JFK Assassin's Rifle

[B Strong]

You're assuming that I'm thinking the government might have intended for Ted to end up as the unabomber, or anyone like Oswald or Ruby to do something specific(anything beyond random loony tunes bat**** crazy). That's not what I've said at all. You even brought up the guy who went nuts and supposedly jumped out a window, I brought up a guy who went nuts and mailed people bombs. Who's to say that someone else didn't go nuts and think murdering people was a good idea? It's not like I'm saying that the CIA programmed Oswald, Sirhan, and Hinkley to go murdering politicians.

You did not, but many others have and will continue to do so.

I posted referencing the efficacy of long established behavior modification programs and related that to the acknowledged results of MKultra, nothing more.

If someone can post links to evidence supporting the creation of directed assassins through behavior modification I'd be interested in reading same.

[B Strong]

#1, Oswald and the "found" PLANTED Carcano did not shoot anyone that day.

#2, There was no "grassy knoll shooter" firing from the side when the front/right side of Kennedy's head explodes. If there had been, Jackie would have been taken out too, as her head is right next to the left side of Kennedy's after he is seen grabbing at his throat, and a side shot from the grassy knoll would have gone right through and hit her head.

#3, The ONLY thing the Warren commission did not lie about is, that all the shots did come from behind Kennedy.

Any evidence? and are you conceding that LHO fired on Gen. Walker with the Carcano and shot Tippet with the S. & W.?

[B Strong]

I understand but the trolls - they can't take any chances. If it can be construed as skepticism of anything official they're on it like a duck on a June bug.

You're back?

I assumed that since you couldn't engage in informed discussion in the last JFK thread and needed to resort to the "ignore button, I win!" school of debate you might have slunk off to the David Icke forum or September Clues.

[M14 Junkie]

Any evidence? and are you conceding that LHO fired on Gen. Walker with the Carcano and shot Tippet with the S. & W.?

Just my opinion based on what I have seen and read over the decades. No, I don't believe LHO killed anyone that day or even fired a gun.

I believe he was exactly what he claimed he was; a patsy. Probably the best ever set-up of a fall guy in history.

[Tarasdad]

A few points.

1. Kennedy didn't "grab his throat" as people think, his arms raised in an involuntary motion caused by the bullet passing close to cervical nerves, but not severing them. Computer processing of the Zapruder film clearly shows his elbows raised above shoulder level and his fists clenched in front of his throat, not grabbing it. Controversy still exists about this but to me the evidence is clear.

2. The rifle found in the Texas School Book Depository Building and the three casings found on the 6th floor match the bullet fragments found in Kennedy's body. At the ranges the shots occurred (well under 100 yards) the rifle was plenty accurate. Oswald was a very good shot, as shown by his military qualifications (probably could have qualified Expert if he'd tried). It has been proven repeatedly that a trained marksman, such as Oswald, could easily have made the three shots in the given time and done so accurately.

3. A recreation of the shooting shows that Oswald had a clear line of sight to the Kennedy limo for the first and third shots, but that a tree trunk would have been in his line of sight for the second. Someone focused on his sights (or especially scope) could easily have missed seeing the tree and fired as it crossed their shot path. Timing of the shots based on the Zapruder film and the Dallas motorcycle officer's radio recording (more on that next) show that the first and third shots are what struck Kennedy. The second shot likely embedded itself in the trunk of the tree.

4. For a long, long time the recording from a Dallas PD motorcycle officer's radio, with a stuck transmit button, has been hailed as "proof" than there was more than one gunman and that more than 3 shots were fired. Computer acoustical analysis of that recording, where a computer model of Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination was constructed and multiple simulations run with the Kennedy motorcade in place and moving and various numbers of shooters in various places, shows that what are heard in the recording are echos - of three shots fired from the vicinity of the corner of the 6th floor of the TSBDB. No other pattern of shots and acoustics can account for the sounds on the recording.

One of the oddities I've never seen clearly explained, or even discussed that much, is that the Oswald who came back from Russia and was killed by Jack Ruby was shorter than the Oswald the USMC has records of. Put that one under your think caps.

[Citadelgrad87]

Just my opinion based on what I have seen and read over the decades. No, I don't believe LHO killed anyone that day or even fired a gun.

I believe he was exactly what he claimed he was; a patsy. Probably the best ever set-up of a fall guy in history.

How much have you read? Check oswalds life story, his decision to go to to the Paine house, where he kept the rifle he admittedly tried to murder general walker with, his decision to take "curtain rods" to work THAT DAY, his wife's reaction where she heard that Kennedy had been shot, which was to run to the same garage he took the curtain rods from to try to find his rifle because she was sure he had done it, the fact that there never were any curtain rods in that garage, or at his work, and the fact that an eyewitness was saw hum firing, his murder of Tippett in front of about 11 witnesses.

Seriously, there's more solid evidence that Oswald did it, alone, than in most criminal prosecutions in this country.

I question the sources of the reading you've done if you aren't familiar with these most basic, and unchallenged, facts. Many conspiracy peddlers simply omit inconvenient facts, but these are established.

I also question the decision to romantically accept the patsy claim. Every criminal defendant in this country denies the crime, that's why there are any criminal trials, because they dispute their guilt. Criminals, and kids, deny guilt routinely, but Oswald is somehow worthy of being taken seriously?

I recommend Case Closed by Posner, it's not prefect, but it's a fairly thorough debunking of almost everything any conspiracist has ever shoveled.

[B Strong]

A few points.

1. Kennedy didn't "grab his throat" as people think, his arms raised in an involuntary motion caused by the bullet passing close to cervical nerves, but not severing them. Computer processing of the Zapruder film clearly shows his elbows raised above shoulder level and his fists clenched in front of his throat, not grabbing it. Controversy still exists about this but to me the evidence is clear.

2. The rifle found in the Texas School Book Depository Building and the three casings found on the 6th floor match the bullet fragments found in Kennedy's body. At the ranges the shots occurred (well under 100 yards) the rifle was plenty accurate. Oswald was a very good shot, as shown by his military qualifications (probably could have qualified Expert if he'd tried). It has been proven repeatedly that a trained marksman, such as Oswald, could easily have made the three shots in the given time and done so accurately.

3. A recreation of the shooting shows that Oswald had a clear line of sight to the Kennedy limo for the first and third shots, but that a tree trunk would have been in his line of sight for the second. Someone focused on his sights (or especially scope) could easily have missed seeing the tree and fired as it crossed their shot path. Timing of the shots based on the Zapruder film and the Dallas motorcycle officer's radio recording (more on that next) show that the first and third shots are what struck Kennedy. The second shot likely embedded itself in the trunk of the tree.

4. For a long, long time the recording from a Dallas PD motorcycle officer's radio, with a stuck transmit button, has been hailed as "proof" than there was more than one gunman and that more than 3 shots were fired. Computer acoustical analysis of that recording, where a computer model of Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination was constructed and multiple simulations run with the Kennedy motorcade in place and moving and various numbers of shooters in various places, shows that what are heard in the recording are echos - of three shots fired from the vicinity of the corner of the 6th floor of the TSBDB. No other pattern of shots and acoustics can account for the sounds on the recording.

One of the oddities I've never seen clearly explained, or even discussed that much, is that the Oswald who came back from Russia and was killed by Jack Ruby was shorter than the Oswald the USMC has records of. Put that one under your think caps.

Occam's razor in action - Oswald lied about his height in self reporting.

Oswald was 5" 9" in the (IIRC) in the NOLA booking photo and listed as 68" tall in his Marine records. not enough difference to hang a theory on.

There was an exhumation and examination of LHO's remains back in 81-82 (IIRC) that determined through dental records from the Corps that the LHO in the ground was the LHO that served in the Corps, and as far as I know there has never been any evidence that LHO didn't serve in the Corps.

[Citadelgrad87]

A few points.

1. Kennedy didn't "grab his throat" as people think, his arms raised in an involuntary motion caused by the bullet passing close to cervical nerves, but not severing them. Computer processing of the Zapruder film clearly shows his elbows raised above shoulder level and his fists clenched in front of his throat, not grabbing it. Controversy still exists about this but to me the evidence is clear.

2. The rifle found in the Texas School Book Depository Building and the three casings found on the 6th floor match the bullet fragments found in Kennedy's body. At the ranges the shots occurred (well under 100 yards) the rifle was plenty accurate. Oswald was a very good shot, as shown by his military qualifications (probably could have qualified Expert if he'd tried). It has been proven repeatedly that a trained marksman, such as Oswald, could easily have made the three shots in the given time and done so accurately.

3. A recreation of the shooting shows that Oswald had a clear line of sight to the Kennedy limo for the first and third shots, but that a tree trunk would have been in his line of sight for the second. Someone focused on his sights (or especially scope) could easily have missed seeing the tree and fired as it crossed their shot path. Timing of the shots based on the Zapruder film and the Dallas motorcycle officer's radio recording (more on that next) show that the first and third shots are what struck Kennedy. The second shot likely embedded itself in the trunk of the tree.

4. For a long, long time the recording from a Dallas PD motorcycle officer's radio, with a stuck transmit button, has been hailed as "proof" than there was more than one gunman and that more than 3 shots were fired. Computer acoustical analysis of that recording, where a computer model of Dealey Plaza at the time of the assassination was constructed and multiple simulations run with the Kennedy motorcade in place and moving and various numbers of shooters in various places, shows that what are heard in the recording are echos - of three shots fired from the vicinity of the corner of the 6th floor of the TSBDB. No other pattern of shots and acoustics can account for the sounds on the recording.

One of the oddities I've never seen clearly explained, or even discussed that much, is that the Oswald who came back from Russia and was killed by Jack Ruby was shorter than the Oswald the USMC has records of. Put that one under your think caps.

Your #4 is out of date. Charlatans lied to the huac committee claiming they heard a fourth gunshot,and that was the stated ONLY reason the committee said there was evidence of a conspiracy. No one could ever recreate the analysis, and the national academy of science trashed it is junk science.

THEN someone listened to the rest of the recording, and it's been time sync he'd, and it was made 2 minutes after the assassination, and likely several blocks away.

[B Strong]

Just my opinion based on what I have seen and read over the decades. No, I don't believe LHO killed anyone that day or even fired a gun.

I believe he was exactly what he claimed he was; a patsy. Probably the best ever set-up of a fall guy in history.

I have no idea what you may have been reading, and similarly what your level of critical thinking skills may be, but where you see evidence of grand conspiracy I find a fairly straight forward criminal case.

Lee Harvey Oswald was a little man with a rifle, and he wanted to be a big man. He could not accept that the Marines didn't recognize his abilities and reward him in the manner he felt entitled to, so he "defected" (I'd call it running away) to the Soviet Union, and when they didn't put him up on a pedestal he took his ball and went home. There has never been any evidence that Oswald fit in and interacted with his peers in any conventional manner. LHO was simply unable to work with others because of his basic personality traits, and he had little or no empathy with anyone - basic sociopathic behavior 101.

It's a recipe for disaster and JFK and Tippet paid the price. The fact that a loser with a rifle can change the course of history is too simple for some folks to grasp, and then you have the opportunists, whack-jobs and other assorted mental defectives that play "connect-the-dots" for entertainment and that strange sense of 'I figured out something the mere public can't" grandiosity.

[Gem1950]

Just my opinion based on what I have seen and read over the decades. No, I don't believe LHO killed anyone that day or even fired a gun.

I believe he was exactly what he claimed he was; a patsy. Probably the best ever set-up of a fall guy in history.

You are correct, but, the gov. proofer trolls will never concede your right to have your own opinion and leave it at that. YOU are not allowed to disagree with the official version. Period. They must press on and on and on, and have the last word to earn their oats. You just watch. Their pattern is unmistakable.

For those who are interested, this is an excellent read on the subject of who did what and why.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/1570757550/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_ttl?_encoding=UTF8&colid=2LM8GWV8YGKKD&coliid=I118U3T4BI8WRO

[Citadelgrad87]

You are correct, but, the gov. proofer trolls will never concede your right to have your own opinion and leave it at that. YOU are not allowed to disagree with the official version. Period. They must press on and on and on, and have the last word to earn their oats. You just watch. Their pattern is unmistakable.

For those who are interested, this is an excellent read on the subject of who did what and why.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1570757550/...I118U3T4BI8WRO

Another drive by post by someone who pretends to value thinking for oneself, up to the point where anyone disagrees with unformed thoughts that hes not brave enough to put down.

Anyone who cites evidence and makes a reasoned argument that maybe this is as simple as it seems, is instantly dismissed as a liar.

Finger in the ears type interaction here.

[M14 Junkie]

How much have you read? Check oswalds life story, his decision to go to to the Paine house, where he kept the rifle he admittedly tried to murder general walker with, his decision to take "curtain rods" to work THAT DAY, his wife's reaction where she heard that Kennedy had been shot, which was to run to the same garage he took the curtain rods from to try to find his rifle because she was sure he had done it, the fact that there never were any curtain rods in that garage, or at his work, and the fact that an eyewitness was saw hum firing, his murder of Tippett in front of about 11 witnesses.

Seriously, there's more solid evidence that Oswald did it, alone, than in most criminal prosecutions in this country.

I question the sources of the reading you've done if you aren't familiar with these most basic, and unchallenged, facts. Many conspiracy peddlers simply omit inconvenient facts, but these are established.

I also question the decision to romantically accept the patsy claim. Every criminal defendant in this country denies the crime, that's why there are any criminal trials, because they dispute their guilt. Criminals, and kids, deny guilt routinely, but Oswald is somehow worthy of being taken seriously?

I recommend Case Closed by Posner, it's not prefect, but it's a fairly thorough debunking of almost everything any conspiracist has ever shoveled.

Probably the best book I have read about the assassination is Jim Garrison's book.

Posner has an agenda, just like everyone else, and that is; his opinion, which trumps all others.

Are you of the opinion that Jack Ruby shot Oswald for the reason he (Ruby) gave; "that he wanted to spare Jackie Kennedy the trauma of going through a trial."

[B Strong]

You are correct, but, the gov. proofer trolls will never concede your right to have your own opinion and leave it at that. YOU are not allowed to disagree with the official version. Period. They must press on and on and on, and have the last word to earn their oats. You just watch. Their pattern is unmistakable.

For those who are interested, this is an excellent read on the subject of who did what and why.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/1570757550/...I118U3T4BI8WRO

Asking for factual evidence on any subject never goes out of style.

To conspiracy theorists things like proven evidence and facts are an awfully uncomfortable subject and are real pain in the *** to deal with when one's world view is based in popular fiction.

If our correspondent G1950 is true to their word, Citadel and I are both on their ignore list. The reason for that is that G is incapable of actually discussing the issue at hand from an informed knowledgeable position -G's answer to any question or observation is "watch this youtube video" or "what about what _____- (fill in the blank) said" absent any discussion of the validity of the cite or the expertise of the individual cited - G's not in a discussion, they're in an uniformed monologue.

I'd advise anyone interested in the subject matter to ask their own questions about the validity and provable expertise of sources cited by any CT'er rather than relying on argumentum ad youtube or the other popular CTist logical fallacies - appeal to rebellion, appeal to probability, appeal to false authority, argument from incredulity, or my all time favorit, Post hoc ergo propter hoc (after this, therefore because of this, very common in the JFK assassination CTist world and the base premise of the mass shooters as gov.org blackops to throw out the Second Amendment and also the base premise of the various 9/11 CT's)

If you support the JFK assassination theories, I'd be glad to discuss same in detail, but CT supporters should have the confidence to discuss and defend their position, not hit the ignore button and declare victory. The confidence to discuss is at least intellectually honest.

Hitting the ignore button is nothing more than cowardice and does not speak well of the poster or the CT theory they subscribe to.

[M14 Junkie]

I have no idea what you may have been reading, and similarly what your level of critical thinking skills may be, but where you see evidence of grand conspiracy I find a fairly straight forward criminal case.

Lee Harvey Oswald was a little man with a rifle, and he wanted to be a big man. He could not accept that the Marines didn't recognize his abilities and reward him in the manner he felt entitled to, so he "defected" (I'd call it running away) to the Soviet Union, and when they didn't put him up on a pedestal he took his ball and went home. There has never been any evidence that Oswald fit in and interacted with his peers in any conventional manner. LHO was simply unable to work with others because of his basic personality traits, and he had little or no empathy with anyone - basic sociopathic behavior 101.

It's a recipe for disaster and JFK and Tippet paid the price. The fact that a loser with a rifle can change the course of history is too simple for some folks to grasp, and then you have the opportunists, whack-jobs and other assorted mental defectives that play "connect-the-dots" for entertainment and that strange sense of 'I figured out something the mere public can't" grandiosity.

I'm sorry that you would question what level my critical thinking is. I think that it's pretty good. Do you infer that I'm not up to par because I disagree with you?

Look, arguing this case is like arguing over politics and religion. It can and will, go on and on.

Almost every item of so called "evidence" of conspiracy or not, can be legitimately questioned in this case. I happen to believe that it was a conspiracy and that the Warren Commission purposely covered it up.

You believe in the "lone gunman/nut theory." So be it. I won't ever change your mind, nor will you change mine.

[B Strong]

Probably the best book I have read about the assassination is William Garrison's book.

Posner has an agenda, just like everyone else, and that is; his opinion, which trumps all others.

Are you of the opinion that Jack Ruby shot Oswald for the reason he (Ruby) gave; "that he wanted to spare Jackie Kennedy the trauma of going through a trial."

I believe Ruby himself didn't have a clear logical thought process when he shot LHO - Ruby was an impulsive actor, a cop groupie, and the circumstances of the shooting are probably one of the best examples of "crime of opportunity" that can be found. I believe that he was indeed effected emotionally by the assassination and was in the right (or wrong, depending on pov) place at the right time and acted on impulse w/o much of anything in the way of planning. Maybe he thought he would be doing DPD a favor, maybe he thought they'd give him a medal, but the only provable indication that Ruby was anything more than a local small-timer is his association with the union representing his employees (Dancers) and his contacts w/ NOLA crime figures involved with that union.

You're correct about Posner, he had some material in his book that made me laugh out loud, but he got the high points correct. LHO was a borderline personality that had sociopathic tendencies.