Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 11/20/2003 5:53:36 PM EDT
Is anyone else watching the Kennedy Assassination documentary on ABC right now and if so, what do you think of it?
Link Posted: 11/20/2003 6:05:49 PM EDT
In a word....BULLSHIT!
Mark Twain was right, there are lies, damn lies, and there are statistics. The shooting reinaction assumes too much, like the seating positions of two people based on fuzzy 40 year old movies. It's too bad more people will see this show than the History Channels 3 evenings of coverage. I still think Oswald was a patsy...
What do you think? ==Bob
Link Posted: 11/20/2003 6:08:32 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/20/2003 6:17:03 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/20/2003 7:18:20 PM EDT
Great link, ETH.

Seeing the position of the President's head, it is easier to understand the exit wound in relation to the angle of shot. Most all of the conspiracy theorist crap I have seen presented a very biased and unscientific assessment of the data. A damn fine shot by Oswald by the way, but not impossible. Even a marksman in the Marines is a deadly shot and I have no doubt he practiced quite a bit to get ready for his "mission". Certainly, I would say that I am a better shot now than when I was a Marine and I was good then.

Link Posted: 11/20/2003 10:27:23 PM EDT
Unsolved History on the Discovery Channel last night pretty much said the evidence points to Oswald as well. Great Show BTW.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 4:37:55 AM EDT
I don't think Oswald was a patsy, patsy's don't go shooting at generals and presidents...his military training and "sharpshooter" skill level proves to me that he was the rifleman that day. He had a bolt-action military rifle with a scope. Anyone with some basic rifle shooting skills could have blown away the president. Its not that difficult like some people want us to believe.


Link Posted: 11/21/2003 4:42:54 AM EDT

In a word....BULLSHIT!

Yes, your post is BULLSHIT. Now straighten up your foil hat, drink your Kool-Aid, and go back to recess.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 4:42:57 AM EDT
i think if any of you had ever seen or shot a Carcano you'd know that oswald is a patsy. i have the nicest carcano ive ever seen and its such a rickety piece of shit i could never make that shot. im not awesome or anything but im a USMC Expert rifleman and i compete regulary. i think im a better shot than oswald and i think my Carcano is in better shape than oswalds. and lets not forget the ballsitics of the carcano round...we arent talking about a high-speed, low drag tack driver here. if i were to guess i'd put it on par with a 7.62x39
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 4:54:02 AM EDT

i think if any of you had ever seen or shot a Carcano you'd know that oswald is a patsy. i have the nicest carcano ive ever seen and its such a rickety piece of shit i could never make that shot.

*SIGH* If you've ever been to Dealey Plaza and seen the distance at which the shot was made, you'd know it was a piece of cake.

If there was this VAST conspiracy that was brave enough to take down a U.S. President in broad daylight, IN PUBLIC, then of whom should they be afraid? Sorry, Foil Hatters, your conspiracy story don't hold water.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 5:02:21 AM EDT

Originally Posted By DvlDog:
i think if any of you had ever seen or shot a Carcano you'd know that oswald is a patsy. i have the nicest carcano ive ever seen and its such a rickety piece of shit i could never make that shot. im not awesome or anything but im a USMC Expert rifleman and i compete regulary. i think im a better shot than oswald and i think my Carcano is in better shape than oswalds. and lets not forget the ballsitics of the carcano round...we arent talking about a high-speed, low drag tack driver here. if i were to guess i'd put it on par with a 7.62x39




i agree with you, i had a carcano, and i also heard on one of the history channel parts that the scope was misaligned, lbj was involved
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 6:23:25 AM EDT
88 yards through foilage (a tree) on a moving target with a misaligned scope. 3 shots in 5.6 seconds. It's doable. Bought that Oliver Stone revisionism film JFK, love this conspiracy stuff. Tin Foil Hat on!
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 6:31:58 AM EDT
Frankly, I don't know. The shot is doable, but I think it's questionable because of the rifle and scope used. I doubt we'll ever know for sure.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 7:14:46 AM EDT
At 88 yards I could have taken him out with an el cheapo Century Arms SAR1 using my IRON sights for heavens sake! Why do people think its so dam impossible??? 88 yards ain't shit to cap somebody and especially if you're shooting from an elevated position!!!


C'mon, OSWALD was a military trained soldier. He attained the level of "sharpshooter" and he knew his rifle better than most of yous!

Link Posted: 11/21/2003 7:48:36 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 8:13:49 AM EDT
Even with a misaligned scope, or if you concede that Oswald wasn't that great a shot, the head shot could just as easily have been dumb luck.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 8:14:54 AM EDT
I think a lot of the disbelief is how could some loser, like Lee Oswald, manage to kill the President, someone who managed to survive WWII combat and Addison's Disease, without help?

The Kennedy family's obsession with privacy, the various bureaucrats who tried to cover their butts in the wake of the assassination, and the now-primitive forensics of 1963 have all fueled a conspiracy that was never there.

If there was a conspiracy that was BOLD enough to take down a U.S. President in a public setting, why would they hide? Who or whom should the conspiracy fear? Everyone who buys into that bullshit overlooks that.

The fact is, Presidential security in 1963 was NOTHING compared to today. Ever been around the President? You can't sneeze within a mile of the man without the Secret Service making a note of it.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 8:35:49 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2003 8:42:19 AM EDT by wiggy762]
The jury is out AFAIAC. The main points NOT addressed by the ABC program were these:

1. The fuzzy Polaroid showing the possibility of a gun team on the grassy knoll 1/6 of a second prior to the fatal shot.
2. The sworn testimony of the Army PFC that a shot came from his right rear. He was standing on the grassy knoll, just inside the fence. He had just finished AIT and the live fire portion and was familiar with the sounds of rifle fire at close range.
3. The sworn testimony of the deaf/mute that SAW 'badgeman' and a railroad worker at the fence on the knoll, then saw the 'badgeman' toss a rfle to the railroad worker and then leave.
4. The sworn testimony of the man standing under the train overpass, he was hit with debris or a richochet from a shot fired fromt he depository. The impact site was found on a street curb and was tested spectrograpically.....but the FBI threw away the findings "to save space".

My personal take is this:

Oswald is in the 6th floor of the Depository and takes the first shot at about frame 160 of the Zapruder film, this shot is a complete miss. This is an accepted part of the story.

Oswald then takes shot #2 and hits Pres. Kennedy in the mid-back and exits the throat then striking Connally(sp) in the right upper back and exiting under his right nipple then lodging in his thigh. This is the shot referred to the 'magic bullet', but review of Zapruder frames with computer enhancement indicates that Connally(sp) heard the first shot that had come from his back right and responds by whipping his head and upper body around to the right. This movement together with the fact that he was riding in a jump seat that was lower and inboard of the President makes the bullet path make sense. This is also widely accepted.

Oswald then takes shot #3 and it is a clean miss. The bullet strikes the concrete curb streetside almost to the railroad overpass and either a ricochet bullet fragment or a debris fragment hit the man discussed in #4 above cutting his cheek.

Almost simultaneous to the final shot from Oswald, a shot is taken from the grassy knoll, behind the fence, by an individual that over 50 people in Dealy Plaza identified as 'badgeman' because he was wearing a police type uniform. This shot hits Pres. Kennedy in the front of the head over his right eye and causes a dramatic expulsion of most of the brain matter through a HUGE exit wound in the right rear of the skull. This expulsion of brain matter is what Jackie is seen crawling after as she moves to the rear of the car. The Secret Service agent seen climbing on the back of the limo has stated that there were huge amounts of blood, brain matter, hair and skull tissue on the trunk of the limo after the kill shot.

Now, to all of the nay-sayers here, let's just deal with that effluent on the trunk. How did it get there if the shot was from behind? How did it get there if the only wound to the President's head was a small entrance wound to the rear right occiput as they would have s believe? Was it someone else's brain matter? How is it there if the majority of the ejecta was sent foreward as per ETH'snegative picture website?
Short answer....it could not have been there if these things happened, so since the brain matter, hair and skull bits were there on the trunk, on Jackie's clothing and face, the shot must have come from the front right.

'Badgeman' and his partner the railroad worker were the backup team in case Oswald missed. Oswald knew nothing about them, they were just insurance.



BTW, to those that buy into the 88 yard distance and think that the shots Oswald took were pretty easy......let's look at the facts.
1. The linear distance from the depository building (ground floor) to the limo at the time of the first shot was 88 yards(264ft), but this is only one leg of a right triangle. If the assumption is made that each story in the Texas School Book Depository is 10 feet, the the other leg is 53ft(6 floors ground floor being 1st floor plus 3 ft for the window sill). Using the Pythagorean Theorym, the hypotenuse (actual shooting distance) was 184 yards! Kinda tough shot now, huh. I may be a little rusty on the calculations, any Geometry teachers outhere may be able to tighten up my numbers a bit, but you get the jist of it.....further than 88 yards....for the FIRST SHOT.

Now wrap your minds around the often looked over fact that the limo was moving at about 25 mph (36.6 ft per second) away from Oswald. This fact makes shot #2 that hits Pres. Kennedy and Connally(sp) a damn fine shot because the limo is now more than 200 yards from Oswald's perch and still a significant downward angle.

And then we have the 3rd shot...a clean miss beacuse Oswald is shooting at a moving head, in a car traveling 25 mph, at ranges over 250 yards. The accepted time elapsed from 1st shot to last shot is 8.4 seconds and at 36.6 ft per second of travel of the limo by the last shot, the limo was an additional 102 yards away from Oswald! That makes the total distance at the end of the shhoting at 286 yards.

This traveling target distance factor is often overlooked in the boasts of "I could make that shot" and other such nonsense. Think about it, the final shot from Oswald is the one that is accepted to have killed Pres. Kennedy and by the admittedly rough calculations I did here, that distance was AT LEAST 286 yards and possibly more. How many here could make that shot with a precision weapon with quality glass against a STATIONARY target? Now have that target be below your bench and moving at 25 mph and shrink the target down to a human head....now how many could make it? Now trade in that quality precision weapon for a milsurp carbine with a mis-aligned (from the Warren Commission) 4 power scope...how many could make that shot now?


Bottom line, Oswald was one for three and did not kill anyone.


BTW, I have been to Dealey Plaza and have paced off the distances and stood in the spots.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 8:40:07 AM EDT

Originally Posted By EricTheHun:
"Lee Harvey Oswald, driven by his own twisted and impenetrable furies, was the only assassin at Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. To say otherwise, in light of the overwhelming evidence, is to absolve a man with blood on his hands, and mock the President he killed."

~ Gerald Posner, Case Closed

Eric The(My$0.02)Hun



Amen. Great book! My only regret is having read it so long ago that I remember precisely none of it.

I'll have to dig it out after the divorce and give it a second read...
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 8:42:31 AM EDT

Bottom line, Oswald was one for three and did not kill anyone.

Yeah, uh-huh. Just from whom are the "conspirators" hiding?
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 8:44:14 AM EDT


Not only was the "Magic Bullet" magic but it was also in 'pristine' condition WHEN FOUND ON THE GURNEY at Parkland Hospital. Not found in Kennedy's body mind you but on a gurney in the hall way. Jack Ruby was at the hospital and spoke with a Dallas newsman. Likely just coincidence. (NOT !) Course the FBI told the Dallas newsman that he was confused and that he had seen Ruby at the Dallas PD.

That was one helluva bullet for anytime much less that time. The "Magic Bullet" hit a couple of people, one twice, and didn't shed any weight.

5sub
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 8:47:16 AM EDT

Jack Ruby was at the hospital and spoke with a Dallas newsman. Likely just coincidence. (NOT !) Course the FBI told the Dallas newsman that he was confused and that he had seen Ruby at the Dallas PD.

The big problem with Jack Ruby conspiracies are the fact that he was too much of a loudmouth to ever keep a secret, hence his LACK of "underworld" connections, and that he was slightly mentally ill.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:01:34 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:

Jack Ruby was at the hospital and spoke with a Dallas newsman. Likely just coincidence. (NOT !) Course the FBI told the Dallas newsman that he was confused and that he had seen Ruby at the Dallas PD.

The big problem with Jack Ruby conspiracies are the fact that he was too much of a loudmouth to ever keep a secret, hence his LACK of "underworld" connections, and that he was slightly mentally ill.



I've seen the Dallas newsman interviewed a couple of times on TV. He knew Jack Ruby from before and states he definitely talked with him at Parkland. No conspiracy involved here.

Jack Ruby WAS pretty well connected to both Chicago and New Orleans.

None of this answers the question of 'WHY' the "Magic Bullet" didn't deform or shed weight.

5sub
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:03:25 AM EDT
I will say one thing: I really feel sorry for Jackie Kennedy...

To see your husband blown away by a head shot that close to your own face.....

Poor thing must have had nightmares 'til the day she died...

Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:13:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2003 9:20:56 AM EDT by Jim_Dandy]

I've seen the Dallas newsman interviewed a couple of times on TV. He knew Jack Ruby from before and states he definitely talked with him at Parkland. No conspiracy involved here.

Well, he DIDN'T talk to Jack Ruby at the hospital. That's been proven false many, many times over the years. In fact, investigators have been able to account for Ruby's whereabouts almost every single second from the time of the assassination, all of the way up to shooting Oswald on the following Sunday.


Jack Ruby WAS pretty well connected to both Chicago and New Orleans.

'Fraid not. Italian organized crime wanted absolutely nothing to do with him and never shared any association.


None of this answers the question of 'WHY' the "Magic Bullet" didn't deform or shed weight.

It DID deform and fragment and none of this conspiracy answers the question of whom should a conspiracy this BIG fear? No one wants to answer that.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:18:22 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:
I will say one thing: I really feel sorry for Jackie Kennedy...

To see your husband blown away by a head shot that close to your own face.....

Poor thing must have had nightmares 'til the day she died...




Yeah, she had a tough life. My wife and I were just talking about that. She must have feared for herself and her children constanly as well.

There is a price to be paid for absolute power.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:19:32 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:

I've seen the Dallas newsman interviewed a couple of times on TV. He knew Jack Ruby from before and states he definitely talked with him at Parkland. No conspiracy involved here.

Well, he DIDN'T talk to Jack Ruby at the hospital. That's been proven false many, many times over the years. In fact, investigators have been able to account for Ruby's whereabouts almost every single second from the time of the assassination, all of the way up to shooting Oswald on the following Sunday.


Jack Ruby WAS pretty well connected to both Chicago and New Orleans.

'Fraid not. Italian organized crime wanted absolutely nothing to do with him and never shared any association.


None of this answers the question of 'WHY' the "Magic Bullet" didn't deform or shed weight.

It DID deform and fragment.



Fraid you're wrong. Ruby was loosely connected to the Mafia for years. First Chicago and much later New Orleans.

We've got to be looking at pictures of two different bullets. The one from the gurney in Parkland was truly pristine.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:25:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/21/2003 9:25:48 AM EDT by Jim_Dandy]

Fraid you're wrong. Ruby was loosely connected to the Mafia for years. First Chicago and much later New Orleans.

Ruby was a "wannabe" who never was. He couldn't make a glass of water without screwing it up and he was too unstable for the likes of Sam Giancana and Carlos Marcello to trust, not to mention that he had gone bankrupt in all of his business ventures prior to the Carousel Club.


We've got to be looking at pictures of two different bullets. The one from the gurney in Parkland was truly pristine.

There was no bullet on a gurney, but there was one removed from Connally's thigh.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:25:42 AM EDT
Wiggy, your math is off some (88yd run and 53ft rise do not make 184yds. According to my calculations, it is slightly less than 90yds) but your post still introduces some interesting information.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:27:15 AM EDT
Loosely connected don't mean shit. I'm loosely connected and I have nothing to do with them. Sure every nabe has a numbers spot, and people know who runs the numbers etc..etc...but to be down with them is a whole different matter....Your forgetting, Jack Ruby was Jack Rubinstein, a Jewish fella, he was a wanna-be like many underdeveloped minds that find that type of lifestyle facinating...
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:42:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By StariVojnik:

Your forgetting, Jack Ruby was Jack Rubinstein, a Jewish fella, he was a wanna-be like many underdeveloped minds that find that type of lifestyle facinating...



Yeah you're right I must have forget. I forgot that Meyer (Lansky) was from Sicily too.

5sub
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:43:40 AM EDT

Yeah you're right I must have forget. I forgot that Meyer (Lansky) was from Sicily too.

Lansky was never a "made" member.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 9:53:51 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Jim_Dandy:

Yeah you're right I must have forget. I forgot that Meyer (Lansky) was from Sicily too.

Lansky was never a "made" member.



Now you trying to tell me Meyer wasn't from Sicily ??

(I don't know if Meyer made his 'bones' or not but I do know he was well connected.)
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 10:01:57 AM EDT

Now you trying to tell me Meyer wasn't from Sicily ??

(I don't know if Meyer made his 'bones' or not but I do know he was well connected.)


A "made" member of La Cosa Nostra is someone who is a full "partner" in their operations. Being a "made" member requires being a Sicilian and Catholic. As you may know, Lansky was neither.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 10:26:00 AM EDT
Wiggy's math is WAAAY off. The Hypoteneuse of that particular triangle is only 269.27 feet or 89.75 yards (both figures rounded to the nearest hundredth.)

The impact of relative angle is comparitively minor at short ranges, and 89 yards isn't that far.

As far as rifle performance is concerned, various shooters have proven that you can rattle off 3 reasonably accurate shots from a carcano rifle in the time Oswald had to shoot, especially when you consider that the first shot was loaded up already and Oswald relatively sighted in. The clock starts when he squeezes off the first round. Practice at cycling the action and adrenaline would definitely speed things up.

Quite frankly, the only real mystery is why? Why the hell did he do it? Was he working for someone else or was he just trying to make a statement?

The fact of the matter is that in all of modern history, politicians are rarely assassinated by organized conspiracies, but rather by lunatics. John Hinckley for one, whoever the nutjob was who shot McKinley, then the guy who shot TR, then Kennedy and Kennedy. All lone gunmen with some wild-ass hair up their hind end. No-one pulls this crap in this country unless they are off their head. Why? because all you need to do to get rid of the Mf*cker is wait 4 years. Presidents come and go, politics and bureaucrats are forever. So anyone rational enough to form an effective conspiracy is rational enough to realize that the downside of NOT waiting until the guy is put out to pasture legally, is much worse than simply biding your time and conspiring to foil his efforts through legal and bureaucratic means. So ultimately the only person who is going to kill a US president is someone seeking to make some incoherent point in the loudest way possible.

Look at the facts. Assassinating the most popular president since maybe FDR or even Washington made a martyr of the man. It inflated his historical status and that of his family to legendary status despite a clear record of highly questionable policies and practices. Had they allowed the man to finish out his second term, he probably would have drowned in scandal as well as the debacle of the Vietnam War. Instead, Kennedy's political legacy damaged LBJ instead, but only after providing him with a martyr to ride into power upon.

The people responsible for all the conspiracy theories here are Kennedy himself, whose penchant for cloak and dagger James Bond shit created weird atmosphere in intelligence circles, and Jack Ruby, whose precipitous actions prevented LHO from ever spilling his guts about why he did it. Had LHO lived, we wouldn't even be discussing this crap now.

As far as the grassy knoll concept is concerned. I cannot rule it completely out, but I can cast suspicion on it.

I remember the hand grenade range at Ft. Benning. When you throw the grenade you duck down behind a cinder block and earth barrier to hide from the fragments since you cannot throw a frag grenade far enough to be outside its frag range. The grenade goes off and the first wave of sound and shock rolls over your head, hits the observation bunker behind you, reflects back and smacks you in the back of the head a small fraction of a second after the explosion. If you happen to be observing the throw from the observation bunker (another long, low concrete block structure with thick lexan windows on one side and an open back to the rear. Behind that there is a large, open field perhaps 200 yards across to the treeline. If you watch a grenade detonation from there, you see and hear the grenade detonate and the frags hit the building, then less than a second later, the sound and shockwave that passed over the building hits the trees at the far end of the field and bounces off their hard trunks to come back at you and smack you in the back of the head.

The lesson here is that sound reflects off of hard objects like concrete buildings, roadways, railroad overpasses, etc. a sound whose primary wavefront may have missed you going out, can hit you a fraction of a second later as it reflects off another object. If you did hear the primary wound wavefront as it passed through, you could easily mistake the sound reflecting back off a hard object a hundredth of a second later as originating from a seperate place at a different time.

Eyewitness accounts are notoriously unreliable for both sound and sight, that's why forensice evidence is so important. Eyewitnesses are always biased and highly subjective.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 10:30:03 AM EDT

Originally Posted By icemanat95:
Wiggy's math is WAAAY off. The Hypoteneuse of that particular triangle is only 269.27 feet or 89.75 yards (both figures rounded to the nearest hundredth.)





Remind me to check the arithmetic if Wiggy ever does my mortgage!



Sorry, buddy.....couldn't resist a chuckle!
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 10:32:33 AM EDT
I told you his math was off.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 11:06:02 AM EDT
I'm just a lowly computer based numers guy. I acknowledged in my post that my math could be off. My point is that the 90 yard figure was for the first shot only, the subsequent shots were at a target that was moving away from Oswald. Once you factor in that the first shot is almost universally considered a miss, then figure where limo was in relation to the depository when the fatal third round struck the President, the target was a bunch further away that the initial 90 yards.

Once again, sorry for the math, it's been 20 years since sophomore Geometry.


Zaphod,

When I do make a mint off of your mortgage, you will never see it coming.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 11:30:46 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wiggy762:
Zaphod,

When I do make a mint off of your mortgage, you will never see it coming.





Just make sure you make it from the lender, buddy! I know the tricks of the trade now!
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 11:41:52 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Zaphod:



Just make sure you make it from the lender, buddy! I know the tricks of the trade now!



Zaph,

Old buddy old pal. Of course it will be from the Lender, or the seller or the realtor or God for that matter......just remember that YOU WILL NEVER SEE IT. I promise that I will be gentle.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 12:18:41 PM EDT
Back to the ABC show itself...

I watched it from the beginning to half hour before it ended. They did a good job with the computer graphic analysis. However, they only accounted for the first TWO shots. No mention was made of the last head shot.

The show was obviously geared toward the lone gunman theory, which is just fine by me. But if they were to go through the trouble, why omit the most important, fatal shot?

Unless they saved it for the last half hour when I fell asleep.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 12:35:08 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Javak:
Back to the ABC show itself...

I watched it from the beginning to half hour before it ended. They did a good job with the computer graphic analysis. However, they only accounted for the first TWO shots. No mention was made of the last head shot.

The show was obviously geared toward the lone gunman theory, which is just fine by me. But if they were to go through the trouble, why omit the most important, fatal shot?

Unless they saved it for the last half hour when I fell asleep.



You missed it, but not at the end, it was dealt with at the outset.

I only saw the first 20min, TiVoe'd the rest, but they concluded, correctly, that there were 2 hits and a miss, I think miss-hit-hit, but I could be wrong on the order. The last shot, the second hit, was the head shot.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 1:27:18 PM EDT
I was born in Dallas and was in the 6th grade at that time. I know the area. The problem I have with the "badge man" is that if another shooter was behind the fence or on the knoll, he is not in front of the president, he is more like 90 degrees to the street. So, how could his bullet hit the president from the front or back?

And during November there aren't alot of leaves on the trees, so Oswald didnt have any visual obsticles.

I'm no expert in math, but the distance is not over 100 yards from the 6th floor window.

This has always been a terrible embarrassement for everyone from Dallas during that time.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 1:44:31 PM EDT
I think the show did a good job.

The "why" question was explored pretty well with the Oswald history - his childhood, the defection to Russia, etc. He always wanted to be seen as important, but never was. He wanted to do something big, and killing the president was it. That's enough to convince me he had a motive - you can't expect him to act rationally. Hinkley shot Reagan to impress a young actress. These guys aren't all there.

As far as the foliage on the tree, the program always had Oswald shooting after the president cleared the tree, so he wasn't shooting through whatever leaves were on the tree.

And what actually was the evidence that the scope was misaligned? From the program, I thought that the misaligned scope theory came from Oliver Stone's movie and has been accepted as fact. Is there actually evidence that the scope was misaligned (and, even if there is, how do we know it wasn't knoocked out of whack later, as ETH mentioned)?

All in all, I thought the program was very good. The one area they could've gone into more was the autopsy evidence - they made the statement that the entry wound demonstrated that the fatal shot came from behind, but didn't go into the forensic evidence to prove it. That's what really knocks out the grassy knoll theory, and from what I can recall, there was evidence on his skull that showed the bullet entered from the back.
Link Posted: 11/21/2003 3:31:04 PM EDT
Point #1, the magic bullet wasn't. The bullet wasn't in pristine condition nor was it found on a gourney in Parkland hospital.
Point #2, the last shot was at 88-89yards not the first shot.
Point #3, the tree wasn't a large in 1963 as it is today. There was a clear shot.
Point #4, if the kill shot came from the grassy knoll the entrance wound would have been on the other side of Kennedy's head. The geometry doesn't match the wounds.
Point #5, the evidence of a fourth shot has been discredited.

Court TV has a forensics show about the assassination tomorrow night and Sunday. Check your local listings.

The Warren Report was badly done. That does not mean they didn't stumble across the truth.
Link Posted: 11/25/2003 8:12:20 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/25/2003 8:13:53 AM EDT by mr_wilson]
While so much info is available to those "desperately clinging" to the [b]Oswald was the lone assassin[/b] crowd, It's about time time they woke up to the truth, and that is they have had their heads stuck in the sand for SO LONG, their brains are full of it, sand that is. Anyone who thinks Lee Harvey Oswald, was the lone assassin that killed JFK, needs committed to a mental institution, 'cus he's one sick puppy. The sheer number of wounds between Connely and JFK and the fact that the neck wound on JFK was an "entrance" wound, dictates that more than 3 rounds and at least 2 rifles were used, one of them being in front of the motorcade. Just because a rookie "Arlen Spector" came up with a theory that desribed the "majic" bullet premise for the Warren Commision, don't make it fact. Here's a link that will provide help for those who might like to consider a serious examination of the facts. [url]http://history-matters.com/[/url], there are also more books on the subject than ya can shake a stick at, and one should definately read the Gerald Posner Book, "Cased Closed" in comparission to those by Jim Garrision and "Coup'Detat in America, to the fallicy of Posners' unsubstantiated "facts".
by ETH, How in the dickens do we know the scope was misaligned for the shot?
View Quote
This information came for the same sources that stated that Oswald "had never fired a firearm" that day, which were the same law-enforcement folk who administered a "gun residue test" to Oswald. They were also the ones who, although they interviewed Oswald for hours, NEVER TOOK ONE NOTE OR RECORDING, meaning that any statement he made couldn't be used against him in a court of law. As a lawyer Hun, I'd be inclined to think these "investigative proceedures or lack thereof" would, pique your suspicions about the validity of the "lone assassin" theory. The mis-handling of the investigation should give a monumental ammount of information to a lawyer such as yourself, any who has viewed Oliver Stones movie "JFK" would be hard pressed to NOT note the LACK of investigative integrity, immediatly noticed by Garrision in his role of LAs justice dept. Which in itself a SERIOUS indictment of the so-called investigation. YMMV, but for my thoughts, Oswald was exactly what he said he was: [b]A PATSY[/b], Mike
Link Posted: 11/25/2003 8:30:20 AM EDT
Link Posted: 11/25/2003 8:37:31 AM EDT
They always (conveniently) forget Tippet. I'm sure it's just a coincidence, ETH. [rolleyes]
Link Posted: 11/25/2003 8:55:24 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/25/2003 8:58:18 AM EDT by StariVojnik]
Meyer Lansky had his office down the block from where I live...St. James Place and Madison Street on the Lower East Side...the office was on the 2nd floor. They also had a lounge on 9th street and Ave D many moons ago. Comparing Ruby to a Lansky is like comparing apples to oranges. There was only one Chairman and that being Meyer...Ruby couldn't even qualify to shine Meyer's shoes and his name should never be even placed in the same sentence. Sicily? Oh, your refering to Lucky Luciano, who had asked Meyer to organize the syndicate. Meyer was the only Jew who had the brains to organize & run a mob syndicate. He spent many years at the Educational Alliance on East Broadway studing/learning everything that he could get his hands on. He had an exceptional mind. He wrote nothing down. Everything was in his head. Ruby? Sorry. Not even on the radar.
Link Posted: 11/25/2003 10:45:43 AM EDT
Originally Posted By mr_wilson: While so much info is available to those "desperately clinging" to the [b]Oswald was the lone assassin[/b] crowd, It's about time time they woke up to the truth, and that is they have had their heads stuck in the sand for SO LONG, their brains are full of it, sand that is. Anyone who thinks Lee Harvey Oswald, was the lone assassin that killed JFK, needs committed to a mental institution, 'cus he's one sick puppy. The sheer number of wounds between Connely and JFK and the fact that the neck wound on JFK was an "entrance" wound, dictates that more than 3 rounds and at least 2 rifles were used, one of them being in front of the motorcade. Just because a rookie "Arlen Spector" came up with a theory that desribed the "majic" bullet premise for the Warren Commision, don't make it fact. Here's a link that will provide help for those who might like to consider a serious examination of the facts. [url]http://history-matters.com/[/url], there are also more books on the subject than ya can shake a stick at, and one should definately read the Gerald Posner Book, "Cased Closed" in comparission to those by Jim Garrision and "Coup'Detat in America, to the fallicy of Posners' unsubstantiated "facts".
by ETH, How in the dickens do we know the scope was misaligned for the shot?
View Quote
This information came for the same sources that stated that Oswald "had never fired a firearm" that day, which were the same law-enforcement folk who administered a "gun residue test" to Oswald. They were also the ones who, although they interviewed Oswald for hours, NEVER TOOK ONE NOTE OR RECORDING, meaning that any statement he made couldn't be used against him in a court of law. As a lawyer Hun, I'd be inclined to think these "investigative proceedures or lack thereof" would, pique your suspicions about the validity of the "lone assassin" theory. The mis-handling of the investigation should give a monumental ammount of information to a lawyer such as yourself, any who has viewed Oliver Stones movie "JFK" would be hard pressed to NOT note the LACK of investigative integrity, immediatly noticed by Garrision in his role of LAs justice dept. Which in itself a SERIOUS indictment of the so-called investigation. YMMV, but for my thoughts, Oswald was exactly what he said he was: [b]A PATSY[/b], Mike
View Quote
This is really surprising to me. I've read the Warren Report in its entirity, and spoken at length with Joe Ball, chief evidence counsel and the author of the chapter on the rifle, I'm certain you can thumb through your copy and check his name there. J Ball was a brilliant man, and a died in the wool liberal democrat. JFK was a god to him, no way he'd whitewash anyhtning. I'm convinced I'm right, but where do you get your info? In addition to the stone cold blooded murder of JD Tippett, merely because Tippett motioned Oswald to come over, is the FACT that Oswald took a well-publicized shot at an anti castro retired Army general through his study window, with THAT rifle. There is no dispute he did this, his wife knew he did it BEFORE he shot JFK (ALONE!), notebooks containing egress routes, he took that earlier shot. Second, he went to the garage where he kept THAT rifle, THAT day, with a witness who gave him a ride, and went into the garage where he kept it, emerging with a paper package about four feet long, explaining that he had curtain rods, but not explaining why he'd need them at work. He wass known to practice with that rifle, and was proud of it. After the shooting, SURPRISE, the rifle ISN'T in the garage where he kept it, it's at his place of work. Oswald ISN"T, he's the ONLY employee of the TBD missing when they search the building, the ONLY one. By the way, it he's a pasty, that must mean he wasn't shooting that day, right? Then we have TWO OTHER guys taking shots? WTF? Then he goes across town, murders Tippett, and tries to shoot the cops who find him in the theatre. Some patsy. Actually, the only one trying to make it look like Oswald did it was Oswald. So it's NOT my mind that's too feeble to grasp the truth, it's the supposed mental superiority of the desperate conspiracy believers who need to claim that the stupid sheeple are too simple to grasp what the superior conspiracy nuts have figured out.
Link Posted: 11/25/2003 10:53:29 AM EDT
They missed one. Ted
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top