Single Bullet, Single Gunman ( Who Shot JFK)

[133724]

THE ability to use advanced forensics and minuscule traces of DNA to solve crimes, even cold cases decades old, has turned many Americans into armchair sleuths seeking to “solve” the unexpected deaths of people like Princess Diana and Anna Nicole Smith. But sometimes, old-fashioned evidence is as useful in solving puzzles as anything under a nuclear microscope.

Last weekend, a never-before-seen home movie was made public showing President John F. Kennedy’s motorcade just before his assassination. An amateur photographer, George Jefferies, took the footage and held onto it for more than 40 years before casually mentioning it to his son-in-law, who persuaded him to donate it to the Sixth Floor Museum in Dallas. The silent 8-millimeter color film was of interest to most people simply because it showed perhaps the clearest close-up of Jacqueline Kennedy taken that morning.

But to assassination researchers, the footage definitively resolves one of the case’s enduring controversies: that the bullet wound on Kennedy’s back, as documented and photographed during the autopsy, did not match up with the location of the bullet hole on the back of his suit jacket and shirt. The discrepancy has given conspiracy theorists fodder to argue that the autopsy photos had been retouched and the report fabricated.

This is more than an academic debate among ballistics buffs. It is critical because if the bullet did enter where shown on the autopsy photos, the trajectory lines up correctly for the famous “single bullet” theory — the Warren Commission hypothesis that one bullet inflicted wounds to both Kennedy and Gov. John Connally of Texas. However, if the hole in the clothing was the accurate mark of where the bullet entered, it would have been too low for a single bullet to have inflicted all the wounds, and would provide evidence of a second assassin.

<snip>

The new film has finally resolved the issue. At the end of the clip, as the camera focuses on the backs of the president and first lady, Kennedy’s suit is significantly bunched up, with several layers creased together. Only 90 seconds before Lee Harvey Oswald fired the first shot, Kennedy’s suit jacket was precisely in the position to misrepresent the bullet’s entry point.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/opinion/21posner.html?ex=1329714000&en=0714defad05ca6f9&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Conspiracy theory???? don't think so

[GreenZoneLT]

1. There are no credible doubts about Kennedy's assassination

Gerald Posner did an exhaustive review of all the conspiracy theory objections in "Case Closed," as well as researching Oswald's life and whereabouts and the eyewitness accounts of the shooting. You really can't conclude anything other than that the Warren Commission was exactly right. Oswald shot him from the School Depository, acting alone, because he wanted to be a big shot, after failing to be a successful student, Marine, communist or husband. Ruby shot Oswald because Ruby was a half a nut who loved Kennedy.

Every other theory relies on supposition and hypotheses that don't square with the known facts.

[LostinVA]

20. Posner had an agenda, and some of his methodology has been criticized

Having said that, I'm not sure WTF happened that day in Dallas, and figure none of us will ever know. Not definitively, anyway.

[WinkyDink]

32. MANY other books refute Posner. And I've read virtually every one.

I think the single-assassin theory is hogwash.

But then, I've never been impressed by Official Government Reports.

[wuushew]

58. what was the weapon that second gunman used?

Firing a rifle tends to be loud noticable affair. Do you believe Kennedy was killed by a weapon similar to the bolt action rifle Oswald used?

[ProfessorGAC]

33. Perhaps, Except It's Posner Saying It

And, Posner is, to put it bluntly, an idiot. I wouldn't trust him to tell me it's raining. He doesn't do research. He fits facts to his already established conclusions. That's not detective work. In school we would all call it CHEATING!
The Professor

[NoGOPZone]

51. No fan of Posner here.

He'll select the evidence that supports his theory and discard the rest. One example. He cites that the testimony of witness James Worrell supports the "Warren Commission conclusion about the location of the assassin." What Posner doesn't tell you is Worrell also testified to hearing FOUR shots, contrary to what the official story tell us.

Posner's theories as to Oswald's motivations are also flawed, IMHO. If Oswald wanted to be a big shot, why was he not reveling in the attention he was getting after being arrested? He denied shooting anyone and seemed most concerned with obtaining a lawyer. This doesn't seem consistent with the notion that Oswald was motivated by a desire for notoriety.

(Spelling and style edits)

[Liberal OIF Vet]

52. I read his book as well.....

And it did not sway me. I get sick off people trying to convince me that my eyes and knowledge of physics and ballistics tell me. They don't want me to believe my lying eyes.

[Octafish]

57. How about the Oswald impersonations in Mexico City?

CIA swore to the Warren Commission this was Oswald.

Learn more:

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Lee_Harvey_Oswald

[alcibiades_mystery]

100. Al Bundy shot Kennedy!

I knew it!

[Octafish]

118. There's nothing funny about the assassination of President Kennedy.

We the People really lost somebody special on Nov. 22, 1963. John F. Kennedy was the last President we've had who told those who think of themselves as the powers-that-be where they could go.


Those who think otherwise can go to hell.

[alcibiades_mystery]

120. Whatever

Killjoy.

Your romanticization of Kennedy and the era are pathetic and sad.

[JackRiddler]

65. Indeed, there are no credible doubts about the Coup d'Etat of 1963...

And Americans with a brain stopped having any right after they saw a mobster with a fatal disease throw himself at Oswald to kill him on live TV, so important was it to silence the patsy. Or perhaps right after a Warren Commission member started doubting the magic bullet theory, only to have his plane crash a few weeks later (Hale Boggs). Or perhaps when there was a rash of car fatalities and shotgun suicides involving people who were about to testify to the House Committee on Assassinations in 1975, including the Bush family associate George de Mohrenschildt, who had been Oswald's controller in Texas after his return from a US spying mission in Russia (called a "defection"). Or perhaps after that Committee concluded there were two gunmen. Or perhaps on reading about the views of Nixon, Al Haig and White House aide Haldeman on the veracity of the Warren Commission in their statements and memoirs (hell, why should these guys know anything?). But hey, Gerald Posner cleared all that up for us, and the Jacket was Bunched. Therefore one bullet caused the seven wounds, cracked the windshield and left fragments around the car, only to show up near-intact on Connally's stretcher, amen.

Coup d'Etat, that's what happens in other countries. That's what real historians write about when it happens in other countries. That's what the CIA does in other countries (like in Vietnam about three weeks before the Kennedy job). It's inconceivable in this country. Only conspiracy theorists write about it here.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

70. And the choir says....

Amen. Good synopsis.

[StrictlyRockers]

131. Amen brother.

Speak da truth.

Knowledge is power.

SR

[Archae]

2. Uh oh...133724...

Now the tinfoil hat conspiracy wacks will come out of the woodwork, flaming you up the wazoo.

Even on "Mythbusters" they showed how a single bullet could have caused the wounds to Kennedy AND Connelly, without having to "zig zag" like the CT's keep whining about.

It's been over 40 years now.
TO DATE, none of the "conspiracy theories" ever have been backed up by *ANY* credible evidence, just lots of wild-ass theories, outright lies and grandstanding assholes like the biggest one, Garrison.

[zeemike]

18. Any credible evidence?

Now that is a joke is it not?
What you mean to say is no evidence that the comity was willing to hear.
Like the on camera testimony by a soldier that was standing on the grassy knoll and claimed a bullet flew past his left side from behind as he filmed the event with his mothers movie camera. and After he got off the ground three men were there ant took the film away from him.
And his presents on the grassy knoll was confirmed by frames from another camera across the plaza.
Now that is just one of the witnesses that the comity refused to hear, and that you pretend do not exist.

[WinkyDink]

28. The Pristine Bullet< anyone? Prove THAT is possible.

[Zynx]

74. 1. It's a FMJ with high sectional density. 2. It actually was somewhat damaged

[GreenZoneLT]

102. Well, fine, except it's not remotely pristine

The bullet is flattened badly, and a good chunk of the lead core was found in Connally. Test firing into torsos placed in the same relationship produces a nearly identically distorted bullet. Test firing into wrist bones at 1,000 fps, the estimated speed of the bullet after being slowed by going through Kennedy's and Conally's bodies without directly impacting bone, shows and almost unmarked bullet.

All your "magic bullet" nonsense debunked here:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm

End-on picture of the bullet in question. Pristine my ass.

[JackRiddler]

71. EVEN ON MYTHBUSTERS?

Really, Mythbusters did that? I guess it's all settled, they're like a university, right? They're like Encyclopedia Britannica and Encyclopedia Brown wrapped into one!

[Zhade]

98. ...

:rofl:

Indeed!

[PDittie]

3. It's been a great ride for 43 years

for the conspiracy theorists, but the party's over.

(I realize that this is a completely twisted way of summarizing this chapter of American history, but there it is anyway.)

[StrictlyRockers]

4. Riiight. That must be why the Congressional Select Committee concluded it was a conspiracy, right?

The United States House of Representatives Select Committee on Assassinations was established in 1976 to investigate the John F. Kennedy assassination and the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. assassination. The Committee investigated until 1978, and in 1979 issued its final report, concluding that President John F. Kennedy was assassinated probably as a result of a conspiracy.

I'll take the authority of a congressional investigation over some weird theory you are trumpeting on the internets that is based on how much Kennedy's suit was seen to be bunched up prior to being shot.

Also, I read "Case Closed". That piece of work is so poorly researched and uses such twisted logic that it convinced me that the reverse of its argument is more likely the truth. That book is not credible. Have you read it? It is bad in many ways.

No, thanks, I'll tend to stick with the conclusion Congress found in its investigation - JFK was assassinated by a conspiracy. You can believe whatever author you choose. Me? I'm sticking with my Congress. I trust the reasoned, conclusive evidence which our Congress found. It showed that JFK was most likely assassinated by a conspiracy.

But hey, just because you are an American does not mean you have to believe in our Congress. You can believe whatever crackpot theories you want.

SR

[GreenZoneLT]

8. Yeah, I've read "Case Closed."

Not sure where you get your opinions on research. Thorough documentation and meticulous footnoting doesn't constitute shoddiness.

The Select Committee on Assassinations, btw, also concluded the single-bullet theory was correct, and that Oswald was the only person who shot Kennedy.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/hscareport.htm

The Select Committee concluded that the assassin fired three shots, two of which struck and killed Kennedy, from the sixth floor window of the Texas Book Depository, and that the shots were fired from Oswald's rifle, and that he had motive and opportunity to be there.

Their only reason for concluding there was "probably" a second gunman was the sound evidence of a fourth shot. This is now a moot point, as later research found that the fourth "shot" was a result of echoes in Dealey Plaza, which have been duplicated in tests.

To quote the committee findings: "# A. Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at President John F. Kennedy. The second and third shots he fired struck the President. The third shot he fired killed the President.

1. President Kennedy was struck by two rifle shots fired from behind him.
2. The shots that struck President Kennedy from behind him were fired from the sixth floor window of the southeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository building.
3. Lee Harvey Oswald owned the rifle. that was used to fire the shots from the sixth floor window of the southeast comer of the Texas School Book Depository building.
4. Lee Harvey Oswald, shortly before the assassination, had access to and was present on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository building.
5. Lee Harvey Oswald's other actions tend to support the conclusion that he assassinated President Kennedy.

# B. Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that two gunmen fired at President John F. Kennedy. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.
# C. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy.

1. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Soviet Government was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.
2. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Cuban Government was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.
3. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that anti-Castro Cuban groups, as groups, were not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.
4. The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the national syndicate of organized crime, as a group, was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved."

Which was all in "Case Closed," btw. You sure you read it?

[Ian David]

27. I think JFK's head was imploded from the inside by very small Israeli art students.

:sarcasm:

[StrictlyRockers]

126. The book just drips with footnotes, you are correct.

If footnotes are to be used as your main indicator of authenticity and believability, than you certainly have found a winner here. Congratulations on your credulity.

SR

[TheWatcher]

5. Self-Delete

Not even worth the response.

[MadHound]

6. This proves nothing friend

Clothes can bunch and unbunch several times within a minute, depending on the person's movement. As far as Oswald being the lone gunman, there is still too much evidence out there that points away from a lone gunman and towards a conspiracy. But hey, if it brings you comfort and warmth at night, allowing you to sleep securely, believe what you want. I, and the majority of Americans, will continue to disbelieve the magic bullet theory, and those few but dedicated will continue to search for the truth.

[GreenZoneLT]

10. The majority of Americans believe in Biblical creationism

I wouldn't get too comfy with that majority. They believe a lot of other stupid shit, too.

[unpossibles]

15. good point, Hell, a lot of them probably believe in

cats with angel wings, and other outlandish crap, like alien abductions, a liberal press, and how Bush is a great President.

[MadHound]

30. Actually the majority of Americans DON'T believe in creationism

Not that your strawman actually relates to the discussion, but I thought I would correct your misimpression anyway<http://people-press.org/commentary/display.php3?AnalysisID=118>

But let's get back to the evidence of the JFK case. For instance, how do you explain the last minute change in the motorcade route that brought JFK through Dealy plaza, right into the sights of Oswald? Could Oswald have done that? I think not. How do you explain the many, many people, some of them battlefield vetrans, who saw the muzzle flash and/or smoke coming from the Grassy Knoll when Kennedy suffered his final shot? How do you explain how Oswald was able to hide a gun, run downstairs, and be sitting calmly eating his lunch, without breaking a sweat, ninety seconds after the shots were fired, all without three witnesses on the stairs seeing him? How do you explain how a man who barely passed his marksmanship tests in the Marines was able to fire 3 shots, two accurately, in 5.8 seconds, through the cover of a live oak, with a crappy gun whose scope was far from perfect alignment? How did a paper in New Zealand come up with this: "This time-zone oversight and resultant foul-up was pointed out by Col Fletcher Prouty, an officer in the USA mililtary, in his book THE GUNS OF DALLAS *:

quoting from the book: "I happened to be far away in New Zealand at the time of JFK's murder. I was on my way to breakfast (the crime occurred at 6:30AM on the 23rd of November there) with a member of Congress from Ohio. As soon as possible, we purchased the first newspaper available -- the Christchurch Star. It is amazing to re-read the front page of that paper today and find all of the detail, the remarkable detail, about Lee Harvey Oswald, about his service in the Marine Corps, about his living in Russia, about his Russian wife, and then the full scenario of the crime." What, did Oswals send his complete bio, along with his intentions, to this New Zealand paper?

These are but a few of the questions surrounding the JFK assasination, none of which have been adequately answered. Instead those steadfast believers in the "official story" use ridicule and strawman arguements to try and silence their critics, much like you're doing. But the fact of the matter is that the official story has no answer for these looses ends, all of which lead to the conclusion that the House Select Committee on Assasinations came to(albeit relunctantly) that the JFK murder was indeed the result of a conspiracy.

But hey, if you've got some real, solid answers to these questions, I'm happy to listen. Unlike those who believe in the "official story" my mind isn't closed to other speculation or facts. All I'm doing is following the truth where it leads me. And sadly, the official story is rather short on the truth.

[benEzra]

36. That part, at least, isn't hard...

How do you explain how a man who barely passed his marksmanship tests in the Marines was able to fire 3 shots, two accurately, in 5.8 seconds, through the cover of a live oak, with a crappy gun whose scope was far from perfect alignment?

He was shooting at point blank range for a rifle. The longest shot was, IIRC, 88 yards. Shooting at 88 yards with a 4-power scope, from a rest, is like shooting a pistol at 5 yards. The Marine marksmanship test is a lot harder than that, and is shot without the benefit of a scope.

Three shots in 5.8 seconds is NOT particularly fast shooting for a clunky bolt-action. I tried that with an even clunkier bolt-action (well-worn Mosin-Nagant M44). At 5.8 seconds for 3 shots (I thought it was even shorter than that, but let's say 5.8), you have nearly 3 seconds between shots, which is much longer than you think.

Personally, I think Oswald was the sole shooter, but not the sole conspirator. He may have been, as he said, the "pansy," and I think his assassination by Ruby was a deliberate coverup.

[H2O Man]

37. "pansy"?

Not what he said.

[benEzra]

45. Oops...patsy (n/t)

[MadHound]

42. Point black range? I think not

Yes, 88 yds is not the long range shot that goes into top end competition, but Olympic and other sanctioned rifle ranges (including military ranges) generally use a 50 meter range for competition purposes, much shorter than 88yds. As you see, it isn't point blank range, it is actually something of a challenge.

And somehow, your math is faulty. It is mathematically impossible to have "nearly three seconds between shots", more like 2.5 seconds. I suggest that you redo your math. You're right though, it was 5.6 seconds, not 5.8. In addition, FBI marksmen, working with the exact same rifle model, could not fire three shots that were even semi-aimed in the time span allotted, much less hit a moving target through the cover of a fully leafed tree. It proved to be physically impossible. Throw an out of alignment scope on top of that, and what you've got is pure BS. I've done my own bolt action shooting also, and I agree with the FBI, it is virtually impossible to have that sort of accuracy in the allotted time with such a crappy rifle.

And again, how do you explain the other evidence that I mentioned? Especially since a hostile House Select Committee on Assasination reluctantly came to the conclusion that there were four shots fired, thus defacto meaning a conspiracy?

Too much evidence leads to there being more than one shooter.

[GreenZoneLT]

46. Math-challenged?

First shot. Wait 2.9 seconds. Second shot. Wait 2.9 seconds. Third shot. That's three shots, total time 5.8 seconds, roughly three seconds between shots. Two seconds is plenty of time to work a rifle bolt and reacquire a head-sized target at less than 100 yards. Sixty Minutes had a guy shoot at a moving, head-sized target at the same range and angle, with the same model rifle and scope, and he hit it all three times (Oswald's first bullet apparently hit the tree and went off target). Oswald won a Marine Corps marksman badge; he didn't "barely qualify." 50-meter Olympic rifle targets are the size of a deck of cards, and Oswald's two hits were a good 6-8 inches apart.

The other stuff either isn't true (witnesses clearly saw the gunman in the window; he wasn't "eating his lunch" 90 seconds after the shooting, the route was published in the newspaper) or is irrelevant. I explained the House Select committee's conclusion of a "high probability of a second gunman," which they STATED was based on acoustic evidence alone (they had no other reason to suspect a conspiracy, and had no idea who the other gunman might have been, or who Oswald would have conspired with). Their acoustic evidence has since been debunked by reproducible (and reproduced)experiment; they didn't have very good acoustic engineers working for them.

You can't on the one hand cite them as your proof of a conspiracy, and then deny all their conclusions about Oswald being the lone killer (they said the mystery gunman fired a shot that missed and left no physical trace).

There is, however, considerable evidence that Oswald was trying to assassinate somebody, ANYBODY, and that he stalked and barely missed shooting Gen. Edwin Walker in April, 1963. Walker was probably saved by the bullet deflecting off a window frame, not Oswald's poor marksmanship.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/walker.txt

[benEzra]

53. Thoughts...

Yes, 88 yds is not the long range shot that goes into top end competition, but Olympic and other sanctioned rifle ranges (including military ranges) generally use a 50 meter range for competition purposes, much shorter than 88yds. As you see, it isn't point blank range, it is actually something of a challenge.

You are incorrect...88 yards is indeed point blank range for a human target using a 4-power scope from a rest, both by the colloquial definition and by the technical definition (i.e. no elevation or azimuth compensation necessary). Leading the target would not be required from that angle and at that distance, and the range is so short that bullet drop is not an issue. And 88 yards was the LONGEST of the three shots.

An 11-year-old and a 13-year-old shot 15 people with scoped rifles from a significantly greater distance (~100 yards) in the Jonesboro school shooting, and they were hardly trained shooters, just a couple of punk kids.

In the Marines in 1956, Oswald qualified 48 or 49 for 50 at 200 yards using iron sights, shooting offhand, if my Web Fu skilz are up to snuff today (they may not be, darn flu).

Olympic 50-yard competition involves shooting with iron sights (not scopes), from unsupported positions (not from rests), and winning groups will be dime-sized. Hitting somewhere on an 8" target from a rest with a 4x scope is quite different than hitting a bullseye the size of a pencil eraser from an unsupported position using iron sights, which is why 50-yard Olympic marksmanship is impressive and Oswald's shot was less so.

And somehow, your math is faulty. It is mathematically impossible to have "nearly three seconds between shots", more like 2.5 seconds. I suggest that you redo your math. You're right though, it was 5.6 seconds, not 5.8.

5.8 seconds would have been 2.9 seconds between shots (nearly 3). 5.6 seconds for 3 shots is 2.8 seconds between shots, still a reasonable amount of time. Even if he lost the sight picture while working the clunky bolt, there was plenty of time. And only the second and third shots are on the timer, as it starts with the first shot; the first two are misses (assuming he's aiming for the head), and the third shot was almost a miss. Entirely believable, to me.

If you assume that the clean miss was the first shot and the torso hit was the 2nd shot, you have even more time (~8 seconds start to finish), but even using the commonly accepted 5.6 second time frame, it's not remarkable.

In addition, FBI marksmen, working with the exact same rifle model, could not fire three shots that were even semi-aimed in the time span allotted, much less hit a moving target through the cover of a fully leafed tree. It proved to be physically impossible.

It has been done on numerous occasions by many people, both formally and informally. If the FBI really did run those tests, I suspect they must have started on signal instead of starting the timer at the first shot. If *I* can fire two aimed followup shots 5.6 seconds after the first with a clunky bolt rifle, there's no reason to think that FBI sharpshooters couldn't, IMO.

And as I said, I don't think Oswald being the only active shooter rules out a wider conspiracy. I just don't see the alleged difficulty in the shot timing.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

54. I agree that 88 yds is not a hard shot, but...

According to the Warren report, LHO rifle was a piece of junk. The bolt was "balky" and the sights were misaligned. Even world-class FBI marksman could not duplicate what LHO did in Dealy Plaza. This is not to say that LHO was not a shooter. I beleive he was. I believe his was the shot that either missed or hit JFK in the back. But no way did he do the head shot. Physics do not allow for it.

[Toots]

39. Yes they do, like you are serving a Nobel cause in Iraq

I know what happens to a bullet when it passes through most anything. It does not stay intact. Especially after hitting numerous bones and muscle. This is one where people are not going to agree with you I would imagine no matter how adamant you are or how much you believe you know the truth and they don't.

[GreenZoneLT]

47. Another thing that's not true.

Do you shoot a lot? I've dug fully-jacketed bullets out of tree stumps that weren't heavily deformed. Military ammunition is designed not to mushroom or fragment the way hunting ammunition does. Again, reproducible experiments have shown that a similar bullet isn't heavily deformed when fired into a carcass from that range. That bullet supposedly went through flesh and cartilage of Kennedy's throat, into and through the flesh of Connally's torso, sideswiping his ribs, and didn't directly strike bone until it wound up in his wrist, by which time it was virtually spent. It's got a big dent on one side, apparently from hitting ribs. The way the two guys were sitting, the wound channels line up.

Here's the cross-section of the supposedly pristine "magic bullet."



Here's a photo of a test bullet and the Oswald bullet. Virtually identical.



http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=&imgrefurl=http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/sbt.htm&h=450&w=812&sz=54&hl=en&start=3&tbnid=iCxe3EHseBzsAM:&tbnh=80&tbnw=144&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dkennedy%2Bassassination%2Bbullet%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26rls%3DDVFD,DVFD:1970--2,DVFD:en%26sa%3DN

[rman]

7. As though the whole case hinges on that one issue.

Not.

[Selatius]

9. One mystery solved. The other mystery is where the bullet that took JFK's head off came from.

Did it come from behind from the book depository? Or did it come from somewhere in front?

[GreenZoneLT]

12. That's not a mystery, either.

The Warren Commission AND the Select Committee on Assassinations concluded it came from Oswald's Mannlicher-Carcano. The bullet entered the back of his skull and blew a big flap of skull open at the right front, ejecting brain matter forward (visible in the computer-enhanced Zapruder film, although I don't put too much stock in computer-enhanced anything). The elastic rebound of Kennedy's neck, plus simple physics (brain goes out the front, head goes back), caused the "mystery" of his head snapping backward.

They did a TV special based on "Cased Closed," showed the same counterintuitive thing happens when you shoot a watermelon. Melon pulp goes out in the direction of the shot, and the melon rocks back TOWARD the gun. The bullet's cross-section is too small to push the melon in the direction it's traveling; it penetrates rather than imparting much of that force.

[LostinVA]

21. Again, "Case Closed" was written with a very clear agenda

And methodology used in the book has been debunked.

I think Oswald shot Kennedy, but I also think there's compelling evidence that there was another gunman, although I do NOT think the assassination was a conspiracy.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

22. I believe.....

That Oswald was one of the shooters as well. His round is probably the one that hit JFK in the back. But it is a conspiracy because the gov't has denied, emphatically, that there was another shooter. Plus a conspiracy would explain all of the other shady things with the case as well (JFK's missing brains, the limo being cleaned and repaired despite it being evidence, the clean, pristine bullet found at Parkland, etc...)

[LostinVA]

24. Okay, I'll agree with your definition of "conspiracy"

I agree that the government fucked up and covered up. I guess I meant that I don't think Oswald and another shooter were in collusion with one another.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

25. Possible......

That is a theory that is plausible.

[GreenZoneLT]

101. Well, you can believe what you like.

But none of those things points to any given individual. It's pointless to claim a conspiracy without conspirators. And as I posted above, the Parkland bullet was far from pristine.

There are FAR too many unexplained and explained events that point AWAY from a conspiracy for me to think one is remotely likely.

[PhilipShore]

104. How about Jack Ruby working for Nixon

The Warren Commission denied that Ruby ever worked for the government.

It is clear to me something is not right. Ruby working for Nixon a rabid anti-liberal, and all the sudden Ruby is a great Kennedy fan, ranting things like a cult follower like -- Kennedy is greater then then Rock and Roll, after he allegedly shot Oswald, in a police basement (give me a break).

If he had even announced in Texas -- the fact -- he liked Kennedy in Texas, at that time, he would of lost 90% of his business income.

Secondly, if he was a geniune liberal fan of Kennedy: and the police in Texas knew it, Ruby would not of been able to get one foot in the door at the police department -- let alone the basement, simply because he was a liberal.

[JackRiddler]

66. Are you saying two guys opened fire simultaneously by coincidence? n/t

[zeemike]

34. I have seen the Zapruder film many times

As most of us have, and what I saw was consistent with a bullet from the front Left. The arguments for the physical evidence you give is bogus on several points.
But, what the bullet does depends on what kind of a bullet it is.
In the case of the bullet that went through Kennedy's back and into Conley it had a full metal jacket and passed cleanly through both men leaving only a small hole and was not deformed by the trip.
So there would have to be two kinds of bullets one with a full metal jacket and one hollow or exploding bullet for the head shot.
But that in itself makes inconsistency sense the body of Kennedy lurched forward with the pristine bullet and backward with the hollow point.
Sorry but no one that knows anything about guns is gonna buy it.

[Zynx]

75. Someone who knows anything about bullets knows the shot is from behind

There is no piece of ammunition that ONLY creates a large, explosive entry wound instead of a small entry wound and a large exit wound other than a point-blank shotgun blast.

Entry wounds are tiny.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

79. You ever heard of.....

Dum-Dum rounds? Didn't think so.

[Zynx]

84. As a matter of fact, as someone who has over ten years of experience

with firearms and has studied them closely, yes I have. I don't see how the Kennedy wound pattern is in anyway consistent with what you suggest.

[Thothmes]

107. Dum Dum Round

Even a flat nose bullet will still an entrance wound the size of the bullet. The exit wound will be very large.

[Richard Steele]

82. Your own words seem to contradict your premise.

You are clearly talking out your ass.

[Zynx]

83. You can say that about any statement. Where is this contradiction?

[Richard Steele]

86. Your "arguement" supports the premise of a round from the FRONT.

You don't even know enough to realize that.

[zeemike]

95. And no ammunition that

Makes the ejected material go in the direction of where the bullet came from. If it had came from behind that flap of scull and brains would have been on Conley's back not the trunk of the car.
And please no repeating of the theory that rewrites the laws of physics to say that it was rocket propelled or some such nonsense, that was invented to convince the choir.

[TX-RAT]

111. Not true

The head isn't much different than a melon, when impacted at high speed the fluid and material inside will eject in all direction, not just away from the point of impact.

[zeemike]

128. The head not much different than a mellon?

Now just think about that. Is a mellon encased in a shell that is as dense as bone?
Put that mellon in a scull of bone covered with skin and see which way that chunk of bone and skin goes when it it is hit with a hi powered projectile. I grantee it will not go in the opposite direction to the bullet.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

11. It's all about simple physics, people!

A shot to the back of the head would not make the head go to the back and to the left. If I throw a ball at the back of you head, which direction would your head go?

Simple physics. Back and to the left means his head was hit to the front and to the right. Simple physics.

[GreenZoneLT]

13. See link #12 for explanation

It is simple physics, but not the way you think.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

14. Nope...sorry...

You are the one who is mistaken. why would Jackie be going to the BACK of the limo to "pick up Jack's brains" if what you say is true? You know, the video shows her doing this and she was quoted as saying this. Simple physics. Shot from the front means brains in the back. Simple physics.

[GreenZoneLT]

16. She was scrambling in terror to get away from him

I don't know what she said later, but looking at the movie, she's getting the hell out of Dodge after his head exploded. And there would be brain matter splattered all over; the guy's head DID snap back and to the left; it's not like the bullet blew all of it out of his head.

So your theory is that TWO congressional committees are so unobservant that your off-the-cuff "physics" lesson didn't occur to them?

[Liberal OIF Vet]

17. No, they did not ignore physics.....

But if you tell a lie long enough, people will believe it. They told lies about SIMPLE PHYSICS and yet, 40 years later, people believe that these laws just happen to go away on a November day in 1963. I tend to believe that the laws of physics exist as they do today even on that day in 1963.

It really is that simple. Highe-speed object hits another, stationary object. Stationary object goes in the direct of the high speed object. Everytime. Simple physics. Back and to the left....front and to the right. Everytime.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

26. So....

She is in terror to get away from him, so she moves in the direction of the "shooter"? Sure. Very plausible *sarcasm*

[WinkyDink]

31. No. she explicitly stated she was going after a piece of the SKULL, not brains.

It's a significant point, as she was NOT scrambling to flee (wouldn't DUCKING be a more logical evasive action??). She stayed, cradling JFK's head.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

38. Seems to me.....

that the skull fragments would be to the front from a rear head shot, no? But alas, there are those who think physics was on vacation that day.

[WinkyDink]

48. I never said I thought all shots came from the TBD.

[rman]

59. Bull

You can see her grab something and then get back into her seat.

[dysfunctional press]

41. that might be true if he were hit with a blunt object- but a bullet acts differently...

the force of the impact isn't spread across the skull- the bullet penetrates- and then, when it exits the front of the head, the brain matter that comes along with it acts like a 'rocket-booster' to push the head backwards. there have been many filmed recreations of this effect.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

49. So you mean to tell me...

that the moment the projectile touches the scalp, that energy is not transfered if not for an instant? Sure. That explains it. *more sarcasm*

Seeing as how I have actually seen people shot before, this notion you are professing is flawed. Trust me.

[Zynx]

76. Bullets don't have enough force to actually move the head much by themselves

You can't knock someone's head several feet with a bullet impact anymore than you can blow someone off their feet with a shotgun.

The person's body has to do most of the work, and that's unpredictable.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

80. Wow......

Now a bullet traveling at thousands of feet per SECOND has very little energy to transfer to a stationary object. You ever play pool?

[Zynx]

81. Ever shot an animal, Einstein? Because I have and the body only moves

because the animal is dead and it falls down. The other motions are incidental and negligible.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

91. Never shot an animal....

But I have seen people get shot in Iraq. And you are clueless, my friend.

[Richard Steele]

85. You are wasting your time arguing with this one.

He gets his "knowledge" of firearms and ballistics from
reading things he doesn't understand, and then regurgitating
them half-remembered.

I've seen him insist that advertising buzzwords were scientific
ballistic terminology.

I suspect he's a 14 year old who subscribes to a lot of the 'gun porn'
type publications.

By the way, I haven't seen you before, so: Welcome to DU! :hi:

[TX-RAT]

112. The head offers little resistance.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

113. Little Resistance or not...

Energy is transferred, no?

[TX-RAT]

115. Of course it is

But in the case of a head shot, that energy will go in all directions, due to the amount of fluid.

see post 111

[TX-RAT]

114. You missed part of the equation

At the time the round hit his head, his chin was actually against his chest, as he was clutching his throat. It was the force of the round from behind that cause his head to recoil off his chest and go backwards.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

116. Recoil off of his chest?

Now thats a new one. Was his chest made out of tampoline material?

Simple Physics. There is no other way around it. The Laws of Physics were alive and well the day he was killed. The force of the bullet FROM THE RIGHT AND TO THE FRONT is what caused his head to recoil back and to the left. Laws of physics.

[TX-RAT]

117. Was his chest made out of tampoline material?

Now your getting ridiculous. Have you ever dropped a rock on concrete? It's not made of trampoline material either but will still bounce. I would even go so far as to. say the chest would have some trampoline effect, due to the flexibility of the rids and diaphragm.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

125. I am getting no more ridiculous...

than you contention that a shot from the rear (with his head bouncing off of his chest mind you) would make a stationary object jerk violently to the back and to the left.

So, that dog don't hunt.

[Selatius]

19. The Zapruder film, if anybody's interested

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-cri43ttTo

It's graphic, so you are warned.

[tetedur]

23. Simple anatomy

The "magic bullet" hypothesis--"that a bullet entered the back of the
President's neck, transited his neck without hitting any bony structures, exited
his throat right at the knot of his tie, entered John Connally's back, shattering a rib,exiting from his chest, damaging his right wrist and then entering his left thigh....
Even Posner's own diagram appears to shift the location from the official diagrams. The physicians who conducted the autopsy at Bethesda did not actually dissect the neck to determine the trajectory that this bullet is supposed to have taken but determined it as a matter of "inference". Thus, on page 4 of the autopsy
report, which may be found in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE (1998), p. 433, the following critical sentences may be found:
"2. The second wound presumably of entry is that described above in the upper right posterior thorax. . . . The missile path through the fascia and musculature cannot be easily probed. The wound presumably of exit was that described by Dr. Malcolm Perry in the low anterior cervical region."
Notice, in particular, that the entry and exit locations were matters of "presumption", which Humes defended on the basis of an "inference" drawn AFTER THE BODY HAD BEEN REMOVED FROM THE MORGUE for preparation for the funeral. After
conversations with Parkland that allegedly only took place on Saturday, he belatedly realized that the wound to the back must have been the entry for the wound to the throat as its exit! Also notice that the description of "the upper right posterior thorax", which is the upper-right portion of the chest cavity, does not quite place the wound where it has to be if the "magic bullet" hypothesis is true. Yet that is the basis for the theory!
...
Readers who are unfamiliar with this case may wonder how in the world, given all of this evidence, THE WARREN REPORT (1964) could have concluded that JFK was hit
at the back of the base of the neck. But, thanks to the good work of the ARRB, we
know the answer to that question. Gerald Ford, a member of the commission, had the
description of the wound changed from "his uppermost back" to "the back of his neck", a discovery that was among the first of the ARRB's important releases, which came in time for me to include parts of THE NEW YORK TIMES (3 July 1997) story in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE, p. 177. THE TIMES considered it important enough to print on p. A8, insuring that most readers would miss it!

Under these circumstances, it appears to be "piling on" to note that David W. Mantik,M.D., Ph.D., has now demonstrated that no bullet could have entered the President's neck at the location alleged and exited at the location alleged without impacting cervical vertebra, as Galanor's COVER-UP, Document 45, and MURDER IN DEALEY PLAZA (2000), pp. 3-4, explain.

Nor does it appear necessary to add that Malcolm Perry, M.D.,
who performed a tracheotomy in a vain attempt to save the President's life, described the wound to the throat as an entry wound three times during a press conference held at Parkland beginning at 3:16 PM, a report that was widely broadcast over radio and television that day--the transcript of which may now be found in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE as Appendix C--and even published in THE NEW YORK TIMES (23 November 1963), p. 2, which may also be found in ASSASSINATION SCIENCE, p. 15, and which has been confirmed by Charles Crenshaw, M.D., in his work and diagrams that may also be found there. So to simplify the challenge for lone nutters, let me merely ask:

WHERE DID THE BULLET THAT HIT THE PRESIDENT IN THE BACK ENTER?

Because if it was not at the base of the back of the neck, then THE WARREN REPORT
(1964), THE HSCA REPORT (1979), CASE CLOSED (1993), and every other work
taking it for granted cannot possibly be true. It follows that the throat wound and the damage to John Connally had to have been caused by separate shots and could not have been inflicted by a lone assassin. But if this most elementary assumption upon which they are based is false, then it is not conspiracy theorists who have been indulging in flights of fancy in support of their untenable hypotheses but lone nutters!"

More at: http://assassinationresearch.com/v1n1/lonenutter.html

[frogcycle]

29. I've been conflicted about this for 43 years

and still don't have a firm position one way or the other.

But this discussion raises a new question in my mind:

The explanation for the head entry/exit wounds and motion of the head makes sense - high-speed small profile projectile enters without transferring much energy to skull; deforms/fragments and causes explosive ejection of matter forward and head backward. OK. That physics works.

Another bullet from same weapon enters upper back, passes thru intact, enters Connolly, passes thru intact shattering a rib, hits his hand and then his thigh

Oh, and an intact bullet was found under the President's body

So were these rounds different? the head one was a fragmentation round and the others weren't?

[H2O Man]

35. "Man of the House"

On page 211 of his autobiography, Tip O'Neill tells how he had believed the Warren Commission until 1968. He was having lunch with Kenny O'Donnell and Dave Powers, and they told him about their experiences in Dallas. Both were sure that there were shots from the grassy knoll.

When Tip asked why they had testified differently to the Warren Commission, they told of being pressured by the FBI to lie.

I've been involved in and associated with a good many investigations in my time. And I can say without any question that an investigation that aims to identify the truth never involves pressuring eye-witnesses to lie. More, any investigation that involves pressuring eye-witnesses to lie is, by definition, attempting to cover up the truth.

[La_Fourmi_Rouge]

40. I wish DU had a "Un-Recommend" option. n/t

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

50. If simple physics....

is a "retarded" theory, then I will claim to be retarded for eternity then.

[cgrindley]

56. uh okay

get back on the short bus then

[PhilipShore]

44. Ed Morales and the Miami Cuban mafia and the Nazis

I have been researching Miami Florida banking connections, concerning a swindle operation -- that involved the probate estate of relatives of mine. It is huge the cover up; that started around 1967 -- and possibly even before to around the time of the Kennedy assassination, when I was an infant.

Because of 9/11 I decided to seriously research this, but the deeper I dig into this, the complications become -- more and more -- with the number of smoke and mirrors I encounter.

The relatives on my fathers side are Jewish, I am half Jewish, and was the beneficiary of an estate estimated to be worth forty million dollars in the 1940s, from real estate and supermarkets that my grandparents, and their relatives started and owned in New England before they retired and moved to Miami Beach.

But the accounting for the estate -- said the estate was worth, six hundred thousand dollars. Of course, at first -- this was one of my main questions I had; and when I questioned the bank that was the trustee, they said that around that time people frequently lied about owning things they did not, and that the estate was not worth more the forty million dollars, but the deeper I dug -- the possibility that they did own property worth that started to become -- more and more obvious.

I contacted the Rhode Island Jewish historical Society -- and they confirmed (which the bank denied) that at least 4 of my relatives were involved in the banking and real estate, and hospital -- industries in New England.

A real estate law firm (started by Henry Williams)-- was involved in the probate of my relatives estate in 1967, my grandfather died at age 63, and then a massive cover-up started, by means of not notifying the beneficiaries of the Will/Trust, and literally rewriting my relatives will/trust to benefit a Insurance manager, and their mother -- and a bank as the sole beneficiaries, and because they rewrote the Will-- no one that was ever the beneficiary (such as myself) of the original will could ever figure out -- they were a beneficiary of the Will --- at all because the document that rewrote the Will was not even in the court records, etc.

And then the smoke and mirrors gets more and more in number; I hire a PI to look into it, and they claim -- that one of the beneficiaries of the rewritten Will/Trust has hired a law firm that has connections with the WAshington DC GOP, (and someone in the Florida area told me that law firm is infamous for being involved in Florida Real Estate scams).

And on my own I dug up -- that that same bank has connections with the futures market company -- involved in shorting the market to profit from 9/11, and that same bank is the major bank that money laundered the money for the 9/11 terrorists, etc.

I think one of the facts -- now is one of the persons by the name of Ed Morales, whom was probably a wealthy Republican with CIA connections has some involvement in this -- because he is involved with one of the alleged swindlers. He and the swindlers, owned a Mortgage Company in Puerto Rico right around the time of the Kennedy assassination. I do not live anywhere near Florida -- but if any JFK conspiracy theory researchers come across the name "Ed Morales" or the name "Morales" -- in any capacity -- please let me know. Morales may of been in Arizona as well around 1964.

[zeemike]

60. Morales was connected to the CIA

And was a player in the Bay of Pigs invasion.He also showed up in the RFK assignation.
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmorales.htm

[PhilipShore]

62. I know -- but I don't know if that is the same Cuban...

Rumor has it David Morales -- was in Arizona too around 1964 (the same time as one of the bank/Insurance swindlers that I need info about).

And, I know for a fact -- that the one connected to Ed or whomever Morales was in Arizona as well, around 1964 (looks almost exactly like Jack Ruby Believe it or not) -- and possibly -- I know for a fact had a unlicensed gun -- that was shown to me.

In addition, if anyone hears of any rumors of a -- Morales -- in Kingston, Jamaica: the Locale of Dr. No - James Bond 007 Spy Movie in 1962, please let me know.

David Morales -- is the same age, as the person that he may of been associating with, and also had been a heavy drinker, in high profile bars, as the one -- I am seeking info about that looks exactly like Jack Ruby.

[zeemike]

96. Well good luck with that

But if it involves the CIa and the mob you have a problem because they can create and destroy identities at will, and you would just have to get lucky to find it out.

But I hope you do, sounds like they ripped you off for a considerable amount of money.

[PhilipShore]

99. Of course money is imporant... but I decided to look into because

of 9/11. I seen the obvious connections, and I did not want to turn 80 years old -- and be saying to myself -- that I wish I had done some sort of research into my grandfathers estate.

As a pacifist, I generally work on bigger social issues, so working on personal issues is difficult, because I am sort of a private person.

And there is so much corruption involved -- my hope is that -- it will grow into something bigger.

In fact, the first paper filed with the court -- by powerful Real Estate lawyers was and obvious attempt to confuse. I am not a lawyer, so all the legal mumbo jumbo of was it a intentional mistake and/or was the corruption politically motivated, etc. will have to be dug up.

because they can create and destroy identities at will,

Good point, one of the papers that was never filed, with the court; they used my identity. And the way the scam is structured, when they created a new identity it opens up hundreds of smoke and mirror issues.

For example, the use of my identity -- at the time could of been used by one of the swindlers for many purposes; and the way my identity was used it appears -- to be not even noticed. But, to have one of the most powerful Real Estate lawyers in Florida writing my name on legal documents, without even telling me, drives me up the wall.And it is my exact legal name (one I never even use) so the only way he could of used it -- is if he was conducting other business in my name, other then the legal document.

[originalpckelly]

55. You know who fired the one that did him in? Someone in a car on the other side of Dealey Plaza...

traffic was still moving in the opposite direction that Kennedy traveled, and someone shot him from one of the cars on the other side of the plaza. That's why the young man heard that shot. If you even look in the Zapruder film you can see the track of the bullet as it comes into the picture, if you take the time to match up where it was exactly in Dealey Plaza, then you'll find out the place where the bullet was fired from.

They killed him because he was an unstable drug-addicted wreck, he almost got the entire world killed.

Kennedy being unstable because he was addicted to meth caused us to slip up both at the Bay of Pigs and later during the Cuban Missile Crisis. It became clear that something had to be done to protect the world from nuclear annihilation. (This would now be solved by the 25th Amendment, which was really drafted because of this.)

LBJ went along with it, and they used him because of his deep seated hatred of John (think not getting the nomination.) LBJ had a thing for Jackie, and he always felt guilty and made sure to check up on her for the rest of his life.

Richard Nixon was a part of it too, it drove him crazy in a strange way. Actually, this was a part of his motivation in going to China, because he knew about what really happened during the Cuban Missile Crisis, that the world almost ended and the only thing that kept our bombers from taking off to bomb the Soviets was a truck at the end of a runway.

That's what Nixon was talking about when he said "that Bay of Pigs thing" repeatedly. It was the primary motivation behind his presidency's greater foreign policy achievements.

Both sides made a deal to keep this thing quiet. One day when Caroline dies, the world will finally find all this stuff out, and the official CIA/FBI documents will be released to the public. (They did that, because LBJ could bear the weight of his (Kennedy's) children knowing what happened.)

[H2O Man]

61. clown n/t

[originalpckelly]

64. Most of what I said is now public knowledge...

Nixon did repeatedly talk about "that Bay of Pigs thing." Plus, he was probably angry over losing a close election, that many thought was stolen.

LBJ was angry with Kennedy over losing the nom and having to play second fiddle.

LBJ's tapes reveal him calling Jackie frequently.

John Kennedy was a patient of "Dr. Feelgood" who used to inject him with a mystery substance, it would later be determined the Dr. Feelgood was injecting his patients with amphetamines.

Hitler supposedly used a "Vitamultin" shot that was administered to him frequently by his doctor, it is now believed this too contained amphetamines. It is well know that amphetamines impair ones' judgment, in Hitler's case it probably lost him WWII. It is likely that the amphetamines had the same impact on Kennedy's behavior.

It is now public knowledge that during the Cuban Missile Crisis, that American bombers were ordered to attack, but the order was later reversed, and the only thing that stopped those planes from taking off was a truck at the end of a runway waving them off.

Why the sudden interest to revisit the disability question during the '60s? :shrug: That problem had existed with the US Constitution for many years, resulting in the odd ends of Presidents Wilson's and Roosevelt's terms in office. The problem was mainly that we had no way of removing a President, save for impeachment, if he became disabled in some way. Kennedy was certainly unimpeachable, so no dice.

[rman]

109. All that has nothing to do with were the hitmen were located.

[jollyreaper2112]

73. hey

Do you have any further info on that runway story with the bombers?

[alcibiades_mystery]

121. Possibly the most insane post ever on DU

Congrats on that distinction!

[originalpckelly]

130. I'm having fun by the way.

:P

I just love it when people bring out the loony stories. I guess people want it to be some big conspiracy, because they don't want to face the truth that for however powerful Kennedy or any President is, they are just human are as vulnerable to death as the rest of us, and can be brought down by a single person.

[PhilipShore]

63. Has any JFK conspiracy theory people gone over the Jack Ruby...

newsreel footage when Oswald was shot? Is it possible, the Jack Ruby newsreel footage could of been manipulated?

[jollyreaper2112]

67. I think so

[PhilipShore]

69. Amazing Trick Photography

[PhilipShore]

72. A Nixon-Ruby Connection

JFK MURDER SOLVED - Reward

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/nixonruby.htm



This FBI-document of 1947 recommends that "one Jack Rubenstein of Chicago" should not be called to testify for the Committee on Unamerican Activities, for he is working for Congressman Richard M. Nixon. According to the Warren Commission, Ruby had no connections with Oswald, Organized Crime or the Government. No wonder the header reads "This is sensitive".

[BuyingThyme]

68. Posner is a shepherd.

[Radio_Lady]

77. HOT POTATO ISSUE -- belongs in the conspiracy theory wastebasket.

[rman]

108. Seeing the replies and the nr of recs. - this is not a hot potato

Which should not really be a surprise to anyone who is a regular on DU.

[AngryAmish]

78. oh no, you have let the nutters out...

[maveric]

89. "Nutters"?

And you buy the "Magic Bullet Theory"? And all the other mountains of evidence showing a conspiracy?
Gimme a break!

[alcibiades_mystery]

123. The Lunatics are On The Grass(y Knoll)

;-)

[Ex Lion Tamer]

87. Simply read the Illuminatus trilogy.

The answer's in there.

(This post is certified fnord free)

[rasputin1952]

88. One of the most telling pieces of film comes when Oswald was

in a press conference after being interrogated by the Dallas PD and the FBI/SS. When he is asked if he killed the president, he answers to the effect that he has killed no one, as can be expected. The next statement from one of the reporters is that he has been charged with the assassination of Kennedy. Just look at Oswald's initial reaction, which last 2-3 seconds, is one of complete disbelief, shock and then he goes into mode where he realizes he has been played for what he calls a "patsy". The Press conference ends abruptly, and Oswald calls for an attorney.

Look at that piece of film, his facial expression and the way he tenses is obvious.

When you add to this the fact he went into the theater, w/o paying, and a large amount of police officers showed up for such a trivial breech of the law, immediately after the president and a Dallas PD Officer, Tippet, have been killed, it makes one wonder just why a petty crime drew so much attention.
While all of this is certainly circumstantial, by using common sense, it becomes obvious that Oswald was to meet someone in that theater, and it wasn't supposed to be the Dallas PD.

[alcibiades_mystery]

122. A large number of police showed uip because he matched the description

of someone who had just gunned down a cop in cold blood on a public street.

I mean, please.

[rasputin1952]

127. However, witnesses at the time of Tippets murder said there were

2 men at the car beside Tippet. Also, there were several rounds from an automatic found on the ground, Oswald had a revolver; not to mention that the revolver he was arrested with had not bee fired.

The individual that shot Tippet was described as a heavy-set man, an did not have the same clothing as Oswald.

Both men at the Tippet scene ran in different directions, and Oswald seems to have chosen that specific theater as a point where he would be met by a contact and given "instructions".

FWIW, the ticket seller gave the description of a man going into the theater w/o paying, he had no knowledge of the assassination. A detective had seen Oswald in the TX SBD and had cleared him on the word of the manager. Oswald appeared calm, and certainly not out of breath. It appears to me that someone who had just shot the president would be out of sorts to some extent, and hardly purchasing a coke in the lounge.

I am not saying that he was no involved, but the Carcano rifle used would not have hit the broad side of a barn, much less a target that was moving away from the "snipers nest". I believe that a shot came from the Jail, making a much better setup. Most snipers btw would have taken a face on shot as the vehicle was coming into range, leaving a chance for follow up shots if there were an error in calculation of something else that might have arisen.

If Oswald took all 3 shots from that Carcano, it is almost seems like a supernatural aspect was involved.

[liberal renegade]

90. Where was GHWB on that tragic day?

What was GHWB's job on that day? What was Oswald's motive? Why didn't the Secret Service have 2 men riding on the back of the Lincoln? That car was equipped for 2 passengers to ride on the trunk lid in order to protect him from behind. Did they just conveniently forget to ride along, or were they ordered to stay off?

3 shots fired from a rickety bolt action rifle in less than 6 seconds, at a moving target no less.

Don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining! Can you say Military Industrial Complex?

Had JFK not been assassinated, there still wouldn't be a republican president in office. JMO!

[California Griz]

105. The agent was called away from his post behind JFK

as the car was turning the corner just prior to the murder. He can be seen raising his arms 3 times questioning why he's being called away from his post. He appears to be very dismayed he is being ordered away from his post. What I never understood was why the shooter waited so long. The clearest shot was when the car turned the corner you could have hit him with a pistol from there as the car slowed for the turn. He couldn't have been more than 60-70 feet away at that point. One logical explanation would be that you were waiting for him to enter the crossfire zone. There are a few other things I have never heard an explanation for. The bullet hole in the dashboard. I find it hard to believe that the death bullet could have made that hole. It would of had to maintained it's straight trajectory and not developed any tumble to make such a perfect hole. If that were the case than why such a large exit wound. The motorcycle cop who immediately pulls over and looks into the storm drain as if he believes a shot came from there. What did he see why was he never interviewed. What happened to the 7.65 mm rifle shell that had been found after the shooting. You know the one that disappeared from it's evidence envelope. Then there's the Johnson semi-automatic 30.06 rifle found at the plaza. I suppose people have a habit of leaving semi-automatic rifles laying around. The fact that 30.06 shell casing was found on the roof of the County Records Building can't possibly have anything to do with JFK. The fact that this particular Johnson was identified as a rifle used by the CIA in operations in Cuba is a bitter pill to swallow if you believe in the lone gunman theory.
But hey I'll ignore that stuff after all his coat was bunched up.

[PhilipShore]

92. Any twin Jack Ruby JFK Conspiracy theories?

I have been trying to find some, but have not as of yet. I know, for example, when I was mugged in NYC, they (the muggers) looked alike and dressed alike (no doubt to avoid identification).

And with stage makeup, and/or masks make it seem more like a twin; as they set up the assassination?

I find it -- mind-boggling -- that Ruby whom used to work for a Rabid anti-liberal (Nixon) -- all the sudden is a liberal fan of Kennedy -- in the heart of texas.

If the fact -- got out -- that he was a liberal fan in Texas, around that time, he would of lost 90% of his business.

[misternormal]

93. If the bullet that struck JFK in the head was from the back and above...

... and was not lodged in his skull, would it not have struck something else in the car? Like the floor board, or the back of the front seat?

Where did it go?

This is a genuine question for anyone that knows anything about ballistics and trajectory, because I do not.

[Liberal OIF Vet]

94. Very good question.

There was no way it could be lodged in the skull.....the projectile was too powerful. No hole in the windshield. Not billet found in the limo, supposedly. For those believe he was shot from the rear, where did the round go?

[DireStrike]

97. WHY. DOES. IT. MATTER.

He could have been shot by one person, or two, or thirty. Completely irrelevant.

He was killed by someone probably acting under orders. Things have been covered up. All very clear.

The question is, who had him killed, and why? Not how.

[misternormal]

103. How???

Having lived through that, I would like to know...

As for why?

He pissed off the CIA after the Bay of Pigs for giving him faulty intelligence, causing him to not authorize air cover. (Fired Allen Dulles)

He was going to take covert operations away from the CIA, and give it back to the military, returning the CIA to an intelligence gathering organization as it was originally designed.

He wanted all US military, and advisers out of Southeast Asia by Christmas of 1964, basically cutting the legs out from under the military.

In removing the troops from Southeast Asia, the Military Industrial Machine, of which Dwight Eisenhower warned, would be out a lot of money.

The Conservative right-wing that hated him for making some sort of deal with Kruschev that ended the Cuban Missile Crisis. (Some said that he promised that the US would not attack Cuba and remove Castro in exchange for removing the missiles).

There were plenty of reasons.

[riverdale]

106. ee

Crap, I read through all that and the last post stole my thunder and gave the real answer. CIA.
Please check out this video. It breaks down all those involved ... including GHW Bush.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-9137354720737304741&q=jfk

[LeftHander]

110. As Jackie waves...notice the missing Agent...

Who was SUPPOSED to be riding on the bumper holding that hand hold...who was told last minute to not...ride his assigned position.

Had he been there Oswald (or whoever) would not of had a clear shot at the President from behind.

Basically the war machine and a group of Texas oil millionares wanted JFK dead...and his brother too.

They got what they wanted. I still feel it was an inside job. We have seen these same people (different generation almost) at work for the last 13 years. They LIHOP, MIHOP 911, to trump up justification for a invasion for profit.

Killing a few people here and there is nothing. Not when billions and billions in profit are at stake.

[HamdenRice]

119. Back and to the left .... Back and to the left ....

Frankly, you can look through all the research, documentation, conflicting theories, etc., but the smoking gun is the Zapruder film and, as Oliver Stone's JFK movie mantra put it, "back and to the left ..."

And oh yeah, the brains as jet fuel thesis is the most ridiculous bullshit I've ever heard trotted out.

We can all watch JFK's brain and head exploding "back and to the left," and Posner and the other apologists are asking you, in the immortal words of Richard Pryor, "who are you gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?"

[Liberal OIF Vet]

124. I will believe my lying eyes thank you very much!

That and physics, of course.

[Horseradish]

129. Check the autopsy photos (before & after ... wink wink)

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/autopsy.htm

Despite all the physics-based threads, every time I see these autopsy photos and imagine - from the Zapruder film - the angles, I just can't be convinced that the head shot came from the back. For the Lloyd's sake, his brains are hanging out the back of his head. All the doctors in Dallas described his head wound as having a large part of the rear of his skull missing. Look at the initial autopsy photos and you can almost clearly see the entry wound above his right eye. I dunno ... seems pretty obvious to me, and I understand some of the watermelon, apple ballistics well enough and believe them) .... but these photos do not corroborate a shot from behind.