 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So true. If there was any conspiracy, my guess is that it was after the fact, to cover up the incompetence of the CIA and the FBI. Maybe Jack Ruby was Hoover saving the CIA's ass.
The incompetence that's always irritated me the most was that of the Dallas Police:
Parading the rifle aroud for photographers once they found it.
-No gloves, no plastic bag to protect the evidence from contamination, you'll notice.
Walking Oswald through crowded areas, as if to say, "Anybody want to take a shot at him before there can be a trial?"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Posted: |
Nov 23, 2013 - 12:34 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Bob DiMucci
(Member)
|
The same show came to the (convincing) conclusion that Oswald WANTED to kill JFK but wasn't capable, managing to get off two shots before the motorcade lurched forwards - and in doing so caused a Secret Service agent in the car behind to accidentally pull the trigger on a gun that was already ready to fire...delivering the fatal bullet.
What really happened we'll never know, but this explanation - supported by evidence - is far more convincing than any other. To me, at least.
Totally plausible. What bad luck that that accidental shot, which could have landed in thousands of different places in Dealey Plaza, in the agent's own car, or in the air above, instead flew into the President’s head, just as an assassination was taking place.
Totally plausible. Except that after 50 years there is no evidence that the agent’s gun was even fired that day. Nine other people that were in the agent’s car or on its running board, including an agent seated two feet away from the alleged shooter agent, have testified that no shot was fired. How is it possible that these nine neither saw nor heard the shot? Furthermore, not one person of the several hundred spectators in Dealey Plaza that day has ever said they saw or heard any weapon being fired from or around that agent’s car. Indeed, the one witness who said he actually saw the rifle in the agent’s hands stated that “it was not fired.”
Totally plausible. Except that no bullet or fragment of a bullet from the agent’s gun, an AR-15 automatic rifle, has ever been found. Every bullet or fragment found has been conclusively linked to the ammunition used in Oswald’s gun.
Totally plausible. Except that Oswald somehow left three empty shell casings behind while supposedly firing only two bullets.
One of the prime proponents of this “agent shooter” theory, a firearms expert named Howard Donahue, was interviewed by investigators for the House Select Committee on Assassinations. But the Committee refused to allow him to testify, not wanting to clutter up the official record with such nonsense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Nov 23, 2013 - 1:21 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Bob DiMucci
(Member)
|
The question isn't the number of shooters or bullets: The question is why Oswald wasn't stopped in advance. Either the dots weren't connected or Oswald's actions were allowed to happen. Either way, it doesn't reflect well on the FBI/CIA.
If "Oswald's actions were allowed to happen," then both the FBI and CIA were in on a conspiracy, and the Warren Commission was as well (or else they were so incompetent that they couldn't uncover the evidence of this conspiracy).
I'd put my money on not connecting the dots (although you'd first have to enlighten me on what dots there were to connect that would have tipped off the authorities that Oswald would be attempting an assassination that day).
But human error is always a possibilty. Take the actions of the Secret Service in Dealey Plaza that day. Established procedure for the Secret Service during a presidential motorcade is to scan not only the crowds but also the roofs and windows of buildings as the motorcade moves along. But apparently, and unbelievably, not one of the 16 Secret Service agents in the motorcade was looking anywhere near the uppper floors of the Book Depository Building. If they had, they would have seen (as several Dealey Plaza witnesses who never had any obligation to look for such things did) a figure or a rifle in the window where Oswald was.
But there's no evidence, from any of the reports of the agents, that they saw anything in Oswald's window, or even saw the three Book Depository employees in the two windows beneath Oswald's window. Where in the hell were their heads as the motorcade passed under Oswald's window, except up their proverbial asses? Sixteen people charged with protecting the president saw nothing out of the ordinary in the Book Depository windows. But several lay people did, and they were only there to watch the motorcade, not watch over the President's security.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JFK was shot in the front of his throat, just above his necktie knot.
JFK was shot in the skull by a bullet that entered at his temple, left a loose flap of skin covering the entrance wound into the skull, and blasted out the right/occipital area at the back of the head.
If you can square these facts with a shooter from above and behind, I've got some gold bullion from a 2:45 a.m. Fox News infomercial I'd like to sell you.
The Warren Report explains the so-called "magic bullet" theory, and later experiments confirmed that the bullet could easily have taken that exact same way. No other "theories", not a grassy noll shooter, not a shooter on the bridge in front of the cavalcade, were ever substantiated by so much as a SMIDGE of evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
The question isn't the number of shooters or bullets: The question is why Oswald wasn't stopped in advance. Either the dots weren't connected ...
Remember 9/11? Obvious leads there, too, but no conclusions were drawn.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: |
Nov 23, 2013 - 5:19 AM
|
|
|
|
By: |
Mr Greg
(Member)
|
I would have to watch the doc again and know the commission report much better to answer all of these....but....
Totally plausible. Except that after 50 years there is no evidence that the agent’s gun was even fired that day. Nine other people that were in the agent’s car or on its running board, including an agent seated two feet away from the alleged shooter agent, have testified that no shot was fired. How is it possible that these nine neither saw nor heard the shot? Furthermore, not one person of the several hundred spectators in Dealey Plaza that day has ever said they saw or heard any weapon being fired from or around that agent’s car. Indeed, the one witness who said he actually saw the rifle in the agent’s hands stated that “it was not fired.”
And yet several witnesses stated that they smelled gunpowder...not possible from a gun that was six floors up so quickly....there was another gun somewhere.
Totally plausible. Except that no bullet or fragment of a bullet from the agent’s gun, an AR-15 automatic rifle, has ever been found. Every bullet or fragment found has been conclusively linked to the ammunition used in Oswald’s gun.
My understanding is that no - it hasn't - and the entry and exit wounds of the fatal shot do not match the ballistics of Oswald's gun and choice of bullets anyway.
Totally plausible. Except that Oswald somehow left three empty shell casings behind while supposedly firing only two bullets.
There were three shell casings - one a few yards from the other two...the first had been used as a block and to stop moisture etc, apparently...only two were fired...?
One of the prime proponents of this “agent shooter” theory, a firearms expert named Howard Donahue, was interviewed by investigators for the House Select Committee on Assassinations. But the Committee refused to allow him to testify, not wanting to clutter up the official record with such nonsense.
And yet the video evidence and ballistics seem to support it...so the cover up might appear to be covering up a tragic accident...?
Again - a fascinating theory...but, again, we will never know 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One may never know who actually killed jfk.
Except we absolutely know who killed him. If you and others want to close your eyes to what the evidence and science supports, then that's your choice. However, we do know who killed him; and have known since November 22, 1963. I don't understand ignoring facts (proof), but believing in theory. I'm pretty sure the word for that is delusional. So many people are delusional about what is really a very simple case - closed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I still think the physics of bullet wounds, and the fact that the back of the head (occipital/parietal area) had the largest wound argues for a shooter from the right and ahead of Kennedy.
This roughly corresponds with the area occupied by the top of the grassy knoll.
I think a shot to the back headed downward--which exits from the throat--would have created a different reaction than the confused groping at the throat by Kennedy.
Of course all of this is made much more confusing by the topography of Dealey Plaza, which has to be entered personally to appreciate the choice of it as killing zone for a moving target.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
