Who do you think was behind the JFK assassination?

to kill oswald so he couldn't spill his guts to the nation.

and they show enough evidance to me to prove that George H W Bush was involved. Of course I always thought so too. With his case I get iffy feelings. I think Oswald was a set up to take the fall and he was blackmailed and all that. Whoever did it probably said they would make his life hell if he didn't. Only what I think.

The film laid out very succinctly the circumstancial evidence of his involvement, including a really interesting declassified paper of J. Edgar Hoover.

JFK was his own man. Even though flawed, he never played to the special interests that control us, so he had to be done away with. The same can be said about RFK and MLK. They tried to get FDR, but Smedley Butler did not allow a coup to occur againt FDR. Thank You Smedley!

:dem:

I think they could live with Kennedy. The Military Industrial Complex needed him gone.

Agreed.i have never heard a better explanation of JFK's death than the Stone film JFK......Donald Sunderland's 8 minute soliloquy Of WHAT happened that day....Too many things that happened could not be done by anyone EXCEPT our governemnt..Who pulled the trigger is of little importance.

to see that movie online??

not to my knowledge..go rent it...the movie is good but the 8 minutes of Donald Sunderland playing retired black ops is worth the rental. I have never heard a better explanation....like I said, who pulled the trigger is not important..there is always some patsy who will do it...Eisenhower warned us about the MIC...50 years later he was right.

We invaded 2 countires for 9-11 and most of the 'bad guys' came from Saudi Arabia..There is always more to met the eye if you are willing to listen.

you just mentioned the puppets on the ends of the tentacles.

Your FDR comment reminded me of something. FDR switched VPs the last time he was elected. When FDR died, the job went to Truman, and he was the President who set up the CIA and oversaw the beginning of the Cold War. Before anyone attacks me, maybe Truman was manipulated or maybe he does not fit into this at all. None the less, this shadow government crap came to be under him.

When JFK was assassinated, he was going to withdraw the troops out of Vietnam, and he was deeply disturbed by the CIA and what was taking place in the Government. JFK was ready to pull the teeth out of the CIA, but he is killed and a corrupt Texas politician by the name of Lyndon Johnson then becomes President. President Johnson reversed JFK's direction on Vietnam and the CIA.

If there was a cover-up with JFK, those covering it up would have feared RFK becoming President. Then RFK is assassinated, and the United States continues with it's direction of our present day official version of events.

When one steps back and looks back on history, a sinister pattern can be seen. 'We The People' ceased to exist as intended a long time ago, and have only been pacified ever since. Just my opinion, but it kind of makes you think.

...the same dark forces have been at work since the Civil War. Anyone or anything getting in the way of the far rightwing shadow government managed by Big Business has been eliminated, one by one. It is my contention that these people will do anything to get the US involved in wars that result in a global net gain economically, politically, and militarily.

I believe Lincoln was the first person to be taken out because he was not going to exploit the South following the Civil War. Lincoln's assassination allowed the hardliners under Staunton to take control of the so-called Reconstruction which was nothing more than a looting of a defenseless South.

The sinking of the USS Maine was also an event that struck me as very curious, particularly since the ship's plates were blown outward by the force of the blast. The "yellow press" owned and operated by Big Business had been demanding war with Spain prior to this event, and this allowed them to stir the pot as rapidly as possible. The result of the War of 1898 was the acquisition of large territories in the Caribbean and Phillipines that were exploited by Big Business.

I've always been curious about the sinking of the Lusitania...that event was the catalyst for bringing the US into WWI.

A very important book has been published about the attack on Pearl Harbor that propelled the US into WWII. The book is "the Day of Deceit" written by a WWII Pacific War veteran by the name of Stinnett. He proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that we provoked the Japanese into attacking our fleet at Pearl Harbor to galvanize the American people into wanting to go to war against Japan, and by default, Nazi Germany.

The fabricated Tonkin Gulf affair was used by LBJ to escalate the war in Vietnam. LBJ had already opened that door with National Security Memorandum 273 (NSAM 273), signed just four days after JFK's assassination, that stated that the US was prepared to support South Vietnam in any way possible. This reversed JFK's NSAM 263 that JFK had prepared on October 12, 1963, that authorized the pull-out of the first 1000 troops from Vietnam.

And we all know about the strange events that have taken place since Vietnam...no need to go into those details.

that RFK would've become president with MLK has his vp. I think that's known now by people and then RFK would've uncovered the truth about what happened but someone shot him. Someone involved with the JFK situation got someone to.

for that! Was this before or after the great depression?

CIA, Mafia, and Cubans.

CIA and Cuba doing the ground work and the mob getting it done.

Jack Ruby was the key.

The Mafia was pissed off because Kennedy didn't fully back the Bay of Pigs invasion, something they were counting on to give them their offshore haven back. The CIA the same, and the Batista Cubans were the most outraged of all.

It was about Cuba. It wasn't about anything else.

Payback for the Bay of Pigs.

I think that appointing Bobby to Attorney general didn't help much. He was going after them pretty bad and after all the work they did to get John elected, they were a little pissed off.

Not Fidelistas.

None other than 41 himself, GHW bush. He wasn't on the grassy knoll. He'd never get that close to a wet operation. But involved nonetheless.

...who later showed up in the Watergate case.

That connects Nixon, who worked with the same crowd when he was Ike's VP, a group that is strongly suspected of being involved with assassinations in the Caribbean, Central America, and South America. Nixon was also in Dallas for four days until his plane took off from Dallas at about 12:30 the day of the assassination. Nixon attended a meeting the night before the assassination with Hoover, several fired and current CIA execs (I'm guessing Bush '41), a couple of senior military types, and reps from Big Oil.

LBJ attended that same meeting. He later told a person very close to him at the time that they wouldn't have to worry about Kennedy anymore.

Prior to going to that meeting, LBJ and JFK had a pretty strong argument documented by JFK's late secretary. The focus of the argument involved seating assignments...LBJ wanted his friend and political ally, Gov. Connally, to sit in his limo, and wanted to send JFK's political ally, Senator Yarborough, up to JFK's limo. LBJ did manage to get the Secret Service car that normally followed the President's and VP's limos moved to a position between JFK's limo and LBJ's limo.

Lots of connections in this case.

with everything. From JFK to 9/11. He was involved directly and planned things but he has other people do his dirty work so he gets away with it. Why can't we get these people?! Is there any way we can ever trial them?

He was appointed director of CIA when he lost an internal power struggle in the Ford Administration. There he basically shuffled papers until Ford lost and Carter replaced him took office.

Of course dedicated CTer believe that he was born into the CIA, but that doesn't change the truth. He was a useless figurehead for the only year that he was at CIA.

At the time of the JFK assination he was in Dallas, which proves nothing about anything.

....Cuban Task Force and the Bay of Pigs. L. Fletcher Prouty was the military liaison to the CIA when he was stationed at the Pentagon, and he was responsible for requisitioning some landing craft from the Navy for the invasion. Two of the craft were renamed the "Barbara" and the "Houston".

Additionally, Bush's old oil company was known as the Zapata Off-Shore Oil Drilling Company....the Bay of Pigs operation was code-named "Operation Zapata".

Contemporaries in the CIA included E. Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis, Bernard Barker, and others involved in the Bay of Pigs operation.

I suspect that GWB joined the CIA about the same time that he got involved with the oil industry...the two organizations are very closely entwined. It's possible that GWB was a mamber of the OSS in the Pacific with a cover story that he was a fighter pilot. The OSS was a forerunner of the CIA, and liked to recruit Yalies with athletic backgrounds who later became Naval officers.

By the way, you don't get appointed as head of the CIA because you LOSE a power struggle. That is terribly ludicrous.

You should be ashamed of yourself for having such little education in this area, and then having the nerve to post it to a public forum. Amazing.

Your funniest line is: "It's possible that GWB was a mamber of the OSS in the Pacific with a cover story that he was a fighter pilot." That one's a howler.

...but try to be as insulting as possible. You haven't done very well along those lines either.

Oh well, what should anyone expect from a Warren Commission True Believer?

...but you already know that, don't you?

In fact, my cousin took a picture of JFK in that car the day before in San Antonio. Was she scouting "The Great Conspriacy"? Gee, is that possible? She's dead now. Could that be part of the web? Was she silenced? (Sarcasm obviously. My deceased cousin really did take such a picture.)

...but there were a number of people in Dallas prior to, and on November 22, 1963, that did.

Your rather interesting/insulting comments aren't going very far toward proving that the Warren Commission had it right.

primarily anti-Cuba, with some help from various other right-wingers.

n/t

.

say exactly the same thing about a vast LW conspiracy. And they also list piles of made up BS as fact and find connections and trails of who knew who, etc.

CTers on each side first decide who they want to blame it on, and then work from there.

It's a drama about a second trigger man coming forward after 30 years.

Has anyone seen this movie? Is it worth it?

So now it's that man and Oswald. I knew there had to be at least three people.

I believe people in the CIA may have had something to do with it, but I also believe RW'ers played a part, and it eventually ended up in the hands of Oswald and Ruby.

That's just my belief.

for whom the Bush crime family is the public face and who have now hijacked the repuke party

JFK's murder was the coup within the national intelligence apparatus

Watergate was the coup within the repuke party

2000 was the national coup

9/11 was the event that enabled the formation of the police state

:kick:

Simple as that.

Lets see :

a defective bolt action rifle with a scope with poor eye relief
a moving target on a curving road that is accellerating past 35mph
and a hell of a lot of english on just one bullet.
The last shot fired was at over 70 yards.

I know an ex sniper Marine with 47 confirmed kills from the Vietnam War that said that event could never have happened the way the Warren commission said it did.

I went to the depository, looked out from the window and walked the street
stopping at the yellow spots in the road to get a sense of the targeting problem.

Oswald did NOT do it. Simple as THAT.

He could not have managed it given that scenereo.

First, the rifle wasn't "defective"; second, the target was travelling at 5-10 mph; third, seventy yards, on a target dead ahead, by a trained marksman using a scoped weapon, is an EASY shot. And forensic analysis has pretty well established that the shots came from roughly Oswald's supposed line of sight in the 6th floor window.

it was moving away and speeding up on the curve. The target angle was 180 degrees
It took the 3rd shot to hit JFK - if we subscribe to the story supported by the Warren Commission.

And a cheap scope with poor eye relief won't help you much at that range.
This is especially true with a moving target. I would not even think of hunting with it.

Seventy yards is challenging enough even on a rifle range with paper targets -
and if its scoped, how did it get sighted in first? If so, at what range?
Essentially every time you disassemble and clean a rifle, adjust the scope you need to re sight it all over. Have seen the gun? Were you very impressed with it?
I say again it is defective and cheap and poorly designed. Look at the reciever.

Why didn't he use a 1903 A3 Springfield? There were plenty of them around back then. It is a far better gun than the rifle in the museum.

Springfields made SUPERB sniper rifles in WW II. Accurate to 1000 yards.

Forensic analysis often lies. Kennedy was shot from the front. Look at the Zapruder film. Oswald had help. I will never believe he managed it the way the Warren Commission stated.

and I'm still convinced that he was shot from behind. The "back and to the left" movement visible in the film is the result of sumple physics.If you look closely at individual frames of the Zapruder film, you'll see that a rather large quantity of Kennedy's brain exited his skull to the FRONT after the headshot. Several ounces to a pound of brain matter blow out of the skull, skull moves BACK...for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.

and I am convinced he was shot from the front.
And again I discussed this with a marine sniper years after I walked the site and tried to work out the tartet soulutions, ( as it probably happened, and what the Warren Comission said ) .
We need to dis agree here.

A rarely mentioned aspect of the assassination is the difference between the bullet that killed Kennedy and the intact "Magic bullet". The killing bullet was obviously an explosive or frangible projectile that shattered into a zillion pieces on impact while the "Magic bullet" did whatever it did and was then FOUND ON THE STRETCHER -- an event so unlikely that I consider it proof of an infinite universe or proof that God exists. If it was found in someone's body then at least its provenance could be firmly established.

In my conspiratorial mind I THINK that the "Magic bullet" was placed on the stretcher specifically to link Oswald's rifle to the assassination, while of course the explosive "Killing bullet" left no ballistic evidence.

Here's what I THINK happened: This scenario explains the anomalies of the assassination and subsequent cover-up. Oswald was "sheep-dipped" to appear as a Marxist & Castro sympathizer (as all conspiracy-minded thinkers know, he was a low-level intelligence operative with a background in the U2 program). An individual who could plausibly be identified as "Lee Harvey Oswald" (but may or may not have been the individual killed by Jack Ruby) fired three shots from the school book depository using jacketed ammunition which could later be identified. The killing shot was fired from the Grassy Knoll by a can't-miss pro using an un-identifiable explosive or frangible round.

Why? I THINK that the reason Oswald was "sheepdipped" as a Castro sympathizer and why the assassination was carried out in such a gruesome way and so publically was to incite war hysteria against Castro and to mobilize public opinion for an invasion of Cuba.

So why didn't we then invade Cuba? Here's where this new scenario gets interesting.

I THINK that within hours of the assassination, or maybe even within minutes, the USSR notified the USA that if the USA invaded Cuba it meant WWIII. I'm sure both sides huffed and puffed and exchanged threats, but eventually came to an agreement which avoided WWIII. The Quid-pro-quo? The USA abandoned the plan to invade Cuba and in return the USSR gave the USA a free hand to intervene in Vietnam.

If you buy this idea, then the anomalies and the ad-hoc nature of the cover-up start to make sense. Why was Oswald, so laboriously "sheep-dipped" as a Castro sympathizer, suddenly transmogrified into a "Lone nut"? The answer: To make it absolutely clear that Castro had nothing to do with the assassination and to defuse the carefully crafted plan to foment anti-Castro war hysteria.

So who was behind the assassination? I have no idea but I do have an idea on how to find out. There's one other event that's comparable to the Kennedy assassination on the Command & Control level and that served the same eventual end -- US intervention in Vietnam. This was the "Gulf of Tonkin Incident". This operation was a complete fake and served as a phony Pearl Harbor to mobilize public opinion for the Vietnam War and to ramrod the "Gulf of Tonkin Resolution" through Congress. If researchers could identify the people behind this fraud I THINK they would find the perpetrators of the JFK assassination as well.

...stretcher that could not be positively identified as a stretcher used by JFK or Connally.

And who invented the "Single Bullet Theory"? Arlen Spector.

there were three shots. One for his throat, one for his front (where he goes back) and one for his brain.

Those who make the case for official complicity in JFK's murder affirm he came under fire from multiple positions, including the Depository. For the truth of the case, you gotta get out of Dealey Plaza, and consider what came before it, and after it. Oswald certainly was in no position to perpetrate the cover up.

And for what it's worth, the throat wound was initially identified as an entry, before it was opened for a tracheotomy. And the slug in his back penetrated less than a finger length.

...a very violent reaction of the body, like becoming completely rigid.

For the record - I buy the single-gunman theory, however firmly believe there was a conspiracy in which Oswald was the button man for nefarious higher-ups.

...must have been members of the same employer...the CIA.

Additionally, LHO had been proven to be incapable of hitting much of anything with even a good firearm. He barely passed his firing proficiencies with the Marines, and some former Marines believe that he was "helped" to get that far.

Guess that explains why he qualified as a sharpshooter in the Marines, eh?

and even a blind pig finds an acorn once in a while.
But it could not have gone down the way the Warren Commision said.

...and Sharpshooter was the LOWEST level of qualification used by the USMC back then. LHO was "helped" to attain that level by his fellow Marines in his company.

Additionally, the term "Maggie's Drawers" was used to describe at least one of LHO's efforts with a rifle on the MC rifle range. The term referred to a complete miss of the target which was indicated by waving a white flag...affectionately known as "Maggie's Drawers"...in front of the missed target.

And that rifle range is at 200 yards. Kennedy was at 70 yards. About 1/3 the distance.

Of course to a dedicated CTer, the CT plays a role similar to a religion in that it gives order to a disordered world.

....another of your rightwing "talking points".

"DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
HEADQUARTERS UNITED STATES MARINE CORPS
WASHINGTON D.C.

8 Jun 1964

Mr. J. Lee Rankin
General Counsel
President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy
200 Maryland Avenue NE
Washington, D. C. 20002

<http://jfkassassination.net/russ/jfkinfo3/exhibits/anderson1.htm>

This memo was prepared by USMC Lt. Col. Folsom for General Counsel J. Lee Rankin of the Warren Commission as Lt. Col. Folsom indicates in his leading paragraph:

"This is in reply to your letter of 2 June 1964 relative to marksmanship capabilities of Lee Harvey OSWALD, former Private First Class, 1653230, U. S. Marine Corps. In view of the lapse of time since Mr. Oswald was separated from the Marine Corps, it would be impossible to ascertain precisely the number of hours in which he participated in weapons marksmanship practice or how many rounds of ammunition he fired."

Take a look at the table enclosed in this memo and note the following information:

*LHO did indeed qualify as a Sharpshooter, barely, with a score of 212 using an M-1 in 1956 while undergoing weapons training in the two week "A Course" at MCRD.

*In 1959, at MCAS El Toro, he barely qualified using an M-1 during the "B Course" as a Marksman with a minimum score of 191.

*The remainder of his weapon courses involved familiarity training with the firarms listed in the table.

Here is Lt. Col. Folsom's summary in regards to Oswald's shooting ability:

"The Marine Corps considers that any reasonable application of the instructions given to Marines should permit them to become qualified at least as marksman. To become qualified as sharpshooter, the Marine Corps is of the opinion that most Marines with a reasonable amount of adaptability to weapons firing can become so qualified. Consequently a low marksman qualification indicates a rather poor 'shot' and a sharpshooter qualification indicates a fairly good 'shot'. I trust the foregoing will serve the purpose of your inquiry."

I think one can safely ascertain from this document that Oswald's shooting skills had degraded from 1956 to 1959. In fact, his shooting skills had degraded to the point that he was barely able to qualify using the M-1 under USMC guidelines.

Additionally, there is absolutely no documentation anywhere that proves that Oswald practiced shooting with any weapon, much less the Mannlicher-Carcano, after his discharge from the Marine Corps.

To a dedicated Warren Commission apologist like yourself, all of the factual documents and other information that point in another direction from the so-called "lone-nut gunman theory" must be like rubbing salt into open wounds. Your wounds will never heal, and so-called CTs will never run out of salt...there are just too many facts for you to successfully dispute.

By the way, how is it that when an assassination takes place in another country, their police forces immediately go to work on the premise that more than one person was involved in the action? And how come, in 99% of those cases, they are correct in their initial premise? Why is it that Americans are always being told, except for the Lincoln assassination, that "lone-nuts" are to blame for our assassinations, contrary to the evidence that surfaces during the usual investigative whitewash that follows?

Oh yes...at the time of the assassination, there were several trees lining Elm Street...at the time that LHO was supposed to have fired the first shot, his supposed line of sight to JFK's limo was blocked by one of those trees. How do you intend to explain that away?

But keep that head buried in the sand...the truth will eventually reach you by way of the "trickle-down" theory.

For what it is worth, the RW CTnuts have a pile of Kennedy assassination theories of their own. Of course their have left wingers and communists as the culprits. I suppose if I were to argue with them on one of their sites, (I rarely bother to even read them anymore.)they would call me a communist.

Most of the so-called facts that CTer of any stripe use are pure invention. Fantasy. CTers can invent fantasies faster than I can debunk them.

One of my favorites of the CT fantasies is the "puff of smoke". Did the shooter shoot JFK with a black powder flintlock? Guns have used smokeless powder since the 1890s.

As I have posted many times, a CT serves much the same purpose as a religion to the believer. It give them the feeling of being one of the enlightened, and brings a sense of order to a disordered world.

...photographs showing the gusmoke drifting across Elm Street after the shooting takes place? How about all of the witnesses, ironically recorded by the Warren Commission itself, who claim that they smelled gunpowder and pinpointed the Grassy Knoll as the direction from which it was drifting? Oh yeah...they must have all been "CTers", right?

When's the last time you watched a filmclip showing combat in Vietnam? Seems odd to me that a lot of the gunsmoke appearing in those films are coming from weapons being fired by our military. The vast majority of those films were taken AFTER JFK's assassination because the Government didn't want anyone to know that we had been in Vietnam since 1954 (Ike's administration, Nixon as VP) and suffered our first casualties in 1956. Firearm systems may be depicted as "smokeless" since the 1890s, but that is relative to the firearm systems that existed before the 1890s.

Additionally, anyone supporting the Warren Commission's view of the JFK assassination, such as yourself, is by definition a rightwinger. Contrary to popular belief, there were NO liberals on that Commission, and there were NO liberals among the hundreds of major figures and staffers that worked behind the scenes to "collect" information and compile it for the final report.

One of my favorite things about Warren Commission apologists is the way they continue to push information about the JFK assassination that is patently false, and/or has been disproven long ago. Those kinds of tactics could be seen as laughable...but remember, we're laughing at you, not with you.

Guns have used smokeless powder ever since the 1890s. They don't produce a blast of smoke. I am a veteran of nine years of service, a tour in Vietnam, and have fired thousands of rounds (total) from M-14, M-79, M-60 GPMG, M-16, and .45 pistol, as well as many more rounds as a civilian from more types of weapons than I care to list.

Modern guns don't smoke.

The only guns that produce a cloud of smoke are black powder guns. So are you saying that he used a flintlock to shoot Kennedy?

I remember the 1950s well and the RWs wanted to impeach him. There were road signs all over Texas that read, "Impeach Earl Warren". And now you call him an RW????

Get Real.

...instead of just repeating the some old tired rightwing mantra.

Texas wanted to impeach everyone to the left of Atilla the Hun...not much teeth in that argument.

Why don't you grow up and start doing some real research.

an RW. Grow up yourself. Warren was hardly RW. I remember the times. Ike even later complained that he had been greatly disappointed with his Warren appointment.

...on the political scale very FAR to the right.

Personally, I don't give a rat's behind what Ike said before, during, and after Warren's appointment. That has nothing to do with Warren's actual decisions on the bench and the rightwingers with whom he was allied.

Yeah...I remember the times too. I also remember that a third of my class in Florida stood and cheered when we all learned that JFK had been killed. What did you do when you learned JFK was dead? Did you rant and rave about LHO because you were told he was a communist and a former deserter?

Everyone I knew was in shock. I sat by the radio for almost an hour hanging on every bit of news. Everybody I knew just seemed to go silent, both Democrats and Republicans. I don't remember anybody that I knew personally that disliked Kennedy, although I knew families that were Republican. But after the 60 election, he won them over. No one that I knew spoke badly of him.

I remember a LOT of news about politics that was critical of JFK, but that was in a different world than mine. And I was angry when some of the national people that had been so critical of him started praising him now that he was dead. I thought it was rather two-faced.

My position on the political landscape is about on the 45L line. (I am using a football field to represent the political spectrum.)

I said that Marksman was the lowest qualification, NOT sharpshooter as you had said. That letter proves me to be right.

Also remember, that the letter speaks from a Marine point of view. Even a Marksman by Marine standards would be a good shot by comparison to most civilians. (Except former military of course.)A weakened shooting ability would NOT mean that he couldn't hit anything. It would mean that he was at the bottom of Marine standards.

And a head & upper torso shot from 60 meters, (rock throwing distance) is a very EASY shot. That he would want a scope for easy iron sights shots would be consistent with poor shooting ability.

...the author of the letter:

"Consequently a low marksman qualification indicates a rather poor 'shot' and a sharpshooter qualification indicates a fairly good 'shot'."

And what does comparing a Marine qualified on ANY weapon have to do with the shooting abilities of "most civilians"? What does that have to do with Oswald's shooting "skills"? His last qualification test was in 1959, a good four years before JFK was killed. As I stated previously, there is absolutely NO documentation that Oswald attempting to fire any weapon on a rifle range after he was discharged from the USMC.

And please quit ignoring the fact that the alleged murder weapon was less than ready for use. The scope was loose, the bolt action had a tendency to stick when it was worked, and the trigger itself had an unpredictable hair-trigger. All of those items had to be repaired before the FBI firearms experts would test-fire the rifle.

And finally, JFK's limo was moving away from the TSBD, slightly downward in elevation, and turning sightly to the left on Elm Street. Added to the poor condition of the alleged murder weapon, anyone firing that day would have had a real problem acquiring, firing, reacquiring, firing, reacquiring, and firing one last time. Also, tell me what kind of targets Oswald shot on the USMC rifle ranges...were they moving or satic?

I haven't taken the time to google around on this so I can't give any links. But I do know that the FBI would not "fix" a rifle. That would be altering a piece of evidence. Nor would it be needed. It would have NO effect on firing the weapon safely to get a sample bullet for ballistics. Safe firing would be effected only by the chamber seal, not by how smoothly the bolt worked or by the smoothness of the trigger pull.

And another poster has stated that the rifle was in good shape.

Most CTer use "made up facts" commonly called lies, to advance their favorite theory. You probably didn't make up the lie, but believed it because it advanced a theory that you wanted to believe.

And as I said, RW CTers have piles of Kennedy CTs that blame the left. JFK is widely respected by the right because of his standing up to the Soviets over the missles and because of his economic policies. (He made a masssive tax cut. He took the top rate down from 92% to 70%.) Much of the RW blames LBJ whom they view as a huge liberal.

...than you do now.

The rightwing hated JFK because they WANTED to go to war to regain Cuba, and they were prepared to do anything to get that war...do a search on "Operation Northwoods" in case you're not convinced.

Most of the rightwing wanted to go to war against the "Godless Communists" as soon as possible, and at that time, the Soviets did not have missiles with the range to reach the US from the USSR. The miltary knew this, and were willing to take "acceptable" casualties from Soviet nuclear missiles located in Cuba.

The rightwing also tried to push us into a war in Laos, but JFK backed away from that, too.

And then Vietnam became the hot topic. When JFK also said "no" to that venture, as reflected in NSAM 263 on October 12, 1963, that was the last straw for the rightwing.

You've lied in virtually ever comment you've posted over the last two days, or you've admitted that you've been too lazy to do the necessary research to find the real answers. You are a true rightwing Warren Commission apologist...Professor McAdams would be very proud of your efforts.

And as a donator as well? Just because I don't believe a bunch of CT lies?

Nor is it known what JFK was about to do with Vietnam. Many people like to believe that he was about to withdraw, but that just is NOT known.

BTW - Rush & Hannity both praise JFK.

...moderator of a couple of very conservative message boards, don't you? People get uncovered here every day that clearly don't have DU's interests at heart.

And once again you look silly. Do a google on JFK's NSAM 263, read it, and then try to fully comprehend what it states. How many troops was JFK pulling out of Vietnam and by when?

Then do a search for LBJ's NSAM 273, signed about four days after JFK's assassination. Does it, or does it not, clearly state that the US will do whatever is necessary to support South Vietnam?

If you don't know why the rightwingers praise JFK, then you truely have no concept of their intentions. You should know by now that any praise directed toward a Democrat is a smokescreen for the old GOP divide and conquer routine. I guess you fell for it.

He was too conservative for them.

He fires three shots at a "target" of about six inches by six inches inside of a hundred yards with a scoped rifle.

He hits it once. And misses completely with his first shot.

This is not exactly particularly good shooting.

why did people go towards that one area (grassy knoll) and also accounts from people on tape of them talking about men behind a fence in that area? I just don't think Oswald acted a lone. He had at least one other person if not two because of how quick the event is and you have to reload the gun and everything and that takes time.

He had to work the bolt. That takes only a fraction of a second to do.

Oswald accomplished the shots. The Mannlicher-Carcano rifle gets a bad rap as a cheap weapon because of the price LHO paid for it. It was extremely accurate, easy to operate and had a muzzle velocity capable of creating the "magic" or "pristine" bullet. Both bullet characterizations have been disproven as well. People just have a hard time believing that a pathetic loser like LHO could end the life of such a great man as JFK. BTW, this type of discussion is the reason I decided to cease being a long-time lurker and become a poster.

I live just outside Dallas and have been to the spot many times.

You said: "...it was moving away and speeding up on the curve. The target angle was 180 degrees..."
180 degrees is directly behind a target moving directly away from you. Take a look at a circle and measure 180 degrees.

The curve is pretty gentle, and part of it would have the car moving directly away from window.

"...Seventy yards is challenging enough even on a rifle range with paper targets..." BULLCRAP!!!!!! In the Army I was able to make head shots 100% of the time on the silhouette targets at 100 meters using iron sights. The targets would pop up and stay up for only a few seconds, then pop down, so my shots had to be quick. A 60 meter head shot is easy, even without a scope. With a scope it become even easier.

"...and if its scoped, how did it get sighted in first?" Easy. It does not take a gunsmith to do that. Once the scope is mounted you go out a field in the country, set up some paper targets, and bang away. Three shots, walk up to the target, make adjustments, try again until satisfied. I have done that many times in my hunting days.

"Why didn't he use a 1903 A3 Springfield? There were plenty of them around back then. It is a far better gun than the rifle in the museum.
Springfields made SUPERB sniper rifles in WW II. Accurate to 1000 yards."

Indeed, the Springfield is a superbly accurate rifle. However, you don't know how accuracy is stated. It is stated in MOA - minutes of angle. At 60 meters you don't need super precision to hit a target the size of a human head. As I said - that is an EASY shot.

"Look at the Zapruder film." Yes, Kennedy's head snaps back. That is because his brains are spraying out the front of his head. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. A bullet entering the back of a skull does not push the head forward as the bullet is traveling too fast for that, nor does it transfer momentum to the head. It causes a shock wave of tissue to move away from the wound channel, which also means that it moves away from the point of entry. Then the bullet opens the skull on exit, and the pressure wave blows the skull fragments and brain matter out of the skull on the exit side. The momentum of the brain matter exiting pushes backward on the skull. The skull snaps back in the direction the bullet came from. Simple physics.

Of course none of this matters to a conspiracy theorist, as the conspiracy theory must be held to at all costs as it is really more closely akin to a religious belief. If gives the believer a feeling that being one of the enlightened ones, and gives him the feeling of order, even if it is an evil order in a universe that is actually chaotic. TRANSLATION: You won't believe a word of it.

I still believe Oswald could not have done it alone.
He had help.
I just don't see how it could have happened the way the Warren Commission said.

how everything is set up as well throughout the event. I always found it strange how for miles people were packed up against each other and then when he gets to that one area where it happens people are spread out. May be nothing so I dunno. :shrug:

I would have a better result with an M1 and iron sites.

Using a bolt-action with the scope in the museum would be tricky.
I could not be confident I could work the bolt, acquire the target and squeeze off a round, ( and then repeat this 2 more times ) , on a moving target curving away from me.
Granted Navy swabs were not that proficient in small arms. Still what little skill I have acquired since probably would not stack up to yours...but I am not confident this targeting situation is do able given that scenereo with that rifle and scope.

I'd have better luck with a crossbow.

A target that is moving AWAY from you does not need to be lead. You just aim at it. That part of the road has an insignifigant curve. The speed, as another poster stated, was about 5 to 10 mph, depending on whether you are measuring at the start or the end of the film. That isn't fast. The distance is only 60 meeters. Most men can throw a rock that far.

For that matter, he missed the head on two shots.

Working a bolt doesn't take that much practice. And you start with the bolt already worked.

...bad condition as noted in the testimony of the FBI firearms experts. That bolt that seemed to stick every time it was fired was a real problem for the Warren Commission to hurdle because it would have caused any shooter to spend more time working the action. In fact, they were never able to explain that, nor were they able to explain the loose scope, and the unpredictable nature of the hair-trigger.

Two different CTers have posted her about that trigger. You say it was a hair trigger, another said the trigger had would stick. Which was it?

...now going to add arguing over semantics to your VERY weak defense of the Warren Commission?

That would be like one person saying that the weather was cloudy all day, and another saying that it was clear all day. No a semantical difference at all.

In fact, there was no defect in the rifle. That is just more made-up-so-it-helps-my-CT bulshit.

BTW. I have now had time to google around and get facts about that kind of rifle. The FBI test showed that that model had was able to consistently, at 100 yards, to hold all its round in a dime sized circle. So much for it being an inaccuracte rifle. The only question remaining is if the scope was zeroed well, and even if it wasn't, Oswald, from his Marine training would know how to compensate for an off-zero sight.

http://www.webcom.com/ctka/pr795-fbifib.html

That site is hostile to the FBI, but still shows it to be an accurate rifle.

Of course, not of this will mean anything to a dedicated CTer.

My gun-nut cousin had one and said that it's not only unreliable but hard to get off more than one reasonably accurate shot within a short time-span because of the type of bolt action.

...Warren Commission apologists will try to tell you that it's a great weapon. LOL!!!

...were made to the rifle.

With a rifle that even the FBI experts would not fire until repairs were nade, how easy do you think that shot was?

Speaking of shots, why didn't the shooter in the 6th floor corner window of the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD), if there actually was a shooter in that location, take a shot at JFK as JFK's motorcade proceeded north toward the TSBD along Houston St.? That shot would have been MUCH easier for aomeone located in the position described above.

<http://www.raymack.com/HomePage/Kennedy/map.html>

Why wait until JFK's limo was forced to slow down as it turned onto Elm Street and proceeded slowly past the TSBD? Why didn't the shooter fire earlier from that position...could it be that a tree blocked his line of sight...or was there a shooter in that position at all?

Maybe he was working up his nerve. You can't prove anything by saying, "He could have done X but didn't."

However, for a dedicated CTer, the CT takes on the role of a religion in giving order to a disordered world.

...and succeeded. That's par for the course for diehard Warren Commission apologists.

where were his security people along side of the limo?

and he's the most knowledgeable gun-nut I've ever seen. He took me to a shooting range with a Carcano and a WWII Czech sniper's rifle he had in his collection called a Brno. He said the type of loose bolt action on the Carcano required the shooter to completely re-aim the rifle with every shot, while the Brno had such a smooth bolt action that the shooter could simply follow his target.

to work the bolt. That doesn't take but a fraction of a second. And re-aiming on a snap shot at 60 meters is NOT world class shooting. Remember, most young men can throw a rock 60 meters. It is close range shooting.

However, for a dedicated CTer, the CT provides a blanket of security, like a religion.

I don't know enough about the JFK killing to know which, if any, conspiracy theories have any credibility, but I'm not inclined to dismiss the possibility mainly because I don't think Oswald behaved like a lone nut.

It seems that most (all?) "lone nut" assassins freely admit their guilt and say why they did it, while Oswald denied his guilt. That, and his being immediately killed by someone with mafia ties.

Of course, to the truly dedicated CTer, those were part of the great conspiracy network.

Ray may have changed his mind later, but he pled guilty at the trial.

And Sirhan initially said he didn't remember killing RFK, but pled guilty at trial.

...that it was a bit strange that there were more holes in people and objects in that L. A. hotel then there were bullets in Sirhan's gun? And how come RFK was fatally shot behind the ear when Sirhan was never closer to RFK than about 6 to 8 feet, and was never in a position to shoot RFK behind the ear?

And how is it that Ray seemed to know all of these interesting contacts...like the guy that prepared his fake IDs in Canada...that helped him get out of the country so quickly? And why did all of the people on the balconey with Ray point to a completely different location that they claimed was the position of the shooter?

And here's another head-scratcher for you. The Bush and Hinkley families go back together to the Midland, Texas oil-boom days. At the time that Hinkley was shooting Reagan, Hinkley's brother was about to have lunch with Neil Bush, brother of our Fearless Leader. How is it that Hinkley only got time in a so-called "sanitarium", basically a supervised country club for the wealthy, instead of being thrown in prison like Sirhan and Ray? I guess those friendly family-to-family connections came in handy for a variety of reasons, don't you think?

And let's not even get into the intelligence connections of Oswald, or the background of Ruby.

They are everywhere. They control everything. They are unbeatable. If you get too close to the truth you may disappear. They can execute the most complex of plots flawlessly. (Sarcasm - obviously.)

That is total CT fabrication.

...that LHO had a 201 Personnel File. You do know what that is, don't you?

I guess Harold Weisberg was wrong when he proved that Oswald was a Marine Corps radar operator assigned to the U-2 program in Atsugi, Japan, and had a "Crypto" clearance. I guess Harold was wrong when he fully documented LHO's activities in New Orleans.

I guess the the documentation uncovered by the House Select Committe on Assassinations was wrong when they uncovered documentation indicating that LHO was also an informant for the FBI in New Orleans and Dallas.

And I guess LHO was just lucky when he was able to move to the old USSR with absolutely no difficulties, live for a couple of years, and then return to the US with a Russian wife, also with no difficulties. Just lucky at a time when every individual suspected of Communist ties in the US was being surveiled 24/7.

Do you have any idea how ridiculous your posts really are?

Please stop, you're just embarrassing yourself.

That is the lowest level of clearance and is automatically given to everybody in the service. Those CTers proved nothing, but manufactured bullcrap.

Of course, as I have said many times, to a CTer, the CT serves like a religion.

but Silver Fox, he sure ain't, Media_Lies_Daily...

I once saw super slow motion pictures of an AK-47 being fired and the barrel actually flops around, yet at 60 meters it would still be able to make a head shot. You just don't need super accuracy to do it.

Also, most people state the time wrongly. It isn't three shot in x.x seconds. (I don't feel like googling to find the time.) It is two follow-up shots in x.x seconds. The first shot starts the time. So the sequence is bang, work bolt, aim, bang, work bolt, aim, bang. With a little practice any bolt can be worked in less than a second.

...was supposedly used to shoot JFK from the 6th floor of the TSBD.

I have yet to see ANY of the televised segmants supporting the Warren Commission actually duplicate the feat that LHO is alleged to have done with a rifle that FBI experts refused to fire until it was repaired. Part of the problem is that prior to being repaired the bolt actually stuck while being worked, the scope was loose, and the trigger had an unpredictable hair-trigger action.

Additionally, when it became clear that the original time alloted for the shooting was not achieveable by one shooter with the poorly maintained Mannlicher-Carcano, they lengthed the time to support their theory.

For further consideration, the so-called "Magic Bullet" looks exactly like rounds that are fired into cotton to determine ballistics matches for forensics purposes. Although the round has been ballistically matched to LHO's alleged Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, no forensic evidence has ever been recovered from that round to link it to the wounds in JFK and Connally. None.

Oh, by the way, the original rifle recovered from the TSBD was a Mauser, an identification the the recovering officer never recanted.

...experts refused to fire the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle that was supposedly fired by LHO until certain repairs were made to the rifle.

*The scope was loose,

*The trigger pulled normally until it reached a certain point and then acted like a hair-trigger making it impossible to know exactly when the rifle would actually fire a round.

*The cocking mechanism had a tendency to stick, making it virtually impossible to get off more than two rounds, much less three rounds.

It was only AFTER the weapon was repaired that test firing was carried out.

The so-called "jet effect" is total nonsense...believeable only by those who know without a shadow of a doubt that LHO was the "lone-nut gunman" and couldn't possibly have been involved in a conspiracy. Those same people see the Warren Commission Report as the absolute final word on the JFK assassination.

It's interesting to note that LHO has been proven to have been a CIA contractor with a CIA 201 Personnel file, and that his trip to the old USSR was a espionage mission. It's also interesting to note that LHO had a "Crypto" security clearance when he was a Marine Radar Operator at the Atsugi Air Force Base in Japan, a fact that was uncovered by the late Harold Weisberg. LHO also was assigned to the U-2 operation as a radar operator tracking the outgoing and incoming flights by the then super-secret U-2 spy plane. Awfully serious duties for a guy that supposedly went off his feed and killed a president, don't you think?

By the way, I had a chance to talk with a couple of former Vietnam-era snipers, Craig Roberts, and Gunnery Sergeant Carlos N. Hathcock Jr., and they stated without hesitation that LHO's alleged three shots taken from the 6th floor corner window of the Texas School Book Depository was an absolute impossibility. Do a Google search on their names and you'll discover why I trust their opinions above all others on this case.

If you can find any Marines that were around for Guadalcanal they will tell you that you can work a bolt and get off shots very quickly. At Guadalcanal the Marines had the 03 Springfield as the Garand M-1 was not yet available.

For that matter, Sgt York, WWWI, was being charged by several Germans. He began to shoot them, last one first and worked toward the one in the lead. His rifle was the 03. He got them all. That was witness and documented. I would say he had to be working the bolt kind of fast to be able to do that.

The jet effect is basic physics. You problem is with Isaac Newton.

The other stuff is conspiracy theory BS.

...germans with his ".45 Colt automatic pistol".

Next.

I don't take the time to google everything. Mea Cupla on that one.

My statements about it being an easy shot stand. Kennedy, at the furtherest shot was still inside rock throwing distance.

...firing that rapidly? I doubt seriously that you have any documentation to support your implied contention. The ratio of bullets fired in combat to the number of casualties produced is quite high, and you should know that.

As far as York is concerned, maybe you missed this information from York's personal diary:

<http://www.alvincyork.org/Diary.htm>

"OCTOBER 8th 1918:

Suddenly a German officer and five men jumped out of the trench and charged me with fixed bayonets. I changed to the old automatic and just touched them off too. I touched off the sixth man first, then the fifth, then the fourth, then the third and so on. I wanted them to keep coming."

....snip...

"In this battle I was using a rifle and a .45 Colt automatic pistol."

Contrary to what was depicted in the old movie starring Gary Cooper, York shot the charging Germans with his .45 Colt automatic pistol, not the rifle as you stated. Yes, York was an excellent shot with a rifle, but he was just as good a shot when using his .45 Colt automatic at close range.

The "jet effect" is nothing but a desperate attempt by Warren Commission apologists to protect the government's conclusions. It is complete and utter crap from a scientific point of view.

So far, I've proven that the information contained in your post is nothing but BS. Maybe you'll do better next time.

OK, first a gotcha on York. My point on the Marine was that bolt action CAN be worked rapidly.

Now about the jet effect. Take a look at this link: http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/macpher.htm

Duncan McPherson is a genuine rocket scientist, has written: Bullet Penetration: Modeling the Dynamics and the Incapacitation Resulting From Wound Trauma. (El Segundo, CA, 1994, Ballistic Publications, and is prominient in International Wound Ballistics Association. Do a google on them and you will see that they are HIGHLY respect.

So this guy knows his stuff. OK? Now here is what he says about the Kennedy head snap.

"G: It is common knowledge that, as captured by Abraham Zapruder, President Kennedy's head and upper torso lurch energetically immediately following the explosion of his head. Could this movement have been caused by the directly transferred momentum of a bullet? That is, can a bullet "push" somebody like that?

MacP: No, and no. The movement of a body due to bullet momentum cannot be greater than the movement of the same body if it was holding the gun that fired the bullet. This is a result of elementary physics and is not disputed by anyone who understands physics. The major frustrating feature of the Kennedy assassination phenomenon is the willingness of people to pretend to talk authoritatively on subjects they know absolutely nothing about, especially things related to firearms. This body recoil is one favorite. Another is the "puff of smoke from the grassy knoll"; the theory here seems to be that someone shot Kennedy with a flintlock (modern firearms don't make a puff of smoke on firing as black powder rounds do).

G: If the effects observed on the Zapruder film are not the result of a direct "push" by a bullet, what could account for JFK's movements?

MacP: In general, body movement in response to nervous system trauma is a result of contractions in body muscles. This is related to movements of your leg when a doctor raps you on the knee with his little mallet; your leg moves because a nerve induces a muscle contraction, not because it was driven into motion by the force of the tiny rap with the mallet. The slightly peculiar location of Kennedy's arms after the 399 bullet impact is known as Thorburn's position, after a description by Dr. William Thorburn in an 1889 paper on injuries to the area of the spinal chord damaged by bullet 399. In addition to this effect, simulations have shown that bullet strikes to the skull that result in blowing out a significant hole upon exit result in skull recoil towards the bullet entry direction. The dynamics of this are a little complicated, but are more related to the pressure inside the skull cavity created by the bullet passage than to effects directly related to the bullet movement. The dynamics of this kind of impact were demonstrated independently in testing by Dr. Luis Alvarez and by Dr. John K. Lattimer et al."

I prefer to get MY information from genuine experts and real facts as opposed to CT BS.

...predates Gerald Posner as being THE major Warren Commission apologist. He has been notorious for ignoring facts and details that he knows that he can never explain away, and has been extremely abusive on message boards to folks with whom he argues about the JFK assassination. It has long been suspected that McAdams takes the information that he gleans from the posts of serious JFK researchers and uses it in his classes at Marquette.

In summary, McAdams is one of the most dishonest, and disagreeable, individuals that I've ever had the extreme displeasure to run across in the JFK asassination world.

Here are my responses to the information you've posted on the so-called jet-effect theory:

1. JFK was struk in the front of his throat slightly above the collar and centered above the knot of his tie. This was an ENTRY wound as noted in the testimony of the nurses and doctors who first saw JFK at Parkland. They knew the difference between an entry wound and one of exit because Parkland was a hospital which routinely treated quite a few gunshot wounds on a daily basis. The entry wound was later used as the entry point for a tracheotomy performed by one of the Parkland doctors, which widened the hole and obliterated all signs of the entry wound. According to the original autopsy notes, this wound had NO exit. JFK's raised elbows and hands in front of his throat indicated his reaction to this shot.

2. The bullet that struck JFK in the back was approximately 6.75 inches down from JFK's hairline and about 2 inches to the right of JFK's spine. Both the suit coat and shirt mark the location of that bullet in JFK's back. Additionally, that wound had NO exit, and could easily be probed with the little finger. There was NO shot that impacted the back of JFK's neck that day to have created the so-called Thorburn effect. JFK also wore a back brace that day, a device that held him straight up in his seat. He is seen in the Zapruder film to be lurching forward slightly as if he was punched in the back.

3. JFK's massive head wound was one that entered above the right front temple, and exited from the lower-center-right of JFK's skull. There was NO jet effect because the pressure necessary to create such an effect was negated by the large, and almost instantaneously created, exit wound in the back of JFK's head. Jackie Kennedy, once she overcame her initial horror at the sight of her bleeding and horribly mangled husband falling over into her lap, climbed out on the back of the limo to retrieve a part of JFK's skull which had flown onto the trunk lid.

I will say this about McPherson...he was probably working under the premise that the Warren Commission was correct and that JFK's head shot was fired from the rear. I doubt seriously that he ever saw the Zapruder film or the other films that survived that day, films that clearly show JFK's head moving after the impact backward and to the left. Even first-time viewers of the Zapruder film have no difficulties describing what they see instead of believing what they've been told.

I won't even start commenting on Arlen Spector's so-called "Single-Bullet Theory" that describes the path of the "Magic Bullet" as it created four wounds of entrance and three wounds of exit in two males seated in a moving limo while taking at least two direction changes in mid-air. If you counter with the recent computer generation that demonstrates that it's true, I will tell you that a computer program can be made to create anything in graphical form...just rent one of the "Matrix" movies sometime. Better yet, rent "Forest Gump" and pay particular attention to the black and white scenes where Gump made to appear as if he's part of various historical clips.

As to someone being more credible because of the academic titles added to their name, I think we've seen quite a few people with big titles lie to the American people over the last several decades, especially when those people have been, or are, employed by the US Government. Maybe you ought to quit relying on Warren Commission apologists for your information on the JFK assassination and start using your eyes, ears, and brain for something other than reprocessing Governmant propaganda.

McPhearson has seen the tape, and he even talks about the position of JFKs arms. He is a genuine expert. But you seem to consider anybody that isn't a CTer as being politically motivated.

You might try learning the real physics involved. Not really that complicated.

For starters, a gun that could cause knock his head away with that force would have to have a recoil on the shooter that would be just as great. Equal and opposite reaction.

However, a thru the skull shot does not work on momentum, but instead on kinetic energy. They are two different things.

The only reason your lack of the knowledge of physics is not embarrassing you is that most people have poor scientific educations.

is that if Oswald was the only person and they have proof why did they lock up his records about everything until the year 2025? Why don't they release the information to put all "consperiacy theory's" to rest? I know ABC had a special not long ago but me believing Peter Jennings is like me believing there's a space ship in my backyard right now in broad daylight.

Where we will never agree is where you talk physics. The big hit came from the grassy knoll and the brains and skull went out the back left of his head. That is where Jackie went on the trunk to try to catch his brain.
Adhering to the magic bullet and the Warren Commission story is not where the truth lies. The bullet they say did most all of the damage barely had a scratch= pristine. The cover up continues, but there is still a lot of information locked away. Why do you think the info. needs to be kept away from us? Clue: Too damaging to the powers that be.
Read Garrison's book which also includes photos of the head wound before the doctored autopsy photos.

It was an full metal jacket bullet and it had toothpasted which is a type of deformity common to that type of hit.

What type of metal was on the bullet? Sure seems that with all the damage attributed to this one bullet that there would be more scratches or mushrooming.

Toothpasting is when the jacket is squeezed causing some of the lead to come out of the base, like toothpaste out of a tube.

another reason why they keep the info locked is because the people involved is still a live. So it would be very damaging to them. And why would that be if it was the lone gunsman Oswald?

We would have had everything released long ago.

is always much bigger than that of entry.

An expert pathologist who lived nearby was sitting by his phone all day, expecting a call at any minute. In vain. Instead, they used novices.

But all the physical evidence in the world isn't worth even considering as proof of a conspiracy, since the astronomical odds against all those witnesses on the grassy knoll dieing within three years is totally compelling and indeed unanswerable.

You argue the physical evidence in the case, which is perfectly compelling to people in good faith, and you simply allow those in bad faith to publish their deliberately distracting fantasies. You can't argue with ignorance - least of all when it's deliberate. The "a priori" statistical evidence is unanswerable, even by dolts and knaves, i.e. conclusive proof.

The physical evidence has been so destroyed or tampered with that there is not much to go on.
The Select Committee on Assassinations already decided there was a conspiracy. It is just the folks like Posner and Peter Jennings trotting out the old lone gunman stuff.
Who in the hell would scrub a crime scene limo immediately after the killing of the President? Terrible people all around Kennedy, that's who.

Oswald took a shot from the Depository, its relevance ranks very low in the actual scheme of things, so I'm baffled why people think his role or his rifle are even worth discussing.

Because, in a most irregular manner, they bored a great hole in the front of his throat (if I remember correctly from a cable programme on the subject), the existence of any exit hole in the front can no longer be discovered. Does anyone know if a small entry hole from the back was discovered? There I go buying into this Oswald discussion!!!

Also, I'm intrigued by the photo that seems to show him in a doorway behind the cavalcade, as it processed past it. Do you remember, some years ago, they used some scientific process for identifying some eastern European monster from a concentration camp - John something or other - extrapolating the morphology of his scone after the war from a photograph, to the way it was after his arrest and deportation to Israel for trial. Was he exonerated? It seemed strange to me.

And I'm not in the least surprised to learn Jennings is a "magic bullet" partisan.

is look at the video of the assissination. He's traveling at a good speed to wave to people. For a long time the crowds are packed and people are just a few inches apart from each other. When they come close to the curb the crowd starts to thin out. Then you hear a gun shot and see him lean forward (from his throat) then you see the driver slow down a little bit and then you see him go back (a few seconds later) real rough and then you see his brains blow out and he falls down and people are running towards that thicket or whatever it's called and after he's shot in the head they speed up and go around the curve. It's impossible for one person to do a lone. Plus Oswald was supposed to be in that room in the building, so why were people running towards that one area? Also people's testimonals I've heard from video's do not add up.

Anyone in the military that can even barely qualify with a rifle gets the designation "Marksman". If you were in the army, you would already know this. If Oswald went above that level, such as an Expert, then your argument would be valid.

The FBI's best snipers tried to duplicate what Oswald was alledged to have done and they couldn't make these 3 head shots in a few seconds with the bolt-action M/C rifle. Besides, the so-called 'magic bullet' will never be explained away, even if you accept the absurdity that Oswald was a world-class sniper.

Hello, longtime lurker, first time poster here. I greatly enjoy reading the boards here.

amber dog democrat wrote:
>>I went to the depository, looked out from the window and walked the street
stopping at the yellow spots in the road to get a sense of the targeting problem.<<

I agree. On the 35th anniversary of the assassination I happened to be in Dallas for a professional conference. That particular day I went down to Dealey Plaza because I'd been interested in the Kennedy Assassination for a long time. Walking around the area, standing in the window below where the shooting occurred (I don't think you can go to the 6th floor of the museum there anymore) was a very unsettling experience for me.

One of the most glaring things about standing in the physical space is a very strong, visceral sense of how utterly WRONG the Warren Commission got things. There's just now way, given how that area is laid out, that it could have happened the way they said it happened.

I know the official verson has it wrong.
But on November 1960 my maternal grandfather said if he were JFK, he'd never get another whole night's sleep knowing he stood between LBJ and the Whitehouse.

I agree. Whenever I read anything dealing with the assisination I get very very bad feelings. It just isn't right. It's the same feelings I get with 9/11. :scared:

told by him that he did not believe the lone gunman theory, I don't believe it was Oswald.

BFEE - the nasty lot of them!

...notice that Connally hangs on to his hat long after the so-called "Magic Bullet" supposedly passed through that wrist. If the "Magic Bullet had passed through both JFK and Connally simultaneously, Connally would have reacted long before he does in the film. Personally, I think Connally was hit from two different rounds...one that struck him in the back after missing JFK, and a second round that hit him in the wrist later in the ambush.

Additionally, there were two hits on the limo itself...one was a round dent in the window frame above the rear-view mirror, and the other was a through-and-through circular hole in the windshield.

JFK's throat wound was one of entrance...as described by the medical personnel at Parkland Hospital. The so-called holes through JFK's shirt and tie, had actually been caused by the scalpel used to cut off JFK's shirt and tie. The very shallow back wound was probably the result of passing through the limo's upholstery behind JFK or iot could have been a ricochet. JFK's head wound was definitely caused by a shot from the right-front...where witnesses heard a gunshot and saw smoke drifting from the so-called Grassy Knoll.

Just a few of many little discrepancies that add up to one big Warren Commission lie.

following the auto that JFK was in were splattered with blood & brain matter. Jackie O even jumped on the back of the limo as if to save parts of his skull. Of course they say now that she just freaked or something.

it looks to me as if she's trying to pick up the pieces. She doesn't look as if she's freaking out too much on the outside. But of course I'm sure on the inside she was. She quickly jumped out after he fell down and you can tell she's picking things off the car.

but like I said "they" have tried to explain it away that she was trying to get out of the car in fear.

:scared: She never felt safe after that, she knew LHO was not a lone gunman.

Anything else requires incredible timing and trusting that nobody will talk. Ever. To anybody.

case closed ?

Have you ever seen the video of the assissination? It's impossible.

n/t

Only two people at the time of the assassination could not recall where they were when they heard the news. Contrast that with the millions of Americans living at the time remembering in vivid detail where they were and what they were doing when they heard the news.

For instance, I was in third grade at a catholic grade school and the church bells began to toll as a nun came into the class asking us all to pray for the President who had just been shot.

As for the two that cannot recall where they were and what they were doing, they are none other than Richard Nixon and GHW Bush.

Poppy called the FBI within MINUTES of JFK's murder to rat out some fellow named Parrott. What else is odd is that Bush didn't call BEFORE the assassination. That's what a law-abiding citizen would do.



Source: http://www.internetpirate.com/bush.htm

is how did Bush know so fast that it was someone? Wouldn't they have to do investigation's? I think that was a big boo-boo for Bush to do that.

Nixon had two different stories. Bush just couldn't remember.

the old man made millions with the help of the mob and when jack and bob started going after the mob,well it was pay back. mob- cia connection sounds pretty much on target

Of course there is some overlap there.
The day our country lost its innocence.

Hello slavery? Genocide of Native Americans. It has always had a dark-side. A bloody one at that.

Let me say that I lost confidence in the nation doing the right things and being transparent. Look how many possible leaders we lost in a few years and look what we are given for a leader.

It always has. It's a question of when we lost our innocence individually when we realized it. No matter how cynical you are-you can't keep up.

It's the day we all died so to speak.

but it was Batista RW Cubans primarily.

counter revolutionary cubans.

They were all tied up together. J. Edgar Hoover refused to admit the existence of organized crime, why? Organized crime and the Cuban counter revolutionaries were tied up tight.

Bobby K. was big on hitting organized crime and the Cubans were mad at JFK.

Oswald was involved in a much bigger conspiracy, and after mob connected Ruby took out Oswald.....

:dem::kick::dem:

Is that true about Johnson laying down before hand? So was he in on it? Poor Mr. Kennedy. Even his own vice president! :cry:

Proven beyond any doubt.

It was organized by a Mafia family in collaboration with a right-wing terrorist anti-Castro organization and help from CIA agents acting without knowledge or approval from the CIA Director.

It's becoming all to clear...

Certainly had to be a combination of Government Intelligence services and Big Oil behind it.

It's true! I saw it on Kos! Al From was on the grassy knoll, Bruce Reed was in the book depository and Will Marshall was in the Dal-Tex Building!

I even heard that Dolestein and Wyldwolf drove the getaway cars!!!

The link says his name is Albert Thomas. He is a very close and longtime friend of LBJ.

An interview with the wife of the winking man. She says JFK made the trip to TX for a dinner for her husb.

She says Kennedy called her, soon to retire, husb and agreed to come to a dinner planned by Thomas's "friends". JFK had planned to go to TX at a later time but changed the plans to accommodate this dinner.

The dinner was in Houston and her husband mentioned that he hoped nothing would happen while the president was at the dinner in Houston.

It was after this dinner that JFK went to Dallas.

This is from the LBJ library. http://www.lbjlib.utexas.edu/johnson/archives.hom/oralh...

Albert Thomas was the one who "reminded" Johnson the plane could not take off until Johnson was sworn in.

Edited to add...Also in every bio of Albert Thomas i saw it mentions his role in getting Kennedy to bring NASA to land donated by Humble oil.

Humble was run by members of the Farish family. They are long time family friends of the bushs, going back to Prescott.

Humble used to be Standard Oil which aided in the construction of the Nazi death camps.

http://www.tarpley.net/bush3.htm

http://www.spiritone.com/~gdy52150/timeline.html

look like he's winking. More proof it leads to the Bush's. So why hasn't he ever been questioned and put on a lie dector test or something?

who stood to gain from Johnson's presidency and the resulting war in vietnam...

Eisenhower hit it on the head when he left office, the military-industrial complex and the energy barons of Texas...

In my estimation...

Pretty much translates to the Bush family and those of their ilk, n'est-ce pas?

Some group of super wealthy, corporate-military guys gave the nod.

Johnson went along with whatever the CIA wanted, he was going to get the presidency and was happy to see Kennedy gone...As stated by Johnson, (paraphrasing) "After tomorrow, I won't be humiliated by those bastards Kennedys ever again".

Why was Johnson, Nixon, Bush and other high profile figures all in Dallas on Nov. 22? Why was there no Secret Service protecting Kennedy, you think Georgie would ride down the streets of Dallas with just a few Secret Servicemen, even today in his Texas?

Who profited...everyone who was in Dallas that day, including the CIA.

Actually Johnson was needed to bring the Vietnam situation into a full blown war. Bush 41 and 43 started both Iraq wars. All three Presidents have/had strong ties to Halliburton. Therefore, I vote other - the answer is Halliburton.

But when I heard that Poppy Bush was in Dallas and he's probably the only person of a certain age who doesn't remember where he was when he heard the news, it jolted me in a big way. Oswald probably did do it, but got his orders from Poppy.

I cried like a little girl (well, I WAS a little girl) because I'd seen Kennedy at the airport in Houston the day before he was killed. I remember a lot of people in Houston that were glad he was "out of the way". Oddly, I'd probably be one of those awful people now should something tragic happened to Bushler. I want no harm to come to him, but it wouldn't hurt my feelings if he was chained and paraded for the press.

the doorway of the book conservatory wearing an outfit that looks like what Oswald was wearing that day.







i am not sure the photo will show up visible but if you click on the pic at this link it can be blown up.

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/JFK/postphotos.html

My jaw literally dropped when Poppy said he couldn't remember where he was or what he was doing that day. Maybe Oswald wasn't the shooter. He did say he was a patsy. I even think he was behind the attempt on Reagan. The Bushes hated the Reagan's and the feeling was mutual. The Bushes said they were treated like slaves. Reagan had them moved to the furthest part of the White House because he didn't trust Poppy. Plus, the Bushes had at least a friendship with the Hinkleys if not a business arrangement.

Reagan for not trusting the Bush's. At least he was very smart on that.

because as of now I have a history instructor who is getting his doctoral degree and his main study is the JFK assination. He has told us that the citizens of this country have not been told all there is to know about this case. He does say though that Oswald was involved, but he was a patsy and he also believes that Jackie had some involvement. He claims there are so many facts that have not been told, mainly because the people in this country would never believe the truth.

about Jackie. Weren't they having marriage trouble's though? I don't know if she'd kill him though. :shrug: But I do think the Bush's and CIA had a major role.

The only contemporary conspiracy theory I have faith in....

I don't think Oswald did it alone. I think Oswald was a set-up.

Beyond that, I don't even pretend to know. I lean toward the entrenched power structure of the time doing it and that leads me to Johnson or Max Taylor, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff (I hate saying that, though- Taylor's one of my favorite division commanders from WWII-- to read about; I'm not a vet).

When I shed this mortal coil, I'll have just three humble requests I make of God:

1. Hug the girl I had a crush on in High School who was killed by a drunken driver the year after she graduated.

2. Have a brandy with Churchill and C.S. Lewis.

3. FINALLY FIND OUT WHO KILLED KENNEDY IT AND WHY!!!!!! IT"S DRIVING ME NUTS!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:



edited for: too many damn typos.

and I'm sure after all these years it'd be nuts driving. I never have been interested in politics much before 2004 and all that with the Bush's and 9/11 but the JFK assissination was the first thing I ever got involved with. I've been reading on this and everything for a few years now. Plus I just adore Kennedy so I wish we could know who did it (even though I have a good inklking along with what you all say).

good shot so it had to be others acting along with him.

I would say that is probably pretty close to National Average also. Even Republicans don't believe it was a single gunman.

These terms are too vague and overlapping and it's ridiculous to vote "The Bush Family" tops.

There seems to have been a Papa Bush connection to the assassination, but that doesn't make him the mastermind. It does found the present regime/dynasty and development of the system in the long-ago killing of the king, however.

What we know best is:

1) It wasn't a lone shooter except for the most dedicated coincidence theorists.

2) The preponderance of evidence points back to a mil/intel op with high cover using (or coming straight out of) members of the CIA's Bay of Pigs crew and mafia.

3) Everyone in the establishment had their piece of the cover-up and seem to have been very happy with the results.

4) Some people will still be denying the obvious and claiming the CT (coincidence theory) is a simpler explanation in 2063.

He was a Bay of Pigs leader
JFK was wacked for pulling away the Air Support on the Bay of Pigs Invasion
Felix Rodriguez worked w/ Bush Sr. on Contra/Drugs/Guns deal
Now he is w/ the Swift Garbage Barge Boat SemiPeople Group

Otherwise the real assassin(s) would have been caught.

The FBI still hasn't found the anthrax terrorist, right?

Whenever there's a high profile "cold case," you can be sure that all the government would have needed to find the perp was a mirror.

...the only thing I feel absolutely certain of is that Lee Harvey Oswald was a patsy, but he knew enough that the responsible parties couldn't allow him to live.

A rarely mentioned aspect of the assassination is the difference between the bullet that killed Kennedy and the intact
"Magic bullet". The killing bullet was obviously an explosive or frangible projectile that shattered into a zillion pieces on
impact while the "Magic bullet" did whatever it did and was then found intact ON A STRETCHER -- an event so unlikely that I consider it proof of an infinite universe or proof that God exists. If it was found in someone's body then at least its provenance could be firmly established.

In my conspiratorial mind I THINK that the "Magic bullet" was placed on the stretcher specifically to link Oswald's rifle to the assassination, while of course the explosive "Killing bullet" left no ballistic evidence.

Here's what I THINK happened: Oswald was "sheep-dipped" to appear as a Marxist & Castro sympathizer (as all conspiracy-minded thinkers know, he was a low-level intelligence operative with a background in the U2 program). An individual who could plausibly be identified as "Lee Harvey Oswald" (but who may or may not have been the individual killed by Jack Ruby) fired from the school book depository using jacketed ammunition which could later be identified. The killing shot was fired from the Grassy Knoll by a can't-miss pro using an un-identifiable explosive or frangible round.

I THINK that the reason Oswald was "sheepdipped" as a Castro sympathizer and why the assassination was carried out in such a gruesome way and so publically was to incite war hysteria against Castro and to mobilize public opinion for an invasion of Cuba.

So why didn't we then invade Cuba? Here's where this new scenario gets interesting.

I THINK that within hours of the assassination, or maybe even within minutes, the USSR notified the USA that if the USA invaded Cuba it meant WWIII. I'm sure both sides huffed and puffed and exchanged threats, but eventually came to an agreement which avoided WWIII. The Quid-pro-quo: The USA abandoned the plan to invade Cuba and in return the USSR gave the USA a free hand to intervene in Vietnam.

If you buy this idea, then the anomalies and the ad-hoc nature of the cover-up start to make sense. Why was Oswald,
so laboriously "sheep-dipped" as a Castro sympathizer, suddenly transmogrified into a "Lone nut"? The answer: To make it absolutely clear that Castro had nothing to do with the assassination and to defuse the carefully crafted plan to foment anti-Castro war hysteria.

Who was behind the assassination? I have no idea but I do have an idea on how to find out. There's one other event that's comparable to the Kennedy assassination on the Command & Control level and that served the same eventual end: the "Gulf of Tonkin Incident". This operation was a complete fake and served as a phony Pearl Harbor to mobilize public opinion for the Vietnam War and to ramrod the "Gulf of Tonkin Resolution" through Congress. If researchers could identify the people behind this fraud I THINK they would find the perpetrators of the JFK assassination as well.

People like Dean Acheson, Charles E. Bohlen, W. Averell Harriman, George Kennan, Robert Lovett, and John J. McCloy. They were very much in favor of esculating the Vietnam war and advised LBJ to do so.

Being extreme cold war hawks, they were probably furious with Kennedy for shifting Cold War policy from containment to cooperation and for trying to dismantle the CIA. They easily could have had the CIA do it.

...seem far more fanciful than necessary.

While I like to stick with Occam's Razor to lead the way on most matters, there are still a couple of things about this whole thing that nag me.

Why did the Secret Service never investigate Lee Oswald in the time leading up to the JFK visit? Not only was his involvement with communists and citizenship kind of leery, but he had been accused of taking shots at Gen. Edwin A. Walker less than a year before Kennedy was shot. That was extraordinarily shaky groundwork for the SS to miss him. After all, law enforcement certainly had no problem tracking him down in the aftermath.

How did the rifle get from Oswald's garage to the school book depository? Do we know Lee brought it in that morning? This was never concluded as the lone witness to Oswald's "curtain rod" package established with his testimony that the Mannlicher-Carcano wouldn't fit the dimensions of Oswald's bundle.

What about the loading dock employees who verified Oswald's statement that he was on the ground floor right before the shots were fired? Their testimony was discounted by investigators who doubted their credibility owing in good part to the fact that they were black men.

Why did Lee Oswald have no problem firing shots into Dallas Police Officer J. D. Tippett, when less than an hour later the same gun wouldn't discharge due to a bent firing pin? How did he bend the firing pin that badly in the interim?

Just questions that have always intrigued me.

We do know this much: Lee Oswald was not an innocent party in this affair. His behavior afterward belies such.

But, could he have had "help" in this regard? Possibly. It wouldn't be the first time a conspiracy of folks did something like this.

A group of conspirators killed Lincoln after plotting as much for years.

Conspiracies killed Goodman, Chaney, Schwerner, Emmett Till, the Scottsboro Boys and many others.

A conspiracy of men flew airliners into the World Trade Center. It's not as tricky as some people think it is.

The difference was, we discovered those. Mainly because the more people you involve in anything, the more likely a lip will slip.

So, the answer lies in asking yourself, "Out of all the 'possibles,' who could keep a secret like that for this long?"

Who, indeed.

The only chance of learning the truth about the assassination is a deathbed confession from one of the big players. Anyone involved in the conspiracy on a high level and still living must be very elderly by now.

Regarding Oswald's "communist leanings": The "sheep-dipping" operation to paint Oswald as a leftist seems to still be working for some. As a Marine, Oswald was assigned to the U2 program at Atsugi AFB in Japan. No one with a Marxist background or communist leanings would have received such a posting, especially in the pre-Francis Gary Powers years when the U2 was the most secret and sensitive US intelligence operation going.

...That makes it all sound so labyrinthian. The pool of knowledgeable people would have been a lot smaller than that.

If there was indeed any such thing, it likely involved no more than a SMALL handful of players, top to bottom.

Remember that the Allied cracking of the German "Enigma" machine encryption, known as "Ultra", was kept secret for 30 years until officially declassified. "Ultra" was known to thousands of people involved at Bletchley Park and elsewhere. So secrets can be kept.

It's up to you if you want to hear them.

Some people just don't want to know about it, don't want to add it up, whatever the evidence and how many the confessions. There's a book devoted to this very subject, with respect to the JFK assassination, titled Someone Would Have Talked, which records the words of those who knew, and who did speak.
http://jfklancer.com/catalog/hancock/index.html

Some who spoke:

Jack Ruby (statement to reporters after his trial: "Everything pertaining to what's happening has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts, of what occurred, my motives. The people that had so much to gain and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I'm in, will never let the true facts come above board to the world." Reporter: Are these people in very high positions Jack? Ruby: "Yes.")

Santos Trafficante (Told attorney Frank Ragano in 1987: "Carlos (Marcello) fucked up. We shouldn't have gotten rid of Giovanni. We should have killed Bobby.")

David Ferrie (overheard by Richard Giesbrecht in the Winnipeg airport on Feb 13, 1964, telling a companion he was concerned about how much Oswald had told his wife about the plot, wondering why they'd ever used him, and mentioning they had more money than ever. Giesbrecht said the man "had the oddest hair and eyebrows I'd ever seen" and immediately contacted the FBI. He positively identified Ferrie. After questioning Giesbrecht and telling him that his information was important and "the break we've been waiting for," the FBI contacted him several months later and told him to forget about the matter since it was too serious and since he was a Canadian, there would be nothing the FBI could do for him if he needed protection.)

Johnny Roselli, made man of both the mob and the CIA. Soon after talking, wound up stuffed in a drum bobbing off Miami.

David Atlee Phillips (head of hemispheric operations for the CIA, stationed in Mexico City. Seen in Oswald's company the summer of 1963 by Alpha 66 leader Antonio Veciana, who was working anti-Castro ops for Phillips. When dying of cancer, Phillips tearfully confessed his guilt to his brother)

Frank Sturgis (CIA operative. Told The San Francisco Chronicle of May 7, 1977 that "the reason we burglarized the Watergate was because Nixon was interested in stopping news leaking relating to the photos of our role in the assassination of President Kennedy.")

"Nobody talked" is a lie told by those who don't want to hear what they say.

Mark Lane's book is pretty convincing. GHWB, The Hunt Brothers, Murchison, and some others.

and Mickey and Minnie Mouse.

but I do know this. I think the government knows more than has been said. Why else was all the transcripts from the Warren Commission and all other info sealed for 75 years.

I think it was done so that all participants in the assassination would be dead and gone before this info could be made public and they couldn't be punished for this heinous act.

Putting away my tinfoil hat now. :tinfoilhat:

:kick:

Is there topic threads on the Kennedy assasination and is it possible you can link me to them, I would really like to read all DU has to offer on the topic. Thanks in advance.

I myself do not believe for one moment LHO was the lone gunman, nor do I believe anything in the Warren Commission. I had a belief that it was CIA-Cuban connection, Bay of pigs, connection. Opperation Zappata, and Mongoose? That Kennedy was planning to downsize the CIA. Pull it's teeth so to speak.

Wasn't Zappata Pappy's operation?

But there seems to be some in every forum. 911 forum and articles, editorials forum have a lot of stuff. I just tried to link my search here, but it doesn't work. The demopedia may have a collection.

It had to be done or they would have lost face after the double cross.

*****

Oswald lost a front tooth as a boy. He lost it after a fight. It is shown in a picture from his school days. It was a permanent tooth. The man that was arrested for shooting Kennedy had ALL HIS TEETH. As did the remains that were exhumed.

http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee/Tooth/Tooth.htm

Medical records say "Oswald" had his tonsils removed as a young boy. His military records show a bout of tonsillitis with...SWELLING OF HIS LEFT TONSIL.

http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee/Tonsillectomy/Tonsil ...

A woman working in unemployment saw "Oswald" two times in a matter of a few months. Although very similar and almost seeming to be the same man she SWORE they were not. One was even taller.

A teacher and friend of Oswald's says he was NOTICEABLY shorter after a break.


These are the photos the government identified as Oswald.




There is a neat military looking fellow. He appears to have a narrower forehead and longer face then the commonly known Oswald. Yet their eyes are EXTREMELY similar.

"Oswald" was seen in a bar with Ruby AFTER "Oswald" was arrested by a waitress that knew Ruby well.

Another man was also arrested BEHIND the theater that day. Witnesses identified him as "Oswald" and believed they had seen the arrest. Some of the police reports from that day mention "Oswald" was ARRESTED in the balcony.

But Oswald was never taken out back. He was led directly to the police care from the front of the theater.

In the theater that day Oswald had moved to sit next to three people. None of them were named on the police report. Everyone else in the theater was.

At the scene of the Tippit shooting a wallet with "Oswalds" ID was found by an officer. This was BEFORE the arrest. After the arrest, in the police car, another wallet was removed from Oswalds pocket.

Oswald repeatedly showed up in two places at once. He was seen several times in CA during the time he was overseas in the military.

http://www.webcom.com/ctka/pr198-jfk.html

http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee /

I've always thought it was Castro.

We tried to off him a coupla times and he got tired of it.

However, it also could have been organized crime, since they were really afraid of the power Jack lent Bobby. And we know what happened to Bobby when he was in striking distance of getting that power on his own.

Audio fingerprinting suggested 4, if not 5 shots were fired that day.

Lee Harvey Oswald was not alone.

And, thanks to hindsight and the murders of other left-wing icons (MLK Jr, Robert Kennedy, et al) there's hardly any reasonable doubt to even humor, let alone give serious consideration to.

Right wing plot.