Best Evidence of a Conspiracy

Discussion in 'JFK' started by Gizmo, Aug 18, 2015.

  1. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
  2. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes Oswald was pretty close

    But of course it is proven the driver only drove and did not fire a gun

    - - - Updated - - -

    That is a lie sorry he made no such admission and he merely clarified a minor point.

    There was no magic bullet theory at the time.

    The magic bullet theory was invented by conspiracy theorists and has been proven a fallacy
     
  3. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Jackie, being the closest eyewitness after the shot, makes her testimony very important in locating exactly where the exit wound was. She describes what so many others did, and now she's confirmed correct by exposing the rear exit wound was always visible in frame 313.

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
    CONTACT: Debra Conway
    JFK Lancer Productions & Publications
    332 N.E.5th Street
    Grand Prairie, TX 75050
    Phone: 817-488-0978
    Email: debra@jfklancer.com
    Web: JFK Lancer - President John F. Kennedy Assassination Latest News and Research

    Warren Commission Suppressed Jackie's
    Testimony On JFK's Head Wound

    Court Reporter's Tape Shows
    Additional Description Withheld

    Dallas, TX -- August 5, 2001 -- JFK Lancer, an historical research firm reports that the Court Reporter's tape shows Jacqueline Kennedy's testimony before the Warren Commission had additional descriptions which were withheld.
    Mrs. Kennedy testified in a short private session held at her home in Washington, D.C., with Chief Justice Earl Warren, Commission General Council J. Lee Rankin, Attorney General Robert Kennedy, and a court reporter in attendance. Testimony of witnesses before the Warren Commission was made public in the fall of 1964. Jacqueline Kennedy's testimony was also released containing her description of her husbands wounds which read :

    "And just as I turned and looked at him, I could see a piece of his skull and I remember it was flesh colored. I remember thinking he just looked as if he had a slight headache. And I just remember seeing that. No blood or anything."

    But a second section in which she described the wounds she saw carried only the notation: (Reference to Wounds Deleted).
    Although very few Americans actually read those transcripts, historians and researchers who did read them were outraged, and waged a legal battle to have the omitted testimony released. In the early 1970s, a court decision required the United States Government to disclose to the public the contents of the still classified section of Mrs. Kennedy's 1964 Warren Commission testimony. Her previously withheld statement read:

    " I was trying to hold his hair on. From the front there was nothing --- I suppose there must have been.

    But from the back you could see, you know, you were trying to hold his hair on, and his skull on."

    Releasing this previously withheld section gave researchers what was assumed to be Mrs. Kennedy's complete description of the President's head wounds. Researchers took for granted that the hand-typed transcript page released by the National Archives from the official records of the Warren Commission ended the matter.

    However, new analysis reveals that the original court tape actually reads:

    "... I could see a piece of his skull sort of wedge-shaped, like that, and I remember that it was flesh colored with little ridges at the top."

    Filmmaker Mark Sobel found the discrepancy while doing research for a forthcoming documentary on JFK. Sobel explained, "I was quite surprised to find that Mrs. Kennedy was not asked for more detail --- she had an opportunity to view the wounds longer and closer than any other person as they originally existed. Given the seemingly contradictory testimony by the doctors who treated the President at Parkland Hospital in Dallas just after the shooting and the Doctors who performed the autopsy at Bethesda many hours later, Mrs. Kennedy's testimony would appear critical."
    Sobel filed under the Freedom of Information Act to have the court reporter's original tape of Mrs. Kennedy's testimony unsealed, citing that the content had already been fully declassified by the courts and that it was in the best interest of the public for the accuracy of the existing transcript to be verified. Sobel explained, "As I compared the 1964 transcript to the original court reporter's paper tape, I reached a sentence officially transcribed by the Warren Commission as: "I could see a piece of his skull, and I remember that it was flesh colored"words on the original paper taped no longer matched up."
    Court Reporter Kathy Bradford of Bradford Court Reporting of Dallas, Texas, agreed. Bradford reviewed the transcript from the archives and certified Mrs. Kennedy's complete statement was not found in the Warren Commission's version..

    This extra description was almost certainly witheld from the Commissioners and Legal Staff as well, since these descriptions are missing in the typed transcript that is contained in the actual Warren Commission Records --- before it was finally released publicly in its entirety.

    Apprised of these new details, David Mantik, M.D., Ph.D. stated, "Given the lack of follow-up in Mrs. Kennedy's description to exactly what she saw, these details could have been valuable to the House Select Committee on Assassinations that reviewed the medical evidence." Mantik is one of the few doctors allowed to view President Kennedy's original autopsy materials in the National Archives.
    Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, seen in films and photos in Dealey Plaza climbing onto the rear of the limousine, stated in his Warren Commission testimony,
    "Between the time I originally grabbed the handhold and until I was up on the car, Mrs. Kennedy--the second noise that I heard had removed a portion of the President's head, and he had slumped noticeably to his left. Mrs. Kennedy had jumped up from the seat and was, it appeared to me, reaching for something coming off the right rear bumper of the car, the right rear tail, when she noticed that I was trying to climb on the car."
    Debra Conway of JFK Lancer, says that the court reporter's tape is now on their web site. Conway stated, "Mrs. Kennedy also describes this piece of skull to historian Theodore White in her famous 'Camelot' interview where she told him, 'I could see a piece of his skull coming off; it was flesh colored not white--' This is very similar to what she said to the Warren Commission."
    Conway went on to explain, "There were pieces of skull found in the street and in the limousine. The piece of skull described by Mrs. Kennedy could have been one of those later found in the street, the limousine, or an avulsed piece still attached to his head."
    Researcher Barb Junkkarinen, who specializes in the medical evidence of the Kennedy assassination and is the Director of the JFK Alliance for Open Archives organization, told JFK Lancer, "The real 'find' here is that two specific descriptions of the head wound by Mrs. Kennedy (that the skull piece was wedge shaped, and that it had little ridges at the top) are not included in what is supposed to be the full and complete transcript of her testimony."
    In his memoirs, Senator Arlen Specter, a Junior Council for the Warren Commission in 1964, suggests that the minimal testimony taken from Mrs. Kennedy was due to Earl Warren wishing to be protective of her, and that the handling of her testimony created some distress among other Commissioners and Legal Staff. However, in formerly Top Secret transcripts of the meetings of the seven Commissioners, Commissioner John J. McCloy repeatedly emphasized the importance of obtaining such testimony as quickly as possible "She's the best witness," he said "as to how those bullets struck her husband."

    Junkkarinen adds, "Why they would withhold an accurate description is open to debate, but the fact that they put out an altered transcript is telling. How many other transcripts may have fallen victim to the same shenanigans? This is a find that proves alteration of original evidence, and that is important.
    -2-
    JFK Lancer Productions & Publications
    JFK Lancer Independent News Exchange

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]

    FRAME 337 SHOWING REAR EXIT AND JACKIE'S SHOCK.

    [​IMG]
     
  4. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    According to his testimony, he was hit less than a second after jfk. That safely excludes Oswald shooting alone.

    Governor CONNALLY. I had seen what purported to be a copy of the film when I was in the hospital in Dallas. I had not seen the slides.
    Mr. SPECTER. And when do you think you were hit on those slides, Governor, or in what range of slides?
    Governor CONNALLY. We took--you are talking about the number of the slides?
    Mr. SPECTER. Yes.
    Governor CONNALLY. As we looked at them this morning, and as you related the numbers to me, it appeared to me that I was hit in the range between 130 or 131, I don't remember precisely, up to 134, in that bracket.
    Mr. SPECTER. May I suggest to you that it was 231?
    Governor CONNALLY. Well, 231 and 234, then.
    Mr. SPECTER. The series under our numbering system starts with a higher number when the car comes around the turn, so when you come out of the sign, which was----
    Governor CONNALLY. It was just after we came out of the sign, for whatever that sequence of numbers was, and if it was 200, I correct my testimony. It was 231 to about 234. It was within that range.
     
  5. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This does not exclude Oswald acting alone he same bullet merely struck both men

    - - - Updated - - -

    She did not determine the exit or entrance but merely a wound.

    It is proven that the bullet entered from behind and above and you have never presented evidence to challenge that fact
     
  6. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    A simple flinch and some honest testimony proves that two shooters were evident early in the shooting. Jfk was shot before frame 225, while Connally was hit in the back about a half second later.

    I think Connally was reacting to a bullet that passed him that went in and out of the windshield and into Kennedy's throat. Then Connally was shot in the back from almost the same position the front left. If you look at Connally you can see that he is holding his hat and appears that his wrist has not been damaged yet. YT COMMENT

    This proves that Connally was hit with different bullet. And do believe that Connally's wrist and thigh wounds are from bullet fragments from the last head shot. I do believe that Kennedy's throat and back wounds are not from the same bullet. Throt wound from the front and back wound from the back. YT COMMENT

    The bullet hole appeared after it came through the windshield. It was captured at frame 255. As everyone can see, it closely resembles a bullet hole in a windshield. The darkness in the center indicates a hole that is surrounded by froth.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    https://www.google.com/search?q=alt...6C_ILNAhUSE1IKHbucCQgQsAQIHA&biw=1280&bih=622

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ryUnTaRttfg
     
  7. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    There were at least three shooters, with Greer being the only certain one. This assumes the same person shot both men in the back. The only obvious location for the throat-shot is the south grassy knoll. JFK was shot in the back just before the fatal headshot.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  8. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There was only one shooter which was Oswald.

    No evidence exists of another shooter.

    The thorat wound was an exit wound. It entered in his back

    - - - Updated - - -

    A flinch proves nothing and the ballistics and physical evidence proves Kennedy and Connally were struck by the same bullet which was fired by Oswald.

    More repeats of a massive failure from you
     
  9. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The bullet entered above the right eye, which is corroborated by all three films and Chaney's up-close view of the President. All eyes by those men were fixed on the car because Greer suddenly pumped the brakes. Jfk was shot in the back right before the headshot, which is depicted more clearly in the nix and muchmore films.

    http://jfkthelonegunmanmyth.blogspot.com/2012/08/first-shot-disinformation-part-2.html

    Let’s begin with James Chaney.
    Chaney was the motorcycle Officer riding to the right rear of President Kennedy’s limousine - in the inboard position. Despite being the closet non-limousine witness to the assassination – he was never called to testify before the Warren Commission! Following the assassination, he was interviewed by Bill Lord from WFAA –TV. This is how he described the shooting:

    “We had proceeded west on Elm Street at approximately 15-20 miles per hour. We heard the first shot. I thought it was a motorcycle backfiring and uh I looked back over to my left and also President Kennedy looked back over his left shoulder. Then, the, uh, second shot came, well, then I looked back just in time to see the President struck in the face by the second bullet. He slumped forward into Mrs. Kennedy’s lap, and uh, it was apparent to me that we were being fired upon.

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
     
  10. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    None of these films shows an entrance wound.

    The autopsy report proves the entrance wound was in the back of the head not the front.

    One witness does not challenge that fact.

    Massive fail again
     
  11. 9/11 was an inside job

    9/11 was an inside job Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2011
    Messages:
    6,508
    Likes Received:
    108
    Trophy Points:
    63
    you nailed it.
     
  12. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    He totally blew it
     
  13. 7forever

    7forever Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2010
    Messages:
    1,726
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Not until very recently did I realize that jfk was shot in the back right before the headshot. My focus was always on the exit wound and the headshot with some work put into the bullet hole in the windshield. I never had strong feelings about the last 2 shots, but mostly believed one was fired to confuse those on elm street.

    Everything important has finally come together and makes perfect sense for the universal belief that the president was shot three times. Two of those shots coming from the front make any rear shooter totally irrelevant. This new evidence is the only way the government would ever revise this case because they could simply add a gunshot wound without changing any prior conclusions from decades ago.

    The back shot had to come from a different shooter because there wasn't enough time to get off another shot, as the last 2 shots were separated by less than a 1/4 second. It takes at least 3/4 of a second between shots.

    http://www.jfk-online.com/bennett.html

    "At this point I heard what sounded like a fire-cracker. I immediately looked from the right/crowd/physical area/and looked towards the President who was seated in the right rear seat of his limousine open convertible. At the moment I looked at the back of the President I heard another fire-cracker noise and saw the shot hit the President about four inches down from the right shoulder. A second shot followed immediately and hit the right rear high of the President's head."

    How Five Investigations into JFK's Medical/Autopsy Evidence Got it Wrong - Discussion

    Secret Service agent Glenn Bennett was riding in the follow up car. He was the first to document, in contemporaneous notes, Kennedy taking the back shot. He wrote, “"I looked at the back of the President. I heard another firecracker noise and saw that shot hit the President about four inches down from the right shoulder."[339] The Warren Commission accorded his observations “substantial weight,” writing, "Although [Bennett’s] formal statement was dated November 23, 1963, his notes indicate that he recorded what he saw and heard at 5:30 p.m., November 22, 1963, on the airplane en route back to Washington, prior to the autopsy, when it was not yet known that the President had been hit in the back.”[

    For starters, the Zapruder film clearly shows jfk's back being impacted right before he's shot in the face. It kinda looks like a 'pow' from a batman episode. The other two films also show an impact but not quite the same way. What SS agent Glen Bennett reported seeing is exactly confirmed by all three films. For all intents and purposes the jfk assassination has finally been solved.

    [​IMG]
     
  14. Your Best Friend

    Your Best Friend Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2016
    Messages:
    14,673
    Likes Received:
    6,996
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Don't be so sure about Lee Harvey Oswald.
    There are many reasons to believe he was not a shooter, if he had any witting involvement in the assassination at all, which seems unlikely.
    http://delcotopten.blogspot.com/2010/11/top-10-why-oswald-could-not-have-shot.html

    He was a CIA operative and at the height of the Cold War "defected" to Russia, renounced his citizenship at the US embassy in Moscow and then had the government pay his way back to the US after claiming he had changed his mind with zero legal repercussions from it at all. Just like you'd expect, right?
     
  15. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Oswald was never a CIA operative. There has never been any evidence to support such a ludicrous claim.

    He did not defect to Russia he EMIGRATED to Russia which is a horse of a different color. Defections worked one way during the cold war from their side to ours.

    There is nothing unusual about his emigration or return.

    He did fire at Kennedy and is the only one to do so. The blog you linked to is full of massive lies such Oswald being elsewhere at the time of the shooting or 3 rifles being found none of which is true and yes his prints were found on his rifle and so on.

    Sorry the evidence proves you wrong

    - - - Updated - - -

    There is no NEW evidence.

    All the evidence proves Oswald acted alone and you have failed to produce any evidence challenging that fact.

    Also the evidence proves conclusively Greer did not fire a weapon
     
  16. Your Best Friend

    Your Best Friend Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2016
    Messages:
    14,673
    Likes Received:
    6,996
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What you state as fact has been definitively debunked countless times. There's not even any point in discussing the matter because you don't deal in facts or in good faith. Please be aware that I'm not interested in your trolling and any further posts of yours
    will be ignored in favor of discussing the issue with more fair minded people.
     
  17. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Yes I do deal in facts and no it has never been debunked.

    You are taking proven myth for granted so present the evidence debunking it. You cannot and will not because there is none. You are interested only in existing in an echo chamber much like 911wasaninsidejob. You are not interested in facts or evidence and only have hearsay from Tv which you accept as truth.

    It is you acting as the troll so debate or begone
     
  18. Your Best Friend

    Your Best Friend Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2016
    Messages:
    14,673
    Likes Received:
    6,996
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lee Harvey Oswald was reported in a New Zealand paper (from a New York wire service) as the killer of the president before JFK was ever assassinated! That's a neat trick. How do you do that?

    He was a patsy set up long before the event. It was all planned out in advance and Jack Ruby was sent in to silence Oswald before his story was ever able to be told.
     
  19. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Obviously you have been watching the fictional and innacurate movie JFK by Oliver Stone.

    Sorry but your claim is a false one. They did not report the story before JFK was killed they did so after the news service wire broke the story which was after the shooting. However due to the complications of the international date line the date on the story in new Zealand was the day before. It is the difference between real time and our designations of the date.

    Try again
     
  20. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    I'll take you to task on this point (and others). CIA operatives are not advertised so because there was no evidence doesn't necessarily mean much. I'll agree that he was likely not simply because they are usually introverts and try to blend in as much as possible to the woodwork.

    That seems like a distinction without a difference.

    Now that is a statement. Can you furnish any data to support it? For example, how many defections/emigrations from the US to Russia and then defections back to the US were performed? I'm guessing it was very rare. I mean, Wikipedia has a page that lists those individually that just came from Russia to the west...Oswald is not on it but it speaks to the low numbers that they can be listed by name. Most did not get to leave with their families which was also something Oswald got to do.

    That I can believe save for the single bullet doing as much damage as the Warren Commission says it did. A bullet hitting multiple bodies...sure. It going uphill after hitting the Governor??? Seems fishy.


    I believe Oswald was involved but I do not see how there are so many coincidence that were ignored.

    That this unremarkable guy who emigrates to the USSR then comes back/defects to the USA; with his family....is turned loose in the South. Apparently nobody is watching the guy. If they are, he is sure to have set off alarm bells when he went to Mexico and visited the Cuban embassy a few months before the assassination, surely it would have set off alarm bells when he supposedly tried to assassinate an Army colonel before he did/participated in Kennedy's shooting, surely it is a massive coincidence that this guy who went from the USMC to Russia to the USA to New Orleans, to Dallas, to visiting Mexico City and the Cuban embassy right before the assassination just happened to have a menial job right on the motorcade route in Dallas??? Right?
     
  21. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Absence of evidence is a form of evidence in and of itself. In this particular case it is more than just absence of evidence that proves Oswald never worked for the CIA. As a person who is clearly at the center of one of the 20th centuries most sensational incidents his life has been examined and documented in detail far more than most people, perhaps even more than Kennedy's life. While it is true that a person who works for the CIA in a covert capacity would tend to keep that fact covert it would also follow that such a person would leave a very uneventful life with little or no record of what they did and where they went. In Oswald's case we have massive records of where he went and what he did with no evidence of any contact with the CIA. This may not be absolutely conclusive but it is in fact solid enough to make any clam that he was CIA an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence. The fact is what we know of his life leaves no time or room to be monkeying around with the CIA. In addition you are correct about such people but you left a great deal out. The CIA is not known for hiring people such as Oswald he was uneducated and an overt communist from as far back as his teenage years. Not the sort of person the CIA is known for recruiting. It is a very fair and logical and reasonable statement that he was not connected to the CIA much less an operative which is not even a term used for CIA employees.

    No there is a significant distinction between emigration and defection. A defection occurs when one is not permitted to leave. This is why many people defected from the USSR to the west. In an open free nation such as the USA however moving to another nation even a politically hostile nation is simply emigration because you are free to do so.

    You are correct that the numbers are low for people who went back and forth but it was not unheard of. Yes I should clarify. When Oswald returned to the USA he had to wait for months as the USSR's notorious bureaucracy processed the paper work for he and his wife. In addition the state departments loan to him was not unusual at all. People abroad with no resources ( such as those who are robbed while traveling ) often do get such loans. He did renounce his citizenship but it was never officially filed or recognized the reason is that the State department officials with whom he stated his intention to renounce it recognized that he was a foolish young man and would probably regret his decision ( they were correct ) so instead of officially recognizing his renunciation of his citizenship they kept his paperwork in limbo until he came to his senses. That part may be unusual but not illogical.

    The bullet never went up hill after hitting anyone it followed a ballistic path which changed only slightly after hitting dense bone such as the governors wrist just as one would expect.

    None of these things were ignored as you say. They did follow up on Oswald after he returned but simply judged that he was not a threat or problem. He was after all an obscure nobody. It is true that his assassination proved them way wrong but at the time with no real indication that he was a threat it is not surprising that they ignored him.

    You are referring to the attempted assassination of Edwin Walker who was a retired general not a colonel. They did not know he was the attempted assassin of Walker until AFTER Kennedy's death. They also did not know that he was working in the TSBD until the assassination. For the reasons already mentioned they simply considered him a nobody and no threat and therefore did not keep close tabs on him.

    Much of this is supported not only by our evidence but other nations as well. After the fall of the USSR many of their archives were unsealed and we learned much of what they knew about it. They knew from the start Oswald was a fool and not worth the trouble they actually intended to send him back to the USA but changed their mind after he attempted suicide in protest. The only reason they gave a damn is the upcoming summit with Ike which they did not wish to upset if the media got a hold of a story of a guy trying to kill him self in protest due to not allowed in the USSR. This is also one of the reasons he was allowed to leave with his wife who also was not important they were simply glad to be rid of him. This is all very consistent with the Russians and USSR's historic contempt for traitors even traitors who serve their side.

    In the end there is really nothing out of the ordinary about what he did before the assassination. And there is no evidence of anyone else being involved.

    Coincidences are not evidence and it is strictly subjective opinion that they point to suspicion
     
  22. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Too, It's unlikely that if he were a CIA agent, someone in the ensuing 50+ years would have said as much/unearthed it by now.

    That being said, it doesn't dismiss his affiliation with any other government and/or involvement with any of the other alphabet soup agencies in Washington.

    And the KGB/USSR let him go (with his wife) free from interference? Still sounds fishy. As for "our end" of it, I'll take your word for it but it seems a bit convenient given the cold war was ramping up.

    Yes it did.

    After exiting Conally's front.

    C'mon... what would be the odds of a bullet creating 4 entrance and 3 exit wounds and still be facing absolutely forward to where it's "business end" was still able to cut into skin? I won't discuss the supposed "pristine" condition of the bullet which--as far as I know--is alleged.

    So the defector/selector; then defector back to the US who visits the Cuban embassy in Mexico and tries to kill an Army Colonel before JFK visits is no threat? That is pretty hard to believe. Especially given that the motorcade route is right by where he works????

    Doesn't pass the smell test.

    Seems like a good reason to "round up the usual suspects"; one of which would be the defector X2 who seems to be up to his knees in strange associations. But if you say so.

    Nothing out of the ordinary....??? I have to really disagree. Do you know anyone who emigrated to a nation then decided...oh well...I'll go back to where I came from? Posed with a murder weapon? Tried to assassinate a US Army General?

    Not really looking for a response; you not seeing this as--at the very least; unusual behavior--is not encouraging for future discussion. I would classify his behavior of being almost bizarre. And we haven't even gotten to why the US Congress concluded that there were 2 gunmen...

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_House_Select_Committee_on_Assassinations

    Thanks for the good dialogue though.
     
  23. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Wrong.

    The bullet did not go up after exiting Connally's chest it continued on the same basic path which was downward which is why it next struck his wrist which was below the level of the exit wound in his chest and from there ended in his leg which was lower still. It also was not facing forward at all. The bullet began to tumble as soon as it struck Kennedy which is very normal for such bullets. It actually struck Connally's back edge on or sideways and continued to tumble as it struck his wrist and entered his leg. This is why rather than being pristine it is actually very damaged and missing mass on the back end and side rather than the nose.

    You are not getting the sequence straight. Yes they knew he emigrated to the USSR and returned and in fact the FBI did investigate. They judged him not dangerous or a threat which was reasonable AT THE TIME although this would be proven wrong later. Because of this judgement they had no idea he went to Mexico and the Cuban embassy until after the assassination. Like wise the attempt on general walker was a local crime not a federal one and the FBI had shared no details about Oswald with the Dallas authorities which is also normal. The police even in Dallas do not round up " usual suspects " they did in fact operate under the constraints of the constitution which requires probable cause etc. People travel to mexico all the time and in those days one did not even need a passport. It is true that the CIA had the Cuban embassy under surveillance but so many people came and went that they could not identify all or even most of them. This is why the famous picture of a man believed to be Oswald taken by the CIA at the Cuban embassy looks nothing like Oswald. They had no idea what the guy looked like and were asked ( after the assassination ) to locate any photos of Oswald outside the embassy in mexico city. They had only a date and approximate time to go on.

    In light of all this it only seems coincidental after the fact or using hindsight. At the time there was nothing suspicious about the guy.

    Posing with a weapon and trying to assassinate a retired general was not known until after the fact which is why I am saying at the time there was nothing out of the ordinary to be seen. Such things are always more clear using hindsight.

    Consider John Hinkley jr for example. There were plenty of clues ahead of time that he might have been a threat. He had sent pictures of himself holding weapons to Jodie Foster and had sent pictures of him self outside the white house to her as well. He hinted in letters to her that he was an admirer of the movie Taxi Driver which she starred in and which includes a plot about an attempted assassination of a politician. She had protection/ restraining orders on the guy and he had been arrested for stalking her.

    Despite all of this no one saw him coming until he was close enough to shoot Ronald Reagan, James Brady, a Secret Service agent and a DC cop. We always see the pieces after the fact that we missed ahead of time and the same is true for Oswald in 63.

    The House Congressional committee did not conclude that there were two gunmen they concluded it was probable that there was a second gunman. This unfortunately has been debunked since it was a conclusion based on one and only one piece of evidence which has been soundly refuted. The evidence was a recording of the noises picked up by the radio microphone of a motorcycle officer who was riding in the motorcade. His Radio mic push to talk button was stuck in the on position and picked up some noises. No clear noises can be heard other than a voice and some bells. It turns out that the voice was the PA system at Parkland memorial hospital and the bells came from a church next to Parkland. This of course means the mic was stuck in the on position AFTER the assassination. Never the less some " experts " claimed that they could identify rifle shots on the recording and IF the officer could be placed in a specific spot ( about 2 square yards ) they could identify the source of the shots which they claimed was the Grassy knoll. Unfortunately for them the officer was identified and photographs place him very far back in the motorcade and no where NEAR that specific spot when the presidential limo entered the triple underpass which was after the shooting had stopped.

    Essentially the experts provided the very conditions which debunked their own conclusions. Once again this is the ONLY evidence which the House Select committee on assassination based their conclusion on. We know this because their conclusion of a probable second shooter was their SECOND conclusion and was published only after hearing the expert analysis of the recording. Their original conclusion was that the Warren Commission was correct and Oswald acted alone.

    Unfortunately by the time the evidence that the experts were wrong was discovered the House Committee had disbanded and could no longer change their conclusions.
     
  24. usda_select

    usda_select Active Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    May 28, 2016
    Messages:
    832
    Likes Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Sorry. In every showing of the Zapruder film I've ever seen, the wrist is above the exit wound. Again, until I see the bullet with my own two eyeballs, I'm not going to say anything about it.

    Again, seems as unlikely as it seems convenient. But, if you say so.

    My comments were made when you said he hadn't done anything unusual--he did; but now you've expanded that to encompass what was noticed by the authorities so, yeah, you're right..

    I'd like to think that if Hinckley had done a quarter of the things Oswald did, the FBI would have him under strict surveillance until Reagan was safely away. Really, the picture you're painting of the presidential security apparatus makes me wonder if there is actually something to the story of US governmental involvement. They seem really incompetent or really derelict in the duties.

    Strange.
     
  25. Soupnazi

    Soupnazi Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    16,690
    Likes Received:
    2,525
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The wrist was not above the exit wound on Connally's chest and in fact the Zapruder film does not clearly show the precise moment of exit from Connally's chest. At best his wrist was right in front of his chest an inch or so away from hi shirt front.

    Hinkley did more than Oswald did. Most of what you have pointed out Oswald did was unknown until after the assassination.

    I do not see it is strange at all considering it was congress which is more often a house of keystone cops than an investigative agency.
     

Share This Page