I know this has been done dozens of times but I have a few questions. I just read an article from Salon (not sure if it is trustworthy or not) Saying Congress Admits Lee didn’t act alone
Now from Wikipedia I found this picture of “JFK’s” head.
It appears to be a small hole. I have seen the video and it shows Jackie Kennedy jumping on the back of the car to grab part of her husbands head that had just blown off. She even stated that brains where all over her to the Governor.
I know there were two investigations the one most people know about the Warren Commission and the other one most people do not know about the one the media never picked up on. So can someone help me out here? I am sure their is a lot we do not know and while I will agree that our government has been involved in many False Flag attacks (Gulf of Tonkin for example), and we all know the CIA does fishy stuff.
There is so much information out there that I cannot seem to find which one is the most accurate and up to date. I have read that 4 shots were fired but have also read that one of the shots is disputed because of the sound.
I have been watching a documentary miniseries on the Assassination on Netflix which brings up interesting points, but the way that the Documentary is laid out makes me question it.
That article is not “from” Salon - it’s a web site owned by Salon that lets users post their own articles. This article is an excellent example of the issues with that model - crap is passed off with an apparent imprimatur of legitimate journalism.
It’s true that in 1976, Congress determined that JFK’s assassination was a probable conspiracy. What it’s not telling you is that their investigation had found nothing to support this view until, at the very last moment in the investigation, some acoustics researchers came in with an analysis of a recording on a police Dictabelt macine. The conclusion of these acoustics experts was that they were 90% sure that the recordings indicated a fourth shot from a different location. The HSCA was ready to get it over with, so at the last minute they threw in that bit about a “probable conspiracy.”
But there’s more to the story: shortly thereafter, someone noticed that the Dictabelt recordings they used could not have been recorded at the time of the assassination - the pops on the recording were something other than shots in Dealey Plaza. This conclusion has stood up well over the years.
The conclusion of the HSCA that it was a probable conspiracy just is not supported by any good evidence at all.
The evidence points strongly to the idea that Oswald was the only shooter there that day. Did others put him up to it? That is legitimately an open question, but most reasonable people think probably not.
Ok so I am pretty much where I started, Lee did it, 3 shots were fired. I am still curious about the head though why is the bullet hole so small when Jackie grabbed a piece of it.
I’m not having any of it!
Go to some other sites and find other arguments.
The dictabelt thing is one big joke. Nobody ever tells where the shots on the dictabelt came from. The whole dictabelt thing was started by a ‘drummer who hears things that most other people don’t, because he’s a musician." :rolleyes:
I won’t go on, here, since I’m sure it’s going into GD real, real soon.
The *official *verdict is, however, same ol’ same ol’, saying that Oswald did it.
Entry wounds are small. Exit wounds are much larger. See in the pic that thing on the right side of his head, just above his ear? That’s a big piece of skull. And read the summary below - the hand at the top of the picture is holding his scalp in place to get a good view of the entry wound - “Though the act of pulling the loose scalp forward across the top right of the head made the entrance wound visible, it also briefly covered the large exit defect on the right front side of the president’s head.”
Oswald was certainly an actor, the question is whether he was the only shooter and whether there were people backing him. We will never know. I am of the opinion that he was not a lone nut because virtually every assassination throughout history with lone nuts has them loudly proclaiming what they did, and not doing it from cover. Oswald, of course, did shoot from cover and was apprehended due to indirect evidence several hours later after having shot Officer Tibbits (presumably it was Oswald that shot Tibbits).
Shooting the President, and his brother five years later, seem to me to be one faction in the government assassinating the leaders of another faction. The same hands seem to me to be involved with the assassination of Martin Luther King, Jr. two months before Sen. Kennedy was assassinated. The silencing of these non-right wing voices for reconciliation and civil rights was no coincidence in my opinion.
I find it very disconcerting that George Herbert Walker Bush denies remembering where he was when he heard that President Kennedy was shot. That is a load of bullshit. Everybody remembered that. He was suing Gov. Connelly at the time. How do you not remember where you were when you heard the President of the United States was gunned down and the guy you were suing, who was sitting next to the President, was also shot?
Interesting about HW Bush did not know that, but I really doubt he was “one of them” were the Bush and Kennedy family rivals? Don’t they share a common bloodline back towards Lincolns times?
I am pretty content with the official story with JFK but RFK? C’mon nothing about that makes sense
Well if GHWB was in on it, his answer to where he was makes no sense. Unless the people who say the grainy photo showing the bystanders standing in front of the book depository that the tall blurry guy was him. Could be. But we will never know. If it was him in front of the book depository, I could understand that he wouldn’t want to be identified as being there because of the suspicions it would raise. My personal hunch is that he was an up and comer and the wing of the CIA that assassinated JFK told him to be there and used it as blackmail later. Or it was just coincidence, which I think is unlikely. And yes, I agree that nothing about the killing of RFK adds up. It is just weird. Manchurian Candidate weird.
We do know that King’s assassin, James Earl Ray says that he didn’t act alone and his contact was a man known only as Raoul.
Like most conspiracy stories, I think the legends around the Kennedy assassination make excessive assumptions about the competence of the alleged conspirators. I think the stories have been fed by cover-up efforts over the years by the CIA – not of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy, but of Oswald’s embarrassing ties to them.
It’s become fairly well established over the years that the CIA had been contacted by Oswald and was trying to cultivate him as a double agent against the Soviets. Oswald indeed may have considered himself to be a Soviet/Cuban operative, though their description of him would likely have been closer to “dangerously unstable intelligence wannabe/groupie”.
A recent American Heritage article billed as “Did Castro OK the Kennedy Assassination?” describes the possibility that Oswald had actually informed the Cubans of his intention to assassinate Kennedy, and was told essentially: “Yeah OK, sure, whatever” by Cuban intelligence. I think it possible that Oswald was essentially playing the CIA, and obtained from them information useful to his plot, possibly by claiming he was trying to prevent an assassination, or infiltrate a communist spy cell, or something along those lines. When he pulled off the assassination, the CIA realized that it had been used, and sought to cover up how badly it had screwed up.
The cover-up has been eroded over the years, but the public has become so jaded that the most common response to the CIA connection has been “There must be more to it than that! They planned the whole thing” rather than “This was gross CIA incompetence, and there needs to be a major overhaul of the agency.”
What do you mean there is no evidence of other shooters? A number of witnesses on the scene claim that shots came from the grassy knoll. Now, that may be evidence that isn’t credible, but it is not no evidence. I wasn’t there, and I don’t know if there were multiple shooters. It is entirely plausible to me that the only shooter was Oswald, or the guy in his sniper’s nest if it wasn’t Oswald. The shot is doable.
Oswald had ties to everyone, including the CIA, the Soviets and Cuba. He is the perfect fall guy as a lone gun man, actually or as a fiction. He is the perfect conspirator.
While I certainly agree that it is possible that Oswald acted entirely alone, it does not strike me personally as plausible. Certainly on the day of the shooting Lyndon Johnson acted is if it were a concerted conspiracy and he was next, and he was there.
No. Fair question. All I have is the inference that Ray claimed to be part of a conspiracy and the three dead men where political allies with the same political enemies. All I have is that the three could be related and my hunch that they are. That isn’t the same as evidence or proof. I’m also not so naive as to think that such things don’t and cannot happen. The US government through the CIA did in the 1970s have an assassination program.
Incidentally, I presume you are aware that countless people over the years have confessed to being part of a conspiracy to kill JFK or approached to kill him? We assume these people are nuts.
Just so you are aware, you need to know that a lot of Americans think that JFK was assassinated as part of a conspiracy and that a subset of those think it was domestic right wingers? In short, your right wing masters of that time did it.
A few made that claim at the time of the assassination. Many others strongly contradicted it. Others came forth later, often recanting what they said at the time; these can be ignored.
So it’s a matter of belief. That’s fine; you can believe what you want. The issues is that you produce actual evidence to back up your belief. You’re just dealing with supposition: “Johnson acted in a way . . .” as though his actions couldn’t be better explained by the facts as they are.
In other words, there’s as much evidence that there are multiple gunmen as there is that JFK was killed by Superman.
Believe what you will, but this is general questions, and we should be dealing with facts.
The fact was several witnesses heard other shots. That is evidence. That some recanted is also evidence. All the evidence needs to be weighed by a person making a decision. This is indeed general questions, and you cannot wish eye-witness accounts away. You may grant them little weight, which you have done. That is your opinion. If it is your opinion that Superman killed JFK, as you have asserted, then you are just blathering.
That some of the witnesses recanted might be evidence that they admitted lying, or thought they might have been mistaken or were lying. Each one has to be individually considered. It turns out that every single witness who recanted was pressured to do so by an investigation that sought to prove one shooter and no conspiracy. That might be the case, but pressuring witnesses to change their testimony for any reason is more suspect than their original statements. However noble (or not) the pressure on the witnesses was, it was bad for the investigation.
What we all do agree on is that Oswald participated, and likely participated in the shooting. The evidence for Oswald participating in the shooting was denied by Oswald, who claimed he was a patsy. But in any event people saw someone who looked like Oswald in the window shooting and his prints and gun were. It was likely Oswald as that is strong evidence. We do know for a fact that Oswald and the CIA had connections, as he did with the Soviets and Cuba. We know that Oswald claimed to his wife that he had taken some sniper shots at a general at a local base.
I always found it irritating that there seems to be a ton of books on every mob boss since the late 1800s, but only a couple written about Carlos Marcello. I find the whole Marcello-Trafficante conspiracy theory to be intriguing, but good luck finding much information on Carlos’ reign. Thankfully what little there is seems well researched.
Reclaiming History by Vincent Bugliosi- a book I’ll admit I did not read from cover-to-cover but read most of and several interviews with Bugliosi- pretty much established for me that Oswald was the lone shooter. There are other great works before and since that have the same conclusion and written by scholars who have no reason to lie or cover up the truth.
It would not surprise me if Oswald was part of a larger conspiracy (though I don’t think it was exactly Illuminati sized if it existed at all) as JFK had no shortage of haters and then as now as always nutcases attract each other, but I don’t see any plausible evidence there were other gunmen.
Lone shooter is entirely possible. It was possible to get off those shots using Oswald’s gun from that vantage point. A number of people over the years have examined the angle. I’m not prepared to completely discount the ear-witnesses and eye-witnesses.
