Never argue by analogy as the very analogy you use will be used to rebutt. The case here isn't rock vs cheese, but granite vs obsidian -- two different rock types.
My gosh, people don't ever fake anything? Haha....
Yes, I'm sure the document IS a result of plain ol' incompetency. I never said it wasn't. I'm just, for the last time, trying to say it is very possible to act incompotent as well. This happens every day in the corporate world. And, for surely and truly, there is just good ol' dumb incompetency as well.
I don't know. I guess I'm being presumptuous. Also, I went shooting just a few weekends ago and had a heck of a time keeping up with another guy who kept outscoring me. Reflecting on the difficulty of shooting and then thinking about jfk just made me think how much trouble that would be, but as you point out, maybe not....
You are a far better shot than me it sounds. I've been shooting since I was like 5 years old, high-powered rifles pretty early. When I wasn't at school or working I was shooting anything that moved on my grandparent's 10 acre, wooded land. I got incredibly good with an apache black 22 with a red field scope and stinger bullets. I've hunted deer, turkey as well. I haven't hunted in years and only recently started shooting again. I don't kill anything anymore and never plan on it. I'm not down on hunters at all.
Having said all of that, I still think those shots were not impossible (is anything really?), just so incredibly difficult, based on all the factors, that only someone like yourself or a professional sniper could do it. Me or Oswald could not.
Toss in more than one person, and the shots are much easier....
using a shotgun is cheating
Yea, but using a model 1100 12 guage magnum with magnum loads and no plug when all your buddies have are 22s and single shot 20 gauges is down right fun....
I take it you've never been in the military or worked in a large corporation. You NEVER write down anything that you don't want others to know. Malicious dealings are always done voice, behind closed doors. Motives are hidden. Orders are given that totally mask the real intent but achieves the result. The last thing they would do is actually write down something to damn them if for no other reason than what is going on right now on/. with these released documents. No, I have read TFA, but I doubt there's any real incriminating information. Or, if anything, they want your to believe they are incompetent. The rules are few: keep your enemies closer than your allies. Always compromise. Never show true motives. Appear agreeable. Appear incompetent if need be, but never malicious, gaming or ulterior.
I wonder just how many/.ers actually shoot guns on a regular basis or even at all in their life. It isn't easy. Hitting even a stationary target is tough. Hitting a moving target, even with a shotgun which sprays a pattern, is tough. Hitting a moving target some distance away with a rifle -- in my thinking -- would be darn near impossible. Factor into all of that the nerves a shooter would have to have as he's thinking, "here's my one and only opportunity to kill the president of the united states."
Bottom line: gun shots killed the president, and it was done by an incredible marksman. I would say by a marksman whose main hobby and practice was that of a sniper.
I saw that too. I've seen lots of documentaries. You need to watch more. They failed to mention, at all, the umbrella man or the hail-fist man who signal just prior to the first shot. They failed to mention, entirely, the photographic work done on the grassy gnoll wherein images of a shooter and an american soldier are discovered verifying the soldier's original testimony (he was even interviewed recently and is a highly credible witness). It failed to mention the dozens and dozens of witnesses who claimed "secret service" agents confiscated their cameras and video cameras 'as part of the investigation.' It failed to mention at all the train station operators who testified to seeing strange construction workers opening toolboxes and pulling things out and then walking onto the grassy gnoll. 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. They failed to mention Johnson's comments on the event with a "well, if it's a war they're wanting I'll give it." They failed to mention how the secret service did many, many odd things that day that allowed the shooting to happen.
For every documentatary and book stating it was Oswald only there are opposite documentaries and books stating otherwise. Don't believe everything you see, read and hear on one source alone. Come on now, you are the post 9/11 crowd. Use your head.
John F., Bobby, MLK, all of those shootings were too convenient, too easy and too mysterious to be so cut and dry.
Stone made a movie, and he made one hell of a one. It still stirs up controversy. That documentary you saw was meant totally to discredit the movie, JFK, and Stone. It appears to have one at least one convert....
"I don't understand, why are people concerned with this?"
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... 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.
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....
No. I only read the blurb on/. and was referring to this part:
Hylas [CC] sends us to Democracy Now for a newscast on the missing emails [CC], an interview with investigative journalist Greg Palast. Here's Palast talking about the fired US attorney from New Mexico, David Iglesias:
The part that throws the flow is: an interview with investigative journalist Greg Palast..
That's called a dangling modifier, and is something you learn not to do in high school. That sentence could have been written several different ways and been better. I'm being a total grammar-nazi here./. admins need to put a bit more work into editing. Maybe that would help the standing of the site in general....
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry, here's the link to the first chapter. Not that you couldn't figure that out. You do have a 3 digit /. account....
b olition1.htm#1
http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/lewis/a
Not to dodge the debate, but anything I could ever say on the matter was covered by another, in a far better and intelligent way than I could ever hope to: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/lewis/ab olition3.htm
Knowing this, too, will not help you pick up chicks in a bar....
they need to put the creators/curators on the list
With no creator, the ONLY thing wrong with committing a crime is, indeed, getting caught.
Yes, I'm twisting your words....
Spongebob: [voice over]"At least I'm safe in my own mind...." Patrick: [voice over]"At least I'm safe in my own mind...." Spongebob: "Ack!!!"
Never argue by analogy as the very analogy you use will be used to rebutt. The case here isn't rock vs cheese, but granite vs obsidian -- two different rock types.
My gosh, people don't ever fake anything? Haha....
Yes, I'm sure the document IS a result of plain ol' incompetency. I never said it wasn't. I'm just, for the last time, trying to say it is very possible to act incompotent as well. This happens every day in the corporate world. And, for surely and truly, there is just good ol' dumb incompetency as well.
C.S. Lewis
Book is, "Surprised by Joy."
I never said there isn't just plain ol' incompetence too. It is simply possible that there is more than one explanation for incompetence....
/boggle
Why does this stir so much resentment?
I don't know. I guess I'm being presumptuous. Also, I went shooting just a few weekends ago and had a heck of a time keeping up with another guy who kept outscoring me. Reflecting on the difficulty of shooting and then thinking about jfk just made me think how much trouble that would be, but as you point out, maybe not....
You are a far better shot than me it sounds. I've been shooting since I was like 5 years old, high-powered rifles pretty early. When I wasn't at school or working I was shooting anything that moved on my grandparent's 10 acre, wooded land. I got incredibly good with an apache black 22 with a red field scope and stinger bullets. I've hunted deer, turkey as well. I haven't hunted in years and only recently started shooting again. I don't kill anything anymore and never plan on it. I'm not down on hunters at all.
Having said all of that, I still think those shots were not impossible (is anything really?), just so incredibly difficult, based on all the factors, that only someone like yourself or a professional sniper could do it. Me or Oswald could not.
Toss in more than one person, and the shots are much easier....
using a shotgun is cheating Yea, but using a model 1100 12 guage magnum with magnum loads and no plug when all your buddies have are 22s and single shot 20 gauges is down right fun....
I take it you've never been in the military or worked in a large corporation. You NEVER write down anything that you don't want others to know. Malicious dealings are always done voice, behind closed doors. Motives are hidden. Orders are given that totally mask the real intent but achieves the result. The last thing they would do is actually write down something to damn them if for no other reason than what is going on right now on /. with these released documents. No, I have read TFA, but I doubt there's any real incriminating information. Or, if anything, they want your to believe they are incompetent. The rules are few: keep your enemies closer than your allies. Always compromise. Never show true motives. Appear agreeable. Appear incompetent if need be, but never malicious, gaming or ulterior.
I wonder just how many /.ers actually shoot guns on a regular basis or even at all in their life. It isn't easy. Hitting even a stationary target is tough. Hitting a moving target, even with a shotgun which sprays a pattern, is tough. Hitting a moving target some distance away with a rifle -- in my thinking -- would be darn near impossible. Factor into all of that the nerves a shooter would have to have as he's thinking, "here's my one and only opportunity to kill the president of the united states."
Bottom line: gun shots killed the president, and it was done by an incredible marksman. I would say by a marksman whose main hobby and practice was that of a sniper.
Does this define Oswald?
The intern talked....
I saw that too. I've seen lots of documentaries. You need to watch more. They failed to mention, at all, the umbrella man or the hail-fist man who signal just prior to the first shot. They failed to mention, entirely, the photographic work done on the grassy gnoll wherein images of a shooter and an american soldier are discovered verifying the soldier's original testimony (he was even interviewed recently and is a highly credible witness). It failed to mention the dozens and dozens of witnesses who claimed "secret service" agents confiscated their cameras and video cameras 'as part of the investigation.' It failed to mention at all the train station operators who testified to seeing strange construction workers opening toolboxes and pulling things out and then walking onto the grassy gnoll. 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. They failed to mention Johnson's comments on the event with a "well, if it's a war they're wanting I'll give it." They failed to mention how the secret service did many, many odd things that day that allowed the shooting to happen.
For every documentatary and book stating it was Oswald only there are opposite documentaries and books stating otherwise. Don't believe everything you see, read and hear on one source alone. Come on now, you are the post 9/11 crowd. Use your head.
John F., Bobby, MLK, all of those shootings were too convenient, too easy and too mysterious to be so cut and dry.
Stone made a movie, and he made one hell of a one. It still stirs up controversy. That documentary you saw was meant totally to discredit the movie, JFK, and Stone. It appears to have one at least one convert....
"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....
Indeed. Scripture is flawed. It was meant to be. Else we would worship it....
Lloyd: "I met a woman today."
Harry: "Yea?"
Lloyd: "She actually spoke to me."
Harry: "Get out!"
--Dumb & Dumber
"What do women want?" [Freud's dying words]
and
You don't know what a woman wants, and you can't find out by asking her....
Welp, that was cosmology. Now on to human diseases, followed by understanding women....
It's near England, which is close to Britain....
"Yes sir, it's a news website" Judge: "A website? um...?"
Judge: "um?"
Secretary: "Your honour, it's a linquistical pause...."
You don't think of it as losing hair. You think of it as gaining face.
How did Moby break his neck? King Kong mistook him for ban roll-on.
"El Nino means ... The Nino...." -Chris Farley
No. I only read the blurb on /. and was referring to this part:
/. admins need to put a bit more work into editing. Maybe that would help the standing of the site in general....
Hylas [CC] sends us to Democracy Now for a newscast on the missing emails [CC], an interview with investigative journalist Greg Palast. Here's Palast talking about the fired US attorney from New Mexico, David Iglesias:
The part that throws the flow is: an interview with investigative journalist Greg Palast..
That's called a dangling modifier, and is something you learn not to do in high school. That sentence could have been written several different ways and been better. I'm being a total grammar-nazi here.
Mod me troll, but that article is horribly written. That, or I'm still not awake. Please proof this stuff....