While I admit that is a possibility (my scoutmaster was the Chicago bureau head so I am all too familiar with the FBI’s shortcomings) your explanation is, like mine, just a supposition based on insufficient evidence. It bears looking into.
**
You are proposing a nonsensical situation in an attempt to ridicule me. Had LHO been an agent of either service or the NSA (totally “black” in 1963) he could have been kept in reserve for some unspecified future operation. Or he could have been what he seemed–an unstable, easily manipulated person who could be included in the conspiracy, do what he was asked, take the fall, and be eliminated before he implicated anybody else. A “patsy,” to use his own word. Either way he was handy to keep around.
Come on, AOB. I gave you a link to a page chock full of hard evidence showing that the SBT is not only believable, but is the obvious explanation, and the one you cite is some nutty hatchet job on Arlen Specter, which only tangentially mentions the SBT? Go read that page I linked to. If you’re not convinced after reading it, then let’s go over the evidence.
See, that just shows you’re not a tinfoil hatter. If you were, you would have accused me of being in on the conspiracy or the cover-up.
True fact: The building just across Houston St. from the Schoolbook Depository has now been converted to lofts. saw that the other day when I was driving past. Wonder how much a view of the 6th floor is going for?
Regarding Oswald…nobody disbelieves that he was a nut case…but wasn’t his uncle a big shot in the New Orleans mob? The CIA was known to have some pretty serious contacts in the Mafia…witness the strange case of the late Johnny Roselli…whose bullet-ridden corpse was found in an oil drum in Biscayne Bay. I am not a conspiracy buff…but surely Oswald HAD connections to the Mob and the CIA…unfortunately, we will nevetr know the extent ofhisinvolvement with either organization!
I know this is hard to believe but I never saw the movie that many of y’all are referring to. :eek: Always wanted to, just never have. What’s the jest?
I’ve read a lot on the subject. While I’m not sure what to believe, there are a lot of coincidences that make me wonder if it really is as simple as “Oswald did it…end of story”
One example that is fact and too coincidental. Jack Ruby worked as a private security guard for Richard Nixon before Kennedy was assassinated. Hmmm…oh well, it was just a coincidence, right?
When questioned about their whereabouts on the day Kennedy was killed, Nixon claimed he couldn’t recall (he recanted later) B.S.
BTW He was in Dallas at the time.
GHWB, Nixon’s “dupe” and ex-CIA head, still says he doesn’t recall where he was when Kennedy was killed. more B.S.
Now, do I believe Nixon, Bush and the CIA had Kennedy killed? I don’t know if they did or not and neither do any of you. Is it so hard to imagine that a Bush would create/manipulate circumstances that might lead to the assassination of a world leader?
Bro, after forty years of reading most everything there is about that incident, whatever the author believes, and sitting through the entire House hearings (broadcast on NPR) I’ve concluded that the only two people alive at that time I am SURE were unconnected are my little brother and I and that’s because he was within eyeshot of me when it happened. :eek:
Ah, but your supposition requires that dozens of people were involved in some conspiracy which remains unclear to this day, while my supposition requires that some people just made mistakes. By simple application of Occam’s Razor, my supposition is simpler and should be viewed as the better until contradictory evidence is found (i.e. a retired FBI agent makes a deathbed confession that he was ordered to give Oswald a pass). Minty green, on the other hand, is saying we’re both wrong and Oswald wasn’t let in through incompetence or conspiracy, but only after he’d been invesitgated and let in based on what the FBI knew about him at the time. I find that explanation even more plausible than one based on pure incompetence, though since it would be easy to claim the FBI screwed up because they are not psychic, I could believe individual FBI agents may downplay their role in investigating (and passing) Oswald, even if their actions made sense at the time.
Well, I am attempting to ridicule you, but the “nonsensical situation” is your creation, not mine. You’re creating even more evidence out of thin air to support your idea that Oswald was a member/victim of a conspiracy. Had the FBI or NSA wanted Kennedy dead, surely there were easier ways to get that result without involving a nut like Oswald, and I don’t see why they would waste time or effort recuiting him in the first place for so-called “black” ops. Surely there were plenty of WW2 and Korean War vets bouncing around in the early sixties who had proven records for bravery, stability and reliability who would have been better choices and had lower profiles than Lee Harvey Oswald.[sup]*[/sup]
The funny thing is that you fall back on the standard paranoia paradox:
[ul][li]The secret conspiracy is made up of tough ruthless professionals who plan everything years in advance and eliminate who gets in their way, but:[/li][li]They still make amateur mistakes by hiring idiots and having thier actions uncovered by plucky whistle-blowers[/ul][/li] Marely23 said it in his earlier post and I agree. Proposing the existence of a conspiracy gives the theorist an ego boost because not only is there a huge secret organization with infinite resources and ruthless intentions, but the theorist knows about it and is therefore special by association.
[sup]*[/sup]On a semirelated note, the recent TV series Now and Again featured a secret government conspiracy to place a human brain in a superpowered genetically engineered body, so naturally they choose some shlub killed in a subway accident, and the schlub naturally wants to contact his grieving wife and daughter. To me, this never made the slightest amount of sense. Surely this agency could have looked through VA hospitals and found a Medal of Honor winner who had no family and was already dying of some terminal illness. The man would have a proven record of bravery and loyalty and less emotional baggage than some random putz (though there might have been some techno-babble reasoning behind the decision). This is how TV always presents conspiracies and the theorists do the same: they’re secretive and ruthless but still make dumbass decisions left and right.
Typical conspiracy thinking–pile up a bunch of junk without demonstrating any sort of actual connection, then claim that the assembled junk proves, well, something or other.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Bryan Ekers * The funny thing is that you fall back on the standard paranoia paradox:
[ul][li]The secret conspiracy is made up of tough ruthless professionals who plan everything years in advance and eliminate who gets in their way, but:[/li][li]They still make amateur mistakes by hiring idiots and having thier actions uncovered by plucky whistle-blowers[/ul][/li][/QUOTE]
Actually, ain’t that the case with a lot of illegal activity–it gets planned and planned then bits get screwed up to the undoing of the plot? Cases like Leopold and Loeb and Watergate come quickly to mind. The difference with the JFK assasination is that, if a conspiracy exists, they have actually managed to keep enough of it secret for many years that no additional convictions have been made. It’s not that unusual a situation–nobody can prove who killed Jimmy Hoffa, either, though there are some good leads. No deathbed confessions, though.
Much of the fun of being a conspiracy theorist, and it IS a fun if gruesome pastime, is how many pieces keep getting added to the puzzle the deeper one digs, eventually causing one to see, or think he sees, “the fundamental relatedness of all things.” It is a multi-dimensional puzzle that can turn your brain inside out; I can understand why so many people who do it go a little bit nuts. It is like String Theory for non-physicists, where most people listen to you for a while, roll their eyes, and move on.
Personally, I lean toward the “assasination as mob hit” theory but that might be because I’ve lived around Chicago most of my life and figure The Guys have their dirty fingers in everything.
Yeah, but it ain’t a real conspiracy until the black helicopters get involved.
Well, strictly speaking, no-one can prove Jimmy Hoffa is actually dead, but that’s nitpicking. More likely, the men who commited the murder were themselves immediately killed. As a successfully secret killing, it’s the exception rather than the rule, though.
Don’t flatter yourself by claiming your thought processes are extraordinary and beyond the comprehension of mere mortals. What you’re doing is no more unusual than staring at a bunch of random dots and imagining patterns in them. It’s been done to draw stellar constellations and fooled astonomers into thinking there were canals on Mars.
But there’s a huge difference - Hoffa’s murder could be pulled off by two thugs, or even one. Kennedy’s assassination, if it were a conspiracy, would require a vast army of insiders to manufacture the mountain of hard evidence that we have that points to Oswald. And these hundreds or thousands of insiders would be government employees, participating in a crime to murder the elected leader of our country. Is there even a hint of plausibility there?
Although I’m not a conspiracy advocate, the Warren commission’s findiings are not consistent.
CurtC said
"It was relatively intact because the trip through Kennedy’s neck (soft tissue) slowed it down without damaging it, so that by the time it entered Connolly, it wasn’t going fast enough to be damaged more. "
Didn’t the bullet crack Connally’s rib and break his wrist? It should have been in much worse shape.
The other question I have is how Oswald got off 3 shots in 4 to 8 seconds with a Mannlicher-Carcano bolt-action rifle and actually managed to hit his target.
Oswald was an army-trained sharpshooter. Check the thread I started about the JFK assassination. FBI agents were able to reproduce, or even improve, on Oswald’s shooting speed with the same piece.
Given the circumstances surrounding Ruby’s killing of Oswald (it appears to have been almost shockingly impulsive), yes, I’m gonna say “it was just a coincidence.” t-keela, if YOU were doing something like this, would YOU hire someone who had worked for you before and who could thus be traced back to you, making you a possible suspect? I hope not.
Unless you’re suggesting Nixon was the shooter on the grassy knoll, this absolutely befuddles me. If Nixon ordered the hit on Kennedy, why would he have gone to Dallas that day? How could a guy smart enough to get the President murdered and never even get a finger pointed at him have been so fucking stupid as to be at the scene of the crime? If I had been in that spot, the ONE place I wouldn’t have been on the day of the hit is Dallas, Texas. I wouldn’t have been within 1000 miles of the place.
Cite? Do you know for a fact that Bush Sr. DID know where he was at the time? I know he was with the CIA, but again, would someone involved with this operation have been under scrutiny (major public office) for so long? Also, back to Nixon for a moment - if he recanted, why is it B.S.?
What makes you reach that unsupported conclusion? Is it simply speculation on your part? And how do you explain the actual experimental evidence, showing that a recreation of the shot results in a basically identical bullet?
By firing a round, working the bolt, firing another round, working the bolt again, and firing a third round. Nothing complicated about it.
If you have a conspiracy, you sell more movies. How many Jack the ripper movies were there, and how many would there be if he was Jo Blow from the mental hospital, vs. how many if he was the queens secret doctor/lover? And JFK the movie has very little basis in fact, yet anyone who saw it would swear it really was a black op.
I was just at the 6th floor museum (book Depository) last Wednesday. After years of reading much on the subject, and watching countless TV shows, I was surprised as to just how easy of a shot LHO had in front of him.
When touring the area where LHO made the shot, one can look out of the window a see a big X on the road where JFK got hit. Kinda morbid, I agree. It does however bring it all into perspective. It was not a long shot, and the motorcade was moving dreadfully slow. 3 succesive shots, to a trained USMC marksman would not have been difficult.
I went to the museum with a bit of conspiracy in my mind. I left as a supporter of the SBT.
Uncle Bill makes a post midway down the first page that is relevant to Nut Magnet’s question.
He says "The shortest distance Oswald would have fired from at the range in the Marine Corps is 200 yards. No closer. Without a scope.
The assassination shot was made from 265 FEET, or less than 90 yards. WITH a scope."
On page 2, Mr. Miskatonic adds “Well, the FBI was able to “shoot that fast” and they were able to do it in the incorrect time alloted (6 seconds) as opposed to the time Oswlad likely took (7-9 seconds). I think one even got it done in 5 seconds or so.”
Three shots in six seconds? Hell, you don’t have to be a marksman.
Fire, cock, fire, cock, fire. Easy as pie. Look, I remember basic training; our first experience firing the rifle was at 100 metres, and everyone hit the target with most of their shots. And these were kids who in many cases had never in their lives fired a weapon before, including me, and in 30 shots I hit a human-sized target every single time. Oswald’s shot was only a 90-yard shot - about 80 metres - which with a rifle is basically unmissable unless you are blind or spastic. He must have been a bad shot - or nervous - to even miss ONCE.
