Kennedy Assassination Question

[jon_berzerk]

Just curious so I thought I'd throw out a historical opinion question. Anyone here think Oswald shot Kennedy, or did other "forces" take him out.

oswald shot Kennedy

with a non magic bullet

in a average distance

 

[yidnar]

these are some interesting facts .Carlos Marcello - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[yidnar]

the mob was pissed about the bay of pigs !! when Kennedy didn't stop Castro from taking over and shutting down mob interest in Cuba !!

 

[rightwinger]

whether Oswald was the lone shooter or not does not dispel an organised conspiracy !!with the associations Oswald had and then the convenient offing of Oswald by Ruby who had mob connections and then the convenient death of Ruby shortly after ...i mean come on !!

I remember as a kid being more upset over the shooting of Oswald than the shooting of JFK

I had seen hundreds of people shot on TV and didn't think much of it. But Oswald was shot on live TV and I knew it was real.
Nobody saw the Zapruder film until ten years later

 

[yidnar]

whether Oswald was the lone shooter or not does not dispel an organised conspiracy !!with the associations Oswald had and then the convenient offing of Oswald by Ruby who had mob connections and then the convenient death of Ruby shortly after ...i mean come on !!

I remember as a kid being more upset over the shooting of Oswald than the shooting of JFK

I had seen hundreds of people shot on TV and didn't think much of it. But Oswald was shot on live TV and I knew it was real.
Nobody saw the Zapruder film until ten years later

it was disturbing !! and there are just to many coincidences for me to believe that it was not a conspiracy !! Oswald may have been the only shooter but his affiliations and the convenient deaths of Oswald and Ruby is very suspicious !!i still suggest reading Double Cross ...a book written by Sam Giancanas brother !! it is a great book about the inside workings of the mob whether you believe it links organized crime to the assassination or not !

 

[jon_berzerk]

whether Oswald was the lone shooter or not does not dispel an organised conspiracy !!with the associations Oswald had and then the convenient offing of Oswald by Ruby who had mob connections and then the convenient death of Ruby shortly after ...i mean come on !!

I remember as a kid being more upset over the shooting of Oswald than the shooting of JFK

I had seen hundreds of people shot on TV and didn't think much of it. But Oswald was shot on live TV and I knew it was real.
Nobody saw the Zapruder film until ten years later

i do not directly remember much of the JFK assassination

other then the many folks that came to our house

since we had been one of the few with a tv in the neighborhood

 

[Bfgrn]

There is no evidence of more than three shots and thousands of witnesses. For your multiple shooter theory there would have been a killing zone with pop, pop, pop, pop, pop from multiple directions

There were three shots fired with gaps in between

Some conspiracy

There were not 'thousands of witnesses. There were hundreds.

About 40 witnesses to the assassination of President Kennedy claimed either to have heard gunshots from the grassy knoll in the northwest corner of Dealey Plaza, or to have seen smoke or smelled gunpowder in that area.

Interviewing the Dealey Plaza Witnesses

Several of these witnesses were interviewed by newspaper, radio and television reporters immediately after the assassination. The interviews were influential in generating doubt about the lone–gunman theory. Many other interviews have been carried out in the years since the assassination, almost all of them by private researchers.

Examination of photographs and home movies suggests that there were perhaps as many as 600 people in Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination. Official interviews or statements exist for around 200 of these witnesses. Because the Warren Commission did no investigation of its own, almost all of the witnesses who testified before the Commission were chosen from those who had already made official statements. The other 400 or so, including many of the spectators nearest to the president, were never interviewed officially at all. Few of these missing witnesses were identified, even when the authorities had been informed of their existence (Warren Commission Hearings, vol.15, pp.525f).

In many cases, the witnesses appear not to have been asked about the origin of the shots. Of those who were asked, probably a small majority claimed that the shots came from the general direction of the Texas School Book Depository. A handful of people claimed to have heard shots from both directions. Many had no opinion.


The Guns of Dealey Plaza

If Oswald were the only shooter there would have to be at least 2.3 seconds between shots, assuming he used the telescopic sight found on the Mannlicher Carcano. The three shots that the Warren Commission claimed were fired from Oswald's rifle could not have been shot faster than 6.9 seconds. Secret Service Agent Roy Kellerman described the shots as a "flurry." Two of the shots were often described by witnesses as so closely spaced that they seemed "simultaneous" and had "practically no time element between them." Additionally, there is a substantial amount of testimony, presented in this article, that describes the later shots as sounding different from the first shot. Governor Connally's initial reaction to the gunfire was "that there were either two or three people involved or more in this or someone was shooting with an automatic rifle." [65]

A double sound, or bang, is described by three Secret Service agents. Two of these agents sat within feet of Kennedy as occupants of the limousine. A double shot was reported by one of the witnesses standing on the overpass.

Special Agent William Greer, the limousine driver, testified that "the last two shots seemed to be just simultaneously, one behind the other." [66]

The other Secret Serviceman in the limousine was Roy Kellerman. Agent Kellerman sat next to Greer and was intimately familiar with the sound of weapons. He described the first shot like many others had, as sounding like a firecracker. But the other two shots, which he officially reported as a "flurry," sounded different than the first shot. Asked by Mr. Specter if Kellerman could describe the sound of the flurry of shots by way of distinction of the first shot, Kellerman replied " ... if I recall correctly these were two sharp reports, sir." Did they sound different from the first shot, asked Specter. "Yes. Definitely. Very much so." Kellerman added: " ... "Let me give you an illustration ... You have heard the sound barrier, of a plane breaking the sound barrier, bang, bang? That is it. It was like a doublebang --- bang, bang." [67]

In Warren Commission testimony Special Agent Hickey described "two reports which I thought were shots ... that there seemed to be practically no time element between them." [68]

Clint Hill, the agent who threw himself into the limousine after the shooting, told the Commission that the second noise he heard was different from the first shot " ... like the sound of shooting a revolver into something hard... almost a double sound." [69]

S.M. Holland carefully watched the motorcade from the railroad overpass. He heard four shots with the third and fourth sounding like a "double shot." He thought some of the shots came from behind the fence on the grassy knoll. "Well it would be like you're firing a .38 pistol right beside a shotgun, or a .45 right beside a shotgun... the third shot was not so loud ... the third and fourth shot hit the President." [70]

Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig. "The first shot ... sort of like it reverberated ... well, it was quite a pause between there [the first and second shots] ... It could have been a little longer [than two or three seconds]... " Between the second and third shots there was "no more than two seconds. It was--they were real rapid." [71]

Joe R. Molina. "... Of course, the first shot was fired then there was an interval between the first and second, longer than the second and third." [72]

Seymour Weitzman. "First one, then the second two seemed to be simultaneously." [73]

Ladybird Johnson. " ... suddenly there was a sharp loud report--a shot. It seemed to me to come from the right, above my shoulder, from a building. Then a moment and then two more shots in rapid succession." [74]

Special Agent Forrest V. Sorrels. "There was to me about twice as much time between the first and second shots as there was between the second and third shots." [75]

Congressman Ralph W. Yarborough. "... by my estimate--to me there seemed to be a longer time between the first and second shots, a much shorter time between the second and third shots... after the first shot about three seconds another shot boomed out, and after what I took to be one-half the time between the first and second shots ... the third shot about one and one-half seconds after the second shot ..." [76]

Mayor Earle Cabell. "There was a longer pause between the first and second shots than there was between the second and third shots. They were in rather rapid succession." [77]

Special Agent Sam A. Kinney. "I saw the President lean toward the left and appeared to have grabbed his chest with his right hand. There was a second of pause and then two more shots were heard ... " [78]

Special Agent William A. McIntyre. "The Presidential vehicle was approximately 200 feet from the underpass when the first shot was fired, followed in quick succession by two more. I would estimate that all three shots were fired within five seconds. After the second shot, I looked at the President and witnessed his being struck in the head by the third and last shot." [79]

Special Agent George Hickey (in reference to the second and third shots). "At the moment he was almost sitting erect I heard two reports, which I thought were shots and that appeared to me completely different in sound than the first report and were in such rapid succession that there seemed to be practically no time element between them." [80]

Special Agent Warren W. Taylor. "In the instant that my left foot touched the ground, I heard two more bangs and realized that they must be gun shots." [81]

Linda Willis. "Yes, I heard one. Then there was a little bit of time, and then there were two real fast bullets together. When the first one hit, well, the President turned from waving to the people, and he grabbed his throat, and he kind of slumped forward, and then I couldn't tell where the second shot went." [82]

Special Agent Rufus Youngblood. "There seemed to be a longer span of time between the first and the second shot than there was between the second and third shot." [83] " ... from the beginning at the sound of the first shot to the second or third shot, happened with a few seconds." [84]

Robert Jackson. "I would say to me it seemed like three or four seconds between the first and the second, and between the second and third, well, I guess two seconds, they were very close together ... " [85]

Arnold Rowland. "The actual time between the reports I would say now, after having had time to consider the six seconds between the first and second report and two between the second and third." [86]

Luke Mooney. "... The second and third shot was pretty close together, but there was a short lapse there between the first and second shot." [87]

Ms. Mitchell (Mary Ann Mitchell). "... there were three---the second and third being closer together than the first and second ... " [88]

Lee Bowers "I heard three shots. One, then a slight pause, then two very close together ... also reverberation from the shots." [89]

Jean Hill. "There were three shots -- one right after the other, and a distinct pause, or just a moment's pause, and I heard more ... " And concerning the shots that followed the first three Ms. Hill said they were "quicker -- more automatic." [90]

There is always confusion in the fog of war. But a consensus seems to be threes shots and three shots were accounted for

If there was a conspiracy involving CIA, MAFIA, Cuba, Russia, LBJ (pick one) don't you think they would want to do the job right?
Multiple shooters with precise semiautomatic rifles. Pepper the presidents limo, kill the driver, be sure of the kill
Instead, the geniuses have an undependable, unstable loner with a $19.95 bolt action rifle

Some conspiracy

My approach has always been not to create a conspiracy. If Oswald was the lone assassin that is fine. BUT...the physical, forensic, medical, ballistic, film, eyewitness and all pertinent evidence should prove Oswald was the lone assassin. NONE of the evidence proves Oswald was the lone assassin. to the contrary; ALL of it points to more than one gunman.


"The great enemy of truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth – persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
President John F. Kennedy – Commencement Address at Yale University, Old Campus, New Haven, Connecticut, June 11, 1962

 

[Bfgrn]

The Kennedy assassination is the place where Historians go to die.

Want to know why I say that?

Because there is so much information/misinformation out there, information that no honest historian can either confirm or discredit, that it is quite impossible for any of us truly know what to believe.

Oh we can all have our suspicions...I know I do.

But for an honest historian, suspicion is NOT enough to advance an historical narrative.

Honestly ed, there have been some excellent private investigations into the JFK assassination. Men like the late Harold Weisberg, a former investigator for the Senate Committee on Civil Liberties and analyst for the Office of Strategic Services in World War II.

The late Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, who served as Chief of Special Operations for the Joint Chiefs of Staff under President John F. Kennedy. A former colonel in the United States Air Force, from 1955–1964 he was assigned to U.S. Air Force Headquarters where he directed the creation of an Air Force worldwide system for "Military Support of the Clandestine Operations of the CIA"

But the forces behind the 'official' truth have done a great job of marginalizing and discrediting these men, not based on their work, facts or evidence. Instead they created a cultural norm that anyone who listens to these men are defective human beings, they are 'kooks', 'conspiracy nuts' and 'whack jobs'.

What I always find ironic, is the people who argue all day long that our government lies to us suddenly defend to the death a government lie. The highest level of government stated their intentions 3 days after President Kennedy was assassinated, and 1 day after Oswald was silenced forever.

As I started on this thread, the Katzenbach Memo clearly states the intentions of the President of the United States, the Director of the FBI and the Justice Department:

November 25, 1963

MEMORANDUM FOR MR. MOYERS

It is important that all of the facts surrounding President Kennedy's Assassination be made public in a way which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told and that a statement to this effect be made now.

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

2. Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy or (as the Iron Curtain press is saying) a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists. Unfortunately the facts on Oswald seem about too pat-- too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc.). The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory, and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus silenced.

3. The matter has been handled thus far with neither dignity nor conviction. Facts have been mixed with rumour and speculation. We can scarcely let the world see us totally in the image of the Dallas police when our President is murdered.

I think this objective may be satisfied by making public as soon as possible a complete and thorough FBI report on Oswald and the assassination. This may run into the difficulty of pointing to in- consistencies between this report and statements by Dallas police officials. But the reputation of the Bureau is such that it may do the whole job. The only other step would be the appointment of a Presidential Commission of unimpeachable personnel to review and examine the evidence and announce its conclusions. This has both advantages and disadvantages. It think it can await publication of the FBI report and public reaction to it here and abroad.

I think, however, that a statement that all the facts will be made public property in an orderly and responsible way should be made now. We need something to head off public speculation or Congressional hearings of the wrong sort.

Nicholas deB. Katzenbach

Deputy Attorney General

 

[legaleagle_45]

oswald shot Kennedy

with a non magic bullet

in a average distance

With the help of Evil Bert.

 

[daws101]

I suggest a psychiatrist to help you overcome the trauma scars and insecurity. I don't believe in conspiracy theories. But I am intelligent enough to be able to examine events with logic, science and skepticism.

Try this one on for size...some facts and deductive reasoning.

I already posted the Katzenbach Memo. Did you read it? It is real. The highest levels of our government vehemently believed:

1. The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial.

2. Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off

Do you honestly believe any commission selected by the same highest levels of our government and ALL evidence for that commission was provided by the same highest levels of our government would reach any other conclusion than "Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial" ???

What type of backlash, panic and outrage would have occurred if the government came out and said President Kennedy was assassinated by more than one gunman and they are still at large?? WHAT possible benefit would there be to the United States if they came out and said anything but: "Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial"????

really? since not everything is deducible and the facts you talk about are after the fact then you are no closer then you were when you started studying the jfk assassination.

I know that Oswald was not the lone assassin. So there was, by definition, a conspiracy.

no you don't, by definition you've convinced yourself there was a conspiracy .no hard evidence has ever been found to disprove Oswald worked alone.

 

[daws101]

really? since not everything is deducible and the facts you talk about are after the fact then you are no closer then you were when you started studying the jfk assassination.

I know that Oswald was not the lone assassin. So there was, by definition, a conspiracy.

Simple question

How did multiple assassins manage to only get off three shots?

muskets!

 

[daws101]

I know that Oswald was not the lone assassin. So there was, by definition, a conspiracy.

Simple question

How did multiple assassins manage to only get off three shots?

Most witnesses heard 3 shots. That doesn't eliminate the possibility that there were more shots not heard.

Secret Service agent Roy H. Kellerman who was in the passenger seat of the Presidential limousine stated to the Warren Commission that "there has to be more than three shots, gentleman" and that a "flurry of shells" came into the car.

But the most damning testimony is the multitude of witnesses who described the timing and cadence of the 3 shots heard as: bang............................................bang, bang.

The rifle recovered on the 6th floor of the TSDB was a bolt action rifle. That rifle is not capable of that timing and cadence.

ear witness testimony is not reliable and not admissible as evidence. it's kinda like hear say.
and you're wrong about the rifle the clip in post #49 prove it.

 

[numan]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Now what is extraordinary about political assassinations? History is full of examples of them.

Perhaps your attitude is that the glorious USA is so infinitely superior [snicker] to other nations that such baseness could not be a factor in its history, as it is in so many lesser countries.

I wish that such might be so, but I see little evidence that it is.
.

 

[legaleagle_45]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

Now what is extraordinary about political assassinations? History is full of examples of them..

Nothing extraordinary about political assinations. What is extraordinary is to speculate that entire government agencies were complicit with the mob and Castro and the USSR in pulling off a coup to place Johnson in power so he could drag us further into Vietnam and thereby obey the wishes of our evil overlords who are shape shifting reptilian aliens from the Constellation Draco.. at least according to David Icke and the his ground breaking book which reveals the conspiracy theory of all conspiracy theories... "The Biggest Secret" . Did you know that George W. Bush, Queen Elizabeth II, Kris Kristofferson, and Boxcar Willie are all shape shifting reptillian aliens from the constellation Draco? Its true!!

David Icke - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And, of course, Evil Bert was involved in taking out Jack Ruby!!!

 

[numan]

Do you honestly believe any commission selected by the same highest levels of our government, and ALL evidence for that commission was provided by the same highest levels of our government, would reach any other conclusion than "Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial" ???

What type of backlash, panic and outrage would have occurred if the government came out and said President Kennedy was assassinated by more than one gunman and they are still at large?? WHAT possible benefit would there be to the United States if they came out and said anything but: "Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial"????

This consideration seems to me to be quite valid -- indeed, quite obvious.

What one might expect, in such a situation, is that, over time, the people truly responsible for killing Kennedy would be hunted down and killed or harmed significantly by highly placed individuals or organizations -- if for no other reason than to discourage others who might try such shenanigans in the future.

Reams have been written about the government supposedly systematically killing inconvenient witnesses to the truth, but I am not aware of any significant study of potential assassins being hunted down after the assassination. It might be an interesting avenue to follow.

Of course, if the real assassins were themselves the highly placed individuals or organizations....
.

 

[legaleagle_45]

Of course, if the real assassins were themselves the highly placed individuals or organizations....
.

Or even shape shifting reptilian aliens from the Constellation Draco!!

 

[numan]

Nothing extraordinary about political assinations. What is extraordinary is to speculate that entire government agencies were complicit with the mob and Castro and the USSR in pulling off a coup to place Johnson in power so he could drag us further into Vietnam and thereby obey the wishes of our evil overlords who are shape shifting reptilian aliens from the Constellation Draco..

Legal Eagle!! I am surprised at you!! You failed to mention the Oil Depletion Allowance in Texas!! · ·
.

 

[Truthseeker420]

really? since not everything is deducible and the facts you talk about are after the fact then you are no closer then you were when you started studying the jfk assassination.

I know that Oswald was not the lone assassin. So there was, by definition, a conspiracy.

no you don't, by definition you've convinced yourself there was a conspiracy .no hard evidence has ever been found to disprove Oswald worked alone.

What do you mean hard evidence? The United States House Select Committee on Assassinations ruled President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. And chastised the Warren Commission for it's inept investigation and only looking at the lone gunman theory.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

I know that Oswald was not the lone assassin. So there was, by definition, a conspiracy.

no you don't, by definition you've convinced yourself there was a conspiracy .no hard evidence has ever been found to disprove Oswald worked alone.

What do you mean hard evidence? The United States House Select Committee on Assassinations ruled President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. And chastised the Warren Commission for not it's inept investigation.

Congress did not "chastise" the Warren commission.

What a silly claim.

 

[Truthseeker420]

no you don't, by definition you've convinced yourself there was a conspiracy .no hard evidence has ever been found to disprove Oswald worked alone.

What do you mean hard evidence? The United States House Select Committee on Assassinations ruled President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. And chastised the Warren Commission for not it's inept investigation.

Congress did not "chastise" the Warren commission.

What a silly claim.

Calling an investigation inept sounds like it to me...