A point: There’s a fun little game played, and I don’t remember the exact numbers, but the game is in, call it ‘Oswald had three seconds to fire three shots.’
See, it’s hard to impossible if you have to load, aim, and fire three times in three seconds.
But it’s a lot easier if you realize that he already had the first shot loaded and aimed, and those three seconds are measured from the first point of impact.
[QUOTE=lekatt]
I should know better than to post about these things, most of your posts are predictable and go only on what you read years after it happened.
[/QUOTE]
Which is exactly what you’re asking us to do here, in accepting your account of what really happened in Dallas. Somehow, I expect the irony of that is lost on you.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
I posted the government findings from a cite linked to the cite you posted. If you read the official government findings you will know that nothing was added to the reinternment. This was testomony by the person you’re quoting, not an alledged conversation by someone relating to this person. What you’re describing is a coverup by someone to hide the fact Kennedy’s remains were reintered with his body.
[/QUOTE]
Unless the Kennedy family decided to dispose of it by other means and the brain was not in fact interred, they have been in possession of it since 1965.
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
So how DID Oswald know Ruby, then?
[/QUOTE]
They did not know each other, unless you choose to believe the claims of credibility-lacking witnesses like Beverly Oliver.
[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
By that logic, nobody ever wins the lottery because the odds against it are too great. Oswald was a former Marine, using his own rifle (presumably giving him ample opportunity to practice with it and learn its particular quirks) and he got off a fairly impressive but by no means superhuman shot.
If there had been a grassy knoll shooter, wouldn’t his shot be about as “not impossible, but very difficult”. Wouldn’t any shot that hits any moving target be the same? How close to Kennedy would the shooter have to be to no longer be described as “not impossible, but very difficult”?
[/QUOTE]
You’re injection a new scenario to a specific scenario. The premise that someone can duplicate 3 shots using the gun Oswald used in the time frame allowed was addressed by 2 different documentaries. It is very difficult to do and I challenged the use of the term “plenty of time” to describe the scenario.
[QUOTE=Johnny Hildo]
They did not know each other, unless you choose to believe the claims of credibility-lacking witnesses like Beverly Oliver.
[/QUOTE]
My mother claims that Oswald said, “Ruby, you son of a bitch!” right before he was shot. What gives?
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
My mother claims that Oswald said, “Ruby, you son of a bitch!” right before he was shot. What gives?
[/QUOTE]
It’s the other way around.
The really disturbing thing about the article is the author’s belief that people who hold wrong-headed views should be ‘shunned’ and ‘cast out into the rain’. I was also unaware that smokers were being ‘shunned’. I thought having them smoke outside was just a response to second-hand smoke, not a societal ‘shunning’ of people because of their habits. The very notion of encouraging society to shun people for not thinking ‘correctly’ is appalling.
By all means, engage them in debate. By all means, write books that demolish their arguments. But you can treat the people themselves with respect, unless their ideas revolve around using force on other people. Then by all means shun them.
If this ‘shunning ignorant people’ thing takes hold, I sure hope that author doesn’t have any grossly incorrect beliefs. I hope he doesn’t believe in homeopathic medicine, or UFOs, or ESP, or God as an old white man who punishes people who don’t worship him correctly, or Bigfoot, or the Loch Ness Monster, or the healing power of crystals, or touch therapy, or past life experiences, or…
In my experience, the people who advocate the shunning of the stupid and ignorant are always completely convinced that they themselves are neither stupid nor ignorant. And they’re usually wrong.
Of course, Ruby did it because he wanted to spare Jackie Kennedy the pain of a drawn out trial. Right? The conscientious mobster/nightclub guy.
The guy also seemed to have an all-access pass to the police department. Not only did he get access right when Oswald was being moved, but he also was photographed as being present in the back of the room during the press conference there 48 hours earlier.
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
The guy also seemed to have an all-access pass to the police department. Not only did he get access right when Oswald was being moved, but he also was photographed as being present in the back of the room during the press conference there 48 hours earlier.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know how difficult it was to get there while Oswald was being moved, but I’ve been to press conferences in police stations where no-one recognized me and all I had to do was say I was a journalism student. Press conferences aren’t exactly bunkers.
[QUOTE=Johnny Hildo]
Unless the Kennedy family decided to dispose of it by other means and the brain was not in fact interred, they have been in possession of it since 1965.
[/QUOTE]
Yes.
So work with me here. We have a piece of evidence that may or may not prove a 2nd shooter. It disappears in to the archives. Restated, the brain of an assassinated President of the United States is lost in the archives. The government specifically tries to track it down. Conclusion, can’t find it. None of the descendents of JFK were listed in the investigation.
Looking at it from your perspective it could be seen as a family matter and everyone is operating with a wink and a nod. They either have it sitting on a mantle somewhere or they interred it. Why the secrecy? Wouldn’t it be SOP to unite all the remains? Why would that be kept from the public? Particularly when there was a reinterment anyway. It would have been a one liner in the news. “Today, the autopsy remains of JFK were laid to rest in a reinternment ceremony at Arlington Cemetery”. done.
You honestly don’t think it’s a little strange that nobody can account for the brain of an assassinated president even after an official investigation?
[QUOTE=Hentor the Barbarian]
Of course, Ruby did it because he wanted to spare Jackie Kennedy the pain of a drawn out trial. Right? The conscientious mobster/nightclub guy.
[/QUOTE]
Ruby was not a mobster. Everyone who ever actually knew him said the same thing.
The “sparing Jackie” motive is discussed at length in an article here. It might not have been the sole reason that he did it, but it seems to have played a part. As previously cited, Ruby thought he would be applauded for his deed and didn’t think he would even spend a night in jail.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
Looking at it from your perspective it could be seen as a family matter and everyone is operating with a wink and a nod. They either have it sitting on a mantle somewhere or they interred it. Why the secrecy? Wouldn’t it be SOP to unite all the remains? Why would that be kept from the public? Particularly when there was a reinterment anyway. It would have been a one liner in the news. “Today, the autopsy remains of JFK were laid to rest in a reinternment ceremony at Arlington Cemetery”. done.
You honestly don’t think it’s a little strange that nobody can account for the brain of an assassinated president even after an official investigation?
[/QUOTE]
The Kennedy family refusing access to a family member’s remains isn’t the same thing as the remains being “unaccounted for.”
I am looking at it from the perspective of a family member. I can totally see the Kennedy family not allowing access in order to spare themselves the pain and aggravation of a media circus every time an author gets a new theory, which is what happened when they dug Oswald up back in the 1980s.
[QUOTE=Johnny Hildo]
It’s the other way around.
Yeah, well, I told her, and she still insists it was “Jack, you son of a bitch!”
I’m not a conspiracy theorist, mind you. And the possibility that they might have known each other, I believe, doesn’t suggest anything of the sort. Just that they may have somehow been acquaintances, and Oswald thought Ruby was an insane asshat with his head up JFK’s ass, or whatever.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
The premise that someone can duplicate 3 shots using the gun Oswald used in the time frame allowed was addressed by 2 different documentaries. It is very difficult to do and I challenged the use of the term “plenty of time” to describe the scenario.
[/QUOTE]
See? Knew someone was going to say that. Try it. JFK Reloaded is still out there. It’s not impossible.
http://www.io.com/~o_m/jfkaos/jfkaos.htm
Five seconds, for three rounds, counting from the first round fired. So really, five seconds for two rounds.
[QUOTE=Johnny Hildo]
The Kennedy family refusing access to a family member’s remains isn’t the same thing as the remains being “unaccounted for.”
I am looking at it from the perspective of a family member. I can totally see the Kennedy family not allowing access in order to spare themselves the pain and aggravation of a media circus every time an author gets a new theory, which is what happened when they dug Oswald up back in the 1980s.
[/QUOTE]
You’re right except we’re not talking about access per se. Kennedy’s body is still there. It is as vulnerable to exhumation as would be his brain.
[QUOTE=Guinastasia]
My mother claims that Oswald said, “Ruby, you son of a bitch!” right before he was shot. What gives?
[/QUOTE]
From Bugliosi p. 273: “Detective Billy H. Combest, who is part of the line of officers forming a protective lane on each side of Oswald and his escorts, also recognizes Ruby and shouts, ‘Jack, you son of a bitch, don’t!’ [source note 1360]” (The other guy to recognize Ruby moments before the shooting was James Leavelle, the detective in the Stetson chained to Oswald’s right side.)
[QUOTE=Magiver]
It’s not the consipiracy theories that interest me as much as the information that was deliberately set asside. The transcripts of the commissioners were originally classified until 2039. And I remember Jackie Kennedy holding documents for release at a particular date but I cannot find a cite for the date. President Ford promoted a complete release of all information related to the event. I’m just curious. What’s so frickin important that needs to be held back for a later date?
[/QUOTE]
Bugliosi discusses this at length. The Commission turned over its files to the National Archives. The Archives has long had a policy of not making such materials available for seventy-five years. In 1992 a law was passed that made virtually the entire collection available to the public. (Did you know Jerry Ford was one of the commissioners? Interesting that someone who served on the Warren Commission was fighting to make their papers public, eh?)
For those who think “There’s no way we can figure out the truth at this late date”: I urge, maybe dare, you to read Bugliosi. Or at the least, the Warren Report itself. It’s amazing how much of the conspiracy debate they anticipated and addressed.
[QUOTE=Sam Stone]
If this ‘shunning ignorant people’ thing takes hold, I sure hope that author doesn’t have any grossly incorrect beliefs. I hope he doesn’t believe in homeopathic medicine, or UFOs, or ESP, or God as an old white man who punishes people who don’t worship him correctly, or Bigfoot, or the Loch Ness Monster, or the healing power of crystals, or touch therapy, or past life experiences, or…
[/QUOTE]
I totally believe in UFOs. I have on a number of occasions seen things flying that I could not identify.
As for JFK’s brain, it’s sitting on a shelf in New Haven next to Geronimo’s Skull, and above Hitler’s silverware.
[QUOTE=BJMoose]
Bugliosi discusses this at length. The Commission turned over its files to the National Archives. The Archives has long had a policy of not making such materials available for seventy-five years. In 1992 a law was passed that made virtually the entire collection available to the public. (Did you know Jerry Ford was one of the commissioners? Interesting that someone who served on the Warren Commission was fighting to make their papers public, eh?)
For those who think “There’s no way we can figure out the truth at this late date”: I urge, maybe dare, you to read Bugliosi. Or at the least, the Warren Report itself. It’s amazing how much of the conspiracy debate they anticipated and addressed.
[/QUOTE]
Well, Jackie left us a nice little note about JFK to read. Not sure what’s in it but the earliest it will be opened is 2044. Maybe it’s all about his affairs. Don’t know.
Yes, I’m aware of President Ford’s push to reveal all the documents. Are you aware he said the CIA was directly involved in the destruction of evidence regarding JFK’s assassination?
Are you aware that a book was written naming the 2nd shooter by name and that person waited until the statute of limitations ran out before suing? Don’t know about you but I would be looking at Ferrari catalogs if someone did that to me.
Yes, the Warren Commission went to great pains to address potential conspiracy issues. They just left out forensic evidence of the 3rd bullet. Which would be easy to discern from the other 2 if was truly different. It’s convenient that his brain grew feet when it became possible to examine it.