Slashdot Mirror
Experts Now Say JFK Bullet Analysis Was Wrong
Spy Handler writes "Researchers analyzing bullet fragments from the 1963 Kennedy assassination using new techniques say that the government's 1976 conclusion that the bullets came from only one gun (Oswald's) is wrong. 'Using new guidelines set forth by the National Academy of Sciences for proper bullet analysis, Tobin and his colleagues at Texas A&M re-analyzed the bullet evidence used by the 1976 House Select Committee on Assassinations, which concluded that only one shooter, Oswald, fired the shots that killed Kennedy in Dallas. The committee's finding was based in part on the research of now-deceased University of California at Irvine chemist Vincent P. Guinn. He used bullet lead analysis to conclude that the five bullet fragments recovered from the Kennedy assassination scene came from just two bullets, which were traced to the same batch of bullets Oswald owned.'"
It's about damn time. Maybe in another 44 years we'll also learn the truth about 9/11?
Time travllers came back and fired invisible bullets from the grassy knoll.
What else do I have to say?
Seriously, was there ever any doubt? Did _anybody_ believe the government over all of the eye witnesses, the drawn out court-case, the ridiculous implausible explanation required, or the pristine perfect bullet found OUTSIDE his body?
It's good somebody finally _proved_ they were lying, but we still don't know why they lied - and really, what moron ever thought the case was closed.
---
this moron
Ace
Then who did it? CowboyNeal?
Uhh..I thought that the Zapruder film, the fact that bullet took an upward, not a downward trajectory, and eyewitness testimony have already trounced on the Warren Commission's findings that Oswald was the lone gunman in Dallas that shot Kennedy.
But I guess this just adds one more piece of evidence for the federal government to completely ignore.
My blog
He's dead - get over it. Marilyn Monroe: dead too. Elvis: him too.
Get over it.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
Why are people still deeply researching this? JFK is dead, so is Princess Diana, so is Elvis; the world is still spinning and everyone else has moved on. I don't understand, why are people concerned with this?
So, unnamed, so-called "Experts" are here to stoke conspiracy theory bullshit and maybe sell a book. What else is new?
I've upped my standards, so up yours.
The researchers believe that the chunk of "grassy knoll" they found among the fragments might also be significant.
ccalam - acoustic versions of new songs.
Obviously there was another shooter that the Gov didn't want you to know. If you look at Oswald's history he was all over the place...defecting to the Soviet Union when he was 19, just 3 days after being discharged from the Marines...that has CIA written all over it.
In a world of acronyms, the words are the real victims.
I can hear it now ... somewhere Bill Hicks is giggling to himself.
"They reached no conclusion about whether more than one gunman was involved"
They only have shown that it is not statistically certain that all bullet fragments were of similar make-up of to those of Oswald's.
We must find those responsible and bring them to justice! I call dibs on the big shovel.
Step into a huge movement. Don't Tread In Me.
Further analysis of the ballistics and stop-motion digitized frames of the famous Zapruder video clearly show that in the frames immediately before the supposed "bullet" that killed JFK Mr. Norris is seen diving into the view of the camera and stopping Oswald's bullet with his beard before it hit the President.
Subsequent analysis shows that JFK's head exploded in sheer amazement of Norris' ability to stop the bullet.
Yeah, my karma sucks....but so do the mods.
Wait, meaning he could have loaded his gun with bullets from different batches of rounds?
Am I misreading this? It just says that some of the fragments had different chemical profiles, meaning they come from different sources. So, why couldn't he have used different sources for his bullets? How does this make a conspiracy, still?
A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
Whoa, it's a meta-conspiracy.
Based on common analysis at the time, it was reasonable conclusion.
/. there is no reason to exsasorbate the issue with post like yours.
This analysis is full of maybes
example:
"If the assassination fragments are derived from three or more separate bullets, then a second assassin is likely, as the additional bullet would not be attributable to the main suspect, Mr. Oswald."
Or he fired another shot.
The guy who claims this has been afer the FBI for years, and what better way to get in the press then dragging this out. Lets see some other groups confirm his analysis.
Even though this post is clearly trollish in nature, and quite frankly doesn't belong on
Was there more then one shooter? I don't know.
What I do know is this:
Any moment in time, looked at be enough people begin to show things that dno't make sense. Any event has thing that seem unexplainable 20+ years down the road.
I also watched a man hit a moving target at 1000 yards, repeatably.
I also no that if there was another shooter, that doesn't mean there is a cover up or conspiracy. Just a wrong conclusion based on faulty analysis.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
This story makes it seem as though this new revelation casts doubt on the whole story. Simply because the lead analysis is wrong doesn't invalidate the highly compelling ballistics evidence and reliable eyewitness testimony. While the lead analysis may not preclude a second shooter, the other evidence certainly does. I would suggest reading Case Closed: Lee Harvey Oswald and the Assassination of JFK by Gerald Posner. It does a very convincing job of examining and supporting Oswald as the sole shooter. This new analysis is not a smoking gun and shame on the media for slanting it that way.
Dont have the time to read all the cofig theories. Let me know when the guy on the grassy knoll is proved to be Arlene Specter.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
Misleading summary on Slashdot? Who would have thought? They didn't say it was wrong (meaning that there was more than one gunmen), they said the analysis was not correct. This means it could have been one gun, it could have been several - the analysis that supposedly proved one gunman actually did not. But, it didn't disprove one gunman either. Of course, "analysis not statistically significant" is a far cry from "multiple gunman proven", but which gets more clicks?
You must not have heard the song he's quoting from?
I used to believe a bunch of the conspiracy bs until I actually visited the site of the shooting in person. Once you've been to the Book Repository and seen the location in person, it becomes painfully obvious that it was almost trivially easy for Oswald to have done the shooting. Quite frankly, the conditions make it very easy (almost convenient) for Oswald to kill Kennedy.
In a nutshell, the location is **small**. Everything is very close together, distances are modest and the shooting was very, very easy from the window to the traveling automobile. The angle was just about ideal for Oswald. The "grassy knoll" is a joke, and the angle from the "knoll" was much less favorable for an assassination attempt.
Seriously folks, go visit the Book Repository yourself. All the conspiracy FUD is just anger and disappointment that something exciting and pretty was destroyed by something ugly and small.
"Man is nothing without the works of man" -- Helvetius
At least SOMEONE is paying attention to the semantics of this thing.
Why does everybody on Slashdot feel the need to jump to conclusions before RTFA?
I've got a bad attitude and karma to burn. Go ahead. Mod me down.
This special was very illuminating. The main takeaway for me, besides the magic bullet, is that most analysis has Gov. Connolly in the wrong position vis a vis JFK.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
This is exactly why people do random acts of shooting, it is glorified.
... whatever.
:)
This is where it starts. Oswald took the role of the bad guy with an opinion. He kills the president and we transform it into a national event!
Now, we have people spending their entire day breaking their brains trying to understand whether Oswald was alone or not, or if he shot once or twice...or
So the message we're really sending to all these lunatic and despaired people is that a good way to be heard is to kill people. They will lose their life (which they dont seem to care about) then a ton of people will give them attention by trying to understand them. They will be seen on the internet, the TV, the radio.
I really wish we'd give less attention to that kind of event, so that in the end, its stops being the "in" thing to do if you are despaired.
Heck, maybe they'd even start blaming rock n roll again for violence and leave the gamers alone
If you look like your passport photo, you're too ill to travel. - Will Kommen
"I have this feeling that whoever's elected president, like Clinton was, no matter what promises you make on the campaign trail - blah, blah, blah - when you win, you go into this smoky room with the twelve industrialist, capitalist scumfucks that got you in there, and this little screen comes down... and it's a shot of the Kennedy assassination from an angle you've never seen before, which looks suspiciously off the grassy knoll.... And then the screen comes up, the lights come on, and they say to the new president, 'Any questions?'"
FOXTROT UNIFORM CHARLIE KILO
One interesting theory I heard: there were two shooters, but the second shooter might not have intended to shoot.
n otated.asp
There were various Secret Service people around, armed with various weapons. If you are well trained, you carry a weapon with the safety applied, and with your finger off the trigger, and the muzzle pointed in a safe direction. But sometimes people do screw up.
So, according to this theory, Oswald starts shooting at JFK, and someone screws up and fires off an accidental shot from an AR-15 or something. Then the person who screwed up never admitted it, because if you fatally shot the man you were trying to protect, would you be in a hurry to admit it?
The accidental shot could have been while taking the safety off in a hurry with a finger on the trigger, for example. (One of Cooper's famous three laws of firearm safety: keep your finger outside the trigger guard until you have the sights lined up on a target you are willing to shoot.)
http://www.sportshooter.com/safety/safetyrules_an
I heard this theory from Massad Ayoob years ago during a lecture on safety. He felt that JFK's head wound was consistent with the small, fast bullet fired by an AR-15, while JFK's other wounds were consistent with a big, heavy, slow bullet fired by the Carcano rifle used by Oswald.
http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/id89.htm
I have not researched this enough to have an opinion on how likely it is, but I do find it interesting.
steveha
lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
But when I came across this wiki article, I said "HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM, I wonder"
From Wiki Article on JFK Assassination
"The FBI has received added scrutiny by Kennedy assassination researchers due to the actions of FBI agent James Hosty. Hosty appeared in Oswald's address book. The FBI provided to the Warren Commission a typewritten transcription of Oswald's address book, in which Hosty's name and phone number were omitted. Two days before the assassination, Oswald went to the FBI office in Dallas to meet with Hosty, and when he found that Hosty was not in the office at the time, Oswald left an envelope for Hosty with a letter inside. After Oswald was murdered by Jack Ruby, Hosty's supervisor ordered Hosty to destroy the letter, and he did so by tearing the letter up and flushing it down the toilet. Months later, when Hosty testified before the Warren Commission, he did not disclose this connection with Oswald. This information became public later and was investigated by the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations.[57]"
Uhhh, hello, McFly! tap tap tap
That person in the Whitehouse currently, along with his pals, are trying harder than anyone in recent history to erode away and steal your personal freedoms. They are deserving of 'our' attention, even if you don't get the joke... meh
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
On his deathbed recently confessed to the conspiracy..0 407deathbedconfession.htm
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/april2007/30
The motives were there in spades too.
Yeah Yeah, knock the messenger (prisonplanet), but read it first.
There was this guy (I forget his name) executed for some crime a couple of thousand years ago, and there are multiple organizations, big and small, arguing about that. Heck, sometimes they even get to killing each other over it. Go figure.
Yes, Oswald was up in his sniper's nest in the Book Repository building and popped off some shots, and his was the "magic bullet" that wounded the President and Governer Connely. As to the bullet being pristine, there is this thing about full-metal jacket military bullets that are supposed to go through you instead of fragment or mushroom, and it was not pristine but rather deformed, and high-energy 22 cal bullets can take strange paths through body tissue.
The big mystery is how Oswald could have popped off the "single bullet" and then the kill shot -- was he that good a marksman at a moving target or was he lucky and the rest of the world so unlucky? The theory is no, the kill shot came from somewhere else -- the commotion of the shooting, a Secret Service agent dropped what was at that time an experimental AR-15, the thing discharged (in front and below the President), and the peculiar ammo inflicted the horrific, fatal wound on the President.
Government coverup? You bet! How could the government admit to the President being killed by his own bodyguards, althought that is what happened to Huey Long -- also an accident. Oswald the lone killer? Also true -- that the fatal shot was an accident in response to someone trying to kill the President doesn't let Oswald off the hood.
I prefer the Gassy Gnoll theory, personally. Some guys were playing D&D nearby and "dogboy" had eaten one too many bean burritos.....needless to say, it wasn't a pleasant result.
Layne
This still isn't the truth. The truth is JFK was killed by bears from space.
"Live as if you'll die tomorrow." Ridiculous. You could die later today.
No, the D&D play nearby would have caused JFK to be killed by "Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt! Lightning Bolt!"
The whole JFK assassination thing never sat right with me. For the most part I believe that your typical conspiracy theory, the ones that would be called kooky, rely too much on the omniscience of the shadowy "they." We're talking a level of coordination and control that any overt organization would be hard-pressed to match, PLUS the ability to keep it all secret! Your typical Illuminati conspiracies fall apart under analysis. But then there's your more realistic conspiracies, what I call the Mafia-type. They're possible, plausible, and have happened in the past, the only question is whether event X involved one. The Loose Change theory that the Pentagon was not hit by a passenger jet, that's kook. The idea that the WTC was taken down by controlled demlolition charges, that's kook. The idea that the Bush administration was behind the whole thing with detailed involvment in the planning, made it happen on purpose, that's kook. But what about the stuff that really happened? Coverying up Pat Tillman's death? Fact. Lying about Jessica Lynch? Fact. Outright fabrication of evidence to steer the nation towards war? Fact. Shutting down and firing anyone within the administration, military, and government agencies who questioned the war? Fact. Basing selection criteria for who to recruit for the rebuilding of Iraq based on party loyalty rather than professional qualifications? Fact. The textbook definition of a conspiracy: an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot. If I plot to kill my wife and my brother is in on it, this is a conspiracy to commit murder. If I plot to steal money from my employer and my coworker is in on it, that is a conspiracy to steal.
But back to what I was getting at originally, the whole official story for the Kennedy Assassination smells funny. You have passionate people on both sides of the issue arguing about whether this point or that validates or disproves the government's story. If Oswald was not the lone killer, it's a conspiracy. If there were some gigantic lapse in security that let Kennedy be killed and officials moved to coverup that embarassment, it's a conspiracy, but not in the sense that "they" ordered him killed. But who would "they" even be? If there is a "they", why kill him on Dallas? Why the whole fancy shooting from the Schoolbook Depository?
And this all leads around to another explanation, maskirova. That's a russian word for camouflage, deception, or misdirection. Take Area 51 for example. The Air Force wants to play with some crazy toys out in the desert. Seeing as the Western powers were the Soviet's best source for military research, the last thing anyone wanted was to give the game away to their spies. So, the public has a fascination with flying saucers and little green men, right? Well, the new experimental aircraft look pretty odd, especially at night. Why not play up that angle? Everybody assumes the government is hiding something so why not really give them something to talk about? Act mysterious, give ludicrous explanations for what people might have seen in the sky, call it swamp gas or venus low on the horizon, act like you've got something to hide. Pretty soon everybody is talking about flying saucers and nobody is talking about stealth aircraft.
So, is there a real conspiracy there or not? Is the government hamming it up to make us think there's something there to misdirect us from the truth? Or is this just typical government bungling and we're just seeing a pattern of deception that isn't really there?
Back, and to the left. Back, and to the left.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
They didn't say it was wrong (meaning that there was more than one gunmen), they said the analysis was not correct.
I guess you could say it was misleading, but it's not the way I took it. I took it to mean the analysis was wrong, as in not correct.
If any step in a proof is wrong, then the entire proof is wrong, even if the conclusion is actually a true statement.
Of course it's all the other problems with the official story that naturally push my mind in the direction of there being multiple shooters upon finding out that the proof of the single shooter was incorrect. But I still didn't take the summary as implying that this was now proven.
The enemies of Democracy are
So they basically came up with a collective "I don't know *shrug*". This is fucking weak.
Geeks strike again 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
from 200 yards away.
With mind bullets.
That's telekinesis, Kyle.
JFK IS NOT DEAD. The CIA cloned him and that was what was really shot. He faked his death so that he could live with Marylon Monroe, who also faked her death, and they are currently living on Cuba as a guest of Fidel Castro with their good friend Jimmy Hoffa.
A fake conspiracy of who really killed JFK was drawn up to give the nut jobs who think everything is a conspiracy something to chew on, leaving just enough evidence to keep them going. To manufacture the evidence the Borg brought back a federation replicator which is powered by a V8 with a 500 mile per gallon carbarator with those tablets that convert water into fuel.
If it seems like Deja-vu, its just another gliche in the Matrix.
Dude, if you think the X-Files movie being available On Demand at the same time this research has come to light is merely a coincidence then you might want to get that wool off your eyes before you fall down and have an "accident".
This space intentionally left (almost) blank.
Just died in a nursing home at 93
they obviously got it wrong to!
Si vis pacem, para bellum! For evil to succeed good men need only do nothing!
The one in the doorway is shot from slightly below the doorway (i.e. looking up), while the clear oswald shot is from above (looking down). From those 2 photos, it is possible for them to be the same person. But I have not looked through any of these photos or really any of that.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
I can't understand your arguement at all.
#1: you say the evidence isn't good enough to know? What kind of proof do you require? Videotape? eyewitness? Since there's no such thing as a time machine, the best evidence in criminal cases comes down to either eyewitness accounts, circumstantial accounts, or evidentary. There were people who identified Oswald as eyewitnesses. There was plenty of circumstances that led one to believe Oswald committed the crime.
#2 You come to the 'one in a million' account through no known reasoning. Explain where that number comes from.
#3 This is just incorrect. There were THREE seperate investigations. The reason why the police didn't pursue heavily a full criminal investigation? They had a suspect in custody, who had been murdered. Did you view the records from the investigation at all? Do you know what processes the police, FBI, and federal agents went through?
#4 Even if this were true, motive does not prove guilt. The same statement you made could apply to Kruschev, Castro, etc. You also state that he was opposed to any investigation. If that's the case, why were there investigations during his presidency? He was the one that declared the Warren Comission.
You wrote that anyone who takes enough time looking at the evidence against Oswald. He's evidence. He worked at the schoolbook depository, a fellow employee DROVE HIM INTO WORK THAT DAY WITH A LARGE LONG PACKAGE WRAPPED IN BROWN PAPER. He was in the vicinity at the time of the shooting, Eyewitnesses identified him as the shooter in the window, Eyewitnesses identified him as the shooter of the cop afterwards. Also, Oswald attempted to assassinate General Walker a few months before he killed Kennedy.
People take comfort in comspiracy theories because it makes them think a larger force is at work (same principle religion offers), and therefore that people can't just 'snap' and kill a lot of people, like what happened in 9/11 or the Virginia Tech massacres. But people can just snap, and kill people. This victim just happened to be the president. Its not hard to believe, Regan was shot, Lincoln was shot. No Conspiracy there.
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
What?
That is an easy shot for any trained marksman. Easy.
Yes, some people look at that and think "Wow, Nobody could do that at the paintball range."
That's about their experience.
This new analysis needs to be done by others before it's creditable.
If it is creditable, it only means the bullet lead didn't come from the same place. Nothing more. Not that they came from different guns.
The grassy knoll would be a horrible place for second shooter, far worse then the book repository.If there is a conspiracy, it was probably to cover up an accidental discharge of an agent.
So LJ went to the SS and sais "Psst, see that the president gets killed, here's a fiver?"
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Ahh yes. Someone stokes the consipiracy flames to sell a book, and that makes news. Meanwhile Vincent Bugliosi, the prosecutior of Charles Manson, writes a book explaining in excrutiating detail about how the Oswald was the lone gunman and fired the shots from the book depository, and no one says a thing.
All this talk about conspiracy theories is absurd. There's a group of people that that refuse to believe that shit happens. One guy can kill a president. A cult would willingly set themselves on fire rather than be arrested. That 19 guys from the desert can hijack airliners with boxcutters and crash them into buildings. I think it comes from that the need to place some meaning and reason on these acts. They can't fantom the power of a single commited individual, and so they find a vast and all powerful secret conspiracy is behind it all. The Knights Templar. The Illuninati. The Zeta Reticulians. The Water Fluoridation Industrial Complex. The Left Handed People of Borneo. The large underground homosexual population of Des Moines, Iowa. You name it. It's quite absurd.
... dead wrong?
Maybe now, FINALLY, the truth will come out!!
That Oswald was really trying to be a hero, and shot only at the sniper he saw hiding in the grassy knoll!!
(with apologies to Family Guy)
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
... d'you not watch prison break?!?!
The saddest poem
I was surprised that no one commented here on E. Howard Hunt's audio tape confession of involvement in the Kennedy assassination: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._Howard_Hunt#Audio- taped_confession
Within the audio tape Hunt names Cord Meyer, Frank Sturgis, David Sánchez Morales, and David Atlee Phillips as co-conspirators. He also claims Lyndon Johnson approved of the assassination for political gain.
"I think that LBJ settled on Meyer as an opportunist, parent--like himself a parent--and a man who had very little left to him in life ever since JFK had taken Cord's wife as one of his mistresses. I would suggest that Cord Meyer welcomed the approach from LBJ, who was after all only the Vice President at that time and of course could not number Cord Meyer among JFK's admirers--quite the contrary."
E. Howard Hunt was also famous for organizing the bugging of the DNC in the Watergate scandal.
- Yes, I am posting at a -1, and no I will not use a proxy to bypass my circumstances.
I guess you missed the recent revelations from e howard hunt's son about his dad's deathbed confession about the assassination conspiracy? Also the now old confessions from LBJs mistress? Or the "most famous wink in the world" picture taken on the plane with the body going back to washington?
The high level shadow government goons had tremendous motive to whack jfk (oil depletion allowance, cutting the fed reserve out and going back to honest treasury money, they wanted a new war for profit, they wanted revenge for cuba and bay of pigs, several more), they certainly had the means(numerous examples of them pulling off forein coups, this is not any sort of hard or new work for themthe list of nations is large and the numbers murdered by the spooks and their proxies is even larger), and they created the opportunity (they ran JFK through a fishbowl killzone at very low speed). Then they offed the main witness, the fall guy, the patsy.
Eisenhower warned the US people about them, in about as clear a language as there is, yet when we see example after example of their handiwork, dudes like you fall into immediate denial, because you are in a a CULT, the cult of statism and cognizant dissonance, you "believe" it couldn't happen because it's so heinous an event so therefore it just couldn't be anything but their cockamammy fairy tale story.
Sorry, I am a natural skeptic, if it comes from official government sources-assume it's a lie until proven otherwise. They've been caught too many times lying about extremely important things. How about the "tonkin gulf attacks"? Never happened, NOW they finally admit it. A complete fabrication. Not one of the assholes involved has gone to jail over it. A couple millions "slopes" and 50 thousand US service people DEAD, based on a lie, for political and economic profit for a few fatcats. How about the USS Liberty, and killing your own guys? It's only because some lived through it and the ship didn't sink that we even found out about it, and it was that same crook LBJ and the zionazis who pulled that stunt.
9-11, the government told their own lower level cops who were investigating matters ahead of the event to SIT DOWN AND SHUTUP about it, several of the cases still magically haven't gone to court yet. Gee, WHY NOT? What ya got to hide, STATIST PIG? What happened to the videotaping "dancing israelis" and their truck and equipment? WHO PROFITS? How about those israeli "art students", huh? Where'd they go to? Start from there and go backwards, you'll see, the guys in charge now are crooks and liars and murderers, and they get away with it because they "decided" to, because they have so many heel clicking MERCENARIES working for them, regular plain dumb and scared order followers who know you follow orders or it gets to be real bad news real quick like, that's why. And congress doesn't investigate because one-they have no guns, a severe oversight with the constitution and two, more practical and direct, none of them want to get WELLSTONED, or have a repeat of the anthrax WARNING they got to NOT question events and to play ball or else. And if you want to see some more of a motive, check out the latest on the *insane* armageddon cult that has infiltrated the DOD and executive branch. These are the fundiest of fundiest who think we NEED a severe huge mideast war to bring about "the rapture". These are guys, an american taliban basically, GIVING ORDERS now. High level, generals, admirals, pentagon chiefs, etc. loons. They DON'T CARE how many folks they kill as long as it brings about their whacked out "end times" scenario.
You want more links, do your own research, there's enough here to find what I am talking about.
As to the pristine bullet, it's the one found on the stretcher magically at the hospital in dallas.
HARTMAN: Do any of you people know who Charles Whitman was?
No response
HARTMAN: None of you dumbasses knows?
COWBOY raises his hand.
HARTMAN: Private Cowboy?
COWBOY: Sir, he was that guy who shot all those people from that tower in Austin, Texas, sir!
HARTMAN: That's affirmative. Charles Whitman killed twenty people from a twenty-eight-storey observation tower at the University of Texas from distances up to four hundred yards.
HARTMAN looks around.
HARTMAN: Anybody know who Lee Harvey Oswald was?
Almost everybody raises his hand.
HARTMAN: Private Snowball?
SNOWBALL: Sir, he shot Kennedy, sir!
HARTMAN: That's right, and do you know how far away he was?
SNOWBALL: Sir, it was pretty far! From that book suppository building, sir!
The recruits laugh at "suppository. "
HARTMAN: All right, knock it off! Two hundred and fifty feet! He was two hundred and fifty feet away and shooting at a moving target. Oswald got off three rounds with an old Italian bolt action rifle in only six seconds and scored two hits, including a head shot! Do any of you people know where these individuals learned to shoot?
JOKER raises his hand.
HARTMAN: Private Joker?
JOKER: Sir, in the Marines, sir!
HARTMAN: In the Marines! Outstanding! Those individuals showed what one motivated marine and his rifle can do! And before you ladies leave my island, you will be able to do the same thing!
It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
...to make claims one way or the other, but even if the original theory was correct, isn't it reasonable to assume that if there were in fact two assassins that they could have simply shared ammo from the same box? I skimmed most of the comments but didn't see anything like this mentioned..
Heck, why not? Slashduh have now been featuring "humans did global warming lol" and "oswald didn't do jfk lol".
"Jews did wtc lol" and "nasa didn't fly to the moon lol" are the natural next steps to take.
Oh yeah, sorry, I forgot: Bush = Hitler!!!!1
(I understand I'm supposed to do that, as I'm from Europe. Give me 5+, Informative, please.)
Ever heard of a Colt 45 peacemaker?
Granted they fired different cartridges and the peacemaker was originally a black powder round (lower velocity).
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I'm wondering if the techniques they are using are "improved" over the old techniques- which, as of 1 September, 2005, has been declared unreliable by the FBI. The whole technique has been declared "flawed."
For years, comparative bullet lead analyses were considered accurate and good proof; I remember reading the neutron activation analyses when I was in college as an undergrad, and thinking it was a fantastic technique. But now it looks like 40 years' worth of convictions are at risk- 2,500 analyses, with 20% of these being introduced as evidence at trial.
That person in the Whitehouse currently, along with his pals, are trying harder than anyone in recent history to erode away and steal your personal freedoms. They are deserving of 'our' attention
I could't agree with you more, just too bad I don't have any mod points today.
I think I speak for everybody here when I say it is our hope that you "truthers" are quickly put on your meds so the rest of us don't have to sift through your bullshit. There's really nothing dumber than claiming Bush knew about 9/11, because then he would have stopped it to make himself look good rather than reading through a kid's book after the secret service agent told him to stay put, making him look stupid to ignorant viewers of hack-job Michael Moore conspiracy films. It doesn't matter how many engineers who actually built the fucking towers claim you're controlled demolition theories are wrong. You just want something to believe in that has no proof whatsoever so that it gives you something mysterious in your life. Fuck that.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Check out the google video that puts Bush Sr. in the center of the conspiracy to kill JFK
People like conspiracy theories because people are fundamentally mistrusting. The world spends an inordinate amount of energy making sure the other guy isn't trying to screw it over. So any time there are messy circumstances like with JFK it makes a lot of people want to take a second look.
In this case it's entirely possible for Oswald to not have acted alone, i.e. he fired his shots and someone else also fired (with or without his knowledge). I was absolutely convinced based on research I did in college (library, no internet at the time) that there was another shooter. Nowadays I am less inclined to feel like I know what happened either way.
I will say that if there was a conspiracy LBJ must have been involved at some level, because you don't kill the #1 for not advancing your agenda without knowing you can advance your agenda with the #2. And people in my family (who lived in Texas all their lives) always said LBJ was a mean so-and-so and they wouldn't put it past him.
I was born around 10 years after Kennedy's death. I've heard the theories. It was the Mafia. It was the CIA. It was LBJ. It was the military industrial complex. It was a nut named Oswald. It was the Russians. It was the combination of any or all of the above.
I'm curious because it became a pivotal point in history. I understand that the government may not want to reveal some security precautions for its head of state, even though it is obvious that they would be changed after an event like this. I don't want to know what they are now.
I do not, however, understand why pertinent details need to be classified for several generations, and I fear that when they are declassified, they will consist of pages of ancient photocopies obscured by black marker. I would like to know what happened, but I accept that I likely never will, because my collective servant will probably have some reason not to tell me.
sigh
From what I understand, it was because the voters of Texas outright hated him and not even Johnson's voting fraud buddies could be counted on to keep things in line. He was there to try to gin up some good will.
Of course, his assasination was the biggest boon to his legacy ever.
He was actually a horrible president with a self-centered high school mentality, put in place by the political mechanations of his father and the Daley's in Chicago. Lyndon and Kennedy actually hated each other, and he was only brought onto the ticket to deliver Texas- fraudulently. JFK's only real gift was charisma, and that's all he needed to win given his father, the Daleys, and Johnson.
If he wasn't assisinated his presidency would have been nothing more than a painful, distant memory by now.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
There was no sniper on the grassy knoll.
[eyes shift back and forth]
ps: dont look at my user name.
A Human Right
They got away with it, even besides the dodgy evidence. They got away with the phony viet nam war for a long time. Shows some competence, lot of billionaires and mutli millionaires made out of that war. They keep getting away with treating sick and wounded vets like utter rubbish-yet still get enough people to "join up" to keep serving them. That shows some competence and leet skills in brainwashing the mass populations. Remember, you only have to keep the bulk of the population under control,not everyone, the rest can be dismissed in any fashion they choose. They keep getting away with ignoring the border and insourcing a lot of serf level labor and outsourcing industries for futher serf level wage scales, in order to drive down the wages of the middle class and increase the profits of the top 1%-, and there's still no mass revolt like there should be, because they have the middle class effectively terrorized, so that shows some criminal competence. They keep getting away with hijacked elections-that shows some competence. They got away with the newest ongoing iraq war, conveniently tied it to 9-11 even though saddam had nothing to do with al queda and OBL and in fact was enemies with the guy and was running a pretty secular modern nation as mid east dictatorships go (they are all dictatorships and certain classes and people are routinely killed and tortured over there), and keep getting away with it. Shows some competence. They keep creating artificial crash and burn bubble economies so they can then "legally" extract wealth from the productive middle class, by inflating the currency supply so much they get people scared they can't just save money, they have to "invest" in wall street ponzi scams, and they keep getting away with that, shows some competence. And so on.
I think you might be confusing normal lower level bureaucratic bloat incompetence with high level successful geo-economic politics and massive fraud and successful buncoism. Remember, government is a jobs and income and power aggregating *racket*. As with all mobs in the rackets, murder is just one tool in their tool box. And lying is the least of their crimes. And all crooks lie, part of their nature.
And then in 35 years we should forget about 9/11 when we got no answers?
9/11 was no conspiracy. JFK was. If we're talking about shelf-life, let's talk about Jesus dying over 2000 years ago...
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
Um, No? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bench_press You got a not competely in top shape army soldier bench pressing 345 there. And 600 is at a bit under half of the world record for squat. Now, had he claimed to do a couple hundred reps with those numbers, it might be different, but just being able to do those numbers once or twice really isn't all that astounding. Strong? Yes. Pathological liar material? No
I read all the conspiracy books about 20 years ago, and the piece of evidence that most rules out the Oswald-only theory is that Kennedy was shot in the neck from the front. The emergency room doctor at the hospital reported that kennedy had an entrance wound in his neck, which the Dr. then cut through to perform a tracheotemy. This doctor, I recall, is the only person to examine Kennedy's body who had any real world experience dealing with gunshot wounds. [p]No evidence stronger than this, on either side, was presented at any point in the entire investigation.
We didn't start the fire.
Dude I don't care about Wikipedia articles, I've seen this stuff first hand. Ronnie Coleman is one of the top body builders in the world and I think his max squat is like 800 pounds and he's a steroid ridden monster.
If anyone doubts it's a conspiracy on some level, just ask yourself how the Brain of one of the most popular presidents disappears after a highly questionable assassination. I mean come on really, If the brains don't fit the conspiracy is legit!
People take comfort in comspiracy theories because it makes them think a larger force is at work (same principle religion offers), and therefore that people can't just 'snap' and kill a lot of people, like what happened in 9/11 or the Virginia Tech massacres.
Minor nitpick:
I don't think anybody regardless of who all they think were involved in 9/11 thinks anybody involved "just snapped".
There's no denying a level of planning beyond that.
YOU LIE!
2. He was an excellent marksman.
it's a matter of record he attained "maggie's drawers" twice before getting his "MARKSMANSHIP" medal. Ask a military man, like myself, what maggie's drawers and marksmanship (e.g. NOT sharpshooter)are.
4. His rifle was a Italian Carcano.
the rifle the sheriff is holding up at the press conference is CLEARLY a GERMAN-made MAUSER.
now shut the fuck up and sit the fuck down
the significance of a signature is insignificant
Great. Now we know less than we knew then.
"Don't let fools fool you. They are the clever ones."
A bit before my time. But according to family members who were alive and watching the news:
#1 - Eyewitnesses gave various radically different versions of events. Many present were CERTAIN that bullets were coming from a different direction. Careful selection of which accounts to believe could provide evidence for practically anything...
#2 - I suspect one in amillion is hyperbole. However, people did not find the offical version convincing at the time. Nor did the later investigation change many minds.
#3 - The conduct of the investigation did not increase public confidence. This was an era before the CSI TV series, but the handling of the body and other physical evidence indicated either remarkable ignorance of forensic science or a lack of concern about determining the truth. The murder of the suspect by an organized crime figure, attributed OFFICIALLY to a transport of civic spirit, did not help matters.
#4 - The initial reaction of my family members upon hearing the news was "Johnson did it." Not any sort of evidence, but indicative of public opinion. And after the Warren Comission, some sort of conspiracy with him involved still seemed more likely than the official account of a lone gunman, some bizarre coincidences, and the worst spin control in recorded history.
I don't have much emotional capital invested either way. It is a bit scary that I find the notion of a successful coup so plausible, but I've heard many whopping lies from the government over far smaller stakes. On the other hand, coincidences do happen. I'd like to know the truth, but suspect it's become a religious issue. Anyone doubting the official version gets labeled a crackpot, while any actual evidence for the offical version has obviously been manufactured by our secret overlords...
Highly suspicious to base an analysis on this. How can they be sure of the provenance of these bullets?
After all, there still exist enough pieces of the true cross to build a cathedral, it is said.
I'd also be a bit creeped out dealing with someone who collects bullets for this reason. Weird.
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
I heard he was assassinated for signing Executive Order 11110 into law...
Wikipedia excerpt:
"This executive order allowed the US Secretary of the Treasury, as per delegated authority given to the President by the Thomas Amendment to the Agricultural Adjustment Act, to issue silver certificates against silver bullion. The major change affected by this order was that the printing of paper money could again be carried out without any reliance on the Federal Reserve System, which by this time had become the sole entity responsible for currency distribution and valuation in the United States. Very little of this silver-backed money was ever issued, with the project largely being abandoned after Kennedy's assassination only a few months later. No President since JFK has ever availed himself of what this order allowed"
You can learn more about the Federal Reserve here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYZM58dulPE
That show you mention even had a guy pull out Oswald's shooters score book from the marines showing what an incredible shot he was, yet you can find evidence with google proving Oliver Stone's assertion that other marines said he had "maggies drawers" and/or was a poor shooter overall. They had simply pulled out a few instances of good shooting he had for your show.
My dad was at one point a Sergeant stationed at MCAF Santa Ana, and enjoyed the dubious honor of being Oswald's last NCO, escorting him to the front gate the day he was discharged. Neither the old man nor the other NCOs he knew were impressed by Oswald's ability on a firing range, barely good enough to rate the "Marksman" shooting badge. When the nature of JFK's shooting came out, my dad could not believe JHO had the ability to pull it off.
Granted, as my mom used to argue, anyone can have a lucky day. But, with two shots, that's damn lucky.
Luke, help me take this mask off
People do things for reasons
k market.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2704stoc
It wasn't the first attempt on the world trade center.
Ted Turner said it was an act of desparation, then a week later (after he was probably threated by anthrax) he changed his statement.
The anthrax was a non-conspiracy government official with enough clearance to not officially inspect the anthrax store of the military base it was traced back to. This person knew enough about anthrax, as anyone trained would know, to do the dirty deed. But as a single person, [conspiracy requires two or more,] but who couldn't guess what the republican political party would do with the results? Those who are stupider'er than politicians? As it would certainly play into controlling the media for Bushes war drum banging....
Fact is, the world stock market gamble caused a very big problem world wide, except for china who wasn't playing that game but got front row seats via hong kong lease ending.
CNN and ABC did stories on the problems this gamble was causing south east asia, banks were closing and mothers couldn't afford to buy baby milk. Indonesians (CIA reports its 88% Muslim) knew it was teh americans but didn't know how they were doing it. They knew their own government was corrupt but this was beyond even that, and they knew it, just not how)
World Bank (run by the US) offered to bail out south east asia for interest payment on such a loan. That did not go over at all. Ultimately interest rate went to 0% even in the US as part of the "saying sorry".
Muslims in general are not to blame, as we Americans simply provided a very good excuse for radical extreamist to promote their cause against the US, so to enlist such a large following as they have. The war Bush waged on Iraq was in no way aimed at Bin Laden, though 9/11 was the excuse for the war. And that only pissed more off.....go figure.
Why the pentagon and white house 9/11 targets? Simple: the target wasn't about hitting those directly responsible, as few knew where they were, but as a statement something along the lines of "wrongful world economic manipulation back by politically controlled military".
I don't like Lil'natzi Bush, nor do I like radical extreamist. However, the Trillion dollar bet was VERY VERY WRONG!!! An dit is what gave cause to 9/11 by radical extreamist and a major excuse for Bush to finish his fathers work against Iraq.
That much money doesn't just appear out of nowhere and then vanish into nowhere and some of the participants have been in teh news, mostly the losers like worldcom, enron, etc... and note the timing on the dot com boom and bust. Some of the winners had to put their easy winnings somewhere (easy come easy go)..... follow the money....
That sounds very suspicious, it must be a cover up!!!
</sarcasm>
Professor Jones of BYU got a sample of the slag from the discovered molten material. He has analyzed it and found that the component metals match the components of Thermate (not thermite).
-- QED
The far left executed a decapitation strike on the moderate left.
It worked. The far left is in control of the Democrat party.
Well, we all knew that. According to the this documentary, the second bullet must have come from Kennedy's gun (the Kennedy from the alternate timeline) on the grassy knoll in order to correct the timeline and get the crew back to Red Dwarf. If Lister wasn't so hung up on Indian food, we wouldn't have these problems.
===== Murphy's Law is recursive. =====
Time for me to put my two penneth in this argument; I've done a bit of writing on this subject, namely the bunched jakcte nonsense which has been pounced upon as proof of Oswald's guilt. Nonsense. Have a read of this: http://www.paullee.com/jfk/bunchedjacket.html Also, a mate of mine has done some writing on this, based on John Connally's wounds. He asks some very serious questions: http://www.dealeyplazauk.co.uk/The%20Wounding%20of %20John%20Connally.htm
My web domain.
http://www.jfkfiles.com/jfk/html/intro.htm This is very good evidence of only 1 shooter.
Tech Support: "No, sir...clicking on 'Remember Password' will NOT help you remember your password."
First, there never was a "proof", at least not in the way you are thinking. Such proofs only exist in the world of mathematics, and there they are only possible because mathematics is a completely abstract field that does not involve perceptions of the real world (which always have some degree of intrinsic doubt). You cannot mathematically prove that Oswald did or did not do it, because Oswald is not a mathematical construct. Its been said many times before, but it bears repeating because people still for some reason try to do it; NEVER interpret real world arguments as mathematical proofs.
Second, here is the exact quote from the article summary:
The summary is clearly saying that the conclusion was shown to be false (meaning Oswald didn't do it), not the argument itself. Which of course is not what the article says at all. If you read it differently, you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.
Third, how the hell is this news anyways? Experts (or rather, people calling themselves experts) have been disagreeing with the lone gunman theory since the day Kennedy was shot. This can only be considered "news" if mainstream scientists can back up the lone research team.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
JFK: You, err, want me to assassinate myself.
Lister: Yeah, sure it'll drive the conspiracy nuts crazy but they'll never figure it out.
Hey, just wait another 50 years and science will have advanced that far.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
The summary didn't say the analysis was wrong...it said the conclusion was wrong. The summary claims, in effect, that these researchers proved that there was more than one gunman.
Evil is the money of root.
What I dont understand is how the standard government/big-media explanation is not a conspiracy theory? So supposedly 19 guys from various countries, driven by their people's hatred of freedom, were being controlled via walkie-talkie's by an ex-CIA officer living in caves in Afghanistan. Whether you do or do not believe the store, 20 people necessarily defines a conspiracy. So I dont understand why the standard explation is not a "conspiracy theory."
Well, not saying I believe in one particular theory or another, but I find it interesting when people use this argument since they usually use it to invalidate the evidence that is there or declare the people who do come forward to be 'nutjobs', thus closing the possibility of anything other than the official explanation.
In reality, governments do occasionally pull off rather large conspiracies of this order *precisely because* of this sentiment. The burning of the Reichstag springs to mind, or, on the other side, the rather large conspiracy *against* Hitler in the German military intelligence department. Such efforts seem so improbable that no one believes them even when faced with quite direct evidence. In fact, the Abwher conspiracy in Germany demonstrates exactly the scale of a military/government conspiracy which 9/11 theorists allege. In the end, it did not fail due to infiltration or bad security, but due to simple bad luck (Hitler survived the bomb).
Secondly, if your theory is correct, that it is not possible for a large organization to keep a secret, how did a large international terrorist organization do it? How does organized crime work? Both require deep hooks into government to function and often carry out quite bold acts in broad daylight. The police knew full well the acts that Capone was responsible for but could not prove it, and he was so skilled in playing the media that much of the public refused to believe the charges as well. They do not need to keep a secret, they (whoever 'they' are) just need to get enough conflicting information out to muddy the waters. Real conspiracies, large and small, happen every day, and the bad guys do not wear black hats.
The government's explanation is also a "conspiracy theory," and, a priori, deserves no more nor less consideration than any other.
watch the Agent's reaction
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
The sailors who were there tell of a coverup.
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
he attained "maggie's drawers" twice before getting his "MARKSMANSHIP" medal. Ask a military man, like myself, what maggie's drawers and marksmanship (e.g. NOT sharpshooter)are.
...scored 191, one point over minimum for ranking as a "marksman."" (Emphasis mine)
"a red flag that is waved from the rifle pits to indicate a complete miss of the target"
From wikipedia: "Although, in May 1959, he qualified as a marksman (a lower classification than that of sharpshooter). Military experts, after examining his records, characterized his firearms proficiency as "above average" and was, when compared to American civilian males of his age, "an excellent shot". [9]" (Emphasis mine)
Footnote 9 links to the Warren Report, page 191, where it states "...tested in December of 1956, and obtained a score of 212, which was 2 points above the minimum for qualification as a "sharpshooter".... In May of 1959, on another range
It goes on to say "We have nothing here to show under what conditions the B course was fired. It might well have been a bad day for firing the rifle.... the rifle he was firing might not have been as good...."
the rifle the sheriff is holding up at the press conference is CLEARLY a GERMAN-made MAUSER.
1) What sheriff? What press conference? Details, people, details.
Wiki sez: "A 6.5 x 52 mm Italian Mannlicher-Carcano M91/38 bolt-action rifle was found on the 6th Floor of the Texas Book Depository by Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman and Deputy Sheriff Eugene Boone soon after the assassination of President Kennedy.[27] The recovery was filmed by Tom Alyea of WFAA-TV.[28] This footage shows the rifle to be a Mannlicher-Carcano, and it was later verified by photographic analysis commissioned by the HSCA that the rifle filmed was the same one later identified as the assassination weapon."
Footnote 28 links to http://www.jfk-online.com/alyea.html
Dont Forget there was a conspiracy to also kill the VP and the speaker of the house to put the next one in the big seat, who had sympathy for the Southern cause. (Sorry guys forgot the names, dnt have time to look them up)
While we are doing all this wild eyed speculation, how about speculating up some brains for our current White House resident.
No one claims that elements of the US government executed 9/11 successfully. If they had the evidence would corroborate the al queda explanation more than it did. If there was nothing to hide then full disclosure is in order. NIST should release the thousands of photos and videos they have possession of. The FBI should release all 80+ video's of the pentagon they claim they have. The American people deserve an earnest independent investigation with subpoena power. Do you honestly believe the Federal government has been completely honest about 9/11? Now put 9/11 in the context of the Iraq war deception. Why shouldn't people question the government's account of 9/11?
If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be-T J
The first is how to find the suspect the Murder She Wrote way. You walk around investigating the suspects and then tell all of them that you know who did it and are going to reveal it tomorrow. The one who turns up that night to kill you, is the murderer. For the JFK assasination we need to go to the twist on that plot. Namely that the person who turns up is the one who wants to protect the person they think really did it.
How does this relate? What is most intresting about the whole JFK thing is NOT who actually pulled the trigger, but the sheer number of people that turned up at night to kill Angela Lansbury. An awfull lot of people/groups/institutions reacted as if they feared that "they" had done it. Not they themselves but perhaps some over ambitious underling, some group they supported and could be traced back.
Since plotting to kill the president of US of A is not what organisations like the FBI and CIA should be doing, just having them react guiltily is enough condemnation.
Think of it like this. I am thinking of killing CowboyNeal and have talked about this with various people. Then all of a sudden CowboyNeal turns up death. I will then offcourse panic, what if someone I talked too actually did it, it could be traced back to me and so I start covering my tracks even though in reality there may be nothing to cover up.
But for me to plot to kill CowboyNeal is not a crime in itself. If it was, millions of lovers of the english language would be in jail right now. It is not quite the same if a security agency plots to kill the president. It does not matter if Oswald worked for them, or even if he was the actuall shooter, that fact that they reacted as if they thought he might have is enough.
The SECOND thing I learned from TV is that conspiracy people are dreamers. They like to believe that the world is run by someone with some degree of competence. Not someone they agree with offcourse but at least that someone is in control.
Sorry. Nope. Unless someone out there is a truly amazing human with skill far beyond any know living being in all of history it just doesn't seem that likely that anyone could pull a shadow goverment type thing off for so long.
People just ain't clever enough. If you look for instance at the 9/11 conspiracies you get the idea that these people desperately wish for a world in wich someone is in control. To set all this up would require a lot of skill that I have never seen displayed before.
In a way conspiracy theorists HELP the powers that be. By looking for order they allow chaos to thrive.
Again the JFK shooting and the Murder She Wrote method. By focusing on trying to find out who DID it, the conspiracy theorists are leaving in the clear everyone who THOUGHT they did it. Who has there been no investigation of the known facts that goverments officials had formed plans to kill the president? These are not disputed, they are know and well documented. BUT because they did not actually do it they get off because everyone wants to find some non-existant secret organisation.
Same with 9/11 by wishing to find that the US goverment planned it all they are ignoring the facts that someone in the US goverment made some really bad choices. Those bad choices did NOT plan the attack but also did nothing to stop it. For some people, charged with the protection of the US, this is a crime itself. Just as plotting to kill the president is.
In my darkest hours I fear that conspiracy theorists are the wetdream of every conspirator. By focussing on the outlandish they are letting the mundane go unnoticed.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Now that's a definitive source for ya. The cable channel on which the show aired has fuck-all to do with the production of the show. At any rate, the careful, rational experts they consulted are certainly more reputable than the same half dozen retarded moonbats the conspiracy fools keep trotting out.
And Popular Science definitively disproved 9/11 was an inside job, right? Mhh Hmm. Americans. No, the authorities in the appropriate fields they consulted disproved it, you smug prick.
Anyway, the CIA certainly shot Kennedy just as they did with Martin Luther King a few years later. Please. As evidenced by 9-11, the "surprise" fall of the Soviet Union, the Bay of Pigs, and countless others, it's quite obvious that the CIA couldn't find its collective ass with both hands and a flashlight. I've worked with the kind of ivy league fucktards that go into the CIA. They're all walking piles of preconceived notions. They couldn't conspire to have a pizza delivered, much less murder a public figure in broad daylight.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
1) There were no eyewitnesses who said they recognized Oswald as the shooter. There was one guy who saw someone shooting from the school book building but he refused to identify the shooter as Oswald, even though he said he would recognize the shooter if he ever saw him again.
2) For Oswald to be the shooter, he had to get the three shots off and hit the target (1 in 50), then race down the stairs to the 2nd floor in 90 seconds and satisfy an extremely suspicious police officer who had just raced in that he was not the shooter (1 in 100), then he had to make his escape from the crime scene on a city bus (1 in 20), then he had to successfully shoot the Dallas police officer with yet another weapon and hide in the theater (1 in 10). Multiply all of these improbable events to arrive at the overall probability...1 in 1 million. Most of us would have had an extremely difficult time even doing one of those things.
3) No, it is not incorrect. None of the 'investigations' was an actual criminal investigation. The 'Warren Commission" was created by Johnson to provide the appearance of an investigation. The FBI quickly stopped their investigation at the request of the white house (Johnson) who put pressure on the FBI Director, Hoover. The Dallas Police Department did a little investigating but the Secret Service elbowed them aside as soon as Oswald was killed. Also, the Dallas PD was a little handicapped because the Secret Service had absconded with the body (at gunpoint), the photos, and the crime scene (the limo) and taken them back to Washington DC. The only thing that the Dallas PD had left was Oswald, the gun, and a few loose ends.
4) Johnson had motive and opportunity, two key things for a murder. Johnson was the guy who created the phony Warren Commission and pressured the Dallas PD to stop doing even the little bit that they had done.
The uber-archetype of all conspiracy theories has been raised on Slashdot, the home of geekdom's Tinfoil Hat Brigade.
Run! Escape before the whole mess collapses into a conspiracy singularity!
Sorry. None of the [skeptic/conspiracy nut] stuff is even a little credible. You need to offer credible counter-evidence, rather than smugly braying "open your eyes, you fools!"
Taken individually, episodes of conspiracy are hard to prove because the conspirators do a half-way decent job of covering their tracks. But when conspiracies are viewed collectively, the entirety of a grand plot against The People begins to take shape.
Rothchilds financing Rockefeller & Standard Oil, the implementation of compulsory schooling to dumb down regular folks (see Gatto's Underground History of American Education), establishment of the federal reserve bank, the sinking of the Lusitania & entry into WWI, mismanagement of the economy by the new Federal Reserve bank leading to the 'Roaring 20's' and the Great Depression, coercing the Japanese into attacking Pearl Harbor, but making sure the most valuable ships (aircraft carriers) were out at sea, JFK assasination and Warren Commission whitewash, Vietnam, Iran releasing the hostages the day of Reagan's inauguration, Iran-Contra, Reaganomics and breaking organized Labor, Free Trade (NAFTA was a joint Bush-41/Cliton betrayal), 9/11, media consolidation, etc.
Listen to Chomsky's Class War talk (buy the CD or find a torrent), read Gatto's Underground History of American Education (link above), read Mark Ames' Going Postal Rage Murder and Rebellion, find a copy of The Screwing of the Average Man (1973 or 1974, iirc), read Kenneth Cole's The Misdirection Conspiracy (early 1980's, I think), etc. Everything fits together nicely into a grand plot against ourselves - I know you didn't join the Army to wage war on yourself, but it's kinda funny how things work out, huh?
Pretty amazing what a little concerted inter-generational organization can accomplish. They can't keep their conspiracy secret, but they can use their bull-horn to drown out everyone who's on to their plot ("they" own the mass-media through four or five media conglomerates, of course).
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
I decided to finish the book after the virginia tech thing. That massacre seems to fit the pattern - Cho was continually tormented by his peers. I bet there was a ton of pressure to "stay in school", to "just get his degree"... Glad I'm out of the "education" madhouse.
Beliefs are easy to mold - who picked yours?
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
(meaning Oswald didn't do it alone )
There, fixed that for ya.
In the UK we mostly drive stick, and the stick is mounted on the floor between the seats. In my car it's about a foot from the wheel. Now I can change gears, moving my arm from wheel to stick to wheel - including smooth accelerator and clutch action - from across the H pattern (say 3rd to 4th) in less than a second. In fact i reckon it's close to half a second, sometimes that also involves operating the indicator lever too as i'm probably negotiating a junction (switching it off as well as on, i can't stand the auto-off).
When you're learning to drive stick it seems like the most complex, impossible task in the universe, having to coordinate all four limbs in a very precise fashion, including the spacial knowledge of the location of said stick and gears so you don't have to look. It's slow and painful to learn and you stall the engine a lot whilst doing so.
It's only after driving ~20,000 miles in the same car that i can do it all so fast and efficiently.
Back to LHO and the bolt action rifle. I'm fairly certain that having never operated a gun in my life i'd find the bolt action reload a real slow difficult pain in the ass. But if i had trained, reloaded, fired repeatedly the same gun hundreds of time's i'm fairly certain the same would apply. I wouldnt have to get up from my prone position, fiddle around in my pockets for cartridges and fumble the lever to reload. I wouldnt even need to take my eye from the sights, i could do it, without looking because my spatial knowlege and muscle memory associated with the rifle would operate my limbs for me. In the end it'd be just as fast and easy as changing gears in a car.
In conclusion, it'd be easy for any old Joe to pick up one of those rifles and after five min os fiddling with the bolt action reload - having never encountered one before - to summarise that operating it 3 or more times in a 6 second period would be impossible.
sorry, i seem to have ranted a little there
If you don't risk failure you don't risk success.
For those remembering Red Dwarf, it was a future John F Kennedy dogged by a messy divorce and investigations over the Mafia who killed his younger self in his prime. This happened after they accidently changed time by eliminating Oswald.
Yes, lets all stop what we're doing and pick up your pet cause full time.
Slashdot - where whining about luck is the new way to make the world you want.
This is indeed a "lone" research team, but it's hard to get more mainstream. In case you missed it: "Tobin was the FBI lab's chief metallurgy expert for more than two decades. He analyzed metal evidence in major cases that included the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 1996 explosion of TWA Flight 800 off Long Island."
Really, if you know of a way a person can be more mainstream, square, and conventional than that, please speak up. Oh, wait, there is a way: "The questions he and others raised prompted a National Academy of Sciences review that in 2003 concluded that the FBI's bullet lead analysis was flawed. The FBI agreed and generally ended the use of that type of analysis." This guy sets the standard for mainstream. He makes Dick Cheney look like a hippie. He makes J. Edgar Hoover look like a crossdresser. Wait... ignore that. He makes Thomas Friedman look like a Juggalo. I predict a sharp rise in conspiracy theories in which Oswald is the lone gunmen, as conspiracy nuts rush to distance themselves from his overwhelming and undeniable stench of mainstreamness.
"The level of confidence is a crucial part of the conclusion. In this case, a very high degree of confidence eliminated entire lines of investigation. A very low level of confidence, which is what the new tests show (essentially no confidence in any conclusion), is an entirely different matter and an entirely different conclusion."
I think in the case of the JFK assassination, it would be very difficult to argue that any line of investigation, no matter how silly, wasn't looked at by somebody.
"This is indeed a "lone" research team, but it's hard to get more mainstream. In case you missed it: "Tobin was the FBI lab's chief metallurgy expert for more than two decades. He analyzed metal evidence in major cases that included the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 1996 explosion of TWA Flight 800 off Long Island.""
I wasn't arguing that there is anything loony with this particular researcher, just that one team's findings isn't enough. It has to be backed up by others. Otherwise we would all be hopping into our cold fusion powered cars to go to work.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
How many were investigated by organizations that were skilled in investigation, had plenty of resources, and weren't just out to make a TV show? Not to mention the legal devices that the government has at its disposal. But actually I don't know when the results of the first bullet analysis were available, so I don't know what impact it had on the investigation.
There was no sniper on the grassy knoll. ;) that sniper was JFK himself.
sure there was it was shown on the BBC
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
Men in Black: Finally the truth about Elvis
(meaning Oswald didn't do it alone, or Oswald did it alone but also used a second gun which has never been found)
There, fixed that for ya. :-)
Using HTML in email is like putting sound effects on your phone calls. Just say <strong>no</strong>.
Posts, MyBio or Sig, may contain satire, sarcasm, bolded nouns be sardonic or even witty & be Church of SD
He could have JFKs, if only "They" hadn't misplaced them in the National Archives next to the Ark of the Covenant.
First, there never was a "proof", at least not in the way you are thinking.
That was the way I worded it, but the fact is that the statement is true for all logical arguments -- if one step in your argument is untrue, then your conclusion is unsupported. It doesn't have to be a mathematical proof. This is obvious, I didn't think the word "proof" would hang anyone up so much. Sorry.
The summary is clearly saying that the conclusion was shown to be false (meaning Oswald didn't do it), not the argument itself. Which of course is not what the article says at all. If you read it differently, you need to work on your reading comprehension skills.
You need to work on realizing that extreme pedantry in a natural language is not the source of good reading comprehension. A conclusion is wrong if the argument supporting it is wrong, because one cannot draw a conclusion from false premises. That you take "wrong" to mean "logical inversion of the stated term" is a perfect example of how your pedantry (and binary thinking) has caused you to fail to understand the statement.
Experts (or rather, people calling themselves experts) have been disagreeing with the lone gunman theory since the day Kennedy was shot. This can only be considered "news" if mainstream scientists can back up the lone research team.
Yes, news only occurs under those circumstances. Really, unnecessarily restrict the meaning of words much? That they claim to have disproved a specific analysis that was used to support the lone gunman theory in specific is the news. After all, as you say experts have been disagreeing with the official story for a long time, yet none have disproven this particular analysis. That's what's new, and thus news. Of course it would be more impressive if there was independent verification, peer-reviewed journal publications, and certainly won't be something I'd ever call "truth" until such is done. I just hope you at least realize that "news" is not synonymous with "truth".
The enemies of Democracy are
#2:
Where do you get these numbers? How do you determine how likely a person is to be convinced of guilt.
The cop who passed Oswald in the hallway was accompanied by an employee. The employee identified Oswald as a fellow employee. The cop was looking for someone out of place, and hearing that Oswald was supposed to be there was enough for him to continue his search. How is that a 1 in 100 chance? I can't think of one off the top of my head, but there have been studies done that show if people believe you are supposed to be in a place or be an official, they will accept you as being in that position.
The real reason you don't believe it is because the concepts are fantastical. They are non-ordinary occurrences. Presidential assassinations are never ordinary. Think of how much chance we encounter every day in our lives. What are the chances I'll catch my bus on my way to work? What are the chances that I'll run down the stairs in 90 seconds? What are the chances that a timeline, provided by people who didn't have synchronized watches, would even make it so sure that Oswald had '90' seconds?
The chances are reversed. It is highly more likely that Oswald did the shooting given the evidence than it is that thousands of people were involved in a huge coverup to make LBJ president.
Reason, free market capitalism, and individualism
One guy can kill a president
Sure...but that's not what happened to Kennedy. Why is so hard for you to accept the idea that Lyndon Johnson and a handful of extremists hated Kennedy enough to kill him? There are literally hundreds of examples of assassination of leaders in other countries. Many current world leaders got their job by deep-sixing their predecessors. Why do you think we surround the president with security? In Kennedy's case, Lyndon Johnson was never going to be president if Kennedy was alive...and Johnson knew it...so he conspired to kill Kennedy as his way to become president. The *fingerprint* of Johnson's guy, Mac Wallace, was found in the sniper's nest. Go read the book "Blood, Money & Power: How L.B.J. Killed J.F.K." by Barr McClellan. When you look at the state of the evidence in the Kennedy killing, it's the obvious handiwork of a lawyer (Clark) who understood how evidence was gathered and used. He puts Oswald in the building with a gun at the time the president comes driving by, by telling him some story about helping some government thing or whatever. Then the president gets shot and the shooters run for cover, leaving Oswald standing there wondering what happened. Of course, Oswald had to die...and quickly...before he realized what had really happened and started talking about who had told him what.
You'll say, though, this is all fiction and Oswald did it. The problem is there is a lot of evidence now that shows that Oswald could not have done it. Even the article that is the subject of this thread shows that there was at least another shooter. For starters, Oswald didn't have gunshot residue on his cheek, as determined by a Dallas PD paraffin test, even though he allegedly fired a bolt-action rifle. Oswald did not have any motive to shoot the president. Oswald was an obvious government agent (phony defection to Russia, training in Russian at a prestigious military language school while serving as a Marine, assigned to a top-secret U2 base in Japan, etc.). How many marines today do you think get advanced russian language training, while on duty, unless it's needed for something they are doing for the government? Oswald didn't have a 'getaway' plan. How many assassins go get on a city bus to leave the scene of the crime? There wasn't any way for Oswald to have even known in advance what schedule and routes the buses would be running on the morning of a presidential motorcade. Obviously, the bus was just a spur-of-the-moment idea after Oswald suddenly realized after the shooting (that he probably didn't even know was going to happen) that his hands were dirty and he needed to get away. Yes, there was a shooter on the 6th floor, but it wasn't Oswald, and there were two other shooters, all carefully coordinated, probably by the guy standing on the sidewalk pumping the opened umbrella up and down on a sunny day at the exact spot of the shooting when the president came driving by.
A anti-Vietnam political leader was assassinated, and a pro-Vietnam political leader came into power. The war industry made billions off of Vietnam. The mafia and CIA were abandoned by Kennedy in Cuba, resulting in lost / captured men. To me those seem like a valid motive to consider either of those groups a suspect.
Numerous eyewitnesses reported suspicious behavior immediately before and after the event. (Construction workers with odd implements, people potentially signaling before the incident, and every bit of photographic evidence confiscated and promptly lost, never to be seen by the public again.) The Secret Service did not follow the rules and guidelines to protect the president that would have been followed on any other day (which could be incompetence, but is also suspect). Reports of multiple gunshots coming from different locations. The accused shooter was killed before he or she could give any real testimony of the event. To me that sounds like case evidence and obstruction of a "crime".
Now what happened in the aftermath is that one of the suspects (US federal gov't) proceded to conduct the investigation. The end result of this investigation was that a single shooter was responsible for the assassination. A photo of the man holding a rifle was provided and made the cover of a magazine, which has since been proven as a forgery by a number of experts. I have also seen enough guilty suspects being walked by policemen to know that Oswald did not have the typical expression most people do when they've committed a serious crime. Most people either smile and wave, or have a stonewall look to them. Oswald looked completely terrified. The only reason a person would be terrified would be if the event was done in the heat of the moment, or they were being setup.
Now I'm not going to say who did assassinate JFK, but there seems to be a substantial amount of evidence that reinforces the assertion that it was not a one-man job. There also seems to be enough evidence to leave credence to the idea that it was also not a small team operation, and that a substantial organization was involved. It also seems reasonable that Ozwald was chosen as the fall guy because prosecutors felt there was "enough" information to get a conviction, whether or not it was true (let's face it, when a president gets shot, someone needs to take the blame, and quickly).
If I were in charge of an organization capable of assassinating a president, the steps that would need to be taken to insure success seem to neatly match up with the events that took place that day. The steps for a single person to insure success seem less likely, and an extreme amount of luck would need to be involved. (As to who did it and why, we might never know for sure. But it seems reasonable that an organization was involved, not a lone gunman.)
The cop who passed Oswald in the hallway was accompanied by an employee. The employee identified Oswald as a fellow employee. The cop was looking for someone out of place, and hearing that Oswald was supposed to be there was enough for him to continue his search. How is that a 1 in 100 chance?
Oswald was in the second floor lunch room holding a coke when the policeman raced in, accompanied by the supervisor, looking for the shooter. Undisputed evidence shows that this occurred only 90 seconds after the last shot was fired so Oswald had to stash the gun under a box, race down four flights of stairs, go to the lunchroom, grab a cook, and look non-chalant and surprised when a policeman holding a drawn weapon entered and pointed it at him. Then he has to convice the policeman that he is completely innocent sufficiently that the policeman puts his weapon away and leaves. I don't know about you but I could have not done that and I don't think Dustin Hoffman or Jack Nicholson could have done it either. But Oswald was supposed to done exactly that after he had just allegedly shot the president of the United States. I give it a 1 in 100 chance of coming off successfully and that's generous. If you gave that little task to a thousand athletic young men with steady nerves, I don't think more than one of them would have been completely successful and I'm not sure about even that. The others would have had pounding hearts, out of breath, made a break for it, started to sweat, started shaking, had tinny unconvincing voices, fainted, couldn't say anything, peed their pants, etc.
Regarding your other point, only a handful of people needed to be in on the actual coverup. The other hundreds were just following orders from someone else. For example, on the coverup of the medical evidence and the goofball autopsy, there is one guy who is everywhere telling everyone what to do, where to go, what to say, etc...Admiral Burkley...who was Kennedy's personal physician before the assasination and became Johnson's personal physician after. Admiral Burkley personally rode in the ambulance next to Kennedy's body as it was delivered from Parkland Hospital to Love Field. Maybe he was looking for signs of life.
Coverups are a reflexive action in government, I think. It's like "Oh shit, I think we just ran over someone. Quick, ditch the weed and brewskies!" It starts with "it wasn't me" and spreads from there.
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
"That was the way I worded it, but the fact is that the statement is true for all logical arguments -- if one step in your argument is untrue, then your conclusion is unsupported."
You said "wrong", not "unsupported". And even "unsupported" doesn't work with real world conclusions. Its perfectly possible for them to still be supported even if one piece of evidence was false. This is because they (unlike conclusions from mathematical proofs or other logical systems) generally involve many pieces of evidence which builds up to a final conclusion. They are usually far from simple modus ponens arguments.
Mathematics and predicate logic are very useful. However, you cannot apply rules from those worlds directly into real world arguments.
"A conclusion is wrong if the argument supporting it is wrong, because one cannot draw a conclusion from false premises."
No, not by any accepted definition of the word 'wrong'. At best you can say the researchers were wrong when they reached that conclusion. It is perfectly possible to get a right answer with faulty reasoning.
"After all, as you say experts have been disagreeing with the official story for a long time, yet none have disproven this particular analysis."
And they still have not disproven this particular analysis. At best they have cast doubt on it. But conspiracy theorists have been casting doubt on it for decades.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
No, not by any accepted definition of the word 'wrong'. At best you can say the researchers were wrong when they reached that conclusion. It is perfectly possible to get a right answer with faulty reasoning.
But the conclusion of the researchers was that the bullets could not have come from multiple shooters. That conclusion is wrong, because the analysis that preculded other shooters was wrong. If this new analysis is correct, of course.
And they still have not disproven this particular analysis. At best they have cast doubt on it. But conspiracy theorists have been casting doubt on it for decades.
And have any of them done so through actual forensic science on the actual bullets? Have any of them had the ability to? Have any of them had the credibility in the field of forensics that the one conducting this study has? No? Then this is news.
I can "cast doubt" on the moon landings by spouting off the stupid standard conspiracy points, that's a far cry from providing geological evidence that the "moon rocks" and "moon dust" are an exact match for sand and rocks from a beach in Paraguay.
The enemies of Democracy are
Funny. I thought it was I thought it was the mafia.
Or was it the KGB?
Or was it the Cubans?
Or was it the Exiled Cubans?
Or was it the Military Industrial Complex as Oliver Stone implied?
Seriously. Have you ever actually read the Warren Commission Report?
I doubt it.
"But the conclusion of the researchers was that the bullets could not have come from multiple shooters. That conclusion is wrong, because the analysis that preculded other shooters was wrong."
Please RTFA. The new analysis does not prove the bullets came from multiple shooters at all. At best it casts doubt on the current evidence. Its still perfectly possible (not to mention likely) that the conclusion that the bullets all came from Oswald's gun is true.
And if you want to bicker that their conclusion was something stronger than that, here is the actual quote from the article summary that we have disputed: "Researchers... say that the government's 1976 conclusion that the bullets came from only one gun (Oswald's) is wrong." This statement is not an accurate reflection of the article, there is no point in you looking like a dumbass while defending it any longer.
" And have any of them done so through actual forensic science on the actual bullets? Have any of them had the ability to? Have any of them had the credibility in the field of forensics that the one conducting this study has? No? Then this is news."
Yes, there have been people who have used actual forensic science while trying to dispute the government's claim. And this claim (which doesn't seek to prove anything, despite your claims otherwise) is actually relatively weak.
" I can "cast doubt" on the moon landings by spouting off the stupid standard conspiracy points, that's a far cry from providing geological evidence that the "moon rocks" and "moon dust" are an exact match for sand and rocks from a beach in Paraguay."
That would only be analogous if these researchers had found one of the bullets to be an exact match to one fired from a gun owned by some mafia hitman.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
it's all known but we'll never know. government in the past has not always been so inept at things clandestine, as are the current banana heads in the big House. what we focus on from that time is really a shame...for far too long jfk has been given a pass by the media and historians because he took a slug in the skull. -50CentsADay.net
You cannot mathematically prove that Oswald did or did not do it, because Oswald is not a mathematical construct.
The universe operates Mathematically. In other words, the universe operates by an absolute and finite set of logical rules. Therefore, Oswald and the entirety of the universe is, in fact, a Mathematical construct.
Such proofs only exist in the world of mathematics, and there they are only possible because mathematics is a completely abstract field that does not involve perceptions of the real world (which always have some degree of intrinsic doubt).
Wrong.
You are not a Mathematician (Pure Mathematics) nor a Physicist (Applied Mathematics). I am. Only make comments here when you truly know what you are talking about.