View Full Version : JFK's Assassination

01-20-2000, 02:46 AM
I used to cruise alt.conspiracy whenever I needed a few laughs but
things got so silly that I couldn't even be bothered to log on anymore.
There is one event however that makes me think conspiracy - the JFK
assassination. After thousands of pages of testimony, dozens of books,
several tv documentaries and the oh so balanced screen treatment by
Oliver King-of-the-Conspiracy-Nuts-Stone I still don't know who did it -
was it the Communists? Castro? The Mafia? LBJ? The Illimunati? Or was
Oswald really acting all on his lonesome and everything else was just
pure coincidence? Please enlighten me on this matter.

Ciao for now

G Ursic

01-20-2000, 03:04 AM
Surely Unca Cecil has touched on this topic before, anyone got the link ? Me personally I think it was highly ranked military personnel and top government officials who were all getting their pockets lined from the "non-war" in Vietnam. When they learned JFK intended to pull out of southeast Asia, they conspired with someone (Soviets ? Cubans ? Mafia ?) to make sure that their hands stayed clean so to speak. But now that I have written this, seems I should to alt.conspiracies. Who knows, I suppose someone somewhere knows the truth . . . but I doubt seriously they post on the SDMB.

"Solos Dios basta" . . . but a little pizza won't hurt.

01-20-2000, 09:36 AM
Shiva-11, angel: If we knew for sure, would it still be so contravercial? Besides, the truth is often hidden from the public.

A friend of mine suggested that IF there were a second gunman, it might have actually been Oswald's wife. Apparently, her past is shady, and everyone's been out looking for a man all these years. Has this angle to the theory to the second gunman theory ever been suggested?

You are correct about Stone, though. He's just making a movie. All showbiz, not facts.

01-20-2000, 09:48 AM
On a trip to Dallas about a year ago I toured the kennedy museum at the old Texas School Book Depository. I heartily recommend it to anyone who's thinking conspiracy. The distance between the 5th floor window and the street where the motorcade was is far shorter than you can imagine -- no problem at all for a reasonably good marksman to hit a slow-moving target.

On cable a couple of nights ago I saw an excerpt of a story Dan Rather did, featuring an interview with an eyewitness, shortly after the shooting, and a follow-up 25 years later. She had completely changed her account of what she had seen, leaving the question, was she right moments after the shooting, or 25 years later.

I think conspiracy theorists are just disgusted by the fact that a lone nut (Oswald, Sirhan, Bremmer, Hinkley, et al) can capitalize on a combination of luck and official incompetence and laxity to affect history.

Earl Snake-Hips Tucker
01-20-2000, 09:50 AM
I would invite you to go to a bookstore and browse thru "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner.

He takes a very systematic approach to all the legends concerning the assassination, and basically nukes them.

Once you consider the real evidence--not what writers have made up and recopied from one another--there's very little doubt that LHO, acting alone, committed the crime.

01-20-2000, 11:10 AM
Kennedy had no intention of getting out of SE asia.

01-20-2000, 11:26 AM
I have to back up Kunilou on this one. I too went to the Texas Book Depository about two years ago, and thought to myself..."Geez it's not that far to the street." I could easily have made that shot. Personally, I'm all for the lone gunman thing.

My personal favorite conspiracy on the subject is one I saw in the book 'Mortal Error' which pins the kill shot on...drum roll...the secret service agent in the follow up chase car who accidentally shot Kennedy when he slipped and fell trying to turn around to see where the shots were coming from. The author, of course, names the agent, who refused to talk to him about the subject...therefore, as we ALL know (please roll eyes here) he MUST be guilty.

01-20-2000, 11:50 AM
I have already shown conclusively that, other than LHO, there was only one person who had the means, motive, and opportunity to do it.


BTW, when I mentioned this theory to Gerald Posner via e-mail, his reply was "Case Reopened!"

It's somewhere on the MPSIMS board, if someone wants to be enlightened.

"East is east and west is west and if you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce they taste much more like prunes than rhubarb does." -- Marx

Read "Sundials" in the new issue of Aboriginal Science Fiction. www.sff.net/people/rothman (http://www.sff.net/people/rothman)

01-20-2000, 02:22 PM
Here's a few documents I put together on the subject a few years ago.


Truth does not change because it is, or is not, beleived by a majority of the people.
-Giordano Bruno

01-20-2000, 02:29 PM
The problem with the lone gunman was never that 'he couldn't make that shot' but that the trajectory at least one of the bullets had to have taken was physically impossible.

Hence the 'magic bullet'.

01-20-2000, 02:44 PM
But the "magic bullet" is a lie. The trajectory it had to take was a straight line, slightly deflected by hitting a solid object like JFK's skull.

The problem with the discussion is the conspiracy people keep repeating things that just aren't true. No matter how often they are corrected, the continue to repeat the same lies. They are willing to believe the most outrageous claims without a single shred of proof and, at the same time, ask for ridiculously high levels of proof from the other side. If one person, no matter how wacky, makes a claim that supposedly disproves LHOs guilt; they believe it.

If I were to claim I was the gunman that day, 50% of all conspiracy buffs would repeat that claim as truth. The fact that I was 12 years old and have never been in Dallas in my life would do nothing to keep them from spreading the story.

"East is east and west is west and if you take cranberries and stew them like applesauce they taste much more like prunes than rhubarb does." -- Marx

Read "Sundials" in the new issue of Aboriginal Science Fiction. www.sff.net/people/rothman (http://www.sff.net/people/rothman)

01-20-2000, 03:07 PM
Since this is The Straight Dope message board, we can assume everyone in here wants to calmly look at the evidence. If you do that, there is no doubt that LHO was the lone gunman. Read Case Closed for the details, but it's the first JFK book I know of that's rational.

If you then ask why did he do it, then we have to start making some educated guesses. LHO was clearly a nutcase, making it fairly believable that he might do it himself. Looking at it from the other side, it's very hard to imagine any organization wanting him to do their dirty work. All the evidence of the man point to someone who might have done this by himself, and any conspiracy argument just doesn't hold water.

Has anyone here ever managed a project of any kind? To pull off any coordinated effort, you have to have lots of communication between the players. Any conspiracy involving government or industry personnel would have to include dozens or hundreds of people to pull it off, all of them keeping quiet for 30 years. This theory is completely impossible.

Although it probably can never be absolutely proven (unless someone figures out time travel), Occam's Razor points clearly to the "acting alone" theory.

David B
01-20-2000, 04:19 PM
Kunilou said:I think conspiracy theorists are just disgusted by the fact that a lone nut (Oswald, Sirhan, Bremmer, Hinkley, et al) can capitalize on a combination of luck and official incompetence and laxity to affect history.I think that pretty much hits the nail on the head. Something that had so much impact and caused such a massive change (like the assassination of a president) must have been the work of a vast conspiracy. To say that one nut can so change the world is to say that the world is almost too chaotic to comprehend. Some people don't like that idea.

Ignorance is Bliss.
Reality is Better.

01-20-2000, 05:22 PM
Hmmm... I must be a nut then....

I've seen a couple of references to "Case Closed". I've also read a couple of Oliver Stone slams. If I may, (and since I'm a registered member, I may), my thoughts.

The movie JFK came out and it bothered me greatly. I mean... think about it... what if it was true? The government may have been part of a conspiracy to kill its leader, or at the very least covered up the truth as to what really happened. Talk about shaking some fundamental beliefs to the core.

I heard all of the media reports about Oliver's "fiction", so I decided to read the books the movie was based on... "On The Trail Of The Assassins", by Jim Garrison and "Crossfire" by Jim Marrs. Has anyone out there read both of these books? If you did, you'd find that Oliver's depiction of the key events are fairly close to both books... granted, he took some creative license and changed periphial things to make a better movie. But the underlying premise of these books were accurately depicted. I encourage anyone that is interested in this subject to read Garrison's book especially. Whether or not you are a conspiracy buff, it's IMHO a terrific read, and an extremely interesting story. Whether you chose to believe it or not is up to the reader, but personally, I found no reason not to believe that he was a part of an amazing period of this country's history and was trying to find the truth. If he was a nut case or an egomaniac, I don't know. That's just my take on the man.

For those of you who think that a conspiracy doesn't exist because the ability to cover it up wasn't possible, you are mistaken. The US intelligence apparatus (like any other country's)is very good at living in a world of smoke and mirrors.. and allowing you to see what they want you to see. That's their business. They live in a world of compartmentalized information and secrets. Whether or not they were a part of this assassination, I don't know. But I've read enough on this subject and know enough about how the intelligence community works to have my doubts about the Warren Commission's conclusions. Most people have no idea what is going on in the world behind the scenes. And quite frankly, most of us don't want to or need to. For most of the world, ignorace is bliss. But don't kid yourselves.

Detailed discussion of specific points would probably require this to be moved to great debates. However, I think that whether or not you believe that Oswald pulled the trigger, you can certainly understand the motives of the US government to pin it on one person and close it quietly. I suspect that they didn't really want to find the truth. Even if they had other leads, who would have wanted to follow them? Most of the conspiracy scenarios (Mafia, CIA, Cuba, KGB) if true, would have been distasteful to say the least. The results of discovering the truth would have to have generated a reaction... if it was a foreign government, what would that be? War? And if it was our own government, then what? We couldn't even handle a bugging of Watergate and that came a decade later. Imagine finding out the CIA killed the President! From a purely pragmatic point of view, the Oswald solution was the cleanest and allowed the country to move on.

We perhaps will never know what really happened. Perhaps we already do. In any event, I sure find it interesting. If time travel was possible, I have a feeling I'd go back to Dallas that faithful day with a video camera and find myself a secluded spot behind the picket fence.

01-20-2000, 05:29 PM
Anyone who is postively certain that Oswald acted alone has to explain his assassination at the hands of Jack Ruby - or at least offer a plausible explanation.

Earl Snake-Hips Tucker
01-20-2000, 05:33 PM
Cooper, et al:

It's covered in "Case Closed," as well as all the other conspiracy "evidence."

01-20-2000, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by Yarster:
My personal favorite conspiracy on the subject is one I saw in the book 'Mortal Error' which pins the kill shot on...drum roll...the secret service agent in the follow up chase car who accidentally shot Kennedy when he slipped and fell trying to turn around to see where the shots were coming from. The author, of course, names the agent, who refused to talk to him about the subject...therefore, as we ALL know (please roll eyes here) he MUST be guilty.

That theory is covered on this website: Ten Wackiest Theories (http://people.fix.no/pudding/burton/kennedy/)

My favorite Wacky Theory NOT covered on that site is that Oswald blamed John Connally for getting kicked out of the Marine Corps, because Connally was Secretary of the Navy at the time. Oswald was actually trying to kill Connally, who was seated directly ahead of Kennedy.

Which means he actually missed his intended target three times. Which would cover the "Oswald was not a good marksman" argument.

I'd better mork on MY alibi, Chuck. I'm from Dallas and clearly remember the excitement when we learned Kennedy was making his visit. Being even younger than you, I said, "Is he gonna sleep here?"

Mom and Dad laughed, and said, "Oh, sure! Daddy'll sleep on the couch and Momma in your room and they'll sleep in our bed!" I was completely convinced this would happen and was disappointed when they didn't show up on the 21st of November!

I was with my Dad on our farm when it happened. We actually didn't know what had happened until we got home because we didn't have a portable radio with us. (Remember when they were called "transistor radios"?)

kunilou: It was the 6th Floor, not the 5th.


01-20-2000, 06:11 PM
"'mork' on my alibi?" How did I do that?


01-20-2000, 06:15 PM
You'll all think I'm nuts........LOL that's ok.
Ask Moira Prophet what happened. She and her mother claim that she is the reincarnation of JFK.

01-20-2000, 10:56 PM
Kudos to Chuck, Kunilou, Curt, Mjollnir, and David for talking some sense here. Posner's Case Closed is the final word. Wiggum, Posner destroys Garrison and his theories and makes you wonder why Garrison is still credited by some people (among other things, Posner shows that Garrison himself was on the take from the mob).

Regarding the "magic bullet", which Posner rightly calls the single bullet, I have my copy of Case Closed at hand. Oswald's second shot (which the Warren Commission wrongly determined was his first shot) hit Kennedy in the back at about 1800 ft/sec and came out through his throat, when it started tumbling. It hit Governor Connally in the right shoulder at about 1550 ft/sec and left a large entry wound and an even bigger exit wound below his right nipple. It then went through Connally's wrist at 900 ft/sec and bounced off his thigh at 400 ft/sec, barely breaking the skin. The only change in the bullet's trajectory was a slight angle when it hit one of Connally's ribs. Posner points out that one of the forgotten aspects of the JFK assassination was that Connally was very nearly killed, too, and only heroic efforts by a team of surgeons kept him alive.

Then, of course, Kennedy was mortally wounded by the third shot to the back of the head.

Sam Stone
01-21-2000, 01:37 AM
Well, for those of you who think you could easily make that shot, try making it 3 or 4 times in under 7 seconds with a bolt-action rifle.

The FBI tried to do exactly that. They took three of their best marksmen, set them up in a tower with an unrestricted view of three targets which represented where Kennedy's body would have been as it moved down the street, and had them fire as fast as they could. They were given as much time as they wanted to set up on the first shot (a luxury Oswald didn't have), and the targets were not moving.

Not one of them hit all three targets.

Then they took some of their weapons instructors, gave them the same rifle, and had them work the action as fast as they possibly could to see how fast they could fire three shots. They just had to hit a target 10 meters away, to account for the movement of the rifle. It turns out that the time of the three shots on the Zapruder film is right close to the maximum theoretical limit for moving the action of the gun, without even aiming. This highly important information comes from... The Warren Commission Report.

Oswald's total marksmanship training amounted to two days on the Marine range, where he qualified with average scores, years before the shooting. The men who tried to re-create the shots were professional marksmen with thousands of hours on the rifle range, and current skills.

Then the House Select Committee ruled that there was in fact at least four shots, after computer analysis of an audio tape recording taken from an open mike on a police motorcycle.

If there were four shots, then Oswald's feat moves from the range of highly unlikely to flatly impossible. Because of that, the House Select Committee on Assassinations ruled that there was a conspiracy.

01-21-2000, 07:29 AM
This cracks me up. Lawrence, Mjollnar, et. al... YOUR evidence is "Case Closed"? In case you haven't read, that book was debunked by the conspiracy wonks as bad as Garrison and others who have painted another picture.
I guess it depends on where your bias is when you read something, or what you believe... if you think Oswald did it, that's fine. Hell, maybe he did. But the original record of "proof" was the Warren Commission Report... and we all know how many holes have been found in that.

I guess my simple answer could be "read On The Trail Of The Assassins. It's covered there." But frankly, that's just as narrow minded as can be. Just because it's written down in a book doesn't make it so, whether it's in Case Closed or any other book.

None of us know.. none of us were there. and the trail is too cold to start re-investigating. Posner sold a lot of books... but if the case was indeed closed, people wouldn't still be debating this.

"No, you got the wrong number. This is 9-1-2."

01-21-2000, 10:18 AM
dhanson, I recall seeing a "fourth bullet" documentary in the 70s. Checking all the available sources, they postulated that the 4th bullet was actually an echo that was heard on some sources but not others. Personally, I don't know enough to believe that or not. But in the same documentary they showed a marksman with a bolt-action rifle. When they started the timer and said "go" there was no way the marksman could squeeze out three shots in 4.6 seconds. However, when they started the timer WITH the first shot, the shoter got the second and third shots off in under 4 seconds. So it really depends on how you run the test.

Just one other thought about conspiracies. If you look at things the government genuinely tired to cover up (involvement in the Bay of Pigs invasion, the My Lai massacre and Watergate) so much information was being leaked by so many sources that the cover was blown in a matter of weeks or months. Look at all the attention the Kennedy assasination has gotten over 26 years, and there's still no "unified conspiracy theory" that people agree on. maybe because the CIA, military, Mafia, John Birch Society, Cuba, et al, weren't involved?

01-21-2000, 10:50 AM
There are a few rebuttals of " Case Closed" floating around..

The most Invisible poster in the history of the boards. Posting invisibly since sept 1999.

Earl Snake-Hips Tucker
01-21-2000, 10:58 AM
This is a point in which I doubt either side is going to give.

Granted, there are rebuttals.

"Case Closed" is itself a rebuttal.

However, Posner supplies over 70 pages of references and bibliography to support his case.

I'd be interested in seeing how well-researched the rebuttals are.

01-21-2000, 11:30 AM

I'm glad you pointed out these two pieces of evidence that go against the "acting alone" theory: the "not-enough-time-to-shoot-three-shots" idea, and the "fourth shot" idea. Both have been vacated by anyone with knowledge about the case.

In Case Closed, Posner convincingly shows that it was Oswald's first shot that missed, not his second as the Warren Commission determined. His first shot would have been when the limo was almost directly underneath the window, but it's very conceivable that the live oak tree in that spot could have deflected a bullet. Any decent marksman (of which Oswald was definitely one) could have pulled off the shots at an almost liesurely pace. In the Zapruder film, you can see when the shots took place, because Mr. Zapruder twitched each time there was a loud noise, and the movie noticeably jiggles there. This little detail was missed by the Warren Commission.

About the House Select Committee and the fourth shot theory - this was disproved almost twenty years ago, right after they reached this nutty conclusion. The sound on the police motorcycle radio, from which they did all these sound-bounce models and gave us the phrase "grassy knoll", was plainly shown to be recorded several minutes after the other three shots. Not even the conspiracy kooks use this anymore.

For people who put stock in Garrison's book, I think you need to get some more Straight Dope books and figure out the difference between sources who are credible and who are not. Jim Garrison was a nut, and widely recognized as a nut by any impartial person who talked to him. The fact that Oliver Stone used him as the central heroic character in the JFK movie tells me more about Mr. Stone than about the JFK facts.

01-21-2000, 03:50 PM
Let an old, former biker put the final nail in the coffin of that police radio recording: American motorcycle cops of the time rode either Indians or Harley-Davidsons, which all used long-stroke, large-displacement V-twin engines. They back-fired A LOT. That is what those "gun-shots" on the recording probably were.

I was in the Navy. In boot camp, I once had to fire a rifle from a prone position at a target that was, I guess, fifty feet away. Out of a possible 30 points, I scored 28. I wore thick glasses then and I still do. I had also never before fired a rifle of any kind. (BB guns don't count.)

Now, my target was not moving and I had more time to fire than Oswald had and I wasn't under the kind of pressure he was. Nevertheless, I think he could have pulled it off. It is in the realm of possibility.

The newer report made in 1979(?) concludes that there was a conspiracy.

It only takes TWO people to constitute a conspiracy, folks. It didn't have to be LHO and the KGB and the CIA and the Mafia and LBJ(!) all working together, all sworn to secrecy for the rest of their lives, several of them murdered just as they were about to tell.

Maybe it was my mother. Yeah, she did it while Dad and I were on the farm. My Dad had a rifle and he didn't take it with him. We had another car and we lived only ten miles from downtown Dallas. I've never actually seen my mother fire a gun, but maybe she took target practice when we weren't around, just waiting for the perfect opportunity...


01-22-2000, 12:54 AM
Where's FORMERAGENT when we need him?

01-22-2000, 01:01 AM
Cooper, et al:
It's covered in "Case Closed," as well as all the other conspiracy "evidence."

Look, I care so little about this case that I've not even seen the Oliver Stone picture, and personally I don't care if the Illuminati or John Wilkes Booth, Elvis Presely or Jesus Christ Himself killed Kennedy.

However, it seems to me that it was pretty goddamn out of character for Ruby to murder Oswald, and I'd like to hear some more about this without doing any tedious research. Now don't point me to your stupid book, quote from it! :)

Sam Stone
01-22-2000, 03:28 AM
Okay, so it was only three shots, in 5.6 seconds. With a bolt-action rifle. With a moving target. From a couple hundred feet.

Try it. I've fired a lot of bolt-action weapons, and cycling the bolt pulls the gun significantly from its line of aim. You have to re-acquire the target through the scope, which has a fairly narrow field of vision. This takes some time. As I said, the three marksmen who tried to repeat the feat ALL failed, and they were much better shots than Oswald, and much more current in their shooting skills. And they were shooting at non-moving targets, knew exactly where they would be and where they'd have to move the gun. With no trees moving in and out of the sight picture.

It's maybe remotely possible. If this was the only questionable part of the case, I'd accept that a miracle happened and an average shooter got lucky. But when you add in all the other coincidences and contortions required to come up with a lone gunman, it strains credibility. To the breaking point.

I'm not a conspiracy nut. I'm a hardened skeptic, as most of you may know from my other posts. But I also understand statistics. Maybe it's possible that a bullet when through two people and caused seven wounds without shattering or markedly deforming. But it's a longshot. Maybe a hundred to one. Maybe Oswald made the shots, but that's maybe 50-1. Maybe a random muscle spasm caused Kennedy to move backwards, but that's at least 100-1. Maybe Jack Ruby didn't know Oswald, even though they lived a few blocks from each other and had several mutual acquaintances in a city of over a million people. But it's highly unlikely.

I could throw five or ten more unlikely occurances in there. We can believe that they all happened, or we can accept that maybe there was another shooter. I don't know who, but I know what the more compelling argument is.

Heath Doolin
01-22-2000, 03:53 AM
Like I said before, it can be anyone but knowing guns, its got to have a second person. I have fired a bolt action carchano(sic) at a gun collectors house once and even at perfect working order, its still a lousy gun. The working mechanism is shoddy, the bolt itself is hard to accurately "shuck and fire" and above all, the weights are strange in it. Now take into effect that Oswalds gun needed to do it in the allotted time with what was described as a 'used' looking gun with a off sight.

DHanson is right. Simply impossible

Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor
01-22-2000, 03:03 PM
I'm more concerned with the deaths of the little kids who get shot as bystanders in today's drive-bys than I am with Kennedy's death.

If all of you road-show versions of Sherlock Holmes are so ^&$-*$@# interested in justice , then get off your dead behinds & try to solve one of those murders. All of you so-called "experts" who volunteer , say "Aye".

Total silence. :rolleyes:

None of you genuinely care that a man died, much less that the President of the United States was killed. It's just another fad to you.

After 30 + years, nobody is gonna find out anything; & nobody even knows if there's anything to find out. Dry up. Or better still, report the crimes that occur in your community, so that innocent lives can be saved today.

If there was a conspiracy , & I doubt it; it was a post-assassination attempt on the part of the FBI or other agency to conceal the fact that they were incompetant enough to make blatant security errors. They f***-up, they cover-up. Simple.

"Show me a sane man, and I will cure him for you."----Jung

Michael Fonda
01-22-2000, 03:35 PM
It just so happens I did solve the drive-by murder of a child. It turns out that he had been asking questions about the Kennedy Assasination at the exact moment of his deminse. Coincidence? I think not. Rather than being thanked, I was kidnapped and am now being forced by the CIA into annoying people by leaving irrelevant, sanctimonious postings on the Straight Dope Message Boards.

01-22-2000, 07:23 PM
I saw a program on the History Channel just this morning. The 1992 congressional committee ordered the CIA to turn over everything they have on the assasination. Everything. Guess what? Documents hidden by the CIA show that Oswald was on their payroll! It seems likely that he "turned" while in Mexico, because he was witnessed meeting a known Soviet assasin. I don't know if there was a second gunman or not, but Russia and/or Cuba look like pretty good candidates for anyone who doesn't buy the Lone Nut Theory.

--It was recently discovered that research causes cancer in rats.

01-22-2000, 11:14 PM
There sure was a second gun. I was not even born yet when it happened, and I am willing to bet that all of us who posted were not there to see it live. However, we do still have one unbaised witness: The Zapruder film. I presume we all accept this film as genuine, no special effects or tampering. What really bothers me is that if the 2nd shot entered Kennedys back, the third shot should have done the same if it were fired by the same person from the same location. This did not happen, I have seen the film, I am sure we all have. Kennedys head is struck from the front or front/right, the impact of which causes his head to whip back and to the left. Its on film!! This also explains the huge exit wound in the back of his head.. the hole is larger hence "exit". Either Oswald (if he did any shooting at all) instantly transported to another location to make that 3rd shot, or there was at least a 2nd gun.

"Wow! Spider-Man! Are you really friends with the X-men?"
"Not since Cyclops tried to use my viewmaster."
(Marvel Team Up #1)

Earl Snake-Hips Tucker
01-22-2000, 11:25 PM
"No mas!"

Michael Fonda
01-23-2000, 01:32 AM
My own theory is that there was a conspiracy. It is my belief that Oswald was hired by Kennedy who had been rendered both impotent and a little crazy by the huge number of aphrodisiacs he had ingested as president. Realizing that he had nothing left to live for and would be remembered as a shallow opportunist with a zipper problem Kennedy opted for the only logical course still available to salvage his legacy assasination. The reason Oswald seemed such an uncharacteristically good shot that day is because Kennedy was deliberately moving his head in an effort to meet the bullets. It's all so pitifully obvious.

01-23-2000, 11:22 AM
Has anyone seen the film, "Arlington Road" with Jeff Bridges and Tim Robbins? After having watched this film, you can see how the government can stick to their "lone gunman theory" for so long. Very, very spooky! And a very good film, loads of tension.

My two cents:

I read that the LHO shot by Jack Ruby was taller and missing a few birthmarks/scars than the "real" LHO. So, let's do an autopsy. Compare his USMC physical with the Dallas coroner's report.

Also, I'd like to take a Jeffrey Dahmer-type, place him in a slow motorcade in Dealy Plaza and see if his head snaps BACKWARDS due to a shot from BEHIND!

"Quoth the Raven, 'Nevermore.'"
E A Poe

01-23-2000, 10:36 PM
Mjollnir, I'm with you. I give up. Either you are a conspiracy nut or you understand a well-researched and well-documented book like "Case Closed". READ THE DAMN BOOK BEFORE YOU CRITICIZE ITS FINDINGS! Sorry, I got a little out of control there. And I am not going to waste any more of my time debunking BS that is clearly debunked in the abovementioned book.

01-24-2000, 12:13 AM
C'mon! Haven't you guys seen the X-files episode that showed that the Cigarette Smoking Man did it?

My dad read a book by Sam Giancana (or someone from the Giancana family) that told of the very close ties between the mafia and the Kennedy family. At least my dad is now convinced that the Mob was in on it.

"The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the human mind to correlate all its contents."
-H.P. Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

01-24-2000, 11:30 AM
This should be looked at with a scientific point of view. When it does, conspiracy theorists have no argument.

How true could a conspiracy theory be, when, after so many people devote so much study on it, even the basic questions remain unanswered? Most real phenomenon will reveal themselves to study. Made-up phenomenon like UFO, huge conpspiracy theories, and government mind-control lasers remain just as mysterious now as they were when they were first "discovered". In other words, there's nothing to find out about them - they are not real.

Using Occam's Razor, the lone gunman is the most parsimonious explanation. "But there's so many unlikely things!" you say. Nonsense. How many incredibly unlikely things had to happen for your parents to be born, and to meet, and to have you as a child? Are you, in fact, impossible? ...