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.

Well some speculation is a lot more likely. An accidental discharge is darn hard to ignore.

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>

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.

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.

It's not incomprehensible or disturbing. In fact nothing is beyond belief. We're just waiting for you to offer some real evidence.

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/wikipedi...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:

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.

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/histor...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>

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>

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