If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Conspiracy Theorist)   Retired FBI agent now claiming Lee Harvey Oswald didn't kill JFK. In related story sales of Reynolds Wrap skyrocket   (prisonplanet.com) divider line 442
    More: Interesting, Lee Harvey Oswald, JFK, no balls, FBI, government corruption, National Archives and Records Administration, Assassination of John F. Kennedy, social bookmarks  
•       •       •

18832 clicks; posted to Main » on 25 Aug 2010 at 12:48 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



442 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-08-25 06:16:40 PM
Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: ronaprhys:Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: uhh... I've never suggested there was a huge cover up. The only thing I've said is that I don't believe the 9/11 Commission Report is the full story.

A quote from you: I have no idea what LIHOP or MIHOP are, but if you think al-Qaeda and the individual terrorists acted independently of any other people, well... let's just say I think you've departed from reason.

To me that seems to indicate that you believe our government was in on the deal. Is that not your assertion?

Not necessarily.


Then what is your position?
 
2010-08-25 06:18:01 PM
ZipSplat: Well, I wouldn't say that; a lot of people who believe JFK conspiracy theories are gun nuts. But anyone can put a melon on a pedestal on their back yard, shoot it, and determine which way it falls.

Somebody who puts camo all over their face and goes out into the woods 'plinkin' doesn't make someone a gun nut. I was refering to those who actually know and understand the mechanics of the weapon system in their hand.

I've met plenty of down country boys "who cud shoot a dime at 2 hundrad yahds standin up wit iron sights" who couldn't measure up to shiat when it finally came to range time.
 
2010-08-25 06:24:52 PM
Nattering Nabob: Giblet: FTGodWin: Coco LaFemme: Oswald was a Marine marksman. You mean to tell me he couldn't make that easy of a shot, when he had made perfect shots from farther distances? Come on.

Furthermore, if you play Connect The Dots with the bullet wounds and then track them all backward, you get the 6th floor window of the Texas Schoolbook Depository. That's where the shots came from. Not the grassy knoll, not in front of the car, not from the other side....from BEHIND. If someone really was shooting from the grassy knoll, don't you think the bullet would have passed through JFK's head and hit Jackie? By the time of the 3rd shot, their heads were pretty close together as he was leaning over toward her and she was leaning into him.

I know it's supposedly "cool" not to trust the government but there's been not one scintilla of evidence over the last 47 years that points to anyone other than Oswald having been the shooter. Conspiracy theories are not evidence, they aren't even interesting.

Umm... Marksman is the worst classification you can pass with on the rifle range. Also, many who hold this level have to try to qualify several times in order to obtain it. The badge you have to wear for this achievement is called the toilet seat badge.

It, like your post, can be considered a D-.


Confirmed.

I have a sharpshooter's medal. That means I had less than 10" grouping in 5 out of 7 rounds from a .45 M1911.

At 25 yards.

Everyone in my company except three guys got similar medals.

The Marksman medal is like winning a Great Effort trophy at the special olympics.


That's real good for a .45 M1911. Not exactly known for their accuracy right out of the box, much less after grunts put a few thousand rounds through them.



It's just OK, and my company wasn't standard boot. Anyone who's shot handguns before would call it easy. Even with a sloppy training piece.

The point is that Marksman medals were practically given to anyone who wanted one, and often meant that the recipient was totally incompetent with a firearm. That's why the Navy stopped giving them out. It was virtually a sign that said "I CAN'T SHOOT".
 
2010-08-25 06:26:41 PM
whammer Quote 2010-08-25 06:09:42 PM

For many, this would be more than enough reason for JFK to be taken out. Who actually ordered it? Who knows. But somebody scared of nuclear war. Which doesn't narrow it down very much.

>>>>

except the only sane people in government not wanting a nuclear war were the Kennedy's.
 
2010-08-25 06:31:14 PM
i am damo suzuki: I didn't think this had ever been in question. I don't know a single person who believes the official story about this.

i am damo suzuki: I didn't think this had ever been in question. I don't know a single person who believes the official story about this.

ok you might be a lunatic but your handle is awesome and not at all obscure and i am the ghost of malcom mooney.
 
2010-08-25 06:35:54 PM
ronaprhys: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: ronaprhys:Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: uhh... I've never suggested there was a huge cover up. The only thing I've said is that I don't believe the 9/11 Commission Report is the full story.

A quote from you: I have no idea what LIHOP or MIHOP are, but if you think al-Qaeda and the individual terrorists acted independently of any other people, well... let's just say I think you've departed from reason.

To me that seems to indicate that you believe our government was in on the deal. Is that not your assertion?

Not necessarily.

Then what is your position?


That the 9/11 commission report isn't a sufficient accounting of the events.
 
2010-08-25 06:42:08 PM
Giblet: The point is that Marksman medals were practically given to anyone who wanted one, and often meant that the recipient was totally incompetent with a firearm. That's why the Navy stopped giving them out. It was virtually a sign that said "I CAN'T SHOOT".

Didn't he get a sharp shooter later though? And he could have also done most of his training outside of the military. For example, I probably fired less than 100 hundred rounds in basic training, and yes I shot marksman. It wasn't until later I got the chance to really shoot, and in fact, it wasn't until deployment would I be able to just shoot mag after mag on my own (had to get rid of the old ammo in supply every month or so). I shot expert afterwards consistently.

Furthermore, it is NOT the most difficult shot to make and has been recreated every time. What they always get wrong after the fact is, that beforehand he didn't HAVE to get a hit in 1 in 3 shots. He very well could have failed. So if another shooter making the shot only had a 1 in 10 sucess rate, that means Oswald had around 33% success rate going in to his mission. Not exactly unfathomable. (And this is just a theoretical speaking and not sure my math is even right, don't know the actual numbers)

In short, he got lucky. It happens in real life. It's not a wild-ass Robin Hood splitting an arrow with another arrow shot. It's a mediumly challenging shot for a medium shooter who happened to get it right.
 
2010-08-25 06:45:31 PM
Look, you want to know the truth? I did it. In a time machine. Because I wanted to troll the whole damn country for the next fifty years. Can I have a cookie now?
 
2010-08-25 06:48:33 PM
Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom:

Then what is your position?

That the 9/11 commission report isn't a sufficient accounting of the events.


You are being kind of vague. I'm curious what your opinion is in more detail.

Let's start with the hypothesis that terrorists planned and executed the attacks without outside help.

Do you believe this is incorrect and if so what facts support that alternative theory.
 
2010-08-25 06:53:06 PM
jules_siegel: No one has ever demonstrated that the rifle Oswald used could have fired three shots in the time recorded. If anyone has information otherwise, I'd like to see it.

There was a NOVA special about ten years back that not only showed that three shots was doable but that 4 would have pretty easy in the time allowed
 
2010-08-25 07:01:39 PM
Torok: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom:

Then what is your position?

That the 9/11 commission report isn't a sufficient accounting of the events.

You are being kind of vague. I'm curious what your opinion is in more detail.

Let's start with the hypothesis that terrorists planned and executed the attacks without outside help.

Do you believe this is incorrect and if so what facts support that alternative theory.


I've changed my mind, I think the hijackers acted alone. Everything else is a bizarre coincidence.
 
2010-08-25 07:10:33 PM
Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Torok: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom:

Then what is your position?

That the 9/11 commission report isn't a sufficient accounting of the events.

You are being kind of vague. I'm curious what your opinion is in more detail.

Let's start with the hypothesis that terrorists planned and executed the attacks without outside help.

Do you believe this is incorrect and if so what facts support that alternative theory.

I've changed my mind, I think the hijackers acted alone. Everything else is a bizarre coincidence.


What about the Kennedy assassination?
 
2010-08-25 07:12:19 PM
Why don't we ask arlen speccter? I'm sure he can tell us the truth, being on the Warren Commission and all.
 
2010-08-25 07:18:05 PM
Magorn: jules_siegel: No one has ever demonstrated that the rifle Oswald used could have fired three shots in the time recorded. If anyone has information otherwise, I'd like to see it.

There was a NOVA special about ten years back that not only showed that three shots was doable but that 4 would have pretty easy in the time allowed


Oswald's shooting wasn't all that great, incidentally. One of the three bullets he fired didn't even hit the President's limousine, much less anyone in it.
 
2010-08-25 07:20:28 PM
Torok Quote 2010-08-25 06:48:33 PM

Do you believe this is incorrect and if so what facts support that alternative theory.

>>>

I think truthers are just showing their true derp, trying to be cool and thinking something isn't really what it seems. But a lot of conspiracy theories don't have to be answered as being so crazy far out. Our government has shown it will do anything with money to further its cause. Use humans as guinea pigs. Drop chemical biological and nuclear weapons on civilians. So in that respect, you should always question authority. What a sane person might believe would be that yes terrorists did everything you said they did, and brought down the towers. But the conspiracy is in the who knew about it, who even might have financed it? Those are questions that need answering.
 
2010-08-25 07:42:13 PM
I always wonder why conspiracy theorists seldom trouble to investigate the *unsuccessful* attempts on the lives of twentieth century Presidents (FDR, Truman, Nixon, Ford, Reagan--and ex-President Theodore Roosevelt).

/just sayin
 
2010-08-25 07:42:59 PM
Magorn: jules_siegel: No one has ever demonstrated that the rifle Oswald used could have fired three shots in the time recorded. If anyone has information otherwise, I'd like to see it.

There was a NOVA special about ten years back that not only showed that three shots was doable but that 4 would have pretty easy in the time allowed


Well...here's the thing about that. The people who supposedly showed it could be done weren't under any pressure. So, you have a guy in a sniper's nest, most likely nervous as hell, and he manages those shots. Now, this is a guy who allegedly tried to kill General Walker, a stationary target, at a lesser distance with the same gun and missed.

Now, I'm a not a conspiracy nut, except for this one. It just stinks all the way around. Even RFK didn't believe the lone gunman idea.
 
2010-08-25 07:55:07 PM
schneide.files.wordpress.comschneide.files.wordpress.comschneide.files.wordpress.comschneide.files.wordpress.com
 
2010-08-25 08:09:44 PM
cybernia: Well...here's the thing about that. The people who supposedly showed it could be done weren't under any pressure. So, you have a guy in a sniper's nest, most likely nervous as hell, and he manages those shots. Now, this is a guy who allegedly tried to kill General Walker, a stationary target, at a lesser distance with the same gun and missed.

Your reasonings flawed. The people recreating it HAVE to have a headshot and HAVE to have it within 3 shots, and HAVE to have it within x seconds from start to finish.

Oswald didn't have those constraints, he could have done it anyway he wanted to.

Sure, he probably got a lucky shot. Lucky as in he got a headshot. If he was going in for, then yeah, maybe, but to him it was a lucky shot that poses somewhat of a mild challenge to recreate.

He had a full silhouette to shoot at from within 100 yards, and 3 shots to hit him. I don't care what kind rifle you give me I'll be able do that easy.
 
2010-08-25 08:17:08 PM
chu2dogg: Giblet: The point is that Marksman medals were practically given to anyone who wanted one, and often meant that the recipient was totally incompetent with a firearm. That's why the Navy stopped giving them out. It was virtually a sign that said "I CAN'T SHOOT".

Didn't he get a sharp shooter later though? And he could have also done most of his training outside of the military. For example, I probably fired less than 100 hundred rounds in basic training, and yes I shot marksman. It wasn't until later I got the chance to really shoot, and in fact, it wasn't until deployment would I be able to just shoot mag after mag on my own (had to get rid of the old ammo in supply every month or so). I shot expert afterwards consistently.

Furthermore, it is NOT the most difficult shot to make and has been recreated every time. What they always get wrong after the fact is, that beforehand he didn't HAVE to get a hit in 1 in 3 shots. He very well could have failed. So if another shooter making the shot only had a 1 in 10 sucess rate, that means Oswald had around 33% success rate going in to his mission. Not exactly unfathomable. (And this is just a theoretical speaking and not sure my math is even right, don't know the actual numbers)

In short, he got lucky. It happens in real life. It's not a wild-ass Robin Hood splitting an arrow with another arrow shot. It's a mediumly challenging shot for a medium shooter who happened to get it right.



Have you actually fired a bolt action rifle?

If you have only 8 seconds from the first shot, and your first shot misses, there's no way in hell those following shots will hit anything. That first shot is the only one where you stand a chance of hitting what you're aiming at because you have time to line up the shot and calculate corrections for range and windage.

Then there's the magic bullet, the exit wound on Oswald's side of the target's head, and the perfectly-shaped bullet that conveniently fell out of Kennedy onto the EMT gurney, missed during the original examination. The original examining doctor - an experienced ER doctor - noted an entry wound in the throat with an exit wound at the back of the head. There is no mention of the neck entry wound by the one questionably-skilled doctor and his team of politicians who took over the official examination.

One ultra-lucky occurrence can be ignored if it's Bob The Grocer who got killed. For a presidential assassination, there are just too many unlikely and impossible conclusions and conjectures to ignore, unless the unlikely and impossible conclusions fit the scenario one wishes to believe. I think it's fair to claim that 98% of the American people really don't want to believe that their own government would murder its leader.

There was only one person with the motive (Vietnam and a deep DEEP hatred for the Kennedys), the ruthless attitude, and the power to pull off a coverup, and he's dead.

The official story is unbelievable and irrational. Oswald claimed he was a patsy. Oswald's assassin had this to say (new window, WMV format video of Ruby).

Believe whatever suits your purpose.
 
2010-08-25 08:27:04 PM
Program Highlights Include: Former CIA director Allen Dulles' presence in Dallas in October of 1963, supposedly to promote a book; the CIA's curious hiring of another man named George Bush, quite possibly to distract from a memo referring to a "George Bush" of the CIA who was monitoring anti Castro Cuban reaction to Kennedy's killing; synopsis of the actions of the Kennedy administration that infuriated the interests who committed the assassination; General D.H. Byrd, Kennedy foe, head of the Civil Air Patrol (in which cadet Lee Harvey Oswald met David Ferrie) and owner of the building from which Oswald supposedly fired the fatal shot; Byrd's removal of the window from which Oswald supposedly fired the fatal shot and his [Byrd's] subsequent reassembly of the window at his private residence; Abraham Zapruder's association with De Mohrenschild's wife and his participation on Henry Neil Mallon's Dallas World Affairs Council; Dallas Mayor Earle Cabell, brother of General C.P. Cabell, fired by JFK (along with Allan Dulles); Prescott Bush's hatred of JFK, whom he "never forgave" for policy indiscretions; Prescott Bush's relationship with Allen Dulles; Richard Nixon's curious presence in Dallas on 11/22/1963, courtesy of the Pepsi Cola company; the interests of the cola bottlers in Cuban affairs (deriving from Cuba's importance in the sugar business.)

Audio for your listening pleasure.
 
2010-08-25 08:27:16 PM
I do remember this theory by no less an attorney:

"In October 1981, with Marina's support, Oswald's grave was opened to test a theory propounded by writer Michael Eddowes: that during Oswald's stay in the Soviet Union he was replaced with a Soviet double; that it was this double, not Oswald, who killed Kennedy and who is buried in Oswald's grave; and that the exhumed remains would therefore not exhibit a surgical scar Oswald was known to carry. However, dental records positively identified the exhumed corpse as Oswald's, and the scar was present."

A classic case of believing what ain't so.

/wiki ctrl c/ctrl v
 
2010-08-25 08:43:57 PM
flagrante: Former CIA director Allen Dulles' presence in Dallas in October of 1963, supposedly to promote a book; the CIA's curious hiring of another man named George Bush, quite possibly to distract from a memo referring to a "George Bush" of the CIA who was monitoring anti Castro Cuban reaction to Kennedy's killing; synopsis of the actions of the Kennedy administration that infuriated the interests who committed the assassination; General D.H. Byrd, Kennedy foe, head of the Civil Air Patrol (in which cadet Lee Harvey Oswald met David Ferrie) and owner of the building from which Oswald supposedly fired the fatal shot; Byrd's removal of the window from which Oswald supposedly fired the fatal shot and his [Byrd's] subsequent reassembly of the window at his private residence; Abraham Zapruder's association with De Mohrenschild's wife and his participation on Henry Neil Mallon's Dallas World Affairs Council; Dallas Mayor Earle Cabell, brother of General C.P. Cabell, fired by JFK (along with Allan Dulles); Prescott Bush's hatred of JFK, whom he "never forgave" for policy indiscretions; Prescott Bush's relationship with Allen Dulles; Richard Nixon's curious presence in Dallas on 11/22/1963, courtesy of the Pepsi Cola company; the interests of the cola bottlers in Cuban affairs (deriving from Cuba's importance in the sugar business.)

all of these "curious" occurrences are explainable simply by hindsight and confirmation bias.

high-falootin' people have lots of connections, which are amplified by their high-falootin' interests (i.e., power, fame, money, etc). people could indeed stand to profit from kennedy's death, but that does not mean they would actively bring about his death (i.e., a high-risk albeit high-reward scenario). rather, if there was any capitalization at all after kennedy's death, they were off the hook thanks to oswald. their get theirs and oswald goes down... but that doesn't make oswald a patsy. it makes them (potentially) opportunists.

in short, those are simply simultaneous occurrences.
 
2010-08-25 09:06:16 PM
moonage daydream: When will conspiracy lovers realize that calling people "sheep" isn't going to "wake them up" anytime soon?

Ah, unless you count the sheep. Then..er...wut?
 
2010-08-25 09:06:36 PM
Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I've changed my mind, I think the hijackers acted alone. Everything else is a bizarre coincidence.

Translation: "I don't like discussing my own derp."
 
2010-08-25 09:06:50 PM
Giblet: Have you actually fired a bolt action rifle?

Har Har, I got muh twunty two in mah back yahd rit now!

If you have only 8 seconds from the first shot, and your first shot misses, there's no way in hell those following shots will hit anything.

Speak for yourself bro. That's the exact type of thing you train for. And a silhouette size target at 100 yards is an easy shot, yes the head shot was lucky. His shot pattern was probably about 2 feet around the top center of Kennedy's back.

So you have 2 foot size target target at less than 100 yards and you can't hit that with 3 shots and a bolt action with a standard scope? If you're answer is no then you're just a terrible shot.

If your answer is yes then you can re-create the Oswald shot. Maybe not on your first attempt, but you can prove that Oswald could have done it.

I'm not claiming to be a sniper and I can't make a headshot on command, but I can recognize a plausible shot when I see one. I've seen alot more dazzling than this.

magic bullet...

uggh..

Please watch this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9RCX3RdVHqo

The forensics involved pretty much confirm all shots were taken from the position of Oswald.

Hey man, this isn't the 1980s anymore where one might have to pour through thousands of documents and read through hundreds of published materials on the matter. Technology has come up to speed, we have pretty reenactments and scientific diagrams that any idiot can understand, it's available, it's out there, it's conclusive, you don't have any excuse to bring up things that were debunked in the 1970s.

Everything else is just derp.

If you have an allegation, bring forth a plausible, factual, scenario. Not if this "I'm just asking questions" stuff. A scientific explanation that jives with the facts.

Because a scientific analysis shows pretty conclusively that the shots had to have originated from the position of Oswald. And it's pretty likely shot that Oswald could have taken.

That doesn't mean he did. But that is what we know so far, and it's pretty easy to tie the two togethor.

Perhaps he had a partner? Perhaps somebody took the shots from the schoolbook depository and Oswald was actually just eating lunch? Why did he flee and kill officer tippit?

I don't know the answer to these questions: The burden is on YOU to find a factually accurate and plausible scenario that can challenge the mainstream paradigm. And that is where the conspiracy theorists fail.
 
2010-08-25 09:08:14 PM
tb tibbles: I do remember this theory by no less an attorney:

"In October 1981, with Marina's support, Oswald's grave was opened to test a theory propounded by writer Michael Eddowes: that during Oswald's stay in the Soviet Union he was replaced with a Soviet double; that it was this double, not Oswald, who killed Kennedy and who is buried in Oswald's grave; and that the exhumed remains would therefore not exhibit a surgical scar Oswald was known to carry. However, dental records positively identified the exhumed corpse as Oswald's, and the scar was present."

A classic case of believing what ain't so.

/wiki ctrl c/ctrl v


Yeah, I would definitely say that duplicating a scar or other such identifying marks would be way out of the league of Soviet work.
 
2010-08-25 09:37:49 PM
i38.tinypic.com
 
2010-08-25 09:41:57 PM
Giblet: chu2dogg: Giblet: The point is that Marksman medals were practically given to anyone who wanted one, and often meant that the recipient was totally incompetent with a firearm. That's why the Navy stopped giving them out. It was virtually a sign that said "I CAN'T SHOOT".

Didn't he get a sharp shooter later though? And he could have also done most of his training outside of the military. For example, I probably fired less than 100 hundred rounds in basic training, and yes I shot marksman. It wasn't until later I got the chance to really shoot, and in fact, it wasn't until deployment would I be able to just shoot mag after mag on my own (had to get rid of the old ammo in supply every month or so). I shot expert afterwards consistently.

Furthermore, it is NOT the most difficult shot to make and has been recreated every time. What they always get wrong after the fact is, that beforehand he didn't HAVE to get a hit in 1 in 3 shots. He very well could have failed. So if another shooter making the shot only had a 1 in 10 sucess rate, that means Oswald had around 33% success rate going in to his mission. Not exactly unfathomable. (And this is just a theoretical speaking and not sure my math is even right, don't know the actual numbers)

In short, he got lucky. It happens in real life. It's not a wild-ass Robin Hood splitting an arrow with another arrow shot. It's a mediumly challenging shot for a medium shooter who happened to get it right.


Have you actually fired a bolt action rifle?

If you have only 8 seconds from the first shot, and your first shot misses, there's no way in hell those following shots will hit anything. That first shot is the only one where you stand a chance of hitting what you're aiming at because you have time to line up the shot and calculate corrections for range and windage.

Then there's the magic bullet, the exit wound on Oswald's side of the target's head, and the perfectly-shaped bullet that conveniently fell out of Kennedy onto the EMT gurney, missed during the original examination. The original examining doctor - an experienced ER doctor - noted an entry wound in the throat with an exit wound at the back of the head. There is no mention of the neck entry wound by the one questionably-skilled doctor and his team of politicians who took over the official examination.

One ultra-lucky occurrence can be ignored if it's Bob The Grocer who got killed. For a presidential assassination, there are just too many unlikely and impossible conclusions and conjectures to ignore, unless the unlikely and impossible conclusions fit the scenario one wishes to believe. I think it's fair to claim that 98% of the American people really don't want to believe that their own government would murder its leader.

There was only one person with the motive (Vietnam and a deep DEEP hatred for the Kennedys), the ruthless attitude, and the power to pull off a coverup, and he's dead.

The official story is unbelievable and irrational. Oswald claimed he was a patsy. Oswald's assassin had this to say (new window, WMV format video of Ruby).

Believe whatever suits your purpose.


CE399 isn't "magic" or "perfectly shaped" at all; it has a slight curve in it and some lead extrudes from its base. It had therefore hit something, or someone, before it was found at Parkland Hospital by Darrell Tomlinson. It was also ballistically matched to the C2766 Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that Oswald quite falsely denied owning. Google "CE 399."

The ER doctor never turned the President onto his stomach, so he never saw the entrance wound on the right side of the back of the President's neck near the shoulder.

I think your assertion about a miss from a first shot from a bolt-action rifle precluding any further hits is conjecture. What I believe Oswald did was "find the range."

The bullet that struck the President on the upper right rear of his head caused his head to snap to the left on impact, so of course the corresponding exit wound would be on the right front of his head. Have a look at the Zapruder film.

I would never exclude the possibility that there have been people in the US government who might want to murder a President. But that's not what happened to President Kennedy.

Going back to a point I made earlier on this page, what if the two men who tried to kill Harry Truman had succeeded? Would we all still be wearing out our keyboards discussing the "conspiracy and coverup" of the Truman assassination? Collazo and Torresola didn't kill their target, though, so nobody ever goes around accusing them of being agents of the KGB, or the CIA, or the Mob, or whatever.
 
2010-08-25 09:53:03 PM
Giblet: Have you actually fired a bolt action rifle?

If you have only 8 seconds from the first shot, and your first shot misses, there's no way in hell those following shots will hit anything.


There is no excuse for any rational person to make this statement. The statement does however illustrate nicely the mindset of conspiracy theorists.

The first shot gives you a reference to adjust your aim and get a closer on the next shot. It is exactly how Oswald would have been trained. The shots he fired were not easy but they were also not that unreasonable for his skill and the weapon he used. The fact that CTs use it as such concrete evidence proves that their reasoning is irrational.
 
2010-08-25 10:06:57 PM
OH I'M SHOCKED AND SURPRISED, FOR YOU SEE I HAVE NO BRAIN!
 
2010-08-25 10:11:22 PM
Torok: Giblet: Have you actually fired a bolt action rifle?

If you have only 8 seconds from the first shot, and your first shot misses, there's no way in hell those following shots will hit anything.

There is no excuse for any rational person to make this statement. The statement does however illustrate nicely the mindset of conspiracy theorists.

The first shot gives you a reference to adjust your aim and get a closer on the next shot. It is exactly how Oswald would have been trained. The shots he fired were not easy but they were also not that unreasonable for his skill and the weapon he used. The fact that CTs use it as such concrete evidence proves that their reasoning is irrational.



What the hell are you talking about?

What "reference" do you get at that range with iron sights, other than "Rats. It looks like that farker's still waving. I guess I missed."

Even with a 4X50 scope you wouldn't be able to see where the bullet hit at that range. "Reference"? Right, Cubby...

You've never even seen a crayon drawing of a bolt action rifle.
 
2010-08-25 10:15:57 PM
Elderly man bordering on senility and running low on retirement funds decides to support controversial theory in well known case.

Yep, not ulterior motives or mental confusion there at all...
 
2010-08-25 10:30:16 PM
Giblet: Torok: Giblet: Have you actually fired a bolt action rifle?

If you have only 8 seconds from the first shot, and your first shot misses, there's no way in hell those following shots will hit anything.

There is no excuse for any rational person to make this statement. The statement does however illustrate nicely the mindset of conspiracy theorists.

The first shot gives you a reference to adjust your aim and get a closer on the next shot. It is exactly how Oswald would have been trained. The shots he fired were not easy but they were also not that unreasonable for his skill and the weapon he used. The fact that CTs use it as such concrete evidence proves that their reasoning is irrational.


What the hell are you talking about?

What "reference" do you get at that range with iron sights, other than "Rats. It looks like that farker's still waving. I guess I missed."

Even with a 4X50 scope you wouldn't be able to see where the bullet hit at that range. "Reference"? Right, Cubby...

You've never even seen a crayon drawing of a bolt action rifle.


You would be able to see where it hit the pavement and kicked up debris. Even if that wasn't the case the second shot did hit Kennedy and would have indicated a good trajectory.

I was speaking more to your irrational belief that it was impossible to hit after one miss.

The ballistics prove the shots came from the book depository and pointed directly to the location of Oswald's rifle left on the sixth floor with his fingerprints on it. If Oswald didn't do it then it had to be a big coincidence that he murdered a police officer later that day.
 
2010-08-25 10:42:00 PM
tirob: Going back to a point I made earlier on this page, what if the two men who tried to kill Harry Truman had succeeded? Would we all still be wearing out our keyboards discussing the "conspiracy and coverup" of the Truman assassination? Collazo and Torresola didn't kill their target, though, so nobody ever goes around accusing them of being agents of the KGB, or the CIA, or the Mob, or whatever.


You haven't looked at where Oswald was relative to the motorcade. He was shooting from behind and off to the limo's right. If Oswald had hit the left side of the president's head, the exit wound would have been in his front-left jaw.

The exit wound was centered on the back of Kennedy's head (I can't post the picture w/o getting the penalty box). If you've shot people or animals before, you know that couldn't happen from any shot coming from the book repository.

The "magic bullet" or "single bullet" theory refers to the Warren commission's nomadic bullet that struck Kennedy and Connally. The commission determined that the bullet turned in flight.

3.bp.blogspot.com

Note: According to the investigation that single bullet, shown above, caused all of Kennedy's and Connally's wounds. For the bullet to leap from Connally's leg back to JFK so it could appear on the gurney is just one of life's many mysteries.

There is an excellent computer recreation on YouTube that demonstrates how the bullet actually followed a straight line. hitting Kennedy and Connally, with overlays from the Zapruder film. That recreation also requires that there be more than one bullet since it requires that Kennedy be hit in the right shoulder, exiting to the right of his sternum.
 
2010-08-25 10:49:39 PM
chu2dogg: cybernia: Well...here's the thing about that. The people who supposedly showed it could be done weren't under any pressure. So, you have a guy in a sniper's nest, most likely nervous as hell, and he manages those shots. Now, this is a guy who allegedly tried to kill General Walker, a stationary target, at a lesser distance with the same gun and missed.

Your reasonings flawed. The people recreating it HAVE to have a headshot and HAVE to have it within 3 shots, and HAVE to have it within x seconds from start to finish.

Oswald didn't have those constraints, he could have done it anyway he wanted to.

Sure, he probably got a lucky shot. Lucky as in he got a headshot. If he was going in for, then yeah, maybe, but to him it was a lucky shot that poses somewhat of a mild challenge to recreate.

He had a full silhouette to shoot at from within 100 yards, and 3 shots to hit him. I don't care what kind rifle you give me I'll be able do that easy.


He did have time constraints. he didn't have all the time in the world. And if you read interviews with those who were in the marines with him, they remember him as a lousy shot. And, again, you have to factor in nerves unless he was a sociopath.

Finally, I remember reading some time ago that the shooters doing the re-enactments had more than one chance at re-creating it. Not one of them was able to do it on the first try.

Sorry, he may have been one of the shooters, but he wasn't the one that killed him.
 
2010-08-25 10:51:42 PM
ZipSplat: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I've changed my mind, I think the hijackers acted alone. Everything else is a bizarre coincidence.

Translation: "I don't like discussing my own derp."


What "derp" would that be?
 
2010-08-25 10:57:47 PM
Giblet: tirob: Going back to a point I made earlier on this page, what if the two men who tried to kill Harry Truman had succeeded? Would we all still be wearing out our keyboards discussing the "conspiracy and coverup" of the Truman assassination? Collazo and Torresola didn't kill their target, though, so nobody ever goes around accusing them of being agents of the KGB, or the CIA, or the Mob, or whatever.


You haven't looked at where Oswald was relative to the motorcade. He was shooting from behind and off to the limo's right. If Oswald had hit the left side of the president's head, the exit wound would have been in his front-left jaw.

The exit wound was centered on the back of Kennedy's head (I can't post the picture w/o getting the penalty box). If you've shot people or animals before, you know that couldn't happen from any shot coming from the book repository.

The "magic bullet" or "single bullet" theory refers to the Warren commission's nomadic bullet that struck Kennedy and Connally. The commission determined that the bullet turned in flight.



Note: According to the investigation that single bullet, shown above, caused all of Kennedy's and Connally's wounds. For the bullet to leap from Connally's leg back to JFK so it could appear on the gurney is just one of life's many mysteries.

There is an excellent computer recreation on YouTube that demonstrates how the bullet actually followed a straight line. hitting Kennedy and Connally, with overlays from the Zapruder film. That recreation also requires that there be more than one bullet since it requires that Kennedy be hit in the right shoulder, exiting to the right of his sternum.


This is a great post. It illustrates my earlier argument about the irrationality of Giblet. You will notice that in his statement in bold and the graphic he posted that he vastly over exaggerates how far the the right the shot came from. It was in fact almost from directly behind. He also moved Connally half off the side of his seat and made him face directly forward contradicting the Zapruder film. The reality is closer to this graphic...

frankwarner.typepad.com
 
2010-08-25 11:26:29 PM
Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: ZipSplat: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: I've changed my mind, I think the hijackers acted alone. Everything else is a bizarre coincidence.

Translation: "I don't like discussing my own derp."

What "derp" would that be?


Exactly.
 
2010-08-25 11:33:24 PM
Giblet: tirob: Going back to a point I made earlier on this page, what if the two men who tried to kill Harry Truman had succeeded? Would we all still be wearing out our keyboards discussing the "conspiracy and coverup" of the Truman assassination? Collazo and Torresola didn't kill their target, though, so nobody ever goes around accusing them of being agents of the KGB, or the CIA, or the Mob, or whatever.


You haven't looked at where Oswald was relative to the motorcade. He was shooting from behind and off to the limo's right. If Oswald had hit the left side of the president's head, the exit wound would have been in his front-left jaw.

The exit wound was centered on the back of Kennedy's head (I can't post the picture w/o getting the penalty box). If you've shot people or animals before, you know that couldn't happen from any shot coming from the book repository.

The "magic bullet" or "single bullet" theory refers to the Warren commission's nomadic bullet that struck Kennedy and Connally. The commission determined that the bullet turned in flight.



Note: According to the investigation that single bullet, shown above, caused all of Kennedy's and Connally's wounds. For the bullet to leap from Connally's leg back to JFK so it could appear on the gurney is just one of life's many mysteries.

There is an excellent computer recreation on YouTube that demonstrates how the bullet actually followed a straight line. hitting Kennedy and Connally, with overlays from the Zapruder film. That recreation also requires that there be more than one bullet since it requires that Kennedy be hit in the right shoulder, exiting to the right of his sternum.


Look at the Zapruder film, frames 320-325 (the head shot was at frames 312/13), as well as the Nix film. Both show that the back of the President's head was intact; i.e. that there was no exit wound there. The ER doctor's observation at Parkland was, I suggest to you, by necessity cursory given the exigent circumstances under which he was working.

I think that Torok's graphic answers your point about the single bullet theory, although I would add that the jump seat Connally occupied was lower than the bench seat where the President was. I myself would have considered it suspicious if the bullet that passed through the President's neck had *not* hit Connally, given the seating configuration in the limousine.

Check out frames 227-230 of the Zapruder movie. I am pretty sure that these frames show when the bullet hit the President and the Governor. At frames 228/229, the President pitches forward and his right elbow flies up (probably because of trauma to the spine); at 230, the Governor grimaces. Connally himself said he was hit at or about frame 230.
 
2010-08-25 11:39:13 PM
@ Giblet: Link to Z-film frame by frame:

http://assassinationresearch.com/zfilm/
 
2010-08-25 11:39:26 PM
One of Adams first assignments was investigating an extreme right radical, with connections to the States Rights Party and KKK named Joseph Adams Milteer. "He was reportedly one of most violent men in the country," said Adams.

I think I've seen this movie, it turns out the FBI agent is actually the guy he says he was hunting
 
2010-08-25 11:47:18 PM
Cat Food Sandwiches: Exactly. Plus, Oswald was seen carrying a rifle shaped package into the SBD, and there were 3 spent shells on the 6th floor that matched the rifle, which had his palm print on it. The dude did it.

None of the officers from Dallas PD or Sheriff's Office identified the "assassination rifle" as the weapon they found in the depository; what they all saw was a different weapon.

And then there were the tests that proved that Oswald had not fired a gun that day....
 
2010-08-25 11:51:43 PM
I have a small penis.
 
2010-08-26 12:08:09 AM
clevershark: Reynolds wrap is cheap, this is the good stuff:

Google search: Alcan, Ootsa

/bastards
 
2010-08-26 12:28:49 AM
Melquiades: Cat Food Sandwiches: Exactly. Plus, Oswald was seen carrying a rifle shaped package into the SBD, and there were 3 spent shells on the 6th floor that matched the rifle, which had his palm print on it. The dude did it.

None of the officers from Dallas PD or Sheriff's Office identified the "assassination rifle" as the weapon they found in the depository; what they all saw was a different weapon.

And then there were the tests that proved that Oswald had not fired a gun that day....


He sure tried to fire his pistol at Patrolman Nick McDonald in the Texas Theater. Don't know if it was necessary to "test" for that, though.
 
2010-08-26 12:31:49 AM
Tyranicle: I have a small penis.

Compared to what?
 
2010-08-26 12:51:30 AM
Melquiades:
And then there were the tests that proved that Oswald had not fired a gun that day....


Wrong.

There is no test that can prove that someone did NOT fire a gun. No test can even prove conclusively that they did fire a gun. They can test for the presence of gun powder residue but it doesn't prove that they pulled the trigger.

Four eye witnesses picked Oswald out of a line up after witnessing him shoot and kill officer J. D. Tippit with a revolver.
 
2010-08-26 01:06:48 AM
Torok: Giblet: tirob: Going back to a point I made earlier on this page, what if the two men who tried to kill Harry Truman had succeeded? Would we all still be wearing out our keyboards discussing the "conspiracy and coverup" of the Truman assassination? Collazo and Torresola didn't kill their target, though, so nobody ever goes around accusing them of being agents of the KGB, or the CIA, or the Mob, or whatever.


You haven't looked at where Oswald was relative to the motorcade. He was shooting from behind and off to the limo's right. If Oswald had hit the left side of the president's head, the exit wound would have been in his front-left jaw.

The exit wound was centered on the back of Kennedy's head (I can't post the picture w/o getting the penalty box). If you've shot people or animals before, you know that couldn't happen from any shot coming from the book repository.

The "magic bullet" or "single bullet" theory refers to the Warren commission's nomadic bullet that struck Kennedy and Connally. The commission determined that the bullet turned in flight.



Note: According to the investigation that single bullet, shown above, caused all of Kennedy's and Connally's wounds. For the bullet to leap from Connally's leg back to JFK so it could appear on the gurney is just one of life's many mysteries.

There is an excellent computer recreation on YouTube that demonstrates how the bullet actually followed a straight line. hitting Kennedy and Connally, with overlays from the Zapruder film. That recreation also requires that there be more than one bullet since it requires that Kennedy be hit in the right shoulder, exiting to the right of his sternum.

This is a great post. It illustrates my earlier argument about the irrationality of Giblet. You will notice that in his statement in bold and the graphic he posted that he vastly over exaggerates how far the the right the shot came from. It was in fact almost from directly behind. He also moved Connally half off the side of his seat and made him face directly forward contradicting the Zapruder film. The reality is closer to this graphic...


Thank you for that.
I got pissed when I saw Giblet's graphic. Connely was sitting on a jumpseat, so he was lower and more to the center of the limo.
Giblet's graphic looks like Zapruder is the one that shot Kennedy.
 
2010-08-26 01:29:56 AM
Giblet:
The official story is unbelievable and irrational. Oswald claimed he was a patsy. Oswald's assassin had this to say (new window, WMV format video of Ruby).


Is there a transcript of this somewhere?
 
Displayed 50 of 442 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report