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
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
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.
Money
People make a lot of money writing books.
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.
Back... and to the left... Back... and to the left...
Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
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.
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?
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
"...back and to the left, back and to the left. Which, by the way, that action you see Kennedy's head go through in the Zapruder film - caused by a bullet... [points behind him] comin from up there, ha. Yes, I know it looks to the layman or someone who might dabble in physics... This action here would be caused by a bullet coming from... Well... [thinks] Up here, did you see that? Did everyone see that? Yeah, but no. What happened was Oswald's gun went off, causing an echo to echo through the buildings of Dealey Plaza and the echo went by the limo on the left up into the grassy knoll hitting some leaves causing dust to fly out which 56 witnesses testified was a gun shot, cos immediately... Kennedy's head went over. But the reason his head went over is cause the echo went by the motorcade on the left and he went "What was that?" "
I was going to make the same point, but then I saw that the next article down on the main page is entitled "Does Zelda Need an Overhaul?" and realized Slashdot is the wrong forum to decide what is useful and what isn't.
"I don't understand, why are people concerned with this?"
... mysterious. "Who is he?" She wonders. We want what we can't have. What we do have, we want to get rid of. Why? We want something new, someone new, new experiences. Lewis called this true joy. Joy, true joy, he explained, is never in the having, but always in the desiring. Never is a thing more perfect than when we don't have it. Never is someone more lovely than when we lose them and can no longer have them. Psychologists tell us that people dumped in a relationship tend to only remember the good things about the one who dumped them. Even the dumper, in time, feels this way. Why? It rebuilds mystery. It rebuilds joy. It rebuilds the what, who and why of it all.
You nailed by italicizing the "why." Mysteries always intrigue the human animal. We read books to find out what happens. Women chase men who are
Why do people care about JFK's death? Because he was the president of the United States. He was mysteriously killed. A very important person dying a very mysterious death builds tons of who, what and why. Yes, in a sense, it builds that mechanism in us that craves knowing. How many of us wouldn't pay all our money to have a true, clear answer to a question that's pained us in our lives? We see that answer as something joyful, fulfilling. Some call it closure. Some call it joy....
"All great things are simple & expressed in a single word: freedom, justice, honor, duty, mercy, hope." --Churchill
From the article, the main guy is William A. Tobin "the FBI lab's chief metallurgy expert for more than two decades". Sounds like an expert to me. He could be wrong, of course, but I would think his say-so would be enough to warrant another review of the evidence, with the improved techniques that he already got the FBI to adopt.
Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
Your statement implies that they were ever going to RTFA. I find that a rather bold and unwarranted conclusion.
We're Slashdot: we already know everything we need to know. We're just waiting for everybody else to find it out.
"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]"
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.
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
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.
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
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.
They don't always leave larger exit holes, but it's a general rule, especially for larger caliber weapons. Velocity, slug material, slug design, trajectory, impacts inside the body etc, all have a factor. Obviously if a bullet hits a bone and carries the bone matter with it, it's going to do more damage than just passing through soft tissue. However, if a bullet passes through soft tissue on entry and only hits bone on exit (say being shot at the base of the skull with exit through forehead) it's a possibility that the exit wound isn't particularly large, especially with high velocity rounds. Lots of factors will affect the final result.
"Growing old is inevitable; growing up is optional."
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.
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.........
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.
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..
Only to extremely ignorant, non-experts, and conspiracy theorists...
Anyone who has ever seen a high-powered riffle going through a human head, knows that the forces involved are extreme, and difficult to imagine by those who have only seen people hit by slow, weak handguns. Bodies really do explode, in whatever direction is least dense... (closest to the surface)
If anything, the Zapruder film makes the "grassy knoll" conspiracy theory laughable, because non-military weapons like handguns and most riffles don't have nearly that kind of destructive force.
People claim they heard more shots... Big deal. Eyewitnesses are often mistaken, and the echo characteristics of cities make such mistakes quite understandable.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
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'
>It's called history
With as many people who would be in on the conspiracy, we should be getting deathbed confessions already.
I'm interested in the Kennedy Assassination because I was there. Too young to be aware of anything, but there, I'm told, with my mom and the other AT&T operators she worked with, at the AT&T building across Houston Street. They didn't realize what was happening, didn't hear any gunshots, but saw the crowd panicking. As far as they were concerned, the parade ended when the car turned on Elm.
Also, my dad was at work at the Ford Furniture company across the street from the Texas theatre when they arrested Oswald.
I myself have lived in a house that Marina lived in later with her daughters. And I've worked at the Texas theatre, routinely parked my car at the North Tower, and had many a lunch break at the Grassy Knoll.
Should I be worried?
My "conspiracy theory" is a little different. I'd accept the premise that the opportunity to assassinate Kennedy presented itself as so completely obvious, that several people *independently* executed a plan, without knowing about Oswald. Maybe the guy at the fence and the guy on the railroad bridge knew about each other, but totally freaked when they realized somebody *else* was shooting.
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
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
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.
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
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
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.
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
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.