I for one would support a Robin Williams candidacy for president.
Easy Moriarty! Let’s not let facts get in the way of a quality conspiracy theory. I’ll have none of that.
Hey now, before I get a rep on the SDMB as a Kennedy assassination conspiracy theorist nut, let me just point out that the part of my post that Moriarty quoted was a small part of a larger post I wrote supporting the conventionally accepted lone shooter theory. That last part was just to say if there’s any, even 1%, of doubt on that, it’s the fact that Ruby shot Oswald before he could stand trial.
But, that was an observation from my point of view as someone who has pretty much just a layman’s knowledge of the subject-- I haven’t stayed up all night studying the Warren Report or anything. But I knew enough to know that Stone’s JFK was a load of steaming crap when I saw it. I’ve since read up a bit on Ruby and learned that he was an ardent Kennedy supporter who was mentally addled from being hopped up on diet pills, and am satisfied that he was a misguided soul who simply acted on his own, just as Oswald did.
All good! I thought I knew where you were coming from.
Having said all of this, I’d be interested in what Reiner and O’Brien came up with, but I don’t want to give them the ‘clicks’ on the podcast.
I never understood why the Warren Commission insisted there was no second shooter. There was a entire crew from the railroad that watched the parade from the grassy knoll. They saw the smoke after the shot and immediately went behind the fence to investigate.
Oswald could have an accomplice. That doesn’t necessarily imply a conspiracy. Just 2 nuts that hated the President.
I listened to Rob’s podcast. He makes some interesting points. I hate to think the CIA could be involved in treason by harming a President. We’ll never know if Rob and other researchers are right.
Holland was a supervisor on the Union Terminal Railroad. He and a crew of men were on the overpass.
There are short interviews with several men from that crew on this channel. They all saw the gun smoke and saw muddy footprints behind the fence.
I think these interviews were shortly after the assassination?
Link https://youtu.be/iaCwrmoa3sQ?si=y0dGrrKQ2HQhgVmn
Do modern firearms emit smoke with each shot?
Oswald had a WWII rifle. Maybe another shooter had a war surplus rifle too?
I don’t know how much smoke comes from that ammunition.
The railroad guys mentioned fresh cigarette butts behind the fence. That’s another source for smoke.
Two nuts working together is still a conspiracy, isn’t it?
Maybe it was just some guy watching the motorcade from behind the fence; when the shots rang out, he ran. None of that means he was a shooter.
Yup 
It’s not an elaborate conspiracy like the best selling books dream up. But it only takes two people.
The guy behind the fence could be someone that wanted a view of the parade.
The investigation was rushed and it was easy to blame it all on Oswald. Any chance of learning the truth is long gone.
Unless we already know the truth.
Personally, I’m somewhere below believing in a conspiracy, but still skeptical about the official version. For a while in the 80s I was friendly with Mark Lane, author of Rush to Judgment. We had some very interesting conversations James Earl Ray, Lee Oswald, and Jim Jones.
The ‘investigation’ took nine months and developed an 888 page report supported by 16,000 pages in 26 volumes. Pretty sure “rushed” isn’t the word you were looking for.
When Oliver Stone was making his movie, he had to use special effects to get smoke. Because guns don’t do that.
The old Soviet Union would be pleased with its success.
“I do not think that word means what you think it means.”
Stranger
And where would that get us, if that turned out to be true and there were some actual substantive evidence for it (not sentences that include “could have”)? After 60 years, that change in the narrative would be essentially meaningless.
You need a bigger target (like organized crime, or Cuba, or a military cabal, or something like that) for your theories, to make them interesting after all this time.
Would any change in the accepted perpetrator make any difference?
- CIA: Would any changes in the agency take place 60 years after the event?
- Soviet Union: Not much can be done now
- The mob: Would anything change in how the feds/police handle the mob?
…a tiger?
I note that smokeless gunpowder was invented in 1884.
I was distancing myself away from the wild Oliver Stone type theories. I’ve never thought the JFK attack was planned with any sophistication. Oswald had a job in a tall building at the right time.
We’re had other attacks on Presidents and they were nut case losers like John Hinckley Jr., Squeaky Fromme and Sara Jane Moore. The so called deep state had nothing to do with it.
By concocting a theory of an accomplice shooter that is equally without basis.
Stranger
I said to make the narrative interesting, not to make it important.