantial and credible.
There is credible evidence that there was a lone gunman and a likely accident with a secret service gun. There is no credible evidence of mob or CIA involvement in a conspiracy.
The perfect choice wouldn't you say? He hardy could have been a "made man".
No I wouldn't. He was unreliable and unstable. Why if they wanted to get rid of the witness that could have exposed the conspiracy, would they hand the authorities another witness who could expose them even more?
The theory makes no sense and even less so when you consider the lack of any hard evidence to back it up.
Bubblehead1980
11-25-13, 08:25 PM
I find it naive to underestimate the power structure, especially of that time.Kennedy was a threat to the old guard, the heroes of WW II still ran the country.Eisenhower had just finished two terms, Curtis LeMay and other WW II "heroes" were in the highest echelons of the military.Allen Dulles, Helms, Cabal etc were all running the CIA.This was the height of the Cold War, people were literally building bomb shelters and schools ran drills.Kennedy sought to ease the cold war, this had him look like he was soft on the commies to the CIA , especially after the Bay of Pigs.Kennedy stopped trusting the old guard since they lied to him.Kennedy sought to stop the cash cow for the military industrial complex that would become the vietnam war.Kennedy was also going after the Federal Reserve, the ultimate seat of power, the bankers.These are relatively small circles in the bubble of D.C., they intermingle. Quite possible some on the military CIA side saw Kennedy's "soft" approach to Communism as a patriotic reason to take him out, others had financial motives.
The CIA and Mafia had colluded together on other things, entirely possible mob hitman were provided, Oswald who had intelligence training, was made to think he was part of the plane and had a way out and it's possible he did fire shots, but then was cut loose, sacrificed, made the patsy.Of course, we are not likely to know this anytime soon if ever, but it's what I and many others find most likely the truth as far as the who and why goes.
How they did it, just seems so easy to myself and others who see multiple shooters involved and the fatal hit coming from the front.I think the only solace, should something like this happen again, it would be much more difficult to pull it off with all the social media etc, much easier to muddy the waters back then, but then again, nothing would surprise me.
I plan to visit Dallas here soon, will check out the Plaza etc and see for myself where oswald allegedly shot from etc.Anyone here been there before?
No I wouldn't. He was unreliable and unstable. Why if they wanted to get rid of the witness that could have exposed the conspiracy, would they hand the authorities another witness who could expose them even more?
The theory makes no sense and even less so when you consider the lack of any hard evidence to back it up.
Hand them what exactly? It's not like Ruby would have to have been privy to a conspiracy, Oswald either for that matter. Now i'm not saying I buy any of this but Ruby is the only piece of the story that doesn't really fit, in my opinion of course.
Ever hear of a high profile killer just being executed like that by someone who had absolutely no connection to him or the victim?
I find it naive to underestimate the power structure, especially of that time.Kennedy was a threat to the old guard, the heroes of WW II still ran the country.Eisenhower had just finished two terms, Curtis LeMay and other WW II "heroes" were in the highest echelons of the military.Allen Dulles, Helms, Cabal etc were all running the CIA.This was the height of the Cold War, people were literally building bomb shelters and schools ran drills.Kennedy sought to ease the cold war, this had him look like he was soft on the commies to the CIA , especially after the Bay of Pigs.Kennedy stopped trusting the old guard since they lied to him.Kennedy sought to stop the cash cow for the military industrial complex that would become the vietnam war.Kennedy was also going after the Federal Reserve, the ultimate seat of power, the bankers.These are relatively small circles in the bubble of D.C., they intermingle. Quite possible some on the military CIA side saw Kennedy's "soft" approach to Communism as a patriotic reason to take him out, others had financial motives.
The CIA and Mafia had colluded together on other things, entirely possible mob hitman were provided, Oswald who had intelligence training, was made to think he was part of the plane and had a way out and it's possible he did fire shots, but then was cut loose, sacrificed, made the patsy.Of course, we are not likely to know this anytime soon if ever, but it's what I and many others find most likely the truth as far as the who and why goes.
How they did it, just seems so easy to myself and others who see multiple shooters involved and the fatal hit coming from the front.I think the only solace, should something like this happen again, it would be much more difficult to pull it off with all the social media etc, much easier to muddy the waters back then, but then again, nothing would surprise me.
Based on what evidence?
The Zapruder film clearly shows the shot came from behind.
Anyone who sees multiple shooters other than Oswald and Hickey is seeing things that are not supported by any real evidence.
Hand them what exactly? It's not like Ruby would have to have been privy to a conspiracy, Oswald either for that matter. Now i'm not saying I buy any of this but Ruby is the only piece of the story that doesn't really fit, in my opinion of course.
Ever hear of a high profile killer just being executed like that by someone who had absolutely no connection to him or the victim?
So whoever tells Ruby to kill Oswald is immune from identification by Ruby somehow? How long it takes to get to the guy that is really calling the shots depends on how many blinds it goes through.
Ruby was considered deluaional, unstable and unpredictable by people who knew him well. Who knows what motivated him? It might have been a mob member whispering in his ear as much as it might have been his own mind deluding him to do it.
Either is as likely as the other. Ruby himself was making a lot of noise about getting to Washington to take a polygraph. The reason he did so was to prove that he wasn't part of a conspiracy. The information debunking the CT rubbish about Ruby is in the links I posted earlier.
So whoever tells Ruby to kill Oswald is immune from identification by Ruby somehow? How long it takes to get to the guy that is really calling the shots depends on how many blinds it goes through.
Ruby was considered deluaional, unstable and unpredictable by people who knew him well. Who knows what motivated him? It might have been a mob member whispering in his ear as much as it might have been his own mind deluding him to do it.
Either is as likely as the other. Ruby himself was making a lot of noise about getting to Washington to take a polygraph. The reason he did so was to prove that he wasn't part of a conspiracy. The information debunking the CT rubbish about Ruby is in the links I posted earlier.
Well like I said I don't buy into any conspiracy theories on the JFK murder but you have to admit Oswalds murder was pretty odd.
Aktungbby
11-25-13, 11:04 PM
in goes Jack Ruby?!!(the real smoking gun) ta finish da' job keep his omerta and die of cancer conveniently;[QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Armistead;2144504]I think if any theory is true, it's mob related.
, G. Robert Blakey, told the New York Times in 1979 that in his own mind, the link was much clearer. "I think the Mob did it," he said."
Well, except for Jack Ruby that is...
Hand them what exactly? It's not like Ruby would have to have been privy to a conspiracy, Oswald either for that matter. Now i'm not saying I buy any of this but Ruby is the only piece of the story that doesn't really fit, in my opinion of course.
Ever hear of a high profile killer just being executed like that by someone who had absolutely no connection to him or the victim?
Its really the only thing that makes sense in the long run; Jack and Bobby made serious anti-mob waves, including the teamsters/Hoffa, and debts of honor involving their bootlegger daddy, Joseph senior who had back-channeled his son's victory at the polls, with unrequited gambling issues related to Cuba, and, at the outside, one seriously annoyed mob don who was deported under Bobby's watch. The mob always squares accounts; and Ruby, the 'foot soldier' with 'nothing to lose' was the the closer of loose ends ie 'patsy' removal.
Well like I said I don't buy into any conspiracy theories on the JFK murder but you have to admit Oswalds murder was pretty odd.
I agree it was odd. But then by all accounts so was Jack Ruby himself.
What makes more sense is a lone nutter with a gun was killed by another lone nutter with a gun. One driven by hatred of his government the other by hatred of the man who deprived his country of its leader.
Haven't any one of you think that Ruby just toke the law in his own hand and killed Lee, whatever Lee was guilty or not.
Remember when Reagan was shot? The shoter was not only arrested, they also made a human ring around him. They would not make the same mistake again.
Markus
Haven't any one of you think that Ruby just toke the law in his own hand and killed Lee, whatever Lee was guilty or not.
I've thought of it but I can't see Ruby's motive for doing it. It's not like Oswald was going to be set free. He'd have gone to the chair for sure, and as far as I know low level Hoodlums aren't given to acts of civic sacrifice even if that wasn't the case.
Remember when Reagan was shot? The shoter was not only arrested, they also made a human ring around him. They would not make the same mistake again.
Sure they would. A lot of investigative doors were closed when Ruby shot Oswald.
Dread Knot
11-26-13, 11:10 AM
I plan to visit Dallas here soon, will check out the Plaza etc and see for myself where oswald allegedly shot from etc.Anyone here been there before?
I visited Dealey Plaza while passing through the Dallas-Fort Worth area in back in 1987. I was actually surprised by how small and close-up the whole spread was. 50 meters seems an easy shot with iron sites, much less a scope. The motorcade was not moving fast, and took the corner right in front of Oswald's position. For any trained marksman, it doesn't seem it would be very difficult. Of course that's given rise to a bizarre conspiracy theory that everything has been "moved around" since 1963.
There were some decent BBQ joints nearby at the time as well. :up:
Betonov
11-26-13, 11:10 AM
What if
Oswald had some debts to the mob and wanted to go in jail to save his life so he shot Kennedy, to make himself a public figure in jail.
And the mob sent Ruby to whack him before they put him away.
Tribesman
11-26-13, 12:04 PM
What if Oswald had a thing for Jackie and wanted the husband out of the way, and Ruby had a thing with John and was heartbroken?
Betonov
11-26-13, 12:06 PM
Now that would be a good plotline for a more female oriented JFK movie.
A presidential soap opera. A love hexagon turned conspiracy
Bubblehead1980
11-26-13, 09:09 PM
[QUOTE=TarJak;2144708]Based on what evidence?
The Zapruder film clearly shows the shot came from behind.
Anyone who sees multiple shooters other than Oswald and Hickey is seeing things that are not supported by any real evidence.
Based on the film, watch him snap back and down from the frontal impact.Even if he was shot from the back, he was clearly shot from the front as well, which makes the simultaneous shot theory possible, although I don't believe it, think he was just hit from the front.Going in with the reports of multiple shots by witnesses who heard them, the grassy knoll witnesses etc.Even the house committee found a conspiracy was likely.
Sailor Steve
11-26-13, 09:16 PM
It has been explained several times that bodies react in various ways to a sudden impact. Yet again you refuse to discuss or even address that, but jump right back into the same song.
Also, the Warren Commission is all lies and cover-up, but the House Committe is now valid evidence? This is called only seeing the evidence you want to, AKA picking and choosing.
Admiral Halsey
11-26-13, 09:17 PM
I don't trust the Zapruder film at all.
Even the house committee found a conspiracy was likely.
Are you trying to say that you're trusting the government on this one?
Based on the film, watch him snap back and down from the frontal impact.Even if he was shot from the back, he was clearly shot from the front as well, which makes the simultaneous shot theory possible, although I don't believe it, think he was just hit from the front.Going in with the reports of multiple shots by witnesses who heard them, the grassy knoll witnesses etc.Even the house committee found a conspiracy was likely.
So other than a head movement which could have multiple other explanations you don't have any hard evidence.
Armistead
11-27-13, 12:38 AM
Here ya go
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrZMBbT5R0g
Here ya go
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrZMBbT5R0g
Apparently people in Australia are unworthy of the ability to view that video. Mind you the comments are telling.
If it's the Zapruder film I've seen it several thousand times at various speeds and magnifications. The film clearly shows forward movement of JFKs head and only AFTER his brain blows out of the right side of his skull does his head rock backwards. The spray from the right side of his head is seen in frame 312 2 frames after his head rocks forward, but its not until frame 315 that it rocks backwards. That's around 1/3 of a second (16fps film speed). In bullet time that's enough time for the bullet travelling at over 1500 feet per second to travel 500 feet! The muzzle velocity of the Mannlicher Carcano is 2000-2400 feet per second and 2800 feet per second for the AR15.
Check what I posted here if you're unsure about the physics http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2144412
If someone can show me hard evidence to the contrary then I'm willing to change my position on this but having been looking at JFKs assassination in some detail since I was about 12 when I caught the bug, you need to show me something more convincing than the scrappy supposition that's been thrown up so far.
les green01
11-27-13, 10:00 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmCEx-f0dfI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=urb1s0iXoiI
Mind you the comments are telling.
Priceless:
"Now I see! The pixels did all of the shooting!"
:)
Father Goose
11-27-13, 12:39 PM
I understand BubbleHead's frustration in providing "hard evidence" of a conspiracy. People have been trying to do that for 50 years.
But I would offer what the Warren Commission wants us to believe in the lone gunman's theory is almost as hard to believe.
Ask any trained sniper firing in a multiple shot scenario and they will tell you that the first shot should be the most accurate. With that in mind, the following sequence of shots makes "Oswald the lone gunman theory" very difficult to support. And keep in mind the 2nd and 3rd shots were rushed and came from a cheap Mannlicher Carcano rifle with a misaligned scope.
Shot 1 - Misses the presidential limousine.
The best shot...and he misses the entire limousine. Interesting.
Shot 2 - Hits Kennedy in the back and exits through the neck.
Oswald makes a tremendous improvement with an obvious rush of adrenaline and the rush from cycling the rifle.
Shot 3 - Hits Kennedy perfectly in the back of the head.
This may be the greatest improvement in shooting of all-time. Oswald went from missing the entire car with a shot that should be his best, to a direct hit, all while in a rush to cycle the rifle and re-sight the target.
Is it possible? Yes
Is it probable? No
I could easier believe the third shot was another shooter's first shot from another location, possibly also behind the limousine.
Madox58
11-27-13, 01:15 PM
Oswald wasn't a trained Sniper.
There's a BIG difference between 'MarksMan' and 'Sniper' qualified.
Alright, put your monies where their mouth is, shoot JFK yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JFK:_Reloaded
Armistead
11-27-13, 01:22 PM
Priceless:
"Now I see! The pixels did all of the shooting!"
:)
Once you cleared the pixels away with updated pixel removing software, you could clearly see a shooter.....I saw him....
Madox58
11-27-13, 01:26 PM
:hmmm:
Wonder if it can still be bought?
I understand BubbleHead's frustration in providing "hard evidence" of a conspiracy. People have been trying to do that for 50 years.
But I would offer what the Warren Commission wants us to believe in the lone gunman's theory is almost as hard to believe.
Ask any trained sniper firing in a multiple shot scenario and they will tell you that the first shot should be the most accurate. With that in mind, the following sequence of shots makes "Oswald the lone gunman theory" very difficult to support. And keep in mind the 2nd and 3rd shots were rushed and came from a cheap Mannlicher Carcano rifle with a misaligned scope.
Shot 1 - Misses the presidential limousine.
The best shot...and he misses the entire limousine. Interesting.
Shot 2 - Hits Kennedy in the back and exits through the neck.
Oswald makes a tremendous improvement with an obvious rush of adrenaline and the rush from cycling the rifle.
Shot 3 - Hits Kennedy perfectly in the back of the head.
This may be the greatest improvement in shooting of all-time. Oswald went from missing the entire car with a shot that should be his best, to a direct hit, all while in a rush to cycle the rifle and re-sight the target.
Is it possible? Yes
Is it probable? No
I could easier believe the third shot was another shooter's first shot from another location, possibly also behind the limousine.
A few things with that. First a missed first shot can be easily explained by initial misjudgement in windage or target velocity, second cheap or not a bolt action is the most accurate class of firearm, third Oswald was a trained marksman who had time to tune up and more importantly practice with his weapon and finally sights aren't misaligned; they are zeroed to a particular shooter so what might appear misaligned to you is perfect for someone else. There is also the possibility that the sights were bumped out of alignment after the shooting when he hid the rifle under boxes filled with God knows what.
Madox58
11-27-13, 01:34 PM
A few things with that. First a missed first shot can be easily explained by initial misjudgement in windage or target velocity, second cheap or not a bolt action is the most accurate class of firearm, third Oswald was a trained marksman who had time to tune up and more importantly practice with his weapon and finally sights aren't misaligned; they are zeroed to a particular shooter so what might appear misaligned to you is perfect for someone else. There is also the possibility that the sights were bumped out of alignment after the shooting when he hid the rifle under boxes filled with God knows what.
Right. It's also possible the first shot was a trigger jerk or failure to control the breathing due to the excitement.
That's a very common cause of missed 1st shots by MarksMen.
Armistead
11-27-13, 01:45 PM
Right. It's also possible the first shot was a trigger jerk or failure to control the breathing due to the excitement.
That's a very common cause of missed 1st shots by MarksMen.
Yea, but to think he could improve on that in a few seconds...it works the other way around.
"A Moving Target and a Poor Rifle
Although the distance from Oswald’s supposed location to JFK’s car was never more than about 90 yards (82 metres) during the shooting, several factors increased the difficulty of the act:
the presidential limousine was moving away from the gunman’s location;
the car was obscured for some of the time by an oak tree;
all the shots had to have been fired within a very short space of time;
and, most importantly, the only rifle that could have been used was awkward and unpredictable.
Simulating the JFK Assassination
For the benefit of the Warren Commission, expert riflemen from the US Army and the FBI attempted to duplicate the assassin’s task, using the rifle that had been discovered on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository.
Even after fixing some of the gun’s mechanical problems, and despite firing at stationary targets from an easier vantage point, they failed to achieve the combination of accuracy and speed demanded of the lone gunman: two hits out of three, within about six seconds (see Warren Commission Hearings, vol.3, p.446 and pp.403–10)."
http://22november1963.org.uk/lee-harvey-oswald-marksman-sharpshooter
Sailor Steve
11-27-13, 01:53 PM
Yea, but to think he could improve on that in a few seconds...it works the other way around.
Here's a question: How do they know for sure which shot missed?
Madox58
11-27-13, 01:54 PM
No it doesn't.
Even the lowest grade of MarksMan can see that mistake and adjust quickly.
Oswald tested to the bottom of Sharpshooter at one time.
He never tested to Expert but at the range the shots were fired?
A SharpShooter could make them easily if he is commited to the kill.
Armistead
11-27-13, 02:08 PM
No it doesn't.
Even the lowest grade of MarksMan can see that mistake and adjust quickly.
Oswald tested to the bottom of Sharpshooter at one time.
He never tested to Expert but at the range the shots were fired?
A SharpShooter could make them easily if he is commited to the kill.
As I quoted
"expert riflemen from the US Army and the FBI attempted to duplicate the assassin’s task, using the rifle that had been discovered on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository.
Even after fixing some of the gun’s mechanical problems, and despite firing at stationary targets from an easier vantage point, they failed to achieve the combination of accuracy and speed demanded of the lone gunman: two hits out of three, within about six seconds (see Warren Commission Hearings, vol.3, p.446 and pp.403–10)."
Not to mention, those test are basic skill test, he was simply a decent shot and he was using a precise military rifle, not a piece of junk.
No low grade marksmen could adjust, that's just silly, they're several factors you have to determine in seconds if you miss and he had no spotter. IMO it would take a skilled sniper to make that shot on a moving target with a good rifle. Just bolting the next shot you're gonna come off target..
Madox58
11-27-13, 02:09 PM
Are you a trained Sniper?
:hmmm:
Wonder if it can still be bought?
It's free to download AFAIK, and there's a patch that fixes some of the more bizarre physics, although if you deliberately set out to break the game it will react in an...interesting...fashion.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOSFafsloes
Never played it myself, apparently the patch puts in a couple of different firing positions too, including the infamous 'grassy knoll'.
Madox58
11-27-13, 02:18 PM
:haha:
I'll need to find this just to play with it!
Looks crazy as all heck!!
Then there is practice and familiarity with a particular weapon. I'm a much better shot with my own AR15 than I ever was with any of my government issued M16s.
Madox58
11-27-13, 02:23 PM
Then there is practice and familiarity with a particular weapon. I'm a much better shot with my own AR15 than I ever was with any of my government issued M16s.
Agree again.
I have an Air Rifle that I can hit a beer bottle with at 100 yards on the second shot.
No one has been able to hit the bottle with the same rifle given 10 shots!
They might get it after 11 or so but never under 10!
It's setup for me and my quirks.
Agree again.
I have an Air Rifle that I can hit a beer bottle with at 100 yards on the second shot.
No one has been able to hit the bottle with the same rifle given 10 shots!
They might get it after 11 or so but never under 10!
It's setup for me and my quirks.
Folks dislike my AR zero too. Good sez I.
Armistead
11-27-13, 02:33 PM
Are you a trained Sniper?
No, but I've shot for years. I did take numerous shooting courses over the years and once shot in competitions. Heck, I would've been shaking. One thing for sure, I would've picked a better angle and escape route...
Think about it...
Range, moving, windage, bolting and reacquiring target. He had obviously never shot from that spot before, no distance marking, probably unsure of when to shoot....
I think this skilled sniper makes a lot of sense.
http://www.riflewarrior.com/case_of_the_impossible_shots.htm
Armistead
11-27-13, 02:35 PM
Agree again.
I have an Air Rifle that I can hit a beer bottle with at 100 yards on the second shot.
No one has been able to hit the bottle with the same rifle given 10 shots!
They might get it after 11 or so but never under 10!
It's setup for me and my quirks.
An air rifle at a 100 yards is liable to go all over the place....please.....:haha:
Madox58
11-27-13, 02:39 PM
Yea. And this is a FEMA Camp in Ohio.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlnMT8yBjRw
:har:
Guess what? I live near this 'FEMA' camp!
It's in Lima, Ohio (Which he never mentions) and it is a prison!
:haha:
So what you see on the 'Netz' ain't really what it is at times.
:D
:haha:
I'll need to find this just to play with it!
Looks crazy as all heck!!
http://www.fileplanet.com/192027/download/JFK-Reloaded-v1.1-%28Free-Game%29
Closest I've gotten so far is 425. It does illustrate how tricky a shot it is to get the ballistics matched exactly right, but you just never know.
Let's sum it all up, what do we really know?
Markus
Let's sum it all up, what do we really know?
Markus
JFK died.
Madox58
11-27-13, 02:47 PM
An air rifle at a 100 yards is liable to go all over the place....please.....:haha:
Would you care to place a bet?
:D
I have a Hatsan 125 Sniper in .25 cal useing the Nitro Piston.
I could probably shoot farther if I had a .22 version but then the wind has more effect on the lighter round.
My .22 cal Air Rifle does great to about 50 yards. But it's full Auto so intended to mow down anything in that range.
It is quite accurate also.
:03:
I understand BubbleHead's frustration in providing "hard evidence" of a conspiracy. People have been trying to do that for 50 years.
But I would offer what the Warren Commission wants us to believe in the lone gunman's theory is almost as hard to believe.[/QUOTE ]
And as there's some good evidence that the head shot came from lower and to the left of Oswalds window , I don't believe that the Warren Commision came to the right conclusion either. I just don't believe that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. There may have been a conspiracy to cover up a security detail failure but I have no hard evidence of that. That's why I try to stick to the hard evidence surrounding the shooting.
[QUOTE ] Ask any trained sniper firing in a multiple shot scenario and they will tell you that the first shot should be the most accurate. With that in mind, the following sequence of shots makes "Oswald the lone gunman theory" very difficult to support. And keep in mind the 2nd and 3rd shots were rushed and came from a cheap Mannlicher Carcano rifle with a misaligned scope.
Shot 1 - Misses the presidential limousine.
The best shot...and he misses the entire limousine. Interesting.
Shot 2 - Hits Kennedy in the back and exits through the neck.
Oswald makes a tremendous improvement with an obvious rush of adrenaline and the rush from cycling the rifle.
Shot 3 - Hits Kennedy perfectly in the back of the head.
This may be the greatest improvement in shooting of all-time. Oswald went from missing the entire car with a shot that should be his best, to a direct hit, all while in a rush to cycle the rifle and re-sight the target.
Is it possible? Yes
Is it probable? No
Read Mortal Error for a debunking of most of this opinion.
could easier believe the third shot was another shooter's first shot from another location, possibly also behind the limousine.
And I agree. If you look at the ballistics then the most probable source of the head shot is the rear left seat of the Secret Service chase car.
Madox58
11-27-13, 02:49 PM
http://www.fileplanet.com/192027/download/JFK-Reloaded-v1.1-%28Free-Game%29
Thanks for the link Mate.
:up:
I want to take a look at this one just to see if I can adjust somethings.
:haha:
Armistead
11-27-13, 02:53 PM
Would you care to place a bet?
:D
I have a Hatsan 125 Sniper in .25 cal useing the Nitro Piston.
I could probably shoot farther if I had a .22 version but then the wind has more effect on the lighter round.
My .22 cal Air Rifle does great to about 50 yards. But it's full Auto so intended to mow down anything in that range.
It is quite accurate also.
:03:
Oh, it's possible, have a friend with a converted .22 shooting ...seems over 1500 psi. Still, he can walk the target and get some hits, but never a tight grouping. You need some perfect weather.....
Madox58
11-27-13, 02:53 PM
the most probable source of the head shot is the rear left seat of the Secret Service chase car.
Occam's Razor
"the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected"
JFK died.
Did he? jokes aside
What do we really know about his dead?
You right the only things we know for sure is that he died.(or did he?)
Markus
Jimbuna
11-27-13, 02:59 PM
Did he? jokes aside
What do we really know about his dead?
You right the only things we know for sure is that he died.(or did he?)
Markus
Well that is probably the only theory that hasn't been aired yet.
Dread Knot
11-27-13, 03:04 PM
You right the only things we know for sure is that he died.(or did he?)
According to this widely respected newspaper he was still alive 21 years ago. :D
http://gal.darkervision.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/jfk-alive.thumbnail.jpg
Seriously what can one say? Presidents die. Conspiracy Theories live forever.
Madox58
11-27-13, 03:05 PM
Oh, it's possible, have a friend with a converted .22 shooting ...seems over 1500 psi. Still, he can walk the target and get some hits, but never a tight grouping. You need some perfect weather.....
I only fire the .25 Sniper on as windless of a day as possible.
That's why it takes 2 shots to trash the bottle at 100 yards.
The first shot, I watch the pellet and can see it's arc.
(You can see this with powder burners as a sort of vapor trail also)
I hit quarter size groups all day long at 100 yards with the Hatsan.
That's knowing I'm lobbing at nearly 2.93 feet high to allow for pellet drop.
I know the weight of the pellet and do the math in my head to adjust for windage.
(You get a knack for that as I'm sure you know so it's more how far to aim into the cross wind feel)
Well that is probably the only theory that hasn't been aired yet.
It has. Has however only read this in a book.
Been awhile, since I read this book.(the book was about the most weird conspiracy)
The Secret Service got information, about a threat on the Presidents life, instead of cancel the tour, they manage to get a stand-in.
When this stand-in got killed, they had to hide the real JFK
Markus
Jimbuna
11-27-13, 03:09 PM
It has. Has however only read this in a book.
Been awhile, since I read this book.(the book was about the most weird conspiracy)
The Secret Service got information, about a threat on the Presidents life, instead of cancel the tour, they manage to get a stand-in.
When this stand-in got killed, they had to hide the real JFK
Markus
I meant on this thread...I should have made myself more clear.
Madox58
11-27-13, 03:10 PM
According to this widely respected newspaper he was still alive 21 years ago. :D
He's was still alive less then a year ago.
http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message2141164/pg1
:yep:
(And a Monkey just flew out of my butt!)
:har:
Did he? jokes aside
What do we really know about his dead?
Well, he could be running that Fish and Chip Shop with Elvis (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DL2GmaI3Xus) I guess. :03:
Armistead
11-27-13, 03:13 PM
I only fire the .25 Sniper on as windless of a day as possible.
That's why it takes 2 shots to trash the bottle at 100 yards.
The first shot, I watch the pellet and can see it's arc.
(You can see this with powder burners as a sort of vapor trail also)
I hit quarter size groups all day long at 100 yards with the Hatsan.
That's knowing I'm lobbing at nearly 2.93 feet high to allow for pellet drop.
I know the weight of the pellet and do the math in my head to adjust for windage.
(You get a knack for that as I'm sure you know so it's more how far to aim into the cross wind feel)
Well, I miss shooting, but nerve disease gives me a mild tremor in my hands, so just do it now for fun when I can....
Madox58
11-27-13, 03:24 PM
Well, I miss shooting, but nerve disease gives me a mild tremor in my hands, so just do it now for fun when I can....
Sorry to hear about the tremor, Mate.
I enjoy the Air Guns as they are short range but require even more attention to the details to go longer ranges.
Most will tell you the 125 .25 Sniper is good for 30 to 40+ yards to be effective as a small critter killer with a high impact.
For the most part that is true.
I just happen to like shooting it at it's max range for a small critter kill shot.
If I can keep it to quarter size? that's good enuff to take a shot for me.
On the Air Gun, I use a bench rest I built so pretty much I hardly touch the Weapon itself.
And I see what your doing here!
You joined with that Criminal Tarjak and are de-railing a perfectly de-railed thread!!
You Bastids!!
:)
Father Goose
11-27-13, 03:43 PM
Read Mortal Error for a debunking of most of this opinion.
And I agree. If you look at the ballistics then the most probable source of the head shot is the rear left seat of the Secret Service chase car.
I'm not going to buy a book about a preposterious theory that a secret service agent accidentally shot the president in the head. Seriously? Really?
I believe my opinion is based on common sense and appears to be supported by Armistead who has made some excellent points and who obviously knows what he is talking about. :rock:
The Witness
Some ran up the hills, some ran toward the building where Lee was
Why?
Could it have something to do with echoes?
(an untrained ear can't say exactly from where a shot is from)
I'm talking about a shot in a street were there's skyscrapers nearby
(I know much about this, but only in Swedish and the google translate is no good)
Markus
I'm not going to buy a book about a preposterious theory that a secret service agent accidentally shot the president in the head. Seriously? Really?
I believe my opinion is based on common sense and appears to be supported by Armistead who has made some excellent points and who obviously knows what he is talking about. :rock:
Fine, believe what you want. If you don't want to spend any money you can get the gist by clicking on the link in this post: http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=2142418
The Witness
Some ran up the hills, some ran toward the building where Lee was
Why?
Could it have something to do with echoes?
(an untrained ear can't say exactly from where a shot is from)
I'm talking about a shot in a street were there's skyscrapers nearby
(I know much about this, but only in Swedish and the google translate is no good)
Markus
Possible. Also possible that they wanted to get away from a place where shots were being fired.
Buddahaid
11-27-13, 04:13 PM
Exactly. It's also possible Oswald just got lucky and got in a good shot. It happens you know.
Sailor Steve
11-27-13, 04:14 PM
I think this skilled sniper makes a lot of sense.
Except for the number of facts he gets wrong, such as that Oswald did not fail his shooting in boot camp; he qualified Sharpshooter. Later he was downrated to Marksman. The writer also either ignores or was unaware of the fact that Oswald had been going to ranges and practicing. A lot.
He also gets the facts wrong about the change in the motorcade route. As we have already shown, there was no change. Elm street was the planned route all along.
He also ignores or is unaware of the many recreations done in the intervening years, recreation in which experienced shooters, but not trained snipers, successfully made the three shots with little or no problems.
Sailor Steve
11-27-13, 04:16 PM
(And a Monkey just flew out of my butt!)
Pictures or it didn't happen.
On second thought, no pictures please. I'll take your word for it.
Madox58
11-27-13, 04:22 PM
A Mil adjustment to most scopes is a 1/4 inch at 100 yards.
(One of mine is 1/8th inch at 100 yards :03:)
The shot was done at less. Right around 88+ yards?
On a slow moveing target where the line of travel is known.
By a somewhat better then average shooter.
Oswald could have pulled it off.
Only thing I dispute is the shot from the front as the kill shot.
I see the shot from the back as the kill shot.
Do I believe Oswald was the only shooter?
I'm not convinced no.
I believe there may have been another shooter but not in front of JFK.
Above Oswald would be the position I would take knowiing he was to be the patsy.
Another thing about Snipers? If one tells you they never missed?
They are liars of the first degree or ain't been in the field.
Sailor Steve
11-27-13, 04:27 PM
As with many things, I neither believe nor disbelieve. I certainly believe Oswald could have made those shots. I also realize that it could have been a conspiracy by any number of different people or groups. Anything is possible.
I simply refuse to listen to people telling me they know this or that, and that I have to believe their version. If they want me to believe, they'd best come up with some real evidence. So far I haven't seen any.
Madox58
11-27-13, 04:30 PM
Pictures or it didn't happen.
A recreation for the family aspect.
:D
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ubPM_BLcL3Q/Tvpe3ekIH8I/AAAAAAAADB0/klu2khArPlQ/s1600/MonkeyAss.gif
Father Goose
11-27-13, 04:30 PM
Here's a question: How do they know for sure which shot missed?
It is my understanding that they don't know for sure. In my post, I was giving Oswald the benefit of the doubt thinking that he improved on each shot.
If Oswald missed the limousine on his second shot, what is the probability that he would have made the necessary corrections to hit the president in the back of the head on his third shot?
And if his first shot missed the entire limousine, a rather large automobile and at the closest distance of the three shots, what is the probability that he would have improved in a few seconds to hit the president directly in the back of the head?
I suppose the point I was trying to make to BubbleHead is he doesn't necessarily have to have all the answers to prove a conspiracy, all one has to look at is Oswald's ability to make the three shots.
I respect your opinion if you don't think it was a conspiracy as I don't know for sure. My opinion is it is a very low percentage that Oswald acted alone. But possible? Yes.
Madox58
11-27-13, 04:41 PM
If you want to go the path of "Don't know for sure"?
Lincoln's assassination is full of loop holes.
Could Booth have been a decoy and the shot was fired from elsewhere?
Say his BodyGuard?
:hmmm:
I suppose the point I was trying to make to BubbleHead is he doesn't necessarily have to have all the answers to prove a conspiracy, all one has to look at is Oswald's ability to make the three shots.
But in making wild claims as he is famous for, he should be able to back up some of his claims with some evidence. So far he's shown nothing other than JFKs backward head movement which leaves unexplained the 6mm entry wound in the back of Kennedy's head. A piece of evidence that he tried to discredit by saying that the autopsy photo showing the hole was falsified. But accepting other photos of the same set as factual.
As privateer so eloquently put it Occams Razor.
Jimbuna
11-27-13, 05:06 PM
A recreation for the family aspect.
:D
More housework for Nancy Lady :o
Sailor Steve
11-27-13, 05:11 PM
It is my understanding that they don't know for sure. In my post, I was giving Oswald the benefit of the doubt thinking that he improved on each shot.
My further question is how he would know if any given shot missed? He might have assumed a shot that he didn't see hit could have gone through a seatback and floorboard, or through the dash. My point here is that he might not have known whether he missed the president by an inch or the limousine by twenty feet. Unless he could see precisely where the errant bullet went he would have no idea how to correct for it. He may not even have been aware that one of his shots missed at all.
I respect your opinion if you don't think it was a conspiracy as I don't know for sure. My opinion is it is a very low percentage that Oswald acted alone. But possible? Yes.
Your post might have crossed with mine, which is only two above it. My opinion isn't that I don't think there was a conspiracy. My only opinion is that I don't know, and I don't accept statements as factual from people who don't know either. I also don't believe in percentages. Did Oswald act alone? I don't know. Was there a conspiracy? I don't know. I don't even care. If evidence comes out to prove there was a conspiracy, all the people like Bubblehead are going to crow "See? I told you so!", and people like me will say "Hmm. It's nice to see some real proof." If evidence comes out that proves there was no conspiracy, all the conspiracy theorists will be saying it was contrived, and proves nothing, and people like me will say "Hmm. Maybe now we can get on with our lives." This is the difference between the honest researcher and the True Believer. My only stake in all this is to understand the truth, and hope to find out what that truth may be. I have no opinion one way or the other, and can only wait for some real evidence to turn up that proves one story or the other. Other than that I don't really care.
Dread Knot
11-27-13, 05:19 PM
My problem with multiple shooters is how could the conspirators guarantee the only bullets or fragments found would be the ones traceable to Oswald's weapon to the exclusion of all other weapons in the world? How could they guarantee there wouldn't be wounds that don't track back to the sixth floor SE corner window of the Depository?
That is why the conspiracy theorists find it necessary to enlarge the conspiracy. With all the wounds, bullets and fragments only pointing to Oswald's rifle from Oswald's vantage place, to make things fit they must conjecture a larger conspiracy to alter the wounds, alter the x-rays and photos, and plant or substitute (or both!) bullets and fragments that point to Oswald from the originals which, they believe, would point elsewhere.
And of course, since the Z-film doesn't show this supposed damage to the head that should be evident from a knoll shot, it too has now become part of the evidence that has been altered, they argue.
As always, everyone has to be in on it. Doctors, nurses, forensic investigators etc. No Occams razor here.
Madox58
11-27-13, 05:20 PM
More housework for Nancy Lady :o
She likes Monkeys but I don't have any flying outta my bum just now.
:D
All the evidence here points me to the fact that ALIENS did it!
:haha:
Jimbuna
11-27-13, 05:24 PM
She likes Monkeys but I don't have any flying outta my bum just now.
:D
All the evidence here points me to the fact that ALIENS did it!
:haha:
Most definitely :)
http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/8039/idz.gif (http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/89/idz.gif/)
Father Goose
11-27-13, 05:35 PM
But in making wild claims as he is famous for, he should be able to back up some of his claims with some evidence.
I agree. I feel sometimes Bubblehead gets carried away with himself and takes a position that his opinion is fact...but all is good.
Your post might have crossed with mine, which is only two above it. My opinion isn't that I don't think there was a conspiracy. My only opinion is that I don't know, and I don't accept statements as factual from people who don't know either.
The posts did cross and I agree with you. This assassination has been analyzed from every angle. It's all history and the real sad part is not that this country lost it's leader, but that the children lost their father.
les green01
11-27-13, 05:58 PM
there only one true way to settle it that be dig him up and check the skull and we know thats not going happen anything else people can say its doctor up,Heck i seen photoes from a book that doctors at parkland wrote and in the pictures he had a inch and half wound to his right temple and back of his head look like a busted mellen.Then i have read a book written by a truck driver bounty hunter where he wrote that he gave ruby and lee shooting lessions and that ruby pay for them,heck i could tell people i did it and it be in books and movies but then i wasn't born until 11 years after the cap got busted on jfk.
Buddahaid
11-27-13, 06:07 PM
Now we're back to Red Dwarf. :hmmm:
Father Goose
11-27-13, 06:39 PM
If you want to go the path of "Don't know for sure"?
Lincoln's assassination is full of loop holes.
Could Booth have been a decoy and the shot was fired from elsewhere?
Say his BodyGuard?
:hmmm:
I said I didn't know for SURE. I didn't say I had no clue or opinion. :)
My opinion...and it is only that...is it was a conspiracy. I base that on what I have already stated on this thread along with the many "activities" that occurred behind the scenes.
But if others believe Oswald acted alone, I respect that. :cool:
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.